Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Administration Doesn’t Expect Election Outcome to Have Big Impact on Paris Climate Accord
cnsnews.com ^ | 11/4/2016 | Patrick Goodenough

Posted on 11/06/2016 7:07:26 AM PST by rktman

A day after Donald Trump pledged to “cancel billions in global warming payments to the United Nations,” top administration climate officials said Thursday that the outcome of next week’s election would not likely have a major impact on the international momentum driving the Paris climate accord, despite the fact that “the candidates have very different views on climate.”

The Paris agreement, the most ambitious climate pact yet negotiated by the U.N., enters into force on Friday.

Despite Trump’s threats to walk away from the agreement as president, one of the officials said that although the accord allows for countries to withdraw, he did not think that would be a likely development.

“There’s an article 28 in the agreement that provides for procedures for countries that would seek to withdraw,” deputy special envoy for climate change Jonathan Pershing said in a teleconference call. “But at the moment, I don’t think that’s very likely.”

Pershing said it was his sense that “there are going to be huge domestic advantages to staying in this agreement,” citing the potential of investments in green energy.

“So I expect us to want to stay in the discussion.”

Also taking part in the briefing, John Morton, the National Security Council’s director for energy and climate change, acknowledged a questioner’s point that Trump and Hillary Clinton “have very different views on climate.”

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: climatecrap; ecowankers
WOW WEE! Oddly enough, regardless of the outcome, the paris BS agreement will have little impact on me. So, the get rich over a long time frame (frog, boiling water) is mostly a plan for countries to begin thinking about putting together some sort of plan to mitigate a non-existent "problem" demanding YUGE amounts of money to maybe solve, so they can move on to further discussions to talk about the plans they have come up with which will require modification and rewrites for decades to come. Okay, makes sense to me, said no one ever.
1 posted on 11/06/2016 7:07:26 AM PST by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rktman

No ratification by the Senate, no agreement.

**** the UN!


2 posted on 11/06/2016 7:09:56 AM PST by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rurudyne

We musta forgot the lyin’ king mantra. “Senate? I don’t need no steenkin’ senate.”


3 posted on 11/06/2016 7:12:32 AM PST by rktman (Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Trump will not use "we gotta save the planet" as a way to further enslave the People by using lies to alarm folks while robbing them blind and throwing money to those who want to destroy us. The U.N. will see a much different set of folks representing American interests once he is in the WH....
4 posted on 11/06/2016 7:13:07 AM PST by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Stroke of the pen, law of the land.

With that, Trump can undo everything Obama put into place.

And the Paris Accord was never ratified by the Senate.

Obama is dreaming.


5 posted on 11/06/2016 7:17:21 AM PST by goldstategop ((In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

That gets me too. The media recently said enough countries were on board with the Paris thing to make it legally binding. And my question was, when did the US Senate ever ratify this agreement?

I have yet to hear anyone in our inept mainstream media, ask the question, about how some agreement is binding when we never went through the Senate to ratify this international treaty?


6 posted on 11/06/2016 7:22:52 AM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rurudyne

They’re softening it by referring to it as an “accord.”
Bunk !


7 posted on 11/06/2016 7:26:40 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Baseball players, gangsters and musicians are remembered. But journalists are forgotten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

They also have long since been calling governing conventions mere treaties.

It’s how lawless scum advance their agendas.


8 posted on 11/06/2016 7:29:35 AM PST by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rktman

They are delusional. If Trump wins this fleecing of America in the name of “climate change” by the UN is over,


9 posted on 11/06/2016 7:30:33 AM PST by fireman15 (The USA will be toast if the Democrats are able to take the Presidency in 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Is this the Paris agreement from last year that says
* countries will decide on and publish their own carbon goals
* countries will report on if they are meeting their goals
* there is no penalty for having a goal like “we will increase our carbon use by 100x in 10 year” or having a goal like “we will get to 0 carbon in 20 years” then tripling carbon and reporting that they are not meeting the goal.

Basically the agreement was to look like something is being accomplished not to actually do anything. And most countries will do nothing. Congress will keep Hillary from destroying the economy regardless of what goals she publishes. She’ll just have to report that no progress has been made toward her goals. Trump will just give a goal to do little/nothing and report we are meeting it (or he’ll ignore an un-ratified agreement).

So it’s true that the election will have little impact.


10 posted on 11/06/2016 7:31:30 AM PST by LostPassword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Trump should stand at the Rose Garden and burn a copy of the treaty.

(Lefties used to burn draft cards in the 1960s—now it is _our_ turn.)


11 posted on 11/06/2016 7:37:12 AM PST by cgbg (Another World War I veteran for Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rurudyne

Getting control of the language...


12 posted on 11/06/2016 7:55:59 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Baseball players, gangsters and musicians are remembered. But journalists are forgotten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rktman
...deputy special envoy for climate change Jonathan Pershing ....

Jon, Trump wins, your job and your department will no longer exist
13 posted on 11/06/2016 8:06:57 AM PST by stylin19a (obama = Fredo smart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

The Kyoto Protocol died when voters threw out the crazy governments


14 posted on 11/06/2016 8:17:58 AM PST by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

““There’s an article 28 in the agreement that provides for procedures for countries that would seek to withdraw,” deputy special envoy for climate change Jonathan Pershing said in a teleconference call. “But at the moment, I don’t think that’s very likely.”

I wonder of those procedures include provisions for being told to “go to hell, we’re cutting you off”?


15 posted on 11/06/2016 10:11:46 AM PST by Rebelbase (DRAIN THE SWAMP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson