EU: There Will Be No Renegotiation of Paris! (AKA "The Art of the Deal")

Guest post by David Middleton

Science & Environment

Juncker rejects US climate deal re-negotiation

By Matt McGrath

Environment correspondent

14 June 2017

The European Commission President said: “We have spent 20 years negotiating”, and now was the time for implementation.

US President Trump has claimed that the accord could be amended and made more palatable to his country.

[…]

“The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,” Mr Juncker said.

“The 29 articles of the agreement must be implemented and not renegotiated. Climate action does not need more distractions. We have spent 20 years negotiating. Now it is the time for action. Now it is the time for implementation.”

The president of the Marshall Island, Hilda Heine, also addressed the parliamentarians, meeting in Strasbourg. She re-iterated her view that the Paris agreement was set in stone.

“We cannot do better (than Paris), and we don’t have the luxury of more time,” she said.

She urged the EU member states and other countries to use the three years before the US pulls out of Paris to try to convince President Trump of the importance of climate action.

She also called on Europe to adopt harder goals when it comes to cutting emissions of carbon dioxide.

“We will not stay within 1.5C unless Europe and others move before 2020 to raise ambition.” The bloc should adopt five-year climate targets instead of the current 10-year plans, she said.

By a huge majority the EU Parliament voted on Wednesday in favour of binding national targets for cutting emissions from areas including transport, agriculture and waste management. These areas are not covered by Europe’s emissions trading scheme.

[…]

BBC

So much material in such a short article.

An agreement that has no enforcement mechanism and allows its participants to set and revise their own emissions targets is “set in stone”…  Riiight.

“We cannot do better than Paris”… But we must do better than Paris… Even though it’s “set in stone”… Riiight.

At least there’s a bright side.  After President Trump wisely withdrew these United States from the Paris agreement, “by a huge majority the EU Parliament voted on Wednesday in favour of binding national targets for cutting emissions from areas including transport, agriculture and waste management.”

Talk about a win-win deal!  President Trump decides to not shoot our economy in the foot… And the EU volunteers to shoot their economy in both feet!

91e51-excellent-4689_preview

“The worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it. That makes the other guy smell blood, and then you’re dead.”

—Donald J. Trump, The Art of the Deal

0 0 votes
Article Rating
288 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 15, 2017 5:59 am

Juncker is an oaf, and a drunken one, by some accounts

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  David Johnson
June 15, 2017 6:14 am

Have you been to Brussels lately? seems like most everyone in and around Rue de la Loi is a drunken oaf these days. The EU will no longer reimburse for more than 2 cocktails with lunch, but a lot of employees pick up the 3rd and 4th on their own tab.

fos
Reply to  David Johnson
June 15, 2017 6:48 am

Johnson! As a drunk I strongly object to your statement.
In my extensive experience a drunken oaf is cheerfully harmless and mildly entertaining.
Its the sober ones who cause the trouble.

Hans-Georg
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 6:59 am

A drunken Gorilla isn´t harmless. It depends on the state of the ape. But a drunken EU-Juncker is indeed harmless.

pochas94
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 10:29 am

“In my extensive experience a drunken oaf is cheerfully harmless and mildly entertaining”
They have to be, in order to panhandle money to fund their habit.

drednicolson
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 5:14 pm

Depends on what kind of drunk they are. Nobody behaves under intoxication in the exact same way, but there’s a few broad categories. You got your happy drunks, your sleepy drunks, your angry drunks, your crying drunks, your batsh– insane drunks, etc. :]

fos
Reply to  David Johnson
June 15, 2017 6:51 am

**It’s** Need a drink…
[The mods are debating whether its “it’s” was originally singular or plural, to (lack of) wit, whether “it’s needs a drink” is more incorrect than “It’s need a drink” or “its need a (of a) drink”; and, if so, (to add even more comma’s in a parenthetical suborbital clause) what kind of drink it’s needed. Must ask Janice. .mod]

fos
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 10:02 am

**It’s** [the sober ones who cause the trouble].
Have you mods been drinking?
Have one on me – cheers!

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 1:09 pm

IT-apostrophe-S = IT IS. There can be no plural, that would be THEIR
[But what is there were two its involved in their dispute about their shared apostrophe? .mod innocently wonders.]

Jim S.
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 7:19 pm

… but there is a possessive: ITS (no apostrophe).

Jim S.
Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 7:21 pm

And plural of IT IS is THEY ARE or They’re. Their is the plural possessive.

Reply to  fos
June 15, 2017 8:29 pm

Its not important.

QQBoss
Reply to  fos
June 16, 2017 2:04 am

“(to add even more comma’s in a parenthetical suborbital clause)”
Mod, what does the comma possess?
[I have no idea, do you? . . . mod]

Editor
Reply to  QQBoss
June 16, 2017 10:17 am

QQBoss

Mod, what does the comma possess?

[I have no idea, do you? . . . mod]

Well, clearly the commas do not possess any lizards.
Quoting the song, “Comma, comma, comma chameleons. They come and go….”

John M. Ware
Reply to  fos
June 16, 2017 10:12 am

Just remember: Contractions need apostrophes (He’s coming = He is coming; Who’s there? = Who is there?), but pronouns never do, even in possessive case (It’s sliding on its side! = It is sliding on the side belonging to it). Surely you never add an apostrophe to his, her, hers, their, theirs, whose, etc., as in “Each male student must bring hi’s notebook, and each female student must bring he’r purse.” Its–as a pronoun meaning belonging to it–never has an apostrophe. It’s–as a contraction meaning it is–always has one. As for the Paris Accord: It’s worthless on its face, and we are (we’re, not were) wonderfully well out of it!

Tom
Reply to  fos
June 16, 2017 6:22 pm

Ware’s right. It does prompt one to ask, though, “Where’re Ware’s wares”?

MikeM
Reply to  fos
June 16, 2017 10:30 pm

“[But what is there were two its involved in their dispute about their shared apostrophe? .mod innocently wonders.]”
So the mods are wonder what the meaning of it’s is? What is this, the Clinton impeachment hearings?

george e. smith
Reply to  fos
June 17, 2017 9:53 pm

The apostrophe merely indicates a missing letter; in this case the (i). So it saves nothing; might as well say ” it is ” .
It’s a whole lot more clear !
G

MikeM
Reply to  ratuma
June 16, 2017 10:33 pm

The correct pronunciation of The EU is The EWWWWWWWWWWW!

ShrNfr
Reply to  David Johnson
June 15, 2017 5:22 pm

Just remember, half an oaf is worse than none.

Gil
Reply to  David Johnson
June 17, 2017 8:59 am

The Allies at the end of World War II were determined to get rid of Junkerism and pull it out by its roots. Looks like it hid out in Luxembourg and has somewhat resurfaced in the form of Jean-Claud Juncker.

David DeCaro
Reply to  David Johnson
June 17, 2017 1:48 pm

I’d just like to point out that we shouldn’t be cheering for anyone to shoot themselves in any appendage. A robust European economy is one we will do more trading with to each party’s benefit. Trade as a zero sum game is a Leftist conceit and we should be careful not to encourage them in their idiocy. Making others poor will never make me rich except in relative terms and I’d far rather simply enjoy my steak than to gnaw on a pig’s ankle while being glad that I don’t have to eat worms like those other guys.

June 15, 2017 6:01 am

The EU seems intent on a course of self-destruction. I feel sorry for the many EU citizens that will suffer, but they are the ones who have elected national governments that are promoting such stuff. How Merkel ever got away with shutting down Germany’s nuclear program because of the threat of tsunamis is beyond me, but seems to be perfectly symbolic of the madness.

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  pstevens2
June 15, 2017 7:20 am

Germany decided to shutdown nuclear well before Fukushima. In 2002 they passed a law that (theoretically) would have shut down the last reactor by 2022. Chernobyl influenced this decision greatly. Fukushima merely expedited any foot dragging.

rocketscientist
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
June 15, 2017 2:36 pm

How many German nuclear reactors are threatened by tsunamis? Maybe 2 at most, as the other 2 coastal plants have been shuttered. And the North Sea isn’t exactly surrounded by a “ring of fire”.

Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
June 16, 2017 9:57 am

Not so silly the Germans, actually. Coal power is cheaper than nuclear power, especially the dirty brown stuff they are strip mining next door to a blooming great coal-fired power station. Watched it all in action out of an office window while at a meeting at my company’s HQ a few years ago. They possibly realise, with molten salt reactors getting close to being commercially viable and fusion coming closer to being a reality now that liquid nitrogen temperature superconductors are commercially available, that high-pressure water-cooled reactors are likely to become obsolete quite soon.
I’m quite sure that they were delighted that Mrs. ‘Climate Crisis’ May decided to sign off on yet another brand-spanking new nuclear white elephant.
I’m sure the Germans much prefer Britain importing German cars than the other way round. I don’t take the Green BS (short for bogus science) too seriously. Of course in the real world the Germans actually have made a green choice. Those little green CO2 suckers must love all that food they’re getting from Germany and elsewhere.

george e. smith
Reply to  I Came I Saw I Left
June 17, 2017 9:56 pm

Who is Shima ??
g

Reply to  pstevens2
June 15, 2017 7:35 am

Europe has relied on the US taxpayer to fund its military defense since the end of WWII. Time to let go, and have them fund it all themselves. We will then see the wild-eyed greenies facing reality.

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 7:53 am

Europe is perfectly able to defend itself, thank you.

MarkW
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:03 am

Hasn’t had much luck defending itself against muslim invaders.

Butch
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:33 am

Henning, do you really believe all those EU SJW’s are going to protect from Russia ?? What will they use, their Fanny Packs ?

Christopher Ellis
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:34 am

Europe to defend itself? Really, Henning?
As a proud Brexiteer, I’m all for the US and UK to leave NATO and let the ungrateful, malevolent Europeans defend themselves from Putin and the Jihadists. Let’s put an end to our subsidisation of Europe’s Welfare State and concentrate on our own citizens for once.

Butch
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:39 am

Chris and Dave, + 1,000 Gold Stars each…..

michael hart
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:45 am

Last time I checked, Europe actually started two world wars and the US was called in to help end both of them.

Neo
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 10:37 am

There has been talk of an EU military for over a decade … just talk

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 1:10 pm

They don’t defend their borders now from an Islamic invasion, why should the US?

