Register to Comment
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 34567 15 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 157
Like Tree32Likes
  1. #41
    rash mulligan rash mulligan is offline
    rash mulligan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,216

    I think you should probably stop thinking about my manbag.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #42
    Watcher2 Watcher2 is offline

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,449

    If true, well done the US. But fracking is certainly not the answer. Co2 emissions are not the be all and end all for a cleaner environment despite the Greens banging on about it. Just goes to show how much the Greens know. As a case in point, diesel fuel fuems while spilling less co2, actually spew countless other, more damaging fumes to the environment.

    But back to fracking, it has been shown from what I read that it is a truly environmentally destructive method of extracting fuel. We will really see its effects if its allowed in this country given our size. Its not such a big deal (relatively speaking) in the US I suppose as the US is a VAST landscape.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #43
    Bill Bill is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,254

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher2 View Post
    If true, well done the US. But fracking is certainly not the answer. Co2 emissions are not the be all and end all for a cleaner environment despite the Greens banging on about it. Just goes to show how much the Greens know. As a case in point, diesel fuel fuems while spilling less co2, actually spew countless other, more damaging fumes to the environment.

    But back to fracking, it has been shown from what I read that it is a truly environmentally destructive method of extracting fuel. We will really see its effects if its allowed in this country given our size. Its not such a big deal (relatively speaking) in the US I suppose as the US is a VAST landscape.
    are you referring to dpm
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #44
    rash mulligan rash mulligan is offline
    rash mulligan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,216

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnotologist View Post
    I have not read through the whole thread but what I have read seems to miss the point of the claim. America will not be even close to its Kyoto target. It is far above that. At least 30% higher. Possibly more than that but I have not checked lately.

    Per capita has nothing to do with targets that were for a reduction in emissions.
    Total energy carbon emissions were 5,473 million tons in 2011 and last year fell below the 1996 mark of 5,501 million tons.

    The first quarter 2012 reduction of 7.5% makes it possible that this year emissions will fall back essentially to the 1990 level of 5,039 million tons.
    From what I can see Agno at 5,473 mt they are approx 9% above 1990 level of 5,039 mt.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #45
    Agnotologist Agnotologist is online now

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,159

    There is something wrong with those figures but I do not have the information. US emissions of GHGs had risen by more than 20% by 2009 (that much I do know). That would make the figure over 6 million tons - based on what is shown for 1990. They did not decline by 10% in one year: that is an absurdity.

    Also, but a different criticism, the US Kyoto target was for 7% below 1990 levels, Even with the suspect figures, they are nowhere near that. The new target, the Copenhagen promise, is for 20% below current levels, not 1990 levels, by 2020. That would bring the US to 1990 levels but a long way from Kyoto by 2020.

    I would like to see some confirmation.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #46
    rash mulligan rash mulligan is offline
    rash mulligan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,216

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnotologist View Post
    There is something wrong with those figures but I do not have the information. US emissions of GHGs had risen by more than 20% by 2009 (that much I do know). That would make the figure over 6 million tons - based on what is shown for 1990. They did not decline by 10% in one year: that is an absurdity.

    Also, but a different criticism, the US Kyoto target was for 7% below 1990 levels, Even with the suspect figures, they are nowhere near that. The new target, the Copenhagen promise, is for 20% below current levels, not 1990 levels, by 2020. That would bring the US to 1990 levels but a long way from Kyoto by 2020.

    I would like to see some confirmation.
    God you really do hate those Americans then.

    Would it kill you or liberate you to credit them ?

    Which do you fear the most ?

    How is Canada getting on with it's Kyo , oh that' right I forgot.

    Click this link first then click on EIA'S Latest monthly energy review.

    USA CO2 emissions may drop to 1990 levels this year | Watts Up With That?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #47
    TheMushyStuff TheMushyStuff is offline
    TheMushyStuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,070
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #48
    galwaytt galwaytt is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    437

    Whether they've hit the 1990 target or not, is moot. The fact us, they're going in the right direction.

    No, the interesting part is that they are doing so without screwing the consumer with any bogus 'carbon taxes'.

    Imho carbon taxes are a complete fraud, and is a money making racket for someone. And as for 'fines'.......jeez, don't get me started.....
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #49
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    America has China and India to thank for being able to reach the Kyoto target.
    It can also thank them for taking away much of its industry and increasing its unemployment.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #50
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by rash mulligan View Post
    How is Canada getting on with it's Kyo
    Quite well, actually:

    What does Canada's withdrawal from Kyoto protocol mean?

    Canada has shown that a legally binding deal does not guarantee countries won't walk away from their commitments

    What does Canada's withdrawal from Kyoto protocol mean? | Adam Vaughan | Environment | guardian.co.uk
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 34567 15 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment