President Obama signs a Climate Treaty with Canada

President Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
President Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (photoshopped)

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

President Obama has announced a climate “pact” with Canada; but this executive action seems likely to once again raise questions about the limits of executive authority.

U.S., Canada Sign Pact to Fight Climate Change

Countries say they will cut methane emissions and try to sign Paris climate deal.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States and Canada agreed joint steps on Thursday to fight climate change, including cutting methane emissions from oil and gas operations and signing last year’s Paris climate deal “as soon as feasible.”

The agreement came as Canada’s new Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Barack Obama met at the White House. Methane, which can leak from pipelines and valves, is a powerful greenhouse gas, with up to 80 times the potential of carbon dioxide to trap the planet’s heat.

The agreement can do “even more to protect our countries and our communities, especially in the Arctic, from climate change,” Obama said during a welcoming ceremony for Trudeau.

The countries committed to cutting emissions of methane by 40 to 45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025, to take steps to fight climate change in the Arctic, and to speed development of green technologies.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will begin developing regulations for methane emissions from existing oil and gas sources immediately and “will move as expeditiously as possible to complete this process,” the joint agreement said.

Read more:

The new agreement, if implemented, is likely to put a substantial dent in America and Canada’s domestic energy production industry, which may cause a rise in energy prices. Gas fracking sometimes releases large amounts of methane, particularly when it goes wrong. Banning the release of methane may amount to a ban on fracking, which would likely reverse much of the competitive advantage which America and Canada have enjoyed in recent years.

Regardless of whether this new commitment breaches the constitutional bounds of presidential power, President Obama can reasonably claim to have a firm political mandate to raise energy prices. Obama openly stated in 2009, that he opposes low energy prices. The President wants energy prices to skyrocket – he believes price rises are necessary, to save the planet from global warming.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
NW sage
March 10, 2016 4:30 pm

Wouldn’t it be interesting if Obama could determine, in a scientifically valid way (not 97% consensus!), that what he is proposing would have a high probability of actually achieving the goal he wishes BEFORE he begins to implement it?

Reply to  NW sage
March 10, 2016 6:38 pm

Is his information really THIS bad? Do we really need to disadvantage our own people, to the degree we have to go fight foreign wars over a resource we could produce cheaper ourselves, to solve a “problem” for which there is NOT ONE SHRED of credible EVIDENCE???
This is just NUTS.

empire sentry
Reply to  Goldrider
March 10, 2016 9:00 pm

If anyone remembers, President Cartah sitting in front a fire place and asking everyone to put on a sweater and suck it up.
He then shut down our resources.
It started out at $60 billion a year and now is over $200 billion (correct me if I am wrong) that we send to imperial tyrants who use the money to buy weapons.
Imagine what an impact that would have had…revenues for infrastructure, royalties to pay for universities, and GROWTH
So this is the FIRST year we can export energy With all that revenue, jobs taxes research we would all have solar power and geothermal in our houses.
The dims are the greatest destroyers of all.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Goldrider
March 11, 2016 8:18 am

No. His information is not bad – it’s conscious fraud. He’s been in on the scam ever since he sat on the board of the Chicago climate exchange with Valarie Jarrett. This was one of his top priorities when he got into office and the once that he’s implemented most quietly and most steadily – he of the ‘if the facts don’t match your agenda, change the facts’ school. It’s the way he handles everything.

Reply to  Goldrider
March 12, 2016 5:30 pm

Shut down Canadian fossil fuel production while at the same time seeking vast amounts of Canadian electricity supply for the U.S.

Reply to  NW sage
March 10, 2016 8:42 pm

Uh, Houston, we have a problem……
“The situation is completely different for a CO2 concentration of 240 p.p.m., which is close to that observed at the end of MIS19. In this case all four model versions simulate rapid ice growth several thousands of years before the present and large ice sheets exist already at the present time (Extended Data Fig. 1). This means that the Earth system would already be well on the way towards a new glacial state if the pre-industrial CO2 level had been merely 40 p.p.m. lower than it was during the late Holocene, which is consistent with previous results.”
Ganopolski et al, 2016 paywalled here:

empire sentry
Reply to  NW sage
March 10, 2016 8:46 pm

Wish…but no.
Never, not on any single Obama program, project, policy …nothing.
This way they can claim they achieved success..because success was never determined.

Reply to  empire sentry
March 11, 2016 7:01 am

…and the problem was never there.

March 10, 2016 4:39 pm

So CO/2 failed to “kill” the planet so lets try the scam with methane?

Michael Jankowski
March 10, 2016 4:40 pm

Imagine he’d feel much differently if he were going to buy a home in Winnipeg rather than Hawaii when his stupidness finally leaves the oval office.

Tom Judd
Reply to  Michael Jankowski
March 10, 2016 6:19 pm

Actually, he’s staying in Washington DC until his daughter finishes high school. ($37,000 a year – but you should see the lunch menu; puts a high brow gourmet restaurant to shame.)

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Tom Judd
March 11, 2016 5:59 am

must be a “safe space”

Reply to  Tom Judd
March 11, 2016 7:03 am

I’m sure where she goes to school nobody has to worry about being in a “gun-free zone”.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Tom Judd
March 11, 2016 10:19 am

Tom: Well, actually it’s more like he’s staying in Washington to make sure his agenda is not tampered with, and to become a walking lawsuit against any pushback, once he’s no longer encumbered by his office.

March 10, 2016 4:43 pm

More grandstanding.

Robert of Ottawa
March 10, 2016 4:54 pm

US and Canada sign treaty (not, congress must approve) to preen their Prime Minister and President’s moral superiority while simultaneously stuffing money into their crony friends’ pockets.

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
March 11, 2016 6:28 am


Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
March 11, 2016 7:04 am

Well, you know…. this climate stuff is fictitious… and this treaty is fictitious.

March 10, 2016 4:55 pm

Well, this is our drama teacher PM at his stupid best – again. Outright win for Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, the rest of the Gulf States, Russia. The losers as usual – Canada and the US.

Reply to  albertalad
March 11, 2016 7:47 am
Rob Morrow
Reply to  albertalad
March 11, 2016 8:15 am

Trudeau is no better than Trump, he just comes from the opposite end of the spectrum. Vacuous feel-goodery is his product and he sells it well.

March 10, 2016 4:58 pm

My Plan will necessarily cause you to suffer more”
thanks for nothin

March 10, 2016 5:00 pm
March 10, 2016 5:02 pm

Democrat Obama’s energy policies are guaranteed to drive the USA to follow the country that has achieved the greatest reduction in coal fired power and greenhouse gases – the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The DPRK (No. Korea) has the astounding achievement of a 76% reduction in CO2 emissions/capita – from 3.38 metric tons/capita in 1993 to 0.81 metric tons/capita in 2011. The remarkable effectiveness of government policy in persuading citizens to participate is shown in the satellite photos of the region. Note the efficient use of energy in the DPRK compared to the blatant waste of electricity in neighboring countries. (/sarc)

empire sentry
Reply to  David L. Hagen
March 10, 2016 8:47 pm

Well done!!!!

Reply to  David L. Hagen
March 11, 2016 7:07 am

Another startling fact is the complete lack of obesity in the DPRK–nobody has enough food to get fat.
So see? There ARE benefits to total depravity.

Reply to  RockyRoad
March 11, 2016 7:10 am

A marvelous example of how to require AVAILABLE technology to achieve the IPCC/UN’s goal of 80% reduction in CO2 AND eliminate the USA’s severe obesity epidemic! (/sarc)

Paul Westhaver
March 10, 2016 5:03 pm

I was thoroughly chastised by the moderators for precise and appropriate ridicule of that communist putz haircut running Canada….So would someone else please do so again on my behalf. Say the worst, it deserves it.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 10, 2016 6:03 pm

Thanks Paul, by sliding your comment by the Mods ( who I believe largely feel the same way) we get the point.
Ballet dancer and drama teacher young Trudeau is keeping his father’s legacy going. Both did and are doing tremendous damage to Canada, the elder with the Human Right tribunal. The younger still not being able to get his head out of one of his lower regions. The fact he is kissing someones other lower region is abhorrent. I wonder how large that carbon foot print of today’s activity really is and if they even want to admit that.

Reply to  asybot
March 10, 2016 7:43 pm

Trudeau Sr. did a lot more damage than that! He gutted Canada’s military and raised the federal debt by about 740% – from $21.2 billion (1968) to $157.2 billion (1984). Trudeau Jr. plans to follow in his father’s footsteps. One major bank estimated that Trudeau Jr., based on his spending promises, will increase the federal debt over the next four years by another $100 billion – from $542 billion to $642 billion. He also plans to cut military spending (another broken campaign promise) by $400 million per year. Total interest payments on Canada’s combined federal/provincial debt ($1.1 Trillion) now stands at around $80 billion per year. Western countries like Canada and the U.S. are committing economic suicide with the one-two punch of high government debt and an unfathomable fixation with global warming.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 10, 2016 7:51 pm

From their web page.
Average generation cost, 2.01 cents/kWh
Average Export price, 6.00 cents/kWh
Boston consumers paid, 30.03 cents/kWh
Transmission costs are paid by the American utilities.
There is no cheap, clean Hydro-Quebec power for Boston consumers when the transmission costs are included. But there is money to be made by transmission companies.
New England customers are being mislead about cheap Canadian power to replace their coal fired and nuclear plants.

empire sentry
Reply to  Barbara
March 10, 2016 8:52 pm

Prices in Ohio tripled. Obama shut down power plants. Electric now comes from Canada at triple the price.
Cities are going around to business doing ‘voluntary audits” to see where people can cut down during the day.
In order to run our test lab, all the lights and air had to be turned in the offices…so we would not exceed ‘peak’ goals.
Needless to say, any high energy, auto maker or other type producer has left town and the state.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
March 10, 2016 8:16 pm

The Star, June 9, 2014
“Christine Lagarde told an international international economic conference in Montreal that whether it’s a carbon tax or cap and trade system,a mechanism is needed to reflect the cost of emissions that will encourage less consumption.”
The Montreal Gazette, June 5, 2015
‘International Economic Forum wants to put Montreal on the map’
Chair, Paul Desmarais, Jr.
Board member, Christine Lagarde
Desmarais family is one of the richest in Canada with European business connections and political king-makers in Canada.

Reply to  Barbara
March 10, 2016 8:27 pm

Barbara commented: “……”
Wow, a gathering of wealth redistributors. I don’t get it. Why do the elite/rich believe the world needs to be equal economically when they are the epitome of the opposite?

Reply to  Barbara
March 10, 2016 8:49 pm
March 10, 2016 5:03 pm

…Read my lips ….It’s the F#%ing Sun Stupid !

James Schrumpf
March 10, 2016 5:07 pm

This is probably extremely familiar territory for many, but I’ve just run across it. While trying to look up the GWP for water vapor — and running across the many weasel words used to explain why its value was “hard to calculate” (as though there weren’t any WAGs in climate science) — I dimly remembered that water vapor was also a byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion. So I figured I’d look up the chemical equations that describe this combustion.
I was somewhat surprised to find out that in general, the water vapor production from hydrocarbon production was anywhere from 25-33% greater than the CO2 production (the formulas ranged from 4(H2O) + 3(CO2) to 5(H2O) + 4(CO2)). This means that burning those evil fossil fuels actually produces more water vapor — a more efficacious greenhouse gas — than it does carbon dioxide.
Most of the articles explaining why it was so hard to calculate water vapor’s GWP stated this was because it was “naturally occurring” and therefore could not be a driver of climate “because it goes in and out of the air so rapidly. In other words, water vapor is weather, not climate. It’s a short-term gas and cannot force climate change.” This seems to be extreme hand-waving, as we’re talking about the physical properties of a molecule, which have nothing to do with how many of those molecules are present.
It seems that we are faced with a never-acknowledged fact of the climate wars: burning fossil fuels actually produces more of an even more powerful greenhouse gas than the one we’re constantly threatened with, but sheer numbers are against water vapor. If there are 18,000 molecules of water vapor for every 400 molecules of CO2, and CO2 has only increased by 85 ppm since measurement started, then at most only 113 molecules ppm of water vapor would have been added by fossil fuel combustion. While 85 out of 400 molecules is significant, 113 out of 18,000 is a three-decimal-point calculation.
It appears I’ve talked myself into seeing why water vapor from HC combustion is insignificant, while the CO2 output is not. However, did I get a correct answer for the right reasons?

