(11-26-2019 09:53 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I think lad buys in to the idea that if the United States 'buys in' to GHG reduction, then the really big polluters will all automatically view the expertise of the United States as paramount, realize the 'error', and all become good citizens by rapidly curbing their growth trajectories.

I dont think he understands the parallel rejection of another US example of the ideals of representative government and individual rights by that same country. At least he didnt go coffee3 on you.

Or perhaps lad doesnt realize who the country with the largest GHG output (almost double of the next) is.

But at the end he chooses to use a non-sequitor in a slut-shame mode. All in all he doesnt seem to understand that the leading GHG producer is not really a prime example for his feel good 'lead by example' paean.

It also really doesnt seem that the lad is aware that US GHG sources have actually declined roughly 15% since the 2004-2006 time period. Bad bad USA.

You’re off quite a lot with your assumptions.

I don’t think that our lead will immediately encourage other countries to reduce their emissions. But if we want to pressure and encourage them to, we must be making demonstrable steps towards reduction. So if we want China to embrace GHG reductions, our government must first do so.

And we must push to try and curb GHG reductions in areas that will be effective in our country and others - concrete manufacturing is a perfect example of where we can push research to try and find alternative energy sources. I just saw that Bill Gates is funding a company that recently made a rather large breakthrough in thermal heat generation.

And while GHG emissions in the US are not at a peak, we can still be more aggressive at looking for solutions to further reduce our emissions. We still do not have a method of capturing the negative externalities of these emissions in our economy, which is a major blind spot, IMO. Plus, I’ve read recently that emissions have risen significantly this past year, driven primarily by transportation, which is so cheap because low oil prices don’t really capture the full cost of GHG or other emissions.

But go ahead and keep making assumptions if you would like. It would be a lot more interesting discussion if you wanted to actually discuss these points as opposed to going on ******* attack mode right off the bat.