China signed but their agreement stated they would INCREASE CO2 emissions for at least five years and their behavior is consistent. They are preparing to lower emissions. Trust me I say they REALLY need that.
In terms of the oceans, algae is the bottom of the food chain, although it is usually not called algae, but called phytoplankton. Plants are always at the bottom of food chains. They have to be, as they don't eat other things. Please explain what you think is on the bottom of oceanic food chains if not algae. Or more specifically, tell me what the algae is feeding on. Here's a pretty accurate diagram of it. http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/take-action/marine-food-chain/
Much of the petroleum out there is associated with the above. It's from fossilized marine algae under pressure.
Phytoplankton are a huge part of the food chain and at the bottom form the foundation of it. Krill feel on it. If you remove the bottom of the food chain you risk an extinction level event so it is very important to the ecology of the marine and even freshwater environment.
Trump backed out of the first global agreement in history. That isn't spin. It is fact. Your equivocation doesn't change that.
Spin it boy. Already explained myself and answered questions on China which YOU ignored. The globe allowed China to increase its production of CO2 gases. Great agreement yet you still spin. And you people wonder why you aren't being taken seriously. And the agreement was voluntary to begin with....no teeth. Bunch of politicians agreeing to nothing of substance patting each other on the back and you buy into the scam. Or you're just full of it as it suspect you are.
Your position seems muddled to me. First you suggest other countries will ignore the agreements they have made at Paris. Then, you say they will go ahead. First, you said we can't make progress unless everyone does it at once. Now you are saying everyone will do it anyway. We are by far the worst per capita emitter of co2. And, other countries have all been doing well financially while taxing carbon use - something the right wing in the US claims is impossible. China is using its government to help it win a leading position in clean energy, making Chian the owner of more patents that other countries (including the US) as well as being the world leader in clean energy technology global sales. Yet, you seem to think we can do well while denying climate change even exists, with moves such as Trump's move to put an aggressive denier in charge of NASA, including it's study of climatology, which has been trusted world wide.
Pick a side, buddy. There is no consistency to your position. Moaning about "no teeth" is not an excuse for losing. China is working hard on clean energy from their top levels of government on down. They have more clean energy patents. They have more clean energy product deliveries. Today, the US has more people working in clean energy than in coal. Yet, Trump is backing coal (which is dead) and working to slow our leadership in clean energy. As I say, pick a side.
We are not the worst emitters of CO2 nor pollution per capita or in toto. I suggest you go to Beijing or even a coastal city like Qingdao, where I live part time, and see what's it's really like in China. I doubt you get reality based facts of CO2 emissions out of China as I don't know they want that information. They know their problems and they are working on them just in their fashion which is long term I understand India is bad but I admit I've never been there. You give us your agenda and it appears you never bother to check your facts as long as it fits your purpose. As before tell the facts and let people make up their own mind. And why not leave Trump out of it. You sound like a shill every time you open your mouth. These problems have been coming for a long time before you ever thought of Trump and in reality your hero never did shyte about pollution; the treaty was a sham as are most anything 'everyone' agrees to.
Yes, we don't have some total solution. But, that NEVER implies we should throw up our hands and fold. Science does show that there ARE steps that can make an important difference.
Steps being avoided like going after refrigerants and and the cattle industry that release far more greenhouse gases connected to human activity than the modern automobile.
I try not to take sides but as a scientist follow facts. I doubt youve been to China much less understand their policies nor know them. Yet you pontificate ex cathedra but are constantly spouting erroneous comments. You have family working for the party in Beijing? Yet I do. But you want to espouse China's policies? Trump backs coal just as China is building plants at break neck speed. Why? To fuel their economy so people can feed and clothe themselves as well as stay employed and warm. It takes time to move to different sources of energy when it is economically feasible. We all understand moving away from fossil fuels is important. So are basic necessities. Slowly back away from your brainwashing and start thinking rationally before you hurt others.
I don't accept this "you have to go there" idea, because people who say that have not been to all places and have not taken measurements that have actually been successfully defended as legitimate. So, don't tell me about your travel. I will readily assume you lead a really cool life of world wide adventure and joy. Today, China isn't just "working on it" - they are actually leading in several ways. Trump is in it, because he is our president, he has pulled us from the Paris agreement, he has stated his disbelieve in science, he has appointed a total IDIOT to lead NASA science including their important role in climatology. I would be fine not mentioning Trump, but when the US president takes action there really isn't a choice in the matter. So, YOU have to suck that up, just like I do.
Going after refrigerants is a case where world wide agreement DID make a difference in the impact of human created gas emissions. It show humans can make a difference. There being more co2 from cattle means there is a possibility of their being more leverage with cattle than with cars. The catch is that nobody has a realistic solution for reducing cattle emissions. On the other hand, every country in the world (save the USA and 2 or 3 others) has levied tax on fuel that has encouraged a wide range of efficiencies.
I live there part of the year. I dont just travel. My sister still works for the Party in Beijing for major players. While my inside knowledge isn't extensive it's silly for you to just brush it off. I have way more knowledge than most. As far as measuring goes I'm the one along with most Chinese who are forced to change outside clothes as soon as you hit the door. That's how polluted it is. Or learning not too touch anything. Or wearing a mask or at least having a couple on you. Or just noticing everyone has their lights on and you can't see a thing at 2 PM because of the smog. It's darker than a total eclipse. Or knowing over 2.5 M people die every year from pollution. I'm going to post this from phone then edit to add in China emissions and more. http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/03/31/chinese-co2-emissions-really-peaked/ As you can see China has long since passed us on CO2 emissions. And their overall pollutants esp those you can see are horrendous. Right now they are fighting to keep the desert out of Beijing. Every year they are fighting famine, drought or flooding in at least one province. They are still trying to feed their population although this is more so in the West than the East now. And people are dying in droves from the pollution. And we haven't even talked about the rivers and waterways including the shoreline. If you're going to debate China with me then be armed with facts not spin. You didn't even know the CO2 emissions difference between China and the US. Perhaps your data was old or I suspect you're just making stuff up to try to win an argument over the internet. Here, you win but if you want to debate do so with facts, be fair and reasonable and leave your agenda at home.
How many of that 2.5M die from pollution caused by the mining of rare earth minerals used to make "green energy" devices?
I have no idea and I don't even trust that 'fact' since it's coming out of China where information like that is always suspect. Many males smoke anyway esp certain generations. So many are walking around with COPD anyway from cigs. But as one famous comedian once said, "Here's the weather report......look out the GD window." They don't really know how many people live there as the Chinese like to avoid the government esp intrusive questions which they consider rude to begin with. My mother is 96 and it took me a year to get her to talk about her mother which she agreed to do.....once. But I have pulmonologist friends and they all agree it's getting worse for their patients esp more kids with asthma. I realize that's anecdotal and is unpublishable but for an experienced physician that's important information to have. It's the same here so that's not surprising. What's surprising is in the last ten years there is a huge difference in particulate matter in the air esp in the larger cities like Beijing. Again, anecdotal but real. I have to be drug to Beijing and I go out of my way to avoid flying there or taking the train even if more expensive. Much of the rare earth minerals are in Mongolia which just isn't populated much so I doubt that's a factor even realizing you are speaking somewhat in jest. There are more cars there per capita than the US now and that amazes me as I never drive there. Too easy to take a taxi or bus which is cheap cheap cheap.
Actually I stated other countries will ignore Trump, not the agreement. I never said anything remotely close to the second part.
Some up north but much is from vehicles and factories. It's different. That stuff blowing in from the desert is earth and grass etc. The smog is much darker looking...black...and just covers everything sticking to clothes. You can't easily brush it off. I live in Qingdao much of the time and we don't have nearly the smog as some other cities. But it happens.
[ The fact is that I didn't say total, I said per capita. If you look at your graph and remember that they have more than 3X our population, you will see what I mean. And, I notice from your graph that China's gross output took an unusual hiatus in growth. Have they really already made that much difference? Or is it an anomaly? Interesting article: China Looks to Capitalize on Clean Energy as U.S. Retreats https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/...clean-energy-coal-pollution.html?mcubz=1&_r=0 I trust your wife is well.
Actually, you were talking to another poster and you stated: "We are by far the worst per capita emitter of co2. And, other countries have all been doing well financially while taxing carbon use - something the right wing in the US claims is impossible. China is using its government to help it win a leading position in clean energy, making Chian the owner of more patents that other countries (including the US) as well as being the world leader in clean energy technology global sales." Sure you used per capita and that one graph supports the US uses more per capita but I'd reject by far and the total does matter much more than 'per capita' so don't try to completely weasel word your way out of all of it. We don't know why the lull. As I've stated, China is hard to gauge because of inherent problems with data collection for one thing along with censorship by the Party. There are more cars there now, more industry and hence more pollution so I'm leary of their lull. But they are emitting twice as much CO2 as we are and that's consistent with the particulate matter in the air which should mirror CO2 up to a point. Your second statement is just made up agenda except I didn't check patents nor do I care. That has nothing to do with what is going on in China. The fact they sell to the rest of the world things the world buys to clean up the world just supports my position rather than vice versa. Please, leave my wife out of our debate although I appreciate the sentiment. I don't remember mentioning her just my Mom and sister and they are well.
Not what I asked, but since you know that "most of it" is from one thing, then you should know what the answer to my question is. So pony up the info. If you can't, then you don't really know if "most of it is from burning coal" or not.
