EU leaders fail to agree on 2050 climate goal

Associated Press ^ | June 21, 2019 | Samuel Petrequin and Raf Casert

[Olog-hai]

European Union leaders failed Thursday to back a plan to make the bloc’s economy carbon neutral by 2050 in spite of promises to protesters across the continent to fight harder against climate change.

Ahead of a U.N. meeting in the fall, the proposal was relegated to a non-binding footnote in the final statement of Thursday’s summit of EU leaders in Brussels.

“For a large majority of Member States, climate neutrality must be achieved by 2050,” the footnote read.

However, for the change in approach to become an official target, all 28 EU countries need to back the change.

The non-decision showed the rift between the western member states and the eastern nations on climate change.

According to French president Emmanuel Macron and several other diplomatic sources, 24 countries including Britain, France and Germany supported the initiative, but were held back by Poland and three other nations which heavily depend on a fossil-fuel economy. …

[Cowboy Bob]

If it is some important, why are China, India and Africa exempt?

[IC Ken]

In the 70’s working on a steel plant there was a protest of environmentalists. It started with a flag bearer carrying the Chinese flag. China has started and supported the environmental movement. Our industries closed and moved to China who because of their support and financial involvement of the movement has made them immune from its effects.

[I want the USA back]

Carbon is not the problem. CO2 is NOT carbon. CO2 has none of the characteristics of carbon. Trying to be “carbon neutral” is insane.

Furthermore, water vapor is the strongest greenhouse gas. Are they going to restrict how much water we drink? (That’s coming!)

[Cowboy Bob]

Have you ever been to Beijing?

[IC Ken]

I have never been to Beijing. A good friend of mine was part of a team of consultants that went to China before the Olympic games to consult on the pollution issues. China did not want the world to see how bad it was. He suggested they close all industry 2 weeks before the Olympics.

He said he saw rivers that were a bright red and most of the population lives by the rivers. His comment to the officials were they would lose a BILLION people to their own filing of the water. Official response was SO WHAT.

[abclily]

OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a giant nuclear furnace that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?

[hal ogen]

eu “leaders” are nitwits. Hopefully, euros will come to their senses and rid themselves of these unelected losers soon.

[gibsonguy]

What do you want to bet they knew (and were counting on) Poland and the others would do this so they were free to virtue signal.

[ArcadeQuarters]

Does “carbon neutral” mean you can be as inefficient as you like as long as you buy imaginary carbon credits from s-hole countries?

[FLT-bird]

Go ahead Yurps! Offer up your economies on the altar of Earth Mother Gaia. Show us beastly Americans how it’s done. Here’s your big chance to “show leadership”. We’ll just be sitting this one out.

[Teacher317]

European Union leaders failed Thursday to back a plan to make the bloc’s economy carbon neutral by 2050

Maybe some of you can enjoy this as much as I do... once you prove to a Leftist drone that CO2 increases are not a problem, they quickly move the goalposts and start talking about temperature changes... which are mentioned nowhere in this article.

4 quick questions for busting Climate Change believers...

1. If CO2 concentrations are so important, like world-ending-soon important, like tens of trillions of dollars important... it seems strange that HS science classes aren't doing the very simple experiments to ascertain what levels of CO2 concentration are best for a chosen species of plants. Shouldn't children be educated about this mortal danger, since they won't get to live to see Halley's Comet return? (2061)

2. Many of these studies have been done (cite), and all demonstrate that growth and photosynthesis rates are optimized at about 850-1400ppm CO2. We are at about 400ppm, and rising at about 1.6ppm per year. How is Earth in danger if we are slowly approaching the optimal levels for all plant life?

3. During the Cambrian Period, CO2 levels were over 7000ppm (cite), and plant and animal life thrived. How do you explain the Earth not withering to dust during this era?

4. Since the oceans emit 10-16 times as much CO2 as all human activity combined, shouldn't we be focusing in on the biggest source of CO2 in our efforts to save the planet?

Enjoy!

[Teacher317]

Does “carbon neutral” mean you can be as inefficient as you like as long as you buy imaginary carbon credits from s-hole countries?

cite: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

(in Mt CO2/yr)

Nation		2017 CO2		1990 CO2		% increase
China		10.88		2.39		+354%
USA		5.08		5.10		+0.4%
All EU		3.55		4.40		- 19.5%
India		2.45		0.60		+305%
Russia		1.76		2.38		- 25.8%
Japan		1.35		1.15		+14.9%
Germany		0.80		1.10		- 21.8%

Russia and China had the same CO2 output in 1990... China has added more than the rest of the world combined since then (8.48 vs 6.36), while Russia had one of the best reductions in the same period.

And that wonderful, inspiring, sacrosanct Paris Accord allows China to add 30% by 2030... 30% of 10.88 being 3.26... about as much as the entire EU combined...

One night want to take a quick peek at global air quality as well...

Note the number of purple and red figures worldwide... and in China... versus the green figures in the US...

(Now wouldn't a good little Leftist drone WANT goods to be made in the clean US, rather than by the air-dirtying Chinese?)

[cweese]

Great points. I’d like to add that increases in atmospheric CO2 levels FOLLOW rising temperatures. IOW, CO2 does not drive higher temperatures.

[A_perfect_lady]

Oh, I thought it was “settled science” that we’d all be dead by 2050.

[bgill]

Proving once again it’s all a scam.

[fruser1]

The human body is 18% carbon, so one way to reduce it is to kill those who propose these rules.

I wonder if they include the mass of the number of EU denizens euthanized in their calculations.

[ArcadeQuarters]

Interesting. Thanks.