Stop the pipeline.
4
He couldn't forge consensus with the House GOP? Who want creationism taught to schoolchildren instead of science?? Wow, NYT, way to go! Of COURSE that must be Obama's fault!!
7
Let's teach kids in grade schools climate change. Don't shelter them from the truth. Let them see how careless, stupid and self-absorbed this country is. Then let them go home and plead with their parents to do something as if they were pleading for the latest Iphone or Apple Computer. Because it is their future wasting away exponentially and if adults cannot find a way to be adults--let the children..........
8
You have to be kidding. Let me remind everyone. Copenhagen 2009. Don't make me rehash the 256 articles I have personally researched and written about Obama's disastrous policies. It won't work NYT, it simply won't work.
6
We are not doing nearly enough. Not even close.
8
I appreciate this article, but wonder why the Times has allowed the entire GOP primary and now the general election to roll by as if this is an inconsequential issue. Where have you been, on this and so many other pressing matters? With you following junk news leads about Hillary's unlikeability or public mistrust and emails, you've framed the buzz around stupidity like the Enquirer and allowed critical issues and Trump fantasy to go unchecked. I expected more from you!
16
I was listening to this while being passed by a hybrid doing close to 90. Biophilia and the art of conspicuous environmentalism is little more than posing and pontificating. Green is just a color with a belief in what everyone else must do. Private jets and speaker fees, grants and credits.
The US green building council and LEED isnt worth it to most building owners who know that certification is usually just an offset, not a real net reduction in anything other than their capital. If half the country is doing it right, we should be seeing some massive drops in net consumption, yet we are not.
Build less, travel less and live closer to work if you can afford it. Use your phone for 5 years and use clothing to adjust to temp. If you own a hybrid, keep the speed limit. You aren't fooling anyone.
As for legacy, the sooner you stop contributing, the better off our kids will be.
The US green building council and LEED isnt worth it to most building owners who know that certification is usually just an offset, not a real net reduction in anything other than their capital. If half the country is doing it right, we should be seeing some massive drops in net consumption, yet we are not.
Build less, travel less and live closer to work if you can afford it. Use your phone for 5 years and use clothing to adjust to temp. If you own a hybrid, keep the speed limit. You aren't fooling anyone.
As for legacy, the sooner you stop contributing, the better off our kids will be.
8
Whenever i read about the Koch brothers and their friends in government (Hello, GOP) and industry, I wonder how they can have no concern for the future of our planet. Then I wonder how they can have no concern for their children, nieces or nephews. I would really like to know how they rationalize this. Do they believe they and their kin will live in golden pods on Mars so it doesn't matter what happens to the 99% on Earth? Do they just not care about anyone or anything as long as they're rich?
Another point-- as many have already noted-- it's not President Obama's failure to forge a consensus. If Jesus himself begged the GOP to address the issue of climate change (I believe there's something in the Bible about protecting the Earth), they would crucify him all over. The false equivalency that both sides are to blame for this has to stop. It's lazy journalism and it's poisoned our country.
Another point-- as many have already noted-- it's not President Obama's failure to forge a consensus. If Jesus himself begged the GOP to address the issue of climate change (I believe there's something in the Bible about protecting the Earth), they would crucify him all over. The false equivalency that both sides are to blame for this has to stop. It's lazy journalism and it's poisoned our country.
11
I think the problem is that people cannot respond to threats like climate change appropriately. Once the danger is so extreme that our country cannot continue, then it'll be too late. It's sad, but I guess we just don't have the mental capacity to handle climate change. Glad I didn't have kids at least!
6
"Yet his determination to act alone inflamed his opponents, helped polarize the debate on climate change and will carry a significant economic cost."
But these are all lies. Your reporter should be ashamed. Significant economic cost - this particular lie is right out of the oil industry book.
But these are all lies. Your reporter should be ashamed. Significant economic cost - this particular lie is right out of the oil industry book.
6
I have always maintained that the Earth has contracted cancer (an uncontrolled growth of cells that destroy healthy tissue). The Earth's defence is fever which will result in massive physical and biological disruption. This defence mechanism will eventually kill the cancer but not without a price. Unfortunately, that cancer is us and the price will be a different planet that may not be habitable by humans.
4
Ever wonder why the Chinese are for climate change mitigation? These guys think in terms of 50 year plans when we can barely plan for tomorrow. Who do you think will come out on top in 50 years? It certainly won't be those idiots that call this a progressive liberal left wing scheme to grow the government and raise our taxes.
8
This article is ultimately critical of President Obama's fight for the environment, his work on climate change. I have thought his policies were insufficient and contractory. However, specifics are always the most useful way to assess a record. Therefore, I found the AP story of a couple of days ago, which cited specific actions, more indicative because it shows the quieter things that only a president can do.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/09/06/world/asia/ap-as-obama-legacy...
These are the reasons all environmentalists always must vote for Democrats.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/09/06/world/asia/ap-as-obama-legacy...
These are the reasons all environmentalists always must vote for Democrats.
4
To criticize Obama's efforts to act decisively in the United States to address climate change is to ignore blithely the organized decades-long campaign of the Republican Party and its minions in the mainstream press to deny the severity of this inexorably progressive ongoing environmental catastrophe. Were the authors of this poorly written article to acknowledge this fact they might not be so utterly confounded by Obama's relative success abroad. Most of the rest of the world still holds what is true and science in high regard.
9
The media coverage is vital, but sorely wanting. The Brookings Institutition's analysis of American media coverage of the Paris climate talks showed that most coverage "followed common journalistic norms of focusing on individuals and the conflict between them, "leading to a somewhat piecemeal representation of the conference. Therefore, the major issues being discussed in Paris were not well covered. Many of the main issues underlying the negotiations were not covered in depth, particularly those concerning the least-developed nations—those most vulnerable to early impacts of climate that have done little to contribute to the problem."
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2015/12/18/the-paris-climate...
To help President Obama and President Clinton (I hope President Clinton), the new NY Times's new climate editor must provide articles that are on the front page daily, not "ghettoized." As President Obama said, "climate change is the greatest long-term threat facing the world, as well as a danger already manifesting itself as droughts, storms, heat waves and flooding." And that assessment does not mention that MENA may be uninhabitable by 2050 (Max Planck Institute), that the ocean rises in pulses and is becoming too acidic for the phytoplankton at the bottom of the food chain to calcify, which is dire news because the ocean produces 65 to 80% of the oxygen, methane feedback loops, and more.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2015/12/18/the-paris-climate...
To help President Obama and President Clinton (I hope President Clinton), the new NY Times's new climate editor must provide articles that are on the front page daily, not "ghettoized." As President Obama said, "climate change is the greatest long-term threat facing the world, as well as a danger already manifesting itself as droughts, storms, heat waves and flooding." And that assessment does not mention that MENA may be uninhabitable by 2050 (Max Planck Institute), that the ocean rises in pulses and is becoming too acidic for the phytoplankton at the bottom of the food chain to calcify, which is dire news because the ocean produces 65 to 80% of the oxygen, methane feedback loops, and more.
9
Yes, Democracy Now, at least, was seriously invested and on the ground in Paris everywhere. The Times acts like this is a side issue, including in this election!
4
Climate Change is the single most urgent problem facing the civilized world. Anyone who thinks that science is "optional", as in something to choose to "believe in" or not, is repeating the mistakes of the Arabic World in the 10th to the 13th Centuries. The Republican Science Deniers are motivated by the money that comes to fund their Campaigns from the Rulers of the Oil Companies..and they and we continue to squander our last chances to reform our energy systems (capable of significant change right now) and save ourselves from destruction. What happens when the Himalayan glaciers melt and 1.5 Billion people in India and China have no water, and where do the non assimilating Arabs go when the Mid East becomes too hot for "human habitation"? This country will seal itself up tighter than a drum and we will all lose our lives fighting over the little bit of water we have not ruined with Fracking and pollution. The Yellowstone rRiver just closed after heating up 15 degrees above what the fish can tolerate as they are being attacked by a parasite. Like Zika carrying mosquitos in Miami that the heat brings out and the lack of cold leaves alive for far longer while Republicans attach funding to combat this to defunding Planned Parenthood ...Obama's fault? Get real. The scientists are constantly revising their predictions. All this is coming at us faster than anyone thought. Brother there is still time? Hardly.
14
From India, writer Amitav Ghosh on what happens when the glaciers melt:
http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/zo1459rOwDTjYN9Wr1ZJqJ/Amitav-Ghosh-We-a...
http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/zo1459rOwDTjYN9Wr1ZJqJ/Amitav-Ghosh-We-a...
1
People should educate themselves on this issue. Read books on the opposing point of view. There are plenty of good books out there.
1
Oklahoma DID recognize that fracking causes earthquakes and acted accordingly because they were directly affected. Sad that they chose once again to wait until the danger is right in front of their noses on Global Warming.
5
Well, the earthquakes were not caused by global warming. They were caused by the environmental damage to the state due to fracking being done in the state. We should expect more states who permit unrestrained fracking will also experience the delayed effects of environmental damage that affects life of their residents.
Many business leaders concentrate on short term profits to the exclusion of remaining a sustainable long term business. Fracking is a short term profit decision that ignores long term adverse effects. Clear cutting forests instead of practicing silvaculture or burning down the Amazon rain forests are also short term decisions that ignore long term adverse effects. Neither directly contributes to global warming but both are environmentally unsound.
Many business leaders concentrate on short term profits to the exclusion of remaining a sustainable long term business. Fracking is a short term profit decision that ignores long term adverse effects. Clear cutting forests instead of practicing silvaculture or burning down the Amazon rain forests are also short term decisions that ignore long term adverse effects. Neither directly contributes to global warming but both are environmentally unsound.
1
Why isn't this a major issue in the election?
12
Because Trump, as a billionaire businessman, does not care a rat's butt about environmental issues. Plus Trump's base of supporters also do not care about environmental issues.
Meanwhile, the only thing the media covers about Clinton is her email server gaffes and concerns about The Clinton Foundation and that someone on her staff has a jerk for a husband. Oh, and Clinton coughs. (Why does the media have no concern about Trump's health when he is clearly obese? He has to have health problems he is hiding. Cheney wasn't nearly as fat and his health was bad.)
Meanwhile, the only thing the media covers about Clinton is her email server gaffes and concerns about The Clinton Foundation and that someone on her staff has a jerk for a husband. Oh, and Clinton coughs. (Why does the media have no concern about Trump's health when he is clearly obese? He has to have health problems he is hiding. Cheney wasn't nearly as fat and his health was bad.)
4
I wonder if the major polluters of the atmosphere realize how thin it actually is? The first three miles up is habitable (flying 36,000ft doesn't count) and above that the air become less dense very rapidly. It is this atmosphere that protects us from the emptiness of space and those pesky rays - UV, cosmic, etc.
We cannot segregate the Earths atmosphere into a smoking and non-smoking section - though I wish we could (having the Koch Bros live in Beijing or Mexico City could be an interesting start). It does not take much for us to change the composition of the atmosphere we depend on for survival - as unlimited as it appears, much like the ocean.
We don't like paying for the next guy. Why should we tolerate our air/water being polluted by the next guy?
Perhaps for the sake of our planet's future we could have Obama continue as POTUS for another four years and be done with the ugly spectacle we are going through right now.
We cannot segregate the Earths atmosphere into a smoking and non-smoking section - though I wish we could (having the Koch Bros live in Beijing or Mexico City could be an interesting start). It does not take much for us to change the composition of the atmosphere we depend on for survival - as unlimited as it appears, much like the ocean.
We don't like paying for the next guy. Why should we tolerate our air/water being polluted by the next guy?
Perhaps for the sake of our planet's future we could have Obama continue as POTUS for another four years and be done with the ugly spectacle we are going through right now.
7
You are not the first who has said this. I happen to agree but unfortunately it is not Constitutional. President Obama cannot continue as president. It is not legal.
If you don't have any offsprings, I may understand. If you have kids and grandkids, I don't know how you can still refuse to believe in climate change when you know or see underground water or seawater appearing on streets and it's not even raining. We will see more sunny day flooding in the US and world. Water does not care if you are Republicans or Democrats. It will go where it wants to go. The world hasn't seen the biggest human migration yet.
7
"By the fall of 2010, Tea Party “super PACs” supported by the billionaire brothers Charles G. and David H. Koch had seized on cap-and-trade as a political weapon, with attacks that helped Republicans take control of the House.
Polls showed that few Americans thought of climate change as a high public policy priority, and the percentage of voters who accepted the reality that it was caused by humans had tumbled."
This is the turning point. The power and reach of the corporate-controlled media is extensive. News outlets don't want to alarm readers and alienate advertisers.
And don't forget that 3 years after this, the NYT "disbanded its four-year-old environmental desk, a controversial decision that critics called a reflection of the news industry’s shift away from specialized science coverage." That move has not been at all helpful to help people understand this topic that touches on everything -- including the development of real estate on the NY waterfront. http://undark.org/2016/08/26/the-new-york-times-reboots-its-climate-cove...
Polls showed that few Americans thought of climate change as a high public policy priority, and the percentage of voters who accepted the reality that it was caused by humans had tumbled."
This is the turning point. The power and reach of the corporate-controlled media is extensive. News outlets don't want to alarm readers and alienate advertisers.
And don't forget that 3 years after this, the NYT "disbanded its four-year-old environmental desk, a controversial decision that critics called a reflection of the news industry’s shift away from specialized science coverage." That move has not been at all helpful to help people understand this topic that touches on everything -- including the development of real estate on the NY waterfront. http://undark.org/2016/08/26/the-new-york-times-reboots-its-climate-cove...
3
Congratulations to the President for what he has done regarding climate change. Unfortunately the opposition party, which is supposed to play constructive role behaved like Great Wall of China in everything the ruling party has done so far, which is too bad to say the least.
It's we as individuals, who should play our role in minimising climate change problems. In India, I have noted that people are purchasing all sorts of vehicles that pollute left, right and centre as part of status without batting an eyelid instead of buying only when extremely needed. When it comes to America, the country has 310 million vehicles or even more, which is a sad state of affairs to say the least.
We should as responsible citizens replace filament lamps by energy efficient bulbs to the extent possible. We should buy air conditioners for our homes only when extremely necessary and also make use of lamps and fans only when necessary. We should refuse to accept certain polythene bags while purchasing vegetables and provisions by carrying our own cloth bags.
I am waiting for the day when all the thermal power plants get closed forever. Unfortunately it may not happen in decades to come due to lack of vision on the part of people's representatives and administrators essentially due to corruption in countries like India.
Unless and until, countries like America, China and India put their foot down firmly on all polluting industries, globally people will have to put up with this menace forever.
It's we as individuals, who should play our role in minimising climate change problems. In India, I have noted that people are purchasing all sorts of vehicles that pollute left, right and centre as part of status without batting an eyelid instead of buying only when extremely needed. When it comes to America, the country has 310 million vehicles or even more, which is a sad state of affairs to say the least.
We should as responsible citizens replace filament lamps by energy efficient bulbs to the extent possible. We should buy air conditioners for our homes only when extremely necessary and also make use of lamps and fans only when necessary. We should refuse to accept certain polythene bags while purchasing vegetables and provisions by carrying our own cloth bags.
I am waiting for the day when all the thermal power plants get closed forever. Unfortunately it may not happen in decades to come due to lack of vision on the part of people's representatives and administrators essentially due to corruption in countries like India.
Unless and until, countries like America, China and India put their foot down firmly on all polluting industries, globally people will have to put up with this menace forever.
5
President Obama stated that he hope that he will be able to have a little more influence on some his Republican friends regarding climate change as an ex president. Fat chance, even members of his own party are not on board. Mr. President you deserve an A for your efforts.
6
Obama legacy is easy: chaos in the Middle East, doubled the national debt in just 8 years (hey, that means he single handedly accumulated as much debt as every did every president since George Washington) and of course the first African-American president. That sums it up.
Climate? Nobody really cares. Changing the weather is hard.
Climate? Nobody really cares. Changing the weather is hard.
1
"doubled the national debt in just 8 years"....Figures don't lie, but liars figure. Obama inherited from Bush an annual deficit of $1350 billion. Last year the deficit was less than $500. That is a deficit reduction of more than $800 billion. Go ahead and name another President that has reduced the deficit by $800 billion during the course of their administration. Go ahead, we are waiting for your response. What, no answer - and folks that really does sum it up.
9
singlehandedly? like your dad singlehandedly ran up the family debt by paying off the credit card bills you ran up?
or did you imagine that putting a hugely expensive war on the tab while simultaneously cutting taxes would have no lasting effects? presumably you did imagine that or else you would be grateful to Obama for reducing the annual deficit every year.
or did you imagine that putting a hugely expensive war on the tab while simultaneously cutting taxes would have no lasting effects? presumably you did imagine that or else you would be grateful to Obama for reducing the annual deficit every year.
2
Trump makes it hard to believe that Mr. Obama is our current President.
Traveling to Mexico and Louisiana, and drawing strategies for our military, it looks like Trump is the one in charge.
With Hillary criticizing Trump's every move, like the republicans have been obstructing Obama's every policy for the past 7.5 years .. we are more interested in Trump's plan to fight climate change.
Traveling to Mexico and Louisiana, and drawing strategies for our military, it looks like Trump is the one in charge.
With Hillary criticizing Trump's every move, like the republicans have been obstructing Obama's every policy for the past 7.5 years .. we are more interested in Trump's plan to fight climate change.
1
Anyone can travel to Mexico and Louisiana. He is still not presidential.
I will not hold my breath with regards
to Trump's proposal on climate change.
I will not hold my breath with regards
to Trump's proposal on climate change.
5
Thanks for waiting until the last minute, prez.
4
it's not like he was going to get anywhere on this issue with the Republicans. despite their bleating about his despotic tyranny, there are real limits on what he can do.
2
The reason coal country will never accept carbon regulation is simple: the president and his party offer no plausible solution to make up for lost mining jobs. If solar panel and windmill factories are going to be placed here why are they not here already? No miner making 80k a year will trade his job for an entry level factory job maybe making 40k. What the president also fails to realize is that most miners are heavy equipment operators not service technicians or low skilled assembly line workers, miners have pride in what they do and would like to continue using the skills they have mastered over years of hard labor. To people here in southern Illinois a few degrees warming is a small price to pay for a comfortable middle class life.
4
If the miners have kids or grandkids, they need to think long term. Many people lost their jobs due to technology or economic shifts. Most of them do not get the same pay for the new job they find. Employees of tobacco companies or tobacco farmers suffered the same during transitions. Earth will do what it's going to do and there is no negotiation between humans and the planet. Establishments keep fighting for existing profits despite the climate change. We as the human race will suffer long term as we might have passed the tipping point.
1
It doesn't matter what the folks in coal country want. We don't use horses any more, most college students today don't know what a side rule is, you can't make a living at Kodak making film, nobody uses a type writer - the party is over. The people in coal country have two choices. They can try to hang on to coal and go the way of the dinosaur; or they can realize that it is time to move on. Yes I feel sorry for them, but mostly because they refuse to recognize reality.
5
mining jobs are becoming history anyway. it's cheaper nowadays to just remove the top from the mountain and carry the coal away.
If there is a problem, which is debatable, Geoengineering would likely offer solutions that won't break the bank.
1
If we get to the point of trying geoengineering -- essentially, experimenting on the test tube while we're in it -- the 'bank' is going to have a lot more problems than worrying about money. But, the research has to go forward because we're late off the mark in doing anything else.
https://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/other-reports-on-climate-ch...
https://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/other-reports-on-climate-ch...
3
that's the kind of he man engineer can-do thinking that made the former Soviet Union the ecological paradise it became. one fix over another, to patch the unfortunate side effects of the previous fix.
Evidently, the only hope to effect the reversal of climate change is to take money from taxpayers and give it to politicians.
Good luck with that.
Good luck with that.
4
Or make a revenue-neutral carbon tax, and return 100% to the public.
citizensclimatelobby.org/about-ccl/
citizensclimatelobby.org/about-ccl/
4
How much global warming to we want to roll back? If we roll all of it since the peak of the last ice back, all of Canada would be under Glaciers and the ocean levels would drop by 400 feet.
I guess Climate Change has good and bad.
I guess Climate Change has good and bad.
2
The Times is doing 7 articles on Obama"s "legacy"? You could less than a page of them, and still have a longer list than "Hillary's accomplishments"
2
The trends are the same as they were when Obama took office, the only thing that has changed is the actual temperature. It is going up as predicted. People need to understand that climate scientists are not futurist and doomsday environmentalist, they are just looking at the science and what it is telling them is that the earth will be warming due to co2 and sea level will be rising quite quickly in the next century. Oh by the way, we will only be able to slow these terrifying trends because it took us 16 years to take the scientific warning seriously. Now what are we prepared to do about it?
7
Obama has done some good things unfortunately today's GOP is absolutely hellbent on destroying as much as possible before they all die off.
7
If global warming causes sea levels to rise dramatically, maybe the waters of the Gulf of Mexico will move several hundred miles to the north, east and west. That'll put a significant part of the Bible Belt under water, and that can only be a good thing.
5
(1) Except for the climate scientists we humans are pretty much incapable of understanding the urgency of this issue. It becomes another item on a long list of urgent "24/7" matters - besides all of the daily/hourly matters in our own lives just to make it through the day.
(2) It is absurd to think that only one person (President Obama) could take on this issue. And as many others have pointed out - it's equally absurd to blame that person for failing to convince the rest of us (esp. the deniers).
(2) It is absurd to think that only one person (President Obama) could take on this issue. And as many others have pointed out - it's equally absurd to blame that person for failing to convince the rest of us (esp. the deniers).
2
My generation knew this was coming down around 1973. We did very little to start preparing for the future although there has been some change. When Reagan tore down the solar cells over the White House and the SUV's came in I felt we were cooked. Americans were buying these huge cars and didn't seem to give a hoot about its impact. now we've got a real emergency on our hands and our grandkids will wonder why we didn't do more. Can't we live simply? Locally. what is this drive to buy more stuff? delivered by truck and jet. why do we fly around in jets so much? why don't we build bullet and hi speed rail? Why do we eat so much beef (a chief cause of warming)? In this article we see people like Inhoffe who are just plain ignorant. I don't think the President is forceful enough. Americans need to wake the heck up and I don't hold out much hope. Just last week the Times had an article on these yahoos seeing how much coal smoke they can blow into the atmosphere with their rigged up trucks. These people are willfully ignorant and defiant in their ignorance. Their candidate Trump denies global climate change. Ms Clinton like Obama is not forceful enough and they should lead by example./ bike to work, take the train, walk. Look at their entourages./limos getting 9 miles to the gallon, dozens of them. playing golf on lawns that are fertilized by oil based products and requiring huge amounts of water.. Lead by example. that's the way you bring up good kids.
3
1973,Let's see , Winston wasn't that 2 years before the famous Newsweek cover story about the impending "next" ice age ? We had incredibly cold winters in the Northeast where I live in the 70's so did you see that as well >
15, 000 years ago Manhattan was under a mile thick sheet of ice , the sea level was more than a hundred feet lower and one could walk 60 miles further East than you can now from Cape Cod.
The earth has been warming ever since the end of the last age and that will continue until the next ice age. The computer models created by the climate "scientists" are completely flawed ( they can't accurately predict the intensity of the upcoming or current hurricane season) , All we can go by is the historical record and the verifiable fact that solar intensity fluctuates in predictable Milankovitch cycles tempered by volcanic input. I am proudly Republican and I decry how the liberals have foolishly made "climate change"an expensive political issue . Liberals should put their mass hysteria and thuggish tendency towards societal control aside and realize that the climate has always been changing.
15, 000 years ago Manhattan was under a mile thick sheet of ice , the sea level was more than a hundred feet lower and one could walk 60 miles further East than you can now from Cape Cod.
The earth has been warming ever since the end of the last age and that will continue until the next ice age. The computer models created by the climate "scientists" are completely flawed ( they can't accurately predict the intensity of the upcoming or current hurricane season) , All we can go by is the historical record and the verifiable fact that solar intensity fluctuates in predictable Milankovitch cycles tempered by volcanic input. I am proudly Republican and I decry how the liberals have foolishly made "climate change"an expensive political issue . Liberals should put their mass hysteria and thuggish tendency towards societal control aside and realize that the climate has always been changing.
2
Lawrence-The thugs I see are the Republicans one of whom is pictured in the video. Inhoffe with the snowball. You are in the dark and probably since we knew we had to switch to renewable energy sources in the 70s. You haven't woken up yet? You provide no proof in your angry post about computer models. All the Nobel Scientists disagree with you. There is irrefutable evidence that global warming is due to the burning of fossil fuels. I bet you're the type person who would deny that there are no whirpools (3 of them) swirling with plastic waste in our oceans. They are each the size of a large state. You would probably think that cleaning that up would be socialist or something. Meanwhile our oceans are dying and the sea life is dying right before your eyes as they ingest plastic particles. You will also deny that there has been a marked increase in species and fauna extinction over the last 50 years. I'm sick and tired of ignorance such as you seem to reveal. Maybe you should join the others spewing coal smoke in their souped up cars and trucks.
1
If you deny a problem exists, then it is no cause for concern or action. - Republican Party. End of problem.
2
This is an issue which concerns Presidents, scholars, scientists, philosophers, theologians, and long term strategists more than anyone else, which is why people are not taking it as seriously as it deserves, and come up with endless reasons to do nothing. The deniers of climate change being man made are focused upon the costs and severe constraints upon our established industries and infrastructure that would be required to end the production of carbon gases that are asserted to be increasing the rates of climate changes. If all the changes are made, it will be decades before any profits from operations will be freed from paying off the costs of the changes. That is a lot of sacrifice for benefits which will be mostly enjoyed by people not yet born by people who mostly will not be alive when the worst would be expected to develop. But doing nothing might satisfy those now alive but it will be resented by those who will be alive in a century.
1
If people cause climate change and if the US causes more climate change than other nations, then why do liberals want so many illegal aliens in the US. They will have a greater negative impact here than if thy go home to Mexico and atay impoverished.
2
your brilliant and incisive geometrically precise logic has converted me into a Trump voter.
The people who don't want you to accept the reality of climate change all have a financial interest in doing so. The fossil fuel industry is an obvious example. All have business or real estate interests that would suffer should climate change awareness gain traction. Think of the waterfront property developments that will become worthless once they start going underwater with the high tide every 12 hours. Just a few inches of water can render a property untenable.
There are billions of dollars at stake and the biggest financial operators all want to make sure that someone else is holding the bag when things get soggy.
Has anyone noticed that the Kochs live at a higher altitude than most of us?
There are billions of dollars at stake and the biggest financial operators all want to make sure that someone else is holding the bag when things get soggy.
Has anyone noticed that the Kochs live at a higher altitude than most of us?
4
and there are plenty of idiots who have accepted global warming denial as a religious litmus test. so much so that to even consider the possibility gets you shunned by the Republicans.
Mr. Obama, after eight years in office, has a terrible war record from his original surges in Afghanistan to his forays in Libya and Syria. He has a legacy as a glib deliverer of the words of his advisers, but otherwise he is an empty shirt that spends his time looking for stumps on which to act out his speech mannerisms. The country has worsened under his leadership. The economy has been propped up statistically but has no solid growth; wars are getting worse and worse as they drain on our economy and military; and guns and killings are at all time highs in our ghettos. And this after eight years of Mr. Obama's "leadership". Maybe Mr. Trump would be much of an improvement.
6
http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20160907-we-recommend-hilla...
This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections.
We recommend Hillary Clinton for president
This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections.
We recommend Hillary Clinton for president
4
Thank you for your unique insight, but we know Obama is black, ok?
As President, Obama could have effectively used his bully pulpit to inform Americans through a series of television news conferences of the reality of climate change and to put pressure on the Oil and Coal Republicans to pass legislation that would have encouraged adoption on solar and wind power. The silence from the White House on this most critical problem facing the entire globe was deafening. Shame on him.
"As President, Obama could have effectively used his bully pulpit to inform Americans through a series of television news conferences ..."
Based on experience, would many people believe him or his Administration.? For example, we were just recently told ransom was not paid for the prisoners held in Iran. We were told we could keep our doctor and health plan and that family premiums would drop $2500. We are told unemployment has fallen when the labor force participation has done them same. We were told mass spying by the NSA was NOT occurring. That deportations are up when stopping people at the border now counts as deporattion.
Before I would believe something I could not self verify, it would have to come from a source more credible than this administration.
Based on experience, would many people believe him or his Administration.? For example, we were just recently told ransom was not paid for the prisoners held in Iran. We were told we could keep our doctor and health plan and that family premiums would drop $2500. We are told unemployment has fallen when the labor force participation has done them same. We were told mass spying by the NSA was NOT occurring. That deportations are up when stopping people at the border now counts as deporattion.
Before I would believe something I could not self verify, it would have to come from a source more credible than this administration.
1
Obama has as much credibility as a Scientist as he does as a Constitutional Scholar. He wouldn't dialog with Republicans when he was our wimpy President. Why does he think anyone will take him seriously when he is just plain wimpy?
2
Too bad those pesky 2.7 billion Chinese and Indians want the things in life that we have such as cars, reliable electricity, air conditioners, refrigerators and central heat. And nothing that Obama does is going to stop them.
1
One of the greatest causes of human misery is poverty and I hope any spending to reduce man made global warming is truly justified and not an attempt to "never let a crisis go to waste'. Spending to ward off global warming is money that is not spent on getting the lead out of our kid's water, early start education, or refugee resettlement.
Since the peack of the last ice age 22,000 years ago global warming has elevated sea level by about 400 feet This melting and warming occurred in the most recent 11% of the age of modern humans. The land which is now Canada was entirely covered by glaciers as was part of the northern U. S.
Would we and Canada benefit if we could erase all the climate change that occurred since the peak of the last ice age? What is the ideal average global temperature, and CO2 concentration?
The tools to mitigate climate changes (previously called global warming until global warming largely leveled off) can also satisfy other motivations like redistributing wealth to achieve a goal of social justice, profiting from carbon credits, and accepting government money to build alternative energy companies that are bound to fail. They can provide benefits to cronies.
I expect there is a man made component to global warming. I expect it will have some positive and negative affects. My concern is that some will exaggerate it for their own financial, political, or ideological gains.
Since the peack of the last ice age 22,000 years ago global warming has elevated sea level by about 400 feet This melting and warming occurred in the most recent 11% of the age of modern humans. The land which is now Canada was entirely covered by glaciers as was part of the northern U. S.
Would we and Canada benefit if we could erase all the climate change that occurred since the peak of the last ice age? What is the ideal average global temperature, and CO2 concentration?
The tools to mitigate climate changes (previously called global warming until global warming largely leveled off) can also satisfy other motivations like redistributing wealth to achieve a goal of social justice, profiting from carbon credits, and accepting government money to build alternative energy companies that are bound to fail. They can provide benefits to cronies.
I expect there is a man made component to global warming. I expect it will have some positive and negative affects. My concern is that some will exaggerate it for their own financial, political, or ideological gains.
3
"One would have hoped for transformational leadership, in the way J.F.K. would have done it,"said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
JFK was inspirational. But the only way he got anything passed in Cnogress was to get shot and killed.
JFK was inspirational. But the only way he got anything passed in Cnogress was to get shot and killed.
2
President Obama could further his efforts regarding climate change if he would discuss how overpopulation is a primary contributor to climate change; perhaps he will feel freer to talk about it once he leaves office-I hope so. With a projected population of 12 BILLION people by 2050, unless the human species is willing to discuss this issue seriously, we are all in big trouble. Then again, famine, drought and war may largely take care of the problem.
2
most of those people have zero effect on climate change because they burn neither coal nor petroleum nor natural gas, directly or indirectly.
what causes climate change is people living like Americans. the planet can't handle 300 million of them.
that's not to say that global overpopulation doesn't have its own set of severe problems, but the monster of planetary climate change isn't among them.
what causes climate change is people living like Americans. the planet can't handle 300 million of them.
that's not to say that global overpopulation doesn't have its own set of severe problems, but the monster of planetary climate change isn't among them.
I know the seas can't be rising because president Obama said, when he was elected in '08 "today is the day the seas stop rising". We know not only would Obama never lie, he is never wrong.
1
Do't worry, all those that feel as you do may eventually be ruled by someone who claimed he is never wrong.
I think it is Goethe who said: even the Gods fight stupidity in vain.
4
By virtue of our nation's history, which has always indicated a complete lack of reason regarding racial prejudice, it should be another in a long list of "no brainers" to figure out just why essentially any program Mr Obama has forwarded to our less than representative Congress has been turned aside.
It isn't as though our prevailing racism respects lines scratched in the sand by either party, as they have among them enough numbskulls to reject any thing of any sort he has, will or might conceive to suggest. McConnell and those of his ilk don't even bother to hide their racist disdain.
Call it what you will the so called minds of those who actually control our nation through their wealth and subsequent power are unable by virtue of inherited blindness to even look at suggestions made by a "person of color": their polite way of referring to those they cannot conceive as having any wit let alone more intelligence than the good ole boys in their private clubs.
These people are frightened every day they wake up and scared silly of anyone who might indicate an ability to sing, dance, love life and his family.
Invoke any "reasons" why climate change is denied, but so long as a our Afro American President proffers concern about this obvious problem it will be denied and you can take that to the bank.
Dance around the subject all we want, but racism and racism alone lies at the heart of our government's implosion and the lack of choice in Mr Obama's "go-it-alone approach"
It isn't as though our prevailing racism respects lines scratched in the sand by either party, as they have among them enough numbskulls to reject any thing of any sort he has, will or might conceive to suggest. McConnell and those of his ilk don't even bother to hide their racist disdain.
Call it what you will the so called minds of those who actually control our nation through their wealth and subsequent power are unable by virtue of inherited blindness to even look at suggestions made by a "person of color": their polite way of referring to those they cannot conceive as having any wit let alone more intelligence than the good ole boys in their private clubs.
These people are frightened every day they wake up and scared silly of anyone who might indicate an ability to sing, dance, love life and his family.
Invoke any "reasons" why climate change is denied, but so long as a our Afro American President proffers concern about this obvious problem it will be denied and you can take that to the bank.
Dance around the subject all we want, but racism and racism alone lies at the heart of our government's implosion and the lack of choice in Mr Obama's "go-it-alone approach"
1
Climate change or not, it was common sense that should have guided us to predict that pollution had short and long term effects and should be avoided. Both automobiles and industries that produced smoke should have been kept to minimal levels from a long time and before the trends have been predicted to be terrifying. Why is common sense so uncommon? We should have let common sense guide us all along that air was meant as an essential source of oxygen and to contaminate air was not prudent.
2
Presidential trips around the world show what isn't working in our society's handling of climate change. Air Force One plus the supporting fleet that follows it emit more than a ton of carbon dioxide for every minute they're in flight. Then the "leaders" of public opinion tell a pipefitter who just got a few thousand dollars ahead not to put down a deposit on a big pickup, because it's bad for us. The pipefitter is annoyed and pays no attention. We need a better class of leaders, people who are able to stay home every now and then and write letters. Abraham Lincoln did it.
It says in Matthew, Wo unto you, ye lawyers, for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye will not touch those burdens with one of your fingers.
If Caiaphas had had a Boeing 747 you can be sure he'd have flown in it, while telling the disciples not to buy so much firewood.
Nothing changes except the climate.
It says in Matthew, Wo unto you, ye lawyers, for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye will not touch those burdens with one of your fingers.
If Caiaphas had had a Boeing 747 you can be sure he'd have flown in it, while telling the disciples not to buy so much firewood.
Nothing changes except the climate.
1
The NYT seems determined to have an Obama legacy. Nothing this guy has done approaches major, bold, or worthy of preserving into a long lasting legacy. He was made into a "fairy tale" by Corporate America to be the next puppet on their strings, and he lasted 8 years without going insane due to guilty conscience - although hundreds of thousands of innocent people were killed and maimed in our "humanitarian interventions."
That is a legacy in and of itself.
That is a legacy in and of itself.
4
As a younger person, nothing could replicate the joy for me of walking in a forest or national park. The smells, the sounds, the cathedral-like grace of giant trees with life teeming everywhere. Now, while that joy still echos, I see trees dying from bark beetles that winter cold was not sufficient to kill; I see animals retreating higher into the hills, their numbers decimated; I see forests dying because the glaciers that feed them have retreated or disappeared.
I'm done discussing whether global warming is real, or whether it has a human cause--I refuse to argue with fools. And I'm deeply saddened to know that future generations won't know the natural environs that I have loved.
I'm done discussing whether global warming is real, or whether it has a human cause--I refuse to argue with fools. And I'm deeply saddened to know that future generations won't know the natural environs that I have loved.
16
Obama had a nice backpedal in Malaysia when asked about the Dakota Pipeline standoff. If he is serious or anybody else is they have to stop playing footsies with Big Oil.
3
Climate change is the number one issue for which I am most grateful to President Obama. He made it a priority of his administration and it was a primary reason that I voted for him. How scary to think that Trump proudly admits that he does not believe that climate change is caused by humans. We cannot have such an ignorant know-nothing in the White House. I will truly miss President Obama.
14
Our beloved planet has been on fire, frozen, flooded and drought inflicted in cycles of untold years before man had his palm prints on our climate. View link. Did man cause the Texas sea to recede?
Liberal hubris. Global warming. Same thing.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/when-texas-was-bottom-sea-180953653/
Liberal hubris. Global warming. Same thing.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/when-texas-was-bottom-sea-180953653/
1
Nice try, George. Here's what the Smithsonian has to say about climate change:
"In October 2014, the Smithsonian Institution released its first official statement on climate change. The bold statement acknowledges that the global climate is warming because of human activities."
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=smithsonian+...
"In October 2014, the Smithsonian Institution released its first official statement on climate change. The bold statement acknowledges that the global climate is warming because of human activities."
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=smithsonian+...
3
yeah, like that lying smokey the bear says people cause forest fires. nonsense, there have forest fires as long as there have been forests. those damn liberal bears just can't stand our freedom in how we put out campfires
2
The Problem with America is that it takes a crisis before action is taken and that action is usually just below what is needed to solve the problem properly. Unfortunately, when it comes to climate change, the crises that will occur will mean mitigation is too late.
13
Several years ago, an article of mine was published in Technology and Society Magazine titled "Standing in the Way: Sustainable Future vs. Sloth, Genes, and Entropy." On the article's cover page was an image of a boiling frog which is what President Obama alluded to, but didn't mention explicitly, when he said basically that climate change, though on a geological timescale is happening in a flash, for us, like the frog who boils to death (unless rescued) in slowly heating water, is happening at a pace that fails to set off alarm bells. At bottom, the world our technology has created is one that is out of tune with our alarm bells, with too few sensitive and perceptive enough to recognize that "the trends are 'terrifying.'" Hopefully Obama's legacy will be one of sufficient clout to raise the alarm bells before we cross the tipping point to game over.
2
Why does action on protecting our environment have to be tied to Cap and Trade? Governments push that agenda as a way to make money, but industry can just 'trade' (or sell) their excess emissions allowance. This is obviously not about the environment. Also, china is the largest polluter by far and yet can increase emissions for another 10 years?! Something is wrong with this politicized, but urgent issue.
3
would the alarmists quit screaming the sky is falling -- and running around with their hair on fire. Let me tell you panicked people something that may soothe your troubled souls.
Climate Change -- very little support for that theory. At least for now. Some evidence of warming, but much of the measured warming may be the result of factors such as urbanization and measurement.
And even if some warming occurs -- don't conflate that with man made climate change. The climate has changed repeatedly long before man appeared.
And even if there is some warming -- and even if man has played a role in it -- it may not be a catastrophe. It may be a boon to civilization. Longer growing seasons, more time to golf (Obama should love that), more time to work on that tan, jog, walk, whatever it is you do outside.
And let's say the seas rise -- oh dear -- well some rich folks may lose their ocean front property -- but I think they will survive that.
And if there are some nasty aspects to CC (should it actually happen) -- then I bet we'll figure ways using our technology, to mitigate those problems. See -- there are areas all over the world where it is so cold you'd freeze to death if you stayed outside buck naked. BUT -- we've invented things called garments, we've figured out how to build houses that retain heat -- we've figured out how to build fires to warm ourselves. Trust me -- we'll get through a small spike in temps.
Now -- don't you feel better.
Climate Change -- very little support for that theory. At least for now. Some evidence of warming, but much of the measured warming may be the result of factors such as urbanization and measurement.
And even if some warming occurs -- don't conflate that with man made climate change. The climate has changed repeatedly long before man appeared.
And even if there is some warming -- and even if man has played a role in it -- it may not be a catastrophe. It may be a boon to civilization. Longer growing seasons, more time to golf (Obama should love that), more time to work on that tan, jog, walk, whatever it is you do outside.
And let's say the seas rise -- oh dear -- well some rich folks may lose their ocean front property -- but I think they will survive that.
And if there are some nasty aspects to CC (should it actually happen) -- then I bet we'll figure ways using our technology, to mitigate those problems. See -- there are areas all over the world where it is so cold you'd freeze to death if you stayed outside buck naked. BUT -- we've invented things called garments, we've figured out how to build houses that retain heat -- we've figured out how to build fires to warm ourselves. Trust me -- we'll get through a small spike in temps.
Now -- don't you feel better.
7
It's not just wealthy beach front owners who'll be affected, but many poor people who live by the sea all over the world.
3
Nearly every science organization worldwide (e.g., AAAS, AGU, API, AMS, US National Academy, other national academies) have stated that climate change is a serious risk to society and the planet and action needs to be initiated immediately to reduce and delay the consequences of continued
emissions.
Are you claiming to be more knowledgeable than the members of these organizations?
emissions.
Are you claiming to be more knowledgeable than the members of these organizations?
3
edsilha
I make no claims. All I've done is look at the data. And I have an extensive background in research and statistics so I'm qualified to look at data. . I really don't care who endorses what. As a scientist -- I don't see much here. But to be objective you must take off you're PC hat and just look at the existing data, how it came to be, etc....
I make no claims. All I've done is look at the data. And I have an extensive background in research and statistics so I'm qualified to look at data. . I really don't care who endorses what. As a scientist -- I don't see much here. But to be objective you must take off you're PC hat and just look at the existing data, how it came to be, etc....
If politicians continue to bicker, we can talk ourselves into a situation where all life on this planet will be extinct in a few thousand years—or sooner.
Earth and Venus: twin planets.
Earth and Venus: twin planets.
1
If the world is not suitable for organisms, single cell, bacteria, and viruses will give life persistence on this planet until it dries up and loses its atmosphere. If we want to live in an artificial environment without much of any natural biosphere, then a few millions humans might survive, but nobody at that time who is alive is going to enjoy a world as man has known.
My son and I went to Shanghai a couple of years ago. it was smoggy. We then took the high speed train to Beijing. It was smoggy for the whole route. Beijing was smoggy when we got there. I can see why China has a problem.
1
It was pretty much his decision where he put his energies, where he thought the US most in need. I am sure the shore front owners will appreciate both efforts to warn and protect. Meanwhile the social collisions of the entire US rise evermore to the fore. Ferguson, MO seems far from the rising seas but maybe it will experience the Mississippi backing up
2
The comments on a climate change piece never fail to disappoint.
I think it's safe to say that there are millions of Americans who, lacking an understanding of advanced physics, would fail to achieve an understanding of say, how MRI technology works even if it were explained to them. They would also sensibly refrain from opining on wether or not they believe in it as they avail themselves of it as a diagnostic tool.
No shame here. Science, including climate science, is hard, and often defies intuitive understanding; beliefs don't have much to do with it.
To those of you who reject the science that clearly points to anthropogenic climate change, I ask you please to honestly examine your motivations, check your politics at the door, and take an earth science course!
I think it's safe to say that there are millions of Americans who, lacking an understanding of advanced physics, would fail to achieve an understanding of say, how MRI technology works even if it were explained to them. They would also sensibly refrain from opining on wether or not they believe in it as they avail themselves of it as a diagnostic tool.
No shame here. Science, including climate science, is hard, and often defies intuitive understanding; beliefs don't have much to do with it.
To those of you who reject the science that clearly points to anthropogenic climate change, I ask you please to honestly examine your motivations, check your politics at the door, and take an earth science course!
16
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/when-texas-was-bottom-sea-180953653/
Was man responsible for this?
Was man responsible for this?
2
"Science, including climate science, is hard,"...Not really. Burning fossil fuels increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (the increase has been measured). CO2 is a green house gas; that is, it absorbs in the infrared and traps heat that would otherwise be irradiated into space. The additional heat that is trapped has to show up somewhere, meaning the earth is necessarily going to be warmer than it other wise would have been. If the CO2 keeps increasing the heat of the earth will keep increasing. Eventually, the additional heat will melt the Greenland ice cap, which means that Florida and a lot of other places will be under water. Ok. Is that hard?
1
Man was not responsible, but Man was not around then. The earth will survive our attempt to play God with the climate, but will we?
It is a sad day when the POTUS decides that the priority of this country is not the well being of the people of the United States, but solving a theoretical problem that he has neither the authority or ability to solve. Indeed the reason why Obama has chosen Climate Change work as his legacy is that he can not be held accountable if it succeeds or fails, he can just look good making speeches.
For him to say that his legacy should not revolve around the failing economy of the United States and it's affect on the world, is simply for him to recognize his gross incompetence. When the American people elected a community organizer and a constitutional lawyer, they didn't realize that the person they elected was and continues to be the most ignorant president on economics and the creations of betterment for the people of the USA in the history of the USA. He has utterly failed at helping the middle class and the minorities he acts like he cares for.
Obama's legacy will be defined and it will be defined by this failure. He can keep speaking about climate change when out of office, get on the boards of companies like Telsa (to line his pockets), who are totally dependent on government subsidies, act all high and mighty, but it will be his economic policies, or lack of, that will follow him to his chagrin.
For him to say that his legacy should not revolve around the failing economy of the United States and it's affect on the world, is simply for him to recognize his gross incompetence. When the American people elected a community organizer and a constitutional lawyer, they didn't realize that the person they elected was and continues to be the most ignorant president on economics and the creations of betterment for the people of the USA in the history of the USA. He has utterly failed at helping the middle class and the minorities he acts like he cares for.
Obama's legacy will be defined and it will be defined by this failure. He can keep speaking about climate change when out of office, get on the boards of companies like Telsa (to line his pockets), who are totally dependent on government subsidies, act all high and mighty, but it will be his economic policies, or lack of, that will follow him to his chagrin.
10
Climate change is real. Man definitely is part of the cause. But is it a problem?
Sea level rise over the last 30 years is slower than was predicted in the 1980s. The 2016 worldwide wheat harvest is shattering the old record. The Atlantic basin has been in a hurricane drought (the time since the last cat 5 is still an ongoing record). The fossil record shows that CO2 levels were much, much higher in the past. We know that such levels of CO2 do not end life on this planet.
We need to stop being hysterical and rationally weigh the benefits and the costs (both of which are significant). The nature of the current debate is unscientific and counter-productive.
Sea level rise over the last 30 years is slower than was predicted in the 1980s. The 2016 worldwide wheat harvest is shattering the old record. The Atlantic basin has been in a hurricane drought (the time since the last cat 5 is still an ongoing record). The fossil record shows that CO2 levels were much, much higher in the past. We know that such levels of CO2 do not end life on this planet.
We need to stop being hysterical and rationally weigh the benefits and the costs (both of which are significant). The nature of the current debate is unscientific and counter-productive.
5
The public debate is unscientific. The scientific debate is over. The US National Academy of Science, the national academies worldwide, and nearly every scientific organization (e.g., AAAS, AMS, API, AGU) worldwide have stated that the risks associated with climate change are very serious and the costs of adapting to the environmental degradation associated with those changes will be more expensive than the cost of reducing carbon emissions.
3
We are not looking at the weather in your back yard today, but globally over the long term. When it gets too hot to live along the equator, or entire countries are under water, like Bangladesh, when the food supply dwindles due to drought, fire or flooding, and when pandemics occur, then we will see what you have to say. Oh, your information source if off in terms of reality.
There are many good scientists who understand the basis of the global circulation climate models (GCMs) (i.e. computer models) used by the IPCC for climate prediction and understand the major deficiencies in them. The dire predictions of catastrophe that are extrapolated are based 'educated guesses'. For example, they use a simplistic single parameter to describe cloud feedback, then guess the worst case condition.
Quick Tutorial on Atmospheric Feedback: When the atmosphere warms due to greenhouse trapping of heat, does this cause more clouds or less clouds to form in the atmosphere? This is a critical question. More clouds->less warming, less clouds->more warming.
The climate scientists do not know the real answer to this question so they pick the worst case. That is why these models predict a warming climate. However, there is ample good scientific evidence to show that this guess is incorrect, and furthermore that cloud feedback is a complex phenomenon that can't be described with a single parameter.
I am a PhD chemist. I wrote to a sitting member of the IPCC with these questions, and he candidly confirmed that the GCM cloud feedback 'parameter' is an educated guess, and that the uncertainty in this parameter is so large that GCM predications can vary from 0 degrees to over 3 degrees in atmospheric temperature change, depending on the sign and magnitude of the number that the climate scientist chooses to insert. Climate Science is purely politics.
Quick Tutorial on Atmospheric Feedback: When the atmosphere warms due to greenhouse trapping of heat, does this cause more clouds or less clouds to form in the atmosphere? This is a critical question. More clouds->less warming, less clouds->more warming.
The climate scientists do not know the real answer to this question so they pick the worst case. That is why these models predict a warming climate. However, there is ample good scientific evidence to show that this guess is incorrect, and furthermore that cloud feedback is a complex phenomenon that can't be described with a single parameter.
I am a PhD chemist. I wrote to a sitting member of the IPCC with these questions, and he candidly confirmed that the GCM cloud feedback 'parameter' is an educated guess, and that the uncertainty in this parameter is so large that GCM predications can vary from 0 degrees to over 3 degrees in atmospheric temperature change, depending on the sign and magnitude of the number that the climate scientist chooses to insert. Climate Science is purely politics.
5
So your PHD in chemistry makes you more knowledgeable than the members of the US National Academy, the national academies around the world, nearly every scientific organization (e.g., AAAS, AMS, AGU, API) worldwide?
Why should I give your opinion any credence given it is contradicted by the statements of nearly every scientific organization in the world?
Why should I give your opinion any credence given it is contradicted by the statements of nearly every scientific organization in the world?
4
The difficulties raised in coming to the rescue of climate change calamity that the U.S. and the whole world envisage are results neither of political fray, nor of innumeracy, but of economic necessity. In a world whose developments depend on capital and its valorization, projects of unprofitability or no returns on investments cannot move forward let alone take off, regardless of efforts and resources to cajole or intimidate capital into agreeing on carrying the projects forward. No, there is no chance for politicians to make any difference in this regard simply because renewable energy projects are not profitable at all as they expropriate almost no living labor power that would have created new value for capital; only bygone dead labor embedded in solar panels and wind turbines provides use value.
Here is what the states have to ascend the dais of monopoly power to do good to mankind. By shutting down fossil fuel power plants permanently in proper order and carrying out electricity rationing as soon as buying them all out, states have to invest on behalf of societies in renewable projects and install them.
If otherwise, climate change will deteriorate from a Dumpster fire into an ineluctable doomsday. Capital for the first time in a long time is experiencing lethargy and irrelevance towards economic activity. States finally have arrived in the new historical era to tread the stage that takes over the political power in totality from capital for the common good.
Here is what the states have to ascend the dais of monopoly power to do good to mankind. By shutting down fossil fuel power plants permanently in proper order and carrying out electricity rationing as soon as buying them all out, states have to invest on behalf of societies in renewable projects and install them.
If otherwise, climate change will deteriorate from a Dumpster fire into an ineluctable doomsday. Capital for the first time in a long time is experiencing lethargy and irrelevance towards economic activity. States finally have arrived in the new historical era to tread the stage that takes over the political power in totality from capital for the common good.
Why not interview the AGW-denying Republicans in congress and ask them the hard questions? Obama has done better than most would in his situation and I'll remember that in 20 years as the water laps at the front door of my residence. And I will also remember those congressmen that not only blocked action but convinced much of the gullible public that climate change is a fraud, simply for their personal profit.
2
Can Obama be serious? He's done next to nothing about climate change. The only realistic thing to be done is to start planning and quickly implementing a managed collapse of much of techno-industrial civilization.
Yes, painful. And it must be done without further immiserating the world's peoples. Stark, but there it is.
Infinite growth, termed "the ideology of the cancer cell" by Edward Abbey, is incompatible with all life and its habitats. Our lifeway is an ongoing catastrophe. It has to change. Structurally. Drastically. NOW.
"The economy" can no longer be asserted as something sacrosanct. Yes, Ms. Thatcher, there IS an alternative.
Yes, painful. And it must be done without further immiserating the world's peoples. Stark, but there it is.
Infinite growth, termed "the ideology of the cancer cell" by Edward Abbey, is incompatible with all life and its habitats. Our lifeway is an ongoing catastrophe. It has to change. Structurally. Drastically. NOW.
"The economy" can no longer be asserted as something sacrosanct. Yes, Ms. Thatcher, there IS an alternative.
6
Hey! He stopped smoking.
2
So...
Going to keep us from drowning in the ocean, 20-30 years from now
Wish he'd kept us from drowning in debt, 2-3 years ago
Going to keep us from drowning in the ocean, 20-30 years from now
Wish he'd kept us from drowning in debt, 2-3 years ago
12
Is everybody just plain stupid?? Obama understood that we still need oil n gas.
If we produce it here in the USA we're not at the mercy of hostile foreign government for our energy. I guess most commenters did not live through the Arab Oil Imbargo of the 1970s when Americans waited on gas lines for 5 -6 hours to get some gas. On top of that at least if we produce oil/gas here our $$$$$
stay here and don't go to, how shall I say it, countries that are not friendly to the U.S.
If we produce it here in the USA we're not at the mercy of hostile foreign government for our energy. I guess most commenters did not live through the Arab Oil Imbargo of the 1970s when Americans waited on gas lines for 5 -6 hours to get some gas. On top of that at least if we produce oil/gas here our $$$$$
stay here and don't go to, how shall I say it, countries that are not friendly to the U.S.
6
Did you ever hear of wind and solar power? Have you ever heard of Tesla electric cars or high speed MagLev trains that can go 250 MPH? We don't need fossil fuels to heat our homes or power our cars. Electricity generated by wind & solar power and the natural power ocean tides can eliminate most of our need for fossil fuels.
1
What are the terrifying trends? We were told hurricanes would be stronger and more frequent. In fact, they have been much less frequent. We were told temperatures would steadily rise. In fact, they have not risen for twenty years. This article says that China is now participating in action. In fact they have said they will do nothing until 2030, and are currently bringing a new coal-fired plant on line every month. This is nothing more than the latest "crisis" the left wants to use to steal power from individuals and individual countries
10
2015 was the warmest year on record, but 2016 will break that record.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
1
"This is nothing more than the latest "crisis" the left wants to use to steal power from individuals "
The government worshiping "progressives" can never have too much government. To them the collective is everything and the individual is nothing.
The government worshiping "progressives" can never have too much government. To them the collective is everything and the individual is nothing.
2
Funny how Obama has changed his legacy to something that really affects no one, cannot be measured.
9
Mr. Obama used most of his political capital to buy the ACA -- so did the Democrats in congress. The cost was bitterly high, and many (me included) questions whether it "was worth it;" though the verdict is not in yet.
One wonders whether something better could have been accomplished by spending that capital on climate issues -- driving the CPP early on, going after a Carbon Tax.
The Republicans have hated and obstructed Obama and the Democrats, and the 2010 election results were a debacle. Could it have been worse, had Obama spent his capital on climate? The Koch brothers own the party ... they would have been even more upset.
If anyone cares, today i am a "hurricane guy" and near retirement, but for the bulk of my career I worked on the problems of radiative transfer in the atmosphere that are critical to understanding climate.
Those problems are done, to the degree that addresses public needs for policy. I moved on to other science.
It is long past time to "get on with it."
One wonders whether something better could have been accomplished by spending that capital on climate issues -- driving the CPP early on, going after a Carbon Tax.
The Republicans have hated and obstructed Obama and the Democrats, and the 2010 election results were a debacle. Could it have been worse, had Obama spent his capital on climate? The Koch brothers own the party ... they would have been even more upset.
If anyone cares, today i am a "hurricane guy" and near retirement, but for the bulk of my career I worked on the problems of radiative transfer in the atmosphere that are critical to understanding climate.
Those problems are done, to the degree that addresses public needs for policy. I moved on to other science.
It is long past time to "get on with it."
5
Too little, too late. I represented the Commonwealth over 20 years ago before the state agency that regulates electricity rates. Dry? Not really. At issue in that one case was whether the state could include the external costs (ie:asthma; receding coastlines; impacts on agriculture, etc.) caused by climate change (the science is not new) and airborne particulate matter into the rates of electricity generated using fossil fuel. The effect if we won (which we didn't) would have been to quit the de facto subsidizing of fossil fuel caused by failure to apply a true cost analysis. If we had won, the playing field would have been leveled (and fair), paving the way for R&D of alternative fuels. I think we could have started a revolution of sorts. We are in way worse shape now, in terms of fossil fuel use, than we were then, despite the overwhelming science, and despite the fundamental tenets of economic modeling. I suspected we were doomed when the federal DOE (under Regan) intervened, arguing pre-emption. So much for state's rights.
3
errata; it was Big Bush that was president at that time, not Ronnie. (I sometimes get the oil/petroleum lobby guys mixed up)
Midway Atoll. The perfect place to build your Presidential Library Mr. Obama. Perhaps even a retirement home.
7
What I don't understand is how the US Military is facing rising seas now at their Virginia naval base and the Republicans are saying "No" to them. The Military! The Koch brothers really got a hold on those R's, now, don't they?
5
global warming is inevitable. even if we completely eliminate greenhouse gas emissions , the planet will naturally cycle from cold to warm as it has done throughout history. we need a robust economic growth so that we have the resources to deal with the effects of climate change. getting rid of our cars and making everyone pay more for energy it's not going to accomplish that. We will have a weak economy and will lack the resources needed to deal with climate change.
5
Your claims that the climate change we are experiencing are natural cycles is contradicted by the US National Academy of Science, the national academies of most other nations, and nearly ever scientific organization (e.g., AAAS, AMS, AGU, API) world wide. Are you more knowledgeable than the members of these organizations?
The economic studies related to climate change have generally shown that the cost of reducing carbon emissions is much less than the costs associated with changes to the environment that will cause disruptions to our economy, or infrastructure, and the food chain.
The economic studies related to climate change have generally shown that the cost of reducing carbon emissions is much less than the costs associated with changes to the environment that will cause disruptions to our economy, or infrastructure, and the food chain.
2
How can the President find common ground with the Republican politicians that call climate change a hoax, accuse scientists of fraud without a speck of evidence, use their official power to demand all communication between scientists, and lie (e.g., global cooling in the 70's, no warming for 18 years) about the facts of climate change despite incontestable proof that the claims are lies.
They provide a platform for the tiny minority of climate scientists that are skeptical about the severity of climate change but ignore the 97 to 98 percent of the climate scientists that consider climate change to be a serious risk to species, the food chain, the economy, the society, and the planet. Nearly every science organization (e.g., AAAS, AGU, API, AMS, US National Academy, other national academies) have stated that climate change is a serious risk to society and the planet and action needs to be initiated immediately to reduce and delay the consequences of continued emissions. The vast majority of Republican politicians simply ignore the most knowledgeable scientists in the world for the benefit of their contributors.
They provide a platform for the tiny minority of climate scientists that are skeptical about the severity of climate change but ignore the 97 to 98 percent of the climate scientists that consider climate change to be a serious risk to species, the food chain, the economy, the society, and the planet. Nearly every science organization (e.g., AAAS, AGU, API, AMS, US National Academy, other national academies) have stated that climate change is a serious risk to society and the planet and action needs to be initiated immediately to reduce and delay the consequences of continued emissions. The vast majority of Republican politicians simply ignore the most knowledgeable scientists in the world for the benefit of their contributors.
5
History is not going to reflect well on Obama and his legacy of inflicting unnecessary economic violence on Americans with policies that have kept the economic on life support.
In twenty years people are going to laugh at all this hyperbole and climate change idiocy.
In twenty years people are going to laugh at all this hyperbole and climate change idiocy.
9
Please tell this to those nations like Maldives whose existence is being threatened because of climate change or to poor farmers who cannot eat 2 meals a day because of irregular monsoon.
3
Look up pictures of the Maldives from 50 years ago (25 years before the first IPCC report) and ones from today. Pay attention to the average beach scene and the average shore line and tell me how different they are. Google Maldives, monsoons and count the number of monsoons to hit them each decade from 1910 to present. What you will find is in spite of average global temps rising a little over 1.5 degrees C since 1910 nothing has changed dramatically for the people of the Maldives (except for a huge economic boost to their economy from increased tourism thanks to increased fossil fuel based transportation). So what makes you so sure their existence and way of life is so threatened over the next 20-30 years??? I'll bet you answer is completely based on prediction and not based on actual observed factors.
2
Why did the Ice Age happen? That was only 10,000 years ago, nothing in time geologically. Why did the warming period of the 1100-1200s happen? Why did the Little Ice Age of the 1700s happen? To repeat, correlation is not causation, and no one has explained these climactic fluctuations. And why do sea levels only seem to rise selectively and not everywhere? And how are current global temperatures measured vs. the past when there was no way to measure temperatures globally until recent years? So many questions, yet we are supposed to panic because, why?
10
This, more than anything else, is why Trump and the Republicans must be defeated.
6
What few have mentioned is that economics will finally & more rapidly reduce fossil fuel emissions than international accords or national laws ever will. I'm not saying that l accords or laws are not important, but the cost of solar & other renewables is precipitously dropping & can now compete with fossil fuels.
There are now companies that are generating electricity from large solar arrays (tens of thousands of solar panels) & selling electricity on the open market at competitive prices.
Some critics of renewable energy might claim that renewables are often subsidized. However, fossil fuels have been subsidized for decades. Regional legacy power generation (nuclear, coal, natural gas) has also stymied the growth of competitively priced renewables.
Furthermore, various constituents (power generators, regional electrical grid companies) have also hindered the development of an integrated national electric grid, one of President Obama's early goals, to efficiently move electricity among regions of the country.
Finally, the development of new battery technology should ultimately provide the electrical storage capacity to supply the amount of energy whenever it is needed.
There are now companies that are generating electricity from large solar arrays (tens of thousands of solar panels) & selling electricity on the open market at competitive prices.
Some critics of renewable energy might claim that renewables are often subsidized. However, fossil fuels have been subsidized for decades. Regional legacy power generation (nuclear, coal, natural gas) has also stymied the growth of competitively priced renewables.
Furthermore, various constituents (power generators, regional electrical grid companies) have also hindered the development of an integrated national electric grid, one of President Obama's early goals, to efficiently move electricity among regions of the country.
Finally, the development of new battery technology should ultimately provide the electrical storage capacity to supply the amount of energy whenever it is needed.
When it comes to a degraded, disintegrating biosphere sure to end civilization as we know it President Obama might as well be King Canute commanding the tides.
All-powerful Earth, the True God if one exists, does what it does indifferent to, and oblivious about, us. Poison it, it poisons us back. That simple fact of life should be manifest to everyone; intrinsically understand. However, that insight hasn't prevented billions of humans from driving themselves around inside internal combustion engine powered automobiles. That alone is the cause of our undoing. Not "will be", or "might be". "Is".
The single most environmentally destructive device ever invented by man is the internal combustion engine, in all its forms. President Obama's impact on that ongoing calamity is about the same as my snapping my fingers at the rising sun every few minutes.
No. President Obama's enduring legacies are:
- our failing Affordable Care Act, sabotaged by design;
- the rise of ISIS, caused in no small part by pulling American ground forces of Iraq too quickly;
- the political and humanitarian catastrophe that Syria has become -- again, caused in no small part by Obama's reluctance to throw a punch, to summon the nerve to decisively use American power there. He prevaricated when he should have acted;
- the tsunami of Muslim refugees causing a rebirth of Fascism in Europe;
and (for lack of a better word):
- the rise of "Trumpism" here at home.
A bitterer cup of hemlock there never was.
All-powerful Earth, the True God if one exists, does what it does indifferent to, and oblivious about, us. Poison it, it poisons us back. That simple fact of life should be manifest to everyone; intrinsically understand. However, that insight hasn't prevented billions of humans from driving themselves around inside internal combustion engine powered automobiles. That alone is the cause of our undoing. Not "will be", or "might be". "Is".
The single most environmentally destructive device ever invented by man is the internal combustion engine, in all its forms. President Obama's impact on that ongoing calamity is about the same as my snapping my fingers at the rising sun every few minutes.
No. President Obama's enduring legacies are:
- our failing Affordable Care Act, sabotaged by design;
- the rise of ISIS, caused in no small part by pulling American ground forces of Iraq too quickly;
- the political and humanitarian catastrophe that Syria has become -- again, caused in no small part by Obama's reluctance to throw a punch, to summon the nerve to decisively use American power there. He prevaricated when he should have acted;
- the tsunami of Muslim refugees causing a rebirth of Fascism in Europe;
and (for lack of a better word):
- the rise of "Trumpism" here at home.
A bitterer cup of hemlock there never was.
14
There is much environmental contradiction in Democratic policy. Ds support: 1) unlimited immigration, which means more people having cars, air conditioners, etc. 2) IVF and reprotech, which means more energy consumption (and higher insurance cost), 3) war on terror (burns plenty of fuel), 4) trade agreements, 5) home mortgage interest deduction, even on vacation homes...and much, much more.
And plenty of Ds use more than their share of fuel, driving, cooling and going on exotic vacations, or taking copters to the Hamptons, etc. None of this is the right wing's fault. Most Ds talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
And plenty of Ds use more than their share of fuel, driving, cooling and going on exotic vacations, or taking copters to the Hamptons, etc. None of this is the right wing's fault. Most Ds talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
5
In fairness to D's, a D tried to put the following language in a Senate Bill recently: "climate change is real and human activity significantly contributes to climate change". It was voted down, the vast majority of GOP Senators apparently don't agree with the statement. It was later found that those voting against it got, on average, five times as much in fossil fuel contributions over the last few years as those who voted for it (every D voted for it).
4
One certainly cannot accuse the GOP of any inconsistency when it comes to doing the bidding of their fossil fuel industry donors.
They always put their mouths where the money hydrants flow freely.
They always put their mouths where the money hydrants flow freely.
1
Well, duh.
"Climate change" is the only thing left that could possibly have any positive effect on his legacy. He muffed the "race" thing... Americans of color are far worse off today then when he entered office, they're involved in way more violent crime (if that's even possible), they're poorer, and there is more divisiveness than EVER.
He created "The Affordable Care Act" which has made health care in America more expensive, and unaffordable for 99.9% of all Americans.
Lastly, our economy, while minimally improved in Obama's eight years (a chimpanzee with an accordion could have been the leader of a more robust recovery simply by playing music, as there was no place to go but up) remains bereft of vitality.
I guess I'd be pinning my "legacy" hopes on this thing that has happened before throughout earth's history in the absence of carbon emissions too!
"Climate change" is the only thing left that could possibly have any positive effect on his legacy. He muffed the "race" thing... Americans of color are far worse off today then when he entered office, they're involved in way more violent crime (if that's even possible), they're poorer, and there is more divisiveness than EVER.
He created "The Affordable Care Act" which has made health care in America more expensive, and unaffordable for 99.9% of all Americans.
Lastly, our economy, while minimally improved in Obama's eight years (a chimpanzee with an accordion could have been the leader of a more robust recovery simply by playing music, as there was no place to go but up) remains bereft of vitality.
I guess I'd be pinning my "legacy" hopes on this thing that has happened before throughout earth's history in the absence of carbon emissions too!
8
" Americans of color are far worse off today then when he entered office, they're involved in way more violent crime (if that's even possible), they're poorer."
Black males constitute at most 7% of the US population yet commit a grossly disproportionate 50+% of all crimes. Could this be because 70% of all black children are born to single mothers and are raised without a father present?
Black males constitute at most 7% of the US population yet commit a grossly disproportionate 50+% of all crimes. Could this be because 70% of all black children are born to single mothers and are raised without a father present?
1
Climate change is very likely to lead to the collapse of our modern civilization, and Obama didn't attempt to increase the federal tax on gasoline – even after its price collapsed – or end subsidies to fossil fuel companies.
I like the president, but his approach to tackling climate change has been severely lacking.
What if, instead of wasting years implementing medical insurance reform that most people didn't want (either because it was too socialized or not socialized enough), he had created public/private partnerships that put solar-paneled canopies of some of the thousands of square miles of parking lots in this country? Cleaner air, reduced CO2, and many thousands of new jobs with a much smaller price tag than the Gulf war. Exactly what we needed to happen when his pockets were bulging with political capital.
What if he had made it a goal of being carbon positive in ten years, instead of just a little less bad than we were 25 years ago. Kennedy launched an ambitious space program, while Obama's greatest effort has been making me pay for health insurance that I can't afford to use, now that I have it.
If you want to stop the upcoming global catastrophe, it's going to take a radical approach. It's too late for this president, and possibly, now, for any president to change to our date with disaster.
I like the president, but his approach to tackling climate change has been severely lacking.
What if, instead of wasting years implementing medical insurance reform that most people didn't want (either because it was too socialized or not socialized enough), he had created public/private partnerships that put solar-paneled canopies of some of the thousands of square miles of parking lots in this country? Cleaner air, reduced CO2, and many thousands of new jobs with a much smaller price tag than the Gulf war. Exactly what we needed to happen when his pockets were bulging with political capital.
What if he had made it a goal of being carbon positive in ten years, instead of just a little less bad than we were 25 years ago. Kennedy launched an ambitious space program, while Obama's greatest effort has been making me pay for health insurance that I can't afford to use, now that I have it.
If you want to stop the upcoming global catastrophe, it's going to take a radical approach. It's too late for this president, and possibly, now, for any president to change to our date with disaster.
1
If Obama, most of our political class, the "liberal" media and our now mostly bought of by corporate donations environmental groups really cared about global warming they would be going all out to stabilize the worlds' human population that is growing by 1 billion human GW gas emitters every 15 years. Gradual techno achieved reductions in carbon emissions per capita are continually overwhelmed by ever more total carbon energy consumers in the world, most of whom predictably want to consume more not less in much of the developing world. But no - all our leaders are in in population denial due to their greed for more money, and the additional power that more citizens give to leaders who can threaten other countries with their larger populations. And because ever more bodies means a higher GDP, and, therefore, more profits for the globe's 1% (no matter how poor average citizens are) 1%ers who by the way will easily be able to escape the most catastrophic effects of future global warming calamities. The United States is an environmental leader joke, lousy role model to the rest of the world regarding unnecessary population growth. Our political class intentionally increases our total GW gas emitters every decade by 30 million by unnecessarily importing 10 million legal & millions more illegal immigrants so our business owner 3% can have slave-wage labor.And all Obama can talk about is putting up a few wind turbines and solar panels and upping gas mileage in vehicles a little bit.
8
In the eyes of lefty liberals....you can tell people that they cannot drink soda pop in certain size cups....you can force them to buy lousy, useless health "insurance"....you can take away their guns, and undo the Second Amendment....but by god, NOBODY can tell you not to have that 4th or 5th child, even if you are a welfare mother with no skills or education and will live on the public dole for generations.
Because having all the kids you want, and making other people support those kids...IS YOUR RIGHT!!!!
The planet be damned.
Because having all the kids you want, and making other people support those kids...IS YOUR RIGHT!!!!
The planet be damned.
The weather changes from year to year. But gullible people are forever.
11
Hal, this is not about weather, it's about climate change, anthropogenic climate change.
I just came back from Greenland where I could see the effects of climate change with my own eyes. It is real, it is happening, and it will affect everybody. However, alarmism and technophobia are misplaced. The Earth has undergone profound cataclysms in the geological past and the biosphere has adapted, even if in many previous extinctions as many as 90 percent of all species went extinct. It will adapt again. The question, rather, is whether our civilization will have sufficient flexibility to develop technological and social solutions to the new challenges. The technological solutions are well-known: solar, wind, nuclear. The social solutions are harder to stomach because they involve strict population control, high urban density (cities are more energy-efficient than sprawl) and curbs on meat-eating and industrial farming. But the sky is not falling, humanity is not going extinct, and the zombie apocalypse is not around the corner.
1
About 1,000 years ago Greenland got its name because it was greener and warmer than it is today. Was that due to human caused global warming?
1
This was not the reason for its' naming.
Why is there not a single word about the deliberate misinformation by the energy companes, similar in strategy but vastly more damaging than the efforts to dismiss the case that smoking cigarettes causes cancer? The lawsuits pending by 22 State AGs? Not even a hint that there are extremely strong economic forces promoting climate change?
9
No joke, open house signs this very moment on land that floods in Miami!
I live in Pinecrest where wetland was filled that should have been preserved for the pumps ahead. The acreage had been the area’s unofficial sump, re drainage basin. Pinecrest officials blamed inland sea-rise for the miscalculations and flawed engineering even as mansion building continues and we will flood. Images on Pinecrest Floods and Pinecrest Bans Sumpland show the desecration. And tell of Zika on its way.
There is no drainage.
Pinecrest Floods
https://pinecrestfloods.blogspot.com/
Pinecrest Bans Sumpland
https://pinecrestbanssumpland.blogspot.com/
King Tide is a given, as is Zika. My grandson attends middle school on Miami Beach, spraying using naled, a known neurotoxin insecticide, was held off today, will begin tomorrow. Beyond awful.
Leaving is difficult for us. The family is here. Am hoping my grandson(s) attend college up north and settle there. Seemingly a necessity by then.
Flooding and Zika adding to eco-Armageddon. Now, in the present, undeniable.
I live in Pinecrest where wetland was filled that should have been preserved for the pumps ahead. The acreage had been the area’s unofficial sump, re drainage basin. Pinecrest officials blamed inland sea-rise for the miscalculations and flawed engineering even as mansion building continues and we will flood. Images on Pinecrest Floods and Pinecrest Bans Sumpland show the desecration. And tell of Zika on its way.
There is no drainage.
Pinecrest Floods
https://pinecrestfloods.blogspot.com/
Pinecrest Bans Sumpland
https://pinecrestbanssumpland.blogspot.com/
King Tide is a given, as is Zika. My grandson attends middle school on Miami Beach, spraying using naled, a known neurotoxin insecticide, was held off today, will begin tomorrow. Beyond awful.
Leaving is difficult for us. The family is here. Am hoping my grandson(s) attend college up north and settle there. Seemingly a necessity by then.
Flooding and Zika adding to eco-Armageddon. Now, in the present, undeniable.
2
When not bringing eternal peace and prosperity to the world, in his spare time he communes with Hawaiian monk seals on a remote Pacific atoll, frolicking in the surf with them and speaking their secret mammalian language, one of many such animal kingdom dialects he is fluent in.
Good grief, really? This is journalism? What is happening to the Times news room?
Good grief, really? This is journalism? What is happening to the Times news room?
10
Equally terrifying is the prospect of Trump winning the presidency and rolling back what little progress has been made so far. The longer we wait to take the dramatic steps needed to harder it will be to change and the worse the results. If Clinton is elected, and (hopefully with a Democratic House & Senate) then we all need work hard with her to get enacted a revenue neutral national fee on carbon emissions.
5
Show me proof about man made climate change please. Our meteorologists can't predict tomorrow's weather with 100% accuracy so what makes you think these so called scientists can prove anything.. Oh by the way they said NYC would be underwater by now. What happened with that prediction?
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2015/06/12/flashback-abc...
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2015/06/12/flashback-abc...
8
Quite a few commenters say Obama is contradictory, that he pursued fracking to the detriment of the climate.
So wrong! Fracking gave the US a leg up on cheap natural gas and the opportunity to reduce reliance on coal and nukes. Cheaper gasoline does not cause more pollution either.
So wrong! Fracking gave the US a leg up on cheap natural gas and the opportunity to reduce reliance on coal and nukes. Cheaper gasoline does not cause more pollution either.
1
I like the President and will miss him. I would have liked to shoot baskets, eat Chinese and talk about women with him. Placing Israel in the shadow of a nuclear cloud was where he went wrong with me. That I cannot forgive or forget.
4
Well, Mr. Stanton, you are supporting Empress Hillary....so you can look forward to MORE OF THE SAME.
As a lefty liberal, she is no friend to Israel and will sell them out at the first chance.
As a lefty liberal, she is no friend to Israel and will sell them out at the first chance.
Everything about the Obama administration is corrupt including IRS, FBI, Justice Department. And the scientists who do Science are corrupt if they depend on government grants to subsist. And they don't get the grants if they do not seek the outcomes of interest to Big government and then achieve those outcomes by skewing design and interpretation. Don't talk about Scientists as if they are these pristine gods any longer .
10
Yet another article on President Obama's legacy. Good grief--let the guy leave office first!
7
As Republicans continue to strive to destroy our lives, our way of living, our natural resources, our clean air and clean water, a few in the world strive to counter their horrific, blind, ignorant evil. It is too little and apparently too late and the Republicans continue their strife to destroy us all.
2
Too little too late. He had many chances in his first term but he chose to ignore them so that he could be reelected. If he were truly green he would have put this ahead of personal ambition. We lost faith in him. This is a legacy scramble. Al Gore is and was sincere. Obama - just another politician.
4
What global warming alarmists don't get about the apparent ho-hum reaction of most people living their daily lives in America, is that we keep hearing you scream catastrophe but what we see seems normal. And this article exemplifies that. Pay attention to the byline. The article was written from Midway Atoll. It is a 2.4 square mile island in the middle of the Pacific with a high elevation of only a couple dozen feet above sea level. It and adjacent Eastern Island each have a primitive and abandoned airstrip. Now go look at pictures of the airstrip during WWII and compare to now. The Island isn't any lower, the beach isn't significantly moved from where it was 70+ years ago. How come? Because the predictions that Hansen, Gore etc. have screamed at us for 30 years haven't manifested. The IPCC in 1991 predicted average global temp increases of 0.3 degrees C/ decade. And yet 25 years later it has barely increased 0.3 degrees C. That means they missed by a factor of 2.5x. Ditto for sea level rise. In 2005 Al Gore predicted ever worsening hurricane strength and frequency. Since that prediction we have experienced the quietest Atlantic hurricane decade in the last 100 years. Hermine was the first hurricane to make landfall in the state of Florida in 11 years and it just barely reached hurricane status!!! Before I change my laws and my lifestyle I want to see your evidence. Not your predictions or your warnings or you hysteria. Your evidence.
10
This may help you.
bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
1
You would think this increased hurricane activity would be noticeable in my front yard, where more than 12 years have passed since a hurricane came through - and the last big one came after a 15 year break.
8
If Obama thinks the trends are so terrifying, why did he do everything he could to expand oil and gas production in the U.S.?
2
Because we still need them and if we produce it here in the USA we're not at the mercy of hostile foreign government for our energy. I guess you did not live through the Arab Oil Imbargo of the 1970s when Americans waited on gas lines for 5 -6 hours to get some gas.
3
Everything Obama has had to deal with, global and domestic - and his biggest priority is the weather? Any connection to his 2008 nomination speech which included promises to lower sea levels?
3
This is what ( I think) I know about climate change. If I'm wrong on any facts I would welcome a correction:
Arrhenius deduced the greenhouse effect in the 1800's. We know that increasing C02 in the atmosphere will increase global temperatures, with a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial levels leading to about a 1 degree increase. This is called climate forcing.
Climate modelers think that this increase will lead to an increase in water vapor in the atmosphere. If that water vapor is primarily just haze, it will also act as a greenhouse gas, increasing temperatures still further, perhaps as much as 5 degrees. This is called climate sensitivity.
If that water vapor instead results primarily in clouds, that will act to cool the Earth instead of warming it.
We don't really understand cloud formation, so we really don't know if a little warming will produce mostly haze or mostly clouds. There has been little progress in solving this problem.
Climate models that assume a little warming will primarily produce haze instead of clouds (and so a great deal of warming in the future) have been doing a poor job of explaining global temperatures for the last decade, although after some controversial adjustments the modelers claim some vindication. In addition these models cannot explain ice ages, climate reversals, the Roman warm period, or the year without a summer. Predictions based on these models should be treated with skepticism.
Arrhenius deduced the greenhouse effect in the 1800's. We know that increasing C02 in the atmosphere will increase global temperatures, with a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial levels leading to about a 1 degree increase. This is called climate forcing.
Climate modelers think that this increase will lead to an increase in water vapor in the atmosphere. If that water vapor is primarily just haze, it will also act as a greenhouse gas, increasing temperatures still further, perhaps as much as 5 degrees. This is called climate sensitivity.
If that water vapor instead results primarily in clouds, that will act to cool the Earth instead of warming it.
We don't really understand cloud formation, so we really don't know if a little warming will produce mostly haze or mostly clouds. There has been little progress in solving this problem.
Climate models that assume a little warming will primarily produce haze instead of clouds (and so a great deal of warming in the future) have been doing a poor job of explaining global temperatures for the last decade, although after some controversial adjustments the modelers claim some vindication. In addition these models cannot explain ice ages, climate reversals, the Roman warm period, or the year without a summer. Predictions based on these models should be treated with skepticism.
2
Ages past didn't have the addition of carbon to the atmosphere. The recent age had the addition of wastes created by the industrial revolution which served a population of 200 million or so. The future is an industrial age serving 6000 million. I.o.w., the waste will will be 30 times what it was in the era of London fog or today's Bejing fog.
So, multiply your clouds by 30, I guess.
So, multiply your clouds by 30, I guess.
Excellency... your final 2 words are the most salient in the whole discussion. You guess. And that's all the models have been and it is why they have proven relatively inaccurate, because there is little understanding of coping mechanisms of the planet and atmosphere to climate changes. It's why past changes (cold or hot) always seem to moderate back. So my point is we don't need to threaten the current usable energy sources required provide a decent quality of life to those 6000 million based on... a guess.
1
Ice ages are related to cycles in the earth's orbit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
The "Year Without a Summer" was likely triggered by ash from a volcanic eruption: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
The factors behind human-caused climate change have been understood since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and now we get to experience it too.
bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
Most added heat goes into the oceans (90%), and the rising temperature of the oceans is observable:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_heat_content
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
The "Year Without a Summer" was likely triggered by ash from a volcanic eruption: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
The factors behind human-caused climate change have been understood since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and now we get to experience it too.
bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
Most added heat goes into the oceans (90%), and the rising temperature of the oceans is observable:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_heat_content
1
It is time to build a monument. A large sculpture perhaps of a human figure with a bag over it's head. Or maybe bending over deeply with it's head inserted in it's rear end.
On the sculpture would be a massive tablet where names are engraved showing the politicians who have denied climate science or stood in the way of action to reverse the earth's heating. This way future generations will see exactly who was responsible for decades of inaction and obstruction. I wonder how these deaf, dumb and blind leaders will react when their names are cut into stone forever.
On the sculpture would be a massive tablet where names are engraved showing the politicians who have denied climate science or stood in the way of action to reverse the earth's heating. This way future generations will see exactly who was responsible for decades of inaction and obstruction. I wonder how these deaf, dumb and blind leaders will react when their names are cut into stone forever.
5
What about those who did nothing about the earth's heating after the last ice age. Manhattan island was covered by a mile-deep glacier. Where is all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the loss of this glacier?
3
We didn't have as much at risk.
They won't be remembered. Who now remembers those who insisted that the earth is flat??
2
I have another idea on how to reduce power-sector emissions w/o congressional action. It involves applying a "social cost of carbon" when determining the dispatch order of power plants.
Recently, regulatory bodies have used a "social cost of carbon" to justify various regulatory decisions, and a recent court ruling backs this practice up. Currently, power plants are dispatched based on solely on cost, i.e., the set of power plants with the lowest variable (operating) costs are used to meet demand at any given time. The idea would be to redefine the cost calculation to include the cost of CO2 emissions, based on some emissions price (e.g., $30 per ton of CO2). That would make coal plants more expensive relative to gas, and they would be pushed back in the queue. This would result in less coal and more gas generation.
This could be done at the regulatory level, such as the FERC or individual ISOs. I don't think it would require legislation. Even a modest applied CO2 price should lead to a large amount of coal generation being replaced with gas.
I present this idea in more detail in the following article:
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/09/28/the-dispatch-queue-%E2%80%93-an-alt...
Recently, regulatory bodies have used a "social cost of carbon" to justify various regulatory decisions, and a recent court ruling backs this practice up. Currently, power plants are dispatched based on solely on cost, i.e., the set of power plants with the lowest variable (operating) costs are used to meet demand at any given time. The idea would be to redefine the cost calculation to include the cost of CO2 emissions, based on some emissions price (e.g., $30 per ton of CO2). That would make coal plants more expensive relative to gas, and they would be pushed back in the queue. This would result in less coal and more gas generation.
This could be done at the regulatory level, such as the FERC or individual ISOs. I don't think it would require legislation. Even a modest applied CO2 price should lead to a large amount of coal generation being replaced with gas.
I present this idea in more detail in the following article:
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/09/28/the-dispatch-queue-%E2%80%93-an-alt...
2
Perhaps President Obama’s record on climate change is “curiously contradictory” because in spite of what he says about the urgency of the problem, under his administration, the U.S. has pursued an implicit “drill, baby, drill” game plan. Mr. Obama has presided over a major boom in America’s fossil fuel output—the stuff that’s stoking climate change—because we’re drilling more than ever. Today, the U.S. is the world’s number 1 producer of petroleum and natural gas hydrocarbons. During his years in office, the use of fracking—an extreme method of extraction that underscores just how desperately addicted we are to carbon-producing energy—has expanded exponentially—even to offshore areas. Just two weeks ago, his government held an auction offering up millions more acres of the beleaguered Gulf of Mexico to oil companies—in the wake of the disastrous Baton Rouge flooding that was exacerbated by climate change and in spite of local opposition (not to mention the 2010 Deepwater Horizon catastrophe). And a couple of days ago, in Laos, he slickly dodged a question about the Dakota Access Pipeline project, which the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is rightly fighting and has urged him to block. His “all-of-the-above” energy strategy hasn’t done much to promote a much-needed drop in greenhouse gas emissions or switch to renewable energy. And the emissions released from that strategy will continue to plague us long after he’s left the White House.
8
What did the Deepwater Horizon tragedy have to do with the flooding in Baton Rouge last month?
1
Someone can shut down a pipeline, but not a 500,000-1,000,000 volt electric transmission line to get so called "green' energy across 3 states to California or New York.
1
Nothing. The Deepwater Horizon happened in the gulf, where the new leases were sold.
2
So I guess we all need to die to protect free-market capitalism. Obviously it's preferable to allowing Obama to succeed.
1
thank you! that's exactly what it's about. capitalism versus central planning. It has nothing to do climate or oceans or anything else. It is just the mantra of the political left wishing to put restraints on free markets and capitalism. Everything else is pure baloney.
2
And what about the part where we all die because the profit motive is all and "everything else is pure baloney"?
yes very near future is EXTREMELY terr!fying (or exciting if you are a GOPer).
however NO candidate is expressing the requisite amount of alarm needed: therefore, no american cares; just goes on about business while 500 yr floods happens regularly etc.
then again, BOTH major party pols are ly!ng: for instance while donald trump idolizes putin, hillary explains diff this way: “The United States of America does not invade other countries to plunder and pillage,” she said. “We don’t send our brave men and women around the world to steal oil."
really? in hillary world US just was invited to p!llage and ruin entire countries fo altruism? halliburton and others did not rush right in after iraq was 'freed'? the reality is OIL and soon WATER have replaced religion as primary reason for ALL wars. sooner we address actual 'inconvenient' realities, better prepared we are. or just keep on staying ignorant and having sh*t happen and pretend it is all magic or god or liberals or IS etc etc etc.
however NO candidate is expressing the requisite amount of alarm needed: therefore, no american cares; just goes on about business while 500 yr floods happens regularly etc.
then again, BOTH major party pols are ly!ng: for instance while donald trump idolizes putin, hillary explains diff this way: “The United States of America does not invade other countries to plunder and pillage,” she said. “We don’t send our brave men and women around the world to steal oil."
really? in hillary world US just was invited to p!llage and ruin entire countries fo altruism? halliburton and others did not rush right in after iraq was 'freed'? the reality is OIL and soon WATER have replaced religion as primary reason for ALL wars. sooner we address actual 'inconvenient' realities, better prepared we are. or just keep on staying ignorant and having sh*t happen and pretend it is all magic or god or liberals or IS etc etc etc.
The sky is falling. The sea is rising. It's cataclysmic and apocalyptic and it's happening right in front of our eyes. It has all the makings of a disaster film, and we are all going to be extras. I can't help thinking about that scene in the original Poseidon Adventure when the passengers realize too late that they should have listened to Gene Hackman. The water comes raging in, and the people desperately try to climb up the Christmas tree to escape. It's a futile effort, of course, with Gene Hackman, the preacher, holding out his hand, looking out in despair as the disbelieving flock is lost. We need more leaders with "messianic impulses"--nothing else will save us.
1
You do realize the Poseidon Adventure was not a documentary. Don't you?
1
Yes, of course. Does that change the fact that the people in the completely-fictitious-not-a-documentary movie realized they should have listened?
With Obamacare crumbling, even his most fawning biographers will be hard-pressed. Elegant figure, certainly, and much better than the competition, but not much has changed. I had high hopes that the long-awaited "peace dividend" might finally be in view--now that's naive!
1
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
--Philip K. Dick
If we don't decide what to do about the planet, the planet will decide what to do about us.
--Philip K. Dick
If we don't decide what to do about the planet, the planet will decide what to do about us.
4
56 million years ago there were palm trees and crocodiles in Antarctica. The planet has decided to do with us before and it will decide what to do with us again.
2
...and you know this personally because you were there, right?
1
Does anyone else remember his cant of "clean coal?" Does anyone know that one of his major campaign contributors (besides the Big Banks) was BP...yes, the same BP responsible for the carnage when their oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded and destroyed marine life for miles and miles and miles? Does anyone remember how he supported the proposed new oil fields in Alaska, right in the wildlife preserve?
How can anyone or any journalist believe that this President did anything at all for the ecology and climate change? The only change we ever got from him was chump change. Even his paltry attempt at creating a legacy by mandating health insurance for everyone (and for those who don't get it, it's a crime) was really just a cover for a huge give-away to Big Insurance and Big Pharma. Shame on you Mr. Obama. Have you no sense of decency left that you are so eager to lie to create a legacy for yourself? How about UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE FOR ALL? Now THERE's a legacy you could have believed in!
How can anyone or any journalist believe that this President did anything at all for the ecology and climate change? The only change we ever got from him was chump change. Even his paltry attempt at creating a legacy by mandating health insurance for everyone (and for those who don't get it, it's a crime) was really just a cover for a huge give-away to Big Insurance and Big Pharma. Shame on you Mr. Obama. Have you no sense of decency left that you are so eager to lie to create a legacy for yourself? How about UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE FOR ALL? Now THERE's a legacy you could have believed in!
2
The reporters here must have had part of their brains turn to oatmeal. Criticizing Obama on this issue is absurd.
As President he has tried to deal with the issue in an intelligent and thoughtful way. Can you imagine interviewing Trump, McConnell, Palin or Inhofe on this issue. You''d not just get sick, but you would be flabbergasted at their lack of knowledge and inane assertions that it's all a hoax.
And how could anyone forge a consensus when half the country and all the repubs in congress oppose doing anything meaningful to mitigate climate change. Most of these ignorant fools don't even acknowledge a problem.
Obama can only do so much but at least he is intelligent and thoughtful and tries. The repubs will likely destroy the country through their rejection of science and absolute commitment to greed over the common good. Looks like ignorance may well lead to the death of us all.
As President he has tried to deal with the issue in an intelligent and thoughtful way. Can you imagine interviewing Trump, McConnell, Palin or Inhofe on this issue. You''d not just get sick, but you would be flabbergasted at their lack of knowledge and inane assertions that it's all a hoax.
And how could anyone forge a consensus when half the country and all the repubs in congress oppose doing anything meaningful to mitigate climate change. Most of these ignorant fools don't even acknowledge a problem.
Obama can only do so much but at least he is intelligent and thoughtful and tries. The repubs will likely destroy the country through their rejection of science and absolute commitment to greed over the common good. Looks like ignorance may well lead to the death of us all.
3
What did we do to mitigate climate change after the last ice age?
1
Mitigate, as in change?
For starters, our ancestors invented agriculture and began clearing forests and grasslands, thus reducing natural carbon sinks. Next, they discovered that smelting of metallic ores and alloys - first with more of that wood from cleared forests, and then with the magic earth which burned (coal) - could create tools and weapons and other sorts of things made of bronze and then iron, eventually steel. Next, they discovered there was a substantial industrial benefit through application of steam power generated from using that coal, and later petroleum or natural gas especially following development of the internal combustion engine.
All that unfettered combustion of geologically-sequestered fossil fuels in the past few centuries has released pretty huge quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere, while rapacious deforestation proceeded apace.
Any other questions?
For starters, our ancestors invented agriculture and began clearing forests and grasslands, thus reducing natural carbon sinks. Next, they discovered that smelting of metallic ores and alloys - first with more of that wood from cleared forests, and then with the magic earth which burned (coal) - could create tools and weapons and other sorts of things made of bronze and then iron, eventually steel. Next, they discovered there was a substantial industrial benefit through application of steam power generated from using that coal, and later petroleum or natural gas especially following development of the internal combustion engine.
All that unfettered combustion of geologically-sequestered fossil fuels in the past few centuries has released pretty huge quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere, while rapacious deforestation proceeded apace.
Any other questions?
1
ET, your question is legit, but it's not easy to give a 2 minute answer that explains the warming and cooling cycles over geologic time.
I am a scientist and I can assure you we are aware of these past cycles. Scientists discovered them after all.
The last ice age which consisted of glacial events and interglacial warm periods were driven by Milankovitch cycles (changes in earth's orbital geometry), which in turn gave rise to additional feedbacks that affected climate (burial and release of CO2 from the oceans, changes in land and sea ice, etc). The broad theory is fairly well understood, though the climate system has internal ocean/atmospheric cycles that mask or enhance warming or cooling trends for decades or longer, so the details are complex.
The important question is what is causing the rapid global warming we've seen over the past century. The consensus scientific explanation is it is primarily a result of human CO2 emissions. The drivers of climate during the last glacial age cannot explain what we see today.
The best way to mitigate this is to stop burning carbon fuels and switch to solar, wind or geothermal, etc. Obama's clean power plan, a small step in the right direction has been totally opposed by the repubs and they are trying to get the Supreme Court to block it permanently. Typical for them unfortunately. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-supreme-court-blocks-obama...
see also https://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm
I am a scientist and I can assure you we are aware of these past cycles. Scientists discovered them after all.
The last ice age which consisted of glacial events and interglacial warm periods were driven by Milankovitch cycles (changes in earth's orbital geometry), which in turn gave rise to additional feedbacks that affected climate (burial and release of CO2 from the oceans, changes in land and sea ice, etc). The broad theory is fairly well understood, though the climate system has internal ocean/atmospheric cycles that mask or enhance warming or cooling trends for decades or longer, so the details are complex.
The important question is what is causing the rapid global warming we've seen over the past century. The consensus scientific explanation is it is primarily a result of human CO2 emissions. The drivers of climate during the last glacial age cannot explain what we see today.
The best way to mitigate this is to stop burning carbon fuels and switch to solar, wind or geothermal, etc. Obama's clean power plan, a small step in the right direction has been totally opposed by the repubs and they are trying to get the Supreme Court to block it permanently. Typical for them unfortunately. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-supreme-court-blocks-obama...
see also https://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm
1
There's a lot of anger directed here at a President who cannot make domestic policy, only reinterpret previous policy (Clean Air Act) in such a way as to lead, certainly, to a Supreme Court challenge among claims of imperial overreach. Presidents can only do foreign policy unencumbered by Congress (mostly), which is why the China deal is so important. 'Unencumbered by Congress': lets talk about that. Here's some words Hawaii Senator Brian Schatz tried to add to a Senate bill: 'climate change is real and human activity significantly contributes to climate change'. The Senate voted these words down, even though they are practically the same words Lyndon Johnson used to warn Congress about this issue 50 years ago. Those voting against it make five times as much in fossil contributions as those minority who voted for it. So don't expect any change in domestic policy, no matter who is President, until Congress 'gets it'. And that means we have to yell louder than Exxon.
3
Addressing climate change will require BIG government and international treaties. The Republican Party is too closely linked with small government and big oil to acknowledge the importance of any issue that requires big government or regulation. Over 40% of American voters will vote for the presidential candidate who denies the existence of climate change. President Obama has been an intelligent, articulate and passionate spokesman for policies to address climate change, but there is just so much that one man can do. By the time everyone agrees that climate change is a serious problem, too much time will have been lost.
4
Obama, we survived eight years of lies from Bush and now you. 16 years assuring Wall Street and the corporate sponsors they can rape our planet and its people and now you see money in being an author.
The jobs that should have been number one when you entered the Whitehouse are those that can save the planet. Solar and wind energy. Interstate railways. Recycle centers just to name a few.
You can't leave soon enough. Made in America, by Americans. We can't wait for the politicians to fix it. They are the cause.
We, the people, can change this. Unite. It is us against them and we have the numbers on our side. Vote with your dollars.
