The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2018 AFPTrump says U.S. could 'conceivably' return to Paris climate deal
By JIM WATSON WASHINGTON©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2018 AFP
46 Comments
Login to comment
Tommy Jones
"One of the great assets of Norway is a thing called water," Trump said. "They have tremendous hydro power, tremendous. In fact most of your energy or your electricity is produced by hydro. I wish we would do some of that."
The US does "do some of that." What the hell is wrong with this guy?
Tommy Jones
Here is a link with a pretty picture so maybe Trump can understand that the US does use hydroelectric power:
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/wuhy.html
Laguna
Paris Accord emission reduction targets are just that - targets, not requirements. And there are zero penalties for missing the targets. It's like receiving a free gym membership and complaining about the hours.
borscht
What a spineless flip-flopper. And don’t say “new evidence” has changed his mind. This moron hasn’t changed his mind since 1962. He was probably manipulated by some science-y guy who knows how to handle children. Does he realize hydropower supplies a lot of electricity outside of his DC and NY “swamps”?
cleo
So does he have a problem with the agreement, or not?
And if global warming is all a hoax by the Chinese, why would he even contemplate curbing global warming emissions? If he thinks curbing global warming emissions is now a Good Thing, is he admitting that global warming is not a hoax?
Gotta have a mind before it can be changed.
Bintaro
Is that really from Trump ? The guy who reauthorized the Dakota Access pipeline ? Who called climate change a hoax ? Who opened national parks for mining ? Who wants to open the coasts for drilling ? Who promotes coal ? Who undermine wind and solar businesses ? Who disbanded the climate advisory panel ? Who've cut the EPA budget by 31% ?
That Trump ?
ClippetyClop
Trump gets easily rattled & intimidated in the presence of strong women. He was like a scolded child with May & Merkel. Once he gets back into his safe zone he’ll revert to his usual cowboy talk.
SuperLib
Fox & Friends will change his mind back tomorrow morning.
sf2k
inconceivable!
Jimizo
It’s hard to know where Trump got that one from - perhaps the same place he got his birtherism and belief that Tex Cruz’s father was in on the JFK assassinstion.
Trump was apparently quite impressed after he met Xi. Xi, you know, knows stuff and things. He may have, and I hesitate to use this word, have had second ‘thoughts’.
It could be a major progression by Trump’s standards.
PTownsend
Is Trump channeling Chauncey Gardiner?
Who knows what Trump meant. It’s doubtful he’s spent much time anywhere there could be dams, or if he has he hasn’t noticed them on his way to play golf at one of his global properties.
For economic and environmental reasons some older dams are being removed. Many dams are in drastic need of repair (see Oroville Dam). The funding for infrastructure repair and rebuild promised by Trump and the GOP seems to be going to defense instead. And perhaps the wall.
If Trump actually cared about the environment, he’d push for greater use of alternatives to burning hydrocarbons. But that would upset his and his fellow Republican’s friends and sponsors in big oil, gas and coal. And big war.
bass4funk
He doesn’t need to and he shouldn’t. That’s with the private industry is therefore there are many companies that are doing this and we don’t need more of the interference and have more of our tax dollars wasted, look to private industry do research and I would support it 100%.
PTownsend
US military forces, i.e. those paid for by US taxpayers, are currently involved and have long been involved in multii-TRILLION dollar wars in MENA, Afghanistan and other areas primarily to protect the interests of US oil and gas industries. And of course their financial backers.
The US will be left far behind in developing alternatives to burning hydrocarbons if Trump and the GOP continue their back to the 1950’s energy policies.
Bintaro
“We’ll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit but you can’t destroy businesses.”
Donald Trump, 2015bass4funk
Yes and that’s part of the national defense. Seeking out new forms of alternative energy sources should use private funds and I personally would invest and put money in for that, I just don’t want the government to get their greedy mitts all over it.
The US will be left far behind in developing alternatives to burning hydrocarbons if Trump and the GOP continue their back to the 1950’s energy policies.
No, there are quite a few companies that are finding ways of developing new forms of alternative energy sources.
xin xin
But it’s also true that the tree-huggers don’t give a damn for business. So, extremists on both ends are actually alike - they destroy any sensible accord.
Serrano
The Paris deal is not fair to the U.S. That's why Trump correctly pulled us out of it.
wtfjapan
"Frankly, it's an agreement that I have no problem with, coming from a POTUS thats doesnt believe in climate change. seriously this guy doesn't know if hes coming or going, seems to be stuck in the grey area between fantasy and reality
wtfjapan
Norwegian water is really, really terrific. They've really got great water. we want our water to be great like their water, let make American water great again!
ClippetyClop
You've been told that, and you nodded your head. The Stockholm Syndrome is strong in this one!
goldorak
LOL you get the sense that the dude knows F all about environmental issues. First thing that went through his mind, 'clean water', boom! Can't be accused of over-complicating things though.
PTownsend
To me national defense is the most important of a federal government’s responsibilities. A country’s borders must be kept safe - that’s job #1 for the feds.
But I can’t see how spending trillions of US dollars to finance invasions of foreign countries - Iraq and Afghanistan, current examples - actually keeps US borders and US citizens safer. I can’t see how military invasions abroad for the primary purpose of protecting the financial interests of the American multinational corporations, especially resource extraction industries, helps keep Americans safer. In fact I think it does the opposite.
Trillions of US taxpayers dollars for military protection to maintain the profitability of oil and gas industries, but nothing for alternative energies? No tax money to support research for alternatIves to oil, gas and coal?
And now Trump and the Republicans want offshore drilling. With the US taxpayer once again picking up the costs of the inevitable spills and other problems. Stop entitlements for the .01%!
