Exiting the Paris Accord will hurt the US economy.
"Withdrawing from the Paris agreement does not make economic sense for the US, a group of economists has argued, as the cost of clean energy has fallen since the agreement was signed in 2015, while the risks of climate catastrophe have increased.
Economists from the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at the London School of Economics examined the economic case for the US withdrawal, which President Donald Trump signalled in June 2017, and which will take effect on 4 November, the day after this year’s presidential election.
They found that climate breakdown would cause growing losses to US infrastructure and property, and impede the rate of economic growth this century, and that an increasing proportion of the carbon emissions causing global heating would come from countries outside the US. That gives the US a vested interest in whether the Paris agreement succeeds or fails, regardless of whether the US fulfils its own voluntary obligations under the accord."
Trump exiting Paris accord will harm US economy – LSE research | Environment | The Guardian
That renewables are starting to out compete fossil fuels all across the world leading to great economic opportunities.
Plunging Renewable Energy Prices Mean U.S. Can Hit 90% Clean Electricity By 2035 - At No Extra Cost
Why Energy Storage Is Proving Even More Disruptive Than Cheap Renewables
There also just the health benefits from reduction in air pollution alone outweigh the cost of the Paris Accord.
Health benefits far outweigh the costs of meeting climate change goals
We can have clean energy without needng to hand over billions to third world countries.
The three billion dollars US would have contribute the Green Climate Fund can be compared to billions of dollars a years Trump wants to spend on propping up failing coal plants. Also that other countries contribute to a lot more to fund the fund per capita than the US.
Donald Trump hopes to save America’s failing coal-fired power plants
The plan would benefit a handful of firms the president favours at the expense of consumerswww.economist.com
Also US spends around 700 billion a years on their military so it makes a lot of financial sense to reduce the need for foreign intervention by helping development countries mitigate the divesting effects of climate change. Especially since the money spent on that is so tiny compared to US military spending and climate change leading to such severe risks to national and global security.
"Washington, DC, February 24, 2020 — In a comprehensive report released by the “National Security, Military and Intelligence Panel (NSMIP)” of the Center for Climate and Security, experts warn of High-to-Catastrophic threats to security from plausible climate change trajectories – the avoidance of which will require “quickly reducing and phasing out global greenhouse gas emissions.”
The panel, made up of national security, military and intelligence experts, analyzed the globe through the lens of the U.S. Geographic Combatant Commands, and concluded that:
“Even at scenarios of low warming, each region of the world will face severe risks to national and global security in the next three decades. Higher levels of warming will pose catastrophic, and likely irreversible, global security risks over the course of the 21st century.”"
RELEASE: Future Climate Change Presents High-to-Catastrophic Security Threat, Warn U.S. National Security, Military and Intelligence Experts in New Assessment
Washington, DC, February 24, 2020 — In a comprehensive report released today by the “National Security, Military and Intelligence Panel (NSMIP)” of the Center for Climate and Security, experts warn…climateandsecurity.org
Please give us a compelling reason why billions of redistribution is needed to curtail the impending climate change?The three billion dollars US would have contribute the Green Climate Fund can be compared to billions of dollars a years Trump wants to spend on propping up failing coal plants. Also that other countries contribute to a lot more to fund the fund per capita than the US.
Donald Trump hopes to save America’s failing coal-fired power plants
The plan would benefit a handful of firms the president favours at the expense of consumerswww.economist.com
Also US spends around 700 billion a years on their military so it makes a lot of financial sense to reduce the need for foreign intervention by helping development countries mitigate the divesting effects of climate change. Especially since the money spent on that is so tiny compared to US military spending and climate change leading to such severe risks to national and global security.
"Washington, DC, February 24, 2020 — In a comprehensive report released by the “National Security, Military and Intelligence Panel (NSMIP)” of the Center for Climate and Security, experts warn of High-to-Catastrophic threats to security from plausible climate change trajectories – the avoidance of which will require “quickly reducing and phasing out global greenhouse gas emissions.”