The jobs that should have been number one when you entered the Whitehouse are those that can save the planet. Solar and wind energy. Interstate railways. Recycle centers just to name a few.
You can't leave soon enough. Made in America, by Americans. We can't wait for the politicians to fix it. They are the cause.
We, the people, can change this. Unite. It is us against them and we have the numbers on our side. Vote with your dollars.
6
If Obama were serious about fighting climate change, he would propose a carbon tax. The most effective way to reduce fossil fuel use and promote clean energy is to make fossil fuel use more expensive than clean energy. In 8 years Obama has never mentioned a carbon tax.
Promoting a carbon tax would take political courage and leadership to go against the fossil fuel lobby and to educate people on the dire need for such a tax. Obama has neither the political courage nor leadership abilities to promote an immediate carbon tax (even a modest one) for an immediate problem. Instead he, like all politicians (exceptions being Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein, who have proposed a carbon tax), will hide behind promises and goals for the future which will slow the growth of carbon emissions.
What these politicians, including Obama, don't get is that slowing the growth of fossil fuel emissions still means growth of those emissions. For the sake of the climate, we can't afford more growth of those emissions. The price of fossil fuels, through a carbon tax, should reflect their true costs for us all in climate damage.
Promoting a carbon tax would take political courage and leadership to go against the fossil fuel lobby and to educate people on the dire need for such a tax. Obama has neither the political courage nor leadership abilities to promote an immediate carbon tax (even a modest one) for an immediate problem. Instead he, like all politicians (exceptions being Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein, who have proposed a carbon tax), will hide behind promises and goals for the future which will slow the growth of carbon emissions.
What these politicians, including Obama, don't get is that slowing the growth of fossil fuel emissions still means growth of those emissions. For the sake of the climate, we can't afford more growth of those emissions. The price of fossil fuels, through a carbon tax, should reflect their true costs for us all in climate damage.
"Obama were serious about fighting climate change, he would propose a carbon tax."...And what would be the point? You do no that both the House and the Senate are controlled by Republicans?
3
WA Spitzer,
That's where leadership comes in. First of all, Obama needed to make clear in 2009 the importance fighting climate change. He didn't. Secondly, he needed to work to get a Congress elected that cared about climate change. He didn't. He couldn't even be bothered in 2010 to campaign for the Democrats who voted for Obamacare, and the result was 2010 defeat of Democrats.
All too often, Obama's response to problems has been, "What would be the point?" That was his response to a possible Medicare for all system, and today we have the mess that is the ACA. The point of leadership is to try when the stakes are high. A good leader might just convince the majority of voters in a democracy what needs to be done. Obama wasn't that leader.
That's where leadership comes in. First of all, Obama needed to make clear in 2009 the importance fighting climate change. He didn't. Secondly, he needed to work to get a Congress elected that cared about climate change. He didn't. He couldn't even be bothered in 2010 to campaign for the Democrats who voted for Obamacare, and the result was 2010 defeat of Democrats.
All too often, Obama's response to problems has been, "What would be the point?" That was his response to a possible Medicare for all system, and today we have the mess that is the ACA. The point of leadership is to try when the stakes are high. A good leader might just convince the majority of voters in a democracy what needs to be done. Obama wasn't that leader.
4
This article doesn't cover the enormous opposition of Capitalism. Where has Obama been? In office almost eight years and it is the first time he has said these things. Remember when he tried to 'negotiate with billionaires about taxes and failed miserably. He faked it. Everyone know he is very persuasive but he pretend to be out smarted because he doesn't want to succeed. How come our carbon emissions have doubled in the last 2 decades? Because he doesn't seem to care. There are nothing done since he won the presidency. His work has been concentrated on bombing other countries. War increased climate change. To me Obama is mostly a failure - picking and choosing some things while ignoring the most important of all. Hillary will be the same. Lots of pretend ideas and nothing accomplished.
7
So...as we already know...his legacy will be one of doing not much of anything...except golfing. And I suppose for sticking up for more criminals than any president before him.
3
In the video of the interview, we see much needed, in-depth questions, challenges, and discussion about issues that affect not only our country, but the entire world. Why are we not having these discussions with the current Presidential candidates? Why are we wasting time on assassinations of personality and not focusing on important issues that take years or decades of persistence and focus to resolve?
This is why our problems do not get resolved. We are more interested in the shocking thing that Donald Trump said today than talking about how we plan to literally save all of human civilization.
Do we care about climate change, healthcare, drug addiction, jobs, homelessness, education or do we think it's more important to talk about Kanye West, homes you can buy around the country for $1 million, and the features of the new iPhone?
Though not solely responsible, news media needs to be a leader in this fight. The first step to changing an addiction is to admit there is a problem. We as readers need to stop clicking on "reality news" articles and stop enabling media addiction to popularity-based content.
This is why our problems do not get resolved. We are more interested in the shocking thing that Donald Trump said today than talking about how we plan to literally save all of human civilization.
Do we care about climate change, healthcare, drug addiction, jobs, homelessness, education or do we think it's more important to talk about Kanye West, homes you can buy around the country for $1 million, and the features of the new iPhone?
Though not solely responsible, news media needs to be a leader in this fight. The first step to changing an addiction is to admit there is a problem. We as readers need to stop clicking on "reality news" articles and stop enabling media addiction to popularity-based content.
5
The part of this article that struck me the most was the revelation that Mr. Obama actually reads scientific papers. We have a President who cares what scientists learn, cares about how science works, and cares about the knowledge scientists discover and share. This, to me, is a source of confidence that our chief executive is a rational, well-informed, and thoughtful individual who follows the evidence where it goes. Even if the politics of climate change does not always permit the most ideal policy response, it is clear that Mr. Obama knows the dynamics of the problem and understands the implications if we don't "do something about it."
We have been very fortunate to have this man in the White House. Too bad the Republicans on Capitol Hill have proven to be so unwilling to exhibit either the intellectual honesty or the political courage to deal with man's impact on our atmosphere and oceans.
Their stubbornness is also a big obstacle to progress on this front, as with so many others. Indeed, their recalcitrance on the Garland nomination highlights the risks the country takes if Mr. Trump is elected in November.
A Supreme Court with five Republican nominees will effectively hamstring any American response to the climate crisis. The fate of the Clean Power Plan depends on whether a jurist who is open-minded enough to actually care about the science, and who is willing to read what the Clean Air Act and the caselaw that has interpreted has long said, sits on that bench.
We have been very fortunate to have this man in the White House. Too bad the Republicans on Capitol Hill have proven to be so unwilling to exhibit either the intellectual honesty or the political courage to deal with man's impact on our atmosphere and oceans.
Their stubbornness is also a big obstacle to progress on this front, as with so many others. Indeed, their recalcitrance on the Garland nomination highlights the risks the country takes if Mr. Trump is elected in November.
A Supreme Court with five Republican nominees will effectively hamstring any American response to the climate crisis. The fate of the Clean Power Plan depends on whether a jurist who is open-minded enough to actually care about the science, and who is willing to read what the Clean Air Act and the caselaw that has interpreted has long said, sits on that bench.
7
It's like that moment in The Graduate where the guy tells Dustin Hoffman there's only one thing he needs to keep in mind: Plastics. This time around the one thing to remember is this: Water wings.
2
Climate change was first studied by Arrhenius, familiar to many Times reader from the Arrhenius equation describing the change of speed of reactions with temperature.
He concluded that carbon emission from the belching smoke stack industry back then would increase the temperature of Sweden, but not sufficiently to increase the length of the growing season, the result he had hoped for.
Why am I writing this ?
To point out that climate change has both winners and losers. I am writing this from a place, that a mere 10 000 years ago was buried by several hundred feet of ice. I would rather have the climate of North Carolina here in NY, than see the ice return that covered much of the State.
Perhaps we all need take a longer time perspective.
And by that, we are approaching the end of the interglacial period (historically 12 000 years) of which used up about 10 000.
If the interglacial periodicity pattern holds up change might actually benefit much of the northern US.
He concluded that carbon emission from the belching smoke stack industry back then would increase the temperature of Sweden, but not sufficiently to increase the length of the growing season, the result he had hoped for.
Why am I writing this ?
To point out that climate change has both winners and losers. I am writing this from a place, that a mere 10 000 years ago was buried by several hundred feet of ice. I would rather have the climate of North Carolina here in NY, than see the ice return that covered much of the State.
Perhaps we all need take a longer time perspective.
And by that, we are approaching the end of the interglacial period (historically 12 000 years) of which used up about 10 000.
If the interglacial periodicity pattern holds up change might actually benefit much of the northern US.
Easy for you to say...you'll be dead and dust.
1
Climate Change aside, I could think of a lot more "Terrifying" things that will impact America far sooner than the climate, like China and their cheating, stealing, hacking, dumping and bullying, Islamic sympathizers in the US waiting for an opportunity to commit mass killings, Iran's almost certain acquisition of Nukes, North Korea, etc.
Terrifying, with or without a "legacy".
Terrifying, with or without a "legacy".
8
Obama is the President he has always had the opportunity to use his bully pulpit! I myself do not believe he has used it enough if this is what he wants his legacy to be...Do as I say not as I do..Fracking with no regulations and no thought as to the consequence, I never hear him or Hillary talking about the huge perils of this, the gulf disaster and still continuing to auction off leases cheaply to these oil and gas industries! Corporate welfare given, tax breaks, no taxes to these industries! Destabilizing the world, with us now being online to pump and sell our oil and gas! Let alone the huge impact on climate change..the pipelines still being planned to carry this crap through our country, with potential to spill and explode and pollute! I have never been more disappointed with him and his administration, sadly! He will be remembered for almost nothing significant, I believe he was in the right place at the right time, elected for change, kept almost all the same people in place..and we can be assured Hillary will continue this!
2
"Obama is the President he has always had the opportunity to use his bully pulpit! I myself do not believe he has used it enough"....And I believe that all the people who complain about what Obama hasn't done should have come out and voted in the midterm elections.
All of the interior states have further to drive, have much less subsidized public transportation and are doing more than their fair share of fighting climate change.
Unlike the cities and states bordering the oceans or the gulf that just take the barges out and dump their waster, interior states are recycling waste, have been fighting CO2 by using carbon capture and are home of the most green energy push in the world.
We are already doing more than the fair share of taking care of the environment without even more costly regulations from Washington.
Unlike the cities and states bordering the oceans or the gulf that just take the barges out and dump their waster, interior states are recycling waste, have been fighting CO2 by using carbon capture and are home of the most green energy push in the world.
We are already doing more than the fair share of taking care of the environment without even more costly regulations from Washington.
1
The things that scientists were predicting 10 years ago or more would happen as a result of climate change are now happening: melting glaciers, rising seas, increased hurricane activity, worse floods and droughts depending on where you live, increased forest fire activity, increasingly warmer temperatures, etc. It's hard to believe that some people are saying this is just part of a cycle. I hope they wake up and face reality before it's too late. This is NOT a partisan issue.
15
now happening: melting glaciers, rising seas, increased hurricane activity, - that's where I had to stop from laughing so hard
You must be a Republican?
Seattle feels completely different to me -- the feel of the air, the moisture, the heat, the mosquitoes -- than it did when I moved here in 1989. I feel it acutely.
This is a relatively balanced article. It shows how Obama, despite his claims of high ideals, put rank political calculations at the top of his list, and by his own acts, showed that he really didn't care about climate change. When he was elected in 2008, he was riding high -- endless praise, 60 Democratic votes in the Senate, a majority in the House. He had as much political capital as any President could hope. If he thought climate change was the biggest threat to humanity, he could have done everything to push through legislation that could have had an effect. He could have give major speeches, made it clear to all that climate change legislation was his number 1, 2 and 3 priority. He could have made something happen.
Instead, he spent his political capital on Obamacare and a stimulus. Yes, he tried to a cap and trade deal that would have had no effect on the climate, but no way did he push that like the other items. Now he tries to tell us that climate change is the biggest issue.
And then he signs "historic" international agreement that conveniently work only if future politicians force hardships on their own people, which won't happen, and even if they do, the results will have no significant effect on the climate, according to the scientists. Sorry Obama -- you failed on this, don't try to make us praise you.
Instead, he spent his political capital on Obamacare and a stimulus. Yes, he tried to a cap and trade deal that would have had no effect on the climate, but no way did he push that like the other items. Now he tries to tell us that climate change is the biggest issue.
And then he signs "historic" international agreement that conveniently work only if future politicians force hardships on their own people, which won't happen, and even if they do, the results will have no significant effect on the climate, according to the scientists. Sorry Obama -- you failed on this, don't try to make us praise you.
8
That car trade-in deal can be considered a step in the tight direction. Can't forget that.
1
Right direction, I meant. (darn auto-correct!)
Unfortunately, Obama did not use his exceptional gifts to lead early, vigorously and consistently on the greatest challenge the world faces.
8
The trends are indeed terrifying. But the Republicans are doing their bit.
After all, Senator James Inhofe, for example, went to all the trouble of writing "The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future".
His keen coal, oil and gas industry fueled insights on such matters are beyond dispute--mostly because they are beyond belief.
What a great display of GOP wisdom: the Party appointed him Chair of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works!
But the Senator also went to all the trouble of bringing a snowball into the Senate Chamber--during winter, yet--just to prove his point.
He is the perfect leader within a party which believes that a neglected and/or ravaged environment is a profitable environment, and that public works are always more economically dealt with if one continually puts off until tomorrow what should be fixed or expanded today.
He is a true contemporary conservative--conserve your seat of power at all costs, and let the private sector and market forces dictate the despoiling of the environment. Short-term profits and short-term budget savings above all else!
I am sure he ascribes the current high number and increased force of earthquakes in his home state, Oklahoma, to demonic forces.
If he does, Inhofe is of course right about this. The forces are indeed demonic. Senator Inhofe just refuses to name them lest they might cut back on campaign contributions to the GOP.
After all, Senator James Inhofe, for example, went to all the trouble of writing "The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future".
His keen coal, oil and gas industry fueled insights on such matters are beyond dispute--mostly because they are beyond belief.
What a great display of GOP wisdom: the Party appointed him Chair of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works!
But the Senator also went to all the trouble of bringing a snowball into the Senate Chamber--during winter, yet--just to prove his point.
He is the perfect leader within a party which believes that a neglected and/or ravaged environment is a profitable environment, and that public works are always more economically dealt with if one continually puts off until tomorrow what should be fixed or expanded today.
He is a true contemporary conservative--conserve your seat of power at all costs, and let the private sector and market forces dictate the despoiling of the environment. Short-term profits and short-term budget savings above all else!
I am sure he ascribes the current high number and increased force of earthquakes in his home state, Oklahoma, to demonic forces.
If he does, Inhofe is of course right about this. The forces are indeed demonic. Senator Inhofe just refuses to name them lest they might cut back on campaign contributions to the GOP.
4
I find it disingenuous at best that President Obama who has been up in Air Force One flying all over the world plus on vacation to Hawaii at Christmas each year and other places in the summer would believe that he is doing something for climate change. The New York Times should add up all the miles he has flown, including ones for fund raising and combined with visits to other cities in the United States and around the world, which would probably total up over a billion miles polluting the air by plane. Now, if each of us individually believe that pollution(CO2 emissions) are seriously damaging the atmosphere, which they are, then one must first take responsibility on an individual level, which he and his family have never done.
12
How should the president get to Hawaii? Swim? The president has to fly on Air Force one. As his predecessors have. The next president will also fly. Accept these as facts and move on. Lastly, you have no idea what he and his family have "ever done".
2
Maybe, he should not go each year, huh? I mean, let's believe that air pollution from jets which falls on oceans, the land(organic and other) is really non-existent. I can do that! Not!
1
@Jody: how about NOT GOING to Hawaii? and demonstrating some PERSONAL SACRIFICE, as he is asking the REST OF US to do without jobs, energy, air conditioning, private automobiles, affordable gasoline and power and heat and food?
He has no skin in the game.
He has no skin in the game.
1
Too little, too late. While I applaud his statements now, he had 8 years to hammer this home to the American people with the Bully Pulpit. I know the Republicans have consistently impeded progress, but he has been an a very modest commentator on this issue until of late, when he has reflected on his legacy. Many of us had so much hope that he would place this on the front burner from the start of his presidency. He did not. The chronology of efforts described is closing the barn door after the horse is gone. He needed to do so much more.......
3
It seems contradictory that globalists also want to battle climate change. International trade is a huge contributor to global warming as products are shipped all around the globe, instead of manufactured and delivered in the markets where they are used. Also, manufacturing is pushed to places that have no environmental standards.
What do you want? Goods moving all across the globe or a reduction in emissions? Obama's trade policies are certainly exacerbating the global warming trend. His policies need to line up.
What do you want? Goods moving all across the globe or a reduction in emissions? Obama's trade policies are certainly exacerbating the global warming trend. His policies need to line up.
5
Mitigating for climate change would be easier if the right wing media hadn't developed a separate set of facts for American conservatives, instead of using the same facts the rest of the world uses.
Imagine if American conservatives of today applied conservative reasoning, along with an acceptance of empirical evidence, to reality instead of Fantasy World. We'd actually have options in both policy choices and the voting booth.
Imagine if American conservatives of today applied conservative reasoning, along with an acceptance of empirical evidence, to reality instead of Fantasy World. We'd actually have options in both policy choices and the voting booth.
3
If this White House or any other were tangibly focused on pollution reduction, they would face the "climate elephant:" The global departments and ministries of defense. The US DOD alone is the single largest consumer of fossil fuel products and the largest emitter of carbon and other related pollutants. The trends in that regard are indeed "terrifying:" perpetual conflict via the GWOT (which is more a global war on terroir, rather than terror). Reader may enjoy my opinion in the FT, "An admirable accord with structural problems," on COP21/Paris, and "At War over Geoengineering," in he Guardian. The NYT will not, so far, publish reporting on military carbon emissions, or geoengineering, which is more centrally causal to so-called extreme weather. As for retail/civilian opportunities, Norway leads the world in electric car adoption. Why? A tax credit. As for distributed energy, modular nuclear or Mpower is the only viable alternative to coal. Carbon tax, cap and trade, etc are mere academic ruses for government revenue and have nothing to do with reducing pollution or stimulating conversion to cleaner energy. See "A sin tax won't lower pollution," FT, June 15, 2015 by same. Regards.
5
Global climate change makes clear a reality that previously was not obvious. It is this: We humans strut around smug and comfortable in the thought that we are THE intelligent species. Yet we are apparently quite willing to optimize our present short-term existence at the longer range cost of frying the earth, triggering mass extinctions (including, eventually, our own), and making the lives of our own children and grandchildren, our own descendants, perhaps barely survivable until that happens. We have nowhere else to go. How intelligent are we? I suddenly find the thought that we are an unthinking life form that is overwhelming the earth, unable at all to act with a long term view - proving us a not at all an intelligent species - to be sad and depressing. If not to think, why are we here? What a disappointment.
3
Uh, let me guess: Climate Change is now Obama's new legacy goal, since all of his other legacy goals didn't work out? This is not to disparage the urgency of climate change, which is real and should be dealt with. I'm just sayin'...
7
He is quite a nice man. And now that his stint is almost over, he is apparently turning out to be another Al Gore with his climate change legacy thing. That's a good place to be in life after the presidency. It is about money. He will have many contributors as they seek other ways to line their nests. Too bad. I thought the president was going to turn out better.
5
Like Al Gore, Obama will take his millions and retire to a golf resort on Hawaii, and build himself a 15,000 square foot mansion on the ocean front (!!!) -- because "global warming" is for us lower class losers, not the rich and powerful.
Humans have been here for 40,000 years. Perhaps this is CEO nature's way of saying you have had a good long run, but we have decided to move in another direction. Evolution will create new species and those who find novel ways to adapt will prosper and pass on their ingenuity to their offspring.
There is a Japanese haiku that states "Nothing is constant and nothing can ever end- all is simply phase." So it may not be such a bad thing that we will be phased out in the next few centuries. We haven't done a very good job for the most part.
There is a Japanese haiku that states "Nothing is constant and nothing can ever end- all is simply phase." So it may not be such a bad thing that we will be phased out in the next few centuries. We haven't done a very good job for the most part.
1
After reading many of the comments in this section it is clear most people enjoy finger pointing far more than doing something about it the climate. We built the atom bomb, we went to the moon and I believe that while it may be hugely difficult if we put the world's best brains to work ways could be found to in passage of time redress the balance. If no effort is made this civilization will die as others have in the past. Even with our best effort it may to late, but at least we will have tried.
On January 9, 2016, we picked the roses that bloomed in our yard here in Connecticut.
I don't think most Americans deny climate change. We are simply acting selfishly and don't care about future generations. Or we're too cowardly to face up to the terrifying reality we have created.
I don't think most Americans deny climate change. We are simply acting selfishly and don't care about future generations. Or we're too cowardly to face up to the terrifying reality we have created.
1
The technology is here TODAY to start this transition to clean energy. Hydrogenics in Canada has the ability to do megawatt storage with green energy converted to hydrogen gas to be used when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. Look up their projects for Kolon in South Korea and E.ON in Germany. No more waiting... invest in clean energy companies now so our kids have a chance on this earth.
Re: "The threat of global warming inspired Mr. Obama to conduct some of the most masterful diplomacy of his presidency, which has bound the United States into a web of agreements and obligations overseas. Yet his determination to act alone inflamed his opponents, helped polarize the debate on climate change and will carry a significant economic cost."
Er, how about "his courage to act alone" when faced with an obdurate political opposition and an array of powerful economic interests lobbying against him. That paragraph exhibits a false equivalence that proceds from a pursuit of "balance" in reporting that at times seems foolish if not downright comical.
Er, how about "his courage to act alone" when faced with an obdurate political opposition and an array of powerful economic interests lobbying against him. That paragraph exhibits a false equivalence that proceds from a pursuit of "balance" in reporting that at times seems foolish if not downright comical.
4
Perhaps Obama should travel to North Dakota and walk in support of those trying to stop a terrible new insult to Mama Earth! Building a pipeline for a fossil fuel UNDER the Missouri River! For godssakes!
Obama too little and way too late on the heating of the planet!
Obama too little and way too late on the heating of the planet!
1
His vision does not include closing Guantanamo or ceasing droning, I.E. terror bombing around the World. Please!
1
How do forge a consensus with people who don't believe--or pretend they don't believe --in the science.
2
In fact, Obama is so unconcerned about global warming that he has gone out of his way to threaten both Russia and China with war rather than seek international cooperation around global warming. If global warming is the chief issue of the hour, why does the US waste so much time concentrating on World hegemony and engaging in military harrassment of Russia and China? This is nothing but a useless diversion and distraction. Obama's world leadership in fact has been an abject failure. No, it's not his faux concern about climate change he will be remembered for but his inauguration of yet a new Cold War at a time when we need international cooperation and the abandonment of the arms race in favor of survival of the human race. I believe Obama's presidency has been an abject failure.
2
Its interesting to think that we as humankind have solely caused this planetary warming episode. After all, we did just come out of a mini ice age some 400 years ago. Its no real surprise the earths temperature equilibrium waxes and wanes much like our satellite. Are we adding to the intensity or swiftness of this shift? Perhaps. Would this shift occur regardless of whether we or the dinosaurs stood here? No.
1
The rhetorical battle over 'climate change' has been lost to the ignorant masses, period! But this is because the knowledgeable voices addressed this issue in terms of factual science and mathematics - both subjects beyond average comprehension.
Texas, on the other hand, is reported in the NYT, to be fast approaching the status of 2nd highest green energy producer, behind California. GW Bush, as governor, signed into law a special tax on utility bills to fund the growth of this industry. Strange, eh? But not really. . .Bush and his advisers saw wind power as a business opportunity in areas where oil drilling had become unprofitable.
The problem for we 'tree huggers' is we generally refuse to embrace the simple economics of renewable energy. We should emphasize the R.O.I. As a resident with solar panels on the roof, we are the same as others in the area and realize a 12%-15% annual ROI (panels purchased and installed by local independent contractor - big box stores are not as economically feasible).
Follow the money to renewable energy!
Texas, on the other hand, is reported in the NYT, to be fast approaching the status of 2nd highest green energy producer, behind California. GW Bush, as governor, signed into law a special tax on utility bills to fund the growth of this industry. Strange, eh? But not really. . .Bush and his advisers saw wind power as a business opportunity in areas where oil drilling had become unprofitable.
The problem for we 'tree huggers' is we generally refuse to embrace the simple economics of renewable energy. We should emphasize the R.O.I. As a resident with solar panels on the roof, we are the same as others in the area and realize a 12%-15% annual ROI (panels purchased and installed by local independent contractor - big box stores are not as economically feasible).
Follow the money to renewable energy!
And the President flies in a 747 and often times the First Lady will fly to same destination in a 757. When he leaves office he will not be flying commercial. If he does, it will be once per year for a photo op. But, then again he is more important the the rest of you.
6
This is important. Scientists tracking environmental warming have found the effects of air travel are significant. There was a marked change in the week following 9/11 when there were many fewer flights.
2
Obama and the Objective Reality of Objective Reality:
For too long, Americans have used "god" and "religious faith" to exempt themselves from an objectivist view of reality. The humanities have contributed to this problem by promoting a subjectivist politics, where identity is the ultimate political prize and the site of all power and justice.
But, just as President Obama implicitly announced the US retains its right to first-strike nuclear capability, thus speaking directly about the reality of the US military posture towards the rest of the world, President Obama reveals, transparently what I label the "hierarchy of homicide:"
First comes homicide. Then, multiple homicides.
These are crimes.
Next comes massacres and mass killings.
These are in between crimes and terrorism.
After that comes civil unrest, martial law, civil war.
These are matters of political struggle, and can involve crime and terrorism.
Following up comes military conflicts with other militaries.
This would describe WWI and WWII.
Finally comes genocide -- the ultimate expression of racism.
Genocide is where the human species is currently trying to figure out what response is required -- we are not consistent on this point.
But, above genocide is extinction. We simply do not have an adequate understanding of our own human extinction, and part of the difficulty of achieving understanding is putting into perspective genocide a rank beneath possible human extinction.
Extinction > Genocide
For too long, Americans have used "god" and "religious faith" to exempt themselves from an objectivist view of reality. The humanities have contributed to this problem by promoting a subjectivist politics, where identity is the ultimate political prize and the site of all power and justice.
But, just as President Obama implicitly announced the US retains its right to first-strike nuclear capability, thus speaking directly about the reality of the US military posture towards the rest of the world, President Obama reveals, transparently what I label the "hierarchy of homicide:"
First comes homicide. Then, multiple homicides.
These are crimes.
Next comes massacres and mass killings.
These are in between crimes and terrorism.
After that comes civil unrest, martial law, civil war.
These are matters of political struggle, and can involve crime and terrorism.
Following up comes military conflicts with other militaries.
This would describe WWI and WWII.
Finally comes genocide -- the ultimate expression of racism.
Genocide is where the human species is currently trying to figure out what response is required -- we are not consistent on this point.
But, above genocide is extinction. We simply do not have an adequate understanding of our own human extinction, and part of the difficulty of achieving understanding is putting into perspective genocide a rank beneath possible human extinction.
Extinction > Genocide
Reading the comments and tallying the recommend clicks, even in the NYT picks sample is instructive. The clicks are so partisan! Lip service to the threats of climate change in the abstract and the need to control emissions get the most clicks. Lots of them. Critiques of Obama's lethargy on speaking to the issue until the last moment also seems to produce a lot of agreement. Broader environmenalist critiques suggesting related evils and specific policy interventions, bring the recommend clicks to a pause. And the slight mention of Hillary Clinton and her policy positions that do nothing or contribute to climate change immediately put an end to the clicks. No critiques in her direction are welcome. What NYT readers want is talk, general principles, but when these need to be translated into policies that may hurt powerful interests then a line is drawn. All that is wanted are bromides. Consciousness raising, so to speak, but with no action if possible, at least no significant action. Let's keep up with the articles and reports and conferences. But let's not link them to real policy making. That will keep everyone happy (except the Republicans perhaps that keep distraction going even more with the war on words).
I am still waiting for the legions of climate warming migrants and Cheerios to disappear from the market. Climatologist James Lovelock, the father of the movement, has been writing alarmist books since the early 1990s spelling out the demise of the human race by 2014, then 2030, and now 2040 or later. He revels even today in the controversy he has caused, although he likes to distance himself from the extremist fringe he calls 'romantics.' He also justifies his alarmism by saying that is how a professor attracted grad students and you lived or died by the number of grad students.
Who's weaknesses were exposed? My opinion the GOP's anti science, anti fact weaknesses were the ones exposed. And the president did the right thing in going around them to make progress on this critical issue. This has been his strength, not his weakness.
1
Here is the bright side of climate change.
The planet cannot sustain an ever growing human population.
The floods and droughts will induce great wars and calamities
Hundreds of millions of people will eventually be displaced, and the immigration to more hospitable lands will cause wars the likes of which we have never seen.
Mother nature will solve the overpopulation of mother earth.
There, I said it.
The planet cannot sustain an ever growing human population.
The floods and droughts will induce great wars and calamities
Hundreds of millions of people will eventually be displaced, and the immigration to more hospitable lands will cause wars the likes of which we have never seen.
Mother nature will solve the overpopulation of mother earth.
There, I said it.
3
Trying to tackle climate change, without addressing human population growth, is sure to be a losing proposition.
Were it not for immigration. many western countries would already have declining populations. Western countries should be limiting immigration, in order to allow our populations to fall, setting an example for other less developed countries to follow.
Were it not for immigration. many western countries would already have declining populations. Western countries should be limiting immigration, in order to allow our populations to fall, setting an example for other less developed countries to follow.
4
But I see most liberals supporting IVF.
2
Trump thinks that global climate change is a Chinese hoax. He has probably changed that story 5 times, but he, undoubtedly, still hasn't a clue about it and has no interest in it. Another reason to be afraid of a Trump presidency.
2
Terrifying, yes.
So why didn't the President argue with a single word for raising the gas tax when gas prices fell to record low levels and American returned in droves to gas guzzling SUVs and pickups ?
26% of the US greenhouse gas emission originates from transportation.
So why didn't the President argue with a single word for raising the gas tax when gas prices fell to record low levels and American returned in droves to gas guzzling SUVs and pickups ?
26% of the US greenhouse gas emission originates from transportation.
2
Hello. The issue of raising the gas tax was put before the Republican Congress and they declined to act......Remember they don't believe the science behind global warming.
6
It's very sad that Obama is using every and any excuse to destroy the United States' ability to maintain leadership in the world. He sure did fundamentally change our country. Unfortunately he changed it for the worst. Amazing how liberals and minorities will vote for someone based on the color of their skin rather then look closely at their ideology and motives for power. Climate change is still up for debate as to extent and cause. What is a fact is that Obama is not, and never was for the best interest of the US and its people.
2
"Climate change is still up for debate as to extent and cause."....Well that depends on whether you believe in science or the tooth fairy. So go ahead and vote for Trump and join the masses of the less-well educated.
5
Well I hope that this indeed his legacy because it certainly won't be new jobs, border control, public education, reduction of inner city crime & violence, or national security.
7
Won't be doing anything good for the climate either. See "Iron Felix's" comments above...
2
With all due respect, this article is a ridiculous whitewash of Obama and his climate change policies. While abroad Obama signs a general frame called the Paris Accords which now have been rendered moot as we are almost at 1.5 degrees celsius above normal global warming temperatures, at home Obama's administration pushes yet another oil agreement, the Bakken agreement, being protested by thousands in North Dakota. This is the same president who has given 1,500 oil permits in the Gulf and sought to open up the pristine Santa Barbara Coast in California. Not only should not one drop of oil leave the ground to prevent Armageddon the scientists are saying, but this dirty oil is also going to pollute and destroying the drinking water of half of the US states. When is Obama going to have a fireside chat with Americans to declare we are now in a climate emergency as scientists are warning? Part of Antartica are now 23 degrees celsius above normal global warming.
4
I.F. you epitomize why so many people ignore global warming alarmists. You throw out words like Armageddon and emergency, while citing erroneous and flat out inaccurate data. 1st you say we are "1.5 degrees Celsius above normal global warming temperatures". What is the "normal" global temperature to which you are comparing? And in the long fluctuating history of global temperatures what makes 1.5 degrees Celsius below current temps THE normal temp??? And where did you get you 23 degrees Celsius above normal data for Antarctica??? In March of 2015 Antarctica recorded an all time high temp of 63 degree F (17.2 degrees C) but that only eclipsed the previous record of 62.8 degrees F, set in 1961, by 0.2 degrees F. Parts of Antarctica have warmed, parts have cooled and the overall trend has been slightly up over the last 30 years though total ice has actually increased in Antarctica. Hardly worthy of the term Armageddon or climate emergency, but then again if you just list facts you can't get voters to do what you want them to do.
2
“'The White House wanted 60 votes on climate, and they weren’t interested in Republican votes,' [Senator Lamar] Alexander said in an interview." That is really pathetic. If there were any Republicans whose interest extended beyond the next election, and included the welfare of this country and the planet, Obama would welcome their votes. But of course, as Alexander well knows, there simply are no such Republicans in either the Senate or House.
This is an important article. But as a number of commenters have noted, the root problem is unrestrained population growth. In Africa and many parts of Asia the populations have far exceeded the carrying capacity of those regions. The "Green Revolution" has already happened and there is little else we can do to forestall the inevitable. The population of the planet must shrink. The choice is whether it shrinks through war and famine, or through universal family planning. Unfortunately, major religions (not to mention the Republican Party) stand in the way of family planning.
This is an important article. But as a number of commenters have noted, the root problem is unrestrained population growth. In Africa and many parts of Asia the populations have far exceeded the carrying capacity of those regions. The "Green Revolution" has already happened and there is little else we can do to forestall the inevitable. The population of the planet must shrink. The choice is whether it shrinks through war and famine, or through universal family planning. Unfortunately, major religions (not to mention the Republican Party) stand in the way of family planning.
2
Terrifying?? If that's the case, why isn't he banning all cars, buses, tractors, trucks, energy plants, and planes immediately? As usual, this guy has no clue how to get concensus to address issues. He just doesn't get it.
2
You really are an 'Average American'. Like most average Americans you have no idea who makes the laws, like for example a law to ban all cars and buses (very realistic). The Congress makes laws, not the President. And, the Republican led Congress has spent the last 8 years refusing to even vote on law proposals by the President. Trying reading. It's amazing what you can learn.
1
"The Congress makes laws, not the President." Hmm, perhaps the president as well as those lowly Average Americans should put down the pen and phone, and be aware of that fact.
Obama hasn't lifted a single finger fighting climate change.
TPP is what he has worked for....
TPP is what he has worked for....
6
You must have been asleep and forgot to read the part where he put increased restrictions on coal fired power plants. Restrictions which Trump has vowed to remove on his first day in office.
3
"The trends are terrifying...", said the Fracker-in-Chief, who bent over backwards to help petroleum companies drill wherever they dreamed of drilling.
5
POTUS Barak Obama's mumblings about "climate change" are but drool when one considers the fuel consumed to transport WH residents, employees and others around the neighborhood, country & world so many, many times!
8
Be real. You embarrass yourself equating the President with EVERYONE else.
1
We have had 3 bad winters in a row so I guess that is why they gave up on global warming. Climate change is nice and fuzzy, it covers warming and cooling, flooding and drought. Do these climate change scientists and climate change lawyer-politicians have any success besides accumulating air-miles to attend summits? I guess it is a change that will keep on giving as the climate changes all the time, what exactly is the right weather anyway, the last ice age when the earth was covered with glaciers for 2 million years? If you take the average for the earth it would be ice age because those last for millions of year with earth covered with glaciers while the interglacial warming periods last for a few thousand years at most. We owe the entire human civilization to the last interglacial warming period that started 10,000 years ago. If I were a worrier, I would worry about the next ice age instead of people living in flood zones who should not be there in the first place.
2
"We have had 3 bad winters in a row".....What a perfect example of ignorance. Climate change is slow and inexorable, anybody with a modicum of education or reading ability would know that you can't meaningfully measure the change by a personal observation from a single location over a couple of years. Green house gasses trap heat that would otherwise be irradiated into space. The more green house gas, the more heat that is trapped. Those are facts that are irrefutable. The extra heat has show up somewhere and the changes are measured in 50 years, a 100 years; all over the earth not just in your back yard. The average earth temperature was the highest on record in 2014 and again in 2015 and is on track for new record in 2016. It takes a long time to gather momentum and a long time to reverse. So go join the masses of uneducated who plan to vote for Trump.
3
Without any education in either climatic science or thermodynamics you might think that global warming would be disproven by extremes of cold weather. It's not. The extremes occur with the over all global temperatures per annum increasing over time. There is more energy trapped and more energy driving the weather towards extremes more frequently.
If he cares so much, why was he for the Keystone Pipeline? Why does he ignore the world and people killing horrors of CAFO meats and GMO's?????
2
No matter the intricate details of climate change, at least I have a president who tries to do something about it despite Republican and PAC supergroups representing old, tired polluting technology. Anyone who disbelieves global warming is real should get their uneducated head out of the sand! Of course the Republicans block anything that doesn't represent big money; that is their job, to be stubborn, idiotic fools! Its really quite a wonder, a miracle, that Obama was able to get as far with global warming as he has! He should be thanked and applauded. As to the Supreme Court ruling on his climate change laws, it will happen. The justices are pretty smart and some of them may possibly have skin cancer already!
7
So why more pipelines? And fracking? And offshore wells???
Wake up Obama! Wake up America!!
Wake up Obama! Wake up America!!
1
What a doofus! Is anybody really surprised at the disrespect just about every world leader has for this guy as illustrated by the Chinese and Filipinos this week. What else do you expect from somebody who regards Climate Change, formerly called Global Warming until the facts demanded a name 'change' as more of a threat than Islamic Terrorism. This guy is a pathetic disaster on every level and anyone who voted for him both times should administer themselves a dope slap.
4
The only doofus is someone who willfully disregards facts and scientific evidence.
4
Its a tad pathetic that in the waning days of what can only be described by future historians as a bottom percentile presidency, Obama is in desperate search of a legacy, beyond almost 400 rounds of golf, a failed stagnant economy, the explosion of healthcare costs, a middle east in abject turmoil, and the very real possibility that he will be giving Mr. Trump and his lovely wife the White House walk through on his last day. Stay tuned.
4
This is all so stupid. The world has been getting warmer for 10,000 years. There have been small changes in the past 150 years. Generally, the world has been getting for a larger number of its inhabitants for the last 70 years even though CO2 has been increasing. (See China and India particularly) See also https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/07/10/from-the-better-than-we-thought-d...
Yet Obama & the Left are trying to induce a false panic about CO2. Even if CO2 continued to increase over the next 80 years and it would otherwise cause problems, it is a virtually certainty that it would be a trivial geoengineering problem at that time because scientific knowledge is increasing exponentially.
Would add that Obama is uninformed about the so-called 97% Consensus on the effects of CO2 that he has quoted from the Cook paper. It has been thoroughly debunked. See http://www.hi-izuru.org/wp_blog/2016/03/a-critic-changes-his-mind/ & http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/03/the_myth_of_the_97_percent_g...
Obama and those peddling the CO2 panic should become better educated. One place to start is climateaudit.org which thoroughly debunks the superficial findings of those peddling CO2 panic.
JD
Yet Obama & the Left are trying to induce a false panic about CO2. Even if CO2 continued to increase over the next 80 years and it would otherwise cause problems, it is a virtually certainty that it would be a trivial geoengineering problem at that time because scientific knowledge is increasing exponentially.
Would add that Obama is uninformed about the so-called 97% Consensus on the effects of CO2 that he has quoted from the Cook paper. It has been thoroughly debunked. See http://www.hi-izuru.org/wp_blog/2016/03/a-critic-changes-his-mind/ & http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/03/the_myth_of_the_97_percent_g...
Obama and those peddling the CO2 panic should become better educated. One place to start is climateaudit.org which thoroughly debunks the superficial findings of those peddling CO2 panic.
JD
2
"This is all so stupid. The world has been getting warmer for 10,000 years."....Do you understand how a greenhouse gas works? It absorbs in the infrared meaning heat that would otherwise be radiated off into space is trapped on earth. The more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere the more heat is trapped. The only thing that is stupid is believing that the additional trapped heat doesn't have any affect.
5
WA "The only thing that is stupid is believing that the additional trapped heat doesn't have any affect."
I expect that warming will continue. However, so far it has been minor. Even if enough warming would occur such that it would be a problem, the geoengineering fixes in the time frame we are talking about would be easily accomplished. Nathan Myrvold has proposed a simple way of getting particulates into the air. Over time, technology will provide many other alternatives.
What the global warming scare is, is simply a convenient method for Leftists to put sand into the gears of capitalism and exert tremendous control over the economy.
JD
I expect that warming will continue. However, so far it has been minor. Even if enough warming would occur such that it would be a problem, the geoengineering fixes in the time frame we are talking about would be easily accomplished. Nathan Myrvold has proposed a simple way of getting particulates into the air. Over time, technology will provide many other alternatives.
What the global warming scare is, is simply a convenient method for Leftists to put sand into the gears of capitalism and exert tremendous control over the economy.
JD
1
"The world has been getting warmer for 10,000 years" We should at least be able to agree that prior to the present warming, the world had, in fact, been cooling for the previous 8,000 years. Here's a graph (ocean sediment data in blue, modern temperature survey in red):
http://www.realclimate.org/images/Marcott.png
You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
http://www.realclimate.org/images/Marcott.png
You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
2
There's an old saying that 'a ruler should always be scared', meaning that no leader can afford to wallow in the calm of everyday affairs.
Hilarious. He's done nothing on any of these topics other than medical insurance, where he's bailed out the forces of evil. Of course, doing nothing is counted as great in our system now.
6
Thank you. Our building new facilities for new nuclear weapons, as the other nuclear states are doing, has been a devasating lapse in leadership for global climate change, and the security of civilization. Our military industries and enterprises around the world are the greatest consumers and polluters, and destroyers of natural habitat, hence the greatest human cause of. We've marched full steam ahead in a secretive non democratic process. Please feel free to view online the recent documentary: Good Thinking, Those Who've Tried To Halt Nuclear Weapons.
1
I understand that there are political roadblocks to much needing reforms like a carbon tax, but if this is such a priority why aren't we doing things like encouraging a massive expansion of the nuclear industry, investing in new reactor technologies, and building creative solutions to deal with the waste? I believe strongly in the need to improve efficiency, build renewables, etc - but if political forces are stopping that, why not push nuclear? I don't think Republicans would be opposed and it could be conveniently framed as 'enhancing America's energy security' by diversifying generation and helping keep natural gas prices low for American consumers and businesses. I think climate change is an absolutely crisis and we should have 10-15+ nuclear plants being built right now, in addition to investing heavily to move beyond the current generation of reactors.
If this fool just supported legitimate govt functions,like preventing people from hurting others,he would be on the right track.I support govt actions to protect the environment and this is what govt should be doing.Instead,this food pushes programs that punish motivation,hard work and good behavior and promotes welfare programs,like Obamacare,that just reward bad behavior and make the country poorer and less able to save the environment.
2
As someone who lives in a sustainable environment I wonder how often those who live in overpopulated areas consider that the simple act of moving to a new location would alleviate this? There is so much bluster and commotion from the large cities...move to the areas that support you. That is the best you can do for the environment.
Sadly, Obama has given mostly passionate speeches on climate change and I will give him credit for at least raising the issue in the public's eye, but behind closed doors, Obama approved of dozens of more dangerous deepwater drilling in Gulf of Mexico, offshore drilling in the pristine Arctic, and he tried to approve, for the first time in US history, drilling off Atlantic coast, but wealthy home owners forced him to reject that decision. He also escalated fracking across country and pushed hard to build the southern part of the Keystone tar sand pipeline to completion. His foreign policies have focused on oil and gas occupation in the Middle East and in Latin America. Obama is a professional hypocrite, he wants to take credit for being the Climate Change President by speeches, alone, but his decisions-actions tell a different story: Oil President all the way, especially for Shell Oil, perhaps due to ties with his father who worked for Shell in Kenya?
2
Like another comment I don't recall a lot of talk about Climate Change. If there was it was behind closed doors like his promise to raise taxes on the rich which he of course did not do and pretended to be a lousy negotiator and failed. He has dropped millions for the rich and zero for the poor and middle class during our severe recession. Obama like Clinton is a neoliberal and more. I knew before the inauguration that he would not be a good president because he was only president to the rich. And he falsely claims he was working hard on Climate Change. He started 7 wars which is right out of the neoliberal handbook, did nothing for the needy which is also in the book. All his political talent but the blew the 8 years and we are the ones to suffer for it. What a fake. HE set it up so he and the Clintons can become billionaires and they will. But what for? His kids will die of the effect of Climate change.
8
While I applaud his efforts, the climate change horse left the barn 100 years ago. It's pure hubris to suggest we can "stop" climate change. That doesn't mean clean power, including nuclear, doesn't have real benefits. Just look at China or Mexico City, the air is choking their economy and people to death. Lets just be honest with ourselves and mitigate what happens next.
8
The current conversations on climate change are not centered on "stopping" it, but rather slowing it. The primary goal of the Paris agreement is to limit temperature rise to 1.5-2.0 degrees by the end of the century, which is achievable, although the lower end would require very aggressive action that may not be politically plausible.
And yes, we will need nuclear.
And yes, we will need nuclear.
3
I agree. Major cities like New York and Miami will be underwater. Just as we cannot deny climate change, we cannot deny that many coastal cities around the world will no longer exist.
1
We could keep it from getting worse though.
1
Overpopulation was, is and will be the earths #1 problem. Global warming, tribalism, unregulated capitalism, human nature and religion are all secondary problems exacerbated by overpopulation.
19
What is the definition of overpopulation? Is it subjective or is there a valid, scientifically accepted measure? If it is subjective then your post reflects your opinion, not accepted fact, and therefore has next to zero value.
Yet the countries with the lowest birthrate produce 17 times the carbon as a place like Ethiopia.
Those who understand energy consumption, energy density, and the difference between fossil fuels and solar/wind energy can only come to one conclusion: fossil fuels will supply at least 75% of the world's energy needs for at least the next 100 years. Energy demand will continue to increase despite significant efficiency gains. The climate will continue to change, as it has for millions of years, and even if Miami and New Orleans are under 10 feet of water, the world will go on, fueled by Coal, Oil, and Natural Gas.
5
I would very much shy away from this, if it was my legacy. An agreement' that has less power than a pinky promise.
The Paris Agreements were amended at the last minute, it was changed by one word, from 'the signatories shall ...' which is a binding agreement, to 'the signatories should ...' which is an optional do it if you want to, or not, no one will hold you to it, it's cool if you never do, or even look back at this.
And this is his legacy, a worthless paper full of empty promises that everyone signed as an optional 'wow, it would be awesome if you did ...' paper.
That, and also having become the largest ever weapons sales person in the history of the world.
That is quite an achievement for a Nobel Peace Price winner. Maybe he 'should' return the award.
The Paris Agreements were amended at the last minute, it was changed by one word, from 'the signatories shall ...' which is a binding agreement, to 'the signatories should ...' which is an optional do it if you want to, or not, no one will hold you to it, it's cool if you never do, or even look back at this.
And this is his legacy, a worthless paper full of empty promises that everyone signed as an optional 'wow, it would be awesome if you did ...' paper.
That, and also having become the largest ever weapons sales person in the history of the world.
That is quite an achievement for a Nobel Peace Price winner. Maybe he 'should' return the award.
6
He would have had to have it ratified by Congress otherwise. You can blame Republicans for that
3
It seems as though you think he is personally responsible for changing the word 'shall' to 'should'. His administration did not want 'should', but there were something like +180 other countries at the table too you know. I agree the Nobel Prize was farcical, but that's not the topic of this article or discussion. At least be on point and credible with your critique of the topic at hand.
2
I have always maintained that if dealing with climate change was revenue neutral there would be no debate. But in out country,especially with one dominant political faction solely focused on the single bottom line nothing will get done. The only hope is that deep red places like Florida, Georgia. Louisiana, and Texas start being inundated regularly this political faction may take their heads out of the sand and congress may support doing something. in the meantime no disaster funds for these communities until their political representative realize that this is not just a local problem but an international problem.
Obama flying over Midway, my home for three years, is an awesome sight. However, the threat to Midway is not just climate change. Midway is now just for the birds, all of them, the wonderful fascinating goonies (albatross) fairy turns, frigates, boatswain, moaning birds, blue faced boobies, and so on. The biggest threat is the tons of garbage on the once pristine beautiful white sand beaches and the tons of micro plastics threatening the oceanic food chain.
People are slobs. Can you imagine what this world would look like if we had cradle to grave accounting and cost management for all the stuff we consume. The costs would not be put off onto others or the earth and it would change our consumption habits.
Obama flying over Midway, my home for three years, is an awesome sight. However, the threat to Midway is not just climate change. Midway is now just for the birds, all of them, the wonderful fascinating goonies (albatross) fairy turns, frigates, boatswain, moaning birds, blue faced boobies, and so on. The biggest threat is the tons of garbage on the once pristine beautiful white sand beaches and the tons of micro plastics threatening the oceanic food chain.
People are slobs. Can you imagine what this world would look like if we had cradle to grave accounting and cost management for all the stuff we consume. The costs would not be put off onto others or the earth and it would change our consumption habits.
7
How dare you put the blame for a lack of consensus anywhere but where it belongs? The Republicans boast about making sure Obama accomplishes nothing, and rejoice in destroying your country for their own partisan purposes, and your president gets the blame?
That Obama has accomplished ANYTHING is a miracle!
That Obama has accomplished ANYTHING is a miracle!
5
And, what was just one of those miracles?
Obama's legacy = "The Great Divider"
13
The TPP and TTIP are designed as steroids for economic growth and as such pave the way for international mega-corporations to call all the shots, especially concerning the destruction of environmental safety regulations, which will lead to increased production, leading further to increased pollution resulting in greenhouse gasses, pushing further climate change.
Mr. Obama has been pushing the acceptance and ratification of both TTIP and TPP. Why the Republicans don't love him I can't imagine, he's doing all their dirty work. But then again he is a black man and automatically not a member of the club.
Mr. Obama has been pushing the acceptance and ratification of both TTIP and TPP. Why the Republicans don't love him I can't imagine, he's doing all their dirty work. But then again he is a black man and automatically not a member of the club.
6
I voted for Obama twice, and while I view it as by far the best choice I could have made both times, I'm not one to give him a pass on his mistakes and weaknesses. His appearance at the 2009 Coppenhagen summit was the first time he really let me down. It seemed as though his attitude was that all he needed to do was turn up and his mere presence would transform the meeting. He had very little to say, and if I recall correctly he even showed up late. His lack of leadership there I think was a massive opportunity missed. I think he's woken up since then and become more engaged, but I do look back on that as a really important moment. Maybe his leadership might not have changed the 2009 summit, but maybe it would have, we'll never know.
4
Per the usual, this legacy puffery piece omits any honest critique of Obama's environmental policy from climate activist community, many of whom feel that his record is decidedly mixed. Why is this, NYT? His lack of substantial progress is not only due to republican obstructionism, but also his compromised policy. Even now he champions the TPP (to the environmental community's horror), while the US is being sued to the tune of $15B by Keystone XL for saying "no" to their pipeline, under the same trade rules that the TPP would extend to other countries across the globe. Which is it Obama?
9
In Toronto Canada it is day 39 this year above 30C (86F). When I walked out the door this morning my first thought was "Bangkok!" - we'd had torrential rain overnight and humidity approached 100%. But the summer has been one of severe drought up to now (after a winter with almost no snow) with cottages abandoned on our northern lakes as water levels dropped. Where is this going? And your leaders among the US Republicans tell us this is a hoax.
18
While I am not convinced that humans are the sole cause or maybe even the major cause of climate change, there are things we can do to significantly reduce our part in real time. A wholesale conversion to nuclear energy as our primary source of power would not only preserve many jobs, but could have the effect of reducing emissions to near zero in 20-30 years, something no other alternative can do. Instead, we are closing down these plants. Nuclear power is safe, dependable, and if we get reasonable about the waste products (no 10,000 year storage areas please; let's get reasonable with 2,00 years or so), we can get a handle on the human contribution very quickly
22
So how should we go about negotiating plutonium's 24,000 year half-life?
3
Safe? Chernobyl remains a mystery and future great hazard. Fukishima as of this writing is still polluting vast areas, for thousands of years to come, and leaking into the Pacific, isotopes that cause cancer found in our west coast fish today. Most accidents are not told to us. Each plant is a potential nuclear bomb with untold polluting effects for centureis. And yes, as you point out, we still have an unsafe storage... putting all this onto future generations... It's very irresponsible of us. Dependable? Yes, to be a huge huge challenge increasing daily as Russia, China, Korea, etc go hog wild building them, with less safetly controls than us. Why would Saudia Arabia, with unlimited sunshine, want these power plants? Hint: thay are part of the nuclear weapon process. So please, let's get more facts out, and less repeating of 70 year old lies. I'm all for technology and continuing nuclear research for sure, but until it is truly safe, and not weaponized, and waste products truly dealt with safely (not happening today), a big no, for civilization and humanities sake.
3
What part are you not convinced of? That human activity has nearly doubled the amount of C02 in the atmosphere? The basic physics/chemistry describing the interaction of radiation with different types of molecules? The fact that land-based ice melts as the temperature rises and the resulting water runs to the sea? This is not even remotely complicated.
2
So, in addition to getting rid of Iran's Nukes, stamping out ISIS and Al Qaeda and making healthcare more affordable, Obama is now going to save the planet. God help us.
10
I lasted more than 6 minutes of the video. Couldn't take the theater ...
I respect and admire President Obama's intelligence and dignity.
I'm sure he's made some diabolical mistakes. A given I think. As complexity increases, one's chance of being correct recedes.
Still, I think he could have done much more re climate. Yes, easy for me to alphabet code thusly.
I think it's Triage Time (or already too late; or as Dr. Frank Vertosick says, the idea that we can be planetary stewards is more human hubris, too complex, beyond our species' abilities. Interview here: http://ow.ly/4neV0l )
I don't know.
“Society is facing a new and unprecedented challenge — responding to its own overwhelming complexity. The structure of our society must change.”
Yaneer Bar-Yam
Probably just another version of cereal-box silliness ... I've wondered about a President (not Trump or Clinton) declaring a state of emergency, military involvement, give people a basic income as we generate multiple, simultaneous variation for civilization's manner of interface with geo eco bio & tech networks ... as society restructures itself.
But the resistance, the myriad unintended consequences, will bring ugly.
Think ugly is already pipeline loaded though.
In Triage Time try to pick less ugly? Not sure that's possible.
"I've seen the future, brother: It is murder.
Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore." The Future - Leonard Cohen
I respect and admire President Obama's intelligence and dignity.
I'm sure he's made some diabolical mistakes. A given I think. As complexity increases, one's chance of being correct recedes.
Still, I think he could have done much more re climate. Yes, easy for me to alphabet code thusly.
I think it's Triage Time (or already too late; or as Dr. Frank Vertosick says, the idea that we can be planetary stewards is more human hubris, too complex, beyond our species' abilities. Interview here: http://ow.ly/4neV0l )
I don't know.
“Society is facing a new and unprecedented challenge — responding to its own overwhelming complexity. The structure of our society must change.”
Yaneer Bar-Yam
Probably just another version of cereal-box silliness ... I've wondered about a President (not Trump or Clinton) declaring a state of emergency, military involvement, give people a basic income as we generate multiple, simultaneous variation for civilization's manner of interface with geo eco bio & tech networks ... as society restructures itself.
But the resistance, the myriad unintended consequences, will bring ugly.
Think ugly is already pipeline loaded though.
In Triage Time try to pick less ugly? Not sure that's possible.
"I've seen the future, brother: It is murder.
Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore." The Future - Leonard Cohen
1
Our Free Trade pacts have the potential to stop us from enacting environmental regulations. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the (yet to be signed) TPP allow International corporations to sue our country, if our regulations hinder their ability to make money.
On 1/14/15, reporter Sunny Freeman said the following in an article titled “NAFTA’s Chapter 11 Makes Canada Most-Sued Country Under Free Trade Tribunals” for the Huffington Post Canada:
"About 63 per cent of the claims against Canada involved challenges to environmental protection or resource management programs that allegedly interfere with the profits of foreign investors.
The government has lost some of these environmental challenges and has been forced to overturn legislation protecting the environment.”
Former president Bill Clinton and aspiring president Hillary Clinton advocated for NAFTA and CAFTA. The TPP was written under Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State. She now is claiming to be against parts of it, but she has not said which parts. President Obama is advocating for passage of the TPP, as written. Neither the Clintons, nor the President are making a priority of environment.
On 1/14/15, reporter Sunny Freeman said the following in an article titled “NAFTA’s Chapter 11 Makes Canada Most-Sued Country Under Free Trade Tribunals” for the Huffington Post Canada:
"About 63 per cent of the claims against Canada involved challenges to environmental protection or resource management programs that allegedly interfere with the profits of foreign investors.
The government has lost some of these environmental challenges and has been forced to overturn legislation protecting the environment.”
Former president Bill Clinton and aspiring president Hillary Clinton advocated for NAFTA and CAFTA. The TPP was written under Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State. She now is claiming to be against parts of it, but she has not said which parts. President Obama is advocating for passage of the TPP, as written. Neither the Clintons, nor the President are making a priority of environment.
8
Obama's main motive is a new tax based on CO2. Much of this money will be distributed around the world. He started the Chicago bureau of carbon credits back in 08 and it closed shortly due to massive corruption and stealing. So now we will do this globally ? :)
The reason in past for rain patterns, Monsoon changing is cooling in Upper hemisphere same as cause d drought that ended Mayan empire. ITS A TAX STUPID http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0313_030313_mayadrought_...
The reason in past for rain patterns, Monsoon changing is cooling in Upper hemisphere same as cause d drought that ended Mayan empire. ITS A TAX STUPID http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0313_030313_mayadrought_...
2
Funny you should provide a link to a National Geographic site, OZme. In fact, National Geographic is a big time climate change believer. Check these out:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=national+geo...
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=national+geo...
3
"We've really got to get on this." Nice for him to say, nearly 8 years into his administration. Too bad he did not follow through on his 2008 campaign promises when his party controlled both houses of Congress. Too bad he torpedoed the Copenhagen climate talks. Too bad he expanded offshore drilling, used his State Department to promote fracking world wide, that he allows pipelines to be built that will further encourage fracking and fossil fuel consumption.
6
The NYT is to be commended on this article documenting the unflagging efforts to control climate change in the face of unrelenting Republican opposition whose head in the sand political stance is dangerous and is a finger in the eye to all who have been attempting to confront this crisis. Trump has basically taken this republican position and said that he will dismantle everything at home and internationally For decades the threat has been recognized and if the Us would have taken concerted leadership the human race would have accomplished much more than we have. if trump is elected the blow to cooperation will be immeasurable and our children will condemn us for our stupidity.
Unfortunately, it is not just Global Warming. Every known system critical to human survival is in deep decline on an exponential level. If Obama had any real guts he would speak about the whole picture, or what could be referred to as Reality. This reality is the collapse of the biosphere. If you think Obama has actually done anything, other than what is easy, you are a fool. If you don't have the fortitude to eliminate the concept of a "first nuclear strike", then any talk about concern for anything that has any meaning is hot air.
4
So far as "forging consensus" is concerned, how was that supposed to work when Republicans in Congress met and vowed in 2009 that they would NEVER work with incoming President Obama?
4
California Man, see link:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-republicans-plan-for-the-n...
On the record, with quotes from people who were there.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-republicans-plan-for-the-n...
On the record, with quotes from people who were there.
1
Here in America the climate-change deniers represent one consequence of the embarrassingly weak quality of the science and math education that's generally been offered in our public schools for decades. People who have never been taught to think systemically find it easy to deny evidence.
3
I am deeply grateful to President Obama and the other world leaders who acknowledge the serious threat that global climate change presents to those of us who will have to endure those years as our global climate becomes increasingly troublesome.
To ignore the science of climate change is to demonstrate a level of stupidity that rises to the level of absurdity. How can such people be so blind to the threat that becomes more and more vivid and evident as time passes in the absence of any appreciable corrective action?
The stakes in this effort are extremely high. It is, quite literally, not only the survival of the human race that is at stake, but the survival of a life-sustaining planet that weighs in the balance.
Our planet is choking to death. And, the planet, I'm sure, has a way to cope with the impending crisis and threat to its health. It will wipe the offending agents who are responsible for the climate change (you and me) off the face of the planet through one disaster after another until the source of the problem no longer exists i.e. the extinction of the human race.
To ignore the science of climate change is to demonstrate a level of stupidity that rises to the level of absurdity. How can such people be so blind to the threat that becomes more and more vivid and evident as time passes in the absence of any appreciable corrective action?
The stakes in this effort are extremely high. It is, quite literally, not only the survival of the human race that is at stake, but the survival of a life-sustaining planet that weighs in the balance.
Our planet is choking to death. And, the planet, I'm sure, has a way to cope with the impending crisis and threat to its health. It will wipe the offending agents who are responsible for the climate change (you and me) off the face of the planet through one disaster after another until the source of the problem no longer exists i.e. the extinction of the human race.
5
It's time for a radical plan. Pay the coal industry and it's employees to stop mining coal! Offer them subsidies to develop and manufacture clean energy producing technologies. Admittedly, it is a costly preventative program that could take years to see any benefits, but as we continually spend billions of dollars to rebuild flooded towns and cities that are most likely going to continue to flood, it would be money well spent.
5
May the gods implore the big volcanos to erupt.
3
People forget that President Obama and Democrats tried to enact cap and trade as the second major bill after health care. I would submit that health care was the more important gamble as well, but alas here we are.
History will judge this administration of incrementally moving us away from fossil fuels, while all sorts of people and groups have sued and screamed at great length to stop eve that.
The real question(s) are was it enough to put us on the right path and will the next Clinton administration pick up the mantle as well ?
I guess the third question is is it too late ? ( I hope not )
History will judge this administration of incrementally moving us away from fossil fuels, while all sorts of people and groups have sued and screamed at great length to stop eve that.
The real question(s) are was it enough to put us on the right path and will the next Clinton administration pick up the mantle as well ?
I guess the third question is is it too late ? ( I hope not )
3
Save Life on Earth
ANYONE Denying Global HEATING Has Their Head in the SAND!
ANYONE, especially Donald Trump, denying Global HEATING (and most other Republicans) are bought & paid for by the Carbon Companies: oil, gas, coal companies, Koch Bros. & billionaire friends as reported by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Deception Dossiers, books Dark Money, by Jane Mayer and Merchants of Doubt by Oreskes & Conway (2010).
While not sexy, all this deception results in not paying the true cost of energy: electricity, gasoline, natural gas, undervalues energy efficiency and renewables, PV, solar thermal, wind, passive solar, geothermal, tidal & energy storage, the very solutions to reverse global heating!
Life on Earth is the Only Risk!
In this article, not mentioning the decades of disinformation is grossly irresponsible. Wake up and shot out!
Bruce Baccei, USMA 67 and U of Oregon MArch, 73
ANYONE Denying Global HEATING Has Their Head in the SAND!
ANYONE, especially Donald Trump, denying Global HEATING (and most other Republicans) are bought & paid for by the Carbon Companies: oil, gas, coal companies, Koch Bros. & billionaire friends as reported by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Deception Dossiers, books Dark Money, by Jane Mayer and Merchants of Doubt by Oreskes & Conway (2010).
While not sexy, all this deception results in not paying the true cost of energy: electricity, gasoline, natural gas, undervalues energy efficiency and renewables, PV, solar thermal, wind, passive solar, geothermal, tidal & energy storage, the very solutions to reverse global heating!
Life on Earth is the Only Risk!
In this article, not mentioning the decades of disinformation is grossly irresponsible. Wake up and shot out!
Bruce Baccei, USMA 67 and U of Oregon MArch, 73
5
Take a deep breath - the sky is not falling! Climate change is real- the climate is always changing no matter what we do. It is a myth that the climate stays fixed. Ten thousand years ago half this continent was covered in huge sheets of ice. Sea level was so low you could walk from Siberia to Alaska. Many species became extinct but humans thrived due to their adaptability and mobility. We need to move to higher ground, put structures on stilts, adopt a more water borne mode of existence, build more dunes and barriers, promote larger wetlands, and focus on the most cost effective ways of adapting. Ruining our economy will not stop climate change, but it will impair our ability to respond.
2
Our President could start immediately by eliminating tax loopholes and subsidies for wealthy oil corporations. And taking that money (billions) and putting it into science and alternative energy. All talk is getting old. Time's a'wasting, we have a VERY limited amount of time to reverse this warming trend, ten to twenty years maximum. Some scientists say even less or that we're already at the point of no return. The methane releasing from the northern boreal forests/tundra will be the crucible of the severe warming. And our oceans are doomed already. We won't have any more unlimited food resources from the sea. Which 100's of millions depend upon daily. Mass starvation will inevitably prevail sooner not later. Buy beans and rice.
42
Interesting proposal, except for yet one more pesky detail - the constitution, which gives the power of taxation and law making to the Congress; thus the president cannot just eliminate tax loopholes or decide on spending money other than the way the Congress allocates it in the budget. I know, I know, seems so unfair that a phone and a pen is all he should nee, huh?
1
Donald Trump has said he will abolish the Environmental Protection Agency on Day One!
2
The Man, that being Mr .Trump is a Wizard. I hope he magically get his butt kicked come November.
A simple and very important step to curb carbon emissions would be to increase the mileage requirements of all cars and small trucks sold in the US.
1
To believe in Obama's radical version of climate change one has to believe:
1. Climate change is occurring.
AND
2. The earth is in a warming trend.
AND
3. A single molecule that is the byproduct of energy generation is the primary driver of climate change.
AND
4. The warming will be cataclysmic.
AND
5. Computer climate models are accurate.
AND
6. If only we give absolute power to our Marxist lite central controllers they can save us all.
Only around 2% of scientists believe in Obama's radical version of climate change.
1. Climate change is occurring.
AND
2. The earth is in a warming trend.
AND
3. A single molecule that is the byproduct of energy generation is the primary driver of climate change.
AND
4. The warming will be cataclysmic.
AND
5. Computer climate models are accurate.
AND
6. If only we give absolute power to our Marxist lite central controllers they can save us all.
Only around 2% of scientists believe in Obama's radical version of climate change.
4
2%? Citation, please.
2
I think you have the ratio inverted; probably all BUT 2% agree w/ the administration's take on climate change. Yes, as another writer said, let's see your citations in scientific journals--not Fox news.
2
Actually you've got that reversed, Jocabi. Only about 2% of scientists don't believe in climate change. And they're on the radical fringes, not Obama.
3
I do not dispute global warning.
we continue to have the popuIation grow we will need more water and the only place to get that is at the polls. Hard to make people live to the old ZPG (Zero Population Growth) idea but it does seem that population is growing more rapidly in certain regions. This is also a very good reason to have strict immigration laws.
I do have one question. When the nuclear plant exploded in Japan it resulted in a shift of the axis, what effect has that had on climate change?
we continue to have the popuIation grow we will need more water and the only place to get that is at the polls. Hard to make people live to the old ZPG (Zero Population Growth) idea but it does seem that population is growing more rapidly in certain regions. This is also a very good reason to have strict immigration laws.
I do have one question. When the nuclear plant exploded in Japan it resulted in a shift of the axis, what effect has that had on climate change?
2
Greed remains as one of greatest obstacles to a solution. The easy response of the money addicts is denial - no thinking needed.
And of course, these are the people who have huge amounts of money already. And money talks !!
I mean, money is speech.
These people put their efforts into blocking progress.
As a society, we may have to make an uncomfortable choice between trying to keep the rich and greedy happy, or survival.
Such a difficult decision.
And of course, these are the people who have huge amounts of money already. And money talks !!
I mean, money is speech.
These people put their efforts into blocking progress.
As a society, we may have to make an uncomfortable choice between trying to keep the rich and greedy happy, or survival.
Such a difficult decision.
4
Climate change is terrifying...each time it has occurred in the short span of human history and memory. Indeed, the French Revolution is blamed, in part, on climate change and the resultant failure of the French wheat crop, prior to the Industrial Revolution.
Still not persuaded that human activity is exaggerating the effects of natural climate change, but I remain impressed by the efforts to criminalize thoughts to the contrary, ala the NY Attorney General and like-minded admirers of the late Sen. Joe McCarthy.
Anyway, with the President's "legacy" issue of free healthcare for all rapidly vanishing and morphing into an expansion of Medicaid, and his "legacy" achievement of empowering the Iranian Islamic terrorist dictatorship through appeasement, I mean the lifting of sanctions for no race to a Bomb at least during Obama's tenure, I suppose the Pres is searching for at least one thing which can be called a "legacy" moment.
Thank you, Mr. Obama, for saving our planet. Now, please work on the Iran deal and on Obamacare before you retire to Ashville, NC.
Still not persuaded that human activity is exaggerating the effects of natural climate change, but I remain impressed by the efforts to criminalize thoughts to the contrary, ala the NY Attorney General and like-minded admirers of the late Sen. Joe McCarthy.
Anyway, with the President's "legacy" issue of free healthcare for all rapidly vanishing and morphing into an expansion of Medicaid, and his "legacy" achievement of empowering the Iranian Islamic terrorist dictatorship through appeasement, I mean the lifting of sanctions for no race to a Bomb at least during Obama's tenure, I suppose the Pres is searching for at least one thing which can be called a "legacy" moment.
Thank you, Mr. Obama, for saving our planet. Now, please work on the Iran deal and on Obamacare before you retire to Ashville, NC.
1
As is usually the case, the loudest voices tend to miss the big questions of the day. We should not be arguing the extreme views that climate change doesn't exist or that climate change will mean the end of days (and soon!). There are saner voices and if readers have not yet adopted quasi-religous positions on either side, I recommend that they would be well served to learn about Bjorn Lonborg and the Copenhagen Consensus (info@copenhagen consensus.com) to be exposed to the notion that there are rational responses that are not apocolyptic/denial by nature.
The Copenhagen Consensus includes many Nobel Prize Winners (for what that is worth) and its legitimacy is solid. It is much better known abroad than here in the U.S. and it works with major international agencies and individual governments to develop meaningful development goals. The Gates Foundation recently endorsed the objectives of the organization.
If you have not heard of this organization, you can probably thank the hysterics on both side of this issue (and their media outlet friends) for the quiet. If you care about the issue of climate change in some rational way, it wouldn't hurt to hear a calm, date-based, rational other point of view.
The Copenhagen Consensus includes many Nobel Prize Winners (for what that is worth) and its legitimacy is solid. It is much better known abroad than here in the U.S. and it works with major international agencies and individual governments to develop meaningful development goals. The Gates Foundation recently endorsed the objectives of the organization.
If you have not heard of this organization, you can probably thank the hysterics on both side of this issue (and their media outlet friends) for the quiet. If you care about the issue of climate change in some rational way, it wouldn't hurt to hear a calm, date-based, rational other point of view.
2
Remove "climate change" and insert "obesity" or "smoking".
“What makes climate change difficult is that it is not an instantaneous catastrophic event,” he said. “It’s a slow-moving issue that, on a day-to-day basis, people don’t experience and don’t see.”
“What makes climate change difficult is that it is not an instantaneous catastrophic event,” he said. “It’s a slow-moving issue that, on a day-to-day basis, people don’t experience and don’t see.”
If Obama believes that the trends are terrifying, then why did nt he apply his own rule in the adjudication of the Dakota Access Pipeline - if it will contribute to global warming, then we do not approve it ? Further, why is he pushing TPP which would make it hARDER to hit the Paris accord climate targets due to the undue influence of FF corporate goals going 180 degrees the other way?
'Published on
'TPP Would Make Climate Goals 'Nearly Impossible' to Reach: Report
Conflicts between environmentalists and trade advocates will become more frequent, the report warns—and more often than not, trade will win out
Tuesday, September 06, 2016 by Common Dreams'
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/09/06/tpp-would-make-climate-goals...
Methinks he is more talk than walk. And , no, Barack, you will NOT be able to say to your kids in 30 years as the world is mired in climate problems, that he did ALL he could to combat climate change.
Serious problems require serious responses and bold leadership, and a continuation of the (19th century) energy status quo. Physics > politics (status quo politics). Nature cares not a whit of triangulation or corporate donors or riches for a few, and our earth is warming due to GHG buildup.
'Published on
'TPP Would Make Climate Goals 'Nearly Impossible' to Reach: Report
Conflicts between environmentalists and trade advocates will become more frequent, the report warns—and more often than not, trade will win out
Tuesday, September 06, 2016 by Common Dreams'
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/09/06/tpp-would-make-climate-goals...
Methinks he is more talk than walk. And , no, Barack, you will NOT be able to say to your kids in 30 years as the world is mired in climate problems, that he did ALL he could to combat climate change.
Serious problems require serious responses and bold leadership, and a continuation of the (19th century) energy status quo. Physics > politics (status quo politics). Nature cares not a whit of triangulation or corporate donors or riches for a few, and our earth is warming due to GHG buildup.
2
I hope that - against all odds - in the near future, there will be enough political capital amassed to support a Clean Energy & Infrastructure New Deal.
This New Deal would implement many of the policies that Obama touched on, and bring the US into the future with: Massive spending for public infrastructure, massive investment for Clean Energy Infrastructure, and massive investment in Clean Energy R&D. In addition, it would hold provisions to transfer jobs in clean energy to those such as the Coal Workers who are directly losing out.
This bill would have the following effects:
1. Create demand for labor, and help those like the Coal Workers.
2. Put the US on the fore-front of Clean Energy technology - which is bound to grow as an industry, and from which we could lead a massive re-tooled global energy industry.
3. Help to massively reduce carbon emissions in the US.
4. Show the world that we are leading the way, and incentivize others to follow our lead.
I'm happy that Obama has shown that he wants to take this issue seriously, regardless of what Congress has (or, rather, has not) allowed him to achieve.
I'm usually not an optimist, but in this, I have little choice but to hope for the better sides of human nature to take the wheel.
This New Deal would implement many of the policies that Obama touched on, and bring the US into the future with: Massive spending for public infrastructure, massive investment for Clean Energy Infrastructure, and massive investment in Clean Energy R&D. In addition, it would hold provisions to transfer jobs in clean energy to those such as the Coal Workers who are directly losing out.
This bill would have the following effects:
1. Create demand for labor, and help those like the Coal Workers.
2. Put the US on the fore-front of Clean Energy technology - which is bound to grow as an industry, and from which we could lead a massive re-tooled global energy industry.
3. Help to massively reduce carbon emissions in the US.
4. Show the world that we are leading the way, and incentivize others to follow our lead.
I'm happy that Obama has shown that he wants to take this issue seriously, regardless of what Congress has (or, rather, has not) allowed him to achieve.
I'm usually not an optimist, but in this, I have little choice but to hope for the better sides of human nature to take the wheel.
29
Until we cut our air flight in half, domestically and internationally for all of the 7 billion people, what point is it, as all of that pollution falls on the land, whether organic or not and seeps into the ground water. In fact, it has been known that jet fuel has been in the breast milk of women in New York for almost 15 years!
1
The political capital will not come until the people begin to demand it -- climate activism.
This, like so many other topics, is an indication of how polarized our country and our politics have become. Regardless of how convincing and telling the scientific evidence of climate change is, we still resist legislative change on the basis of preconceived and habitually complacent thinking. Like Obama, I've read Jared Diamond's book "Collapse", which seemingly has no political agenda but rather points out what has happened to other cultures that have refused to look at the societal impact of their actions on the environment, and yes the “trends are terrifying”.
Why is it necessary to diminish Obama's successes and achievements in addressing climate change when some headway, at least in awareness, is occurring? I realize that time is catching up with us in our resistance to act prudently but at least, there now seems to be someone in a position of power that champions change. Shouldn't we all get behind him?
Why is it necessary to diminish Obama's successes and achievements in addressing climate change when some headway, at least in awareness, is occurring? I realize that time is catching up with us in our resistance to act prudently but at least, there now seems to be someone in a position of power that champions change. Shouldn't we all get behind him?
34
We live in a very rural area, the Appalachian mountains of southwest Virginia. America's huge population centers are in the low-lying regions: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Savannah, most of Florida, New Orleans, Houston, San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, etc., etc.
When sea levels rise and really begin to encroach upon those regions, to where do you think their populations will go? You got it - the mountains. And those refugees will come to neighborhoods like mine, armed with their many guns, and demand that we give them our homes and our food.
If you think the Muslim refugees pose a threat now, just wait and you'll see and feel the results of global warming. Then we'll see how many deniers in Congress go to the Capitol armed with snowballs. Here . . . catch!
When sea levels rise and really begin to encroach upon those regions, to where do you think their populations will go? You got it - the mountains. And those refugees will come to neighborhoods like mine, armed with their many guns, and demand that we give them our homes and our food.
If you think the Muslim refugees pose a threat now, just wait and you'll see and feel the results of global warming. Then we'll see how many deniers in Congress go to the Capitol armed with snowballs. Here . . . catch!
4
Obama's words and actions on climate change, incomplete though they may be, and as hindered by vested interests and the Republican Party as they have been, will in the long run prove far more important a legacy than the enormous clutter of day to day political minutiae that fills the news but ends up historically irrelevant.
Among his many other catastrophic faults, that Trump has enthusiastically embraced the GOP's current climate change denial position is one more reason to shun him at the polls.
Among his many other catastrophic faults, that Trump has enthusiastically embraced the GOP's current climate change denial position is one more reason to shun him at the polls.
2
I hope that in the upcoming presidential debates between Clinton and Trump more than anything the interviewers will question the candidates about their views and their plans about climate change. Because such questions will expose Trump's complete lack of understanding and total unwillingness to even talk about climate change, let alone tackle the miriads of problems the world and our children are facing In the near future. Trump is a climate change denier!!!!! Trump's devastating view and his planned politics on environmental issues should be reason enough for every voter to deny him their vote and send a very clear message this November that Trump's and the GOP's view on climate change are absolutely unwanted and a complete disaster.
2
Mr. President, wanna do something about climate change to really cement your legacy? Drop the political correctness and address population growth as a factor that works in conjunction with pollution.
3
We are between ice ages and it has been warming for 10,000 years. No one. Repeat, no one, knows how much global warming is caused by human actions. To take world scale actions based on half-baked science may end up costing more lives and create more problems with the environment than the status quo. You simply don't know.
Climate change, acupuncture, numerology, astrology, they go together.
Climate change, acupuncture, numerology, astrology, they go together.
Warming and cooling cycles have occurred throughout this planet's existence. However, natural climate change is gradual in onset. Species have time to migrate or evolve to adapt. Man-made climate change is rapid in onset, making it more like the catastrophic events that have caused major extinctions.
3
Want to stem climate change? Stop the population bomb. There are too many people on this planet. Humans have been burning carbon for millennia, but it's just that there are too many people doing the burning.
Encourage family planning? By all means, but not sure how that would go down in areas of the planet with the highest birth rates. Could smack of racism.
You know, a cruel solution would be to end the migration of people from high population areas to low. It would allow Malthus to do his job.
Encourage family planning? By all means, but not sure how that would go down in areas of the planet with the highest birth rates. Could smack of racism.
You know, a cruel solution would be to end the migration of people from high population areas to low. It would allow Malthus to do his job.
4
I agree that action on climate change is the most important thing President Obama has tried to do. But why did he expend his political capital on health care before turning to climate? Had he acted on climate first, much more could have been accomplished. We lived with our crummy health care system for years and could have continued to live with it (though uncomfortably), but climate change will make life a lot worse. I suspect the barrier to acting on climate first 8 years ago was the Democratic Party. It didn't take climate change really seriously back then, and it still doesn't. For most politicians, climate is just one more issue in a long list to use in political battles. We need to find climate solutions that both parties can live with, and enact them ASAP. The only realistic option is a revenue-neutral carbon tax, which gets the job done but doesn't grow government. That's still a hard sell, but there are a growing number of conservatives getting behind that. Democrats should also be supportive, and not hold on to pet solutions such as subsidies and regulations. Both parties need to give up their political jousting and fix this thing.
1
Isn't anyone else struck by the silhouette image of the president that introduces this article? The visual rhetoric suggests Magritte, perfect for the irony of Obama and his success in intervening on behalf of nature.
1
What is truly "terrifying" is the extent to which Obama and the global warming alarmists lie and fear-monger in order to promote their morally and intellectually bankrupt agenda of bigger government, higher taxes, fewer individual liberties and less economic freedoms. A cleaner environment with lower adverse human impacts is a noble and universally shared goal; no country has done more to achieve that than the USA. The problem is the politics and politicians that ignore, and lie about, the irrefutable scientific conclusion that no amount of regulation or money will stop or reverse global warming. Climate is a dynamic condition that cannot be controlled or accurately predicted. The arrogance and deceit of Obama and the global warming chicken-littles is sickening. We deserve better; nothing less than scientific integrity and absolute truth.
Scientist have been studying climate for ages. They know that the change the planet is undergoing now is unprecedented and unlike anything previous changes.
To put one's head in the sand and deny that 8 billion humans have anything to do with it - is stupid indeed.
To put one's head in the sand and deny that 8 billion humans have anything to do with it - is stupid indeed.
1
How? Offshore drilling and fracking?
1
Thank you, thank you, thank you NY Times for this important coverage.
Sometimes the real news, or "realer" news, is easy to find in the paper edition but somehow seems to be buried and hard to find in the digital version. Its encouraging to see NY Times ramp up coverage of climate change, even if its in the context of covering the President, and good to see this prominently placed in the digital edition.
Now if I could just find those articles on the Dakotas pipeline protest a little more easily ....
Sometimes the real news, or "realer" news, is easy to find in the paper edition but somehow seems to be buried and hard to find in the digital version. Its encouraging to see NY Times ramp up coverage of climate change, even if its in the context of covering the President, and good to see this prominently placed in the digital edition.
Now if I could just find those articles on the Dakotas pipeline protest a little more easily ....
2
The right to pollute seems implicit in current "cap and trade"-oriented solutions to anthropogenic climate change and disruption. This should clearly be questioned:
https://www.academia.edu/15092472/Living_in_Peru_-_Peru_in_Copenhagen_Th...
A good starting point for discussion of the manner in which anthropogenic climate disruption could and should be discussed and resolved is the recognition that the world is at the brink of recovery or conflagration, indeed at a tipping point:
https://www.academia.edu/23094646/OFA_At_the_Brink_of_Recovery_or_Confla...
https://www.academia.edu/15092472/Living_in_Peru_-_Peru_in_Copenhagen_Th...
A good starting point for discussion of the manner in which anthropogenic climate disruption could and should be discussed and resolved is the recognition that the world is at the brink of recovery or conflagration, indeed at a tipping point:
https://www.academia.edu/23094646/OFA_At_the_Brink_of_Recovery_or_Confla...
3
The timely abatement of anthropogenic climate disruption requires a context of orderly, concerted, environmentally-friendly, and holistic global development that ensures the worldwide reduction of inequality, and the elimination of extreme poverty, and this in turn requires leaders to think -out-of-the-box:
https://www.academia.edu/12823841/Mathematical_Model_and_Simulation_for_...
There is no escaping this need for concerted intelligent development, as Thomas Piketty has already clearly demonstrated the unavoidably negative consequences of unfettered capitalism which is what we have in the planet today:
https://www.academia.edu/12823841/Mathematical_Model_and_Simulation_for_...
https://www.academia.edu/12823841/Mathematical_Model_and_Simulation_for_...
There is no escaping this need for concerted intelligent development, as Thomas Piketty has already clearly demonstrated the unavoidably negative consequences of unfettered capitalism which is what we have in the planet today:
https://www.academia.edu/12823841/Mathematical_Model_and_Simulation_for_...
4
This link should replace the previous one:
https://www.academia.edu/13062623/Informal_Proof_of_Thomas_Pikettys_Thes...
https://www.academia.edu/13062623/Informal_Proof_of_Thomas_Pikettys_Thes...
1
I voted for President Obama twice, but this is plain ridiculous. His speeches and interviews might focus on fighting climate change, but his actions actually make it worse. Here I cite from CNN Money: "Under Obama, the steady drop in U.S. oil production which had occurred virtually unchecked since 1971 has been reversed. Crude oil production has risen every year of his administration. It has jumped 72% since he took office, producing about 3.6 million additional barrels a day during that time." He also tried to sell us on "clean" coal.
Further, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, traveled across this planet, pushing for fracking. She did that on his orders, as she keeps pointing out.
In addition, meat exports have surged under Obama. Considering that meat production is polluting our water ways, soil, and air at incredibly high levels, meat production is a major contributor to climate change. And here I am not even looking at the cruelty of the industry.
I could go on and on. But President Obama bemoaning the terrifying trends of climate change is a joke, and considering that Hillary Clinton has vowed to follow him on this path, she is equally as scary.
Further, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, traveled across this planet, pushing for fracking. She did that on his orders, as she keeps pointing out.
In addition, meat exports have surged under Obama. Considering that meat production is polluting our water ways, soil, and air at incredibly high levels, meat production is a major contributor to climate change. And here I am not even looking at the cruelty of the industry.
I could go on and on. But President Obama bemoaning the terrifying trends of climate change is a joke, and considering that Hillary Clinton has vowed to follow him on this path, she is equally as scary.
49
And you know what, Phoebe? You'd probably vote for him a third time. Next!
1
No, I would absolutely not vote for President Obama again. I will also not vote for his surrogate HRC.
The only person who takes climate change seriously is Jill Stein. Since there is nothing progressive about the democratic party anymore, I am now registered as a Green Voter! For our children! For the animals! For our environment!
The only person who takes climate change seriously is Jill Stein. Since there is nothing progressive about the democratic party anymore, I am now registered as a Green Voter! For our children! For the animals! For our environment!
1
Would you rather have us import it from Saudi Arabia, where there are no environmental regulations?
1
The problem is multi faceted. First, the environment is almost always far down the list of priorities for the voters. Conservation is not on the mind of the voter, particularly conservative voters. Second, the attention span of the voters is often for their own well being at the current time. They are not taking the long view and thinking of the future for the children and grandchildren. Third, politicians never think farther ahead than the next election. They have their own well being in mind, not the well being of the public. Fourth, people have little understanding of the effect of small changes made now result in large changes in the future. Think of the analogy of compound interest. Fifth and more important, conserving energy conserves money (doesn't everyone like to save money?) and has the unintended consequence of saving the planet.
2
I agree, Tom. And if I might add another frustration......those in the natural sciences, for whatever reason, tend to dislike politics and activism. I know many professional biologists, botanists, zoologists, geologists, foresters and horticulturists. They would tell you, if asked, that man-made climate change is real. In fact, they'd look at you like you were crazy if you doubted it, and give first-hand examples of changes they've seen. But they will not take on activism. After years of knowing such people, I can only guess that many of the scientific personality are introverts innately disinclined towards politics. That they are so reticent is our grave loss.
1
We need to stop the language of disaster that permeates the left when discussing climate issues and stop hiding the fact that global temperatures fluctuate, a lot, over time. The planet is going to get warmer, no matter how much we feebly try to reduce the growth of carbon output. We are not 'causing' warming, we are increasing the rate at which the planet would otherwise warm up without us, and after a long while it will get very cold again. The planet has been doing this for eons, we can't stop it, and we need to re-frame the issue in terms of the overall benefits that a clean and sustainable energy system would provide. Enough of the fear-mongering, people, it just leads to bad decisions.
20
I think the fear mongering is one reason many people become skeptical. After one unmet doomsday scenario after another people get tired of hearing nothing but gloom and doom predictions.
1
You betray a fundamental lack of understanding about the role of human activity. Like the climate change deniers, you posit a scenario that is at odds with the data, and with well established scientific principles. While it is true that there are a number of factors such as precession and nutation that result in climate cycles, there is no natural explanation for the steady increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide since the beginning of the industrial revolution. It is that increase in atmospheric CO2 that leads to increased trapping of solar heat, and global increases in temperature over and above what would occur through entirely natural processes. When the CO2 increase is coupled with massive deforestation and emissions of other greenhouse gases like methane, the effect becomes even more catastrophic.
3
David, I don't know how many times it must be said before deniers choose to remember. And I do mean choose, because you and I both know you've been told this many times before:
Warming and cooling cycles have occurred throughout this planet's existence. However, natural climate change is gradual in onset. Species have time to migrate or evolve to adapt. Man-made climate change is rapid in onset, making it more like the catastrophic events that have caused major extinctions.
If you cannot commit this to memory, printing it out and taping it to your screen might help, or perhaps a tattoo on the back of the hand.
Warming and cooling cycles have occurred throughout this planet's existence. However, natural climate change is gradual in onset. Species have time to migrate or evolve to adapt. Man-made climate change is rapid in onset, making it more like the catastrophic events that have caused major extinctions.
If you cannot commit this to memory, printing it out and taping it to your screen might help, or perhaps a tattoo on the back of the hand.
3
Perhaps, the real problem is TOO MANY PEOPLE making TOO MANY PEOPLE! Let's hear it for BIRTH CONTROL!
10
Even if climate change is being driven by man, I am not terrified, and others should not be either. The earth and the biosphere are in a constant state of flux, and most of the of flux is not a reflection of the direct hands of man. The point is that changes are inevitable, and the earth will make adjustments, so that there is no net change. For example, if an area becomes a desert, another area will become a forest. If water recedes in one area, water will rise somewhere else.
And if man is driving "dangerous climate changes", the earth will move to reduce the population of man.
And if man is driving "dangerous climate changes", the earth will move to reduce the population of man.
"More and more, there are events that are happening that are astoundingly unusual, that knock your socks off, like the flooding in Louisiana." Yeah, they said that during the last Ice Age, too.
2
What is terrifying is that so many folk can be duped by such an obvious scam.
1
it's the willfully ignorant majority that will bring all of us down in the not too distant future.
1
To really fight climate change it has to attain a way more prominent role in the media and policies of politicians. The problem is that - aside from those still denying it, although most scientists support man-made climate change - that climate change is a slow and ongoing process. Yes, its pace may have picked up lately and changes may be seen within a human lifespan but still slowly enough to just make people not care enough, especially when not living in an area where its effects are imminent.
Obama, as many of the leaders of western countries, believes in climate change, steps are taken to reduce the carbon footprint of mankind but still the policies are lacking a major thing - education. Most people in the general public may have heard about climate change, but because of spotty and sometimes faulty media coverage of the topic and the constant but very loud voice of climate change deniers the true dangers of it are not realized. People have to be made aware that their way of life is in danger, that things will change and that steps have to be taken. Otherwise they will always be hesitant to truly support politicians with - sometimes costly - policies regarding climate change.
Obama, as many of the leaders of western countries, believes in climate change, steps are taken to reduce the carbon footprint of mankind but still the policies are lacking a major thing - education. Most people in the general public may have heard about climate change, but because of spotty and sometimes faulty media coverage of the topic and the constant but very loud voice of climate change deniers the true dangers of it are not realized. People have to be made aware that their way of life is in danger, that things will change and that steps have to be taken. Otherwise they will always be hesitant to truly support politicians with - sometimes costly - policies regarding climate change.
3
Climate Change should be the number one issue during this election cycle.
People think the Syrian refugee crisis is a problem?
Just wait until nearly a billion people from all over the globe are displaced by Climate Change.
And Donald J. Trump says it is all a hoax. That alone disqualifies him from POTUS.
People think the Syrian refugee crisis is a problem?
Just wait until nearly a billion people from all over the globe are displaced by Climate Change.
And Donald J. Trump says it is all a hoax. That alone disqualifies him from POTUS.
6
Human caused climate change is the continuing result of human global overpopulation. We talk about climate change only, as yes, perhaps that can be helped a bit, but no one, no nation, especially in the 3rd world, is concentrating on controlling its population, which will be the real earth killer in the near future. 3rd world countries, with their uncontrolled and overwhelming population growth, will eventually send, by any means possible, their overpopulated, illegal immigrant masses to the 1st world to offset and overwhelm any reduction in citizen populations in developed countries, so that the entire world will eventually suffer the brutal consequences of human gross unconcern for the real issues that threaten humanity, and the entire world as a result.
8
Apparently punitive taxes are the only thing Obama can offer to fix a problem that may not be fixable. Why aren't America's leftist stepping up and setting an example of how to live green to protect the planet? Who is stopping them?
1
"namely an inability to forge consensus, even within his own party, on a problem that demands a bipartisan response."
Could anyone forge consensus with this group of Republican obstructionist? John Boehner could not. Eric Cantor could not. And now Paul Ryan is having his own problem with these zealots.
Could anyone forge consensus with this group of Republican obstructionist? John Boehner could not. Eric Cantor could not. And now Paul Ryan is having his own problem with these zealots.
4
If the trends are so terrifying, why not stop subsidizing the National Flood Insurance program? If people had to pay the true actuarial cost for living in flood-prone areas, then they would move.
And while you're at it, why not ban any new development within critical areas?
Or would that be too steep a political price to pay for the climate fear camp?
And while you're at it, why not ban any new development within critical areas?
Or would that be too steep a political price to pay for the climate fear camp?
7
It is only the rich that make their money from dirty energy and environmental disregard that don't believe in climate change. It may be too late to reverse the damage that has been done to the planet.
2
Climate change should be at the top of the list for presidential debates in the next few weeks. Trump's people will likely do everything in their power to avoid the subject. Why? Because they don't give a damn about the future of our planet. They are mainly concerned about dieing rich and going to some imagined hereafter to continue their bliss.
2
Without security, all other issues including climate change, are moot.
4
Sorry but you have that exactly backwards. An uninhabitable planet trumps any security concerns.
1
Jill, climate change IS a security matter. Open your eyes.
1
Actually, without a sustainable climate, all other issues, including security, are moot.
1
The best hope for bipartisan leadership on climate change right now is in the other Washington. Last year, CarbonWA's grass roots' volunteers gathered 363,000 signatures from across the state to put Initiative I-732 on our ballot this November. It would enact a $25/ton revenue neutral carbon tax within Washington state, modeled on British Columbia's successful carbon tax enacted in 2008. Instead of debating ad nauseam what will or won't work, click onto YESON732.org & help us win. Winning in the other Washington is our only hope for getting other states & our national government to come to their senses and act now, before it's too late. As Victor Hugo once put it, "More powerful than all the armies of the world is an idea whose time has come."
3
Dear God, can we place get this election over, and get on with addressing the real and existential problems of the world? We can't go from our serious, astute leader to a monkey-brained egoist, so come soon November 8, let's build on Obama's agenda by electing Hillary and using our available and aggregate intelligence to mitigate climate change. Enough sun hits the world in a few hours to power it for a year, so let's stop burning what's in the ground and instead capture and apply what's in the sky.
2
"The trends are terrifying...."
Duh.
And have been for 20 years.
"We have raised awareness..."
I haven't seen enough myself from the presidency, the awareness has come from sequential climate disasters and big events, from Katrina, that one NY had (?) , and photographs of polar bears trying to find some ice.
That's why we have to get over this superficial stuff -- the mideast, for instance --
And begin spending our resources on the greatest threat, not military trinkets, but global warming.
Time to shift the military's mission to that and other constructive efforts. If we reduced our military budget by 85%, we'd still have the largest one in the world. That's staggering. Eisenhower must be shaking his head.
And yet no president since Carter has come close to this one's awareness of the real world.
Duh.
And have been for 20 years.
"We have raised awareness..."
I haven't seen enough myself from the presidency, the awareness has come from sequential climate disasters and big events, from Katrina, that one NY had (?) , and photographs of polar bears trying to find some ice.
That's why we have to get over this superficial stuff -- the mideast, for instance --
And begin spending our resources on the greatest threat, not military trinkets, but global warming.
Time to shift the military's mission to that and other constructive efforts. If we reduced our military budget by 85%, we'd still have the largest one in the world. That's staggering. Eisenhower must be shaking his head.
And yet no president since Carter has come close to this one's awareness of the real world.
5
the Tampa Bay area just had a not-so-close brush by Hurricane Hermine; not really that close, hundreds of miles away... yet all the major cities and towns-Tampa, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Largo- found their sewage systems were overwhelmed by the rain, and millions and millions and MILLIONS of gallons of raw and partially-treated sewage flowed into the bays and rivers- and out manhole covers in streets (residents were begged on robo-calls from Pinellas County to stop sending any more water down the drains- no washing, no flushing)... and thousands and thousands lost power... some neighborhoods were advised to boil their tap water because it had been contaminated... and the beaches on all the barrier islands lost huge amounts of sand from their beaches and protective dunes, putting homes and businesses in a very precarious position if another storm comes
and it will
it will be in these kinds of failure of infrastructure: electricity, water, sewage, roads- that the creeping threat of climate change will really start to be felt, little by little, more and more...
and it will
it will be in these kinds of failure of infrastructure: electricity, water, sewage, roads- that the creeping threat of climate change will really start to be felt, little by little, more and more...
4
Why the quote marks around the word "terrifying" in an attributed statement?
It's the most serious issue facing America today. Far more important than all of the rest of the nonsense being discussed in this election.
2
Sadly, mostly passionate speeches. Behind closed doors, Obama approved of dozens of more dangerous deepwater drilling in Gulf of Mexico, offshore drilling in the pristine Arctic, and he tried to approve drilling off Atlantic coast, but wealthy home owners forced him to reject that decision. He also escalated fracking across country and tar sand pipelines. His foreign policies have focused on oil and gas occupation in the Middle East and in Latin America. Obama is a pro-hypocrite on global warming.
