“A victory for Donald Trump in November’s presidential election could lead to an additional 4bn tonnes of US emissions by 2030 compared with Joe Biden’s plans, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.
This extra 4bn tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) by 2030 would cause global climate damages worth more than $900bn, based on the latest US government valuations.”
Analysis: Trump election win could add 4bn tonnes to US emissions by 2030 – Carbon Brief
Atmospheric CO2 growth just set a new record under Biden
Global Monitoring Laboratory – Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases
US CO2 emissions declined under Trump, and have increased under Biden.
So every 4.5 kg of co2 will cause 1 Dollar damage.
I’d really like to see the science behind this.
Especially when we use this math wiith global co2 output and compare it to global GDP something tells me that this absolutely does not work.
And also when we use it with Chinas coal plants.
Maybe some co2 is more equal.
And just in case if this US Policy is governmental.
Is it even legal to use an agency for political campaigns and propaganda?
The ‘science’ is that of psychological warfare, nothing to do with the climate.
That’s what I thought.
Literally everything that was built during the last 100+ years and increased standards ,value ,health,tech,SCIENCE was result of releasing co2 with the use of fossil fuels.
Wealth of many trillion dollars.
But all of a sudden every little bit of this wealth building co2 is destroying the very economy built on Co2.
In an Orwellian way it is even logical as this very same life building co2 that has created our environment is now destroying environment as it is now officially a pollutant.
It seems from the reliable CO2 emission figures in the charts and graphs above that CO2 emissions declined when DT was potus, and peaked under Biden.
Could somebody please venture to tell us all why?
It may be due to coal-fired plants closing and being replaced by gas-fired generating plants.
So the reality could be that burning gas makes more Co2 than burning coal? Seems counter-intuitive!
My wild guess would be that under Trump exporting US Jobs to China was no more = Chinas perpetual increase in Co2 output may have entered a hiatus.
Another factor may be that the massive push for unreliables under Obama had the effect that most of those projects were finished under Trump.
It also may be that under Trump the use of Nuclear energy increased for the growing economy .
Why does it even matter? If IRCC, the portion of man-made CO2 added to the atmosphere is so small it doesn’t. The bulk of the new (recycled) CO2 added to the atmosphere comes out of the ground and oceans – and if humans completely died off, atmospheric CO2 is going to do what it’s going to do anyway – whether it is offgassing and adding to the atmosphere during warm cycles or retracting back into the oceans and soil during cold cycles.
The whole AGW premise – that CO2 from mankind is an issue is based on bad science and fraud – both in the amount of CO2 that mankind emits and in the supposed warming powers that CO2 has.
That decline was SARS-CoV-2 lockdown related.
All this indicates is that the various modelling teams should be disbanded with immediate effect, and the funds saved directed to real science. Modellers are the modern tribal medicine men, they survive as long as the public believe in them, not because they have ever made a correct prediction. Now the people have discovered that the government has been lying to them, that faith will evaporate.
At the very least, some evidence that the models have been validated against real world data might give them some credibility, But no, the real world must be validated against the model results. Blind faith in non-validated models, based on spurious theory, must surely be a mental illness.