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 1:11 pm

What is Europe supposed to defend itself against? The only possible threat is from Russia. But seriously? Look at manpower, financial strength, military forces…Russia would never have a chance of winning, and they know it very well. US adventures is not the same as defence of Europe.

eyesonu
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 1:28 pm

Henning ,
Europe can’t defend itself from itself.
At the current rate of regression the majority won’t be able to get their own panties off! Those that don’t wear panties will be vilified for not doing so.

MarkW
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 1:58 pm

Henning, so in your opinion, only the immediate neighbors pose a threat?
That kind of thinking went out of style with the advent of the airplane and is down right suicidal now that more and more nations are getting ICBMs.

JohnKnight
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 2:04 pm

Henning,
“What is Europe supposed to defend itself against?”
Totalitarian government might be a good start . .

Auto
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 3:45 pm

Neo
June 15, 2017 at 10:37 am
Thanks.
Found the source of the Hot Air (AKA CAGW).
And
Incidentally,
I note Juncker – (A) President Jean-Claude Juncker (What sort of body has a slack handful of Presidents?) – has a law decree.
Eminently qualified, in his mind, therefore, to understand and comment on scientific questions.
At least my BSc is that – even if it is Maritime Studies . . . .
Auto
Bum Boatie to the last

Graphite
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 7:53 pm

@Michael Hart “Last time I checked, Europe actually started two world wars and the US was called in to help end both of them.”
++++
Last time I checked, the US stood on the sidelines of two world wars and didn’t join in until most of the heavy lifting had been done.

Hivemind
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:09 pm

“Russia would never have a chance of winning”
Henning,
what have you been smoking? That statement is just completely disconnected from reality. Without the US (and UK to a lesser degree) troops in Europe, the Russians would walk all over it, just like they did the Crimea.

Roger Knights
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 16, 2017 4:52 am

“Last time I checked, the US stood on the sidelines of two world wars and didn’t join in until most of the heavy lifting had been done.”

The waiting of the U.S. in ww2 was justified by the refusal of Britain and France to go along with President. Wilson’s terms for a settlement of WW1, instead insisting on a victor’s peace that led to German revenge-seeking in ww2.

Cloudbase
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 17, 2017 5:23 am

Are you for real Hemming. ‘What has Europe to protect itself from’. Are you not watching what is happening in Turkey with its wannabe Islamist dictator who is in charge of one of the biggest militaries in Europe. Do you not wonder why People voted for Brexit in light of EU’s open door policy and Turkey about to be granted restrictionless travel.
By all means keep looking the other way if it makes you feel safe.

george e. smith
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 17, 2017 9:59 pm

Well Henning, they certainly have had a lot of practice.
G

george e. smith
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 17, 2017 10:12 pm

Well Henning, they certainly have had plenty of practice at it !
g

Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 19, 2017 7:17 am

@Henning Nielsen “Europe is perfectly able to defend itself, thank you.’
Europe has many security interests well outside their physical borders, it would be interesting to see the EU try to defend their right of passage in the Strait of Malacca, The Strait of Hormuz and the Horn of Africa at he same time.

ratuma
Reply to  pstevens2
June 15, 2017 1:36 pm


Walter Hallstein : the origin of european union – tks

Carbon BIgfoot
Reply to  pstevens2
June 16, 2017 5:24 am

For those you have not read Steve Goreham’s ” Outside the Green Box” …..he opines that the “sustainable wind and solar program…has resulted in the disruption of wholesale energy prices, rising consumer and industrial prices, the migration of energy-intensive industries, the financial demise of traditional electrical utilities, bloated national budgets from renewable subsidies, and the eventual decline of renewable investment. Other countries should learn from Europe’s lesson and adopt policies to allow energy sources to complete on a level playing field on capability, reliability, price and environmental quality. Sorry I’m preaching to the Choir. Time to short the Euro.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  pstevens2
June 16, 2017 9:58 am

Basically, the voter is given no real choice in EU country elections, and the centre of power is an unelected parliament in Brussels. This is the plan the “progressives” have and the swamp Republicans were heading for. Elections in US had become meaningless with “progressives” having their real constituency outside the country in an EU/UN centric non representative seat of power.
The hysteria over Trump is because of an existential crisis this creates for an entire generation of neo-Mrxists who were on the verge of grasping the long (~150 years) planned for комiитеrи global governance. Yes, the Iron curtain fell, but with aparatchiks from a population of chess players exiting, this was not checkmate (полное поражение).

Latitude
June 15, 2017 6:03 am

They have been trying to “implement” for 20 years…..
The EU is going to get a lot smaller….without our money….even smaller

June 15, 2017 6:08 am

This petulant opposition was what Trump counted on. Snicker, snicker.

June 15, 2017 6:08 am

“President of Marshall Island” (singular, their quote)? Never heard of it. –AGF

Reply to  agfosterjr
June 15, 2017 6:09 am

It must have sunk already.

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 15, 2017 7:54 am

If they get umpteen climate millions from the “rich” and “guilty” nations, they will not sink. Without that money, they will sink. Like the Maldives did.

Butch
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 15, 2017 8:45 am

Henning, if the “umpteen millions” is paid in Gold, and delivered to Southern part of the island, will the Island “tip over” ?
https://youtu.be/mnk0tIqsbYM
…D’OH !!!!

george e. smith
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 17, 2017 10:04 pm

Well the last time I checked, there were a whole bunch of Marshall Islands. So just of which rock is she President ??
g

Dave Walker
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 15, 2017 12:26 pm

Right, it’s a group of atolls. https://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/26551.htm

rocketscientist
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 15, 2017 2:44 pm

The Marshall Islands are more at risk from erosion, not sea level rise. Millions of years ago the islands were mountains. Now, only vestigial atolls. Must have been all the CO2.

MarkW
Reply to  rocketscientist
June 16, 2017 6:17 am

Ocean acidifications what dun it.

george e. smith
Reply to  agfosterjr
June 17, 2017 10:15 pm

Whatever happened to the Gilbert and Ellis Islands ??
I think maybe Ellis got moved to New York; but where did Gilbert go ??
g

TA
June 15, 2017 6:15 am

From the article: ““We cannot do better (than Paris), and we don’t have the luxury of more time,” she said.”
All true. Which means you should give up. But they won’t give up, they will double down.

chris y
Reply to  TA
June 15, 2017 6:33 am

From the article-
“Climate action does not need more distractions. We have spent 20 years negotiating. Now it is the time for action.”
As in, a piece of the action?
Definition-
“a piece of the action”
A share of the profits or advantages that come from an activity.

Phillip Bratby
Reply to  chris y
June 15, 2017 11:41 am

Several world wars could be fought in the time it takes these idiotic bureaucrats to complete their negotiations. And the wars would probably do less damage and be much cheaper.

drednicolson
Reply to  TA
June 15, 2017 5:24 pm

After all, the double-down strategy always works in blackjack, assuming you have infinite money to bet.
Oh wait.

Bruce Cobb
June 15, 2017 6:15 am

“The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,” Mr Juncker said.
So, is that your final offer then?

Butch
Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 8:53 am

To which the Socialists of the world replied to their sheep …..
https://youtu.be/CV7CTlIcKlw?list=PLYFSDchh–Af6_bJP_0uvXC_iG8rt_gO8

Latitude
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 15, 2017 9:28 am

“The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,”…
Of course not…..they would have to do it for every other country out there then

SAMURAI
June 15, 2017 6:17 am

Trump should immediately stop ALL expenditures involved with the Paris Accord..
The Senate never passed this treaty and there are no penalties for noncompliance.
Not one more dime should be wasted on this CAGW scam.
With the US out, there will be a mass exodus of other countries from the Paris Agreement, and once a critical mass is reached, this infernal scam will implode.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  SAMURAI
June 15, 2017 10:55 am

Samurai,
The president can’t authorize payments (unfortunately, nobody told Obama); spending bills originate with Congress. All Congress has to do is NOT pass any spending authorizations for the Paris ‘Accord.’ It will then shrivel from benign neglect.
One reason that treaties are supposed to be approved by the Senate is to insure that if there are any financial commitments that they have a probability of being authorized. Obama overlooked that detail when he decided to go it alone.

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
June 15, 2017 1:59 pm

Unfortunately there are several pots of money that previous congresses have set up for the president to spend at his discretion.

george e. smith
Reply to  SAMURAI
June 17, 2017 10:20 pm

Actually spending bills begin in the House .
And it seems when the Republicans get in control of the House, they spend like drunken sailors; just like the Democrats do, but without apologies to drunken sailors.
G

TA
June 15, 2017 6:21 am

From the article: “She urged the EU member states and other countries to use the three years before the US pulls out of Paris to try to convince President Trump of the importance of climate action.”
Trump isn’t going to accept the Paris Accord deal. He’s already said so.
The unfairness of the Paris Accord to the U.S. is so obvious even the Democrats couldn’t sell the Paris Accord to the American people.
The Paris Accord places all sorts of restrictions on the U.S. and requirements to pay other nations enormous amounts of money, while there are no restrictions on China or India, and they don’t have to send any of their money to other nations.
Try selling that kind of deal to the American people. It it not going to fly. It didn’t fly in the past, and it’s not going to change in the future. The CAGW advocates are barking up the wrong tree.

Reply to  TA
June 15, 2017 7:05 am

So absurdly disadvantageous to the US was this ‘deal’ that the only rational conclusion is that Obama was indeed a traitor dedicated to bringing down the US. When you look at what he was trying to implement by EO your jaw drops in horror at the sheer scale of the destruction that single man was attempting to wreak. How he is still walking around America at liberty will be forever beyond my comprehension. He makes Kim Jong-un look like your favourite nephew. The climate alarmist agenda is the perfect smokescreen for enemies of the West and any horror visited upon it whatsoever may be justified in terms of some dopey ecoloon claim or other.

markl
Reply to  cephus0
June 15, 2017 8:45 am

+1 And then some.

Butch
Reply to  cephus0
June 15, 2017 8:57 am

Dave, it is called “Leading from behind” !!

rocketscientist
Reply to  cephus0
June 15, 2017 2:48 pm

“Never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained by incompetence.”
I think in this instance both played a large role.

Reply to  cephus0
June 15, 2017 9:22 pm

@TA “The Paris Accord places all sorts of restrictions on the U.S. and requirements to pay other nations enormous amounts of money, while there are no restrictions on China or India”
Yup..comment image
It only gets worse from here.