The panel, made up of national security, military and intelligence experts, analyzed the globe through the lens of the U.S. Geographic Combatant Commands, and concluded that:
“Even at scenarios of low warming, each region of the world will face severe risks to national and global security in the next three decades. Higher levels of warming will pose catastrophic, and likely irreversible, global security risks over the course of the 21st century.”"
RELEASE: Future Climate Change Presents High-to-Catastrophic Security Threat, Warn U.S. National Security, Military and Intelligence Experts in New Assessment
Washington, DC, February 24, 2020 — In a comprehensive report released today by the “National Security, Military and Intelligence Panel (NSMIP)” of the Center for Climate and Security, experts warn…climateandsecurity.org
None of what you posted has anything to do do with what I said--- We can have clean energy without needing to hand over billions to third world countries.
Why Prolong the Pain? Countries Must End Harmful Allegiance to Paris Agreement
The United Nations’ (UN) collective decision, under the Framework Convention on Climate Change, to wage war on fossil fuels required a draconian energy policy. First it tried the Kyoto Protocol—under which almost no nation lived up to its commitments. Ironically, the United States, which never ratified it, had the world’s best record at reducing greenhouse gas emissions during the period Kyoto covered.
Continue reading →
Please give us a compelling reason why billions of redistribution is needed to curtail the impending climate change?
Did you know... The climate is always changing!
Do you relly think mankind has the power to do more than Mother Nature?
None of which speaks to the point.The economical benefits with renewable energy and the cost of coal is so great that renewable surpass coal even with a president that promised to save coal.
.
While at the same time for example EU countries have a lot higher percent of renewable energy than US and also a lot less pollution per capita. So there can be great potential for the US to speed up the transition.
Europe now gets 21% of its electricity from solar and wind
Globally 10% of all energy was produced by solar panels and wind turbines in the first half of 2020.www.euronews.com
American states like Texas already benefiting from the dramatic drop in cost of renewable energy thanks to previous investments in mostly other countries that have lead to innovation and economic scale. There US helping developing countries as well as learning and cooperate with other countries can lead to even more economy of scale and innovations with even lower prices and more efficient renewable energy.
We've already pumped hundreds of billions into Africa to prevent them from doing any development whatsoever, and the IMF is asking for another $345 billion.0000
Third world countries are not developing green energy. They are sitting there waiting for developed nations to hand it to them.
0000
Third world countries are not developing green energy. They are sitting there waiting for developed nations to hand it to them.
We've already pumped hundreds of billions into Africa to prevent them from doing any development whatsoever, and the IMF is asking for another $345 billion.
IMF chief sees $345 billion financing gap for African states
Countries and institutions must do more to help African states weather the global pandemic and its economic impact, the International Monetary Fund said on Friday, noting the region faced a projected financing gap of $345 billion through 2023.www.reuters.com
This is part of their Marxist "redistribution of wealth" scam and what the leftist Climate Change/Global Warming/Global Cooling movement has always been about for the last 50 years.
Why does the left, like the USA being used by the rest of the world?US will now rejoin the Pairs Accord.
Biden Reaffirms Commitment to Rejoining Paris Agreement
Former Vice President Joe Biden, who took the lead Friday morning in the crucial battleground state of Pennsylvania according to The Associated Press, has reaffirmed his commitment to immediately rejoining the accord if he wins the 2020 presidential election against incumbent Donald...www.ecowatch.com
There it also are strong support for a transition towards renewable energy that can create opportunities for all of the USA.
Poll: Two-thirds of voters support Biden climate plan
New polling indicates Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s climate plan is doing well with voters even as they are split on their support for fracking.Results from a Tuesday survey cond…thehill-com.cdn.ampproject.org
Renewable Energy Surges Even In Fossil Fuel Friendly Red States
The nation’s two largest coal-producing states, Wyoming and West Virginia, have entered the top ten in renewable energy and energy storage, respectively, according to a new report.www.forbes.com
I think the political left finds joy in harming the US!Why does the left, like the USA being used by the rest of the world?
Not accepting the propogranda from the Koch brothers is not harming the U.S.I think the political left finds joy in harming the US!
The harm cause from joining the Paris accord, has nothing to do with the Koch brothers,Not accepting the propogranda from the Koch brothers is not harming the U.S.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?