Suck it Al Gore. And pound sand Paris Accord.

German Daily ‘Die Welt’ Declares: ‘President Trump was the world’s most successful climate protector’

Die Welt’s energy journalist, Daniel Wetzel: "Now the results are in: No country in the world saved more CO2 in 2017 than the USA."
On USA’s impressive reductions, Wetzel called it “bizarre”: "Foremost a development emerged that was quite bizarre: Of all countries, the USA under President Donald Trump was the world’s most successful climate protector.”

http://www.climatedepot.com/20...l-climate-protector/


Global energy-related CO2 rose by 1.4% in 2017, an increase of 460 million tonnes (Mt), and reached a historic high of 32.5 gigatonnes (Gt). Last year’s growth came after three years of flat emissions and contrasts with the sharp reduction needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change.

The increase in carbon emissions, equivalent to the emissions of 170 million additional cars, was the result of robust global economic growth of 3.7%, lower fossil-fuel prices and weaker energy efficiency efforts. These three factors contributed to pushing up global energy demand by 2.1% in 2017.

The trend of growing emissions, however, was not universal. While most major economies saw a rise in carbon emissions, some others experienced declines, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico and Japan.

The biggest decline came from the United States, where emissions dropped by 0.5%, or 25 Mt, to 4 810 Mt of CO2, marking the third consecutive year of decline. While coal-to-gas switching played a major role in reducing emissions in previous years, last year the drop was the result of higher renewables-based electricity generation and a decline in electricity demand. The share of renewables in electricity generation reached a record level of 17%, while the share of nuclear power held steady at 20%.

In the United Kingdom, emissions dropped by 3.8%, or 15 Mt, to 350 Mt of CO2, their lowest level on record back to 1960. A continued shift away from coal towards gas and renewables led to a 19% drop in coal demand. In Mexico, emissions dropped by 4%, driven by a decline in oil and coal use, efficiency gains in the power system, strong growth in renewables-based electricity generation and a slight increase in overall gas use. In Japan, emissions fell by 0.5% as increased electricity generation from renewables and nuclear generation displaced generation from fossil-fuels, especially oil.

Overall, Asian economies accounted for two-thirds of the global increase in carbon emissions. China’s economy grew nearly 7% last year but emissions increased by just 1.7% (or 150 Mt) thanks to continued renewables deployment and faster coal-to-gas switching. China’s carbon dioxide emissions in 2017 reached 9.1 Gt, almost 1% higher than their 2014 level. While China’s coal demand peaked in 2013, energy-related emissions have nonetheless increased because of rising oil and gas demand.

http://www.iea.org/geco/emissions/

But the US must still pay the other nations in the world, as our damage to the environment has damaged their economies.

Anything positive for Trump doesn't count.

Why are they trying to starve our trees?

quote:

Originally posted by zoom6zoom:
Why are they trying to starve our trees?

I was wondering about that too.

I won today wearing nothing but underroos.

Thank you President Trump.

All the hot air left with Obama and Clinton.



.

The percentage change for US was 0.5% vs a 3.8% decline for the UK, and the comments are “the US did the most”?
A bit of a stretch....

quote:

Originally posted by Surefire:
The percentage change for US was 0.5% vs a 3.8% decline for the UK, and the comments are “the US did the most”?
A bit of a stretch....

The whole thing is an outright fraud and a farce.

quote:

Originally posted by Surefire:
The percentage change for US was 0.5% vs a 3.8% decline for the UK, and the comments are “the US did the most”?
A bit of a stretch....

What's a bit of a stretch?

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:

quote:

Originally posted by Surefire:
The percentage change for US was 0.5% vs a 3.8% decline for the UK, and the comments are “the US did the most”?
A bit of a stretch....

The whole thing is an outright fraud and a farce.

Bingo. But if this report causes pain suffering for liberals in this country, well, I think its just great news.

quote:

Originally posted by Surefire:
The percentage change for US was 0.5% vs a 3.8% decline for the UK, and the comments are “the US did the most”?
A bit of a stretch....

Not really. The important number is the amount of CO2 reduction, not what percentage it was. Only statisticians are interested in the percentages. The effect of the CO2 is dependent on the actual amount.

I will agree that it's all irrelevant, anyway--botanists are saying that the Earth needs more CO2 to nourish its plant load.

flashguy

IMHO: All this CO2, carbon credits, climate change propaganda is nothing more than a scam for certain people to get rich. Unfortunately, there are many self guilt ridden people that fall for the nonsense. I am constantly amazed how many "smart" educated people live by this propaganda crap. Like PT Barnum said, "Theres a sucker born every day". Seems like there are a lot of suckers out there!