Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 12229
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:35 am

With the United States rejoining the Paris Agreement, the world is again put (hopefully) on the right track again. We have seen a lot of progress being made in the past 5 years. We need to do a lot more of course. It is just a new stap in our evolution as mankind, first the industrial revolution powered by coal and other fossil fuels, and now to clean up the earth power it by renewables.

Signators, but not implemented in legislation:

Eritrea (0.01% / world greenhous gas emtions)
Iran (1.30% / world greenhous gas emtions)
Iraq (0.20% / world greenhous gas emtions)
Libya (N/A[b] / world greenhous gas emtions)
South Sudan (N/A[b] / world greenhous gas emtions)
Turkey (1.24% / world greenhous gas emtions)
Yemen (0.07% / world greenhous gas emtions)

2,99% to be fully committed.

I was surprised to find Turkey on this list, but with Erdogan I should have known I guess.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:51 am

We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Olddog
Posts: 1585
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:57 am

Paris agreement was just a step. I am eagerly waiting for the next step.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13236
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:58 am

Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


Have you tried any of the fake meats available today, they aren't very nice and no substitute for the real thing.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:27 am

Kiwirob wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


Have you tried any of the fake meats available today, they aren't very nice and no substitute for the real thing.


Because what's available today is very primitive - the first step was to be able to grow muscle cells. Now, they are getting better at replicating the complex lattice of protein structures that holds meat together. The results are promising.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04 ... -real-deal
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
KWexpress
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 4:03 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:17 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


Wow, your just full of ideas!
 
User avatar
Challenger007
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:03 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:28 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


Have you tried any of the fake meats available today, they aren't very nice and no substitute for the real thing.


Because what's available today is very primitive - the first step was to be able to grow muscle cells. Now, they are getting better at replicating the complex lattice of protein structures that holds meat together. The results are promising.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04 ... -real-deal


It's not that all the same. Besides, livestock farms are not the biggest problem in my opinion. Now, if we reduced the number of gadgets produced, making them better and more durable, now if we stopped creating tons of useless clothes that brainless individuals clog their wardrobes with - these are the directions, the optimization of which would reduce the amount of pollution in our world. There are also cars with internal combustion engines. Electric cars are our future. But to do this, you need to achieve more sustainable electricity production.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7463
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 4:58 pm

Power generation, construction, and excavation for raw materials are big polluters.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:01 pm

Challenger007 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

Have you tried any of the fake meats available today, they aren't very nice and no substitute for the real thing.


Because what's available today is very primitive - the first step was to be able to grow muscle cells. Now, they are getting better at replicating the complex lattice of protein structures that holds meat together. The results are promising.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04 ... -real-deal


It's not that all the same. Besides, livestock farms are not the biggest problem in my opinion. Now, if we reduced the number of gadgets produced, making them better and more durable, now if we stopped creating tons of useless clothes that brainless individuals clog their wardrobes with - these are the directions, the optimization of which would reduce the amount of pollution in our world. There are also cars with internal combustion engines. Electric cars are our future. But to do this, you need to achieve more sustainable electricity production.


Those are all critically important too - cheap clothes and indurable goods comprise a big chunk of container ship traffic, which also would benefit from optimization.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 5:02 pm

KWexpress wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


Wow, your just full of ideas!


Good investors tend to be well-read, no?
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6957
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:24 pm

I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 12651
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:32 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


I look forward to your explanation of this fictitious requirement.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
2122M
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:49 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


"The Paris agreement doesn't create a new international legal obligation. It reiterates the obligations already contained in Article 4 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The United States became a party to the Framework Convention after the Senate gave its advice and consent by an overwhelming vote in 1992." - https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doni ... -need-sign

http://www.c2es.org/document/key-legal- ... -agreement

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... agreement/

The Paris accord does not madate any new laws or any new spending. It's a non-binding accord encouraging nations to take steps and meet specified reductions in carbon emissions.

If the US decides the best way to do this is with a new carbon tax, or to mandate high as mileage standards for cars or anything like that, then THOSE measures WOULD need to be agreed to in congress. But the Paris accord contains no new laws, no new spending, and in non-binding.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:36 pm

2122M wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


"The Paris agreement doesn't create a new international legal obligation. It reiterates the obligations already contained in Article 4 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The United States became a party to the Framework Convention after the Senate gave its advice and consent by an overwhelming vote in 1992." - https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doni ... -need-sign

http://www.c2es.org/document/key-legal- ... -agreement

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... agreement/

The Paris accord does not madate any new laws or any new spending. It's a non-binding accord encouraging nations to take steps and meet specified reductions in carbon emissions.

If the US decides the best way to do this is with a new carbon tax, or to mandate high as mileage standards for cars or anything like that, then THOSE measures WOULD need to be agreed to in congress. But the Paris accord contains no new laws, no new spending, and in non-binding.


Whoa - way too much nuance provided there for the knee jerk climate crowd.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6957
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:45 pm

casinterest wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


I look forward to your explanation of this fictitious requirement.


Ratification is now a fiction? Really? Article 2, Section 2 requires treaties be ratified by 2/3rds vote of the Senate. Under the Vienna Convention on Treaties, it’s a treaty.

Are you afraid it won’t pass ratification?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6957
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:47 pm

2122M wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


"The Paris agreement doesn't create a new international legal obligation. It reiterates the obligations already contained in Article 4 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The United States became a party to the Framework Convention after the Senate gave its advice and consent by an overwhelming vote in 1992." - https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doni ... -need-sign

http://www.c2es.org/document/key-legal- ... -agreement

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... agreement/

The Paris accord does not madate any new laws or any new spending. It's a non-binding accord encouraging nations to take steps and meet specified reductions in carbon emissions.

If the US decides the best way to do this is with a new carbon tax, or to mandate high as mileage standards for cars or anything like that, then THOSE measures WOULD need to be agreed to in congress. But the Paris accord contains no new laws, no new spending, and in non-binding.


I’m sure the NRDC and the CAP are unbiased. Why the furore over Trump leaving it, if it isn’t binding in some manner. Why did Obama wait for a year to sign off on it?

The UN thinks it’s a treaty,

https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings ... -agreement

If it’s so obviously a good idea, the Senate will pass ratification
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 13288
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Paris agreement

Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:51 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


I look forward to your explanation of this fictitious requirement.


Ratification is now a fiction? Really? Article 2, Section 2 requires treaties be ratified by 2/3rds vote of the Senate. Under the Vienna Convention on Treaties, it’s a treaty.

Are you afraid it won’t pass ratification?


Funny how the WH withdrawal in 2017 made no mention of Congressional ratification requirements and they continued to abide by the multiyear exit process required by the agreement. :sarcastic:
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 12651
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 12:46 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I look forward to the Senate debate and ratification vote, as required by the Constitution.


I look forward to your explanation of this fictitious requirement.


Ratification is now a fiction? Really? Article 2, Section 2 requires treaties be ratified by 2/3rds vote of the Senate. Under the Vienna Convention on Treaties, it’s a treaty.

Are you afraid it won’t pass ratification?



I t already did. I am not sure you understand this subject since you have been lied to by right wing media.

Please look up the definition of an agreement vs a treaty. Or maybe you don't understand how Trump was able to leave it with an EO?

Either way. The senate isn't owed squat in this one.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
NYCVIE
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:01 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 3:50 am

Ted tweeted yesterday "By rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, President Biden indicates he’s more interested in the views of the citizens of Paris than in the jobs of the citizens of Pittsburgh. This agreement will do little to affect the climate and will harm the livelihoods of Americans."

Oh dear, who's gonna tell him.... And he could have at least picked a city not located in a state where he attempted to overthrow the will of voters :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:


From the Library of Congress - "Under international law, a "treaty" is any legally binding agreement between nations. In the United States, the word treaty is reserved for an agreement that is made "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate" (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution). International agreements not submitted to the Senate are known as "executive agreements" in the United States, but they are considered treaties and therefore binding under international law."

https://www.loc.gov/rr/main//govdocsgui ... nstitution).
 
User avatar
CitizenJustin
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 am

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 4:22 am

Challenger007 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

Have you tried any of the fake meats available today, they aren't very nice and no substitute for the real thing.


Because what's available today is very primitive - the first step was to be able to grow muscle cells. Now, they are getting better at replicating the complex lattice of protein structures that holds meat together. The results are promising.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04 ... -real-deal


It's not that all the same. Besides, livestock farms are not the biggest problem in my opinion. Now, if we reduced the number of gadgets produced, making them better and more durable, now if we stopped creating tons of useless clothes that brainless individuals clog their wardrobes with - these are the directions, the optimization of which would reduce the amount of pollution in our world. There are also cars with internal combustion engines. Electric cars are our future. But to do this, you need to achieve more sustainable electricity production.



This is so true. The fashion industry is one of the worst polluters. Cancerous sludge behind their factories in China is enough but the mindless drones filling their plastic bags with cheap crap that ends up in the dump a few months later doesn’t help.
 
olle
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 6:52 am

The truth is that by skipping Paris USA made its industries in renewable coming 4 years if not more behind China and Europe.

The cheapest energy today is not coal nor gasoline.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13779
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:38 am

Global carbon pricing on everything is the solution.

Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


I doubt that's anywhere near the top of priorities. And will face a lot of opposition, both in developed and in developing countries.

@Challenger007 : yes livestock is a big problem, too much meat consumption, and often fed with stuff we could eat directly (soja, corn) and is grown on burnt forest... But the solution there is simply to eat less meat.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14126
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 11:40 am

Aesma wrote:
Global carbon pricing on everything is the solution.

Aaron747 wrote:
We are already way behind. The G20 should be seriously looking at synthetic meat production and vertical indoor urban farming. We have all the technology needed, investment just needs a ramp-up.


I doubt that's anywhere near the top of priorities. And will face a lot of opposition, both in developed and in developing countries.

@Challenger007 : yes livestock is a big problem, too much meat consumption, and often fed with stuff we could eat directly (soja, corn) and is grown on burnt forest... But the solution there is simply to eat less meat.


the forest cleared by fire does not just release the stored carbon, but also removes carbon sinks .

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
Challenger007
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:03 am

Re: Paris agreement

Fri Jan 22, 2021 12:43 pm

Aesma wrote:
@Challenger007 : yes livestock is a big problem, too much meat consumption, and often fed with stuff we could eat directly (soja, corn) and is grown on burnt forest... But the solution there is simply to eat less meat.


I agree, but it is far from the only one. Humanity has passed into a super-consumption mode and this applies to all spheres of life. Food, fashion, gadgets, cars - all of this has been elevated to a cult. Everyone should have only the best, the newest. How many purchased foods do we throw away because we don't have time to eat? I'm not even talking about the systematic overeating of many people, which also leads to overproduction.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armadillo1 and 62 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos