Guest essay by Eric Worrall
A senior member of the Chinese dictatorship has demanded that Donald Trump renege on his commitment to the American People to tear up the Paris Climate Agreement, if he wins the Presidency.
China criticises Donald Trump’s plan to exit Paris climate deal
In a rare comment on a foreign election, veteran climate chief says a wise political leader should make policy in line with global trends.
China on Tuesday rejected a plan by US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to back out of a global climate change pact, saying a wise political leader should make policy in line with global trends, a rare comment on a foreign election.
The world is moving towards balancing environmental protection and economic growth, China’s top climate change negotiator told reporters, in response to a query on how China would work with a Trump administration on climate change.“If they resist this trend, I don’t think they’ll win the support of their people, and their country’s economic and social progress will also be affected,” Xie Zhenhua said.
“I believe a wise political leader should take policy stances that conform with global trends,” China’s veteran climate chief said.
…
Xie’s comments come as China plans to launch a national carbon trading scheme in 2017.
The scheme is on track and pilot programmes have already traded 120m carbon allowances with total transactions amounting to 3.2bn yuan ($472.29m), he added.
…
At first glance it might seem that Xie Zhenhua is being completely unreasonable, but in my opinion the person who is really to blame for the confusion which led to this outrageous Chinese demand is President Obama.
Obama did everything in his power to convince the world that his signature on the Paris Agreement meant something. But without ratification by the US Senate, President Obama’s signature on the Paris agreement is just an autograph, without legal force or standing.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
list of the largest consumer markets of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets
list of countries by merchandise exports, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports
When I was growing up , if it hade made in China on it, you put it back on the shelf because you knew it wasn’t going to last . Now we snap that crap up like there’s no tomorrow. Is China the leader when it comes to planned obsolescence
“Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design and economics is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so it will become obsolete (that is, unfashionable or no longer functional) after a certain period of time.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
After years of observation, it appears to me, that we vote in the best liar. What they say during their campaign, is nothing like what really happens. I think the US would be better of ,dragging in of the street someone that had no ties to any political part and make him or her president. A bit like Trading places, staring Eddie Murphy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjDbJQKDXCY
I hope if Trump is elected that he will support Vietnam and the Philippians to retake the South China Sea as an open and international area, even if by force…Hillary will never do that. I served in the US Navy during Vietnam, and the whole area was international waters…Let’s keep it that way.
If Trump is elected I give it three months before there is a serious escalation in tension between the US and some other country/countries. Within a year there will be a war. I’m so glad I live as far away from the US as possible.
…What planet have you been living on for the past 8 years ? The world is in turmoil right now because of the Obama and Clinton policy decisions…
P.S…..Trump was AGAINST the Iraq war…D’oh !
I think you are getting bad reporting, Simon. Hillary Clinton is rather more truculent as far as foreign policy than Trump. Considering what the US press does to political reporting from the UK or Australia, they have a decided bias.
It won’t matter if Trump or Hillary wins, unless there is some very smart diplomacy, there’ll be a war. Right now, it’s just a question of timing and where it starts.
Ever notice that no matter how aggressive the communists get, it’s always the fault of the US for not capitulating fast enough.
The communists can fight a war much more cheaply than the US. Similar to the Nips in Burma during WWll, each soldier was given a bag of rice then told to capture British supplies and press on. The tactic was successful until the battle of the Admin Box, then Kohima and Imphal.
Marcus
So when Trump was asked if he was for the war and he said “Yeah, I guess so; I wish the first time it was done correctly.” (Interview with Howard Stern, 2002)”
He meant “no”?
Doh!!!
It is depressing that, although it is commonly understood that the presence of water vapor has made the planet warm enough for life, instead of realizing that the steadily rising water vapor has contributed to global warming and is now countering global cooling, the effect is blamed on CO2 which has no significant effect on climate.
And why do you think there is more water vapour in the air? I will give you a clue. The air is warmer and what can warmer air do…. that’s right…. hold more water vapour.
Initial radiant heat from the sun is transferred around the biosphere in a number of ways; at sea level and ground level latent heat is absorbed to produce water vapour in large quantities which after convection is released by precipitation in the upper atmosphere. The heat released is transferred in all directions by radiation. Initial radiation from the sun is reradiated primarily upwards through the atmosphere where a little is temporarily retained mostly by water vapour CO2 is a minor player in this process.
Fortunately Simon, the world is not as simple as you are.
MarkW
Mmmm …. rather than insult me, why don’t you tell me where I am wrong. Till then you are the simple one.
Simple, Simon, there’s a lot more in the world than just CO2 and H2O.
MarkW
Mmmm, but it is CO2 that was predicted to warm the world, if we keep increasing levels in the atmosphere. And hello we have….. and it has. So now the atmosphere is warmer, it can hold more moisture. Watt (deliberate) part of that don’t you get? Here’s a little graph to help you…
http://static.berkeleyearth.org/pdf/annual-with-forcing.pdf
Which makes more clouds, which reflects more sunlight, which reduces warmth. But then I’m forgetting about the latent heat when water vapor becomes clouds or rain. So we are back to thermodynamics are we ? And it is really warm at 15,000 meters isn’t it? Not that any storms reach that high or higher … oh no,no, they stay right there at ground level…
( really, I have to add a sarc tag , ok ) sarc
Hi, Simon,
Here’s a little graph or two to help you:
Both in short time scales,
CO2 UP. WARMING STOPPED,
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_temp_2002_2008.gif
(Source (hostile witness, thus, more powerful evidence, too): http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-correlation-between-CO2-and-temperature.html )
and in long time scales,
CO2 lags temperature by a quarter cycle.
http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/vostok_temperature_co2.png
(Source: from comment thread here: http://euanmearns.com/can-geology-tell-us-what-is-warming-the-climate/ )
(Source: Dr. Gerald Marsh, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1002/1002.0597.pdf (Marsh’s graph, which I was not able to copy and post here, cites the same data analysis which Mearns graph above does, i.e., Time series from the Vostok ice core showing CO2 concentration, temperature, d18Oatm, and mid-June insolation at 85oN in Wm-2. Based on Fig. 3 of J. R. Petit, et al.))
Janice
Hi, Simon,
Here’s a little graph or two to help you:
Both in short time scales,
CO2 UP. WARMING STOPPED,
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_temp_2002_2008.gif
(Source (hostile witness, thus, more powerful evidence, too): http://www.{INSERT HERE $kept1c@1$c1ence SPELLED CORRECTLYL}.com/The-correlation-between-CO2-and-temperature.html )
and in long time scales,
CO2 lags temperature by a quarter cycle.
http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/vostok_temperature_co2.png
(Source: from comment thread here: http://euanmearns.com/can-geology-tell-us-what-is-warming-the-climate/ )
(Source: Dr. Gerald Marsh, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1002/1002.0597.pdf (Marsh’s graph, which I was not able to copy and post here, cites the same data analysis which Mearns graph above does, i.e., Time series from the Vostok ice core showing CO2 concentration, temperature, d18Oatm, and mid-June insolation at 85oN in Wm-2. Based on Fig. 3 of J. R. Petit, et al.))
Janice
Janice
Come on Janice, that’s a bit nawdy. The SKS article was making the point using such a short time frame (2002 -2208) was not fairly showing the correlation. They provide a much longer term graph ton the same page hat pretty much shows what the Berkeley one does.
The graph, dear Simon, is what it is, regardless of the rest of that article.
It nicely makes this point:
HUMAN CO2 UP (more than all the previous centuries combined) . WARMING STOPPED.
Janice Moore
“The graph, dear Simon, is what it is, regardless of the rest of that article.
It nicely makes this point:” That you can show anything if you cherry pick a short term interval. Long term the message is loud and clear. More CO2 = more warming.
Actually, no. The very long term graphs show CO2 lagging warming by 800 years. What it means is More warming = More CO2. At least that is what the data says.
Phil, co2 lags temperature in the short term as well. Even though the total amount of co2 in the atmosphere has increased, the last 60 years co2 increases track temperature per year. The response of CAGW has been that these are variations. I disagree. It’s every year since 1960 co2 follows temperature. From that I can say that there has been an overall warming trend. There is no other reason, in spite of year after year of increased production of co2, for co2 ppm to drop when the temperature did. It’s the temperature for certain. The graph that the warmist put up is misleading it shows yearly temperature anomolies against total co2. If they graph co2 anomolies per year against temperature anomolies per year the picture becomes crystal clear. Co2 follows temperature.
Rishrac – I know. But simon wanted a long term trend. And you cannot get any longer than the historical ones (I suspect he will come back now and want a shorter term trend, and when you trump him with that, he will cherry pick 3 individual years to prove his ignorance).
There are a lot of issues I have with AGW, but this buried it. What’s left is a tombstone for AGW. I suspect as time goes by, AGW will begin to acquire a dead theory status by all. Also, keep in mind that the co2 count per year is affected by cosmic ray and solar activity.
How is the CO2 count affected by cosmic rays and solar activity?
The co2 ppm per year follows the solar cycle from peak to peak. It is clearly in the record for the last 60 years. ( it goes back further). Cosmic ray activity also follows very closely. That pattern between cosmic rays and solar can be seen if you look at the levels in 1962 and 1963. The cosmic ray count fluctuated at that time. It was an anomaly that verified the pattern. Co2 certainly follows temperature. For the rest of the time there was no break between the solar cycle and cosmic ray activity. It seems there is a tandem effect on co2 between the 3 elements.
So, I am looking at whether the solar cycle or cosmic rays induced temperature change, or whether the lack of or additional cosmic rays add to or subtract from the co2 story. Or whether these are just indicators of some other factors that has not been identified.
Simple, it is not.
Agencies that adjust data for political purposes doesn’t help. The next few years should be very interesting. It’d be nice if the sun went into a deep sleep, (for the sake of argument ) but I’m not so sure that is going to happen. .. ( whether some solar physicists agree or disagree about the meaning of a quite sun, I do think that it is contributor to cooling, and that is a concern) . We are not prepared for cooling.
It’s difficult to just focus on one thing because this is a system that interacts. At each level of organization, new and different properties are revealed.
Thanks for that; my question was concerned with the mechanism by which cosmic rays and solar activity affect CO2 count.
To what degree, and directly or indirectly is the question. Are co2 levels solely temperature dependent, do cosmic rays directly effect co2 levels, or via indirect and the status of the indirect elements. Is a pie chart of percentages with cosmic rays producing more than one result ? Are they also affecting temperature as well, which also controls the co2 amounts ?
I understood you wanted the mechanism, I’m saying it’s complex and a simple answer, as of yet, is not in the offing. I may have not asked all the questions available either. Somebody may know . I would find it difficult to believe that I’m the only one that is analyzing this.
Either the IPCC knew that co2 follows these elements and is committing fraud big time, or they are so dumb that they shouldn’t hold those positions. I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.
Hi, Simon. 🙂
Read — it — and — weep:
Climate Models Unfit for Purpose
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1.png
(Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/06/climate-modeling-epic-fail-spencer-the-day-of-reckoning-has-arrived/ )
Mr. Trump has said that, as President, with his vast business experience, he will be able to renegotiate many of the unfair trade deals that the US suffers under now. He often talks about a “level playing field”. I hope he is right! However, I am not as sanguine as many on the site seem to be.
For me, the first test of his negotiating skills has come with the recent Presidential debates. The results, biased moderators and cheating on the other side. Mr. Trump seemed genuinely caught off guard by these tricks. As a strong and savvy negotiator he should have been able to get better terms. And he should have foreseen that the other side would cheat.
If he is unable to get a “level playing field” from the Presidential Debates Commission, NBC, and the Clinton campaign, how will he be able to negotiate from a position of strength against the likes of Xi Jinxing, Vladimir Putin, or the Iranian mullahs? Will these people cheat?
The real world is not a reality TV show.
Mr. Trump, It is time for you to tell the Chinese in no uncertain terms what a “level playing field” between the USA and China would look like, in energy, in trade, and in diplomatic relations.
A Trump supporter, hopeful, but uneasy,
Alan in Kansas
How did Clinton cheat in the Trump debates? And he doesn’t want a level playing field he wants to whack tariffs on the other countries. How level is that?
Wikileaks has shown that Clinton was given the debate questions before the debate.
I’m not surprised that you are pretending to not know that.
MarkW
Really?Please provide a reference that says Clinton got any questions before the Trump debates? Till then you are just blowing hot air.
Hold on to waste time I will help you. The allegation was for the democratic debates. Wrong again Mr MarkW.
Guess you missed the WikiLeaks letters. It was in all the papers….NOT!
Janice harpooned you on this one. The difference between blind loyalty and supporting a candidate is you do not get blind sided if you are not blindly loyal.
Here you go, Simon.
Source: The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/cnn-drops-donna-brazile-as-pundit-over-wikileaks-revelations/2016/10/31/2f1c6abc-9f92-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html
Janice, I suggest you re-read your post. Pay close attention to the words “primary debate questions.” You see Janice, Simon asked the question, “How did Clinton cheat in the Trump debates?” You seem to be confused between what a “primary debate” is and what an “election debate is.”
Actually no. What makes you think the cheating stopped? What stopped was the email leaks as they were taken during the primary.
So you have to ask yourself 2 questions.
#1 – Why would a crook stop being a crook when they have not been caught?
#2 – Why did Hillary never reveal she had gotten the questions before Wikileaks proved she did?
Go sell your unicorns to the blindly faithful. This is not a forum of them.
Simple Simon does his best to not see anything that would challenge his world view.
Dear Mr. Baguley,
I did, indeed, read too hastily Simon’s question. Thank you for the correction.
Clinton had to cheat to beat Bernie Sanders. In the Trump debates, she didn’t need the questions ahead of time. She had the patently biased moderators to help (and if you do not think that they did that, you did not watch the debates; it was blatant).
Sincerely,
Janice Moore
Dear Mr. Baguley,
I did, indeed, read too hastily Simon’s question. Thank you for the correction.
Clinton had to cheat to beat Bernie Sanders. In the Trump debates, she didn’t need the questions ahead of time. She had the patently biased m0derat0rs to help (and if you do not think that they did, you did not watch the debates; it was blatant).
Sincerely,
Janice Moore
MarkW
“Simple Simon does his best to not see anything that would challenge his world view.”
I am going to take it from this rather weird (Trumpish) reply, you are conceding I am right.
Trump should send the agreements to the Senate for an up or down vote
“Trump should send the agreements to the Senate for an up or down vote”
Yes, that’s the way to officially kill it. Then the climate alarmists will have lots of people to complain about, not just Trump.
Eric
Where in this does China “demand” anything?
Dear Simon,
Please see above: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/02/chinese-official-demands-donald-trump-submit-to-the-paris-climate-agreement/comment-page-1/#comment-2331859 .
#(:))
Janice
Yeah… Nah. A demand is a demand. Eric is just winding up the faithful.
Simon: You should stop saying such things about Eric.
😉
Simon, don’t you mean the skeptical? ‘Faithful’ is an adjective I would apply to the CAGW believers.
I must have missed the global policy trend of declaring ownership of swathes of international waters and building military complexes on man made islands. Must be there, surely China wouldnt be just going it alone being such a great international citizen and all.
Xie is best buds with Podesta and Todd D Stern of State. and is well aware of how much money can be made through the climate trading scam.
“I believe a wise political leader should take policy stances that conform with global trends,” China’s veteran climate chief said.
Does this mean that China is finally admitting the Chairman Mao was not “a wise political leader?”
In a research project negotiations more than 10-years past I was told that the life of a “Big Whitey American” was 100-times less than a Japanese man. So “Big Whitey American” had to do 100-times the work at 10-percent the cost, on Japan-man exchange basis, or no deal.
No deal won the day.
Ja ja
I’d just reply with one line: get used to disappointment.
There is no reason to believe that the Chinese carbon trading scheme will work. The Chinese gentleman may be speaking for the Chinese regime “officially”, but he is still rent seeking: he is defending his personal turf. And given that China us extremely harsh with even high level embezzelers, and given how corrupt every green enterprise is shown to be, the gentleman is certainly very motivated indeed.
Trump ain’t no chump and American tax payers will be spending all that cash promised China
draining the Washington swamp .
China here’s some free advice … send Hillary’s Emails back before they get taken back .
The days of the corrupt Washington administration are over .
They got caught but unlike China’s justice they won’t get a bullet just a nice cosy cell .
The USA is coming back .The crooks and other self dealers are going to be on the street or in a cell .
+ 999 gold stars…
FU Xie !
Wow! It’s as if the Chinese have joined the Russians in helping Trump’s campaign? If Trump wins, it will be a wild, wild ride for a while – – – provided he does what he’s stated in his campaign.
I sure they would love to see the US handcuffed economically, so China can do what it wants.
The Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989 was definitely not in line with global trends, neither its treatment by Chinese communists since then. Therefore they are not “wise political leaders”, but something else. Q.E.D.
As for environmental policy, China tops WHO list for deadly outdoor air pollution.
Mr. Xie would better be very silent.
“a wise political leader should make policy in line with global trends.”
F you China.
Hi, Simon,
Here’s a little graph or two to help you:
Both in short time scales,
CO2 UP. WARMING STOPPED,
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_temp_2002_2008.gif
(Source (hostile witness, thus, more powerful evidence, too): http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-correlation-between-CO2-and-temperature.html )
and in long time scales,
CO2 lags temperature by a quarter cycle.
http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/vostok_temperature_co2.png
(Source: from comment thread here: http://euanmearns.com/can-geology-tell-us-what-is-warming-the-climate/ )
(Source: Dr. Gerald Marsh, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1002/1002.0597.pdf (Marsh’s graph, which I was not able to copy and post here, cites the same data analysis which Mearns graph above does, i.e., Time series from the Vostok ice core showing CO2 concentration, temperature, d18Oatm, and mid-June insolation at 85oN in Wm-2. Based on Fig. 3 of J. R. Petit, et al.))
Janice
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/04/paris-climate-change-agreement-enters-into-force
“The Paris agreement on climate change enters into force on Friday, marking the first time that governments have agreed legally binding limits to global temperature rises.
Under the agreement, all governments that have ratified the accord, which includes the US, China, India and the EU, now carry an obligation to hold global warming to no more than 2C above pre-industrial levels”
“Demands”, eh? Shove it, Comrade. That might work in your country, but not here.
China’s leaders ought to let their citizens access WUWT. We could have some good discussions.
But China’s leaders are afraid to give this much freedom to their citizens. Instead, they block out the world to Chinese citizens.
Unfortunately, China’s leaders are not the only censors in the world. Even some western nations censor their citizens to a point that would outrage an American citizen if the U.S. government tried to censor them to that extent. U.S. citizens should consider themselves very lucky to be able to speak freely the way they do. It’s not that way in other parts of the world.