ThePBot
How? Wasn't the agreement about having each individual country setting their own agenda? Meaning no one was forcing any country to do something that wasn't right for them?
Where is America competing now? The old fossil fuel industries?
bass4funk
No, should be left to the private sector.
The rich will always win, always and will always be on top regardless of what either party does or implements.
To be really fair, I personally don’t want to see or care for offshore drilling and there are many conservatives that feel the same.
mukashiyokatta
He just got through with saying he favors oil, coal, and gas (Hillary favors "windmills") -- all of which completely TRASH the environment.
Tommy Jones
Government has almost always footed the bill for initial research and development costs and then handed over the technology to the private sector. Make the risk public while making the profits private.
Don't worry, when the US finally gets around to realizing that hydrocarbons are not the way to go, world leader in renewable energy China will be happy to sell the US advanced technology.
This is an accurate statement that means that the US is not a land of equality. People that happen to be born to rich parents have a far better shot at success than those of us that didn't chose our parents correctly.
TorafusuTorasan
Offshore drilling has been called off specifically around Florida, after the GOP gov spent 20 minutes reading Interior Secretary Zinke the riot act.
If coincidentally Trump owned a large resort property in Florida, the optics on this exemption would be terrible. (I like writing like this because it goes over a few heads.)
Tommy Jones
Torafusu: Brilliant.
TorafusuTorasan
Aw shucks... I like to call it genius-level unshakably stable brilliance. But that's enough about me.
Goodlucktoyou
he is right to invade Norway and take their water.
Ray Payne
Paris climate deal, Trump will do what is good for America and fair for all.
SuperLib
So we should subsidize coal, then we should let coal police themselves on the environment? Sounds pretty nostalgic to me.
Tommy Jones
Super: Whilst allowing other countries become world leaders in the next generation of energy creation. Don't worry, the US will just buy that technology from those countries.
bass4funk
No, the US is a land of equality, my grandmother was an immigrant (legal) and she came with nothing and her and my grandfather built a lucrative business from the ground up. If you want it and you work hard, there’s no limit to what a person can achieve. Yes, I had a better shot, but in my case I wasn’t handed down a fancy car or anything. Everything I personally own came from my blood sweat and tears. Now that doesn’t mean that a person with less can’t obtain similar goals, maybe harder but not impossible.
bass4funk
Exactly. Liberals are the smartest people on the planet, I was sure that would have been easily understood. But yes, growing up privileged doesn’t mean, I didn’t have to work hard. I did and I wasn’t spoiled, but for some reason liberals think we just clap our hands and money and opportunities just fly at us and nothing could be further from the truth.
Texas A&M Aggie
Another kitten chasing a laser light story.
The Paris Accords is a scam disguised as a charity. All that matters is President Trump got us out if it. . . .
Laguna
Ironic. The topic at hand is fossil fuels, the most subsidized fuels on the planet, not just directly but in terms of the impact the resulting gasses have on the planet. Why not ask Trump why he doesn't permit oil drilling off of Mar-a- Lago? Typical Trump: All talk, no walk. Just like those who complain of a sense of "entitlement."
Tommy Jones
I don't think many people clap their hands and money and opportunity simply appears. I don't doubt that you have worked hard. My point is there is a lot of options people born into privilege have that others do not.
Wolfpack
If the US got the same sweet deal as it’s main international competitor, China, then yes even I, a warming realist, would not object to signing back on to the accord. An accord, by the way, that even it’s most ardent adherents say will not stop warming enough to prevent the end of the world scenario’s they so often use to convince poor people to allow elites to keep them in poverty by denying them affordable energy needed to raise up their living standards.
Subsidized perhaps because poor people also need energy to eek out a living. Do socialists really want to make it harder for those on the lower end of the economic scale to survive?
Wolfpack
Come on Bass - you and I both know that some people (by that I mean ALL white males) are ALL born with privileges that make it completely unnecessary for them to do anything to better their lives. All is given to them on a silver platter by the white supremacist cis-gender patriarchy. All those poor white trailer trash only exist brief instants of time so that Leftist’s can tell conservatives how dumb they are. Then it’s back to all white people are privileged and don’t know what it’s like to face hardships. Seems you haven’t been keeping up with the narrative from the mainstream media.
The privileged people can go without affordable energy. And while we are at it, let’s make it expensive for everyone else too. Why? Because if the climate changes even a little, which it has been doing for 4.3 billion years, everyone will die!
Obviously...
Tommy Jones
A climate change realist?
So if something is a step in the correct direction, but isn't a silver bullet, there is no use pursuing it? Got it.
Wolfpack
The climate always changes and there is no way for scientists to be absolutely sure what temperatures will be in a hundred years. Recall that Gore predicted that Artic ice will have melted completely by now. Therefore humans should adapt to reality by focusing on raising people out of poverty and adapting to warming or any cooling of the environment. The belief that humans can control the Earth’s temperature is insanity.
If a proposed solution fails to even offer to solve the problem while potentially leaving many millions of people worse off than they other wise would be (eg. higher levels of poverty) then yes, there is no use pursuing it.
Tommy Jones
So if scientist cannot be absolutely sure of something, they should just give up trying to understand the issue?
No, I do not recall Gore predicting that because he never did. Gore incorrectly said others had predicted this, but he never made that prediction.
Agreed. However, that does not mean humans should not adapt their behavior so as not to continue to contribute to climate change.
Humans cannot control the earth's temperature in the absolute way you are intimating those that care about climate change claim. Those that care about climate change do not claim humans can control the earth's temperature in an absolute way. They do say that humans have contributed to fluctuations in the temperature and that humans should do what we can to not speed these fluctuations.