Paris Climate Change Accord

France, Germany, Italy say Paris climate accord can’t be renegotiated

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/06/01/france-germany-italy-say-paris-climate-accord-can-renegotiated/0lH3rowhqv7TtQynlx7S1J/story.html

The leaders of France, Germany and Italy say the Paris climate accord cannot be renegotiated as President Donald Trump has demanded.

French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Premier Paolo Gentiloni said in a joint statement Thursday that they take note ‘‘with regret’’ the U.S. decision to pull out of the 2015 agreement.

The three leaders say they regard the accord as ‘‘a cornerstone in the cooperation between our countries, for effectively and timely tackling climate change.’’

They added that the course charted by the accord is ‘‘irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated.’’

The White House said Trump spoke with the leaders of Germany, France, Canada and Britain Thursday to explain his decision.

The president thanked the leaders for holding ‘‘frank, substantive discussions’’ with him on the issue. He reassured them that the U.S. is committed to the trans-Atlantic alliance and ‘‘robust efforts to protect the environment,’’ according to the White House readout of the call.

Trump also vowed that the U.S. will be ‘‘the cleanest and most environmentally friendly country on Earth’’ going forward.

The president met with all four leaders last week at the NATO and Group of 7 summits in Europe.

Meanwhile, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement ‘‘a major disappointment.’’ He says through a spokesman it’s ‘‘crucial that the United States remains a leader on environmental issues.’’

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric said Thursday the U.N. chief believes the transformation envisioned in the accord is already underway.

Dujarric says the secretary-general is confident that cities, states and businesses around the world ‘‘will continue to demonstrate vision and leadership by working for the low-carbon, resilient economic growth that will create quality jobs and markets for 21st century prosperity.’’

He said the secretary-general ‘‘looks forward to engaging with the American government and all actors in the United States and around the world to build the sustainable future on which our grandchildren depend.’’

waterfield wrote:

Yes-what I meant is that when it comes to this particular issue the Republicans will always default to economics.

This is a good n important thread to start W, thanks for the contribution.

I wonder if diehard dogmatic republicans can be explained by genetics.

Zooey wrote:

zn wrote:

waterfield wrote:

Yes-what I meant is that when it comes to this particular issue the Republicans will always default to economics.

This is a good n important thread to start W, thanks for the contribution.

I wonder if diehard dogmatic republicans can be explained by genetics.

I wonder about that, too. And about environmental factors. I’ve been thinking about that since I started thinking more about political “branding,” about identifying with a political brand.

As I said a month or so ago, I think the Republican brand tends to attract people who tend to place a higher value on Authority, and on unsympathetic black and white rules/discipline.

Is that kind of thing genetic? Or is it personality based? I dunno.

Genetic? Eh, I dunno…

I think it’s a mix of psychology and culture.

It’s very appealing because it’s easy. It doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t ask you to question your beliefs. Its tenants dovetail nicely with all the propaganda you’ve been immersed in your entire life.

Wouldn’t it be nice to think America is the supreme force for good in the world and not question it? Wouldn’t it be comforting to believe in American Exceptionalism? To have unquestioning faith in what your leadership says and does? Damn lefties with their “science” telling us how we’re destroying the biosphere – well we have God and he would never let that happen so stop worrying and start drillin’….

Here’s how much Exxon paid Republicans who urged Trump to ditch Paris climate deal

link: http://resistancereport.com/politics/exxon-paid-republicans-paris/

22 Republicans were behind the push to get President Trump to leave the Paris climate agreement. Those senators are also favorites of polluters.

A letter sent to the White House last week — signed by 22 of the most conservative Republicans in the U.S. Senate — rejected the overwhelming global scientific consensus behind climate change in favor of short-term economic growth. Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) led the coalition of Republicans who co-signed the letter, which calls on Trump to exit the climate accords so he can successfully repeal the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan. ExxonMobil was one of the chief opponents of the Clean Power Plan, with then-CEO Rex Tillerson (who is now Trump’s Secretary of State) blasting the proposal in a 2015 speech.

“A key risk to fulfilling this objective is remaining in the Paris Agreement. Because of existing provisions within the Clean Air Act and others embedded in the Paris Agreement, remaining in it would subject the United States to significant litigation risk that could upend your administration’s ability to fulfill its goal of rescinding the Clean Power Plan,” the letter reads. “Accordingly, we strongly encourage you to make a clean break from the Paris Agreement.”

Inhofe, who has served in the Senate since 1994, has received $1.8 million from the oil and gas industry throughout his career, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, making the industry his top donor by more than $1 million. Here’s how much all of the letter’s co-signers received from the industry throughout their senate careers, ranging from $184,250 for Senator David Perdue (R-Georgia) to more than $3 million for John Cornyn (R-Texas).

(It should be noted that Luther Strange, the junior senator from Alabama, has only been in his position since January of 2017, as he was appointed to fill the seat vacated by Jeff Sessions when he was confirmed as Attorney General, and no donor data is immediately available for him as of this writing.)

Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyoming): $728,766

Senator Roy Blunt (R-Missouri): $1,143,574

Senator John Boozman (R-Arkansas): $281,352

Senator Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi): $462,890

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas): $3,031,956

Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho): $440,937

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas): $2,484,520

Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming): $513,733

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah): $772,179

Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah): $281,620

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky): $1,975,245

Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky): $286,465

Senator David Perdue (R-Georgia): $184,250

Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho): $209,900

Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kansas): $817,150

Senator Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota): $204,900

Senator Tim Scott (R-South Carolina): $523,276

Senator Richard Shelby (R-Alabama): $532,846

Senator Luther Strange (R-Alabama): (NO DATA AVAILABLE)

Senator Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina): $263,400

Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi): $686,876

WV =

A year ago, the suggestion that the U.S. should face tangible punishment for putting the rest of the rest of humanity at risk was laughed off in establishment circles: Surely no one would put their trade relationships in danger for anything so frivolous as a liveable planet. But just this week, Martin Wolf, writing in the Financial Times, declared, “If the U.S. withdrew from the Paris accord, the rest of the world must consider sanctions.”

We’re likely a long way from major U.S. trading partners taking that kind of a step, but governments are not the only ones that can impose economic penalties for lethal and immoral behavior

I can easily see an increase in import tariffs (duty) in Paris agreement countries that import U.S. exports.

If Trump is considering an import duty increase for Mexico’s exports to the U.S. to fund his wall, these Paris agreement countries will do it to the U.S. for exiting this environmental agreement.

Paris agreement countries have a valid reason to impose a higher import duty rate on U.S. exports and it will hurt U.S. export business.