TA
Reply to  cephus0
June 16, 2017 5:32 am

“So absurdly disadvantageous to the US was this ‘deal’ that the only rational conclusion is that Obama was indeed a traitor dedicated to bringing down the US. When you look at what he was trying to implement by EO your jaw drops in horror at the sheer scale of the destruction that single man was attempting to wreak.”
On top of that, Obama has been the biggest enabler of radical Islamists terrorism in world history. He enables the terrorism of the Mad Mullahs of Iran, and sits and does nothing while the Islamist Terror Army runs wild across Syria and Iraq, which disprupts the whole Middle East and threatens the viability of western European society with the huge refugee flows.
President Obama was definitely the “worst president evah!” We will be cleaning up the messes he created for years to come.

Reply to  TA
June 15, 2017 8:35 am

It isn’t three years to exit. Its one by operation of Paris Article 28(3). Trump,is also exiting the GCF. That is separate from Paris, Under UNFCCC Article 4(3). Since that Pact (aka a congressional-executive agreement) was approved by Congress in 1994 under Clinton, the only way to escape the binding obligation is to exit UNFCCC also under Article 25 (1 and 2). Then Article 25 (3) kicks in as does mirror Paris Article 28(3). One year.

Rick C PE
Reply to  ristvan
June 15, 2017 10:01 am

I think Trump should claw back the second $500m payment made by Obama to the UNFCCC since it was apparently made illegally.

Reply to  ristvan
June 15, 2017 10:36 am

DM, it was unlawful under 1994 PL103-236, because in April 2016 (after first $500million but long before second $500 million on Jan 17 2017) UNFCCC recognized Palestine as a full member state. Law is crystal clear and Obama broke it.

Doodle
Reply to  ristvan
June 15, 2017 11:25 am

So strange that anything to do with Israel makes the Globalists freak out.

noaaprogrammer
Reply to  ristvan
June 15, 2017 6:14 pm

For a more palatable NYC, just have the UN move out and sprout again in Brussels.

Auto
Reply to  ristvan
June 16, 2017 1:08 pm

noaa
Or to Gori, near Tiflis, where Stalin was born.
Auto

TA
June 15, 2017 6:26 am

From the article: “She also called on Europe to adopt harder goals when it comes to cutting emissions of carbon dioxide.
“We will not stay within 1.5C unless Europe and others move before 2020 to raise ambition.” The bloc should adopt five-year climate targets instead of the current 10-year plans, she said.”
Don’t you love the unsupported assumptions she makes. She assumes she knows what is going on with the atmosphere, and she knows just how to fix it. If only that mean ole Trump would get in line, everything would be fine. The UNIPCC has everything under control.

June 15, 2017 6:26 am

It’s not a good idea for the EU to hurt its economy, in the future they may require economic aid.

richard verney
June 15, 2017 6:27 am

Trump was never interested in further negotiations.
Trump knew that there could never be a deal acceptable to the US and those clinging to the idea that developed nations must decarbonise and pay reparation, whilst developing countries have a free reign to push ahead with economic growth and produce as much CO2 as they like. and get paid money to boot.
The offer to renegotiate was a blinder, made merely to deflect some heat and reduce criticism.
What the developed West does not readily appreciate is that the US can, and indeed will reduce, its CO2 emissions without cutting back on its energy demands because the US is exploiting fracking which is real performing energy and decarbonisation. The US will be able to retain industrial competitiveness.
On the other hand the other countries that make up the developed West will have to cut back their energy demands if they wish to reduce CO2, perhaps by offshoring their industry to China or even to the US!!
The other countries in the developed West have shunned fracking and nuclear so have no effective means of providing the energy that they now enjoy and utilise. Germany with its push to wind and solar has already come up against the buffer; there has been little reduction in CO2 emissions since 2005, and last year CO2 emissions increased. Materially, Germany has only been able to hold CO2 emissions steady because of the interconnect with France which provides Germany with back up power from nuclear. However, France cannot provide nuclear powered back up for all of Europe (to fill in when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine), and in any event, France has penciled in the decommissioning of its nuclear plants!
If Germany is going to reduce CO2 it cannot achieve that by further rolling out wind and solar. It must now start cutting back its energy demands which will cripple its economy which is already straining under the high and uncompetitive price of energy.
China and India are in a win win position since much of the developed West’s industrial base will be off-shored to China and India, and the US is the only sane country having taken steps to protect its industrial base.
A great pity that European political leaders are so stupid that they cannot see what is unfolding before their eyes. If the UK was sensible it should grasp the opportunity that Brexit provides and cast itself free of the shackles imposed by the EU, set aside the Climate Change Act and go hell for leather with fracking. It too has the opportunity to reap the rewards that the US will enjoy, and if it adopted this stance it would still be able to reduce its CO2 emissions whilst all around in Europe suffer.

Editor
Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 6:46 am

President Trump may be open to further negotiation, with the aim of making the Paris agreement fair to the US, but Supreme Leader Juncker isn’t. SLJ knows that the Paris agreement wasn’t about cutting CO2 emissions, it was about making the US finance the Green Climate Fund. Being fair to the US destroys the whole purpose of Paris. So SLJ can’t go there.

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 7:11 pm

‘Canadian Hydropower And The Clean Power Plan, April 2015
Contents:
Begins on p.19: ‘The Clean Power Plan’s Approach to International Hydropower Imports
Re: U.S. could use Canadian hydropower to meet its proposed 2030 emissions target.
Read at:
https://canadahydro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/C2ES-Report.pdf
And:
Regulations. Gov
CHA/Canadian Hydropower Association
CHA comment to EPA on supplying hydropower to the U.S.
Read at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602-29776
Canadian hydropower available for U.S.use.

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 8:52 pm

‘Canadian Hydropower And The Clean Power Plan’, April 2015
P.20, Regarding Sierra Club & Earthjustice:
Renewable energy sources in foreign countries such as Canada.
See: Citation 81 which also has a link for more information on The Clean Power Plan
Clean Power Plan
See: D, Areas Without Affected EGOs & use of foreign power sources.
————————————————————–
U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
FERC/PJM Interconnections case, Petition filed July 8, 2016
Sierra Club, NRDC, Union of Concerned Scientists, Earthjustice
AWEA is an intervenor in this case.
Case number is required for online information on these proceedings.
USCA Case # 16-1234 or Case No. 16-1234, D.C.Circuit.

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 11:36 am

Canada | NRDC
Scroll down to:
“We’re working to expand trade in clean energy and take advantage of Canada’s enormous potential; identify ways that Canada’s provinces can provide states with the clean energy supplies to meet carbon-reduction targets; and make the air cleaner and healthier on both sides of the border.”
More at:
http://www.nrdc.org/canada

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 5:34 pm

For the Canadian audience:
C2ES/Center For Climate And Energy Solutions, Arlington, VA, U.S.
Has many articles on Canada.
Board includes:
David Hone, Shell International, Ltd.
Ann Klee, GE
Theodore Roosevelt, IV, Barclays Capital
And others
http://www.c2es.org/search/common?text=Canada
And:
Climate Realty Project, Washington, D.C.
Board includes:
Al Gore
James (Gus) Speth
Theodore Roosevelt, IV
And others
http://www.climaterealityproject.org/whoweare

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 7:57 pm

IETA/International Emissions Trading Association
“The International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) emerged from the United Nations Conference on Trade And Development (UNCTAD) Policy Forum on greenhouse gas emission trading in 1999.”
Directors include:
David Hone, Chief Climate Change Adviser, Shell
Ed Ma, Senior Advisor, Suncor
Daniele Agistini, Enel
Arthur Lee, Chevron
And others
http://www.ieta.org/Governance

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 9:18 pm

For Australia
Global CC Institute, Australia
David Hone, also on the Board of IETA
International Advisor: Lord Nicholas Stern
https://hub.globalccinstitute.com/david-hone

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 9:39 pm

Correction: Global CCS Institute
https://hub.globalccsinstitute.com/users/david-hone

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 17, 2017 8:07 pm

Canadian Hydropower Association, Ottawa
Canadian Hydropower and the U.S.
‘5 reasons Americans Should Care About Canadian Hydropower’
No.2 Canadian Hydropower Delivers Competitive , Sustainable Energy and American Jobs.
Keeps rates low for American and Canadian customers
Can help facilitate additional wind and solar projects in the U.S.
More at:
https://canadahydro.ca/facts/5-reasons-americans-should-care-about-canadian-hydropower

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 17, 2017 10:19 pm

United States Environmental Protection Agency Clean Power Plan
Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602
Proposed rule
‘Comments of the Canadian Hydropower Association, Oct.10, 2014’
At:
http://canadahydro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/CHA-DECEMBER-1-General-Submission-to-the-EPA.pdf

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 18, 2017 4:09 pm

The Brattle Group – News, June 28, 2016
‘Report by Brattle Economists Provides Guidance on Enabling Canadian Energy Imports for Clean Power Plan Compliance’
“Canada is rich with clean energy resources.”
Follow the link to the June 2016 Report.
http://www.brattle.com/news-and-knowledge/news/report-by-brattle-economists-provides-guidance-on-enabling-canadian-clean-energy-imports-for-clean-power-plan-compliance

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 18, 2017 9:14 pm

International Conference On Trade And Development, Oct.29, 1998
IETA was established in Geneva
The inaugural meeting in Nov.,1998 was chaired by Maurice Strong.
The establishment of IETA was to help the effort to design the implementation for a greenhouse gas emissions trading system.
Inaugural partners included: Ontario Hydro and Shell International.
http://unctad.org/en/pages/PressReleaseArchive.aspx?ReferencedocId=3156

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 18, 2017 9:26 pm
Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 19, 2017 10:57 am

UN Sustainable Development
Partnerships for SDGs/Sustainable Development Goals
Partnership:
IETA
WRI/World Resources Institute
CDP/Carbon Disclosure Project
And others
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/partners/?id=10260

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
June 20, 2017 8:18 pm

United Nations Development Programme, 1 January 2000
Global Programme Project Document, Project Number = GLO/99/H06/A/1V/31
A.1, Greenhouse gas emissions
A.5, Prior role of ‘Energy After Rio: Prospects and Challenges’ , UN publication 1997.
Annex 6, Participants
Project cost about USD $ 1.5 million.
http://www.uncclearn.org/sites/default/files/inventory/undp47.pdf

Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 7:13 am

The UK has it’s own groaning burden of psychotic quasi-religious leftists and anything proposed of an advantageous nature to the UK will be met with screeching and hollering to wake the dead plus violent demonstrations and civil unrest.

Wayne Delbeke
Reply to  cephus0
June 15, 2017 11:15 pm

The UK many of us knew growing up is long gone. The demographics have changed, the Millenials have different values, London has fallen:

Ernest Bush
Reply to  cephus0
June 16, 2017 9:28 am

@Kalifornia Kook – there is a theory that I believe has validity that tthe MSM in the U.S. controls the Democrat Party. That party is maybe falling apart and losing elections because the MSM moguls are clueless about winning elections.
You would think from all the hype in the media that the Georgia House Rep. race was sown up already by the Democrat candidate. They are spending tens of millions in outside money as they did in the Montana race. The result will be the same.

Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 7:39 am

The elite have become corrupt and incompetent. Both at the same time.

Joey
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 8:30 am

“Become corrupt and incompetent”? They have ALWAYS been corrupt and incompetent.

Auto
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 3:52 pm

Joey
Yes.
Now they are also intolerant and inward-looking . . . .
Auto

Kalifornia Kook
Reply to  texasjimbrock
June 15, 2017 11:01 pm

They have also always been intolerant and inward-looking. But the press pays obeisance to them. I suspect out of laziness, but in fact, it could merely be that the elite learned to control the minds of the intellectually-challenged – i.e., the Press, shaping their minds from grade school all the way to a journalistic degree.

PiperPaul
Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 7:57 am

China and India are in a win win position since much of the developed West’s industrial base will be off-shored to China and India
Not just the industrial base – the intellectual base as well in the form of higher level knowledge workers (programmers, engineers, etc.).

george e. smith
Reply to  PiperPaul
June 17, 2017 10:36 pm

What higher level knowledge do programmer workers need ??
A two year old child can make better traffic control decisions, than the people who program the traffic lights in Silicon Valley.
Besides, ages ago, IBM discovered that good programmers are Musicians; NOT Engineers.
You merely have to put the right instruction in the right place at the right time; or you get garbage; same as trying to play a Beethoven piano sonata.
It helps if you have some basic problem solving skills (common sense), before you tell some stupid computer what it should do. It WILL do what you tell it; but even it doesn’t know if that will solve the problem.
G

Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 8:10 am

Trump’s speech was brilliant from start to finish . His expressing openness to renegotiation took that potential “bitch” off the table , but his laying out of necessary changes made it impossible for the eKo-statists to see anything they could possibly accept .
His not disputing the “science” , while I felt initial disappointment , I saw by the end of the speech laser focused on the economics and the lack of any meaningful effect under all the best assumptions brilliant in defusing that issue . The next day in Spicer’s new conference several MSM reporters looked absolutely brain-damaged dumb perseverating on the whether or not he believed “climate change” a hoax despite Trump’s having made the issue moot .
https://s3.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20170602&t=2&i=1187299476&w=644&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&sq=&r=LYNXMPED511E5

Chris
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
June 15, 2017 9:43 am

Brilliant speech? Wow, the standards for what makes a great speech have really declined.

Doodle
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
June 15, 2017 11:37 am

No Chris, it’s just that your idea of brilliance has more to do with emotive and pathos reasoning rather than rational disarming and logos reasoning to prevent political opponents from having a real argument.
It was brilliant. Trump has everyone fooled more so than Bush 2 did. Everyone thinks he’s stupid, but there he is, sitting in the Oval Office.

Catcracking
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
June 15, 2017 11:38 am

Agree it was a brilliant speech that it reveals that it is the UN folks are the ones who are Recalcitrant and unable to reconcile the facts of available low CO 2 renewable fuels with the proposed reductions. They even ignore the IEA warning that renewable fuels development are not on a path to meet the Paris CO 2 reduction goals. Unfortunately he laws of thermodynamics need to be followed.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/09/energy-technology-is-not-advancing-fast-enough-to-meet-climate-goals.html

drednicolson
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
June 15, 2017 5:43 pm

Was Chris one of Obama’s speechwriters or what?

Ian W
Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 8:34 am

You forgot to include all the extra demand from electric vehicles which seem to have been forgotten. UK is already close to the edge of base load supply adding several million electric vehicles will on its own consume all the current base load supply. So where is the power going to come from? The same applies to California and its dream world.

John Hardy
Reply to  Ian W
June 15, 2017 2:28 pm

Ian – you recharge overnight and if necessary add incentives to do so. Besides refining petrol takes a lot of electric power too

Catcracking
Reply to  Ian W
June 15, 2017 5:39 pm

David, Thanks for the data,
In addition virtually all the construction equipment probably runs on Diesel or other fossil fuels, Does anyone believe all the heavy machinery that builds roads, buildings, windmills, etc can run on electricity from windmills and solar panels? Do they envision electric ships transporting “stuff” over the ocean or going back to sail boats?
Also there are significant regions where the home heating heating is still provided by oil. Not t mention that plastics, tires, fertilizer, and other necessities are provided by fossil fuels.

Griff
Reply to  Ian W
June 16, 2017 1:49 am

Demand drops overnight and EVs will surely use the spare capacity from midnight to 6 am

MarkW
Reply to  Ian W
June 16, 2017 6:20 am

Numbers mindless troll, numbers.
Is there enough excess capacity to recharge 100 million EV’s over night?

george e. smith
Reply to  Ian W
June 17, 2017 10:51 pm

So when Moonbrown finally achieves his end goal of 100% electric and 100% renewables, who is going to pay the power bill for all of the free Tesla charging stations.
I actually flattened my car battery the other day while working on a crossword puzzle, while sitting in a local Library parking lot. I forgot I still had my headlight high beams on and the car radio.
I have to drive in the day time with my headlight high beams on, because I drive one of those small white automobiles that is hard to see in the daytime, so people are always driving into where my car is, thinking it is an empty space.
I don’t need the high beams on at night because there is good contrast between my white car, and the black night.
So the car wouldn’t start, when I went to leave. Well I was only 20 feet away from the three free plug in electric car charger stations, at which an electric BMW SUV, and a couple of Datsun Leaves, were slurping at the public trough. Well my jumper cables couldn’t quite reach, and I would have had to unplug the Beemer.
Eventually got a boost from a Detroitosaurus Maximus that came by. gasoline to the rescue. So much for Electric cars.
G

Griff
Reply to  richard verney
June 15, 2017 10:17 am

CO2 emissions in Germany are dragging because of heat and transport are not making progress, not electricity… and only went up a fraction last year. Germany now exports more power to France than vice versa. German generation and exports went up last year, while domestic demand fell.
Germany continues to roll out and commission new wind power: at present the plan is to concentrate on offshore wind.
Earlier this year for various reasons 4 of the remaining 8 reactors were offline and it made no difference to German electricity supply.
Oh, and current plans for coal plant shut down now total 6.7 GW.
The new UK climate minister (to my surprise) gave an interview this week in which he said Trump was wrong to pull out of Paris. The National Grid has launched a new initiative for grid balancing to further support renewables roll out…

Leo Smith
Reply to  Griff
June 15, 2017 11:36 am

no griff. the carbon intensity of the electricity used is lagging behind
renewables do not significantly lower emissions unless you have hydro for backup.
its a fact .
get over it.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
Reply to  Griff
June 15, 2017 11:57 am

Let’s presume for a moment your opinion would be factual, why do citizens pay more for kWh in Germany than in France?

Reply to  Griff
June 15, 2017 11:58 am

My question is for Griff

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  Griff
June 15, 2017 1:22 pm

Griff, Germany’s co2 emissions are now at the same level as in 2009. Their 2020 target of 40% cut from 1990 level is impossible to reach, that would mean a reduction from 907 to 751 m tons, in 3 years. To accomplish this, the whole society, and not least the industry, would have to grind to a halt. Even more far-fetched is the 2030 target of 563.
They just can’t do this, and they know it, but still Germany is hailed as the saviour of our planet. Why?
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-carbon-emissions-rise-2016-despite-coal-use-drop

Griff
Reply to  Griff
June 16, 2017 1:46 am

Jaako
Part of it is tax and VAT.
Also note Germans use less power per household than US households and may well have solar panels or a share in a renewable energy community scheme

Griff
Reply to  Griff
June 16, 2017 1:47 am

Henning, they are going to hit their renewable electricity target -but miss heat/transport, probably.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  richard verney
June 16, 2017 11:46 am

+1,000.
But I do think it’s high time for Trump to go on the offensive, on two fronts.
1. By pointing out the “Inconvenient Fact” (love using that one for some reason) that *even if every country meets its Paris “Deal” commitments, AND we accept the CAGW BS,* the effect wouldn’t even be enough to accurately measure, despite costing trillions.
2. The CAGW BS is, indeed, just a political agenda, and is completely unsupported by any actual empirical data. The challenge should be put forth to “put up or shut up” on evidence of the supposed catastrophe, and it should be made clear that the existing argument of “we can’t account for the x amount of warming that occurred since [fill in the blank] without our pet hypothesis about human CO2 emissions, and we’re scientists, so there” argument from ignorance is NOT evidence. Nor are models, or exaggerated claims of “consensus,” or coincidental correlations without scientific connection beyond the pet hypothesis.

June 15, 2017 6:49 am

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/27/study-the-solution-to-unreliable-wind-and-solar-power-build-more/comment-page-1/#comment-2411408
Europe’s goose is cooked – there is only so much energy and economic stupidity that a society can sustain.
Brexit was brilliant – the common Brit is much more sensible than his rulers.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/28/germanys-merkel-contemplates-social-media-crackdown-to-counter-fake-news/comment-page-1/#comment-2355706
[excerpt]
If it continues on its current course, Europe will become a museum, a later Luxor (Thebes). A society can only sustain so many foolish policies.
Best, Allan

Rhoda R
Reply to  Allan M.R. MacRae
June 15, 2017 3:32 pm

Nope. The islamics with Europe will destroy what is unique about European culture to replace it with their 7th C mideavilism. Just about everywhere islam goes, it destroys the culture they are invading into and replaces is with islam. No museums.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Rhoda R
June 16, 2017 10:31 am

They built a pathetic plastic glass cage around the Eiffel Tower that is like painting a target on it! The Mona Lisa and the entire art and cultural underpinnings WILL be destroyed. Islam majority by 2040 and the climate crisis won’t even be remembered. Europeans are milling around in деиуал of their end and climate change is like the orchestra on the Titanic temporarily detracting them. I shed tears.

Leonard Lane
June 15, 2017 6:51 am

The EU has bigger problems than CO2 reduction and the hardships that costs. Their willingness to allow radical Islamist to grow ever faster and ever more powerful has almost insured their destruction. They seem oblivious to the cancer growing deep in their belly.

Reply to  Leonard Lane
June 15, 2017 7:35 am

Exactly. Any discussion of what happens in future Europe is only a projection of what might have happened had they not lost what feeble minds they had in the first place and decided to adopt an extreme tolerance ‘multiculturalism’ philosophy with an extreme intolerance ‘culture’ whose entire raison d’être is the extermination of all other cultures. Only the Visegrad Four in Europe maintain any kind of rationality and all the rest are lost in yammering and burbling-at-the moon insanity.
Of course the rest of the Western World is heading down precisely the same path but just a few years behind.

Mariano Marini
June 15, 2017 6:56 am

A great pity that European political leaders are so stupid that they cannot see what is unfolding before their eyes.

Remember that European was so stupid that they cannot seen six millions of persons burning in Polonia.

Doodle
Reply to  Mariano Marini
June 15, 2017 11:39 am

S5tuff that didn’t happen for $500 Alex.

Joey
June 15, 2017 7:01 am

“No renegotiation”? Okay…..bye now.

Catcracking
June 15, 2017 7:03 am

One wonders how long Ms Juncker can ignore the International Energy Agency report that technology is not advancing fast enough to meet the Paris accord goals
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/09/energy-technology-is-not-advancing-fast-enough-to-meet-climate-goals.html
“Paris Agreement has more problems than just Trump: Clean technology isn’t advancing fast enough
Just 3 out of 26 energy technology categories the International Energy Agency tracks are on pace to help meet global climate goals.
The IEA has a fairly straightforward solution: implement policies that will encourage investment in these technologies and work across borders to develop them.”

MarkW
Reply to  Catcracking
June 15, 2017 8:06 am

Just pass a law requiring them to develop the technology faster.

Trebla
Reply to  MarkW
June 15, 2017 9:41 am

Or make the physics of energy density go away.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  MarkW
June 15, 2017 10:07 am

Isn’t that just what the U.S. did in the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 which requires renewable fuel to be blended into transportation fuel in increasing amounts each year? The RFS requires a certain amount of ‘Advanced Biofuels’ each year which no one has yet figured out how to make in quantity and at an acceptable cost.

Catcracking
Reply to  MarkW
June 15, 2017 11:03 am

Joe that’s absolutely correct, there was a mandate for ever increasing volumes of cellulosic ethanol every year; however , the industry despite massive subsidies could never produce the mandated amount of fuel. Ethanol from corn does not qualify, although we do have the 10% mandate in most locations.
The Obama Administration just pretended their was no problem and the fuel suppliers had to take them to court frequently. Often the requirements were not established until the year was half over. Hopefully Trump can sort this mess out also.

dan no longer in CA
Reply to  MarkW
June 15, 2017 2:50 pm

The international fusion project, ITER, is $billions over budget and years behind schedule with no clear path to commercialization. Meanwhile, there are at least three viable small scale hot fusion programs proceeding on commercial investment. Here are two:
http://www.emc2fusion.org/
http://www.tokamakenergy.co.uk/

Dobes
June 15, 2017 7:07 am

Ok so can we just leave it at that? I personally dont see anything to negotiate. I dont want to send our money and technology to anyone else, I dont think this agreement or any other agreement will change our climate by even a fraction of a degree, and if it did alter anything why are they convinced it would be for the better. R.I.P. Paris climate accord. Do with it what you will. I know you wont abide by it.

Towering Inferno
June 15, 2017 7:19 am

Grenfell – Victims of the scheme.
$10,000,000 spent to turn their high rise into a flaming inferno !

Roger Knights
Reply to  Towering Inferno
June 15, 2017 8:06 am

I wonder if the insulation enthusiasts who pushed that cladding addition will have the nerve to under-install similar cladding installed elsewhere.
BTW, a story in WaPo today says the reason for installing the cladding was decorative, to make the building fit in better with its posh neighborhood. No mention was made of its main purpose: insulation. This lying-by-omission is an example of the MSM’s blindness to its instinctive bias.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 8:08 am

oops, make that “uninstall”

richard verney
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 8:29 am

a story in WaPo today says the reason for installing the cladding was decorative, to make the building fit in better with its posh neighborhood.

I too have seen that claim in UK MSM, but I am sceptical of the claim.
I consider it probable that the cladding was all to do with insulation, and requirements for better insulation brought about by the Green Agenda.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/06/15/15/416FC28400000578-4605674-Cladding_is_a_material_attached_to_a_building_s_frame_to_create_-a-16_1497536809126.jpg

Chris
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 9:46 am

“I consider it probable that the cladding was all to do with insulation, and requirements for better insulation brought about by the Green Agenda.”
Good grief, so now being more energy efficient is a “Green Agenda” and not just a common sense thing to do?

Roger Knights
Reply to  Chris
June 15, 2017 2:27 pm

Green is the new black.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 10:19 am

Actually that exterior wall design is not only for insulation, The air space behind the cladding is usually placed there for moisture control. I would guess that no one actually looked at the fire risk of that design when they specified it. I would not like to be the engineer that signed off on that design.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Joe Crawford
June 15, 2017 2:46 pm

Here’s a Telegraph story on an engineer who tried to warn them against this design for years. TPTB turned a deaf ear to him. I wonder how many buildings will now need to be de-cladded.
http://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/817447/London-Fire-expert-slams-Home-Office-Grenfell-Tower-cladding-This-Morning-ITV

MarkW
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 2:03 pm

I love the way leftists assume that any benefit, no matter how small or costly, must be a good thing.
Who cares if the mandated insulation will never pay for itself, we have virtues to signal.

richard verney
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 2:51 pm

Good grief, so now being more energy efficient is a “Green Agenda” and not just a common sense thing to do?

I am not against commonsense, but a lot of old building are not suitable for adaption to modern insulation standards.
In the UK many buildings have cavity walls. The void space is now often filled with insulation, to meet green energy criteria, but frequently this leads to damp.
Many old building have double glazing fitted but this too often leads to damp especially if chimney/fireplaces are blocked off/boarded up. Old buildings were designed to be drafty so as not to be damp. Neighbours of mine had an Edwardian semi (built circa 1912), and they removed the fireplaces and installed double glazing to keep heating costs down. Their house always smelt musty and was damp. I had a 1930s house, it had ill fitting crittal windows and fireplaces. it was very drafty but had no damp problems. Energy bills were higher of course, but that comes as part and parcel of owning an old building.
There is an article in the Daily Telegraph about this fire. It comments:

Alongside the cosmetic appeal of cladding, it is used as an insulation to make buildings more sustainable to meet green energy requirements.
“It could be that this is the quest for sustainability trumping other concerns,” Dr Glockling warned.,

The insulation cost several million.May be it would have been more sensible to let the small amount of energy leaching through the concrete structure of the building to be simply wasted. If this had been done perhaps about 100 people would still be alive today going about there daily business.

TA
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 4:13 pm

That cladding looks like a chimney.

Auto
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 16, 2017 1:33 pm

I am no lover of the bloated plutocrats doing deals on ‘Right to Buy’ properties [wheeler dealers with an inside lead] [legal, but not creating anything], against those who through their own efforts have created wealth.
However, this link below needs either confirmation or refutation;
It worries me; has the (Presumed [!]) lust for gold been allowed to kill scores – 70??? –
https://insidecroydon.com/2017/06/16/right-to-buy-is-an-organised-high-yield-industry/#more-43486
Auto.
We’re seeing Corbyn-Stalyn mobs demanding ‘something’; May has announced £40,000 per family in help; and the former housing minister, now freshly minted Chief of Staff to May; former Croydon MP, until last week (and my ward councillor from a few years ago) seems struck dumber than the average ox.
Worrying in many aspects.

Jim Reedy
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 17, 2017 9:43 pm

My Understanding is the makers of said cladding say it is NOT to be installed on buildings > 3 stories
(I think normal size fire engine ladders).
as it is a fire hazard.

Robertvd
Reply to  Towering Inferno
June 15, 2017 2:19 pm

Celotex RS5000 comprises rigid polyisocyanurate foam core (PIR) using a blowing agent that has low global warming potential (GWP) and zero ozone depletion potential (ODP).
•Has been tested to BS 8414-2:2005, meets the requirements in BR 135 and the first PIR insulation suitable for rainscreen cladding applications above 18 metres in height
•Achieves an ‘A+’ rating when compared to the BRE Green Guide
https://www.celotex.co.uk/products/rs5000

Hivemind
Reply to  Robertvd
June 15, 2017 8:31 pm

Would I be wrong in assuming that polyisocyanurate will decompose into cyanide gas in a fire?
Bags not being in one of those building when they go up.

Realist
June 15, 2017 7:36 am

“US President Trump has claimed that the accord could be amended and made more palatable to his country.”
But why play footsie with the Glo-Bullist cabal at all?
Why humor the humorless and give ANY legitimacy to this politics-over-science power grab?
Call it what it is:
A monstrous lie that serves the interest of self-serving liars and con artists.
Just Stop The Madness Here and Now.

Butch
Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 9:31 am

There is also a 1 in 1 trillion chance that I could win $110,000,000 in the lottery, even though I didn’t buy a ticket !!…..LOL

Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 12:15 pm

There is a chance:

June 15, 2017 7:51 am

President Trump: “We’re getting out the Paris accord but are happy to consider renegotiating the deal.”
Herr Junker: “We will not renegotiate the Paris deal, instead, we will spend the next three years persuading the US to sign up again, having left because it was a crap deal”.
Is it me?
Anyone know how much a nice 4 bedroomed house in the US would cost. Or even how much say, half an acre of land would cost so I can build my own? I’m seriously thinking of retiring across the pond to the US. British politics is bad enough but when half the country wants to cancel Brexit and throw themselves at the mercy of these crackpots I think it’s high time many of us called it a day.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 15, 2017 8:10 am

David,
any suggestions. A bit of land on the outskirts of a nice small town with supermarkets, restaurants etc.?

SocietalNorm
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 6:54 am

Grand Junction, Colorado is very nice. Lots of people retire and live around that small city. Lots of festivals, hiking, and skiing nearby with pretty low-cost housing. Hot at times, cold at times, but usually quite pleasant there.

Roger Knights
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 7:59 am

There are lots of cheap houses in the rust belt. Some are actually being demolished, such as in Buffalo, NY. You might be able to get some at a song, just for back taxes.

Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 8:08 am

Roger,
we see images of these beautiful looking, derelict houses on UK TV constantly.
You better believe I have thought of it but it seems we might be the only people in an entire neighbourhood of derelict houses.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 8:54 am

There are also houses abandoned after the flooding last year in North Carolina. The restoration would be costly, unless one did it oneself.

Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:06 am

Oh yea, and the mad half of my Scot’s brethren want to divide the UK as well!!!
A PM with a parliamentary majority calls an election to strengthen her Brexit hand and ends up with a hung parliament. Meanwhile home grown terrorism is taking hold and far from kicking suspects out the country, we’re forced to accept as many as Europe decides we should have.
The largest and more efficient coal fired power station in Europe, Drax, is converted to burning processed wood pellets imported from the US and winds up emitting 17% more CO2 than it did burning coal.
And perhaps 100 people will have died in a fire that engulfed flats, thanks, it appears, to cladding recently installed ‘for environmental reasons’ at a cost of £10M, but they wouldn’t spend £65K to fix the lifts.
You couldn’t make all this up.

Ian W
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:43 am

HotScot – The SNP do not want independence they want to be a region of the European Union. That way all their politicians can have sinecure EU posts on EU pensions with no worry about any voters voting them out of their EUrocrat offices. They will sell Scotland just to get the EU pensions.

dan no longer in CA
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 3:18 pm

Optimum location depends on if you are retiring or have a paying job. Texas is good if you have a job, as there is no income tax, but real estate taxes are high. If you are retiring, a place with low real estate taxes, like Florida would be cheaper in the long run.

MarkW
Reply to  HotScot
June 16, 2017 6:24 am

Florida doesn’t have an income tax either.

Editor
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:09 am

Hot Scot

Anyone know how much a nice 4 bedroomed house in the US would cost. Or even how much say, half an acre of land would cost so I can build my own?

In coastal California, or the government-environs around NY and DC, a 4 bedroom apartment could be 1,000,000.00 USD. Or more. in the south, outside of downtown Charlotte, Atlanta, or Orlando, a good-quality (but used) 4-bedroom stand-alone home at 3500 sq feet on a 1/2 acre lot could be $120,000.00 used.
New, the same 3500 sq foot 4-bedroom/3-bath house might be as low as 175,000.00 to 190,000.00 – although more new house on smaller properties are offered at 250,000.00 to 350,000.00 . Older houses out here are much more likely to have large lots than the small ones the younger generation seems to want.
That 1,000,000.00 California apartment? Be prepared to have to pay more for the parking privilege.

Reply to  RACookPE1978
June 15, 2017 8:15 am

RACookPE1978
I think I would avoid California like the plague, too many lefties there as far as I can gather.
Charlotte, Atlanta, or Orlando sound good. When we sell our small, 3 bedroomed cottage in Kent, 18 miles outside London, we will likely get around £500,000 for it. House prices in the UK are nuts.

Editor
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:24 am

Well, do plan to be “outside of” Charlotte, Atlanta, Orlando, Greenville for the lower prices.
Higher altitudes (above 1000 feet elevation in the foothills) = cooler, dryer air than the more humid, hotter Atlantic and Gulf coastal areas.
Further north (past north GA or NC state lines) invites “more snow” – heck, you might have three or four snow days a year in TN or south VA.

Ian W
Reply to  RACookPE1978
June 15, 2017 8:45 am

Look at the Atlantic coast from the I-4 North all the way to North Carolina – focus on the small towns.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  RACookPE1978
June 15, 2017 11:02 am

HotScot June 15, 2017 at 8:15 am

Charlotte, Atlanta, or Orlando sound good.
we will likely get around £500,000 for it. House prices in the UK are nuts.

Charlotte, Atlanta and Orlando have all had ”mass shootings” lately, haven’t they. Course iffen you like that kind of excitement, plus high crime rates and racial disharmony, go for it.
Unless you are partial to the “bright city lights”……… then central and/or north central WV is a place to consider for either a small town or rural setting ……. and a Super Walmart within 30 minutes of the location you choose. £500K would buy you a nice abode and you would have at least £350K left for your spending pleasure.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:27 am

Hot Scot,
Florida is the place to be. Just make sure you are on the Gulf Coast south of Tampa.
“A bit of land on the outskirts of a nice small town with supermarkets, restaurants etc.?”
Sarasota meets those needs. Did you know that Scots have a long history in Sarasota?

Rhoda R
Reply to  Tom in Florida
June 15, 2017 3:44 pm

Actually, so does the Gulf Coast on the Florida Panhandle. Nice houses on decent sized lots, or if you move inland about 20 miles you are in rural Florida with some small cities where you have larger lots and safer environments as well as better housing costs.. We do have humidity and mosquitoes though.

Griff
Reply to  Tom in Florida
June 16, 2017 1:44 am

The smart money says Florida coastal property is already heading for unsaleable due to sea level rise.
I know people here don’t believe in that -the sea does not care.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom in Florida
June 16, 2017 6:25 am

Funny thing, prices for ocean side property in FL continues to rise. Despite Griffies lies to the contrary.

K. Kilty
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:33 am

You can find quite nice houses in a place like Bowie, Arizona for a few tens of thousands of dollars, but there is nothing to do there. I have a very nice house in southern Wyoming that would cost two and one-half times what I spent for it just 100 miles to the southeast of me in the Denver area. It all depends on what you demand for social services, culture and all other trappings…

richard verney
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:40 am

I’m partial to Texas.

I remember one of my first business trips which was to Houston. The Client invited me back to his home. It was a newish 3 bed detached house built to a high standard, double garage, swimming pool, Jacuzzi on a gated community with sports facilities and it cost about $85,000. In the UK, the house would have been a 5 bedroom house since in the UK bedrooms are small, no walk in closets, perhaps only 1 en suite etc.
It struck me what wonderful value for money that represented, since it was cheaper than my small 1 bedroom flat in one of the cheapest areas in the East of London.
The US generally enjoys a very high standard of living, and good quality of life compared to the UK.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 8:42 am

You could try the “Live Free and Die” state, New Hampshire. I’d stay away from the southern/southeastern portion. Getting a bit crowded there, and besides, you are more apt to find areas with depressed housing prices further north. Very scenic areas, and close to mountains, lakes, etc. Property taxes can be a bit high in some areas, and electric rates are high. Still, worth looking into.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 9:17 am

@HotScot:
Don’t know if the list below helps you any, but I thought I would post it here in case it does.
Best of luck with your decision whatever it is.
http://livability.com/best-places/top-100-best-small-towns/2015.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
June 15, 2017 9:32 am

Very much obliged to everyone for the suggestions.
Lots of research to do now )

Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 11:07 am

The US is a VERY big place. You could get what you want for $1-2 million US in places like Greenwich CT, or $100,000 in rural places. The question is what region you would like to live in, and then work from there. Folks have said Texas, but from the UK, you might find that rather hot. I would suggest North Carolina, Maryland, or Delaware. Improved climate from the UK, but not blindingly hot. Reasonable prices and interesting towns and cities. On the east coast, so close, relatively speaking to the UK.

Rhoda R
Reply to  Mike_GenX (@MikeGenx)
June 15, 2017 3:47 pm

Also, don’t forget Tennessee and Kentucky. Frankly, I loved eastern Kentucky with it’s four real seasons and wonderful scenery. I bit dodgy if you like to hike in the woods though, in some areas, because of the moodshiners.

Caroline Chamblin
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 11:44 am

I would welcome a sensible person like you, HotScot!

Stephen Richards
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 11:47 am

That’s the stupidity and arrogance faced b Britain in their brexit negotiations. That’s why UK should just do a trump and leave. Tell the EU to knock on the door when ready.

Reply to  Stephen Richards
June 16, 2017 4:00 am

Stephen,
my thoughts as well, but a lot of crap to be unravelled. We are likely to still be here in 5 years time. If not 10.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Stephen Richards
June 16, 2017 11:10 am

That’s the best deal! When you have the world’s English speaking countries who share your economic thinking, culture, values work ethic, laws and freedoms as your trading partners, you should just let go of any ‘advantages’ or even assets you may possess as members of a dead end entity like the EU.
One thing I’ve said about the US is multilateral deals are for the meek. If you are big and strong, joining such makes you an equal minority player. In a bilateral deal for the strong, they are in the driver’s seat.
Settle with the EU in a week, and go out and strongly deal with your natural historic and cultural offspring. You will be surprised how well you do. Tell EU if they want any Stilton cheese, or Newcastle Brown, give us a call.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 12:28 pm

In Texas, you can get a half-acre well outside of Houston for $50K if you get a good deal. Inside the city goes up quite a bit. Further out, you can get acres for far less. Construction on a 4 bedroom will vary wildly from $200K to $400K. I can recommend you a few builders if you are serious.

drednicolson
Reply to  HotScot
June 15, 2017 6:22 pm

The counties that border the Red River in southern Oklahoma have a good number of expanding small towns, typically the county seats. Especially the regional college towns of Weatherford and Durant. I see new houses going up on the outskirts of Durant on occasion (I live nearby). And Texas is just across the river. It’s common for people here to live on the Oklahoma side (cheaper rent/property tax) and commute to a job on the Texas side (somewhat better pay depending on the occupation). As a bonus, OK is pretty much the Republican-reddest state in the Union. Every single county posted a Trump majority back in November, even our urban centers of OKC and Tulsa.

david smith
June 15, 2017 7:55 am

I presume the woman from the Marshall Islands made her presentation by Skype….

Reply to  david smith
June 15, 2017 1:08 pm

Doubtful. They probably recommissioned Concord for a single return flight, for a single passenger. Just so she wasn’t away from her constituency for longer than was absolutely necessary.

Roger Knights
June 15, 2017 7:57 am

By a huge majority the EU Parliament voted on Wednesday in favour of binding national targets . . .

Are they into B/D too?

MartinR
June 15, 2017 8:22 am

A non binding piece of crap our President told you to take a hike Junkers, screw you idiots 🙂

Tom in Florida
June 15, 2017 8:23 am

““The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,” Mr Juncker said.”
Is that your final answer?

hunter
June 15, 2017 8:24 am

Mark Steyn is doing an audio book reading of The Time Machine. He sees the story as a cautionary tale, warning us how dangerous degeneracy is. The European degeneracy is manifested in their obsessions over climate “risks” in the distant future while ignoring the consequences of their self destructive immigration policy today. They are so degenerate they cannot distinguish real from unreal, wasting precious time and treasure on the unreal climate crisis while their culture is expropriated away as they speak.

K. Kilty
Reply to  hunter
June 15, 2017 8:41 am

It’s the human condition, isn’t it? There are actually very few people who have any sort of critical sense and vision. When I taught engineering econ an interesting exercise was to take a hundred dollars in Roman times and watch its compound growth at 3% reach many billions of times the present wealth of the entire world population. Then we would discuss why it is that the world is not more wealthy than it is. Much of the problem is the lack of reasonable investments, of course, but much comes from the accumulated economic damage of stupid ideas.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  hunter
June 15, 2017 9:34 am

hunter June 15, 2017 at 8:24 am
“Mark Steyn is doing an audio book reading of The Time Machine.”
Reading H.G. wells The Time Machine always makes me hungry
michael

Reply to  hunter
June 15, 2017 1:14 pm

hunter,
The European degeneracy is Germany concluding outstanding WW2 business.
France is, as usual, is a German puppet and Macron will soon find Merkle’s hand firmly embedded in his arse, operating his mouth.
If it’s not already.

Butch
June 15, 2017 8:26 am

“And the EU volunteers to shoot their economy in both feet!”
Actually, I’d say the E.U. just shot itself in the @ss !!
91e51-excellent-4689_preview

michel
June 15, 2017 8:40 am

Everyone needs to read Varoufakis’ book “Adults in the Room’. What you find in it is time after time, well documented occasions, on which the unelected officials of various Euro institutions, meeting in secret and without minutes, make decisions which they themselves admit to be unjustifiable and irrational. Over and over again. The particular subject Varoufakis demonstrates this happening on is Greece and the Greek debt and bailout plans.
But it is pretty much universal. It is not that the decision makers are elected officials with unelected advisers. This is common in contemporary democracies, and its reasonable to wonder whether such advisers are wielding excessive influence. As they appear to have done in the last UK government.
No, this is people who have never gone near an election or popular mandate simply dictating to the elected representatives what they will do. They are a sort of self perpetuating oligarchy at the heart of Europe.
Read Varoufakis on the Eurogroup. Its a body you have never heard of, with no legal existence as a thing in the various treaties that have constituted the EU. And yet it is basically dictating what the elected and accountable heads of state shall do in very important policy areas.
The EU madness on climate, with its shining achievement being the promotion of diesel engined cars, is down to this kind of idiocy. People with no democratic mandate who say one thing in public and quite another in private, and have complete contempt for democracy.
There will be no negotiation on Paris, just as there was no negotiation on the Greek debt, and there will be no negotiation on Brexit. Someplace in a room that in the old days would have been smoke filled a bunch of people will decide what their decision is, and give the Commission and the Council of Ministers their marching orders. They will be doing whatever the German Chancellor tells them.
Meanwhile in another part of the wood the EU Parliament, a unique world leading institution, the first Parliament in the world to have no power to initiate legislation, what will it be doing? It will roll over and put its paws in the air, and hope to be given a bone.

Roger Knights
Reply to  michel
June 15, 2017 9:02 am

Another example of unelected madness: Allowing Greece into the EU.

Joel Snider
June 15, 2017 8:49 am

Here’s an open message to those trying to bluff Trump – you can’t. Because he’s not bluffing.

cbone
June 15, 2017 8:53 am

The problem with the EU setting targets and caps is that the EU isn’t satisfied with hamstringing only themselves. They want to bring everyone down with them. They will attempt to extend their crippling decisions outward via coercive laws that require any business wishing to do business in any way with the EU to agree to the suicide pact as well and force its suppliers to comply and on and on down the supply chain.

June 15, 2017 8:59 am

See, that is how fake news is created. “No new renegotiation” means there had to be a negotiation. There was not. There was a dictate that Obama swallowed, but even his party members in the Senate would not vote for.
Part of “The Art of the Deal” is to know when to walk away from the table. Trump did. The EU does not or they would not still be whining about it.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  philjourdan
June 15, 2017 10:05 am

You got to know when to hold ’em.

benofhouston
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 15, 2017 1:16 pm

Bruce, this is better represented by the rest of the chorus.
“Know when to fold ’em. Know when to walk away. Know when to run”

commieBob
June 15, 2017 9:04 am

The EU may be taking a gamble on President Trump’s impeachment.
To impeach the president, if I understand correctly, a lot of Republicans would have to vote for it. That’s a problem. Even the Democrats are wary of impeaching the president. link On the other hand, if the public perceives that he is a traitor who cheated his way into the Oval Office, they might demand it.
My prediction: popcorn sales through the roof. Much depends on how the Republicans are feeling about 2018.

LdB
Reply to  commieBob
June 15, 2017 10:30 am

There have been exactly 0 US presidents impeached in history. Take the closest historic attempt on Bill Clinton and he was facing strikingly similar charges ( one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice) and most would say he was guilty. The problem is you need 67 senators to vote for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton
The cost was $70 million they had a simple clear cut case and they got 50 of the required 67 votes.
You have snowballs chance in hell of impeaching Trump even if you could prove the charge. All the rubbish does is sell papers and give news a filler.

markl
Reply to  LdB
June 15, 2017 10:41 am

“….All the rubbish does is sell papers and give news a filler…..” That’s the naive answer. The purpose of it is to provide ammunition for the smear campaign and incite people to anarchy.

commieBob
Reply to  LdB
June 15, 2017 10:47 am

David Middleton June 15, 2017 at 10:37 am
Johnson and Clinton were impeached.

WHAT? … oh yeah, right, the other Johnson

rwisrael
Reply to  LdB
June 15, 2017 1:47 pm

You confuse impeachment with conviction.

phaedo
June 15, 2017 9:04 am

I thought it was the individual states that entered into the agreement not the EU.

Robertvd
June 15, 2017 9:10 am

The Global Warming Green fraud kills.
Celotex RS5000 comprises rigid polyisocyanurate foam core (PIR) using a blowing agent that has low global warming potential (GWP) and zero ozone depletion potential (ODP).
•Has been tested to BS 8414-2:2005, meets the requirements in BR 135 and the first PIR insulation suitable for rainscreen cladding applications above 18 metres in height
•Achieves an ‘A+’ rating when compared to the BRE Green Guide
https://www.celotex.co.uk/products/rs5000
The insulation material used in the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower “will burn if exposed to a fire of sufficient heat and intensity”, according to its manufacturer.
Celotex confirmed that it supplied its RS5000 insulation for the £8.6 million renovation of the London tower block, where at least 12 people died and scores were injured.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15347983.Tower_insulation_firm__Material_will_burn_if_exposed_to_fire_of_sufficient

Peta from Cumbria, now Newark
Reply to  Robertvd
June 15, 2017 10:10 am

They built what is effectively a chimney. The builders/renovators filled and wrapped it with plastic and the occupants filled it even more with plastic tat (mostly) imported from China.
Surprise sur-fooking-prise – it went off like a firework on Bonfire night.
Were the victims killed by Global Warming. They most certainly died because of it.
What was wrong with using white asbestos as insulation. It doesn’t burn, it doesn’t hurt anyone, it simply dissolves if you breathe it in. Brown and blue asbestos are the menaces but quite rarely ever used anywhere.
Another blind panic that has created a gold-mine for the cronies who ‘volunteer’ to remove the stuff wherever they think they find it
And what sparkling witticism will we get from Michael Mann about this?
I ain’t holding any breath.
And that Junker – there goes a childish tantrum if ever there was. Somebody give him his soother back before he busts a blood-vessel.
I echo HotScot – wtf has gone (and is going) wrong around here?
I always fancied Arizona. Dunno why. Somewhere big though. I like big country/space/sky/horizons…..
Cumbria had those but the climate was sh1t.
OK, maybe not The Climate. The weather has totally cr4p though.

cwon14
June 15, 2017 9:18 am

Good! Now exit the entire UN Climate Framework. They just told the US to drop dead.
So much for half measures of the legalistic Paris only exit. Worried about Russian election interference? Here’s the whole globalist UN actively seeking to unseat Trump. Where’s the outrage?

Butch
June 15, 2017 9:53 am

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5472414772001/?#sp=watch-live
Live….
Scott Pruitt testifies at House hearing on EPA budget

June 15, 2017 9:57 am

Great, I guess we’re done here.

Ktm
June 15, 2017 10:25 am

We have no time to reconsider action to prevent an immeasurably small change in temperature 100 years from now.
Just when you think they can’t get any more ridiculous, they raise the bar.

Zum Bomb
June 15, 2017 10:36 am

No doubt the world is relieved to note that the UN, FCCC and IPCC are administered by the Office of Mr. Junker (surrogate of Mrs. Merkel and the GDR) and the EU (NOT).
Jajajajajajajaja

Neo
June 15, 2017 10:42 am

Out in the private sector, there are these “deal makers” who can’t do much more than make deals.
There are nothing like the average businessman you may have seen on TV or the movies.
They live to deal. Whether it is a good deal or bad deal is irrelevant, but they will deal.
The mess they leave behind themselves is awful.

Bruce Cobb
June 15, 2017 11:04 am

Trump must be heartbroken with this news.

drednicolson
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 15, 2017 7:06 pm

The tears are rusting his 9-iron on the fairway, I’m sure.

willhaas
June 15, 2017 11:08 am

The reality is that the climate change we are experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rational to support the idea that the climate sensivity of CO2 is zero. So the Paris Climate Agreement will do nothing to affect climate change and hence is of no benefit. But even is we could somehow stop the climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise are part of our current climate so there is still no benefit to be gained.
So much of the Paris Climate Agreement is voluntary so our federal government is voluntarily not going to abide by it. But that does not stop local governments and individuals from lowering their carbon footprints. If you feel that the use of fossil fuels is bad then stop making use of all goods and services that make use of fossil fuels. After all it is your money that keeps the fossil fuel companies in business.
In the town where I live the transportation is based on fossil fuel based equipment.. The city can always pass new laws to ban such equipment in favor of horse powered equipment. The city can also ban the use of electricity derived from fossil fueled powered plants. Such laws would help to lower our cities human population which would further serve to reduce CO2 emisions within the city limits.

Leo Smith
June 15, 2017 11:32 am

Thank you, for EU regulations
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/817651/london-fire-grenfell-tower-block-cladding-latest-updates-european-union-regulations
17 dead and rising from ‘climate change: the legislation”.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 15, 2017 12:14 pm

There should be a thread here on that topic (inflammable cladding). We already have some good comments on it in various threads that could be re-posted into it.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 15, 2017 1:32 pm

“17 dead and rising from ‘climate change: the legislation’.”
Black is the new green.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Leo Smith
June 15, 2017 5:50 pm

You won’t find any building in Brussels installed with this cladding.

Gus
June 15, 2017 11:35 am

“>>> There Will Be No Renegotiation of Paris! <<<"
Then, there'll be no American membership of it.

SteveT
Reply to  Gus
June 16, 2017 6:56 am

Exactly as planned. – Brilliant, he left the door open and it was them that walked away.
SteveT

GPHanner
June 15, 2017 11:53 am

“There Will Be No Renegotiation of Paris! ”
Then you’re on your own.

June 15, 2017 11:56 am

I’m not a scientist, i just take care of their equipment. Can one of you Ph.D’s explain why if this is inevitable, we spend 100’s of billions on research for science that is settled, but nothing to prepare us for it?

June 15, 2017 12:09 pm

Juncker’s speech http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1647_en.htm is enough for me:
I’m the first EU climate refugee – seeking for a safe place in the US.

Butch
June 15, 2017 12:10 pm
Ivor Ward
June 15, 2017 12:37 pm

The Paris agreement was between nations. The EU is not a nation and Juncker is not the leader of any nation.
Therefore I do not see what the hell it has to do with him.

Butch
Reply to  Ivor Ward
June 15, 2017 12:52 pm

…The E.U. BELIEVES it is a nation, just like the leftist loons that BELIEVE in Anthropological Catastrophic Global Warming….NUTS !

Gunga Din
Reply to  Ivor Ward
June 15, 2017 1:23 pm

Ivor, somebody pays him. Without the US exporting its Green, those checks may begin to bounce.

June 15, 2017 1:20 pm

Nations, states, parties, etc., etc, — does everybody even have the same definition of all these, let alone the common comprehension about them to determine if there are any legally binding terms applicable to them?
I’ve been reading some pretty intense legal-type articles about the Paris agreement, and even they seem wishy washy. If it came down to some sort of litigation, I think it would just be a matter of who was judging or mediating the legal drama that day.
I still get the overall feeling that the Paris Agreement is a puny legal obligation, as in no legal obligation whatsoever . Obama agreed for HIS administration, under HIS executive order, … he did NOT agree for the whole UNITED STATES, under all future executives, by disabling all future executive orders concerning it.
Is “circumventing” the law the latest positive spin on “breaking” the law? How about I … “circumvent” … the law, as I place a demanding note in front of a bank teller, instructing her to hand over all the bank’s money. Gee, all I have to do is modify my descriptive vocabulary, and maybe I could get away with it.
Your honor, I did not break the law – I circumvented the law, and, therefore, plead not guilty. Yeah, that would go over real well.

eyesonu
June 15, 2017 1:34 pm

“The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,” Mr Juncker said.
====
That is a great response from Trump’s point of view. He can just walk away. No need to waste any more of his time and USA $$$$$.
Hold Juncker to his word.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
June 15, 2017 1:37 pm

Interesting that the EU vote to impale itself further on the Paris accord was “nearly unanimous”. I wonder which countries had the sense to drag their feet?
Is the congressman interview really genuine? If so I think it is terrifying that someone in such high office can say something like that. Surely he needs removing from office to a place of safety for his and all our sakes.
We are all doomed it seems, Europe and America alike. At least it won’t be global warming that gets us-just stupidity.

rwisrael
June 15, 2017 1:44 pm

The best part of this fiasco is that the signatories seem to believe that the U S can’t opt out of the Accords for another three years because that’s the agreement that 0bama signed. Flash to the world, 0bama ain’t in charge and the Accords ain’t a treaty ratified by the Senate. They just don’t get how the U S works.

Bill J
June 15, 2017 2:16 pm

I’m glad that they refuse to renegotiate the Paris Accord. If they were open to renegotiate it then the US might consider signing back on.

James Schrumpf
June 15, 2017 2:41 pm

“We’ve spent twenty years negotiating it. Why should we let you negotiate it again, when your only purpose is to find something wrong with it?”

Louis
June 15, 2017 3:03 pm

“The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement,” Mr Juncker said.
When Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement, it was the end of the world. One magazine even wrote an obituary for the planet. What does it tell you when they won’t renegotiate to stop the world from ending? Even they don’t believe their own hype.

Patrick MJD
June 15, 2017 5:43 pm

“Talk about a win-win deal! President Trump decides to not shoot our economy in the foot… And the EU volunteers to shoot their economy in both feet!”
Not by a long shot. The EU volunteers to shoot itself in the foot followed by the head.

ScottR
June 15, 2017 6:42 pm

I wonder how many participants, if any, Trump will send to this year’s tea party in Bonn? A quick check of the participants list for COP21 in Paris showed there were 146 party goers including Obama. Excluding POTUS and his entourage, the cost must have been well over $1m.
I ashamed to say that New Zealand where I come from sent 37 people to the party – way more on a per capita basis than the US.

June 15, 2017 7:17 pm

I admit to being a bit concerned when President Trump said he wanted to renegotiate – he might have actually managed to get a (somewhat less) crippling piece of garbage past the Congress.
Now I can sleep better, though. The Kameraden of the Socialist States of Europe have pounded their desks and screamed “Nyet!!!” They will soon be back in the Sixth Century economically, and socially under Sharia.
Perhaps time to expand that travel ban to a few more countries…

J.H.
June 15, 2017 10:11 pm

I think that they think that Donald Trump is not going to be there in 2 or 3 years time…. They are counting on him being “removed”.
The stakes are now sky high for them. Without the funding and regulatory frame work of “Climate Change”, the Globalist Socialists will not be able to fund their Global Socialism or exert control over recalcitrant countries.
These Socialist fanatics are now all in….. That is why Republicans are being shot at charity baseball games and conservative speakers attacked at universities or beaten in the streets. The Socialists are determined not to let us speak and if they can’t stop us from speaking, they will escalate their violence.
It’s only one side of politics doing this….. The Socialist Democrats and their foreign globalist ilk.
Trump needs to apply the constitution and the law…. and be utterly steadfast in that application.

Amber
June 15, 2017 11:02 pm

The great thing about not being a member of the scary global warming church is that we have been subjected to the same playbook currently on display throughout the national political and social scene . No debate , just polarized intolerance of anyone else’s perspective . Global warming , global governance
motivated by money .
It has gotten so bad that as soon as you see things like …. Sources close to , or government officials (without names that is ) you know that it is just made up crap . NYT , WAPo, CNN have become unhinged ,
In fact you have to give Al Gore credit because he would often reference some obscure scientist as the source for his prophesy’s of doom . Arctic ice disappearing for example . Having no scientific credentials himself at least at times he tried to create the elusion of sound scientific conscientious but without pointing out the high degree of uncertainty . For example climate models which are used to underscore the climate Armageddon have been proven to be grossly inaccurate and consistently overstating warming projections.
There have been some complete bullshit statements like “the climate has a fever” which belay the desperation of a failing fear campaign .
President Trump is the peoples chance to stop the ship from sinking but it’s tougher when mutineers pump water into the boat .

Griff
June 16, 2017 4:58 am

Sweden just passed a law committing itself to a target more ambitious than its Paris commitment:
https://qz.com/1007833/swedens-climate-act-legally-commits-the-country-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2045/
India just announced it expects to meet, indeed surpass, its agreemnt 3 years early@
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/06/14/india-joins-renewable-energy-revolution-increases-emissions-reduction-pledge/
I see also US got 10% of all electricity from wind and solar in March…
Things moving on, even in the US!

Griff
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 7:27 am

But you can see the way this is going… every year more solar and more wind than the year before comes online. And more coal plants retire.
Great potential here. Some parts of the middle of the US have 45% wind capacity and then there’s offshore. There’s much more solar to exploit: Nevada just changed its tariff it pays to domestic solar owners back to market rate, for example.

MarkW
Reply to  David Middleton
June 16, 2017 11:56 am

Once again Griffie actually believes that because a trend exists, that it will continue forever.

Griff
Reply to  David Middleton
June 17, 2017 12:56 am

Whereas Mark, you seem to believe a trend you don’t like can be ignored and a political direction you don’t like is lies, not a statement of intent.
a trend is a statistical thing, based on real world figures. People like India are delivering on their promises, as you can see from multiple sources recording their energy use.
There is no underlying reason why the downward coal trend should reverse

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
June 16, 2017 6:33 am

Funny thing about Griff. He actually believes that the statements of politicians take precedence over reality.
IE, if a politician says something can be done, then it can be done. Period. No questions allowed.

Griff
Reply to  MarkW
June 16, 2017 7:23 am

but then I check the information about how many solar panels (for example) are being installed…
Or are you trying to tell me you don’t trust what President Trump says he will do ! ? !

MarkW
Reply to  MarkW
June 16, 2017 11:56 am

Ah yes, politicians are paying people to put up solar panels, and this proves that solar panels will eventually take over electricity production.

June 16, 2017 7:57 am

It took 20 years to create a 25 page document with 29 articles. They can’t do anything unless everyone (the US) signs, agrees, and abides. Here’s to another 20 years of nothing.

JasG
June 16, 2017 9:39 am

Why yes let’s commit to increased poverty and decreased GDP as soon as we can. It’s a no-brainer!

Amber