Sen. Schumer gas for electric car trade in program?

[wink]

I own a 2 stroke dirtbike

???

Further it allows the PRC to advance their interests in the Pacific and Indian Ocean.

Not over time. All those reclaimed reefs, artificial islands and disputed islands on which the Chinese have invest tons of money and manpower will simply disappear under the waves due to climate change, no? Why should we bust a gut preventing that?

 

[nodropinufaka]

???
Not over time. All those reclaimed reefs, artificial islands and disputed islands on which the Chinese have invest tons of money and manpower will simply disappear under the waves due to climate change, no? Why should we bust a gut preventing that?

Lol good point.

Also I will echo what @SELRES_AMDO said. I too own a bunch of toys to include a large fishing boat which burns a shiet ton of gasoline.

But that being said- I try to minimize my impact on the environment and think renewable energy is the future.

 

[AllAmerican75]

Some Pacific Island Nations Are Turning To China. Climate Change Is A Factor

The Solomon Islands and Kiribati recently established ties with China. Economic considerations are a key driver, but both nations also cite concerns about climate change as a reason for the decision.

www.npr.org

Climate risk and response in Asia

Climate change in Asia: A detailed analysis of the extent of climate risk facing the region and effective responses for adaptation and mitigation

www.mckinsey.com

Step-up with China in the Pacific on climate change and development aid - Disruptive Asia

Australia has recognised the need to adjust its approach to development in the Pacific, particularly with respect to its changing relationship with China. The ‘Pacific Step-up’ is becoming a whole of Government approach to rethink our relationship with our Pacific neighbours. However, rather...

asiasociety.org

And like I said earlier Department of State/USAID is already publishing about the threat to stability that climate change will have in the INDOPACIFIC.

I can't publish it here for obvious reasons but it is allowing the PRC to advance their interests. The PRC is already moving quick with BPC missions, military aid, funding, etc both west towards the IO and East towards PINs.

The PINs are specifically stating that climate change is a threat to themselves as well (As well as data sets that support it).

So we have to at least acknowledge it and move towards sustainability and renewable energy. Otherwise if we don't the messaging is going to be that we don't care in climate change, don't believe it, and its not necessarily human caused.

Again, show me that climate change is anthropogenic or "man made." And then show me evidence that EVs and reducing carbon emissions actually works. If it does, why has the reduction in carbon emissions in much of the Western world not made a dent in the claims of climate alarmists?

There are things we could be doing right here and now that would have a net positive impact, but we aren't because nobody wants to talk about them because the sustainability and environment discussion has become so politicized and driven in a single direction by the media and large special interests. We could spend tons of money on developing the third world so they don't pollute as much, change how we farm and raise livestock, actually work towards clean water and air, and then reduce the amount of habitat we destroy and our impact on that habitat. Instead we keep hearing that only solar, wind, carbon exchanges, and reducing our standard of living to pre-industrial levels will save the planet.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Some Pacific Island Nations Are Turning To China. Climate Change Is A Factor

The Solomon Islands and Kiribati recently established ties with China. Economic considerations are a key driver, but both nations also cite concerns about climate change as a reason for the decision.

www.npr.org

Climate risk and response in Asia

Climate change in Asia: A detailed analysis of the extent of climate risk facing the region and effective responses for adaptation and mitigation

www.mckinsey.com

Step-up with China in the Pacific on climate change and development aid - Disruptive Asia

Australia has recognised the need to adjust its approach to development in the Pacific, particularly with respect to its changing relationship with China. The ‘Pacific Step-up’ is becoming a whole of Government approach to rethink our relationship with our Pacific neighbours. However, rather...

asiasociety.org

And like I said earlier Department of State/USAID is already publishing about the threat to stability that climate change will have in the INDOPACIFIC.

I can't publish it here for obvious reasons but it is allowing the PRC to advance their interests. The PRC is already moving quick with BPC missions, military aid, funding, etc both west towards the IO and East towards PINs.

The PINs are specifically stating that climate change is a threat to themselves as well (As well as data sets that support it).

So we have to at least acknowledge it and move towards sustainability and renewable energy. Otherwise if we don't the messaging is going to be that we don't care in climate change, don't believe it, and its not necessarily human caused.

From the first article:

“Although China is one of the biggest CO2 emitters, it is showing leadership and commitment to help lead our global efforts against [climate change].”

Total and complete bullshit. China is showing real leadership by not promising to cut anything while western states do so. Great leadership there. Feel free to continue using climate change in this boogeyman capacity though, it’s good for everything else. I slept through my alarm this morning because of climate change, then there was a ton of climate change induced traffic.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Again, show me that climate change is anthropogenic or "man made." And then show me evidence that EVs and reducing carbon emissions actually works. If it does, why has the reduction in carbon emissions in much of the Western world not made a dent in the claims of climate alarmists?

There are things we could be doing right here and now that would have a net positive impact, but we aren't because nobody wants to talk about them because the sustainability and environment discussion has become so politicized and driven in a single direction by the media and large special interests. We could spend tons of money on developing the third world so they don't pollute as much, change how we farm and raise livestock, actually work towards clean water and air, and then reduce the amount of habitat we destroy and our impact on that habitat. Instead we keep hearing that only solar, wind, carbon exchanges, and reducing our standard of living to pre-industrial levels will save the planet.

We do those things already in the smaller countries. Literally USAID and BHA do that on a regular basis.

further- what’s wrong with sustainability and reducing carbon emissions. It doesn’t have to be political.

I can see that it reducing my waste, recycling, and not being wasteful has a net positive impact on the earth. Why exactly is that a political statement and wrong?

 

[nodropinufaka]

From the first article:

“Although China is one of the biggest CO2 emitters, it is showing leadership and commitment to help lead our global efforts against [climate change].”

Total and complete bullshit. China is showing real leadership by not promising to cut anything while western states do so. Great leadership there. Feel free to continue using climate change in this boogeyman capacity though, it’s good for everything else. I slept through my alarm this morning because of climate change, then there was a ton of climate change induced traffic.

So tell me why DOS is trying to counter it and chinas influence due to it?

no one is saying that China is good. Just that we need to make the right move and reduce our impaxts

 

[Treetop Flyer]

So tell me why DOS is trying to counter it and chinas influence due to it?

no one is saying that China is good. Just that we need to make the right move and reduce our impaxts

I think you shouldn’t believe everything you read. An island nation aligning with China because of their leadership in climate change is like a sheep aligning with a wolf for pushing veganism

 

[SELRES_AMDO]

I think you shouldn’t believe everything you read. An island nation aligning with China because of their leadership in climate change is like a sheep aligning with a wolf for pushing veganism

Does it make a difference?

If they aligned then that is a problem.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Does it make a difference?

If they aligned then that is a problem.

Sure, but still a bullshit excuse

 

[SELRES_AMDO]

Sure, but still a bullshit excuse

Is it?

China may be polluting. But, if the small PIN is legitimately suffering from climate change and aligns with China for help then I don't see it as bullshit. It may not be man made, but does that make a difference?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Is it?

China may be polluting. But, if the small PIN is legitimately suffering from climate change and aligns with China for help then I don't see it as bullshit. It may not be man made, but does that make a difference?

Because China isn’t even attempting to reduce emissions. They aren’t leading shit.

 

[wink]

“Although China is one of the biggest CO2 emitters, it is showing leadership and commitment to help lead our global efforts against [climate change].”

So called leadership and commitment is more important to NPR types that then how much CO2 you produce or reduce. The US was supposed to be ceding leadership because they pulled out of the Paris Accords, but still met or exceeded the goals of the Accords. Call that leading by example. I'll take America's performance over anyone else's commitments any day.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Ok but I think you guys may be missing the point.

Does any of that make a difference if it allows china to gain influence across PINs and move more and more inside the INDOPACOM AOR?

Sure- China isn't leading by example. But if PINs are looking to someone and they go to China the United States loses.

Further- should we not lead by example on this?

 

[SELRES_AMDO]

Because China isn’t even attempting to reduce emissions. They aren’t leading shit.

Did I say they were?

 

[Mos]

Because China isn’t even attempting to reduce emissions. They aren’t leading shit.

I think what's trying to be said is that China is playing a strategic PR game, as they've done in the past, not that they're really actually doing the right thing. They can win this game because they're trying harder and have unity of purpose in doing so, while we as a country can't agree whether there is a problem.