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 10, 2016 5:18 pm

If you really want to spin your head, think about how an evaporating water vapor can lose energy breaking free leaving a cooler ocean behind. Rise in the air losing energy, and then turn around and capture the energy leaving the cooler ocean and “warm” it.
Seeing as water vapor is more prevalent and powerful, it is amazing how every step in the process looses energy but somehow heats its source.

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 10, 2016 5:21 pm

Comparing the production of atmospheric water vapor via the solar/ocean cycle with water vapor produced during anthropogenic HC combustion is like comparing molecules to mountains (at least on a global scale).
You are right about the significance of CO2 output. Its obvious effects are on plant growth not climate. It is very unlikely increased atmospheric CO2 significantly effects climate or temperature. There is no evidence it does.

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 10, 2016 9:40 pm

You need to spend some time down wind of a big power plant. All that steam and water vapour going into the atmosphere doesn’t stay there very long. It’s like lake effect snow and rain. It comes out rather quickly. I lived near several large power plants for 13 years. In the winter, the down wind effect was pretty obvious in the neighbourhood of the power plants by the increased snow depth.
As an aside, my house was near the North Saskatchewan River. The same effect was obvious adjacent to the River. Not right next to it as the water vapour had to rise, cool and fall – about a mile or two from the river bank.
That’s not science, just observation.
Also, take a look at humidity trends in the atmosphere. Not doing what the IPCC folks thought. Why?

Paul Coppin
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
March 11, 2016 7:04 am

Same is true of major airports, due to fine particle nucleation from jet exhaust. There is a well defined “snow-belt” around Pearson Int’l (YYZ -Toronto), particularly in Mississauga where the jets come down through the winter decks on their approaches.
If you ever been to an airshow when the humidity is relatively high, you may have noticed that later in the afternoon, typically about 3-4pm, it gets cloudy over the airport and often rains lightly. Usually this occurs not long after the military jets have done their low level (relatively) aerobatic routines, working the 1000-5000 ft airspace.

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 11, 2016 9:12 am

Somebody, somewhere, has probably made the argument that since water, H2O, is a byproduct of fossil fuel combustion, that it contributes to rising sea level.

March 10, 2016 5:08 pm

Turley warned of the Imperial Presidency under Obama
Justice Roberts unwillingness to strike down ACA and his questionable rewrite of the ACA mandate as a tax, further eroded the balance of power.
While I know many believe an outsider (Trump) is the only way out of our mess, it is a dangerous time to put an ego driven narcissist into our newly formed monarchy.

Tom Judd
Reply to  FTOP_T
March 10, 2016 6:33 pm

Choosing a president is strictly a question of choosing the least bad of the very bad. As such, I think I’d prefer an ego driven narcissist that has not gotten a Nobel Peace Prize to an ego driven narcissist that has gotten a Nobel Peace Prize.

Reply to  Tom Judd
March 10, 2016 6:41 pm

Said Nobel Prize winning narcissist in bed and being diddled by the United Nations.

Reply to  Tom Judd
March 10, 2016 7:13 pm

goldrider….it’s not a good diddle unless there is a smile at the end. Read Edgar Allen Poe “on the art of diddling”

Tom in Florida
Reply to  FTOP_T
March 11, 2016 5:36 am

I agree with your assessment of Trump but would like to clear up a misconception about the tax ruling of Justice Roberts. Justice Roberts did indeed declare the mandate a tax because it truly is. It appears on the 1040 under “additional taxes”. He did also say that only Congress has the power to change tax law not the Supreme Court. That is a noble position. He was indicating to the Congress that they had the power to change the tax mandate portion of the ACA. The fact that Congress has not done so is not the fault of Justice Roberts.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
March 12, 2016 7:46 pm

Scalia described the ruling as SCOTUScare and certainly felt Roberts rewrote the penalty as a tax to avoid conflict with the Commerce clause. It appears on the 1040 because of Roberts.

March 10, 2016 5:09 pm

The amounts of methane clathrate (also called methane hydrate) decomposing in the oceans into atmospheric methane is immense. Ocean-sourced atmospheric methane dwarfs anthropogenic releases of into insignificance. The natural decomposition of organic matter in forests, fields, swamps and grasslands is another incredibly large natural source of methane.
Where’s the humility? We know enough to be certain man-caused releases of methane into the atmosphere are totally insignificant in any honest global perspective. Restrictions on anthropogenic releases of methane can not effect the atmosphere in any meaningful way.

Reply to  willybamboo
March 11, 2016 6:53 am

Exactly, the human part is a tiny bit compared to the natural cycle.
It is just another way for the green radicals to suppress the oil and gas industry, making energy harder for people to get and use.

March 10, 2016 5:13 pm

This is one thing that may make Trump good to have as president as such things will hurt the bottom line of his businesses. I would be curious to see how Trump would weigh in on all this climate BS. Obama is just another elitist sock puppet just as Hillary is already. To me it’s a choice of sock puppet vs puppeteer. Provided Trump doesn’t fall prey to puppeteers himself, he just may do some good for this country.

Reply to  Ryan
March 10, 2016 5:26 pm

Maybe its past time to hear from Trump about Anthropogenic Global Warming. Why not tell us, in his endearing, straightforward manner exactly what he thinks. “Why so quiet?” Of course we will have to deal with how it contradicts whatever it was he said before…. Trump knows contradictions are only an issue for small, petty minds.

Reply to  willybamboo
March 10, 2016 5:55 pm

He is a skeptic.
He has said he will houseclean the EPA.

Reply to  willybamboo
March 10, 2016 7:43 pm
Donald J. Trump
✔ ‎‎@realDonaldTrump
This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps,and our GW scientists are stuck in ice
4:39 PM – 1 Jan 2014
Any and all weather events are used by the GLOBAL WARMING HOAXSTERS to justify higher taxes to save our planet! They don’t believe it $$$$!
1:40 PM – 26 Jan 2014
The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.
11:15 AM – 6 Nov 2012
It’s snowing & freezing in NYC. What the hell ever happened to global warming?
7:25 AM – 21 Mar 2013
Ice storm rolls from Texas to Tennessee – I’m in Los Angeles and it’s freezing. Global warming is a total, and very expensive, hoax!
7:13 AM – 6 Dec 2013

March 10, 2016 5:17 pm

“Methane, which can leak from pipelines and valves, is a powerful greenhouse gas, with up to 80 times the potential of carbon dioxide to trap the planet’s heat.”
First off, it is only 20 times the “greenhouse gas” than CO2, if greenhouses even exist in an environment that has convections. It’s half-life is about 5 years, about the same as the half-life of CO2. A tempest in a teapot, for sure.

Reply to  higley7
March 11, 2016 5:19 am

if greenhouses even exist in an environment that has convections
precisely. true greenhouses warm by limiting convection. greenhouses gases do not and cannot limit convection.
any increase in surface temperatures due to “back radiation” is only temporary, as it will necessarily increase convection, restoring surface temperatures. nature always works to resist a change. which is why the “hot spot” only exists in models.

Patrick MJD
March 10, 2016 5:31 pm

From the article;
“Methane, which can leak from pipelines and valves, is a powerful greenhouse gas, with up to 80 times the potential of carbon dioxide to trap the planet’s heat.”
What? 80 times the potential of CO2 to trap heat? How can these people be so wrong in so few words?

March 10, 2016 5:34 pm

Obama said that openly but the media did their best to see that it never saw the light of day. Had it been made public he never would have made it to the White House.

March 10, 2016 5:39 pm

I suppose Project Ice Age is going to continue rolling effortlessly forwards. I happen to live where glaciers were half a mile thick. This desire for another Ice Age is one wish I fear will be granted by our Overlords.
But then, every Ice Age also caused this group of chimps and gorillas to evolve into humans at a ferocious pace.

March 10, 2016 5:41 pm

Here’s the other side of the blogosphere.
I just don’t know what to say.

Reply to  jpatrick
March 10, 2016 6:21 pm

jpatrick commented: “…Here’s the other side of the blogosphere……I just don’t know what to say.”
Yes, it’s a conundrum. Some of the charts at that site support natural variability though. Others are time truncated for effect. Others use questionable data….something that is claimed by pro and con AGW sides. But nothing at that site supports the models. Nothing. And models is their whole shtick.

March 10, 2016 5:41 pm

Slowly but surely, step by step, inch by inch…….

March 10, 2016 5:41 pm

“A key concession in the treaty in that Michelle will not be planting anything in the brassica family in the Whitehouse garden this year” the press secretary announced.