1
To the author…. Making arguments for evidence of climate change that include events floods in Louisiana and the occurrence of two hurricanes at one time you discredit the concern and push the opposing sides farther apart.
1
You ding Mr. Obama for being unable to forge a consensus, even within his own party. With whom? Joe "Coal" Minchin? Heidi "Fracking" Heitkamp? And you ding Mr. Obama's inability to forge a consensus with a group of men and women who have, from day one, forcefully and viciously proclaimed that his presidency is illegitimate, who have blocked Merritt Garland for how many months now? Tell me, please, how you three reporters would suggest he form a consensus with these racist velociraptors?
3
This article is far too gentle with the GOP's obstructionism.
It is laughable to suggest that the GOP has been willing to support meaningful legislation if only Obama had been more tactically clever.
It is laughable to suggest that the GOP has been willing to support meaningful legislation if only Obama had been more tactically clever.
116
" ... he believes that his efforts to slow the warming of the planet will be the most consequential legacy of his presidency."
Obama gets climate change 'religion' in the 11th hour of his administration and somehow expects this to be the "most consequential legacy" of his 8 years in office? Despite the insane opposition and denial of Republicans this president did too little too late. If this is his legacy he should be leaving office with his head hung low.
Obama gets climate change 'religion' in the 11th hour of his administration and somehow expects this to be the "most consequential legacy" of his 8 years in office? Despite the insane opposition and denial of Republicans this president did too little too late. If this is his legacy he should be leaving office with his head hung low.
4
I live in Nevada. If the sea rises California will disappear and I will have shore front property in Nevada.
Every time a writer blames Obama for not getting support from crazies in congress I worry a little more for our country, and in terms of climate change, for our planet (and our species for that matter).
There was absolutely nothing he could have done (or that Hillary will be able to do in the future) as long as the Republican party exists in its current state and had any power.
Our only hope is that demographic changes in the country make the Republicans a toothless minority -- as they already are in California.
So please. as the Obama retrospectives start rolling in, let's not start repeating the meme that Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan were great consensus builders, and that a great leader could have rallied compromise. Today's Republicans would have chewed up and spat out those great leaders.
There was absolutely nothing he could have done (or that Hillary will be able to do in the future) as long as the Republican party exists in its current state and had any power.
Our only hope is that demographic changes in the country make the Republicans a toothless minority -- as they already are in California.
So please. as the Obama retrospectives start rolling in, let's not start repeating the meme that Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan were great consensus builders, and that a great leader could have rallied compromise. Today's Republicans would have chewed up and spat out those great leaders.
2
History will record that in a crucial time of tumultuous change on many fronts, the American people, the American press, the American political leaders, the American industrialists and the elite were all distracted by the most entertaining, and inexplicably, newsworthy antics recorded live in real time on every possible media platform of "The Clown versus The Frown" locked in a sparring contest that not only dragged on tediously and lasted longer than any other in the history of mankind, but also persisted and permanently destroyed the ability of the country to deal with matters of real importance while it descended into the puerile "Dog in the Manger" politics it never again managed to extricate itself from.
The elites and the industrialists walled themselves off from the vast rest of society, making tons of money off their movement to the bottom, as any self respecting person of social power would, realizing all too late that tunnels made by desperate people are nothing compared to tunnels made by rising waters.
I am so saddened that the country Leonard Cohen described as "the cradle of the best and the worst" has decided to embrace only the latter part of his judgement.
The elites and the industrialists walled themselves off from the vast rest of society, making tons of money off their movement to the bottom, as any self respecting person of social power would, realizing all too late that tunnels made by desperate people are nothing compared to tunnels made by rising waters.
I am so saddened that the country Leonard Cohen described as "the cradle of the best and the worst" has decided to embrace only the latter part of his judgement.
1
Maybe if it rained 40 days and 40 nights that would convince the republicans that climate change is real. Maybe
Maybe the first step in dealing with climate change is to stop legitimizing those who deny it by publishing their comments and opinions. Is it OK for me to think that the world is flat? Is that a legitimate position?
Deniers fall into two groups: those like the Kochs who profit from it, and the majority that are just willfully ignorant or (at best) contrarians for its own sake...
Deniers fall into two groups: those like the Kochs who profit from it, and the majority that are just willfully ignorant or (at best) contrarians for its own sake...
3
Mild warming in some places is predicted. This has been GOOD FOR MAN. Catastrophic warming is a nihilist fraud, a vicious attack on man, mind, individual rights and happiness. Capitalism (individual rights) is the best political method for man's survival in nature.
Sustain man.
Nature is a tool. Exploit it.
Green is the color of money.
Environmentalists make good mulch.
Sustain man.
Nature is a tool. Exploit it.
Green is the color of money.
Environmentalists make good mulch.
Thank god Obama really gets it and congratulations to the Times for covering the greatest issue of our times. How the Republicans sleep at night considering what they are leaving to their children and grandchildren for the sake of political correctness I have no idea but they will do down in history as shameless and clueless opportunists.
1
Talk about misplaced priorities. Despite all the blather, he effectively gave Iran carte blanche on their nuclear program. And if the Iranians or their psychopathic buddies in ISIS, Hezbollah, etc., get nuclear weapons, a rising water table will be the least of our problems. Focus on the important stuff that you can do something about, Mr. President.
1
You are wrong, wrong, just wrong.
1
no, not wrong. Climate is cyclical. It warms, it cools. 20,000 years ago New York was under a mile of ice. The climate warmed, the ice receded. 10,000 years ago, under a mile of ice again. The ice receded. Meanwhile, China is opened a new coal-fired power plant a week. India still needs to bring electricity to 400 million people and they're not doing it with rooftop solar. Let's not get crazy.
Those who, for various reasons, have been in the habit of denying the scientific evidence that has clearly shown us where the world is going because of increasing levels of greenhouse gas emissions, will be dead when the worst effects of their opposition will be felt. For that reason alone, they're behaviour has been unconscionable.
As for Mr. Obama's legacy, I think most thinking observers would conclude that, in the face of all the nonsense and all the unreasoning opposition, he did well to accomplish as much as he has done.
As a Canadian, I've seen first-hand the damage done to our country and its environment by the reckless and thoughtless focus on money and jobs, to the exclusion of thinking about long-term environmental and social consequences of gnawing stuff out of the earth to burn for fuel. Alberta, for example, faces a huge reckoning because it had, for decades, basically put all its eggs in the fossil-fuel basket. Albertans certainly are not going to benefit now that the bloom has come off that particular rose.
As for Mr. Obama's legacy, I think most thinking observers would conclude that, in the face of all the nonsense and all the unreasoning opposition, he did well to accomplish as much as he has done.
As a Canadian, I've seen first-hand the damage done to our country and its environment by the reckless and thoughtless focus on money and jobs, to the exclusion of thinking about long-term environmental and social consequences of gnawing stuff out of the earth to burn for fuel. Alberta, for example, faces a huge reckoning because it had, for decades, basically put all its eggs in the fossil-fuel basket. Albertans certainly are not going to benefit now that the bloom has come off that particular rose.
3
People are actually mad at the President because all he's done is to:
1. Amp up the CAFE standards.
2. Start phasing out coal.
3. Sign the Paris Accords, and back it up with China.
4. Torpedo Keystone XL.
5. Vastly increase the size of the Pacific Reserve...
...and about fifteen other things.
For crying out loud. Waddya want, wicker?
1. Amp up the CAFE standards.
2. Start phasing out coal.
3. Sign the Paris Accords, and back it up with China.
4. Torpedo Keystone XL.
5. Vastly increase the size of the Pacific Reserve...
...and about fifteen other things.
For crying out loud. Waddya want, wicker?
3
He could direct the Army Corps of Engineers to withdraw permits for the Dakota pipeline, the one being prayerfully protested by many Native Americans. One short article this week in the NYTimes falsely implied that the courts have stopped the destruction of sacred native lands. These pipelines not only threaten peoples' water supply, but they also delay the day when we cut back on use of fossil fuels and ultimately replace them.
Our Free Trade deals (such as NAFTA and CAFTA signed and promoted by Bill Clinton) allow foreign investors of multi-national corporations to sue a country if they think that county’s regulations threaten their profits. Corporations have successfully sued countries over their environmental regulations. The Canadian company that wanted to build the Keystone Pipeline is suing our country for stopping it. The special courts that handle these disputes have handed out such high settlements that governments could become wary of enacting environmental regulations.
President Obama is advocating for the TPP even though it would strengthen this “investor-state settlement system”. If the President wants to protect our environment, he will revise or throw out this Free Trade pact.
President Obama is advocating for the TPP even though it would strengthen this “investor-state settlement system”. If the President wants to protect our environment, he will revise or throw out this Free Trade pact.
47
SO TRUE...the levels of mired corruption starting with the power players of big Gov with CEO's...and then the lack of transparent auditing on not just eroding labor conditions in this Asian factories..but like organic agr...there will be very little "policing" of transparency in adhering to the TPP's carbon goals/benchmarks....IT won't benefit America's jobs...and China will remain PO'd for singling them out....of this "boys club" trade partnership..
2
No, I do not support either NAFTA or CAFTA, but I do not believe such provisions are in the older trade agreements. They are in TPP, and are an excellent argument against it.
It will not be flood, drought, heat or famine which destroys the bulk of humanity. It was be the disintegration of society, governments and any sort of order as supplies run out, upheaval forces mass migration and finally nuclear weapons are unleashed as chaos collapses the center. Does anyone want to survive that scenario? As a Buddhist I believe none of us has a choice whether we do or don't. The only question is in what form of being, and the answer to that is how we live now.
We knew about this problem in the mid 1980s. At that time I remember people saying, "we'll just turn down the air conditioner" and imaging that our species would evolve to adapt to increased temperatures. President Obama is the first US chief executive that I remember who has taken the climate change crisis at all seriously. Somehow the US population, easily deluded by the Republicans, seem to think that having the entire Florida peninsula under water will just mean that the beach will be in Georgia.
What are the long-term effects of killing millions of honeybees in SC via reckless pesticide use for mosquitoes? Are there other pollinators that can take up the slack caused by the absence of bees? I found it troubling that this event was written off as mere collateral damage and not a big deal.
It would be great if Obama were to devote his post-Presidency life to educating people and advocating new laws, practices and lifestyles that reflect our changing climate.
It would be great if Obama were to devote his post-Presidency life to educating people and advocating new laws, practices and lifestyles that reflect our changing climate.
The blurb for this article reads something 'More than healthcare, race or the economy, the President believes that the most important legacy of his presidency will be his efforts to slow global warming." This is really news. Since when any of the first three or even the new fourth can be considered to have brought about a "consequential" outcome? Nothing that will make it to the history books here. All have been blips at most. They will not survive the longterm memory of the nation. Not even the short term. I don't think Pres. Obama is so deluded as to think this himself. Perhaps a cynical last ditch effort from the professional image makers to shape our memory. Too late.
1
A sentence from a lead letter entitled, "Overblown rhetoric on sea level rise"
appearing in yesterday's Jacksonville, Florida newspaper: sums up our challenge as a country. "Just what is so sacred about our present shorelines, other than to the property owners who will lose value in their properties? It depends on whose ox is being gored."
The writer's opinion is shared by many who reside here in the city whose nickname is "Florid's FIRST COAST".
appearing in yesterday's Jacksonville, Florida newspaper: sums up our challenge as a country. "Just what is so sacred about our present shorelines, other than to the property owners who will lose value in their properties? It depends on whose ox is being gored."
The writer's opinion is shared by many who reside here in the city whose nickname is "Florid's FIRST COAST".
2
Now we're getting this flurry from Mr. Obama, right toward the end of his eight years. And of course he is preoccupied with his so-called "legacy"—that's all that seems to count. But he has paid far too little attention to the fundamental threat of climate change. Far too little!
If you want to hear it given its proper urgency, listen to Jill Stein, for instance, or to legions of scientists.
If you want to hear it given its proper urgency, listen to Jill Stein, for instance, or to legions of scientists.
2
The long term effects of man - made, industrial age climate change are baked in and growing worse by the day. The consequences are irreversible. The planet will eventually recover but the impacts to civilization, as we know it, will be cataclysmic.
3
As a resident of South LA whose house came within a hair's breadth of flooding a few weeks ago, who dodged Rita and Katrina by a few miles, I'm with President Obama that serious action needs to be taken now to keep the climate problem from getting worse. Nevertheless, the President has to speak to all major issues, and I'd like to see his and Ms. Clinton's views on on the Keystone Pipelie/Native American conflict. I think there must be some route the pipline could take that does not disturb land sacred to Native Americans. I'd also like to see stories on why most major media outlets are ignoring the latter issue.
3
Yet the President does not see the relationship with the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) which he supports. Emerging Pacific nations and China disdain environmental regulation and sacrifice the environment for profit and the President wants to incentivize that. Topsy turvy. Intelligence in politics ain't what it used to be.
4
Facts and science mystify "Dumb Donald" and most republicans. No wonder the world is ravaged by climate change and nearly every one of them lie at every press conference they hold. These are supposedly well educated people, so how do they explain their inability to approve Zika funding or put a priority on programs to reduce global warming? Instead of bringing a clean Zika bill to the floor they hide planned parenthood reductions in the bill. We need a national referendum on what the content of policy or funding bills should contain that will require negotiation on a clean bill. We need to tell the Congress and the Senate, this is what you will do! You work for the American People and we will define the ground rules, not you!
4
Did we not just discover a second earth about a trillion miles away last week? We got this!
2
It is nice to know that Obama has a way to regulate the sun, the primary driver of climate. Then he can work on planetary oscillations, deep ocean currents, volcanic activity (including the thousands of submarine volcanoes), supernova eruptions, comet dust, impacts by comets and asteroids, bacteria, soil formation, sedimentation, ocean currents and the chemistry of air.
3
"President Obama believes his efforts to slow global warming will be the most consequential legacy of his presidency." I knew there would be something!
1
If you look at a map of the US after the predicted effects of sea level change occurs, you can see why the GOP continues to deny it happening.
Many of the areas that are most affected are the population centers/states that are now completely controlled by Democrats. [Northeast, west coast]
The GOP sees climate change as a strategy for winning elections by getting rid of the Democratic strongholds.
Many of the areas that are most affected are the population centers/states that are now completely controlled by Democrats. [Northeast, west coast]
The GOP sees climate change as a strategy for winning elections by getting rid of the Democratic strongholds.
1
What one thing could be done to minimize the harmful effect of climate change on populations while at the same time reducing greenhouse gas emissions? The simple answer to reduce world population over the next 50 years to 3 billion people while at the same time letting the force of human creativity loose on the technical issues. Sadly not a word is spoken about the main driver of pollution: people. If population reduction were being promoted, the constant economic refrain " grow ourselves out of this problem " as well as the dizzyingly bizarre abandonment of creativity and commitment that arrives when population reduction is discussed along with subjects like caring for the aged would have to stop and leave forever. Fewer humans and better technology just might make for a better world in the long run.
3
As a history buff, Midway is on my bucket list to see. If I wait much longer, I'll have to bring scuba gear to see it. Global warming will one day put the low lying islands underwater.
But in human terms, Midway isn't so bad; there are no permanent residents on the islands. But on many populated islands in the Pacific the situation is dire. As mentioned, the whole nation of Kiribati threatened. How do the industrialized nations get away with destroying a nation,however small. Is it the fascist principle of, 'might makes right'? Let's hope that standard is never applied to us.
But in human terms, Midway isn't so bad; there are no permanent residents on the islands. But on many populated islands in the Pacific the situation is dire. As mentioned, the whole nation of Kiribati threatened. How do the industrialized nations get away with destroying a nation,however small. Is it the fascist principle of, 'might makes right'? Let's hope that standard is never applied to us.
2
He has to be joking. He's joking... right?
The climate changes. Historical records show that. But imagine, in 8-years of his presidency, not one hurricane made landfall (yes there were some tropical storms).
This guy is shooting blanks in a live fire fight and America is losing.
The climate changes. Historical records show that. But imagine, in 8-years of his presidency, not one hurricane made landfall (yes there were some tropical storms).
This guy is shooting blanks in a live fire fight and America is losing.
5
No, President Obama is not joking. But clearly cj is, by bringing in irrelevant data.
1
Climate change is the one event which will profoundly affect human life for the rest of this century. Greater than globalization, population growth, terrorism, and even Donald Trump. The only event which will have nearly the same affects is the massive extinction of species that has begun. If we continue along this path of trying to preserve short term profits while ignoring the inevitability of changes which will demand the expenditure of wealth far beyond anything of which all the economies of this planet can generate will demand if we do nothing about it, we will be in sad shape one hundred years from now. We have the science, we have the well organized states and international organizations that we can use to address the problems but we have not the will to do anything differently until we become terrified by events which overwhelm. Sad situation. The most intelligent beings known in the universe with plenty of warning let themselves sink into a dark age where all it dark and miserable because of simple sloth excused by denial.
2
I think it is better to look at this issue as pollution and less as global warming.
You can sell the conservatives better that way ie, they believe global warming is a liberal scientist plot whereas pollution is real with a direct cause and
effect.
Liberals and conservatives worked better in the past when the issue was viewed in this light and now our air is much cleaner.
You can sell the conservatives better that way ie, they believe global warming is a liberal scientist plot whereas pollution is real with a direct cause and
effect.
Liberals and conservatives worked better in the past when the issue was viewed in this light and now our air is much cleaner.
19
I live in a mixed red-blue state. A road where I take my walks leads to a park where the local rednecks play baseball and softball. I can always tell when it is ball season because of the number of beer cans and pop bottles littering the road. These are the folks with the Americun flags on their cars, climate change deniers, who are polluters too. So no, in my experience, you will not get conservatives signed on to tackling climate change because they believe in the inherent right of business to pollute if it increases their profits, and for individual citizens to do whatever makes them feel good.
thank you for your reply 24b4Jeff....my experience has been a little different. Conservatives will deny climate change because it is not happening in their back yards but as soon as you get smog, other types of pollution, toxic waste etc....they start to move their rear ends...
2
"They" are idiots if so. The idea that it is a "plot among the world's scientists" is utterly ridiculous, and simply betrays ignorance ... willful paranoid ignorance at that.
You want to argue the science? That means you need to LEARN the science!
The biggest problem we have with those on the right is the intellectual laziness and cupidity. They seem unable to do addition and subtraction correctly -- any higher math and physics is all "a libural plot."
It's the party of stupid ... willfully stupid.
You want to argue the science? That means you need to LEARN the science!
The biggest problem we have with those on the right is the intellectual laziness and cupidity. They seem unable to do addition and subtraction correctly -- any higher math and physics is all "a libural plot."
It's the party of stupid ... willfully stupid.
There is nothing consequential that President Obama can do to positively affect global climate change short of population control. The planet can sustainably support approximately 500 million people. The world's population is now more than 8.6 billion. You don't even need to do the math. The results of out of control population expansion are obvious. President Obama is fooling himself and just flat out wasting time and effort talking about global climate change without addressing population control (a global birth rate check). It (pop control) can be done humanely --- in fact that is the only humane thing we can do for ourselves to combat global climate change. But I'm sure no one will listen.
President Obama is a smart man but too conventional and wedded to incrementalism which is illogical in addressing such a globally catastrophic issue.
The cynic in me see this as President Obama's opportunity to cash in after his presidency. But at least the NSA and CIA will begin to leave him alone knowing his "solutions" will be harmless to the global order elite.
President Obama is a smart man but too conventional and wedded to incrementalism which is illogical in addressing such a globally catastrophic issue.
The cynic in me see this as President Obama's opportunity to cash in after his presidency. But at least the NSA and CIA will begin to leave him alone knowing his "solutions" will be harmless to the global order elite.
1
'Another critic, Laurence H. Tribe, likened the rules to “burning the Constitution” — a charge that might have stung, since Mr. Tribe, a liberal constitutional scholar, was a mentor to Mr. Obama at Harvard Law School.'
Yes, the Constitution will burn (or at least dessicate and become irrelevant in an unliveable planet) along with all other paper documents if we do not address climate warming with enormous reductions in CO2 production.
The article does point out that Tribe is the presumably very well-paid (several hundred dollars per hour) client of Peabody Energy, the nation’s largest coal company.
Would Tribe be willing to disclose how much money he has received from Peabody and other fossil fuel producers? Until that happens, Tribe has about as much credibility on this issue as Jack the Ripper's lawyer might have in describing Jack as a misunderstood victim.
Recall that Tribe was instrumental in OJ Simpson beating his wife-murdering rap. As Johnnie Cochran pointed out after that trial, there is no doubt that the people with the most money can afford and get the most effective legal representation.
Yes, the Constitution will burn (or at least dessicate and become irrelevant in an unliveable planet) along with all other paper documents if we do not address climate warming with enormous reductions in CO2 production.
The article does point out that Tribe is the presumably very well-paid (several hundred dollars per hour) client of Peabody Energy, the nation’s largest coal company.
Would Tribe be willing to disclose how much money he has received from Peabody and other fossil fuel producers? Until that happens, Tribe has about as much credibility on this issue as Jack the Ripper's lawyer might have in describing Jack as a misunderstood victim.
Recall that Tribe was instrumental in OJ Simpson beating his wife-murdering rap. As Johnnie Cochran pointed out after that trial, there is no doubt that the people with the most money can afford and get the most effective legal representation.
5
You are so wrong. Obama has created the Clean Power Plan, even though the claimed statutory authority for it is inadequate (the thinnest of reeds). And if the courts uphold it, he will have successfully addressed global warming despite Congress.
But the TPP can undermine any of our regulations.
2
Americans are so scientifically illiterate that they confuse weather with climate. Americans do not know the biology, physics nor chemistry that lies beneath meteorology and geology on a dynamic evolving planet.
Americans want the socioeconomic political equivalent on climate change of going to Heaven without the inconvenience of either dying or living a morally accountable life. America does not control the wind nor the water nor the land of our chronologically ecologically biologically evolving moving planet.
Neither God nor Mother Nature believe that America sits at the center of the universe.
Americans want the socioeconomic political equivalent on climate change of going to Heaven without the inconvenience of either dying or living a morally accountable life. America does not control the wind nor the water nor the land of our chronologically ecologically biologically evolving moving planet.
Neither God nor Mother Nature believe that America sits at the center of the universe.
2
"Do you think CC is dire enough that it could lead to the collapse of our civilization?" I'm not sure that's a useful implication. 'The collapse of our civilization' scenario is often invoked (I invoke it myself), but it causes skeptics to dig in their heels. With geoengineering, collapse can probably be forestalled indefinitely. But many trillions of dollars will be lost and many will die. Somehow the image of an engine-less freight train must be invoked: something that we have been pushing on for 150 years, that has just begun rolling (perhaps even slightly downhill), and we just noticed that our grandchildren are playing on the track. If we're going to stop this train, we better start pushing in the other direction yesterday, even though the worst consequences are still decades off.
2
Pres. Obama’s fixation with “climate change” illustrates the most disappointing aspect of the man: his sometimes amateurish and overly broad assessments of complex subject matter.
I’m sorry, but Obama’s odd assertion that “climate change” is the nation’s biggest security threat simply smacks of quack science. A hundred years from now historians will laugh at such statements by the 44th president.
I share the Obama’s concern for the environment, and believe we should act to safeguard the climate and the planet, but I do not believe him to be an effective or at times even rational promoter of good environmental policy.
I’m sorry, but Obama’s odd assertion that “climate change” is the nation’s biggest security threat simply smacks of quack science. A hundred years from now historians will laugh at such statements by the 44th president.
I share the Obama’s concern for the environment, and believe we should act to safeguard the climate and the planet, but I do not believe him to be an effective or at times even rational promoter of good environmental policy.
3
Sorry kids, maybe you can use your iPhone 25 to find dry land and clean air. PS, don't buy a home, just rent. At least you won't watch your life savings float away.
2
Obama is right about efforts to slow global warming being " the most consequential legacy of his presidency." But, that legacy is one of colossal failure.
The chairman of Exxon Mobil and leading climate scientist James Hansen both called publicly for a national carbon tax BEFORE Obama took office as president nearly 8 years ago. He has done nothing to try to help enact such a tax. His hand-picked successor, Hillary Clinton, had her agents work assiduously to keep a carbon tax off of the 2016 Democratic national platform.
These are historic realities that will be remembered long after Obama's nice polished speeches (rarely translated into action or accomplishment) are forgotten.
The chairman of Exxon Mobil and leading climate scientist James Hansen both called publicly for a national carbon tax BEFORE Obama took office as president nearly 8 years ago. He has done nothing to try to help enact such a tax. His hand-picked successor, Hillary Clinton, had her agents work assiduously to keep a carbon tax off of the 2016 Democratic national platform.
These are historic realities that will be remembered long after Obama's nice polished speeches (rarely translated into action or accomplishment) are forgotten.
2
Science denial is the worst faith there is. It discards the survival value of intellect.
3
The problem with climate change as a stand alone issue is that it overshadows a much, much graver problem of which it is but a part: we are, and have been for generations, consuming the capital of our planet faster than it can regenerate - forests, prairies, soil, rivers, lakes, oceans, groundwater, all driving the sixth mass extinction, the anthropocene. And the population of our terribly overpopulated planet continues to balloon. Mass migrations of humans have been underway for centuries, are escalating exponentially, while the media focus on emails and such. So just wait.
3
With all the truly terrifying conflicts raging all over the world today, especially in the Middle East, our president is most concerned about climate change, which is probably one of the last things most Americans are concerned about. Why doesn't he worry about how Putin and Xi are making a fool out of him and his administration?
It's too bad Obama did not get behind a candidate who is interested in more than lip service to addressing climate change. Clinton will create dozens of commissions, protocols, summits, slogans, support research for a new kind of battery or some other poster child, and very little will change.
3
President Obama should take this message directly to the House districts in play this fall. It's time to go all in.
2
Challenges for mankind, control the population and deal with the changes. We as a species will just have to adapt as the others did from the caveman in the ice ages to the people living in desert areas of the planet. Most obvious is cutting the population in half or have Mother Nature make the Cull.
4
From the "chart or report or graph" department, here's one that I do not find "terrifying". Climate change means more snow in the Northeast. I live in the Northeast and I like snow.
In the Boston area, 135 years of record keeping shows that 6 of the 8 heaviest snowfall seasons have occurred in the past 25 years.
1. 2014-2015: 110.6 inches
2. 1995-1996: 107.6 inches
3. 1993-1994: 96.3 inches
4. 1947-1948: 89.2 inches
5. 2004-2005: 86.6 inches
6. 1977-1978: 85.1 inches
7. 1992-1993: 83.9 inches
8. 2010-2011: 81.0 inches
The President uttered pure nonsense when he said "It’s a slow-moving issue that, on a day-to-day basis, people don’t experience and don’t see." I certainly saw the immediate effects of climate change when I shoveled snow off my roof in early 2015. That inconvenience was offset by many enjoyable visits to several cross country skiing trails.
Please leave climate change alone. The additional snow is lots of fun. The President and his friends should read the 2006 report "Temporal and Spatial Characteristics of Snowstorms in the Contiguous United States".
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAM2395.1
In the Boston area, 135 years of record keeping shows that 6 of the 8 heaviest snowfall seasons have occurred in the past 25 years.
1. 2014-2015: 110.6 inches
2. 1995-1996: 107.6 inches
3. 1993-1994: 96.3 inches
4. 1947-1948: 89.2 inches
5. 2004-2005: 86.6 inches
6. 1977-1978: 85.1 inches
7. 1992-1993: 83.9 inches
8. 2010-2011: 81.0 inches
The President uttered pure nonsense when he said "It’s a slow-moving issue that, on a day-to-day basis, people don’t experience and don’t see." I certainly saw the immediate effects of climate change when I shoveled snow off my roof in early 2015. That inconvenience was offset by many enjoyable visits to several cross country skiing trails.
Please leave climate change alone. The additional snow is lots of fun. The President and his friends should read the 2006 report "Temporal and Spatial Characteristics of Snowstorms in the Contiguous United States".
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAM2395.1
1
hmmm. 2006, single article. Never mind the facts:
http://climate.nasa.gov/
There are vast resources, as scientists get clearer and clearer about what is going on. Of course there are those 3% who are for a variety of reasons inclined to contrarian thinking. Would you believe 3% of doctors if your health was at risk?
I was here for those blizzards; that was only one year. Yes, where it's winter increased moisture will be snow in winter. Lots of people suffered, so you "liking" snow is a personal choice.
Climate is weather over space and time. You won't be so happy with sea level rise and right now there's drought. One can always cite specific weather but that ignores the big-scale changes under way.
The last time CO2 was this high, sea level was over 20 feet higher than now. If we melt all the ice (which we will unless we get a grip) it will be over 200 feet. It takes a while for climate to catch up, but our experiment has guaranteed a delayed effect that will damage most of the world's low lying cities.
As to "leaving climate alone" that's exactly what we are not doing. We're conducting a massive experiment, and there's no planet B.
http://climate.nasa.gov/
There are vast resources, as scientists get clearer and clearer about what is going on. Of course there are those 3% who are for a variety of reasons inclined to contrarian thinking. Would you believe 3% of doctors if your health was at risk?
I was here for those blizzards; that was only one year. Yes, where it's winter increased moisture will be snow in winter. Lots of people suffered, so you "liking" snow is a personal choice.
Climate is weather over space and time. You won't be so happy with sea level rise and right now there's drought. One can always cite specific weather but that ignores the big-scale changes under way.
The last time CO2 was this high, sea level was over 20 feet higher than now. If we melt all the ice (which we will unless we get a grip) it will be over 200 feet. It takes a while for climate to catch up, but our experiment has guaranteed a delayed effect that will damage most of the world's low lying cities.
As to "leaving climate alone" that's exactly what we are not doing. We're conducting a massive experiment, and there's no planet B.
3
You DO understand that a warming climate will put more water vapor into the atmosphere - thus enhancing the short-cycle component for heat-trapping effects in a much more robust positive feedback loop driven by methane and CO2, which in turn can precipitate more of that moisture as seasonal WEATHER conditions occur, right?
I thought not.
I thought not.
Obama has a mixed record on climate change. I admire his efforts with the Paris climate accord and his expansion and creation of protected wildlife reserves (especially the huge one near Hawaii), but he is still reluctant to confront the fossil fuel companies. He hasn't done anything to curb fracking, offshore oil drilling, or tried to stop oil pipelines that threaten our environment and Native Peoples' rights. His focus is on curbing emissions, but not on curbing production. That seems like a Sisyphean strategy. If we keep extracting and producing oil, we are going to keep consuming (and emitting) carbon. It's naive to think otherwise. We need a President who is going to boldly tackle this problem of climate change with a massive green energy infrastructure plan that helps the fossil fuel economy transition rapidly into a renewable energy one. Unfortunately for us and the world, neither Clinton nor Trump will be that leader.
43
That's because the fossil fuel industry fuelled his campaign coffers. He owes them, BIG time.
1
Take some time to study the planets that orbit the sun. The only one still alive is Earth. There must be a reason that applies to all. Understanding Evolution, by Thomas Huxley and Eugene Dubois discusses the first human fossils discovered, which are Neanderthal, Homo erectus, Modern human. To consider the evolution of man, read Charles Darwin's Origin of Species. These and more are covered online in Understanding Evolution, (The History of Evolutionary Thought (pre1800, 1800s, 1900 to present).
I guess living in San Francisco it does not matter if gasoline is 5 bucks a gallon. But in most of the country it is a very big deal.
Once again President Obama shows himself to be the most serious and thoughtful adult in the room.
Your greatest legacy Mr President may be to give the world a chance to avert a disaster. Thank you.
Your greatest legacy Mr President may be to give the world a chance to avert a disaster. Thank you.
3
This man is a leader. He is not god. Those of you who just can't help yourselves from pointing out every single short coming in this man's legacy, do you evaluate all things in life with such a narrow uninspired focus? You are so much better than that.
2
Perhaps Obama shouldn't talk so much.
Sadly, "freakish" isn't a scientific term, and there haven't been more "freakish" storms in the past 50 years than there were in the 50 years before then, or the 50 years before that. Sea level has been rising in some places and dropping in others. So essentially, he's "aliasing" - he's seeing something that he claims is "Human-Caused Climate Change" which is indistinguishable from "Naturally-Caused Climate Change".
Hey Chicken-Little - The Sky is NOT Falling.
Hey Chicken-Little - The Sky is NOT Falling.
3
To those of you inclined to "blame Obama" I suggest a little time travel. I went to a meeting at MIT in 2009 with all the biggest authorities and legislators and Obama representatives. We were so hopeful.
John Podesta produced this which ran in prime time on ABC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDqRpM72Odg
Take a reality check and get to work. Stop blaming the people who are obstructed at every turn, stop supporting Russian hacks (that's ClimateGate) and Republican congressional obstruction. Wake up and get to work.
Obama has done his best in a difficult situation. Trump will be a disaster. Hillary might be able to do quite a bit with proper support, but if you turn your backs on her and on Congress, you will live (and die) to regret it.
John Podesta produced this which ran in prime time on ABC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDqRpM72Odg
Take a reality check and get to work. Stop blaming the people who are obstructed at every turn, stop supporting Russian hacks (that's ClimateGate) and Republican congressional obstruction. Wake up and get to work.
Obama has done his best in a difficult situation. Trump will be a disaster. Hillary might be able to do quite a bit with proper support, but if you turn your backs on her and on Congress, you will live (and die) to regret it.
8
As Noam Chomsky would say, market capitalism ignores externalities. Little things like destroying the planet.
The climate crisis is the only sign you'll ever need of the failure of today's capitalism and the failure - and complicity - of government in favor of enriching the elite.
Ethical consumption must start now. This requires removing the money from politics.
The climate crisis is the only sign you'll ever need of the failure of today's capitalism and the failure - and complicity - of government in favor of enriching the elite.
Ethical consumption must start now. This requires removing the money from politics.
13
As anyone who has read James Hansen's book, Storms of Our Grandchildren and the updates on his website to 2016, knows, the biggest threat from global warming is a sea rise of up to 80 feet by the end of this century. This is by far the #1 national security threat as all of our coastal cities will be drowned. This is already happening. Unless we abandon coal in favor of nuclear, solar, and wind very very soon, we will be past the tipping point. Republican obstruction is treasonous.
6
Until Republican leaders are affected personally by climate change - such as the mayor of Tybee Island where the one-road access to Savannah that is no longer there - they will ignore it. Same as the positions of Cheney and Rob Portman of Ohio toward gay rights that changed when they found out they had gay children.
6
My neighbor and his son go out on their boat fishing. The water is usually warmer in the summer months so there's a lot more to catch. He called me over for some rare bluefin tunas, sashimi grade. Last month it was sea bass. Just hearing the stories over the years, I can tell you that there's something big going on in the ocean. There is a frenzy competition for bluefins off the coast right now, he said. They have been catching 100-lb bluefins. That hasn't happened around here in a 100 year (his words). I surf 2-3 times a week. Last year the warm water of summer lasted until mid December, not August. My neighbor plans to fish until past October. Usually I slow down during fall and winter, doing more indoor and snow sports, but the perennial summers that we have had here in southern California has allowed me to loose almost 50 pounds without needing a gym pass. Reeling in a 100-lb bluefin will exhaust you for a few days. As weather climate changes get worse, the coastal home prices trend up. The weather here is very stable, between 64-68 F year-round, with 6.5 days of sunshine.
Yes, carbon emission is a factor, but I think the ocean can no longer function as a stabilizer, a neutralizer, a detoxifier, a pacifier, a buffer. I don't think we'll loose the ocean, but changes are currently unstable and volatile, and may last decades before it is stable again. There have been catalysts for these changes, and I believe oceanographers have the answer, not politicians nor businessmen.
Yes, carbon emission is a factor, but I think the ocean can no longer function as a stabilizer, a neutralizer, a detoxifier, a pacifier, a buffer. I don't think we'll loose the ocean, but changes are currently unstable and volatile, and may last decades before it is stable again. There have been catalysts for these changes, and I believe oceanographers have the answer, not politicians nor businessmen.
13
Actually really big bluefins were caught off Catalina Is. in the late 80s.
The captains were able to pay huge bonuses to the crews and some even bought new boats. But it didn't happen again, not for a long , long time.
What kind of sea bass was it? Calico bass (kelp bass)? Or white sea bass? Both are excellent but white sea bass is farm raised by local groups then let loose like salmon while kelp bass is off-limits to commercial fishermen. Kelp bass gets caught in gill nets but can't be landed. It gets wasted...
Warmer waters generally means less fish off California, not more. Kelp used to be the basis of the food web but now it's phytoplankton enhanced by sewage. Millions & millions of people living near the coast have huge impacts.
Tuna have been a regular item for Gulf of Alaska fishermen for decades now. Can California's biggest fishery, squid, hang on? That's doubtful since Cal F&G has allowed every fishery to fail. Why? It's run by fishermen & spineless bureaucrats who's careers depended upon political appointees.
When was the last time you ate abalone? If you even know what that is!
The captains were able to pay huge bonuses to the crews and some even bought new boats. But it didn't happen again, not for a long , long time.
What kind of sea bass was it? Calico bass (kelp bass)? Or white sea bass? Both are excellent but white sea bass is farm raised by local groups then let loose like salmon while kelp bass is off-limits to commercial fishermen. Kelp bass gets caught in gill nets but can't be landed. It gets wasted...
Warmer waters generally means less fish off California, not more. Kelp used to be the basis of the food web but now it's phytoplankton enhanced by sewage. Millions & millions of people living near the coast have huge impacts.
Tuna have been a regular item for Gulf of Alaska fishermen for decades now. Can California's biggest fishery, squid, hang on? That's doubtful since Cal F&G has allowed every fishery to fail. Why? It's run by fishermen & spineless bureaucrats who's careers depended upon political appointees.
When was the last time you ate abalone? If you even know what that is!
1
Thanks PNW for your reply. I really appreciated that. I'm not a boater or a fisherman, just heeding the calls from a neighbor to go over for some "fresh fish."
I think it was a white sea bass. Tasty and soft, but not like the Chilean sea bass at the finer restaurants.
The fishes generally follow the warm water currents, but only for food. It's good only for fishing, not farming. We get fishes here in SoCal lately that we don't normally see unless it's Baja or Gulf like water temperature. I can tell you that I see more fishes swimming in between the waves of the past 3 years than the past 15 years. The drought also has had an impact - it actually slowed the runoffs for clearer water. However, the sewage system is rich in nitrates and super concentrated. During raining seasons, we get actually an algae over flow here. You find kelp more in the north, unless you scuba dive deep into the underwater canyons and ridges of SoCal.
Newport Beach just voted today against another coastal home development. The Bolsa Chica wetlands was brought by the State a few years back. Palos Verdes banned abalone hunting long time ago. California IS beautiful, and we've just begun to realize. I'm 150% for conservation - I don't even own a boat (may be an electric one someday).
I think it was a white sea bass. Tasty and soft, but not like the Chilean sea bass at the finer restaurants.
The fishes generally follow the warm water currents, but only for food. It's good only for fishing, not farming. We get fishes here in SoCal lately that we don't normally see unless it's Baja or Gulf like water temperature. I can tell you that I see more fishes swimming in between the waves of the past 3 years than the past 15 years. The drought also has had an impact - it actually slowed the runoffs for clearer water. However, the sewage system is rich in nitrates and super concentrated. During raining seasons, we get actually an algae over flow here. You find kelp more in the north, unless you scuba dive deep into the underwater canyons and ridges of SoCal.
Newport Beach just voted today against another coastal home development. The Bolsa Chica wetlands was brought by the State a few years back. Palos Verdes banned abalone hunting long time ago. California IS beautiful, and we've just begun to realize. I'm 150% for conservation - I don't even own a boat (may be an electric one someday).
1
My my my. Threat to the planet? Maybe so, but he ignores the largest source of the problem--humans. There are more then 8 billion humans on this planet breathing in air, and breathing out CO2. I've been to India, Pakistan, China, etc. and the people there have stripped their environments clean in pursuit of what they need to just live on a daily basis. So, forget US factories, autos, etc., the real problem is 8 billion people and the number continues to grow. The only way to reverse this, is to significantly reduce the human footprint on this planet. I'm sure some day a virus or bacteria will oblige--its natures way of bringing things back into balance. Until then, "don't worry, be happy."
10
Well said.
Three cheers for Barack's precious legacy.
What I want to know is what is the target temperature for Mother Earth? Where do he and His Guy want to set the thermostat? What is the temperature that will sustain the unsustainable population explosion of our planet?
Will the target temperature grow our glaciers? How far will sea levels drop? Will the Sahara blossom and bear fruit? Will the Out Back rival the Amazon for biodiversity? Will our Department of Offense need more or less WMDs in a cooler world?
If the Legacy Builder wants to change the thermal characteristics of our atmosphere, I would like to know what his specific outcome targets are.
What I want to know is what is the target temperature for Mother Earth? Where do he and His Guy want to set the thermostat? What is the temperature that will sustain the unsustainable population explosion of our planet?
Will the target temperature grow our glaciers? How far will sea levels drop? Will the Sahara blossom and bear fruit? Will the Out Back rival the Amazon for biodiversity? Will our Department of Offense need more or less WMDs in a cooler world?
If the Legacy Builder wants to change the thermal characteristics of our atmosphere, I would like to know what his specific outcome targets are.
4
Today's legacy is indeed climate change. This one will hopefully propel our president's name more properly into history's spotlight. The cost of learning devices like building snowballs and demoing them in Congress is part of the process, we are happy to spend the resources and do the legwork. Ensuring the maximum legacy for a public servant's name is our top responsibility, assuming it meshes with party goals. The side effect of incidental public service is an unfortunate distraction, one that we endeavor to prevent from derailing us from what's truly important.
Of course the climate will change, it will get hot, then, it will get cold, then hot, then cold again. In 1970 a cover of Time mag featured a scary story featuring the coming global freeze. What an amazing conceit to believe that we can change the climate. How many trillions will get spent for maybe 1 degree. The Chinese are laughing at the silly American's attempt to bankrupt themselves. Meanwhile, while our President is preoccupied with saving the planet from CO2, hundreds of thousands in Syria get killed, Russia goes rogue and China taunts us with the building of navel bases in the South China sea. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. It's not just sad, it's pathetic....
3
Dakota Access Pipeline is just a substitute for the defeated Keystone. I'd hoped that decision by Obama would cement his legacy with me (along with gay rights and his overall raising the bar of intelligence for our highest office). But now, here we are again with so far, the White House as well as NYT ignoring a crucial step in the effort to truly look at what must be done to save our planet: Keep it in the ground. When you see the organizing effort bringing multiple Native communities together, with support from many others, it's difficult to see how you haven't recognized that this is an important story.
1
Thomas Malthus thought England was adequately populated for cultural purposes when he projected that the global human population would ultimately outgrow the productive capacity of the whole planet.
The human drive to populate and exhaust resources right now puzzles me as much as it did the last of the Mohicans.
The human drive to populate and exhaust resources right now puzzles me as much as it did the last of the Mohicans.
3
4 years ago, I watched an award winning climate change documentary "Chasing Ice". At the end of it, while the theater was still dark, I was weeping. Seeing the actual destruction of our planet by a thousand cuts, every day, was nerve wracking, depressing and I am fearful of our future unless we do something about it. I am appalled by the climate change naysayers who think it is a hoax when the evidence is there right in front of your eyes.
9
This is our greatest failing, and he shares in that.
1
President Obama knows all the right information. He says all the right things. He does some of them (despite vicious opposition) - but WHY, WHY does he still permit, support + subsidize building NEW fossil fuel infrastructure that will be in place to pollute for 20+ years?
5
Obama lied about the ACA lowering health care costs, lied about the Benghazi attack being caused by a spontaneous reaction to a film that insulted Mohammed, lied about terrorists being on the run, lied about the Iran Nuclear deal, lied about the payment to release hostages from Iran -- and lied saying HRC was the most qualified candidate for president ever (how about LBJ?). (Just a sample).
He's slandered police at every turn, failed to forge bipartisan coalitions on any issue, deliberately tried to destroy the coal industry, slandered people who didn't agree with him by saying the clung to their guns and bibles.
Why should we believe him about CC?
Maybe he's seen how much Gore has made pushing this false narrative and wants to get in on the action. Or maybe, like most progressives, he is easily deluded.
We've got a lot of group think re climate change. Recognize that all the science is based on are (a) a temp record that is faulty (b) anecdotal evidence -- the polar bears are dying and (c) projections of computer models that are attempting to model a highly complex system that many variables impact. It is not as simple as increases in CO2 warm the planet. Nor does climate science provide falsifiable hypotheses -- at least within our lifetime as all the projections are for 100 years from now.
The planet may be warming at present -- but climate has always changed -- even before man took the stage. Can't see why controlling the climate is his #1 priority.
He's slandered police at every turn, failed to forge bipartisan coalitions on any issue, deliberately tried to destroy the coal industry, slandered people who didn't agree with him by saying the clung to their guns and bibles.
Why should we believe him about CC?
Maybe he's seen how much Gore has made pushing this false narrative and wants to get in on the action. Or maybe, like most progressives, he is easily deluded.
We've got a lot of group think re climate change. Recognize that all the science is based on are (a) a temp record that is faulty (b) anecdotal evidence -- the polar bears are dying and (c) projections of computer models that are attempting to model a highly complex system that many variables impact. It is not as simple as increases in CO2 warm the planet. Nor does climate science provide falsifiable hypotheses -- at least within our lifetime as all the projections are for 100 years from now.
The planet may be warming at present -- but climate has always changed -- even before man took the stage. Can't see why controlling the climate is his #1 priority.
7
Talk is cheap. If Obama believes his own words, he would halt the Dakota Access Pipeline, and ban fracking.
He has been a decent president, but lacks a key quality: Courage. You don't prove that quality by bombing civilians.
He has been a decent president, but lacks a key quality: Courage. You don't prove that quality by bombing civilians.
7
It's way too late for even drastic measures, which, of course, aren't contemplated. It's time for a comission to begin studying how we're going to move our costal populations and infrastructure to higher ground.
1
Ugh. The coasts of this country are already too populated for me. Now they are going crowd into he Mid-West?
He had eight yrs. to do something about this issue, instead, he promoted an "all of the above" energy policy which featured something he called "clean coal." He went on to allow the Fossil Energy barons to frack and drill wherever they liked and they did. Because of his policies oil is far cheaper today than when he came into office and gasoline is as well. In essence , his policies have made things worse by giving these companies a free pass to extend their grip on our economy and the planet. Our great grandchildren will NOT look back kindly on the Obama regime, which at a pivotal moment in history chose political expediency over science and cowardice in the face of the enemies of the planet and humanity. His term will not be remembered than as a "profile in courage" on this they issue of our age.
4
That's right, just ignore the obstruction and opposition (planned out on his inauguration evening) and that he had scant 5 months when the opposition could be overcome.
Ignore the Kochtopus; ignore the legal attacks from Rep. Lamar Smith, Sen. Cruz, and Judicial Watch (yes, those guys attacking the Clintons forever, joined in demanding many years of emails to "prove" the temperature record has been manipulated, by the original manipulators themselves).
Ignore that only a few outlier scientists are used by Republicans to testify against the truth, and that the press treats it as 50:50 when it's 97:3, just like Trump and Clinton, where he is coddled and she is attacked).
Blame your own side, and ignore the real opposition. Stay home at midterms. Refuse to vote in local people who will do some good.
And then blame the people you refuse to join and help.
I'm angry because it's my world too. You can run but you cannot hide. Do something positive rather than blaming the people who've been kneecapped by the real opposition, the people you won't fight because you're too busy with your circular firing squad.
Ignore the Kochtopus; ignore the legal attacks from Rep. Lamar Smith, Sen. Cruz, and Judicial Watch (yes, those guys attacking the Clintons forever, joined in demanding many years of emails to "prove" the temperature record has been manipulated, by the original manipulators themselves).
Ignore that only a few outlier scientists are used by Republicans to testify against the truth, and that the press treats it as 50:50 when it's 97:3, just like Trump and Clinton, where he is coddled and she is attacked).
Blame your own side, and ignore the real opposition. Stay home at midterms. Refuse to vote in local people who will do some good.
And then blame the people you refuse to join and help.
I'm angry because it's my world too. You can run but you cannot hide. Do something positive rather than blaming the people who've been kneecapped by the real opposition, the people you won't fight because you're too busy with your circular firing squad.
5
Well...that is Obama saying something...his biggest legacy will be his administrations actions on Climate Change. And to think of the the Berniebots who believe that he hasn't done nearly enough or that Hillary won't either. On the opposite side...Trump. There's no problem...let's burn more coal Trump. And the American people...who are starting to recognize that there is a problem, but don't want to do anything about it...and will vote for Trump anyway. Or...they have their heads as far up their behinds as Trump does and refuse to recognize the huge problem Climate Change represents. Or they will vote for Jill Stein as if the Green party as accomplished anything...anything at all...EVER.
It's not a bright future. The planet is clinging to a thread. Hillary MUST win, or we are all in deep, deep trouble. We're in trouble now...up to our necks, but trying to pull ourselves out...if Trump wins, it's a dive to the bottom. Goodbye.
It's not a bright future. The planet is clinging to a thread. Hillary MUST win, or we are all in deep, deep trouble. We're in trouble now...up to our necks, but trying to pull ourselves out...if Trump wins, it's a dive to the bottom. Goodbye.
5
Efforts to slow Global Warming? His craven capitulation to China that allows the world's greatest contributor to Global Warming to continue to INCREASE its destruction unabated for FIFTEEN YEARS, then slow if they decide to, will go down in history as the Neville Chamberlain moment in the climate war.
5
President Obama had almost eight years to use his office as a bully pulpit for climate change, yet he only played lip service. For Obama to suddenly discover the catastrophe we are facing is too little too late. Hillary will only address climate change to the extent that she believes the progressives will vote for her, there is no money in climate change for the Clintons. The American people, in their ignorance, rejected Bernie Sanders, the one candidate who would seriously address the issue. Our generation will go down in history as guilty of crimes against humanity because of our selfishness, greed and ignorance. We have sold out our children, we have denied them a future.
59
Perhaps Bernie will take this on in the new administration, assigning a climate czar, defining, implementing, and measuring success of programs to stop the worst effects of global warming.
We are really 50 years too late when the world population was 3 billion plus. Politicians can't step on the toes of religious people and tell the Catholics, Fundamentalists, Muslims, and Orthodox Jews not to have more than 2 children. That is the basis of everything. We have a modern society who each want digital devices brought to each one on ships from Asia. People don't seem to care that all of that is polluting the atmosphere. If no one flew on a plane more than once each year, etc. that would help but politicians just don't go there because reality is for responsible, honest adults, and that is missing first of all with most of the politicians. You need to live the talk, you can't just talk the talk. President Obama has talked the talk about climate change rather than walk the walk, and stop flying on planes that pollute the atmosphere constantly. How dumb does the media think the average person is? Many are indifferent because they don't see the average politician doing anything personally to control their pollution footprint!
1
"The American people, in their ignorance, rejected Bernie Sanders..." Yes, they did, and shame on them. Shame, also, on Bernie for giving up when every day it becomes clearer that he would have won the election since neither Clinton nor Trump appeal to the masses. RUN, BERNIE, RUN!!! PLEASE!!!
1
Please. Obama has done next to nothing to slow climate change, let alone turn it around. Whenever he campaigned and spoke about "climate change" he ended up talking about the "US being energy independent". Those are two different things, but the lawyer in Obama knows how to mix up words without lying. What Obama was really saying was "drill, baby, drill" and fracking.
Obama has been a weak president even though he was given a strong mandate by the people who elected him for real change. He never seriously opposed the powers that really make policy: Wall Street, Big Oil, Global Corporations and the Military Industrial Complex.
Now he is spending his last year in the White House working on his legacy. He has gone back to talking about the things he promised in 2008 but never pushed for, let alone accomplished. He wants everybody to forget his real legacy of drones, TPP (a real downer for climate change advocates), bankers and war (1 TRILLION for more nuke bombs, really!).
Obama has been a weak president even though he was given a strong mandate by the people who elected him for real change. He never seriously opposed the powers that really make policy: Wall Street, Big Oil, Global Corporations and the Military Industrial Complex.
Now he is spending his last year in the White House working on his legacy. He has gone back to talking about the things he promised in 2008 but never pushed for, let alone accomplished. He wants everybody to forget his real legacy of drones, TPP (a real downer for climate change advocates), bankers and war (1 TRILLION for more nuke bombs, really!).
11
Climate change is real, it's here, and it's accelerating. Obama has been obstructed and blocked every step of the way, and this has endangered us all.
Republicans have done a lot of harm, and moving the goalposts ever to the right has made it worse. The Koch billionaire network is also culpable.
But Democrats, progressives, liberals, whatever you call yourself, you are all too prone to prefer attacking people who are closer to you and letting the unified obstructive Party of No win.
Please do *not* stay home in midterms. Do *not* think only presidential elections matter. We learned a hard lesson during the 5 months between seating Al Franken and Ted Kennedy's illness and death, that even with a supermajority there is a limit to what can be done with a dedicated and united opposition.
This is real, and it is dangerous. In addition to immediate problems like the Louisiana floods and sea level rise, increase in every kind of extreme event (hurricanes/cyclones are only one special case of high winds and flooding), climate change is a threat multiplier.
Then there's pollution. Coal is toxic in addition to its greenhouse heat-trapping emissions. Large scale efforts like mountaintop removal are taking away jobs as well. Entire watersheds are poisoned by the waste and people get sick and sometimes die, and are not counted because they are poor and don't fit the profit narrative.
Do not be deceived. Earth bats 1000, and our toys won't matter as it ramps up consequences.
Republicans have done a lot of harm, and moving the goalposts ever to the right has made it worse. The Koch billionaire network is also culpable.
But Democrats, progressives, liberals, whatever you call yourself, you are all too prone to prefer attacking people who are closer to you and letting the unified obstructive Party of No win.
Please do *not* stay home in midterms. Do *not* think only presidential elections matter. We learned a hard lesson during the 5 months between seating Al Franken and Ted Kennedy's illness and death, that even with a supermajority there is a limit to what can be done with a dedicated and united opposition.
This is real, and it is dangerous. In addition to immediate problems like the Louisiana floods and sea level rise, increase in every kind of extreme event (hurricanes/cyclones are only one special case of high winds and flooding), climate change is a threat multiplier.
Then there's pollution. Coal is toxic in addition to its greenhouse heat-trapping emissions. Large scale efforts like mountaintop removal are taking away jobs as well. Entire watersheds are poisoned by the waste and people get sick and sometimes die, and are not counted because they are poor and don't fit the profit narrative.
Do not be deceived. Earth bats 1000, and our toys won't matter as it ramps up consequences.
9
The very rich will not suffer as much from climate change. America as a country may not suffer as much as some of the smaller, less developed and less prosperous nations. And we won't lose our entire nation because, with the exception of Hawaii, all of our states are on the continent. We'll lose land mass, access to as much fresh water as we're used to having, arable soil, and our climate may be much less agreeable for the crops we currently grow.
It would have been nice if our representatives had used considered the idea of leaving the planet a better place to live on than they had found it. They didn't because it was more important to get the monetary backing of the fossil fuel industry, the mining industry, industries that polluted our waterways, polluted our air, and wrote studies denying the truth. It's been quite obvious for the last 20 years that we are changing our climate faster than it would change on its own. Yet even if it weren't so don't we have a duty to the future to keep the planet habitable for ourselves and the plants and animals we share it with? Obstruction is not a solution. The best disaster is one that never happens. Failing that one can always plan for ways to deal with it. So far, thanks to the intransigence of all, we've let things go for way too long.
It would have been nice if our representatives had used considered the idea of leaving the planet a better place to live on than they had found it. They didn't because it was more important to get the monetary backing of the fossil fuel industry, the mining industry, industries that polluted our waterways, polluted our air, and wrote studies denying the truth. It's been quite obvious for the last 20 years that we are changing our climate faster than it would change on its own. Yet even if it weren't so don't we have a duty to the future to keep the planet habitable for ourselves and the plants and animals we share it with? Obstruction is not a solution. The best disaster is one that never happens. Failing that one can always plan for ways to deal with it. So far, thanks to the intransigence of all, we've let things go for way too long.
1
For the deniers I have two words: Willful ignorance. And stupid. Make it three.
14
Has not done much of anything! Legacy? Nonsense!
5
Interesting that the Times can devote this much space to climate change policy without any mention of either nuclear power (and Obama's opposition to the Yucca Mountain waste repository) or fracking, which has had a lot more to do with putting coal out of business than anything Obama has done.
6
I'm really getting tired with the narcissism associated with the constant attention to a president's "legacy". both from the president and, especially, his doting admirers in the media. Honestly, it's like it's more important that big and showy is the goal, lest historians not credit an outgoing president with being some sort of savior.
16
Exactly. Just another piece of the Times' ongoing campaign to make Obama seem significant.
2
Evidently President Obama has not read the fine print of the IPCC reports.
Page 113 of the 2013 Technical Summary Report from the IPCC Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate refers to Tropical and Extra-tropical Cyclones in the following manner; “There is low confidence in long-term (centennial) changes in tropical cyclone activity, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities. However over the satellite era, increases in the frequency and intensity of the strongest storms in the North Atlantic are robust (very high confidence). However, the cause of this increase is debated and there is low confidence in attribution of changes in tropical cyclone activity to human influence owing to insufficient observational evidence, lack of physical understanding of the links between anthropogenic drivers of climate and tropical cyclone activity and the low level of agreement between studies as to the relative importance of internal variability, and anthropogenic and natural forcing’s.”
A list of 30 “Key Uncertainties” can be found on page 114 of the same IPCC report.Raising taxes and eliminating low cost fossil fuel energy sources will not keep the climate from changing; even the IPCC is uncertain about that.
Page 113 of the 2013 Technical Summary Report from the IPCC Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate refers to Tropical and Extra-tropical Cyclones in the following manner; “There is low confidence in long-term (centennial) changes in tropical cyclone activity, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities. However over the satellite era, increases in the frequency and intensity of the strongest storms in the North Atlantic are robust (very high confidence). However, the cause of this increase is debated and there is low confidence in attribution of changes in tropical cyclone activity to human influence owing to insufficient observational evidence, lack of physical understanding of the links between anthropogenic drivers of climate and tropical cyclone activity and the low level of agreement between studies as to the relative importance of internal variability, and anthropogenic and natural forcing’s.”
A list of 30 “Key Uncertainties” can be found on page 114 of the same IPCC report.Raising taxes and eliminating low cost fossil fuel energy sources will not keep the climate from changing; even the IPCC is uncertain about that.
6
I suggest people reading the IPCC read the summary and avoid this kind of selective reading which is dishonest advocacy at best.
Cyclones are not the whole picture. If you want some vision, try recent history: Louisiana floods, extraordinary heat, Arctic melt, sea level rise, and if you are willing to look beyond the US borders, there are a lot of challenging events worldwide almost every day.
This is not normal.
Cyclones are not the whole picture. If you want some vision, try recent history: Louisiana floods, extraordinary heat, Arctic melt, sea level rise, and if you are willing to look beyond the US borders, there are a lot of challenging events worldwide almost every day.
This is not normal.
11
Predicting the effects of cloud cover on radiation balance is the trickiest aspect of climate science. This is an urgent area for more research.
There isn't a hell hot enough for Senator Mitch McConnell and the rest of the criminally negligent Republican Congress for failing to acknowledge and address climate change years ago. They have been advised by the same scientists; they have seen the same terrifying charts; and they have surely known in their heart of hears that this dystopian future was coming but they decided to let it happen and try to deflect the blame for it elsewhere. We have needed Republican cooperation from the beginning; but from the beginning, ever since Ronald Reagan laughed at Jimmy Carter's sweaters and took down his White House solar panels, the Republican party and their media machines have led Republicans nationwide in deriding prudent politicians like Al Gore along with all Democrats, scientists and environmentalists who have been practically boxing our ears with warnings about the consequences of unregulated pollution of the air with heat-trapping gasses. Now we are all going to suffer because of Republican recklessness and irresponsibility. Oh how I wish only they would suffer.
18
Al Gore has a 25,000 sf home.
4
And they're still going at it: "It’s no coincidence that GOP attorneys general have mounted an aggressive fight alongside the fossil fuel industry to block the Clean Power Plan. That appears to be exactly what the industry paid for."
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-07/battered-coal-comp...
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-07/battered-coal-comp...
1
I love and will miss Obama but my disappointment is that in the 8 years he hasn't been more vocal about the environment. He should have been in our face as much as he was with healthcare. I hope he makes this his personal crusade post president. People respect him and will follow his lead.
3
"President Obama believes his efforts to slow global warming will be the most consequential legacy of his presidency."
-----------------------------------------
That must be why he started this initiative with 3-1/2 months left as president. That also must be why everything is framed by what we are going to accomplish by 2030.
To call it hooey is to give it too much credence. There is little to no evidence that anything catastrophic will be caused by this. In addition the worlds need for power is growing and will continue to grow at an ever increasing rate. Far greater than any solar panels or windmills will ever provide. One good answer is nuclear power. But despite all the global warming alarmists not a single one has been built in this country in the last 25 years. And none are coming online anytime soon. Why should anyone take this seriously when it is obvious those in charge do not.
-----------------------------------------
That must be why he started this initiative with 3-1/2 months left as president. That also must be why everything is framed by what we are going to accomplish by 2030.
To call it hooey is to give it too much credence. There is little to no evidence that anything catastrophic will be caused by this. In addition the worlds need for power is growing and will continue to grow at an ever increasing rate. Far greater than any solar panels or windmills will ever provide. One good answer is nuclear power. But despite all the global warming alarmists not a single one has been built in this country in the last 25 years. And none are coming online anytime soon. Why should anyone take this seriously when it is obvious those in charge do not.
4
When a country is dominated and run by corporations, as the US is, the president can't make the direction of policy shift without congress. What we've got now is a congress in place through gerrymandered districts, strongly Republican (even in districts like Pennsylvania where they should be dominated by democrats), and owned by corporations, directed by corporate lobbyists and brazenly profit driven. Kim Kardashian couldn't get consensus from that crowd, even with her clothes off. We must vote the Republicans out of congress and then hold the Democrats feet to the fire - because they are also corporate lackeys, just look at their track record on the NRA...Yee Gods.
7
“I am losing precious days. I am degenerating into a machine for making money. I am learning nothing in this trivial world of men. I must break away and get out into the mountains to learn the news.” John Muir
Thank you President Obama for learning the news and leading others to change their hearts and minds based upon the science of climate change.
Thank you President Obama for learning the news and leading others to change their hearts and minds based upon the science of climate change.
71
I get angry at the kind of question asked at the end of the interview by Ms. Davenport regarding what the people working in coal "are owed". It is highly irresponsible of her as a journalist to feed the notion that workers in the coal industry are being put upon. No Ms. Davenport, the fact that they have performed these jobs for generations and didn't want to adapt to the times doesn't entitle them to do so in perpetuity, against all indicators of the harm it does to human and environmental health. In a capitalistic society, you perish if you are not constantly refining, improving, or modernizing your job skills. Nobody is "owed" a job, just the opportunity to compete for one. Burying your head in the sand when faced with the current shifts renewable energy and then screaming about how the government destroyed your industry is a sad reprise of what happened with big tobacco. Must we be taught this lesson over and over again?
In any case, I think the President handled the question beautifully. However, in the discussion that he wants to have with people working in coal power, he would be well served to remind them of the near-term impacts of coal burning on air quality and human health, in addition to those on climate.
In any case, I think the President handled the question beautifully. However, in the discussion that he wants to have with people working in coal power, he would be well served to remind them of the near-term impacts of coal burning on air quality and human health, in addition to those on climate.
4
If he is so concerned why not set an example and mothball air-force one , he can walk or bicyle or canoe to climate summits.
4
Do you all remember that TV commercial from the good ole days for Chiffon Margarine? "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature?"
3
Attempts to reduce greenhouse emissions probably won’t work. The current world population of 7.3 billion is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100, according to a new United Nations. And even if we succeed in reducing greenhouse emissions and slowing the rate of climate change, the Earth will continue to thaw just as it always has between glacial maximums, unless a new ice age intervenes. While working to reduce greenhouse emissions, we need to start planning to cope with climate change effects. For example, we need to gradually evacuate cities and regions threaten by rising sea levels. We need to start shifting agriculture production to regions previously covered by permafrost. A new ice age might intervene, but the consequences of a new glacial maximum are far worse than global warming.
6
Preventing the climate from continuing to change as drastically as it has been should be a pro-conservative issue.
Unfortunately, too many of today's so-called conservatives are hell-bent on keeping a fossilized way of life from changing not a whit. They’re not seeing the bigger picture.
Sure, the adjustments to our energy supply from non-renewable to renewable or carbon neutral sources need to happen in a realistically sequences and proportionate way — but the change needs to happen!
We've had a worldwide run of "hottest years on record" and conservatives and everyone else need to understand that mitigating climate change is big-picture issue. We cannot get caught up in defending our home turf or preferred form of energy creation.
President Obama and Hillary Clinton are exercising real leadership when the rank climate change policies at the top of their lists. Conservatives should realize preventing climate change is at its root a conservative measure.
Unfortunately, too many of today's so-called conservatives are hell-bent on keeping a fossilized way of life from changing not a whit. They’re not seeing the bigger picture.
Sure, the adjustments to our energy supply from non-renewable to renewable or carbon neutral sources need to happen in a realistically sequences and proportionate way — but the change needs to happen!
We've had a worldwide run of "hottest years on record" and conservatives and everyone else need to understand that mitigating climate change is big-picture issue. We cannot get caught up in defending our home turf or preferred form of energy creation.
President Obama and Hillary Clinton are exercising real leadership when the rank climate change policies at the top of their lists. Conservatives should realize preventing climate change is at its root a conservative measure.
4
This president has been all talk and very, very little action. He supported coal, he wants to allow putting a pipeline through sacred native american land, he helped BP get away with a fine, most of which never got to the people who needed the money, he promised things in Haiti that were never delivered.
He has big ideas all over the place and is just not able to deliver. I do not see Mr. Obama as being effective as a leader (generally) because he was too busy "reaching across the aisle". When he had a Democratic Congress, he didn't really know how to use it. Then, he was stonewalled by the idiots in the Tea Party but he continued to try to "reach across the aisle". A waste of time and energy.
When President Kennedy wanted to put us on the moon, he went directly to the public, as did FDR when he wanted to put through domestic programs and do things to help with WWII. Obama, not so much. People respond to a challenge. He didn't give them one. Sacrifice is not impossible, so long as everyone makes the same sacrifice. When only poor and middle class people bear the burden, all you get is anger.
As long as the entire system is rigged to help corporate CEOs make millions of dollars and put dividends above all else, environmental issues are never going to be addressed. There would have to be fundamental changes in how we live on a day to day basis. Without strong leadership, that is impossible. Not going to get any help with the next POTUS either, no matter who wins.
He has big ideas all over the place and is just not able to deliver. I do not see Mr. Obama as being effective as a leader (generally) because he was too busy "reaching across the aisle". When he had a Democratic Congress, he didn't really know how to use it. Then, he was stonewalled by the idiots in the Tea Party but he continued to try to "reach across the aisle". A waste of time and energy.
When President Kennedy wanted to put us on the moon, he went directly to the public, as did FDR when he wanted to put through domestic programs and do things to help with WWII. Obama, not so much. People respond to a challenge. He didn't give them one. Sacrifice is not impossible, so long as everyone makes the same sacrifice. When only poor and middle class people bear the burden, all you get is anger.
As long as the entire system is rigged to help corporate CEOs make millions of dollars and put dividends above all else, environmental issues are never going to be addressed. There would have to be fundamental changes in how we live on a day to day basis. Without strong leadership, that is impossible. Not going to get any help with the next POTUS either, no matter who wins.
4
Judging by the lousy leftish turnout in 2010 and 2014, it's a little doubtful that "going directly to the public," means a darn thing. Anyway, Obama tried it. Repeatedly. Zippo response.
And yeah, Kennedy went directly to the public. In Dallas. How'd THAT work out?
Know what got civil rights legislation and Medicare finally passed? A semi-corrupt, log-rolling old Texas pol, who cut deals and twisted Congressional arms, and who had rational Republicans helping him.
And yeah, Kennedy went directly to the public. In Dallas. How'd THAT work out?
Know what got civil rights legislation and Medicare finally passed? A semi-corrupt, log-rolling old Texas pol, who cut deals and twisted Congressional arms, and who had rational Republicans helping him.
The ultimate no-lose argument!
Temps continue to rise? Haven't done enough!
Temps go thru another 1970s cool down? Because we took action!
Temps continue to rise? Haven't done enough!
Temps go thru another 1970s cool down? Because we took action!
3
President Obama will go down in history as a politician who worked very hard to build consensus around the world on this issue. He's had a talent to be able to reach out in the world and be respectful of other countries, like China, or India and heal the "north-south divide." Within the US he has managed to use regulatory power to do more quietly. That he couldn't convince the snowball throwers in Congress to vote against their "selfish" interest is understandable. But he is right to call them limited pockets of resistance. With seas already sinking parts of Miami and Maryland the people, and insurance agencies will start clamoring for preventative measures. Because what is true is that it is really too late to do reverse course. Every future president will be dealing with mitigation issues and the political fallout of disaster.
3
Now he tells us. If global warming had really been at the top of his list, as it should have been to anyone with a pulse, then he would have pushed that as his very first act as President instead of the misbegotten ACA which was written for and by the health insurance industry. Instead he has opened the east coast offshore waters to drilling, let it go ahead in the Arctic, continues to allow drilling permits in the Gulf even after the disaster of the BP spill which, by the way, he was slow and ineffective in addressing, and never mentions the fight going on in the Dakotas right now, RIGHT NOW, over another proposed pipeline. He doesn't really mean any of this because if he did, he would use the bully pulpit and could have and should have been using it from day 1 of his presidency. The only candidate who has a plan is Jill Stein. Mr. Obama is now finally (which is astonishing) realizing that his "legacy" which is more important to him than actually governing well, will be that of a Democratic President who fiddled while the planet burned. Good luck with that. I live on high ground with plenty of good clean water available and I'll leave that to my kids and hope and pray for them and their future.
5
It's amazing that this article seems to seek to blame Obama somehow, while it should be an indictment of the Republican congress that to this day is dominated by climate change deniers. Even this quote:
“One would have hoped for transformational leadership, in the way J.F.K. would have done it,” said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.
For a guy who was not in the U.S. during the Kennedy administration, I wonder what the "JFK" way would have been, and I have been politically active since Truman. I loved JFK, but he would not have done well with this congress either.
“One would have hoped for transformational leadership, in the way J.F.K. would have done it,” said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.
For a guy who was not in the U.S. during the Kennedy administration, I wonder what the "JFK" way would have been, and I have been politically active since Truman. I loved JFK, but he would not have done well with this congress either.
6
Truman worked with Congress. Eisenhower worked with Congress. JFK worked with Congress. Johnson worked with Congress. Nixon worked with Congress. Ford worked with Congress. Carter worked with Congress. Reagan worked with Congress. Bush pere worked with Congress. Clinton worked with Congress. Bush fils worked with Congress. Obama couldn't. That is what happens when you elect someone whoe experience peaked at community organizer and istead of working with Congress decided to inform them that elections have consequences, forgetting that they had also just won their elections. Like Truman said "The Buck Stops Here". Obama never met a buck he didn't try to pass.
1
Not true. JFK had to deal with the segregationist Democrats, and slow-rolled Civil Rights until he was forced to deal with it.
JFK was a defense hawk who expanded military spending and expanded the development of nuclear missiles. He intervened in Vietnam and authorized assassination attempts on foreign leaders. He cut taxes to stimulate the economy. He was personal friends with Joe McCarthy as a senator.
JFK would be considered a far-right wing Republican today. There is no evidence that he would have problems with a Republican congress.
JFK was a defense hawk who expanded military spending and expanded the development of nuclear missiles. He intervened in Vietnam and authorized assassination attempts on foreign leaders. He cut taxes to stimulate the economy. He was personal friends with Joe McCarthy as a senator.
JFK would be considered a far-right wing Republican today. There is no evidence that he would have problems with a Republican congress.
1
I really think the NYT has to get over worries about everyone's "legacy" and face the problems that person is dealing with instead. We just had the hottest summer in NYC on record. Obama's concerned about the greater problem. Yet, the NYT is concerned about Obama's handling of the issue over getting the issue handled itself. If it was such a recurring pattern I wouldn't even comment. Over and over and over...................legacy............. How about..............solutions?
2
It is obvious that the climate is changing - something most would agree with. Sometimes it gets warmer - such as after a period of glaciation - and sometimes it gets cooler, much cooler. We have great evidence that the earth has been much warmer in the past (trees under the ice in Greenland), that CO2 levels have been over 4x the current level and life flourished just the same. We have ample evidence that CO2 increases in the past have trailed temperature increases by approx. 800 years. It seems reasonable to theorize that CO2 is not the driver of climate change. It is also reasonable to theorize that water vapor, a much more potent greenhouse gas, has much more influence on climate.
Without the theoretical positive CO2 feedback built into most climate models we would not be spending billions on climate mitigation but would instead be paying attention to dealing with the results of weather and climate that we can control. Are we really willing to make the world much poorer based on some non-validated models, which have proven to be incorrect relative to data collected since the beginning of the satellite era? I think not. Most of the commenters here will be extremely unlikely to turn off the a/c in the summer and heat in the winter, stop driving cars and take mass transit, stop traveling the world in aircraft and cruise ships, giving up plentiful food raised by agribusiness using fertilizers and pest controls, living in houses using built without cement and adhesives
Without the theoretical positive CO2 feedback built into most climate models we would not be spending billions on climate mitigation but would instead be paying attention to dealing with the results of weather and climate that we can control. Are we really willing to make the world much poorer based on some non-validated models, which have proven to be incorrect relative to data collected since the beginning of the satellite era? I think not. Most of the commenters here will be extremely unlikely to turn off the a/c in the summer and heat in the winter, stop driving cars and take mass transit, stop traveling the world in aircraft and cruise ships, giving up plentiful food raised by agribusiness using fertilizers and pest controls, living in houses using built without cement and adhesives
5
Sweden is already doing a good job at decarbonizing, and life seems to be going well for them:
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1145908
Scientists are not asleep at the switch, and are beginning to cut back on air travel.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4829415/
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1145908
Scientists are not asleep at the switch, and are beginning to cut back on air travel.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4829415/
2
What I find terrifying is that Obama refused to prosecute any of the war criminals from the G.W. Bush administration and ultimately doubled-down on both Iraq and Afghanistan, never fully withdrawing from either. Never closed Guantanamo. Yes, global warming is real but if a President can't even deliver on any of his signature campaign promises, in the very areas the President is supposed to control (foreign policy), why should we expect any progress on something as significant as climate change?
6
After all is said and done, after all the international agreements are in place: The reality is that the trends that are described by our president as “terrifying” are also inexorable. As the scientists quoted in this newspaper, at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/science/flooding-of-coast-caused-by-gl..., discuss, and which, in that article, the NYTimes chose to present as arguments for action rather than demonstrations of the inevitability of global warming: Major warming and cooling cycles are a natural part of this planet’s existence. We might slow the current warming process ever so slightly by altering our use of fossil fuels but, even if mankind were to cease all CO2 and methane emissions, the sea level will continue to rise. Not just a few feet – but, apparently, up to 70 feet, maybe more.
That is the reality of the world’s future, and all our efforts at mitigating emissions, and all the international treaties in which others promise to do the same – and agreements with China on the topic are window dressing, China will never allow them to interfere with its economic pursuits – can have no significant impact. Rather than banking on the unreasonable expectation that alterations to man’s activities would make a difference, we should start making plans to move inland and abandon low-lying coastal areas – including major cities and, in the case of Florida, virtually the entire state.
Anything else is emulating King Canute.
That is the reality of the world’s future, and all our efforts at mitigating emissions, and all the international treaties in which others promise to do the same – and agreements with China on the topic are window dressing, China will never allow them to interfere with its economic pursuits – can have no significant impact. Rather than banking on the unreasonable expectation that alterations to man’s activities would make a difference, we should start making plans to move inland and abandon low-lying coastal areas – including major cities and, in the case of Florida, virtually the entire state.
Anything else is emulating King Canute.
23
This argument is precisely a version of, "Oh, well, kids just naturally get sick and die sometimes, waddya gonna do? Anyway, doing anything Costs Money, so why is the dern gubmint squawking around with these newfangled vaccine thingies? i heard they kill birds, anyway."
90% of the added heat caused by GHG's goes into the ocean, and once it warms we're stuck with that future level of climate disruption. That could cause us to go to levels of impacts that cannot be adapted to by society. That's why the Paris Agreement is so important; it's set at the threshold at which we believe we can still successfully adapt.
And even with the Paris treaty, we're factoring in being able to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere later in the century with technology not yet developed. The further we go with present emissions, the more and more we will be forced to rely on an attempt to extract those emissions later. What we burn now, someone is going to have to try to extract from the atmosphere in the future.
The timeline for the Paris Agreement goals is shown at this link from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Every pathway involves a sharp turn, and wasting time is very expensive. It would be great if the NYT were more clear about this as well.
http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/just-published/121526/capping-warming-2-d...
And even with the Paris treaty, we're factoring in being able to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere later in the century with technology not yet developed. The further we go with present emissions, the more and more we will be forced to rely on an attempt to extract those emissions later. What we burn now, someone is going to have to try to extract from the atmosphere in the future.
The timeline for the Paris Agreement goals is shown at this link from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Every pathway involves a sharp turn, and wasting time is very expensive. It would be great if the NYT were more clear about this as well.
http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/just-published/121526/capping-warming-2-d...
2
The sky is falling. The sky is falling.
And yet I am sureyou call this science.
And yet I am sureyou call this science.
1
As a trout fisherman for the past 55 years, where clean and cold water are the sustaining elements of the ecosystem, I have witnessed the slow and subtle but unmistakable changes that are so easy to overlook: mayfly hatches have become thinner, the summer water temperatures are higher and linger longer into the fall, and the spawning habits of trout have changed as well. Some years ago, a Maine warden said to me--"enjoy it now, because it's as good as it will ever be." Sadly, a lot of fishermen don't want to discuss these changes--and their passivity is painful to experience. And even more painful to argue with. As the poet Keats said, some people do not understand the necessity of something until you punch them in the mouth. Alas.
158
I have lived and fished in New Zealand for the past thirty years. The trout fishing has literally gone to hell. The water temperatures have risen drastically in both fresh water streams and the Tasman sea. Our new sport is fly fishing for king fish off the south island. (they never even used to be in those cold waters)! I used to love catching big trout in New Zealand, but now it is easy to go a full day without a touch.
New Zealand is projected to be one of the countries least affected by global warming. If that is the case, the rest of the world must be in a terrible state!
New Zealand is projected to be one of the countries least affected by global warming. If that is the case, the rest of the world must be in a terrible state!
1
Even 'educated' people are so divorced from the natural world, the world outside our bubble of civilization that they don't realize that the effects of ( or at least many of them) global warming are going to be gradual and probably have been for may years. And something like, for instance, the geographic range of Aedes aegypti can have devastating effects. But we'll learn and probably too late.
4
The bigger view is that humans are slightly more evolved monkeys and they are smart enough to pull coal and oil out of the ground and makum fire, but they are not smart enough to do something about the climate heating effects of the carbon that these many fires put into the atmosphere.
2
No more pressing issue exists in our time - for every living thing on this planet. People talk about jobs and the economy and national security as if these are the holy of holies. And yes they are hugely important. But do they not realise how severely the economy and national security is already being affected by this issue? I highly doubt it. But ask the people of Louisiana, and New Orleans, and the eastern seaboard and California and the South Western farmers who rely on the Ogallala aquifer, for example, and they will tell you it is not an 'environmental' issue. It cannot be pigeon-holed like that and put away for later discussion. It is a massive all-consuming crisis that MUST be tackled now with everything we have got. The biggest problem is overcoming the political inertia and outright hostility from many quarters, most of whom are being funded by big oil and gas in one way or another. It is also why it is CRITICAL that Hillary Clinton be the next POTUS. If Trump, with his backward views on the subject, gets in we can just forget it, we are condemning ALL forms of life (people, animals, fish, plants) around the globe to an extremely uncertain and unpleasant future. Simple as that.
4
Very fine interview by Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Mark Landler and Coral Davenport with President Obama on climate change. Much as I love President Barack Hussein Obama and I have loved him, yes LOVED him since I first saw him giving us his brilliant keynote address at the DNC in 2004. A young handsome half-black, half-white passionate, fiery Democrat who merited winning two Presidential terms, which are now coming to an end. Alas. We will not see Barack Obama's like again Yes, his legacy would be greater if he could affect climate within our lifetimes. But time has run out while we thought and mulled and argued over climate warming. But no matter how willing and able Obama is, there is no chance to keep Planet Earth spinning as it was before we first crawled from the salty soupy seas onto land and then over millennia, proceeded to despoil our land beyond imagination, humanity and comprehension. Perhaps a greater legacy might be a Manhattan Project type of push to find another inhabitable planet for our succeeding generations who will not have potable water to drink, upolluted air to breathe in the almost foreseeable future.
Good word there Nan in mulled. Mulling is Obama's true legacy.
We are already living with the impacts of Climate Change and things will only get worse.
If my memory serves me correctly, the carbon entering the atmosphere this year will be up there for about a century. That means if we put no more carbon into the air we would be dealing with what has already been put there for longer than any of us are likely to be alive. The time to act was long ago and the Congress and candidates we now have are not likely to do much.
Globalization and mitigating Global Climate Change are incompatible. How much of the carbon entering the atmosphere is wasted by shipping things here from the other side of the world that could be produced locally? The supply chain for the new iPhone will include many parts sourced in many places- all shipped to China for final assembly and then flown on jets to the US and other markets around the world. How much carbon input exists in that little device from resource extraction and processing, transportation in the supply chain and shipment to markets?
We cannot get a grip on climate change if we continue to ship shirts from India, shoes from Vietnam and jeans from Jordan on container vessels. Even worse is the Jet delivery of electronics and such direct from China.
We have to re-localize our economy and that is incompatible with Globalization and trade schemes like the Trans-Pacific Partnership and upcoming ones like TISA and TTIP. Even NAFTA wastes massive amounts of fuel and creates massive carbon input.
If my memory serves me correctly, the carbon entering the atmosphere this year will be up there for about a century. That means if we put no more carbon into the air we would be dealing with what has already been put there for longer than any of us are likely to be alive. The time to act was long ago and the Congress and candidates we now have are not likely to do much.
Globalization and mitigating Global Climate Change are incompatible. How much of the carbon entering the atmosphere is wasted by shipping things here from the other side of the world that could be produced locally? The supply chain for the new iPhone will include many parts sourced in many places- all shipped to China for final assembly and then flown on jets to the US and other markets around the world. How much carbon input exists in that little device from resource extraction and processing, transportation in the supply chain and shipment to markets?
We cannot get a grip on climate change if we continue to ship shirts from India, shoes from Vietnam and jeans from Jordan on container vessels. Even worse is the Jet delivery of electronics and such direct from China.
We have to re-localize our economy and that is incompatible with Globalization and trade schemes like the Trans-Pacific Partnership and upcoming ones like TISA and TTIP. Even NAFTA wastes massive amounts of fuel and creates massive carbon input.
3
Why does the New York Times, as well as other media, continue to overlook the $91 billion that Obama devoted to clean energy projects in his 2009 Recovery Act? That investment kicked off an industry in renewable sources of energy -- wind, solar, geothermal and more -- that could indeed be Obama's greatest legacy.
3
This story proves that Obama is unhinged!
Global warming is a myth and a fraud!
Global warming is a myth and a fraud!
2
In the words of John McEnroe, you cannot be serious. The idea that global warming is a myth and a fraud is itself a myth and a fraud. Call me crazy, but I'll go with all the scientists, fishermen, farmers and my own eyes rather that your take, Matt.
2
The DC area had the hottest July on record in July. The stats are not in yet for August, but it had a record nimbrt of over 90 degree days. We haven't had any real, sustained rain all summer. Today looks to be another hot, dry one.
The result is that the corn is closer to an elephant's knee than its eye. Established trees are dying. My lawn, despite an astronomic water bill is in ICU.
It's here, folks!!
The result is that the corn is closer to an elephant's knee than its eye. Established trees are dying. My lawn, despite an astronomic water bill is in ICU.
It's here, folks!!
1
President Obama is articulate and eloquent as usual. Yet, I have to wonder why his administration took on an "all of the above" energy policy that promoted fracking, which not only encourages the use of fossil fuels, but threatens water systems. I'm also disturbed that the President has not spoken out on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline, which not only infringes on Indigenous land rights, but threatens the Missouri River watershed. The United States needs to do much more to keep fossil fuels in the ground, and we Americans need to pressure Obama to withdraw support from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which favors corporate profits over environmental regulation.
4
It is about time Obama and the NYTimes started ringing the alarm about our pending eco-cide. It will take courage to tell the truths. It will take even more courage for the world's people to come together in what may still be a futile effort to "stem" the planet's sloughing off most life forms. Obama and the Times article, however, reflect the real problem (not challenge!) of organizations deeply-invested in the status quo of class privilege. Even writing about the inevitable catastrophes and the required collective dismantling will have to go through a revolution. I don't see the Times, or Obama, or indeed any existing leaders or power networks capable of being part of the change but only and always part of the problem (not challenge! -- the corporate method of getting rid of problems).
2
What a puff-piece.
A pox on all your houses..
Those who criminally funded the Climate Change Denier Science (Exxon Mobile) are now major backers of HRC.
Hillary refused to place a Carbon Tax on the party platform.
Under Obama, we became a major exporter of fossil fuels.
He should have used his bully-pulpit every month, from January 2009, to enlist the American public in the fight against our biggest threat.
In fact, he did not risk one iota of political capital in that fight.
(Heaven forbid he got laughed at just as Jimmy Carter did.)
He had wrongly swallowed the wisdom that fighting climate change would harm our economic recovery.
Just as he did two weeks before the BP disaster, he has again opened areas for deep-sea oil exploration/extraction.
While forbidding fracking on federal lands, he has been laissez-faire everywhere else. (see: Hunter Biden's fracking dealings in Ukraine under Sec. Hillary's watch, for just one example.)
Please read up on the Dakota Access Pipeline that must have received the blessings of the Obama Administration.
I live in a liberal, monied town, the number of low MPG SUV's is strong evidence of our sad lack of concern.
A pox on all your houses..
Those who criminally funded the Climate Change Denier Science (Exxon Mobile) are now major backers of HRC.
Hillary refused to place a Carbon Tax on the party platform.
Under Obama, we became a major exporter of fossil fuels.
He should have used his bully-pulpit every month, from January 2009, to enlist the American public in the fight against our biggest threat.
In fact, he did not risk one iota of political capital in that fight.
(Heaven forbid he got laughed at just as Jimmy Carter did.)
He had wrongly swallowed the wisdom that fighting climate change would harm our economic recovery.
Just as he did two weeks before the BP disaster, he has again opened areas for deep-sea oil exploration/extraction.
While forbidding fracking on federal lands, he has been laissez-faire everywhere else. (see: Hunter Biden's fracking dealings in Ukraine under Sec. Hillary's watch, for just one example.)
Please read up on the Dakota Access Pipeline that must have received the blessings of the Obama Administration.
I live in a liberal, monied town, the number of low MPG SUV's is strong evidence of our sad lack of concern.
3
I'm always disappointed when climate change is discussed on binary terms. It's either 'dirty' jobs or climate remediation. Is it not clear that if we don't have a livable planet, jobs won't matter? In other words, saving this planet means saving everything, whereas saving a mining job, say, means destroying a livable Earth.
Further, discussions are always about humans. Will this planet be livable for humans? Rarely in these condensed discussions is there mention of the hundreds of thousands of animals and species that will perish long before we, more adaptable, humans reach the point of extinction. Our dependence on a functioning web of fauna and flora is limited to mention of pollinators; mention of any other species and their part in the global ecosystem is largely, woefully absent.
Further, discussions are always about humans. Will this planet be livable for humans? Rarely in these condensed discussions is there mention of the hundreds of thousands of animals and species that will perish long before we, more adaptable, humans reach the point of extinction. Our dependence on a functioning web of fauna and flora is limited to mention of pollinators; mention of any other species and their part in the global ecosystem is largely, woefully absent.
131
“The White House wanted 60 votes on climate, and they weren’t interested in Republican votes,” Mr. Alexander said in an interview. “Now it’s back to power plant only. The lesson here is that if people who want a result would be a little bit more flexible, they might actually get one.”
This is why. Because the GOP, which never planned to work with Obama claims that if he'd been this or that things would have been different. They vowed to stonewall him right after he was elected in 2008 and they didn't stop even after he was re-elected in 2012. Therefore anything he's accomplished has been done in spite of the GOP, not with their assistance. They cared more about their donors than the country or planet.
This is why. Because the GOP, which never planned to work with Obama claims that if he'd been this or that things would have been different. They vowed to stonewall him right after he was elected in 2008 and they didn't stop even after he was re-elected in 2012. Therefore anything he's accomplished has been done in spite of the GOP, not with their assistance. They cared more about their donors than the country or planet.
1
Comments appear here and elsewhere by those convinced of man’s contributions to the degradation of the environmental support actions to prevent or at least mitigate them. Some who are of this persuasion also observe that those denying it will only be convinced of it too late when they experience the environmentally caused disasters resulting from inaction. Don’t bet on it! Even then deniers will still insist that what is taking place is an act of God or the equivalent. You can always tell a fool because you can’t tell them anything.
3
President Obama, I am going to miss you. Thank you so very much for all you accomplished, and thank you even more for what you tried to accomplish and didn't quite succeed.
I'd like to address myself to the younger generations:
You must unite! You can see that many of the "elders" are wobbly on their canes, and simply can't do what needs doing.
Demand that core problems like environmental degradation, obsolete economic infrastructure, and inequality of opportunity get addressed. Bernie is right: believe in yourselves, and strive for something truly great.
Our country is awash in money, and none of it's getting spent to address the most important problems. Why is that? It doesn't have to be that way, and you can change it.
If an institution stands in the way of these crucial changes, exit that institution and join another one that's more effective. Vote with your feet.
The U.S. is on the brink of major political change. Take heart and prepare yourself to make both sacrifices AND demands. Not one without the other. Both. That's what a "social contract is": work and reward.
Pardon the grammar, but "don't let nothin' stand in your way". We need you.
I'd like to address myself to the younger generations:
You must unite! You can see that many of the "elders" are wobbly on their canes, and simply can't do what needs doing.
Demand that core problems like environmental degradation, obsolete economic infrastructure, and inequality of opportunity get addressed. Bernie is right: believe in yourselves, and strive for something truly great.
Our country is awash in money, and none of it's getting spent to address the most important problems. Why is that? It doesn't have to be that way, and you can change it.
If an institution stands in the way of these crucial changes, exit that institution and join another one that's more effective. Vote with your feet.
The U.S. is on the brink of major political change. Take heart and prepare yourself to make both sacrifices AND demands. Not one without the other. Both. That's what a "social contract is": work and reward.
Pardon the grammar, but "don't let nothin' stand in your way". We need you.
3
Law is a scale-independent system of contracts, organized and enforced by the rules of a negotiated social contract. The US Constitution was the first successful effort to negotiate a social contract according to principles that emerged in the 18th Century.
President Obama's legacy will relate to his emphasis on climate change, race and healthcare but in reverse order. His healthcare program has already mushroomed into a vast unmanageable and expensive intrusion into what remained of the private healthcare market. His ruminations on race and the campus agenda his administration has pushed will serve to divide us further in its attempt to institutionalize guilt. His climate efforts will amount to nothing but an additional poke at commerce and a paean to redistributive efforts to emerging economies better left to growth with higher carbon output versus certain stagnation without the benefit of fossil fuels. He has little to offer as a legacy.
5
Most of the rest of the world has figured out that "health" isn't insurable, and amelioration of public illness and senescence are ongoing expenses.
Resistant to the science. Is this a new definition of ignorant?
3
Agree with Mr. Rozenblit that the task is huge. His first comment, "produce goods", is so key.
How many catalogs are mailed to our residences from companies that claim "sustainable" products? How can our ongoing consumption of these "sustainable" products be sustainable when we get these catalogs every 4 weeks or so? Are hybrid or electric vehicles replacing cars that are only 5 years old (or less) truly "sustainable" ?
And, really, the foundation of decreasing consumption should start with looking at the need vs. the desire to procreate. Does every couple really need a child or children? As a society, maybe it should be taught that even though our bodies CAN reproduce, it doesn't mean we have to. That if we truly want to affect climate change for the positive, collectively, then reproduction shouldn't be a knee-jerk expectation for or from everyone.
How many catalogs are mailed to our residences from companies that claim "sustainable" products? How can our ongoing consumption of these "sustainable" products be sustainable when we get these catalogs every 4 weeks or so? Are hybrid or electric vehicles replacing cars that are only 5 years old (or less) truly "sustainable" ?
And, really, the foundation of decreasing consumption should start with looking at the need vs. the desire to procreate. Does every couple really need a child or children? As a society, maybe it should be taught that even though our bodies CAN reproduce, it doesn't mean we have to. That if we truly want to affect climate change for the positive, collectively, then reproduction shouldn't be a knee-jerk expectation for or from everyone.
4
Good luck convincing people who believe procreation is the only legitimate reason to have sex.
Stanford, which unlike many colleges is not still in the dark ages, actually has a class that is relevant to student's futures:
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/lambilliotte2/
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/lambilliotte2/
1
The root cause of all global environmental problems, including any effect of humans on the climate, is overpopulation, but there is no political leadership to address it. Nothing Obama has done will have any significant effect on the climate of the planet, as the human population is projected to grow from 7.4 to about 10 billion this century. It's likely that Obama's military and refugee policies have actually increased CO2 emissions. As billions more humans aspire to a carbon-intensive lifestyle this century, our easily-prevented ecological disaster will continue to intensify.
10
The primary cause is rates of consumption.
https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2015-12-02/worlds-riche...
https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2015-12-02/worlds-riche...
1
And, given the Republican Party's platform and the one-note anti-abortion focus, coupled with antipathy at best and downright hostility to birth control in general, overpopulation is an issue best addressed by a Democratic president.
When you get right down to it, this whole scenario was set up by Reagan, when he got into bed with the so-called "religious right."
Imagine if Reagan had looked down the road, and encouraged birth control use not only in the States but in other countries as well. Would we have the immigration pattern we have now? All the countries whose populations are leaving for better lives and better opportunities are leaving countries—South American, African, Asian—where, by law and by custom (and by that I mean religion), no birth control is available.
So all these Republicans who complain so bitterly about illegal immigrants...they'll fight tooth and nail to prevent access to birth control, including abortion.
You can't have it both ways, but they've tried, and this is the result.
When you get right down to it, this whole scenario was set up by Reagan, when he got into bed with the so-called "religious right."
Imagine if Reagan had looked down the road, and encouraged birth control use not only in the States but in other countries as well. Would we have the immigration pattern we have now? All the countries whose populations are leaving for better lives and better opportunities are leaving countries—South American, African, Asian—where, by law and by custom (and by that I mean religion), no birth control is available.
So all these Republicans who complain so bitterly about illegal immigrants...they'll fight tooth and nail to prevent access to birth control, including abortion.
You can't have it both ways, but they've tried, and this is the result.
1
War only intensifies the rate of burning.
Mr Obama has been MIA on the Dakota Access Pipeline. Clinton too. Corporate interests in the pipeline represent some of their biggest campaign contributors. The Obama legacy on climate change, like in so many areas will show articulate speeches, small efforts but way too little and way too late.
107
If it is established that there is a limit to the carbon humans can put into the atmosphere, then it will make sense to produce it from the most accessible and least costly deposits.
Bob,
As with the Libya fiasco and his "leading from behind", opening up the Gulf to deep-sea oil extraction just two weeks before the BP Disaster, getting behind gay marriage only after 60% of Americans where polled for it, our president has been a centrist leader unwilling to expend any of his political capital for the fight against climate change. This article is a public relations manipulation for his precious "Legacy".
He has earned his lifetime membership to the Palm Springs Country Club.
As with the Libya fiasco and his "leading from behind", opening up the Gulf to deep-sea oil extraction just two weeks before the BP Disaster, getting behind gay marriage only after 60% of Americans where polled for it, our president has been a centrist leader unwilling to expend any of his political capital for the fight against climate change. This article is a public relations manipulation for his precious "Legacy".
He has earned his lifetime membership to the Palm Springs Country Club.
Perhaps he should have flown to North Dakota instead of attending the G20 Leaders Summit in China—after announcing last Sat. that the United States and China had joined last year’s landmark Paris climate agreement?
Meanwhile, our Senate Environment and Public Works chair, Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a climate-change denier funded by petrol industry, is on record about where he and his fellow travelers stand:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-and-china-formally-commit-...
Meanwhile, our Senate Environment and Public Works chair, Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a climate-change denier funded by petrol industry, is on record about where he and his fellow travelers stand:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-and-china-formally-commit-...
Barack Obama is the only leader that can get the world out of the climate mess. Think about it.
7
The founder of the Weather Channel is a serious scientist and he had done a series of videos detailing the long term, as in millennia, working of the Earth's climate shifts, many of which occurred long before Man rubbed the first two sticks together.
Al Gore (the inventor of the Internet?) was wrong, the gang over in England are wrong, and Obama is hand wringing because he cannot find anyone to apologize to.
Is there a shift in the weather? I think so, but I don't believe that is solely the work of modern man. We have had Ice Ages repeatedly, who was to blame for those major climate events?
Al Gore (the inventor of the Internet?) was wrong, the gang over in England are wrong, and Obama is hand wringing because he cannot find anyone to apologize to.
Is there a shift in the weather? I think so, but I don't believe that is solely the work of modern man. We have had Ice Ages repeatedly, who was to blame for those major climate events?
3
If the demographic predictions are correct, the Republican Party climate change deniers will soon be thought of in the same way we now think of the Medieval flat earth zealots. Like myself, their decomposing flesh will soon be contributing to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. But what will happen to their grandchildren's planet? By per capita standards we are still the worst polluter. We can do more and must to save the ecosystem that has evolved over many eons. If only we can somehow send all of the Republican Congressional climate change deniers and Trump, of course, into outer space we would be doing a lot more to save the planet.
20
They really are pining for the "Rapture", when they expect a universal personality of nature they call "God" to intervene to save the apes "He" ostensibly made in "His" own image, by beaming the Good up to Heaven, and burning the Evil in a global eruption of brimstone.
Giving credibility to anyone's beliefs about what "God" thinks is fatally stupid public policy.
Giving credibility to anyone's beliefs about what "God" thinks is fatally stupid public policy.
> Medieval flat earth zealots
If egalitarian nihilists succeed in their blood-drenched hatred of our our scientific-industrial-capitalist civilization, we will return to the Christian Dark Ages.
If egalitarian nihilists succeed in their blood-drenched hatred of our our scientific-industrial-capitalist civilization, we will return to the Christian Dark Ages.
I guess President Obama is starting to realize that the ACA will not be a positive part of his legacy, so now he's positing to his actions on climate change to buffer his presidential resume. With that being said, I certainly hope his actions on climate change are in fact better than the ACA.
7
This article chides the President for not unifying the opposition. The opposition is a coalition of dirty energy behemoths (Koch Industries etc...), and people who don't like Obama to succeed in anything (the top Republican meeting led by McDonnel that set a goal of a one term presidency for Obama). This front included fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and business interests who just want to end all regulations that affect them.
This united front used xenophobia (primarily but not exclusively racist and classist) to poison the public opinion to oppose healthcare, global climate change and just about anything else to discredit the President. The medical/pharmaceutical lobbies encumbered the ACA (Obamacare) with protections and exclusions and then spent more than $100 million attacking it in the press.
Right now in San Francisco we have a ballot measure to tax soda pop. I have in front of me a flyer that demands "What exactly is (in red ink) the Grocery Tax? (notice the capitalization of Grocery Tax making it seem a legitimate name.
They use television commercials with "restaurant owners" complete with to portray themselves as victims who will go out of business if this law passes. The flyer hints that other items will cost more. There is no mention of Coke or Pepsi and their real fear that we will consume less of their unhealthy products just as big tobacco did.
But you say that it's President Obama's fault that he didn't compromise.
This united front used xenophobia (primarily but not exclusively racist and classist) to poison the public opinion to oppose healthcare, global climate change and just about anything else to discredit the President. The medical/pharmaceutical lobbies encumbered the ACA (Obamacare) with protections and exclusions and then spent more than $100 million attacking it in the press.
Right now in San Francisco we have a ballot measure to tax soda pop. I have in front of me a flyer that demands "What exactly is (in red ink) the Grocery Tax? (notice the capitalization of Grocery Tax making it seem a legitimate name.
They use television commercials with "restaurant owners" complete with to portray themselves as victims who will go out of business if this law passes. The flyer hints that other items will cost more. There is no mention of Coke or Pepsi and their real fear that we will consume less of their unhealthy products just as big tobacco did.
But you say that it's President Obama's fault that he didn't compromise.
25
Exactly.
His tragic flaw is that he compromised too much, too often, & never explained how far to the left our policies would have to go, to effect real change.
By not shouting out his liberal point of view (if indeed he has one), he prevented some (even more) raucous criticism from the extreme right. But he completely muffled the message on climate, as well as numerous other issues (unions, charter schools, health care, federal deficit, imperialism, etc, etc.).
The past 8 years feels like a holding pattern, with the Democrats too timid to put up a clear alternative message. By leading with Republican Lite, the Dems guaranteed that any results (from compromising) would be firmly to the right, & that they would forever have a much more difficult time reversing course to move back left again.
This is the only faint ray of hope offered us by Trump: that Hillary & all the rest of the mainstream GOP can take over (under whatever party name they inherit) the moderate conservative role, & Sanders, Warren, (Nader?) et al can build a truly progressive party to take in the poor, the students, the minorities, long-term thinkers, & the rest of us who still feel disenfranchised by 50 years of military-industrialism.
His tragic flaw is that he compromised too much, too often, & never explained how far to the left our policies would have to go, to effect real change.
By not shouting out his liberal point of view (if indeed he has one), he prevented some (even more) raucous criticism from the extreme right. But he completely muffled the message on climate, as well as numerous other issues (unions, charter schools, health care, federal deficit, imperialism, etc, etc.).
The past 8 years feels like a holding pattern, with the Democrats too timid to put up a clear alternative message. By leading with Republican Lite, the Dems guaranteed that any results (from compromising) would be firmly to the right, & that they would forever have a much more difficult time reversing course to move back left again.
This is the only faint ray of hope offered us by Trump: that Hillary & all the rest of the mainstream GOP can take over (under whatever party name they inherit) the moderate conservative role, & Sanders, Warren, (Nader?) et al can build a truly progressive party to take in the poor, the students, the minorities, long-term thinkers, & the rest of us who still feel disenfranchised by 50 years of military-industrialism.
1
Oh, do you mean like how lefty liberals SWORE to make GW Bush a "one term President JUST LIKE HIS FATHER (!!!)" because his election was "illegitimate" and he was "appointed by SCOTUS"???
Like that?
Like that?
Times reporters write: "But while climate change has played to Mr. Obama’s highest ideals — critics would call them messianic impulses — it has also exposed his weaknesses, namely an inability to forge consensus, even within his own party, on a problem that demands a bipartisan response."
This is the sort of gratuitous snark and misleading claim that so infuriate Times readers. Why in the world put in an unsourced and silly swipe at President Obama that he has "messianic impulses"? Totally uncalled for.
And once again, The Times completely ignores the unyielding opposition of the Far-Right Republicans in congress to blame President Obama for "failure" to pass his agenda.
After nearly eight years of the worst obstructionism faced by any American president, The Times should place blame squarely where it belongs. And it does not belong with Mr. Obama.
This is the sort of gratuitous snark and misleading claim that so infuriate Times readers. Why in the world put in an unsourced and silly swipe at President Obama that he has "messianic impulses"? Totally uncalled for.
And once again, The Times completely ignores the unyielding opposition of the Far-Right Republicans in congress to blame President Obama for "failure" to pass his agenda.
After nearly eight years of the worst obstructionism faced by any American president, The Times should place blame squarely where it belongs. And it does not belong with Mr. Obama.
115
Please, this from a man who, in his acceptance speech in 2008, said that his election would mark the moment when "...the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal...".
2
> After nearly eight years of the worst obstructionism faced by any American president,
Obstructionists are obviously evil advocates of man's independent mind. All hail The Consensus!
Obstructionists are obviously evil advocates of man's independent mind. All hail The Consensus!
2
While reading this article I had to scroll past four cute 'The Truth About Fracking -- Energy From Shale' ads.
I hope the irony is not lost on the other readers, and I also hope the revenue these ads generate are not castrating (or influencing in any way) the NY Times' voice on this incredibly important topic.
I hope the irony is not lost on the other readers, and I also hope the revenue these ads generate are not castrating (or influencing in any way) the NY Times' voice on this incredibly important topic.
79
And the guy that bailed out the NYT financially flies in a private jet. $ always wins.
1
Those ads run CONSTANTLY and have for at least two years now -- maybe longer. Even worse, they often start playing LOUDLY whether or NOT you click on them! Really intrusive!
How about the ads here for luxury $20 million apartments? Or a whole real estate section, devoted to super luxury homes? Or ads from Cartier, Tiffany's, Lexus? Do you think that rich people will give up mansions and automobiles?
If so, you are a biggest sucker than even Obama thinks you are!
YOU -- you average middle class loser -- YOU will be hit with huge taxes, and restrictions, and no cars -- YOU will have no air conditioning as it gets hotter and hotter ...
But Obama will be fine. And Al Gore (THE BILLIONAIRE AL GORE) will be living in baronial splendor in his 15,000 Montecito mansion (on the Pacific COAST!!!) with his Olympic size pool (heated by fossil fuels!).
While we starve to death in the dark.
All hail King Obama and Empress Hillary!
How about the ads here for luxury $20 million apartments? Or a whole real estate section, devoted to super luxury homes? Or ads from Cartier, Tiffany's, Lexus? Do you think that rich people will give up mansions and automobiles?
If so, you are a biggest sucker than even Obama thinks you are!
YOU -- you average middle class loser -- YOU will be hit with huge taxes, and restrictions, and no cars -- YOU will have no air conditioning as it gets hotter and hotter ...
But Obama will be fine. And Al Gore (THE BILLIONAIRE AL GORE) will be living in baronial splendor in his 15,000 Montecito mansion (on the Pacific COAST!!!) with his Olympic size pool (heated by fossil fuels!).
While we starve to death in the dark.
All hail King Obama and Empress Hillary!
One can hope that the Republican party will lose by landslide and open the door for real legislation. If that happens, maybe they will take a hard look at themselves, acknowledge science, and become a willing participant in solutions to the "terrifying" onslaught of climate change. How can anyone believe that the President of United States would not have access to the best science available, or that he would take on such a divisive issue if it were not essential to do so. That scenario makes no sense on its face. Citizens' Climate Lobby (CCL) has proposed legislation that will reduce emissions without harming the economy, which respects the main priorities of conservatives and liberals. I urge all to go to CCL website and learn about it.
14
Agreed Dmath. I share Obama's fears and passion about the environment. Every day I ask myself what I am doing, now, today, to ensure that there will still be a habitable planet in 1000 years.
Carbon fee and dividend may not be the "perfect" solution, but it is the only path that has a realistic chance of passing Congress. 2017.
Carbon fee and dividend may not be the "perfect" solution, but it is the only path that has a realistic chance of passing Congress. 2017.
1
IF the Ds can take the Senate and the House, and the WH, perhaps we can get something done. And it would benefit the economy.
Let'f face it Obama unfortunately got to govern at the time of the rise of the morons and so his promise was squandered. I mean really, this age has seen ardent climate deniers, proponents to arm people in schools and bars, obfuscation on Planned Parenthood, coal rollers, the take over over government by industrial interests like the Koch brothers, open bribery on campaign financing, racist laws to limit voting, and finally Trump.....
79
Totally agree and that is why this election is so important. Let's hope the democrats can win back congress and we can effect meaningful changes to this country including the climate. The president has had to fight tooth and nail against the biggest obstructionists the world has ever seen!
1
Something that many commenters here and elsewhere do not seem to take into account is that this issue is not being fought just by "big coal" or "big oil" but also by folks who will lose their jobs because of changes in our behavior.
Many people are concerned about the now of supporting themselves and their families. They may be more torn if they live in areas that most likely would feel the negative brunt of a warmer climate, but in reality those events are in the murky future. Calling them names is not productive. Coming up with real implementable solutions would swing more people.
To respond to this threat, we are asking people to give up their future to save their future. For some of us, who aren't in the industries affected, or maybe living in an area that would benefit from a warmer planetary climate, it sounds simple to act on.
Power plants are relatively easy to regulate. How do you talk most Americans about either giving up the freedom of their vehicle or changing to less damaging to the environment? For my 50+ years, a vehicle defined "freedom" and status, whereas public transportation was frowned upon.
It's a tough battle and President Obama has made headway, but he can't change minds or provide solutions alone. We're focusing on the wrong kind of terror in my opinion.
Many people are concerned about the now of supporting themselves and their families. They may be more torn if they live in areas that most likely would feel the negative brunt of a warmer climate, but in reality those events are in the murky future. Calling them names is not productive. Coming up with real implementable solutions would swing more people.
To respond to this threat, we are asking people to give up their future to save their future. For some of us, who aren't in the industries affected, or maybe living in an area that would benefit from a warmer planetary climate, it sounds simple to act on.
Power plants are relatively easy to regulate. How do you talk most Americans about either giving up the freedom of their vehicle or changing to less damaging to the environment? For my 50+ years, a vehicle defined "freedom" and status, whereas public transportation was frowned upon.
It's a tough battle and President Obama has made headway, but he can't change minds or provide solutions alone. We're focusing on the wrong kind of terror in my opinion.
51
Maybe is the President didn't bring along in a seperate airplane a staircase to exit from Air Force One I might believe his concern for the environment. I do believe we are doomed if we don't change, so practice what you preach. Then I'll also believe what you say.
1
Anyone who thinks that obvious impacts of climate disruption are somewhere off in a "murky future" is so unaware of their surroundings that they should always have help crossing the street.
1
The needed effort to build a renewable energy economy will employ the many thousand currently at work in the coal and oil industries if they will get retrained which I believe the government should help them with in terms of education and interim living costs. I agree they are afraid of the their futures but none of us will have much of future without dealing with our climate problems. Fear will not solve the crushing future.
2
And the Koch Brothers pay organizers to write love notes about selling fossil fuels forever. It has been fifty years since we could see this coming. And we care about emails and a dolt with orange hair. If the NYT is the only place that begins now to take this with seriousness we are cooked.
6
If Mr. Obama was elected to a third and fourth term and climate change became undeniable (oh, and it will) within his administration, I have no doubt that conservatives would blame him for not convincing them earlier.
Thanks, Obama.
Thanks, Obama.
25
Just last year (7/15/15) Obama’s EPA chief had to admit before a house hearing that she didn’t know what the percentage of CO2 comprises the atmosphere. She did know that it had reached 400 parts per million. The earth’s atmosphere is 0.04% carbon and of that man is responsible for 10% or 40 parts per million of the C02. There are more than a few Brooklyn bridges for sale in the shift to creating a market for carbon trade.
Follow the money… George Soros has invested in a state sized tract of land in the Amazon. A “Carbon Sink” just to sell carbon offsets once the trade platform is set. Al Gore is set to reap from Cap and Trade (he even buys carbon offsets from himself to cover his carbon footprint).
Obama standing in front of an Alaskan glacier melting in the August summer sun makes a pretty picture. Midway is also a nice backdrop. I don’t even think he understands who he is doing the promotional work for because he, like many other Americans, has already bought the Brooklyn Bridge.
The climate is changing as it always has - man made C02 is not the cause.
Follow the money… George Soros has invested in a state sized tract of land in the Amazon. A “Carbon Sink” just to sell carbon offsets once the trade platform is set. Al Gore is set to reap from Cap and Trade (he even buys carbon offsets from himself to cover his carbon footprint).
Obama standing in front of an Alaskan glacier melting in the August summer sun makes a pretty picture. Midway is also a nice backdrop. I don’t even think he understands who he is doing the promotional work for because he, like many other Americans, has already bought the Brooklyn Bridge.
The climate is changing as it always has - man made C02 is not the cause.
8
The fact that some people have seen a business opportunity in carbon offsets doesn't prove that humans aren't contributing to climate change.
Yep, all those thousands of Earth and atmospheric scientists around the world are wrong. If I just repeat "man made CO2 is not the cause" over and over again and ignore the basic physics of the problem, then I can know that I'm right.
2
wikipedia.org/wiki/Faint_young_Sun_paradox
The sun of 4 billion years ago was at 70% of the intensity of the Sun's radiation today and has steadily increased its output to its level now. This is known as the "Faint young Sun paradox".since temperatures then rivaled and exceeded those of today. Vulcanism as a source of carbon dioxide, methyl hydrate escape and global warming at something like today's pace is the obvious reason. It was global warming w/ 5%-30% less sun then as against now, depending on how far back one looks. Is that not global warming as warning? You'd think we'd hear about this phenomenon more often as it ends the sun as culprit argument.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth
At 5 to 30% less intense Sun; a lot of global warming would for sure be required to overcome an Ice Age Snowball Earth effect ( right down to the equator 650 million years ago) when the sun was 6% less intense than it is now, yes? So, Global Warming now has the most intense Sun. Of Ever! and with the mega-volcanic like output in factories, farms, highways, skyways and anyways, we can do it! We can take Global Warming to undreamed of heights!
The sun of 4 billion years ago was at 70% of the intensity of the Sun's radiation today and has steadily increased its output to its level now. This is known as the "Faint young Sun paradox".since temperatures then rivaled and exceeded those of today. Vulcanism as a source of carbon dioxide, methyl hydrate escape and global warming at something like today's pace is the obvious reason. It was global warming w/ 5%-30% less sun then as against now, depending on how far back one looks. Is that not global warming as warning? You'd think we'd hear about this phenomenon more often as it ends the sun as culprit argument.
wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth
At 5 to 30% less intense Sun; a lot of global warming would for sure be required to overcome an Ice Age Snowball Earth effect ( right down to the equator 650 million years ago) when the sun was 6% less intense than it is now, yes? So, Global Warming now has the most intense Sun. Of Ever! and with the mega-volcanic like output in factories, farms, highways, skyways and anyways, we can do it! We can take Global Warming to undreamed of heights!
If Obama thinks that China will abide by any climate change regulations that restrict their ability to grow their economy, he is delusional. The agreement with China allows them to continue to pollute unabated until the late 2020's. Meanwhile the U.S. faces immediate and punitive restrictions on emissions that will further retard economic growth. Obama has capitulated again to stronger and better foreign negotiators, just as did with the one sided Iran nuclear deal.
11
Perhaps you are completely unaware that Shanghai, Tianjin, Hong Kong and Guangzhou/Shenzen which are China's principal ports and economic urban centers are all very close to sea level, and thus will become some of the first to succumb to the ocean as high-altitude and -latitude ice sheets melt. The Chinese government is not -- and unlike democratic systems like the US, the Communist Party leadership in Beijing (however else nasty they are and may become) is actively forcing their economy and industrial structures to change.
"But while climate change has played to Mr. Obama’s highest ideals — critics would call them messianic impulses — it has also exposed his weaknesses, namely an inability to forge consensus, even within his own party, on a problem that demands a bipartisan response."
You might as well have said "inability to bend steel wth his bare hands" is his weakness, what with the vested fossil fuel stooges as opponents.
You might as well have said "inability to bend steel wth his bare hands" is his weakness, what with the vested fossil fuel stooges as opponents.
297
Can you imagine Donakd Trump doing any - ANY - of this excruciatingly hard legislative and diplomatic work? Now how about Hillary Clinton?
Please elect the adults in November. I'm with her.
Please elect the adults in November. I'm with her.
15
chris, you and the rest of the SF crowd are working overtime today. If you want to talk about legislative accomplishments, Hillary led the charge to have two streets and a post office renamed during her tenure in the Senate.
Next, her four years at State will be known for creating chaos in the Mid-East and elsewhere, all while she was peddling influence to benefit herself and the Canadian, money laundering operation she ran.
Next, her four years at State will be known for creating chaos in the Mid-East and elsewhere, all while she was peddling influence to benefit herself and the Canadian, money laundering operation she ran.
WOW! It took Barack Obama almost eight years to "discern" that global warming (the more benign term, "climate change") is "terrifying"! This "revelation" of Obama's latent discovery of a long-known fact is, in itself, terrifying! So much for America and its "leadership" on our ever sicker planet!
12
He's been chasing this horse since 2009, did you read the article?
1
“What makes climate change difficult is that it is not an instantaneous catastrophic event,”
Wrong, Mr. President. In the geologic record, this climate change is happening at a rate unprecedented in the planet's history, What's becoming apparent now in the climate IS INSTANTANEOUS, and that's the very point this president and our next one need to pound home until we start to restore a natural balance we've abused for centuries.
Wrong, Mr. President. In the geologic record, this climate change is happening at a rate unprecedented in the planet's history, What's becoming apparent now in the climate IS INSTANTANEOUS, and that's the very point this president and our next one need to pound home until we start to restore a natural balance we've abused for centuries.
8
No, what is terrifying is how leftist political education and propaganda has been used to dumb down and de-moral-ize a people to the point where they believe abject nonsense like "MMGW". Our society is in the mid stages of the hellish nightmare predicted by George Orwell. Do you REALLY think that if you cheer and go along, you won't end up in Room 101? Hmmm.
5
I am a gardener. This year my tender summer seedlings froze during unusual May deep freezes. Then the new ones were baked. I couldn't catch up and the abundant produce my family, friends and food bank recipients enjoy did not materialize. Now the record heat is keeping the fall seeds from sprouting and cooking the seedlings I bought. We should be easing into fall now but that's not happening. After several years of unusual fluctuations, I am considering a greenhouse to insulate the growing food from the changes. I have gardened for decades, beginning as a child learning from my father. I am not a scientist. But I don't need to be to see the effects of climate change. I can see, smell and touch it.
331
More Co2 in air is more tree food, means bigger trees. A park from where I could see skyscrapers over the trees now has no such view, and Sarah Jessica Parker's Girls won't have Fun. I have to climb a hill a mile away for a view.
The tires on my car are wearing out faster too, I think. Must be the roads are hotter due to climate change. Darn those oil companies!
I live in Western Washington State on the Olympic peninsula we are crying for rain, many trees have withered and died. This summer was the hottest on record here on the peninsula.
Donald Trump thinks climate change is a hoax.....Unfortunately he is wrong as is the GOP Congress.
The entire planet will suffer for their ignorance.
The entire planet will suffer for their ignorance.
5
Will the New York Times provide in-depth coverage of the presidential candidates' policies relating to climate change, the most important issue facing this country and the world? If so, my fear is that it will say "Donald Trump will promote increases in greenhouse gases out of ignorance and hubris. But of course Hilary Clinton is just as bad, because emails."
2
When things get really difficult around the world, wars break out. If coastal cities are inundated and people have nowhere to go, governments, unable to cope any other way, can start wars to avert attention and try to grab some territory not impacted by rising seas. It is that serious and, in a way, more so because it appears to be going on the entire world, all at the same time.
While we are still likely to be using fossil fuels to some degree 100 yrs. from now, the great threat to the oil oligarchs is the devaluation of the oil reserves in the ground held by themselves and their corporations. If we need far less oil, then the price per barrel will go low and stay low, perhaps lower than the cost of bringing it out of the ground. This is what the Koch brothers and their like are fighting: the disappearance of their underlying fortunes. Massively deadly wars have been fought over less, so this is a battle that will continue for a long time.
While we are still likely to be using fossil fuels to some degree 100 yrs. from now, the great threat to the oil oligarchs is the devaluation of the oil reserves in the ground held by themselves and their corporations. If we need far less oil, then the price per barrel will go low and stay low, perhaps lower than the cost of bringing it out of the ground. This is what the Koch brothers and their like are fighting: the disappearance of their underlying fortunes. Massively deadly wars have been fought over less, so this is a battle that will continue for a long time.
7
Of course climate change is real - it's been real for millions of years. Whether it's man-made doesn't really matter, as it's questionable that ANY amount of social or economic policy refinements can offer even a smidgen of hope to slow or reverse it. Climate change has gone from environmental to political; it's become a power and money grab (every man for himself!) and we're doomed no matter how you look at it. Save the planet? - Why? When the last human dies, all regret and remorse will cease to exist. The end.
3
I am really, really sad to see President Obama approaching the end of his second term.
But I have no doubt, after reading many interviews with him, that he will continue use his influence, wisdom, intellect, leadership and grace to do great things after his presidency. We will still "have" him, but in a different form.
As for climate change: we are so wrapped up in the here and now that it is easy not to focus on it when so many other pedestrian issues (everything from getting kids to school on time to paying the mortgage) directly affect our lives. Thankfully, we have people like President Obama and others who devote a lot of their time, energy and leadership to reflect on climate change and act on it in big and small ways.
But I have no doubt, after reading many interviews with him, that he will continue use his influence, wisdom, intellect, leadership and grace to do great things after his presidency. We will still "have" him, but in a different form.
As for climate change: we are so wrapped up in the here and now that it is easy not to focus on it when so many other pedestrian issues (everything from getting kids to school on time to paying the mortgage) directly affect our lives. Thankfully, we have people like President Obama and others who devote a lot of their time, energy and leadership to reflect on climate change and act on it in big and small ways.
4
Vanessa is correct, if Hillary gets in, she will nominate Obama to the SCOTUS and follow him with Loretta Lynch as Slick Willie promised during the infamous "runway pow-wow" to get Comey to give Hillary a pass, just as he did 20 years earlier in the Whitewater coverup.
What would follow is an "un-natural disaster" lasting for decades.
What would follow is an "un-natural disaster" lasting for decades.
1
The President -- has not done nearly enough. I don't know what is going on with the Times's journalism. You are not historians, your job is not to continuously frame and comment on events, but to report them. Your hagiography of the President is not playing well with this registered Democrat. The President's narrative that public awareness of the dangers of climate change has increased during his terms is false -- way before he was elected, public concern was greater. He did not fight the aggressive disinformation campaign conducted by the fossil fuel industry. His all of the above energy policy was disastrous. That is a large part of his legacy, unfortunately.
6
This is just like the Healthcare Problem growing at alarming rates and needs attention. We let the Gov take control and it gets worse. The Gov and Big business just want more profits and they have never talked about cutting back on anything. We are back to building bigger cars, taking less rides in mass transit. We eat more meat, consume more calories and spend more money on everything that is energy related. We need a leader that can provide us with a plan not just talk. I think they just want to tax energy once we are so dependant that we all become slaves.
1
Well community organizers and presidents are uninformed about science and apparently easily terrified. I know the president was not alive but I wonder what he might have had as an emotion living in south florida during the 60's. Now potential nuclear war might be terrifying for some, not me. I am stronger than that.
2
Global warming is simply a longer term problem that can be viewed as having very high short-run expenses to combat via costs in the US jobs market. Focusing on such longer term objectives has never been required of man because his actions have never before altered the climate. Man is probably driven to see his own gene component survive, first; and that of his kids next, with about one-half of his genes passed on to each child. At for grandchildren only 1/4 of his gene pool is passed to each. Thus, man probably has an innate short-term focus, with less regard for each following generation.
Short term, climate change remediation may impact coal country jobs. Longer term, a failure to enact a longer term climate plan will compress the actionable period remaining for corrections. Severe time contraction can ultimately force future reliance on very risky environmental technical solutions with extremely high environmental collateral costs to gain these advantages. For example, emitting particles into the atmosphere to absorb and reflect solar energy into space for its cooling benefits has a huge potential error rate.
An article from the Times (4/24/2016) entitled: "Global Warming Feels Quite Pleasant," states that: "For a vast majority of Americans, the weather is simply becoming more pleasant." It continues: 80 percent of Americans now reside in counties with more pleasant weather than 4 decades ago.
[JJL; Th 9/8/16, 9:17 am; Greenville, NC]
Short term, climate change remediation may impact coal country jobs. Longer term, a failure to enact a longer term climate plan will compress the actionable period remaining for corrections. Severe time contraction can ultimately force future reliance on very risky environmental technical solutions with extremely high environmental collateral costs to gain these advantages. For example, emitting particles into the atmosphere to absorb and reflect solar energy into space for its cooling benefits has a huge potential error rate.
An article from the Times (4/24/2016) entitled: "Global Warming Feels Quite Pleasant," states that: "For a vast majority of Americans, the weather is simply becoming more pleasant." It continues: 80 percent of Americans now reside in counties with more pleasant weather than 4 decades ago.
[JJL; Th 9/8/16, 9:17 am; Greenville, NC]
2
With reference to his mentor at Harvard: 'You know, I love Larry,' he said, but 'when it comes to energy issues, Larry has a history of representing fossil fuel industries in big litigation cases.'
Mom will be glad to know that she has company under the bus.
Mom will be glad to know that she has company under the bus.
5
He's dead right.
Climate change is by far the biggest challenge. And this is not about polar bears, its about massive disruption to human society, massive numbers of refugees, weak governments collapsing and the consequent revolutions morphing into wider wars and incubating terrorism. This not just the future, its now: climate change-driven drought in the Mideast was one of the factors involved in the collapse of the Syrian state and the rise of ISIS.
Coal country, the Koch Bros. and their minions in Congress need to understand the enormous damage they are doing to the planet. Burning coal must stop and soon.
A scientist
Climate change is by far the biggest challenge. And this is not about polar bears, its about massive disruption to human society, massive numbers of refugees, weak governments collapsing and the consequent revolutions morphing into wider wars and incubating terrorism. This not just the future, its now: climate change-driven drought in the Mideast was one of the factors involved in the collapse of the Syrian state and the rise of ISIS.
Coal country, the Koch Bros. and their minions in Congress need to understand the enormous damage they are doing to the planet. Burning coal must stop and soon.
A scientist
351
According to the National Geographic, the oceans are currently rising at the fantastic rate of 1/8 inch per year. At that rate the oceans will rise by an entire ONE FOOT in 100 years. Wow! Let's wreck our economy to prevent that.
1
Actually it's also about polar bears, fish, birds, etc etc etc - all suffering because of human-made messes and problems. Your identification of the causes is right on but let's not continue to act like humans are somehow more important than the rest of this pale blue dot's inhabitants.
1
Do you not feel that forcing the developed world to give up reliable nuclear and fossil fuel power will not be massively disruptive?
The earth will not care on iota what we do with CO2. The climate will continue it's chaotic random walk into the future. The only thing that is important for us is how we'll prepare for the changes nature will met out.
The earth will not care on iota what we do with CO2. The climate will continue it's chaotic random walk into the future. The only thing that is important for us is how we'll prepare for the changes nature will met out.
I fully support efforts to control climate change, but let's be clear: Obama flying all over the planet on gas-guzzling Air Force One to fight climate change is brazenly hypocritical.
He's just legacy-building at this point for his billion plus dollar Presidential Library and his 'brand'. If there was real conviction here, why wasn't this a focus much earlier in his 8 year tenure?
All politicians are depressingly the same. Imagine how rich and powerful Obama and his family will be once he leaves office.
He's just legacy-building at this point for his billion plus dollar Presidential Library and his 'brand'. If there was real conviction here, why wasn't this a focus much earlier in his 8 year tenure?
All politicians are depressingly the same. Imagine how rich and powerful Obama and his family will be once he leaves office.
10
The Obama's will be just like the Clinton's -- their role models, I am sure -- speeches to the 1% -- Wall Street cronies -- fake "book deals" for self-serving, congratulatory autobiographies -- living in Hawaii and golfing all day, while raising money for the Obama Presidential Library -- the Obama's will be mega-millionaires and in just a few months.
That's why Barack and Michelle look so happy all the time!
That's why Barack and Michelle look so happy all the time!
Career politicians (Bill and Hillary and many others in DC) plus Obama who lacked the skill and ability to work with congress have led America into a hell hole. Our inner cities are like 3rd world countries. We have greed, homelessness, poverty and citizens without hopes and dreams. We have over 500 killings in Chicago just this year. We can not address climate change until we have a strong healthy country. Perhaps we do need a BIG change in Washington DC. Then we can lead the world with solutions and ideas regarding this important subject.
11
Your uncharmingly myopic point of view completely ignores the post-WW2 business-oriented centers of power and floodgate of corporate dominance which held sway under Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and both Bushes, and is completely unexplainable by anything other than a strong neofascist bias or previous frontal lobotomy.
1
Sad to say but many Americans are stupid, obtuse, and afflicted with narcissism (soulessness). Many Americans are poor judges of situations and are morally bankrupt (Republicans, conservatives) thus rendering their mere opinions about climate change irrelevant.
The greatest threat to the USA is narcissism, which obscures perception and judgement. Trump is the perfect example. Such people are alienated from and are at war with Self, Nature, and Nature's G-d so it is no wonder that they are antagonistic towards and destructive to Earth and environment.
It's time for the Americans that do get it to take bold action to save the human race from self destruction.
The fault is not Obama's; the faults are the idiots clinging to perpetual fossil fuel usage fantasies, the moronic climate change deniers, and the people like the Koch bros who are spending billions to deceive people in order to keep their oil revenues flowing.
The USA has become absolutely sickening and disgusting. Trump is the product of the sickness that is killing the USA.
The greatest threat to the USA is narcissism, which obscures perception and judgement. Trump is the perfect example. Such people are alienated from and are at war with Self, Nature, and Nature's G-d so it is no wonder that they are antagonistic towards and destructive to Earth and environment.
It's time for the Americans that do get it to take bold action to save the human race from self destruction.
The fault is not Obama's; the faults are the idiots clinging to perpetual fossil fuel usage fantasies, the moronic climate change deniers, and the people like the Koch bros who are spending billions to deceive people in order to keep their oil revenues flowing.
The USA has become absolutely sickening and disgusting. Trump is the product of the sickness that is killing the USA.
15
Excluding trade, the issues which have attracted the fiercest passions from progressive activists over the past several years are *precisely* where Clinton and Trump are most radically different.
On climate change, Clinton has a fairly solid plan to move forward; that's why Trump can savage her so easily in West Virginia. Trump calls global warming a Chinese hoax, promises to kill our international agreements, halt US contributions to international global warming programs, and instantly reverse Obama executive orders on everything from car emissions to coal to wind power. Remember when people said Keystone XL was “game over” for climate change? Obama killed that. Trump wants to revive and approve it.
On inequality and Occupy Wall Street, Clinton has a modestly progressive tax plan. Trump's plan would abolish the estate tax on billionaires and dramatically ease the burden on the 0.1%. Deficits would soar, and things like Clinton's or Sanders' plans for free/low-cost college education would disappear from the public debate.
On Black Lives Matter, Clinton has learned and become sympathetic; Trump tells his mobs that we simply need to unleash the police.
If Trump wins, he will have a 2-house Republican Congress pushing him to keep all of his awful promises. No matter how much you dislike Clinton or blame the Democrats for their own electoral predicament: if you ever cared about any of these issues, voting for her is now your only chance to prevent that.
On climate change, Clinton has a fairly solid plan to move forward; that's why Trump can savage her so easily in West Virginia. Trump calls global warming a Chinese hoax, promises to kill our international agreements, halt US contributions to international global warming programs, and instantly reverse Obama executive orders on everything from car emissions to coal to wind power. Remember when people said Keystone XL was “game over” for climate change? Obama killed that. Trump wants to revive and approve it.
On inequality and Occupy Wall Street, Clinton has a modestly progressive tax plan. Trump's plan would abolish the estate tax on billionaires and dramatically ease the burden on the 0.1%. Deficits would soar, and things like Clinton's or Sanders' plans for free/low-cost college education would disappear from the public debate.
On Black Lives Matter, Clinton has learned and become sympathetic; Trump tells his mobs that we simply need to unleash the police.
If Trump wins, he will have a 2-house Republican Congress pushing him to keep all of his awful promises. No matter how much you dislike Clinton or blame the Democrats for their own electoral predicament: if you ever cared about any of these issues, voting for her is now your only chance to prevent that.
16
China is over polluting the world, as evidenced by the amount of garbage that is leaping out of the Pacific . The US has also allowed this type of pollution not to alter capitalism and consumption. It is a waste of time to give a speech, water levels will rise very fast over the next ten to twenty years due to melting of ice, and there is nothing you can do about it. Unless consumption is brought under control.
4
"Polls showed that few Americans thought of climate change as a high public policy priority..."
Meanwhile, most Americans could not raise $400 if their lives depended upon it. Oops!
Meanwhile, most Americans could not raise $400 if their lives depended upon it. Oops!
5
Obama's right. And he will be judged well on his actions on climate change.
Obama's a great president. We probably won't ever see his like again.
Obama's a great president. We probably won't ever see his like again.
14
"…it has also exposed his weaknesses, namely an inability to forge consensus…"
Even Jesus Christ couldn't forge a consensus with today's Republican Party. And please, can we finally quit the false equivalency regarding who's to blame for this country's mad slide toward superstitious medievalism. Only the GOP is responsible for its vindictive, racist obstructionism in response to arguably the best president since Abraham Lincoln. And then there's Trump…God help us.
Even Jesus Christ couldn't forge a consensus with today's Republican Party. And please, can we finally quit the false equivalency regarding who's to blame for this country's mad slide toward superstitious medievalism. Only the GOP is responsible for its vindictive, racist obstructionism in response to arguably the best president since Abraham Lincoln. And then there's Trump…God help us.
578
I disagree. I think he's the worst president ever.
1
Jesus Christ required counter-parties who kept their promises.
BHO has not. That's why very few want to "deal" with him, because so few results can occur. As in, life is short.
BHO has not. That's why very few want to "deal" with him, because so few results can occur. As in, life is short.
We will miss Barack Obama. Would that he could run for a Third Term. The best President in this very Senior's time. And yes CJ, God help us.
2
"But while climate change has played to Mr. Obama’s highest ideals — critics would call them messianic impulses — it has also exposed his weaknesses, namely an inability to forge consensus, even within his own party, on a problem that demands a bipartisan response."
What on Earth is that sentence?!?! Start with the truly bizarre "messianic impulses" reference of critics." By including without comment the outlandish, patently false, meaningless political attack in your analysis, you adopt it as a reasonable suggestion. Do you as reporters believe the President's Constitutionally obligated efforts to protect the country from the clear and present danger climate change presents can in any way be reasonably called a "messianic impilse"? Of course not. Then don't repeat it. You might as well write "some would say foreign-born impulses of a Muslim dictator." It demeans the NYT to repeat political nonsense like this.
Second, and perhaps even more importantly, his failure to forge consensus does not "expose" his "weakness." What nonsense. There is NOTHING Republicans will agree on when it comes to climate change. Republicans have been bribed into denying the climate science. The lack of consensus on this issue does not expose any weakness of the President. It exposes the abject corruption of one of the the two major political parties in this country -- perhaps the only clear and present danger to the country greater than climate change.
What on Earth is that sentence?!?! Start with the truly bizarre "messianic impulses" reference of critics." By including without comment the outlandish, patently false, meaningless political attack in your analysis, you adopt it as a reasonable suggestion. Do you as reporters believe the President's Constitutionally obligated efforts to protect the country from the clear and present danger climate change presents can in any way be reasonably called a "messianic impilse"? Of course not. Then don't repeat it. You might as well write "some would say foreign-born impulses of a Muslim dictator." It demeans the NYT to repeat political nonsense like this.
Second, and perhaps even more importantly, his failure to forge consensus does not "expose" his "weakness." What nonsense. There is NOTHING Republicans will agree on when it comes to climate change. Republicans have been bribed into denying the climate science. The lack of consensus on this issue does not expose any weakness of the President. It exposes the abject corruption of one of the the two major political parties in this country -- perhaps the only clear and present danger to the country greater than climate change.
27
Good Grief!
2
People don't realize how big a task combatting climate change is. To stop it, we have to change the way we produce goods, travel and live. We have to change everything we do. Our economy, in fact our civilization, has been built upon consumption. The more stuff we pull out of the ground, the more money and economic growth we have. That model has to be changed.
We have to create a system that rewards not consuming natural resources, especially carbon based energy sources. The entrenched powers, view this as a threat to profits. It is not a threat, it is a new opportunity, a new way to make money. For example, early in the 20th century, the auto makers put extreme pressure on local governments to eliminate mass transit. Europe did not. The results speak for themselves.
If we are to move ahead on climate change, we have to change our election laws to release Congress from the grip of big business. If we don't, we are hobbled. Big business is ruled by quarterly profits. They don't spend money today that will benefit society 20 years from now. They are beholden to the share holder and the bottom line.
Through legislation, we can change that dynamic. We can set requirements, provide subsidies, and initiate public/private projects with our tax dollars. It's called government investment in infrastructure. The entire rest of the world does it. Your vote counts.
We have to create a system that rewards not consuming natural resources, especially carbon based energy sources. The entrenched powers, view this as a threat to profits. It is not a threat, it is a new opportunity, a new way to make money. For example, early in the 20th century, the auto makers put extreme pressure on local governments to eliminate mass transit. Europe did not. The results speak for themselves.
If we are to move ahead on climate change, we have to change our election laws to release Congress from the grip of big business. If we don't, we are hobbled. Big business is ruled by quarterly profits. They don't spend money today that will benefit society 20 years from now. They are beholden to the share holder and the bottom line.
Through legislation, we can change that dynamic. We can set requirements, provide subsidies, and initiate public/private projects with our tax dollars. It's called government investment in infrastructure. The entire rest of the world does it. Your vote counts.
169
"We" need to change the way our civilization operates. Well, the "we" is the whole world, but starting with setting a good example as the most greedy, wasteful and powerful country in the world - the United States of America.
4
You've hit the nail on the head here. Big business interests are not in alignment with the interests of the general public yet they control Congress. Voters need to change this dynamic. Thank you for presenting the solution so clearly.
4
As usual, look to Sweden:
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1145908
It might be hard to convince the 116 billionaires in Manhattan that that is a good model, but maybe their kids will listen.
citylab.com/work/2016/07/mapping-where-the-super-rich-live/488015/
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1145908
It might be hard to convince the 116 billionaires in Manhattan that that is a good model, but maybe their kids will listen.
citylab.com/work/2016/07/mapping-where-the-super-rich-live/488015/
1
Presidents have the capacity to create policy that addresses some climate change issues. For more significant and long-lasting changes, Presidents need the support of Congress.
In January 2015, the Senate voted on the record on whether climate change is real and human-caused. These Senators voted that it did not..
(Reported January 21, 2015 in Wired Magazine)
Barrasso, John (R – WY)
Blunt, Roy (R – MO)
Boozman, John (R – AR)
Burr, Richard (R – NC)
Capito, Shelley Moore (R – WV)
Cassidy, Bill (R – LA)
Coats, Daniel (R – IN)
Cochran, Thad (R – MS)
Corker, Bob (R – TN)
Cornyn, John (R – TX)
Cotton, Tom (R – AR)
Crapo, Mike (R – ID)
Cruz, Ted (R – TX)
Daines, Steve (R – MT)
Enzi, Michael B. (R – WY)
Ernst, Joni (R – IA)
Fischer, Deb (R – NE)
Flake, Jeff (R – AZ)
Gardner, Cory (R – CO)
Grassley, Chuck (R – IA)
Hatch, Orrin G. (R – UT)
Heller, Dean (R – NV)
Hoeven, John (R – ND)
Inhofe, James M. (R – OK)
Isakson, Johnny (R – GA)
Johnson, Ron (R – WI)
Lankford, James (R – OK)
Lee, Mike (R – UT)
McCain, John (R – AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R – KY)
Moran, Jerry (R – KS)
Murkowski, Lisa (R – AK)
Paul, Rand (R – KY)
Perdue, David (R – GA)
Portman, Rob (R – OH)
Risch, James E. (R – ID)
Roberts, Pat (R – KS)
Rounds, Mike (R – SD)
Rubio, Marco (R – FL)
Sasse, Ben (R – NE)
Scott, Tim (R – SC)
Sessions, Jeff (R – AL)
Shelby, Richard C. (R – AL)
Sullivan, Daniel (R – AK)
Thune, John (R – SD)
Tillis, Thom (R – NC)
Toomey, Patrick J. (R – PA)
Vitter, David (R – LA)
Wicker, Roger F. (R – MS)
In January 2015, the Senate voted on the record on whether climate change is real and human-caused. These Senators voted that it did not..
(Reported January 21, 2015 in Wired Magazine)
Barrasso, John (R – WY)
Blunt, Roy (R – MO)
Boozman, John (R – AR)
Burr, Richard (R – NC)
Capito, Shelley Moore (R – WV)
Cassidy, Bill (R – LA)
Coats, Daniel (R – IN)
Cochran, Thad (R – MS)
Corker, Bob (R – TN)
Cornyn, John (R – TX)
Cotton, Tom (R – AR)
Crapo, Mike (R – ID)
Cruz, Ted (R – TX)
Daines, Steve (R – MT)
Enzi, Michael B. (R – WY)
Ernst, Joni (R – IA)
Fischer, Deb (R – NE)
Flake, Jeff (R – AZ)
Gardner, Cory (R – CO)
Grassley, Chuck (R – IA)
Hatch, Orrin G. (R – UT)
Heller, Dean (R – NV)
Hoeven, John (R – ND)
Inhofe, James M. (R – OK)
Isakson, Johnny (R – GA)
Johnson, Ron (R – WI)
Lankford, James (R – OK)
Lee, Mike (R – UT)
McCain, John (R – AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R – KY)
Moran, Jerry (R – KS)
Murkowski, Lisa (R – AK)
Paul, Rand (R – KY)
Perdue, David (R – GA)
Portman, Rob (R – OH)
Risch, James E. (R – ID)
Roberts, Pat (R – KS)
Rounds, Mike (R – SD)
Rubio, Marco (R – FL)
Sasse, Ben (R – NE)
Scott, Tim (R – SC)
Sessions, Jeff (R – AL)
Shelby, Richard C. (R – AL)
Sullivan, Daniel (R – AK)
Thune, John (R – SD)
Tillis, Thom (R – NC)
Toomey, Patrick J. (R – PA)
Vitter, David (R – LA)
Wicker, Roger F. (R – MS)
214
This list should be chiseled in stone, with one copy for Miami and one for Battery Park in Manhattan.
9
Why don't I see any "D's" there?
5
We should make these backward, self-serving, Republican idiots relinquish their memberships to the human race. None of them qualifies. Vote Democratic, all the way down the ballot. Ultimately, this is a much bigger threat than terrorism.
4
Excellent interview which makes it clear that Pres. Obama understands the threat of climate catastrophe. It's evident that he will spend his last few months making sure his legacy includes action on climate change.
It is sickening to know that there are corporations and politicians who are doing their best to prevent the switch to clean energy in order to make more money. Fortunately, the cost of clean energy is dropping, making dirty fossil fuels a bad investment. If the Republican candidate wins the presidency, he will have a difficult time changing the direction we are headed - to a clean, green energy future!
It is sickening to know that there are corporations and politicians who are doing their best to prevent the switch to clean energy in order to make more money. Fortunately, the cost of clean energy is dropping, making dirty fossil fuels a bad investment. If the Republican candidate wins the presidency, he will have a difficult time changing the direction we are headed - to a clean, green energy future!
15
He does? More like an overly emotional response to something that we are addressing in various ways. How about the undeveloped world not increase their emissions or perhaps reduce them.
We in this country will not get any serious progress on climate change until we first have campaign finance reform. Back here we now have continuous TV ads tooting our friendly fossil fuel corporations. (And of course, no ads for the generation of renewable energy). Yes is it a world wide problem but we must keep it in the ground and spend more efforts on harnessing renewable energy - the tides, wind turbines, nuclear FUSION... Right now our Democratic presidential nominee ought to speak out against the new pipeline being dug through the ancestral lands of the original owners of this country - the land we took away from them. The war, banking, fossil fuel corporations have PURCHASED our elected people. We should not be building any more oil pipelines here. Those people need to be employed building wind turbines, or energy efficient railroads. Our incessant wars burn a lot of fossil fuels in order to enrich corporations that make money from war.
Bernie spoke out against this pipeline in North Dakota. The American Indian people, (including children) peacefully protesting the pipeline have been attacked by dogs. The only decent mainstream media (TV) coverage this has been from Lawrence O'Donnell who visited the site. We STOLE the land from these people and now we threaten their clean water. Shameful.. What does our Democratic nominee think about this pipeline?
Bernie spoke out against this pipeline in North Dakota. The American Indian people, (including children) peacefully protesting the pipeline have been attacked by dogs. The only decent mainstream media (TV) coverage this has been from Lawrence O'Donnell who visited the site. We STOLE the land from these people and now we threaten their clean water. Shameful.. What does our Democratic nominee think about this pipeline?
41
Lawrence O'Donnell comes through again. He is smart, well spoken and urbane. Why MS NBC doesn't give him him a larger role is beyond me. Instead, they insist on giving prominence to that verbal bully, Chris Matthews. Let O'Donnell, at least, have a Friday show.
3
Good opinion, but "we" didn't take any ancestral lands away from anyone. This is not 1800, so please stop trying to put people on a guilt trip for things that happened hundreds of years ago. It's divisive, and what we need now is unity to find solutions to this problem. And that is never going to happen if people continue to play political games and insult one another for things they didn't do.
1
@Ed -My guess is that O'Donnell only wants four shows a week - he has made his name and his money. My guess is he does this show because he cares..and thinks. Also remember MSNBC is owned by Comcast, a very conservative corporation. He's taking a risk in speaking out on behalf of the people we stole the land from - and, because he has his money, he can speak up until Comcast finds an excuse to can him.
The Democratic Party Platform states the following: "We will streamline federal permitting to accelerate the construction of new transmission lines to get low-cost renewable energy to market, and incentivize wind, solar, and other renewable energy over the development of new natural gas power plants." Natural gas power plants fill in the gaps in power production when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. So what do Dems want to use to produce electric power when wind and solar aren't producing? Opposition to nuclear power among Democrats is so strong that there is no mention of it in the party platform. So what do they want to do? I suggest that leadership on climate change in the Democratic Party is weak and confused.
And many oppose say offshore wind. All of this is nice except the subsidies forever.
1
To negate the impact of climate change (warming) is plain idiocy, given we have the worsening catastrophes upon us already, as we continue to destroy the environment in the name of greed and dubious progress. Should this trend continue, due to our impertinent denial of the obvious, and our "willful" ignorance of the facts, we will have no one to blame but ourselves, a slow-motion collective suicide akin to self-hate and self-induced stupidity. That republicans, as a matter of dogma, remain 'faithful' climate change deniers, is an outrage to reason and common sense; if those leaders had an ounce of decency, they should resign and get out of the way so urgent solutions can be found...and implemented.
13
The US is not the industrial nation it once was in the 50"'s, we are mostly a consumer nation of goods, many materials and more & more services. with over 700 billion people in the world and only 300 million people in the US, the issues are distributed across the globe such the world must solve issues from fossil fuels, industrial waste, potable water worldwide. In the interim we like many nations must address rising tides now, etc as much of our population lives near water., Sandy was a warning
1
Yes and we are over populated, rebuilt in areas that should not have after that super wimpy Sandy. And of course the damage from Sandy had almost nothing to do with climate change, but rather an area that is not prepared for such storms.
A. Tax,
Your point seems to want to delay action due to the fact we aren't the only people on the planet.
We ARE a huge contributor of Greenhouse Gas. Combined with China, we top two polluting nations put a combined 400 metric TONS of carbon dioxide in the air (as of 2011).
To state that our diminished industrial capacity gives us a pass on action is to dilute the actual current facts of our actions.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-co...
Your point seems to want to delay action due to the fact we aren't the only people on the planet.
We ARE a huge contributor of Greenhouse Gas. Combined with China, we top two polluting nations put a combined 400 metric TONS of carbon dioxide in the air (as of 2011).
To state that our diminished industrial capacity gives us a pass on action is to dilute the actual current facts of our actions.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-co...
2
There are 7 billion, not 700 billion people in the world. And considering the damage being done by the 7 billion, the planet would collapse in a very rapid manner if there were 700 billion people. As it is, we can not sustain the current levels of pollution and degradation of the land and sea. Just like Easter Island...those chickens are coming home to roost for the whole planet. There is a judgement day coming....but it's a natural one, not a religious one.
3
When he first took office, as I recall one of his first foreign trips was to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen.
I recall the excitement about his arrival and the hope generated by his reputation as a "change" from the dreary politics of his predecessor.
I also recall that he said practically nothing, offered a few generalizations and bromides, and left.
During his eight year tenure, I can't recall any major speeches to the country on the subject of global warming. If he was committed to using the "bully pulpit" of the Presidency to bring about public awareness of this now unavoidable catastrophe, I do not recall him doing so.
In fact, as I also recall, he was touting "clean coal" as a candidate.
So, I'm afraid that will be his legacy.
When he could have done something, or energetically tried to do something, he did little or nothing.
And now, when it is too little and too late, he says what should have been said in 2009.
That will be his legacy.
I recall the excitement about his arrival and the hope generated by his reputation as a "change" from the dreary politics of his predecessor.
I also recall that he said practically nothing, offered a few generalizations and bromides, and left.
During his eight year tenure, I can't recall any major speeches to the country on the subject of global warming. If he was committed to using the "bully pulpit" of the Presidency to bring about public awareness of this now unavoidable catastrophe, I do not recall him doing so.
In fact, as I also recall, he was touting "clean coal" as a candidate.
So, I'm afraid that will be his legacy.
When he could have done something, or energetically tried to do something, he did little or nothing.
And now, when it is too little and too late, he says what should have been said in 2009.
That will be his legacy.
124
Given the president's relentless push for the Trans Pacific trade deal, his rhetoric on climate change rings hollow:
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2016/09/06/trans-pacific-partnershi...
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2016/09/06/trans-pacific-partnershi...
2
When has Obama ever had the opportunity to do something? He only had 1 year when he had a super majority in the Senate (before Ted Kennedy died) and he felt he needed to use his political capital for the ACA first. If you're saying he should have addressed global warming first, I agree. But it would have been hard to tell a dieing Sen. Kennedy that he was going to delay Kennedy's pet initiative to do another major project first.
3
I believe he spoke about climate change in at least one State of the Union address.
1
There are more Climate Change deniers in Congress than the public. That is because fuel companies, coal companies, and others that dislike Climate Changes fund their re- election.
The question is will Congress provide funds to help those whose homes were flooded or help those where' costal high tide street flooding happens regularly.
The question is will Congress provide funds to help those whose homes were flooded or help those where' costal high tide street flooding happens regularly.
19
President Obama's position on climate change is analogous to his positions on universal health care and the financialization of the economy in the following way:
Tempermentallly or due to political or post-presidency ambitions, he refuses to confront the underlying controversial problem . In the case of climate change, it is the addition of 5 billion people and all their waste products to the world population in the last sixty-five years.
Tempermentallly or due to political or post-presidency ambitions, he refuses to confront the underlying controversial problem . In the case of climate change, it is the addition of 5 billion people and all their waste products to the world population in the last sixty-five years.
12
20% of emissions come from the wealthiest 1% of the world. (An income of $83,000/year puts one into that category.) It's more of a rich person problem than a population problem, though both are problems.
http://www.corporateknights.com/channels/climate-and-carbon/carbon-budge...
A great short video from demographer Hans Rosling puts it all into perspective, with Lego as a teaching tool:
https://youtu.be/SxbprYyjyyU
http://www.corporateknights.com/channels/climate-and-carbon/carbon-budge...
A great short video from demographer Hans Rosling puts it all into perspective, with Lego as a teaching tool:
https://youtu.be/SxbprYyjyyU
3
It's easy to throw up your hands and say "population!" But, the problem isn't just the number of people; it's their level of consumption. The per-capita climate pollution of the US and a few other countries is far greater than that of much poorer countries. In any case, unless you're suggesting mass genocide as a solution, reducing population is a long-term project that requires educating and empowering women world-wide to control their own fertility. So we have to solve the problem given the population as it is.
That will require that we stop burning enormous quantities of fossil carbon. The problem is not technical, but political. And the first step is to stop electing fossil-compromised, science-denying Republicans to Congress and the Presidency.
That will require that we stop burning enormous quantities of fossil carbon. The problem is not technical, but political. And the first step is to stop electing fossil-compromised, science-denying Republicans to Congress and the Presidency.
"Save the planet! Save the planet!" Rot. Framing it in these terms is one reason it's so unseen to so many people. I think George Carlin said it best: "Sooner or later this old world will shake us off like a bad case of fleas. The planet itself will recover and be fine."
If we keep it in more realistic language -- that we're the only species that so throughly, comprehsively, and consistently fouls its own nest; and that what we need to "save" is the Earth's ability to sustain life -- I bet the effort would find a lot more traction. Similar to how I seem to strike a nerve with AGW-denying friends when I say "Okay, let's allow that it isn't caused by our emissions... can it possibly be okay to keep pumping all that crap into the air anyway?"
If we keep it in more realistic language -- that we're the only species that so throughly, comprehsively, and consistently fouls its own nest; and that what we need to "save" is the Earth's ability to sustain life -- I bet the effort would find a lot more traction. Similar to how I seem to strike a nerve with AGW-denying friends when I say "Okay, let's allow that it isn't caused by our emissions... can it possibly be okay to keep pumping all that crap into the air anyway?"
8
That was not George Carlin (the saying about fleas) -- it was the late, great Carl Sagan (astrophysicist -- "billions & billions of stars" etc.).
Err - no Concerned Citizen - it was George Carlin as the OP said
What are you doing regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline?
Not glamorous enough perhaps, nevertheless an exemplary opportunity to assert you actions, not merely your words.
Not glamorous enough perhaps, nevertheless an exemplary opportunity to assert you actions, not merely your words.
13
Trump and others worry about "radicals" from the middle east but I'm afraid they don't see the real enemy lurking. When there are food shortages and mass migrations, we'll see a new type of terrorist -- The Radical Environmentalist.
Maybe Obama and Clinton can make things better but I think we are all on a sinking ship. I'm holding my breath.
Maybe Obama and Clinton can make things better but I think we are all on a sinking ship. I'm holding my breath.
6
I'm a lot more afraid of the Radical Fossil Fuel Lover . . .
How do you "forge consensus" with Republicans who despise everything you do, who are so deep in the pockets of the fossil fuel industries as to be indistinguishable from lobbyists, and who deny any problem exists or claim it's a hoax or a Chinese conspiracy?
How is it flawed leadership to be unable to break into those hermetically sealed minds?
The blame lies on the other side, not the president's.
How is it flawed leadership to be unable to break into those hermetically sealed minds?
The blame lies on the other side, not the president's.
137
Many of our pressing current challenges like poverty, education, healthcare are significant to each of our lives, no doubt, but the President correctly sees the existential threat of climate change for what it is and that the clock is ticking fast. It's refreshing to see a leader lead, and try to do meaningful things with the soapbox they are given. May every President aim to live a post-presidential life of consequence, a la Jimmy Carter.
9
What effects do you consider sure to destroy the US? And when? There are none, and when is a long time from now. Even total nuclear war would not destroy the entire US, so a little climate change surely won't either.
1
Denying anthropogenic climate change is like denying that hitting one's head with a hammer over and over will not cause brain damage. And the denying is strongly encouraged by Donald and friends. My guess is that the existence of our species will be much shorter than of those other species we are making extinct so rapidly.
5
Although I have had a pretty good life so far, I have never feared death.
And with probably no more than 20 years left on earth, I am glad I won't be around to see the collapse of human societies and ecosystems due to climate change. A world without any wild elephants or lions or gorillas just won't be a place I want to live in.
Edward Abbey on Capitalism: "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell."
And now we're considering electing a bigot, homophobe, misogynist, racist and xenophobe as president...who made his millions from casino gambling and real estate speculation and who wants to align the U.S. with Russia's genocidal dictator Vlad Putin.
And with probably no more than 20 years left on earth, I am glad I won't be around to see the collapse of human societies and ecosystems due to climate change. A world without any wild elephants or lions or gorillas just won't be a place I want to live in.
Edward Abbey on Capitalism: "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell."
And now we're considering electing a bigot, homophobe, misogynist, racist and xenophobe as president...who made his millions from casino gambling and real estate speculation and who wants to align the U.S. with Russia's genocidal dictator Vlad Putin.
147
Oh I see no wild animals in Africa is what climate change will cause.
1
The facts are not enough for the recalcitrant GOP and their Know Nothing Supporters.
Stupid Is As Stupid Does, Mr Ryan.
Stupid Is As Stupid Does, Mr Ryan.
5
It's a modest and fragile legacy, though the President's diplomatic campaign--not just with China but India, Turkey, Indonesia, Brazil, and many more--was a remarkable achievement, and a hallmark of his second term. But people, we need to realize that a Trump presidency will UNDO ALL THIS AND MORE, will KILL THE PARIS ACCORDS, and make it inevitable that climate change will continue unabated. This is an EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO OUR SPECIES--yet still the press yammers on about email servers and he-said-she-said. Will voters wake up to the urgency of this issue? Or are we effectively, spiritually dead already?
14
The Paris accords are already dead unless the Senate approves them, and humans are not so easy to eliminate either. There is urgency to adapt, not so much to destroy our economy.
1
"Trump presidency will UNDO ALL THIS AND MORE..."
Exactly. All the hard won, baby steps progress we've already made will be out the window.
Exactly. All the hard won, baby steps progress we've already made will be out the window.
President Obama has done positive work towards addressing the unforgiving issue of climate change, but as usual with him, he's been doing this largely behind the scenes.
In contrast with his positive efforts to address climate change, his work of communicating persuasively with the American people about climate change has been lacking.
If, as this article claims, climate change is to become the central legacy of President Obama, then he needs to talk about it more regularly with the people. Casual but frequent allusions to climate change will move the people more effectively than all his formal speeches and prepared remarks, which often seem to come late.
Educating, persuading, sharing, and being more communal and communicative about climate change will go a long way towards turning this issue into his central concern.
President Obama needs to work towards becoming once again the agile and spontaneous communicator he once was. Not only on climate change but on everything else he needs to recover the quicker, more daring delivery of his younger years.
On climate change, of all things, he needs as a communicator to be light and fast, direct and simple. He is certainly articulate enough to do this.
By making these changes to his presentation, President Obama could literally change the world as he moves us to change our views on climate change. He is on the right path with this.
oz.
In contrast with his positive efforts to address climate change, his work of communicating persuasively with the American people about climate change has been lacking.
If, as this article claims, climate change is to become the central legacy of President Obama, then he needs to talk about it more regularly with the people. Casual but frequent allusions to climate change will move the people more effectively than all his formal speeches and prepared remarks, which often seem to come late.
Educating, persuading, sharing, and being more communal and communicative about climate change will go a long way towards turning this issue into his central concern.
President Obama needs to work towards becoming once again the agile and spontaneous communicator he once was. Not only on climate change but on everything else he needs to recover the quicker, more daring delivery of his younger years.
On climate change, of all things, he needs as a communicator to be light and fast, direct and simple. He is certainly articulate enough to do this.
By making these changes to his presentation, President Obama could literally change the world as he moves us to change our views on climate change. He is on the right path with this.
oz.
4
What Mr. Obama and his highly qualified team of advisors achieved is remarkable. Knowing than Hillary will continue this endeavor brings hope for the millions of people that are aware that climate change is the greatest threat to our planet. What is truly terrifying is to imagine America, the greatest power on earth in the hands of a bunch of science deniers, short term profit takers and Koch brother surrogates
9
They did try to build a pipeline, but that was about all.
The three things to always remember when buying real estate: altitude, altitude and altitude.
132
Also, not build your house in the middle of a flood plain no matter how pretty looking out the kitchen window looks like.
1
We moved to Marfa to get off the humid coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Marfa sits on a beautiful near mile high desert plateau in far west Texas, close on to Mexico. And gaaah, it seems to me that in the past month and on to this week, our altitude has not prevented us from a bit of climate change. In my view, it has rained more in that time than in our 20 years out here. The humidity has been in the 90's and my big yard looks like the ranch land the grass is so high. And the ranch land has never been so green. And so on.
Didn't it used to be "water, water, water ..."?
1
The earth's climate has always changed, and it always will. This has never been a static planet.
When it's not getting a little warmer, it's getting cooler. This is normal. Obama needs to brush up on his history.
When it's not getting a little warmer, it's getting cooler. This is normal. Obama needs to brush up on his history.
4
Obama is young enough to know about climate change from high school science classes. Why did it take him so long to address this issue? He has allowed oil companies to rule the roost and to pursue the construction of oil pipelines and rigs, almost everywhere. For me, his lack of interest in the environment until the 11th hour is the most significant failure of this presidency, regardless of how his friends in the media try to spin it now.
5
Find it interesting how there is so much blame to go around.
Climate change has become a political ping pong. Well crafted by the energy consortiums to stop people from taking action.
What changes have you made to your way of life to reduce your carbon foot print?
Don't wait until everybody agrees and laws are enacted that force you to change. Wake up!
TAKE ACTION NOW.
COMMIT YOURSELF
Life does not waste anything! Only the stupid human consciousness thinks it can get away with burning and consuming all resources and that by just negating the consequences they will disappear.
Be one with life, reduce your own carbon foot print.
Over the past 3 years I have reduce mine to half. Make a plan for the next 5 years and take massive action.
Wake up and do your part! Your effort is needed to change the trend. You are the savior of your world.
All the best!
Climate change has become a political ping pong. Well crafted by the energy consortiums to stop people from taking action.
What changes have you made to your way of life to reduce your carbon foot print?
Don't wait until everybody agrees and laws are enacted that force you to change. Wake up!
TAKE ACTION NOW.
COMMIT YOURSELF
Life does not waste anything! Only the stupid human consciousness thinks it can get away with burning and consuming all resources and that by just negating the consequences they will disappear.
Be one with life, reduce your own carbon foot print.
Over the past 3 years I have reduce mine to half. Make a plan for the next 5 years and take massive action.
Wake up and do your part! Your effort is needed to change the trend. You are the savior of your world.
All the best!
1
Face it. President Obama is no profile in courage. His "noble" pronouncements have come, if at all, when the risk of a political downside is minuscule.
1
I try to stay optimistic in life but realistic too. We lost this, unless some technological breakthrough enables us to reverse nature. Ridicule from republicans no longer matters to me. We are truly in the same boat, ultimately. We made unbelievable progress as a species but still could not overcome greed.
9
"...and will carry a significant economic cost."
How about the authors provide some data to back up this assertion. I notice they state this as fact and then never back it up.
How about the authors provide some data to back up this assertion. I notice they state this as fact and then never back it up.
3
Even though he didn't have the activist record of Al Gore or John Kerry, his heart has been in the right place. He looked and saw and learned from his experience. Now let's hope that Hillary Clinton continues this and applies her experince to this cause.
4
If nothing else, Green house gas emissions has to be harmful to the people that breath this pollution, there is no doubt that these gases are terribly unhealthy.Is climate change a reality,it sometimes feels that way & other times it’s change is not noticeable..The melting of the ice caps of the Arctic, & the rising water levels, certainly give climate charge credibility.In any event I side with Obama on doing whatever is necessary to stem this condition.
5
The most terrifying prediction related to climate change is rising seas. Just think about, as coastal areas are flooding, the flood of people that will have to move inland. Where will they live? Where will they work? What will they eat?
And what about the health of our oceans, as the rising waters corrode the abandoned infrastructure and leach out contaminants that pollute whole oceans.
We can suffer a little economic disruption now, or we can suffer massive economic and environmental and human disruption in the future.
Terrifying is exactly the right word for what awaits if we don't do something now.
And what about the health of our oceans, as the rising waters corrode the abandoned infrastructure and leach out contaminants that pollute whole oceans.
We can suffer a little economic disruption now, or we can suffer massive economic and environmental and human disruption in the future.
Terrifying is exactly the right word for what awaits if we don't do something now.
10
Thanks, NYT, for a great interview with the president about a difficult topic. Excellent questions and intelligent, articulate responses from the President. I will be sad to see him go in January.
7
There's a new rule of thumb in the real estate investment world: Buy high, and sell low. (For those of you that don't get it, think altitude.)
9
In 2008 candidate Obama was lauded for his vision, his youth, his energy and his outlook to bring change to Washington. Almost eight years later he has all but given up on his greatest asset; his ability to campaign and inspire the American people.
Special interests in congress will always oppose climate initiatives, but if the president had used his own bully pulpit more might have been done. But he didn't. Instead he relied on a legislative strategy that yielded little. In the aftermath we have watched catastrophic storms flooding West Va. Houston, Missouri and Louisiana. Drought envelops the entire west and some small towns have already run out of water.
Bringing these issues and their cause-global warming to the publics attention requires a vigorous campaign, not an occasional interview. Even the CIA lists climate change as the most likely cause of world instability, yet we never hear that from the White House.
The world has already gone over the cliff and the only question is how hard our fall will be. Yet climate change is almost never mentioned in the current presidential campaign. Obama started out with such promise but wasted his political capital on a GOP designed health care initiative. By the time of the bank bail outs it was clear that any chance of real change from his administration was lost.
He fought for the bailout and used all his political skills. But turned into a tepid technocrat on what he calls the worlds most pressing issue. What a waste.
Special interests in congress will always oppose climate initiatives, but if the president had used his own bully pulpit more might have been done. But he didn't. Instead he relied on a legislative strategy that yielded little. In the aftermath we have watched catastrophic storms flooding West Va. Houston, Missouri and Louisiana. Drought envelops the entire west and some small towns have already run out of water.
Bringing these issues and their cause-global warming to the publics attention requires a vigorous campaign, not an occasional interview. Even the CIA lists climate change as the most likely cause of world instability, yet we never hear that from the White House.
The world has already gone over the cliff and the only question is how hard our fall will be. Yet climate change is almost never mentioned in the current presidential campaign. Obama started out with such promise but wasted his political capital on a GOP designed health care initiative. By the time of the bank bail outs it was clear that any chance of real change from his administration was lost.
He fought for the bailout and used all his political skills. But turned into a tepid technocrat on what he calls the worlds most pressing issue. What a waste.
1
My wife and I live on Miami Beach... We are currently making arrangements to move back up north and inland... Climate change is very real... The king tide will strike Miami Beach in the next couple of weeks, this town will flood as it did last year... The difference this year is we also have Zika to contend with...I don't see how this town is going to defeat the water, the water always wins...
306
This foundation for Miami Beach’s future is actually a complicated and expensive experiment: As much as $500 million to install 80 pumps and raise roads and seawalls across the city. A first phase appears to be working, at least for now. But just one year into a massive public works project that could take six more, it’s way too soon to say whether and for how long it can keep the staggeringly valuable real estate of an international tourist mecca dry — especially in the face of sea level rise projections that seem to only get scarier with every new analysis.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/a...
Exactly.
Property values in FL are going to drown. When, not if.
Another cut in the 100,000 cuts ... knifing going on we're not even aware of.
Property values in FL are going to drown. When, not if.
Another cut in the 100,000 cuts ... knifing going on we're not even aware of.
1
I live in Miami, a suburb of Miami called Pinecrest where wetland was filled that should have been preserved for the pumps ahead. The acreage had been an unofficial sump, re drainage basin. Pinecrest officials blamed inland sea-rise for the miscalculations and flawed engineering even as mansion building continues and we will flood. Images on Pinecrest Floods and Pinecrest Bans Sumpland show the desecration. And tell the Zika prediction. There is no drainage.
Pinecrest Floods
https://pinecrestfloods.blogspot.com/
Pinecrest Bans Sumpland
https://pinecrestbanssumpland.blogspot.com/
King Tide is a given, it affects/ effects inland, too. Zika also a given. My grandson attends middle school on Miami Beach, spraying using naled, a known neurotoxin insecticide, was held off today, will begin tomorrow. Beyond awful.
Leaving is difficult for us. The family is here. Am hoping my grandson(s) attend college up north and settle there. Seemingly a necessity by then.
Pinecrest Floods
https://pinecrestfloods.blogspot.com/
Pinecrest Bans Sumpland
https://pinecrestbanssumpland.blogspot.com/
King Tide is a given, it affects/ effects inland, too. Zika also a given. My grandson attends middle school on Miami Beach, spraying using naled, a known neurotoxin insecticide, was held off today, will begin tomorrow. Beyond awful.
Leaving is difficult for us. The family is here. Am hoping my grandson(s) attend college up north and settle there. Seemingly a necessity by then.
4
‘All Bets Are Off’
Too bad he did not mention that there will be about another 4 billion people in the world by century end.
Too bad he did not mention that there will be about another 4 billion people in the world by century end.
5
Until the entire world gets behind efforts to mitigate the effects of global warming, those self-imposed actions that only affect Americans will have little impact. Indeed, our willingness to damage our own economic competitiveness by these unilateral efforts simply incentivizes China, India Russia, Mexico and many other countries to continue seeking to build their middle classes on the back of cheap energy and at the cost of the destruction of our own middle classes.
Like global stability generally, successful climate change mitigation is hard because it requires sacrifices by EVERYONE, and we have taken the easy road rather than face the challenge of leading the world to effective solutions.
We don't live within an American biosphere: it's a global one that is being affected by ALL participants.
Like global stability generally, successful climate change mitigation is hard because it requires sacrifices by EVERYONE, and we have taken the easy road rather than face the challenge of leading the world to effective solutions.
We don't live within an American biosphere: it's a global one that is being affected by ALL participants.
7
Getting the world to go along would have required an actual leader who had the ability to talk people into taking chances. That was never going to be anything we could have asked of a man who'd only spent 153 days in the U.S. Senate after already deciding in 2006 to run for the White House.
3
Thanks, Richard, but I wish you mentioned the BIG ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.
Global warming & climate change (*which I absolutely believe exists) is caused by PEOPLE.
We have too many people on this planet. This planet CANNOT support 7 billion people -- not even half that number! -- and we are headed very directly towards 9 billion in a few years.
We abandoned Zero Population Growth in this nation and nearly all others. The Chinese have even given up on their "one child" policy!
Affluent families in the US routinely have 3-4 children. Poor families on welfare have large families, to up their welfare take. Illegal aliens and most immigrant families have an AVERAGE of FIVE children -- for illegals, having anchor babies is THE way to get to stay in the US.
ALL of our policies reward childbearing with tax subsidies, refunds, credits and deductions. We give NOTHING to those who don't have children, nor reward those who stop at two children (ZPG).
People who divorce and remarry, often start ALL OVER AGAIN with a "new" family....more children. BTW: ZPG is two biological children from your own genes, NO MATTER if you marry, divorce or remarry! It is TWO PER PERSON, not two per marriage or family!!!!
We not only don't have a handle on this, to hear the President....it is not even a discussion point.
Lefty liberals honestly believe we can tackle THE GLOBAL WARMING OF THE WHOLE FRICKIN' PLANET by .... using cloth grocery bags, and recycling cardboard in our trash. I mean, seriously!
Global warming & climate change (*which I absolutely believe exists) is caused by PEOPLE.
We have too many people on this planet. This planet CANNOT support 7 billion people -- not even half that number! -- and we are headed very directly towards 9 billion in a few years.
We abandoned Zero Population Growth in this nation and nearly all others. The Chinese have even given up on their "one child" policy!
Affluent families in the US routinely have 3-4 children. Poor families on welfare have large families, to up their welfare take. Illegal aliens and most immigrant families have an AVERAGE of FIVE children -- for illegals, having anchor babies is THE way to get to stay in the US.
ALL of our policies reward childbearing with tax subsidies, refunds, credits and deductions. We give NOTHING to those who don't have children, nor reward those who stop at two children (ZPG).
People who divorce and remarry, often start ALL OVER AGAIN with a "new" family....more children. BTW: ZPG is two biological children from your own genes, NO MATTER if you marry, divorce or remarry! It is TWO PER PERSON, not two per marriage or family!!!!
We not only don't have a handle on this, to hear the President....it is not even a discussion point.
Lefty liberals honestly believe we can tackle THE GLOBAL WARMING OF THE WHOLE FRICKIN' PLANET by .... using cloth grocery bags, and recycling cardboard in our trash. I mean, seriously!
3
Your presidential candidate, Trump, wants to walk away from all international agreements that, however imperfectly, attempt to share the burden. He says this is all a Chinese hoax.
Let me guess: Just a negotiating tactic, right? Clearly he and his fellow Republicans in Congress are just itching to overcome the stalemate and solve this problem, right? Right?
Let me guess: Just a negotiating tactic, right? Clearly he and his fellow Republicans in Congress are just itching to overcome the stalemate and solve this problem, right? Right?
Let's face it - collectively, Americans are just too stupid to address long range issues, even potentially existential ones like climate change. When Miami, New Orleans, New York City, and San Francisco are flooding, then maybe we'll start to see some meaningful political recognition of the problem. Until then, it will remain just part of "the liberal agenda" or too politically unpalatable to confront. Meanwhile, any thinking person is moving to higher ground.
365
Sorry, this is not an issue of American's "being too stupid." It's a human nature issue that goes across cultures.
1
The sky is falling!
1
By the time our major cities are affected, it will be too late. We suffer from short attention spans in the US; perhaps another indicator that Trump could, indeed, be elected in November.
Talk about terrifying!
Talk about terrifying!
1
Well every bilateral relationship we have in the world is in worse shape now than when he was sworn in, except for Iran which is on its way to being a nuclear terrorist state. Obamacare is a continuing fiasco. Maybe his global warming foolishness could be his legacy.
9
I do not have the scientific background to adequately assess the research. However, Obama and the NewYork Times have been soooooo wrong on sooooo many issues that I do understand. So, why should I believe any sales pitch about climate change they so avidly promote?
10
nessa, i've been a student of the science of climate change for 30 years. i do have the scientific background. here's the first thing -- most of the significant trends (actual measurements) line up with our more dramatic projections. In the end, this is about things we can directly measure. it is happening, and it is happening fast. here's the second thing: we don't really know what is going to happen. and that's a political hot potato. but given that our models (which are improving) are proving true, it's pretty clear we have a problem. Anyway, don't ask a scientist. Go ask a birder. Ask them how the bird species are changing.
37
I hope you believe in gravity despite not being a theoretical physicist (I assume).
7
"soooo wrong....sooooo many issues" is not enough. Please be specific.....
what ?
what ?
3
and--- so it begins. Ignorant GOP sycophants will start screaming HOAX, FRAUD,
and like everything---- it will all come to an end.
and like everything---- it will all come to an end.
23
With the onset of the recession, economic production and carbon emissions slowed. But since 2009, we have been burning ever more fossil fuels and so, for the first time in many years, US carbon emissions are steadily increasing. Republican policies and Obama's conservation efforts are pretty much peripheral to the problem. When the economy picks up and we are only equipped to increase fossil fuels for lack of alternatives, emissions go up. You can blame Obama or the Republicans or the failure to generate abundant renewable fuels, but it's almost alll about the cycling of the economy.
4
While I salute Obama's efforts to close down coal powered electricity plants, he has also continued relentlessly with the "drill- drill-drill" strategy he derided of Sarah Palin. Instead of closing down deepwater drilling after the Horizon disaster Obama granted new permits. He has proposed opening the midAtlantic to deep-sea drilling. He has conitnued the giveaway of drilling and mining rights on Federal lands instead of either getting money for taxpayers instead of oil companies for it or closing it down. While Obama has made efforts to promote Green Transit, he has refused to increase the Federal gasoline tax or stop the endless highway expansion like the total wasteful new Tappan Zee Autos only bridge. Obama's legacy is to take baby steps instead of the real leaps forward we need to salve the plutocrats who funded his election.
2
"He has proposed opening the midAtlantic to deep-sea drilling."
Perhaps you missed this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/us/politics/in-reversal-us-plan-on-dri...
And "he" doesn't get to unilaterally raise the gas tax. That requires a law from Congress. And infrastructure improvements do not have to equate to greater greenhouse gases. If all cars were converted to zero emission electric cars run on energy generated from renewable sources like wind and solar, you can have more cars and less pollution. It is possible.
Perhaps you missed this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/us/politics/in-reversal-us-plan-on-dri...
And "he" doesn't get to unilaterally raise the gas tax. That requires a law from Congress. And infrastructure improvements do not have to equate to greater greenhouse gases. If all cars were converted to zero emission electric cars run on energy generated from renewable sources like wind and solar, you can have more cars and less pollution. It is possible.
Climate change is a major national security issue. As you reported just a few days ago, it threatens our naval bases and vibrant coastal communities: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/science/flooding-of-coast-caused-by-gl....
With the Paris accords and the recent agreement with China, Obama has laid to foundation to address this threat. Clinton would build on it. Trump, Mitchell and Ryan, and the rest of the GOP would reverse it.
And the American electorate: It amazes me how many seemingly intelligent and supposedly well-informed people I know choose to ignore climate change and / or call it a hoax by scientists looking for grant money. Meanwhile they drive around in over-sized SUVs wishing for a GOP victory so their taxes go lower.
The twin sins of Greed and Myopia will undo this good Earth.
One day we will all miss Obama's vision, compassion and conviction to address what matters most, with his uncommon intelligence and the cooperation he is able to engender from other countries.
With the Paris accords and the recent agreement with China, Obama has laid to foundation to address this threat. Clinton would build on it. Trump, Mitchell and Ryan, and the rest of the GOP would reverse it.
And the American electorate: It amazes me how many seemingly intelligent and supposedly well-informed people I know choose to ignore climate change and / or call it a hoax by scientists looking for grant money. Meanwhile they drive around in over-sized SUVs wishing for a GOP victory so their taxes go lower.
The twin sins of Greed and Myopia will undo this good Earth.
One day we will all miss Obama's vision, compassion and conviction to address what matters most, with his uncommon intelligence and the cooperation he is able to engender from other countries.
223
We're about 100 years too late. It's done. We're doomed, get over it.
1
President Obama is a consensus builder despite what people in these comments say about him. Country leaders around the world, listen to him and follow his lead. It is only at home that Republican obstructionism blinded by politics and bigotry attempt to thwart his every effort. We are our worst enemy and will rue the day that our blindness stopped us from taking action on climate change and so many other things.
3
" .. One day we will all miss Obama's vision .."
Right now, at least 48% of Americans wish BHO was gone, because he flip-flops on tentative agreements. Many say he is unreliable, in negotiations.
Then again, what would one expect from someone who was a U.S. senator for 153 days before running for president? Making even the Kennedys, seem like pikers? Even Teddy Kennedy and GWB made deals together.
Right now, at least 48% of Americans wish BHO was gone, because he flip-flops on tentative agreements. Many say he is unreliable, in negotiations.
Then again, what would one expect from someone who was a U.S. senator for 153 days before running for president? Making even the Kennedys, seem like pikers? Even Teddy Kennedy and GWB made deals together.
Dear President Obama,
Economic "growth" yields climate change. PERIOD.
Economic "growth" yields environmental destruction. PERIOD.
Consumers produce one thing: WASTE.
Too late. Sorry.
Enjoy your retirement.
Jonathan Horwitz, Vietnam War Vet
Economic "growth" yields climate change. PERIOD.
Economic "growth" yields environmental destruction. PERIOD.
Consumers produce one thing: WASTE.
Too late. Sorry.
Enjoy your retirement.
Jonathan Horwitz, Vietnam War Vet
30
President Obama has demonstrated that he's on the right side of history regarding climate change and other issues. What fine things could he have accomplished without the do-nothing obstructionists in Congress?
I for one will miss his presence.
I for one will miss his presence.
299
The president could have done a lot had he been willing to compromise. He stubbornly stood his ground and so did congress. Please don't forget that the Democrats had the White House, the Senate, and the House for the first 2 years of Obama's presidency. What did he accomplish in all that time? - the PPACA, that's it.
2
There is a reason that Democrats in Congress were voted out of office. Not everyone agrees with you and President Obama. That does not make these voters dumb or less informed, they simply share a differing view.
2
Should have put legislation into ObamaCare - the bill the democrats only wrote and voted for.
2
Good. Please keep covering this issue, NYT.
I was disappointed that there were no questions about climate change last night in the pre-debate. Hopefully, that will change. It must.
I was disappointed that there were no questions about climate change last night in the pre-debate. Hopefully, that will change. It must.
97
Last night's debate was about national security and the military, not climate change. Hopefully, it will come up more than once during the regular debates so we can watch der Donaldt fall all over himself spewing his latest conspiracy theory.
We are watching an extinction event unfold before our very eyes and doing nothing to prevent it. Unfortunately it is our own extinction we are denying. All we have to do to prevent it is change our entire way of living, working and playing in the western world from carbon intensive to carbon neutral. Oops, too late. So eat, drink, be merry, and above all keep burning that coal. The Koch brothers will thank you, but not your great grandchildren.
199
All indications are that cataclysmic results are happening already and faster and faster. We won't have to wait for our great grandchildren to thank the Kochs.
1
"All we have to do to prevent it is change our entire way of living, working, and playing".
Yup. And the "way" will HAVE TO BE for the majority of humanity to return to a very primitive way of living. No antibiotics, so you die young. No cars. Little or no heat. Certainly no air conditioning! The only job: subsistence farming, which everyone will have to do or starve. Of course, many will starve anyhow when crops fail. That is how most of humanity ALWAYS has lived.
The great thing is that if everyone lives that way....there won't be pollution or global warming. Of course, you must agree to die at age 45, and have 75% of your children die before their 5th birthdays.
And most humans will suffer periodic bouts of famine and mass starvation.
But on the bright side....there won't be any more pesky global warming!
Yup. And the "way" will HAVE TO BE for the majority of humanity to return to a very primitive way of living. No antibiotics, so you die young. No cars. Little or no heat. Certainly no air conditioning! The only job: subsistence farming, which everyone will have to do or starve. Of course, many will starve anyhow when crops fail. That is how most of humanity ALWAYS has lived.
The great thing is that if everyone lives that way....there won't be pollution or global warming. Of course, you must agree to die at age 45, and have 75% of your children die before their 5th birthdays.
And most humans will suffer periodic bouts of famine and mass starvation.
But on the bright side....there won't be any more pesky global warming!
1
Well, our extinction would solve the problem. That's one way to go.
1
Given that the Pentagon is the world's biggest fossil fuel consumer burning up 6% of US Oil consumption for the endless Wars and also the world's biggest greenhouse emitter you would think if Obama was serious about Climate Change he would stop the endless Wars. But from the moment he sent another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan Obama despite all his nice sounding rhetoric has continued and expanded the endless Wars from Libya to Syria to Ukraine and arming the Saudis to bomb Yemen. In fact Obama has set a new record for arms sales abroad including over $60 Billion to the Saudi dictatorship which has armed ISIS and is right now bombing civillians in Yemen. Despite nice words about ending nuclear weapons, in reality Obama is pushing to waste another $1 Trillion of our taxpayer money to actually create a new generation of lethal nuclear weapons. As if our current nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the planet hundreds of times over is not enough. If Obama and the Corporate Democrats truly wanted to challenge the Republicans they would call their bluff and veto the huge Defense Bills at record levels while the planet burns. The Republicans did not force Obama into the illegal Libyan War spreading 20,000 weapons to terrorists, the Syrian covert war to overthrow Assad, or the coup in the Ukraine. Obama did that by himself advised by Hillary Clinton. Instead of calling for NATO countries to waste even more on the scourge of War we need to redirect that money to save Earth
12
ok, just to say, the impact our military has on climate change is tiny compared to the corn/cow/pig industry. etcetera. consider this: because the military is a big organization, it can be changed. tell a general to do something, and it gets done. that's why we're seeing some impressive initiatives in the army and navy towards adopting alternative energy. war is a drag, that we have a military is more a statement about the primitive level of human development, you and me included, than something happening 'out there' to us. So let's leverage it.
1
It is incredibly naive to believe a President can wave a magic wand and make all foreign conflicts vanish, particularly when the conflicts are the results of actions by previous US administrations. Nor can the US wave a magic wand and stop other countries from creating conflicts while pursuing what their rulers perceive as in their national interest. The US did not create tyrants like Qaddafy or Assad, nor was it responsible for the fact that their subjects wanted to get rid of them. What we see in Syria would probably be what Libya would look like today without Western intervention. Anyone who thinks Syria is better off than Libya today needs his head examined. The fundamental problem in those countries is the lack of institutions than can uphold the rule of law. The US does need to reexamine its military expenditures and postures but just asking to drastically reduce the defense budget and remove the US completely from foreign conflicts is not going to produce a world without conflict nor will it make the US less vulnerable to destructive trends in the rest of the world. A president needs to deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it would be.
3
The earth has been cooling for the past 15 years and al gore's inconvenient truth never materialized, yet the left contines to harp on the ruse of man-made global warming. Oh I mean man made climate change. They had to change the label from global warming to climate change because the carbon taxes and regulatory controls could not be substantiated when the earth was cooling. But now any weather event works. We have a hurricane, climate change, a drought, climate change, a snowstorm, climate change. Yes, climate change is the perfect tool of the left because anything than happens can be blamed on climate change and then the governemrnt can raise carbon taxes and add more controls. Yes, climate change is the core of the perfect storm.
13
Jurgen, i have family members who argue as you do. i'm not sure if it's good or bad (no intention of making you wrong, as I would never do so to my father-in-law :), but the actual data -- facts on the ground, my friend -- are overwhelmingly supportive of a nonnegotiable reality: the climate is rapidly changing due to human pollution. Forgive me for being blunt, but if you really think the science is wrong, then when you get in your car in the morning and attempt to turn it on, it should not work. Because the scientific fundamentals behind climate change and making your car work are the same (it's called the laws of thermodynamics). In fact (now I'm teasing you), your car shouldn't even exist if you don't accept the science that tells us climate change is real.
12
Surface cooling only. Total temperature including water temps has been rising. This old chestnut has been worn out and explained many times to those who would deny the obvious signs of man-made global warming. Of course for those whose minds are made up based on dogma instead of science, the explanations are a waste of time.
6
The term "Climate Change" was used long before the term "Global Warming." Republican spin doctors urged republican politicians to use "Climate Change" because "it sounds less threatening" Global surface temperatures measured with actual thermometers show the surface has been warming with a steady trend for the last 40 years. Satellite estimates of tropospheric temperatures are based on theoretical models implemented in reams of computer code and do not even attempt to measure surface temperatures. Most of us do not live 5km up in the air.
6
Yes, Climate change is real. It is why North America is no longer covered by a glacier. What is NOT real is that Climate Change is man made.
A couple of years back, when the cooling trend extended into the 'Decade' range and the 'Global Warming' moniker was changed to 'Climate Change', a ranking member of the UN Climate Committee stated that they had underestimated the impact that Solar activity has on the Earth's climate. Seriously!?! That was taught in 3rd grade.
A couple of years back, when the cooling trend extended into the 'Decade' range and the 'Global Warming' moniker was changed to 'Climate Change', a ranking member of the UN Climate Committee stated that they had underestimated the impact that Solar activity has on the Earth's climate. Seriously!?! That was taught in 3rd grade.
16
Nonsense of the first degree. One data point (1998 or so unusually warm years) neither makes nor breaks a trend. Read the primary scientific literature.
To an extent, 'global warming' transformed to 'climate change' partly as a PR strategy. However, the change was made as a wide range of scientists realized that there are multiple long term effects as a result of a cause-the rapid rise in temperature.
To an extent, 'global warming' transformed to 'climate change' partly as a PR strategy. However, the change was made as a wide range of scientists realized that there are multiple long term effects as a result of a cause-the rapid rise in temperature.
4
"That was taught in 3rd grade."
In your state, Jim Crow laws were taught in 3rd grade not so long ago. In fact, I don't have much faith in what 3rd graders are taught in Texas today.
In your state, Jim Crow laws were taught in 3rd grade not so long ago. In fact, I don't have much faith in what 3rd graders are taught in Texas today.
2
You've chosen motivated reasoning and conspiracy thinking. Congrats.
I thought his legacy was to be legalizing the millions of "undocumented" persons from Mexico and points south now living in the US. Or was it closing Guantanamo and bringing all troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan...
15
Wrong on all counts. It is the Affordable Care Act. At least we can't be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions now.
8
President Obama has deported more illegal immigrants than any other president, and illegal immigration is down. Maybe that will be his legacy, because as the MENA region becomes uninhabitable in the next 30 years, the climate refugees will be legion, and this does not even address those on our coasts.
1
Maybe he should have taken action earlier in his eight years as president rather than passing the buck to the future president. They're always the same - making it easy on themselves, promoting industry which hurts the environment, just to get themselves elected. Just watch while more and more storms bater the Gulf Coast.
8
Read the article. He tried. It is very frustrating that these two journalists are interviewing Obama, and implying that non-action on climate is his fault, rather than sitting down with Boehner, Ryan, McConnell, and confronting them with the overwhelming science and demanding to know on what they base their skepticism on the issue. It is analogous to blaming the deer for the hunter's bullet. These people need to be called out on this issue by the media and shamed. Is it the media's fixation on balance? Is it ownership of media outlets by fossil fuel interests? Is the media afraid that they will lose the knuckle draggers as eyeballs for advertisers? Whatever the reason, the Times and others who clearly know what is happening need to make Forbes, Wall Street Journal, and other outlets of denial part of the story. Are there no back room meetings of wise men any more? The prevarication must stop.
6
President Obama should be commended for his attempts at addressing global warming. but unfortunately the republican Party and business leaders in general will not take the matter seriously until we have a major disaster that can be directly attributed to global warming. Unfortunately it may be too late at that time.
CEO's and other business leaders will not change the way they do business unless the laws are changed and strictly enforced. The Republican party has tried to convince the general public that regulations are bad for business and that they stifle growth and hurt the job market. The Democratic party is also to blame as they do a very poor jib on explaining why we have regulations. We have safer food, drugs and cars because of regulations. Most regulations come to being because people were either injured or their heath greatly compromised by chemical or processes that were very dangerous or extremely unhealthy.
If both political parties do not come together on a common ground to stop global warming it will soon become moot and nature will do what it always does and try to achieve equilibrium even if it drastically affects our globe.
CEO's and other business leaders will not change the way they do business unless the laws are changed and strictly enforced. The Republican party has tried to convince the general public that regulations are bad for business and that they stifle growth and hurt the job market. The Democratic party is also to blame as they do a very poor jib on explaining why we have regulations. We have safer food, drugs and cars because of regulations. Most regulations come to being because people were either injured or their heath greatly compromised by chemical or processes that were very dangerous or extremely unhealthy.
If both political parties do not come together on a common ground to stop global warming it will soon become moot and nature will do what it always does and try to achieve equilibrium even if it drastically affects our globe.
38
actually, it's the CEO's of many companies that are way ahead of the politics on climate change. they are making decisions all the time. in fact, the acceptance of climate change accelerated when the insurance industry did the math back in the 1990s and realized they held many trillions of $ of exposure in underwriting coastal property. i agree with you strongly though -- regulations are important for getting everyone to play in the same game. i also agree that the political discourse has to radically shift. It will -- realities on the ground will force it to.
2
Why not persuade individuals to limit population growth? That would mean giving industries and companies less than full absolute control over the climate change agenda, which must be undesirable for politicians who love lobbyists and political gesturing.
3
"Why not persuade individuals to limit population growth?"
Why not persuade right wing Republicans that their opposition to abortion, contraception and even basic sex education isn't helping.
Why not persuade right wing Republicans that their opposition to abortion, contraception and even basic sex education isn't helping.
2
So here's the scary thing. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. We've only had about 200 years of industrialization. In that brief amount of time we have altered the earth's climate. Considering that the earth's population will only get larger, I believe the damage is irreversible.
134
i think you are right.
It does not have to get larger, if we ALL adopted an aggressive ZERO POPULATION GROWTH mandate and really took it seriously.
Unfortunately the left AND the right are united in their utter disregard for POPULATION as the cause of global warming.
Unfortunately the left AND the right are united in their utter disregard for POPULATION as the cause of global warming.
3
It is not possible to reverse industrialization. However, it is possible and desirable to limit population growth. Need to revive Zero Population Growth. Why bring lives to a perilous world in order to make it more so?
2
Just as the coal industry has always refused to admit the pollution and the deaths due to coal, so the oil and gas industries have refused to admit the pollution and deaths due to oil and gas exploration and use. Fracking is used by coal and by oil and gas, so they are going to deny everything till the earth is totaled by them.
59
Articles abound about all the earthquakes in Oklahoma as a direct result of fracking. Will anything change? I doubt it.
The families of the companies polluting the earth will be just as dead as everyone else. There won't even be anyone around to ask, "grandpa/grandma why didn't you do something?
1
I know Obama is a "sell out" and part of the "military industrial complex" etc etc....
However, he consistently, on a personal level acts like the same guy with decent values and a keen intellect. He cares about the same things I care about. It's a sad sign of our times that even the president does not have the ability to overcome the entrenched and growing corruption and influence of large corporations and the military.
I hope that he is able to leave somewhat of a positive legacy on some level. Climate change is the most important issue of our generation. Those who don't understand this will understand this is few years.. or sooner.
However, he consistently, on a personal level acts like the same guy with decent values and a keen intellect. He cares about the same things I care about. It's a sad sign of our times that even the president does not have the ability to overcome the entrenched and growing corruption and influence of large corporations and the military.
I hope that he is able to leave somewhat of a positive legacy on some level. Climate change is the most important issue of our generation. Those who don't understand this will understand this is few years.. or sooner.
244
So if you and the consensus scintists are wrong, are you and they willing to put your personal fortunes in a pot to reimburse everyone for the expense of complying with all of the regulations and taxes associated with carbon and climate change? I would say the answer is no. You have no skin in the game and are quite happy to attempt to advance this ruse because it is always at the risk of someone else's expense.
7
Reaching the tipping point of no return to remedy climate change may prove Mr Obama's truth. But will it be too little too late?
1
Irene,
The sad part is that the president barely gave lip-service to the issue for the first six years of his mandate. There was no bully pulpit as he believed (wrongly) that fighting climate change would stifle our economic recovery.
We became a major fossils-fuels producer/exporter under his watch; just as his arms sales deposed Dubya's by 60%.
With the same Exxon Mobile execs supporting HRC as who funded the Climate Deniers these last twenty years, don't hold your breath waiting for any serious actions to be taken from our leadership.
The sad part is that the president barely gave lip-service to the issue for the first six years of his mandate. There was no bully pulpit as he believed (wrongly) that fighting climate change would stifle our economic recovery.
We became a major fossils-fuels producer/exporter under his watch; just as his arms sales deposed Dubya's by 60%.
With the same Exxon Mobile execs supporting HRC as who funded the Climate Deniers these last twenty years, don't hold your breath waiting for any serious actions to be taken from our leadership.
2