The right wing 'China won't curb their emissions' argument goes down in flames

[PoloMalo43]

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/03/uk-china-climatechange-idINKBN0EE0KB20140603

I guess some of you guys can always fall back to the Jim Inhofe 'God is in control so we don't need to do anything' argument.

Personally from the latest study I glanced earlier on methane hydrates being released, and Obama's weak attempt at coal power regulation which leaves the states a backdoor out, In my opinion it might not matter what we do if it's not 80 ~90% carbon clean.

Natural gas is even dirtier than coal when you consider leakage losses.

Besides the most CO2 comes from beef and other animal food production 51% IIRC, and heaven forbid we lose our Big Macs in fat slothful America. That would start a revolution, although it would probably get winded pretty quick.

 

[hamster]

Nice gesture. We'll see if it happens. Better yet, why don't they just convert everything to solar? They are leaders in the field, and can produce it cheaply, right?

 

[Omar10213245]

*GASP* China's gonna cap their CO2 emissions?! Well garsh, do ya really mean it??? Boy howdy that's swell, I just can't WAIT to see China help to make the world a cleaner place, because...because China NEVER goes against their own word....right??

 

[Rod Farva]

I trust the Chinese as much as I trust the current crop of miscreants in DC.

 

[Vincent]

What does "China plan(s) to cap CO2 emissions" actually mean in context to their emissions growing from 7 billion tonnes to 11 billion tonnes in 2030? Or in any context, for that matter?

For the record Polo, what do you suggest as the alternative to coal? Not adjuncts (sun, wind). Alternatives (fuel).

 

[CharlesDavenport]

What a joke. What is with these libs and their complete trust in bad guys?

 

[EdReed4Prez]

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/03/uk-china-climatechange-idINKBN0EE0KB20140603
Besides the most CO2 comes from beef and other animal food production 51% IIRC, and heaven forbid we lose our Big Macs in fat slothful America. That would start a revolution, although it would probably get winded pretty quick.

The government should mandate a vegan lifestyle, right comrade?

 

[Vincent]

The government should mandate a vegan lifestyle, right comrade?

Vegetable digestion produces Methane, "a potent greenhouse gas". You will be reported to the Sarcasm Ministry.

 

[oneforthebus]

Baaa baaaa....

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/l...china-will-limit-co2-emissions/#axzz33hLvwZop

Headlines blared Tuesday that President Obama’s announcement of a rule limiting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants had convinced China, the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, to impose its own cap-and-trade system.
A huge victory for those hoping for an international climate agreement next year. The only problem is that China made no such commitment. The liberal media actually quoted a Chinese official who was voicing his opinion, and not speaking on behalf of the Chinese government.
“It’s not the case that the Chinese government has made any decision. I’m not a government official and I don’t represent the government,” said Professor Jiankun He, who is the director of the Low Carbon Economy Lab of Tsinghua Universtiy and the deputy director of the National Expert Committee on Climate Change.
Jiankun He told this to Reuters after American media outlets jumped at earlier reports that quoted him saying China would cap carbon dioxide emissions in its next five-year plan.
“What I have said today was my personal opinion,” Jiankun He told the Reuters yesterday. “What I have said does not represent the view of the Chinese government or of any organisation.”
Regardless of the fact that Jiankun He was not laying out official Chinese policy, American media outlets ran with the story, spinning it as a triumph for Obama ahead of the United Nations’ next major climate conference next year.


Read more at TLR: Liberal Media Duped By Reports That China Will Limit CO2 Emissions | The Libertarian Republic http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/l...china-will-limit-co2-emissions/#ixzz33hME6B5C
Follow us: @LibRepublic on Twitter | LibertarianRepublic on Facebook

 

[Vader]

I'm sure Polo will be here shortly to explain how a Chinese professor speaks for China and how they are well on their way to capping carbon emissions.

 

[madinsomniac]

China's air emmission policy is being driven from local air pollution, not global. They industrialized so quickly and on such a large scale that they are running into the same issues we did on a greater scale alreadythink Spaceballs with an asian flavor ... if they think they can bilk money or ingenuity out of the US or europe to help them with that issue they will...

 

[PoloMalo43]

I'm sure Polo will be here shortly to explain how a Chinese professor speaks for China and how they are well on their way to capping carbon emissions.

Actually he wasn't supposed to speak outside of Chinese gov. circles on policy, but he is involved. They're still wondering how to play their hand and they have already suffered from AGW in China so they know the game is up.

Yes professors are involved because they have to explain the science and the consequences to those in government.

Shocking huh? You would think they would do it the American CON-servative way and have Ted Cruz consult a West Virginia snake handling pastor, or have Nancy Reagan consult an astrologist.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/03/china-climatechange-idUSnL3N0KJRU20140603





BEIJING, June 3 (Reuters) - China is considering an absolute cap on its CO2 emissions from 2016, a senior adviser to the government said on Tuesday, a day after Washington announced new targets for its power sector, signalling a potential breakthrough in tough U.N. climate talks.

Progress in global climate negotiations has often been held back by a deep split between rich and poor nations, led by the United States and China, respectively, over who should step up their game to reduce emissions.

But the statement by adviser He Jiankun, coupled with the U.S. announcement, sparked optimism among observers hoping to see the decades-old deadlock broken. The steps come ahead of a global meet on climate change starting on Wednesday in Germany.

Adviser He had suggested at a conference in Beijing that China would put the cap in place by 2016. But he later told Reuters that the idea was his personal view.

"What I said today was my personal view. The opinions expressed at the workshop were only meant for academic studies," he said. "What I said does not represent the Chinese government or any organisation."

Earlier, He had told the conference: "The government will use two ways to control CO2 emissions in the next five-year plan, by intensity and an absolute cap."

 

[EdReed4Prez]

"What I said today was my personal view. The opinions expressed at the workshop were only meant for academic studies," he said. "What I said does not represent the Chinese government or any organisation."


You highlighted the wrong part. Here's the key paragraph. If and when the Chinese curb emissions it won't be because of global warming terror. It will be due to good old fashioned smog and a need to breathe.

 

[PoloMalo43]

"What I said today was my personal view. The opinions expressed at the workshop were only meant for academic studies," he said. "What I said does not represent the Chinese government or any organisation."


You highlighted the wrong part. Here's the key paragraph. If and when the Chinese curb emissions it won't be because of global warming terror. It will be due to good old fashioned smog and a need to breathe.

I couldn't find those words, even if I did it sounds like the bloggers opinion not the professors words, am I right?

That's why I highlited the quote where he blurted out what he wasn't supposed to.

 

[Vader]

Actually he wasn't supposed to speak outside of Chinese gov. circles on policy, but he is involved. They're still wondering how to play their hand and they have already suffered from AGW in China so they know the game is up.

Yes professors are involved because they have to explain the science and the consequences to those in government.

Shocking huh? You would think they would do it the American CON-servative way and have Ted Cruz consult a West Virginia snake handling pastor, or have Nancy Reagan consult an astrologist.

No what is shocking is that you don't even understand what he was saying. He is an ADVISOR not a government official.

But later, Reuters quoted Professor He as saying a decision had not been taken by the Chinese government to pursue an absolute cap, and it was his personal view. This is what he said.

"The opinions expressed at the workshop were only meant for academic studies," he said. "What I said does not represent the Chinese government or any organisation.''

The New York Times also reported Professor He as saying: ''This is a suggestion from experts, because now they are exploring how emissions can be controlled in the 13th Five-Year Plan . . . This is a view of experts; that’s not saying it’s the government’s. I’m not a government official and I don’t represent the government."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-p...n-emissions-20140603-zrwpj.html#ixzz33iATD8C5

It's a WORKSHOP for academics. Maybe you should go to an astrologer to find out how much pull he has with the Chinese government? Or maybe you should consult scientist and known liar like Al Gore?

 

[oneforthebus]

Doesn't it bother you at all Polo, the way news is manipulated to support this cause? If the science was so sound why would people have to twist and distort the truth when reporting it?

 

[Steeltime]

China and India are adding coal power plants on a regular basis, and China now gets nearly 80% of its electricity from coal.

http://sustainability.thomsonreuter...ts-provide-close-to-80-of-chinas-electricity/

Polo, you are simply a moron if you believe that China will voluntary cut off its own energy production due to "global whatever-the-****-it's-called-now."

China is of course thrilled to encourage Europe and the United States to reduce coal consumption. Think of it this way - how would you feel if the Steelers announced that they would no longer draft or retain players who weighed more than 285 lbs. in an effort to "fight global obesity"?

Yeah, fine, but the other teams get the 350 lb. guys, who crush the Steelers players.

That is EXACTLY what is going on here. Coal is astoundingly efficient at producing energy. It is accessible, and affordable, and not controlled by guys who want to kill Americans.

And we refuse to use the resource.

India and China say, "Great, you go, America." Meanwhile, they produce affordable, reliable electricity using coal, and our ******* manufacturing goes to those nations because they have affordable energy.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

You highlighted the wrong part. Here's the key paragraph. If and when the Chinese curb emissions it won't be because of global warming terror. It will be due to good old fashioned smog and a need to breathe.

Remember, they had to shut down two-thirds of the country's manufacturing three weeks before the Olympics to clear the air enough so the athletes wouldn't die from running around in it.

The Chinese are good at smiling and agreeing to everything you say until you leave the room, then they go ahead and do whatever they were going to do anyway. As my dad found out when he tried to do business there. I tried to tell him.

 

[SteelChip]

The Chinese are good at smiling and agreeing to everything you say until you leave the room[/B], then they go ahead and do whatever they were going to do anyway. As my dad found out when he tried to do business there. I tried to tell him.

Sounds a little like our Libtard leaders huh Ron. Then you have Polo makin' bashes like ...

"Shocking huh? You would think they would do it the American CON-servative way and have Ted Cruz consult a West Virginia snake handling pastor, or have Nancy Reagan consult an astrologist".

She's not going to give up 'till the countries across the world are equally subverted and standing in line for UN supplied aid.

View attachment 162.......View attachment 163

 

[Rod Farva]

I couldn't find those words, even if I did it sounds like the bloggers opinion not the professors words, am I right?
That's why I highlited the quote where he blurted out what he wasn't supposed to.

What? It's in your own C&P........

Maybe because like most liberals you only see what you want to see.

 

[EdReed4Prez]

http://news.yahoo.com/u-carbon-plan-not-reach-climate-goals-study-122711220.html

The Climate Action Tracker suggested that overall U.S. emissions would be only about 10 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, roughly equal with existing levels, unless tougher action is taken in sectors from transport to agriculture.

And worldwide, it said that greenhouse gas emissions would have to fall to zero sometime between 2060 to 2080 - more ambitious than almost any nation's long-term plans - to give a strong chance of limiting warming to below 2 degrees Celsius.


Yeah, good luck with that.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

She's not going to give up 'till the countries across the world are equally subverted and standing in line for UN supplied aid.

But where will the UN get the money for aid? Libtards don't think things all the way through. (They can't, or else they would find out that they are wrong.)

And worldwide, it said that greenhouse gas emissions would have to fall to zero sometime between 2060 to 2080 - more ambitious than almost any nation's long-term plans - to give a strong chance of limiting warming to below 2 degrees Celsius.

Except that there is no global warming. Sure, there are Kool-Aid drinkers who honestly believe in it but when you look at who is behind AGW you see that it's all about control and wealth redistribution and a way to coax the sheeple into going along with it. I live in PA, heck, I wish global warming WAS real. I hate being cold and wet half the year. Those palm trees they truck in every year and plant in the back patio of the bar across the street from my office, I want those ******* growing there for real!

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Baaa baaaa....

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/l...china-will-limit-co2-emissions/#axzz33hLvwZop

Headlines blared Tuesday that President Obama’s announcement of a rule limiting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants had convinced China, the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, to impose its own cap-and-trade system.
A huge victory for those hoping for an international climate agreement next year. The only problem is that China made no such commitment. The liberal media actually quoted a Chinese official who was voicing his opinion, and not speaking on behalf of the Chinese government.
“It’s not the case that the Chinese government has made any decision. I’m not a government official and I don’t represent the government,” said Professor Jiankun He, who is the director of the Low Carbon Economy Lab of Tsinghua Universtiy and the deputy director of the National Expert Committee on Climate Change.
Jiankun He told this to Reuters after American media outlets jumped at earlier reports that quoted him saying China would cap carbon dioxide emissions in its next five-year plan.
“What I have said today was my personal opinion,” Jiankun He told the Reuters yesterday. “What I have said does not represent the view of the Chinese government or of any organisation.”
Regardless of the fact that Jiankun He was not laying out official Chinese policy, American media outlets ran with the story, spinning it as a triumph for Obama ahead of the United Nations’ next major climate conference next year.

Palo's one of the most faithful in the flock.

 

[Black & Gold Bleeder]

"What I said today was my personal view. The opinions expressed at the workshop were only meant for academic studies," he said. "What I said does not represent the Chinese government or any organisation."


You highlighted the wrong part. Here's the key paragraph. If and when the Chinese curb emissions it won't be because of global warming terror. It will be due to good old fashioned smog and a need to breathe.

Me play joke... me go pee pee in your coke..

 

[PoloMalo43]

But where will the UN get the money for aid? Libtards don't think things all the way through. (They can't, or else they would find out that they are wrong.)


Except that there is no global warming. Sure, there are Kool-Aid drinkers who honestly believe in it but when you look at who is behind AGW you see that it's all about control and wealth redistribution and a way to coax the sheeple into going along with it. I live in PA, heck, I wish global warming WAS real. I hate being cold and wet half the year. Those palm trees they truck in every year and plant in the back patio of the bar across the street from my office, I want those ******* growing there for real!

There is no global warming? lol how do you feel about gravity? This is basic physics....no one with half a brain says "There is no global warming." Unbelievable.

Here you go since one of you here likes cartoons IIRC, this one should cover most of you. Replace the Kardashians at the end with "Who did the Steelers draft" and we're golden.