March 10, 2016 6:14 pm

Trudeau plans to ram a carbon tax down the throats of Canadian citizens to stop the earth’s climate from changing. And so far Canadian conservative politicians have been completely silent about it, apparently they’re as left as the Liberals.
They don’t even ask how they’ll know when the climate has stopped changing. Lol!
Only leftists believe that a tax can change the weather.

John Robertson
Reply to  Klem
March 10, 2016 6:46 pm

There are very few conservative politicians in office in Canada.
The current CPC are way too progressive for my tastes, being mostly power seeking parasites, they feared doing anything conservative when they had a majority.
Refused to have a full examination of the government complicity in creating,promoting CAGW.
Liberal Lite just means a slower collapse, Having the Cabin Boy as PM means the whole Kleptocracy crashes and burns sooner, less over all harm.
Western Canada will be seeking partners for the new nation as the Trudeau Two idiocy will probably split Canada.

Reply to  John Robertson
March 10, 2016 8:01 pm

PM Stephen Harper made it clear he would not impose a carbon tax unless it was in conjunction with an U.S. carbon tax. For any politician in Canada to admit to any doubts about AGW would result in the media jumping all over him/her with the label of “Denier”. Since most people in Canada seem to be clueless about global warming it would amount to political suicide. It’s too bad Sun News Network was sabotaged by the CRTC because they were the only TV news station in Canada to give a regular voice to people like Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris (Ottawa based International Climate Science Coalition).

March 10, 2016 6:40 pm

Stephen Harper was correct when he called it a “tax on everything”. I wonder if Canadians understand that their food will get more expensive, their heat, everything. I am furious that friends of mine are living in cold because they cannot afford heat. People on my road heat with wood so at least they will be warm when the woodstove is burning. I refuse to live like that so I am not there until May. But it still gets cold in Canada then. And in July, August, Sept and gets really cold by Oct. What is Le Fluff thinking about and how many Canadians is he willing to kill?

Reply to  Eve
March 11, 2016 5:10 am

we have only 2 seasons in Canada. Cold and hockey.

Bob Quartero
March 10, 2016 6:46 pm

Fracking happens under controlled conditions and never releases Methane of any significance. Blow-outs are extremely rare and not really the “lets regulate the emissions” kind of events.
All this agreement does is potentially limit testing of flowrates post frac, which means that companies have to take a bit of an economic gamble on the tie-in. This process has already been implemented 20 years ago in Alberta; could possibly tighten the testing some more, but it is all but a political puff of Methane.
Besides, the Earth’s crust “breathes” Methane continuously, yet the atmosphere shows just a trace amount. In the presence of abundant Oxigen and a few thousand lightning strikes every day, it is just not that stable..
Politicians with a degree in arts or law just don’t know that.

Reply to  Bob Quartero
March 11, 2016 5:09 am

methane is bacteria food. they convert it to CO2 and H2O, using the enery produced for their metabolism.

Tom Judd
March 10, 2016 6:49 pm

Sung to the tune of: It’s Hard to be Humble
Oh, Lord, it’s hard to be humble
When you’re perfect in every way
I can’t wait to give a press conference
‘Cause I get better lookin’ every day
To know me is to love me
I must be a hell of a prez
Oh, Lord, it’s hard to be humble
You better do everything that I says
I used to have a Senate
But I guess, it just couldn’t compete
With all of these edicts and memos
Now kneel and kiss my feet

Reply to  Tom Judd
March 10, 2016 6:56 pm

Seems like you have met Obama ??

David Wells
Reply to  Tom Judd
March 11, 2016 8:45 am

Think the last verse could be better maybe:
I used to have a senate
But I guess, it just couldn’t pass
With all of these edicts and memos
Now kneel and kiss my a..e.

Tom Halla
March 10, 2016 6:57 pm

One issue is the willingness of congressional Democrats to give Obama that much power. He is clearly stepping on their prerogatives as Congress, but his own party apparently values solidarity more than procedure. Of course, the “surrender caucus” could block them, but lacks votes for a veto override, so it does nothing.

Reply to  clipe
March 10, 2016 7:30 pm

clipe commented: “… …..”
I don’t know of any politician actively supporting AGW that is not a poseur.

Reply to  markl
March 10, 2016 7:49 pm

Lorrie Goldstein has been banging on about this for years, but nobody is listening.

March 10, 2016 7:31 pm

Get back to me when the Senate ratifies it.

Reply to  Geistmaus
March 10, 2016 7:52 pm

Geistmaus commented: “…Get back to me when the Senate ratifies it.”
It’s a “pledge”. Nothing binding. Like between two fraternity brothers. Nothing to ratify, verify, or even think about. Sort of like saying the pledge of allegiance to AGW.

March 10, 2016 7:49 pm

Well our PM has certainly done his part to stop methane from leaking from pipelines. No Keystone, no Energy East. No pipelines, no methane leaks. All in a days work for our illustrious drama queen, aka Nincompoop II.

Reply to  ferdberple
March 10, 2016 7:54 pm

Welcome to Trudopia.

March 10, 2016 9:08 pm

The green puppet of Canada met with the green puppet of America and they conceived a green blob.

March 10, 2016 9:29 pm

Did the drama teacher even pass Grade 11 science ? Climate changes ,scary global warming is a fraud , and although former Prime Minister Harper wasn’t a Mr. Selfie he did have a brain .

March 10, 2016 9:36 pm

Tend to agree with John Robertson . Western Canada and Texas should merge and leave the left wing socialists to freeze in the dark Don’t forget the new greener than green Hillary promise to “shut down the fossil fuel industry ” . What happened to American backbone . Toadies to $$billion dollar lobby groups .

March 10, 2016 9:53 pm

Amber – LOL – I have a couple of friends in southern Utah who say the continent wasn’t divided up properly and we should fix it. They think the continent should be divided into three parts. Everything between the Mississippi and the Rocky Mountains from Texas to the Arctic Ocean should be one country, and the East and West coasts should be two other countries. The north-south connections make more sense than east west connections.
There was a time when we called Calgary “Houston North”.
Some days, I think they are right. Maybe after the big earthquake to come puts a little bit of Ocean between California/BC and the rest of the continent we could redraw the boundaries.
Justin Trudeau is just carrying out his father’s dream of completing the National Energy Policy of the 1980’s. What did people expect?

March 10, 2016 10:35 pm

Less than 10-months to go!
Hold On! Hold On! Wait. Take YOUR Time. Think It Through.

March 11, 2016 2:44 am

The models say that more greenhouse gases increases positive Arctic and North Atlantic Oscillations. That will cool the Arctic, it takes an increase in negative AO/NAO for the Arctic to warm.

March 11, 2016 3:06 am

.Bloomberg View) – Last year, eggs were declared safe. After demonising the cholesterol in them for a generation, nutritionists finally acknowledged that there was overwhelming scientific evidence that eggs were not artery-clogging killers after all.
But wait. What’s this? The US government’s latest nutrition guidelines came out this month and they’re not egg-friendly. They say people should consume as little cholesterol as possible. That’s even stricter than the 2010 standard allowing 300 milligrams a day, about the amount in one egg.
Scientists are supposed to change their minds when confronted with new evidence – whether it’s reclassifying Pluto as not quite a planet or admitting that Neanderthals contributed to the modern human gene pool
When it comes to diet, though, even scientists sometimes get stuck in a rut. Then they drive the rest of us into a baffling morass of nutrition advice, in which the cholesterol paradox is a world-class stumper. Why would the same nutrition scientists who said last year that “cholesterol is not considered a nutrient of concern for overconsumption” keep warning people not to eat it? Follow the MONEY.

Reply to  Russell
March 11, 2016 5:06 am

nutrition scientists
precisely the same cherry picked statistics went into nutritional science as climate science. the result is an epidemic of obesity and diabetes. and the blame is placed on the individual, not the scientists.
the “food pyramid” recommended by nutritional science is at the heart of the problem. sugars and starches are not healthy alternatives to fat and protein, yet that is what the food pyramid promotes.
why should grain fed people be any different than grain fed cattle? cattle over 6 months double in weight in feed lots. it isn’t muscle they are developing.
if fat that makes you fat, why don’t feed lots feed cattle fat? why do they feed them grain? why does the food pyramid promote feeding grain to people?

Reply to  ferdberple
March 11, 2016 6:20 am

ferdberple well said It is easy to understand that such rapid progress has brought with it detrimental consequences to our lifestyle and our health. But should we be putting our trust in a story sponsored by Big Food and Big Pharm? This is Climate Change 101.

