iS THIS TRUE?

[BigBearJohn]

http://www.palmerreport.com/politics/2021-trump-climate/3231/

When Donald Trump announced his intention today to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Accord, which he intended as a defiant slap in the face of pretty much everyone on earth, he left out a few key words: “…if I get reelected.” Because as it turns out, he can’t get the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement until 2021, and by that time someone else may be President instead.

[janterry]

1. In his speech

he said he was withdrawing us from the 'nonbinding' agreement.

I found that interesting. But there is a time lag written into the agreements. He cannot withdraw us immediately.

However, he said nonbinding - so, I'm expecting that he thinks we can.............

[Sunlei]

9. 100 billion statement was another Repub. deception. That's total for ENTIRE WORLD. 3bil for USA

USA already paid 1 billion and will pay their other 2 billion by 2020. Nothing will change until after 2020.

[Nitram]

22. And those paymentws are voluntary, if I'm not mistaken.

[SCantiGOP]

23. Answer is Yes and No

We cannot pull out until Nov 4, 2020, and he was giving notice that we would do that. Since the actions under the agreement were voluntary it is not as momentous a decision as everyone made it sound. A newly elected President in 2020 would apparently have to get Congress to vote to re-enter the agreement.
What it does do is say that we won't be involved with the rest of the world on this subject for the next 3 1/2 years.

[Sunlei]

25. only Americas bullshitter president and his crazy tabloid fanclub-eatUP Republican party LIES.

FUCK YOU Republicans- for allowing YOUR disabled/UNFIT president to feed your Corporate lies mixed with his crazy bullshit to the American people.

I'm more than ASHAMED of your party, ashamed of America- you let trump authorize slaughtering families, INFANTS in arms of Mothers on his 5th day! you're murderers! That was it for me, now its even worse you Republicans have torn apart 40,000 families in America, dropped leaflets on a city block in Iraq to 'shelter in place' then flattened the entire city block, assisted Russia/Assad slaughtering innocents and killed/wounded several of our elite military. In a couple of months!

That doesn't even count your American "Republican-terrorism" towards our own most vulnerable citizens.

[pangaia]

27. Too bad his father didn't pull out...

[mwooldri]

2. From what I'm hearing likely yes.

A new President can in Jan 2021 reverse this. Or earlier depending on events.

[FM123]

21. A new president can reverse this...

Sure hope that the new president can reverse ALL of those stupid decisions that crazy 45 has been making. Your words give me a some hope.

[Ilsa]

36. I'm looking forward to the hourly tweet storm

as all of the damage he is doing gets reversed.

[Docreed2003]

3. Kind of...

The earliest date that the US can completely be out of the agreement is Nov 2020, the day after the national election!

[jimlup]

5. So technically Trump could pull us out for 2 months... /nt

[Docreed2003]

7. I'm not sure about that...

The way it was phrased was that complete withdrawl wouldn't happen until 11/20, but the effects of America's no participation would be definitely felt by that point and it would likely become a hot button issue for the 2020 campaign.

[jimlup]

20. Yes

Obviously it isn't the technical association with the agreement but instead the political ramifications. I'm hopeful that it will be a major issue in the 2020 election.

[BeekeeperInVermont]

16. That's what I heard on several different

shows on NPR yesterday from their panels of knowledgeable commenters.

[Sunlei]

4. ask the Republicans who wrote the script for Donald to read off his large print monitor.

cut the power to that reader and trumps mind will stall like a car out of gas.

[OldRedneck]

6. Trump's decision is irrelevant

Trump's decision to withdraw us from the Paris Accords is an irrelevant action, aimed at the goobers who voted for him and who still support him.

Anyone with any sense, anyone with any skin in the game is continuing to prepare for global warming and for the end of oil. Here are some facts to support my claim.

1. The Norfolk-Hampton Roads VA area is home to a YUUUGE naval base -- which, along with the rest of the area, is going underwater because of sea level rise and land subsidence caused largely by global warming. The Navy is spending $500 million this year alone to build sea walls, move buildings, buy safe land, etc. The Navy is not changing their plans because the Dept of Defense is smart enough to recognize what Trump denies.

2. At least three governors -- CA, WA, NY -- told Trump they are ignoring him. Jerry Brown was all over MSNBC Thursday night telling the world that California is committed to green energy technology and will change nothing in the wake of Trump's decision. Ditto for NY and WA governors. Watch for several more governors to follow.

3. Many companies large and small have announced they are moving ahead with their plans to go with green energy.

4. Yes, it's true that a small coal mine re-opened in Western PA; they will hire 70-100 miners. HOWEVER -- this mine produces high-quality metallurgical coal, not the nasty, smoky stuff used in electrical power generation. Trump will claim credit -- he lies.

5. Automobile emission standards are still in effect.

6. Solar and wind created more jobs last year than currently exist in the coal industry.

7. The rest of the world is mocking Trump. He is more and more isolated and ignored.

It seems to me something important is happening. In the immediate wake of Trump's election, everyone held their breath to see if he would become "presidential," or, would he remain the ignorant 6th grade bully from the campaign. Now that it's clear he is incompetent and surrounded by ignorant, incompetent people, the nation and the world have decided it's best to ignore him, move along, and prepare for 2018 and 2020 when we can dump the lot of them.

[bucolic_frolic]

11. This decision is the cherries jubilee

on Trump's entire term in office. He has painted himself into a corner.
The world reviles him. Popular opinion in his own country moves away
from him every week. This is now Nixon in December 1973, Hitler after
the Phoney War. He has waged ideological conflict with no regard for
fact or legitimacy. No ruler throughout history has long maintained such
idiocy. It is only a matter of time. Our political challenges are 2018, 2020,
and the Supreme Court. These are our mountains. Climb.

[Zoonart]

14. Yes...

an irrelevant action that is dangerous in it's disregard for the damage done to the prestige of the USA as world leader and enlightened partner in planetary events.

So much destruction...so little time.

[saidsimplesimon]

17. Thank you OldRed

Excellent analysis, I agree with the facts.

The guardian, in typical cheeky style, has suggested we keep our eyes on the ball as the really rich and powerful meet. The closing paragraph, "Constable of the Tower of London" , whatever does the writer mean? The article mentions that new Trump friend Henry Kissinger will attend.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/01/bilderberg-trump-administration-secret-meeting

Bilderberg 2017: secret meeting of global leaders could prove a problem for Trump

The storm around Donald Trump is about to shift a few miles west of the White House, to a conference centre in Chantilly, Virginia, where the embattled president will be getting his end-of-term grades from the people whose opinion really matters: Bilderberg.

The secretive three-day summit of the political and economic elite kicks off on Thursday in heavily guarded seclusion at the Westfields Marriott, a luxury hotel a short distance from the Oval Office. The hotel was already on lockdown on Wednesday, and an army of landscapers have been busy planting fir trees around the perimeter, to protect coy billionaires and bashful bank bosses from any prying lenses.
…snip
The White House is taking no chances, sending along some big hitters from Team Trump to defend their boss: the national security adviser, HR McMaster; the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross; and Trump’s new strategist, Chris Liddell. Could the president himself show up to receive his report card in person?

Henry Kissinger, the gravel-throated kingpin of Bilderberg, visited Trump at the White House a few weeks ago to discuss “Russia and other things”, and certainly, the Bilderberg conference would be the perfect opportunity for the most powerful man in the world to discuss important global issues with Trump.
…snip
The invitation list for this year’s conference is a veritable covfefe of big-hitters from geopolitics, from the head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, to the king of Holland, but perhaps the most significant name on the list is Cui Tiankai, China’s ambassador to the US.
Snip…
So will Trump be given his marching orders at Bilderberg, or will he be kept on as a useful doofus? There’s a small but worrying clue for what Bilderberg might have in mind for Trump tucked away on the invitation list: one of the guests this year is the UK’s former chief of the defence staff, Sir Nicholas Houghton. His new role? Constable of the Tower of London.

[onenote]

8. Even if the US withdrawal wouldn't formally take effect, Trump's abandoning the commitments

made by the US as part of the agreement. Those commitments are non-binding and what it means is that even if a new president rejoined the pact in 2021, the US would be well behind in meeting the commitments it made in 2015-2016.

[MichMary]

10. This was never ratified by the Senate,

so I don't know that we can't withdraw.

[-Steph-]

12. From what I've read on CNN, we can't put our notice in to withdraw until November 2019. Then

there's a one-year notice period. Which means actual withdrawal wouldn't be until late 2020, after the next presidential election.

However, CNN also stated that there's a way Trump could get us out of the Paris Agreement much sooner than 2020. According to CNN, if Trump exits the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), it would automatically get us out of the Paris Agreement in just 1 year.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. I had seen that yesterday as well

Exiting the overarching U.N. program would be the only way to pull out "faster" and that would probably take out any other agreements that fall under it.

Thing is, the large urban areas, most of which are Democratic-party run, have committed to continuing to follow the plan (which I expect includes things like pollution control standards and restoring green spaces, etc). These urban areas make up a good-sized chunk of contribution to climate change, so that would mitigate the disastrous decision to a degree. In fact, I just saw this morning (a story posted last night) that 3 states (Washington, New York, California) have formed their own consortium to keep the standards in place.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/01/climate-alliance-washington-california-new-york-239038

[former9thward]

18. Where is the science that supports your statement?

"These urban areas make up a good-sized chunk of contribution to climate change,". Can you cite any science that backs that statement up?

[Wounded Bear]

24. Not sure about the "science" of it, but...

there is such a thing as urban heat islands. Cities are concentrations of people, and of their vehicles and factories and industries that generate much of the CO2 getting released into the atmosphere. So, yeah, 100 square miles of city probably does cause more climate change than 100 sqmi of farmland.

Certainly, they are regions where pollution occurs.

Thankfully, they are also places with high concentrations of progressives and liberals.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. WTF?

You are kidding right?

Please go back to bed. Thanks!

[former9thward]

30. I didn't think I would get an answer.

More #waronscience.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. As a degreed scientist

I say #thinkaboutit.

[former9thward]

32. An actual degreed scientist should be able to answer the question.

I have a graduate degree in science so I am always curious to see the actual science behind an internet claim.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. Here's some info

since your posts specialize in disruptive nonsense, here is something to sift through -

https://unhabitat.org/urban-themes/climate-change/

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010GL042845/full

This one is pretty cool - it will be interesting to follow this through the future as they are standardizing how to collect/measure the emissions data -

http://www.c40.org/other/gpc-dashboard

Enjoy and put a lid on it.

[former9thward]

34. Your first link is not written by a scientist.

But a journalist without any evidence. The last two links had no evidence at all to support the articles. You should put a lid on it but you won't. And I won't either. Urban heat islands create weather not climate change.

[BumRushDaShow]

35. Naturally you completely dismissed

an argument that was not made. You ignored a summary article from the U.N. and then claim I wrote that "climate change" = "urban heat island", while disregarding what was provided to you as ongoing scientific research for what constitutes the primary *contributions to* "climate change" from urban areas - emissions. The C40 dashboard linked to is DATA that shows the emissions contribution from participating cities world-wide. You can drill down to the data for these cities to see what that is (what types & how much). Cities in general, are an obvious source of emissions from vehicles, power generation, and power utilization for various activities (including manufacturing and consumer use).

But as a note, the urban heat island is a fact and does impact localities, including increases in overnight temps, and potential for increases in severe weather. And depending on topography, this further concentrates emissions. Significant changes in weather patterns in an area can be a barometer for climate change in that area. The last update to the USDA map has started reflecting the recent warming trend since the previous version in 1990. The USDA staffer responsible for posting the update @ the USDA site used to post on Garden Web and many of us on the Mid-Atlantic Gardening forum at GW watched and waited over a decade ago while the whole thing was held up due to politics... as some draft maps showed significant warming and some orgs (AHS & Arbor Day ran with the data anyway at that time). USDA finally issued a new map (using a new contractor and providing zip code granularity, with more data over a longer period) for the current 2012 version, which does show the warming (representing a change in climate in certain areas).

In this case, "weather" is an individualized short-term event but changes in "climate" are longer term and represent consistent, changes in weather patterns over time.

Save your courtroom drama for someone else. Maybe Judge Judy will have you on one day. Common sense is missing. Who knew climate change deniers post on DU?

[former9thward]

37. Courtroom drama?

I didn't know we were in court. Oh, well. And of course if someone disagrees with you on any given point they lack "common sense". And the old,very old attempt to shut down discussion by saying someone who disagrees with you is a "climate change denier". Why don't you throw in a holocaust denier while you are at it. And a denier that we landed on the moon.

[BumRushDaShow]

38. How about this

We disagree and you can go off in your corner secure in your opinion and I will do the same. You don't "discuss", you swoop in out of nowhere and attack with nothing provided to back up your assertions except because you said so. At this point, you're not worth my time and effort and what I posted stands.

[progressoid]

13. He has no idea what he's signing or saying most of the time so

I wouldn't read too nuance into it.

[Amishman]

19. It's a non-binding agreement, the only thing this does is stop funds transfer

The only real impact is we won't be paying the last $2 billion we were due to pay by 2020.

So as usual Palmer has a nugget of truth but misses the reality of it. People really need to ignore his clickbait

[elecpencil]

26. Interesting

That would certainly be interesting to know.

[riversedge]

28. msnbc had a EU offical on last night, saying basically the same. Years was his word I think.

[librechik]

39. absolutely true--implementation won't start til 2020

so his claim that "we are already saving money by dropping out" is BS like every other thing he says