So President Biden has officially made the United States re-join the Paris Climate Accord. This will be interesting to see how this will play out. Will it benefit the United States and climate change? Or will it cost us, dearly, trillions of dollars without even making a “dent” in climate change?
What about the other countries? Did they provide actual changes in their country’s policy to “reduce” carbon emissions?
China, to me, is questionable in their participation in the Paris Climate Agreement. Beijing, for example, has the worst air quality overall in comparison to various cities around the world:
The Paris Climate Agreement is expensive. I see this as like an expensive gym membership but some members do not bother to use this gym and work out to get the results that everyone assumes to achieve.
Why is it that our country has to literally PAY out of our asses to be in such an expensive agreement when all the other countries are not going to do their part until 10, 15, 20, 25 + years later?
Surprisingly, in the video above, the United States has greatly reduced carbon emissions with constant development and innovation on current energy sources – natural gas, etc.
Here’s my personal take on energy – let us continue to utilize what currently works with reduction in carbon emissions with sources of energy that we have been utilizing. And at the same time we can utilize the newer sources of “renewable energy”. I see that the “renewable energy” is still in the beginning phases (baby phase) of being used – e.g. solar, wind and whatever else. But we have to remind ourselves, solar and wind WILL ONLY WORK if there is sun and wind! And it is funny how quite a bit of politicians are pushing for only solar and wind – like those are the ONLY sources of renewable energy out there.
Okay for simplistic sake, here’s an analogy that I can try to best relate in continuing to use energy which currently works and is in CONSTANT IMPROVEMENT (e.g. fracking and natural gas). Think of the very first internal combustion engine, in the late 1800’s. That was then used in the automobiles – Model T – for example. That was in the beginning phases (baby phase) of being in use and granted it probably emitted quite a bit of carbon back then in the 1800’s and 1900’s. HOWEVER, through innovation we had the ability to make the internal combustion engine more efficient and more environmentally friendly. Take for example, Nissan since 2010, has been working on making their engines more efficient: https://www.nissan-global.com/EN/TECHNOLOGY/OVERVIEW/ice.html
In contrast, the electric vehicles are still in the “baby phase”. Yes, it is more appealing because it produces no emissions when you are using the vehicle. However, in producing the electric vehicle (currently) does generate quite a bit of greenhouse gases.
So do we believe United States really benefiting in re-joining this Paris Climate Agreement? Again, why is it that our country’s government spend billions or possibly trillions of dollars to be in this expensive agreement when all the other countries are not going to do their part until 10, 15, 20, 25 + years later? It’s like we are participating in a 1-man team… where we are doing everything and no one else around is helping. Is continuing to pay trillions from citizen’s tax dollars into a cliché “group” project a real solution for a better climate?
Anhle.blog 