David Wells
Reply to  Russell
March 11, 2016 8:51 am

Especially when for people who have no particular issues 84% of your cholesterol is produced by your own body and there remains no evidence that cholesterol has ever caused a heart attack.

March 11, 2016 6:30 am

What Canada really needs as a wake up call is nuclear threats from NK and land grabs of territory by Russia and China.

Paul Coppin
Reply to  Resourceguy
March 11, 2016 7:08 am

Already happened – but rather than invading, they’re just buying it.

Tom in Florida
March 11, 2016 6:41 am

OK, check my numbers please.
The methane concentration in the atmosphere has an average of 1823/ppb.
How much of that is from “oil and gas operations”? Can we estimate on the high end of 20%?
So, that is 364/ppb and the Presitator (president & dictator) wants to reduce that by 40-45% which is 164/ppb leaving 1659/ppb in the atmosphere.
Let’s covert to ppm for comparison.
CO2 is approx 400/ppm and CH4 would end up at 1.659/ppm.
So the Presitator wants to concentrate efforts into reducing CH4 by .164/ppm in order to save the planet.
You may now stop laughing and resume your normal lives.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
March 11, 2016 7:14 am

Facts, fact checking, and details are not what politician lawyers do. It is the science of win-the-day over reach that matters most to them.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
March 11, 2016 7:23 am

I stopped laughing when I realized, contrary to any logic or common sense whatsoever, this current president is serious.

March 11, 2016 7:05 am

This agreement will not in any way interfere with southern migration of Canadians in the event that the pause turns into a downturn with the long cycle AMO decline and a relative long cycle solar minima. The current media spin will be long forgotten and short memory span is the basis for all the policy moves anyway.

Paul Coppin
Reply to  Resourceguy
March 11, 2016 7:11 am

We’re way ahead of you – Cdns have already established major beach-heads throughout the Caribbean. once we get all the locals into boats and on their way to the US to Fla, NY and LA, we’re good to go,.

Reply to  Paul Coppin
March 11, 2016 7:16 am

Just don’t count on Cuba like a lot of Canadians have been doing. Note that U.S. taxpayers are currently footing the bill for Cubans stuck on Central America trying to get north.

tom in Florida
Reply to  Paul Coppin
March 11, 2016 8:29 am

And you Canadians are safe on the water. Everyone know that unlike boats and canoes, Canadians never tip.

March 11, 2016 10:28 am

Dear Canada, your CO2 output is 2% of the global. Statistically you cannot affect the global CO2 concentration. Sorry. So why is your guy wasting everyone’s time and money when it is not a problem for Canada.

Reply to  DayHay
March 11, 2016 10:42 am

…or was 2% before GDP went negative

Reply to  DayHay
March 11, 2016 11:14 am

DayHay: We ask the same questions but our left wing socialist and mindless majority thought the current half-wit in control would be the greatest thing since pop corn. They didn’t realize that the newly minted PM would also have the same brain as a piece of pop corn.
On behalf of real Canadians (no hyphen), please accept our apologies to the rest of the world for the actions of this fool.

March 11, 2016 11:11 am

Those two leaders (?) are probably two of the most inconsiderate people in North America. Perhaps Obama’s modus operandi is straight forward fraud but in the case of Trudeau, I’m not sure he has the intelligence to commit fraud; he’s just plain stupid. Just look at his background.

March 11, 2016 11:48 am

COP21, different treaties and so on…. I wonder how much is politics and image and how much is real care for climate change and for our impact over climate…..

March 11, 2016 12:54 pm

One maniacal policy leader leaves office and one or more problems moves in. Cleaning the carpets will not help in this case.

March 11, 2016 2:14 pm

The leaders of the US and Canada, two powerful but useful idiots, get together to sign a treaty to feather the nests of their acolytes and cronies while inconveniencing and impoverishing the people who were deluded enough to vote for them. They do not fail to exude moral superiority however, at all times.

March 16, 2016 7:15 am

“But when a president gets his times so wrong; when he so botches the opportunity to get them right; when he so pigheadedly substitutes his agenda for the country’s, it amounts to a kind of failing of the state anyway.” Holman Jenkins, WSJ

%d bloggers like this: