Obama Pursuing Climate Accord

President Obama is seeking an international climate accord that would not require cooperation from either the Senate or the House of Representatives. I don’t love the idea of completely going around our political system on this. But, with the survival of humanity and most of the multicellular life in the biosphere and in fact, the health of the biosphere as a whole on the line, it may be necessary.

We all know that if he tries to get this through even the senate, he’ll never get the required 67% for a treaty. After all, the repugnicans have proven that they would rather kill off humanity and cause another Permian/Triassic level extinction (where 95% of all multicellular species go extinct) than actually allow Obama to accomplish so much as brushing his teeth.

So, for now, with the means being not too bad and the ends being necessary for survival, I’m going to go with the ends justify the means on this limited case, even though I strongly disagree with the philosophy for most issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html

Advertisements

9 Responses to Obama Pursuing Climate Accord

  1. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    There is no such thing as going around Congress. There is a separation of and balance of powers each with their own pros and cons.

    This proposed “accord” is as close to meaningless as you can get…other than doing absolutely nothing. The Pres can do a few small things to go green but anything meaningful or to influence other countries, has to have Congressional action.

    • Actually, the EPA can do a lot unilaterally and is already starting to do so. Also, the president can raise CAFE standards for vehicles and has already done so.

      But, this is about getting international cooperation which has proven as difficult abroad as it is here. Maybe something non-binding can actually do a bit more than the absolutely nothing that has been done thus far.

  2. ECA says:

    Want the truth?
    Fire everyone that has been there 20 years or less, Including those elected and HIRED…
    THEN lets start over, and if they DONT GET THE HINT…FIRE those 30 years or less… and keep working on it..

    Until we START GETTING A PUBLIC FORUM…

    • Funny, I’d start with firing those who’ve been there the longest. They have the proven track record of inactivity. Young blood might do more and care more.

      Unfortunately, that dumps on the younger generation the problems caused by the older. But, so does doing nothing.

      • EC A says:

        SORRY IT TOOK SO LONG..
        My meaning is EVERYONE..not just the elected, Paid by public money..All of them..

  3. ECA says:

    I really have to say something…
    In the USA we have had alot of pollution problems..STILL DO..
    we made tons of laws to protect our lands. and the Corps moved out..
    WE had a problem world wide with Ozone..STILL DO..and the Aussies love us for it. As the corps dont care while they make things in other lands, that dont have our regulations.
    Japan and Taiwan, have learned lessons..STOPPED or are charging for the Problems associated with it.
    NOW we have Carbon..Basically, you can break down almost anything to Carbon. but there are OTHER THINGS causing problems. Basing them on 1 thing is STUPID.. And it seems we have forgotten the past problems.

    There are TONS of alternatives out there. that work as well, or BETTEr then what we use/do today. Bamboo/hemp and other can replace Wood products to fabrics. Even replace Fiberglass.. but many GOOD products cant be controlled and restricted. And OWNING them isnt hard..trying to grow a CROP of trees, takes TIME and space. Bamboo and HEMP are common weeds.
    It used to be that farmers had sheep, for cloth and food.. They could even give a few away..NOW you have to pay for EVERYTHING that used to be free..only TIME was needed.

  4. ECA says:

    It would be interesting to start our own company in the USA…Except you cant grow HEMP..and most people dont kow HOW to use Bamboo..

  5. ECA,

    I’ve said it before. I agree with you about all of the other pollution. Regarding the ozone layer, it’s a good model for what to do with CO2.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol

    The international Montreal Protocol regulated the ozone depleting chemicals. Unfortunately, the existing CFCs in the upper atmosphere are still doing their damage. There is still an ozone hole. But, things got a lot better after the Montreal Protocol.

    That said, the pollution issues you bring up, while important, do not have the same urgency as CO2.

    Regulation of CO2 needs to be very targeted and agreed on in international courts because the problem is global. It doesn’t matter whether the CO2 comes from the U.S. or from a factory producing goods for the U.S. in China. (I say that to squeak in the aside that 1/3 of China’s greenhouse emissions are still U.S. emissions that have merely been outsourced to China. They’re still ours.)

    But, the important thing that you repeatedly refuse to ignore is that climate change and ocean acidification from CO2 are literally going to cause us to go extinct. And, it’s going to happen relatively soon, possibly within the lifetimes of people already on the planet.

    Climate change is what caused the largest mass extinction in the history of multicellular life on this planet.

    Those other forms of pollution are really bad. But, they’re not so bad as to kill off 95% of the multicellular species on the planet. CO2 is.

    So, we must act specifically to combat CO2 and other greenhouse gases with measures that are specifically targeted for GHG reduction as our first order of priority. Not to do so is to deliberately kill ourselves and many other species completely. None of the other pollutants you mention are at that level of urgency at this time. Left alone, and with regulation of GHGs, we’ll get there too. But, in the absence of GHG regulation, the rest won’t matter.

    • ECA says:

      I agree on most of it, the problem is TRYING to get the corps to see alternatives..they dont like change.
      Humans can adapt to changes, even in purchasing things..the Problems come with FIXING what we bought..
      WE could go back to modified STEAM power..EASILY..but the CORPS are invested in a product they KNOW..
      And I would LOVE for allt he CO2 to be released from pop bottles.. but WHERE would you put it all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: