@Mugin16: USA is the top country in the world to pollute the environment with co2. The Paris plan is to reduce the amount by a very small percent and in doing so we will help to save the Earth's ecology system in future years. Or so this is what I am reading.
@Starshine: You are reading the wrong stuff then. CO2 is not a pollutant but desperately needed plant food. Atmospheric CO2 levels are dangerously low, geologically speaking. If Co2 levels fall under 180 parts per million then green plants will die and both mankind and animals will have nothing to eat. The planet's ecolocy system has coped, well actually thrived, with much higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
@Ynotisay: The truth. The economy is also doing much better without subsidising renewable energy (or any energy actually). Nature is also benefitting from us (mankind) using fossil fuels. The more gas, oil and coal we use, the less land we need for agriculture, the less trees we have to cut down and the less birds will die by the rotors of wind turbines.
@Mugin16: You cannot be serious. You really believe fossil fuel is better than solar or other forms of renewable energy for our eco system and our economy?
@StepDad2: Of course I am serious. Fossil fuel are cheaper and thus allow economic growth which makes people mores prosperous or less poor. As for nature, if you use fossil fuels to heat your houses and to power tractors and ships and to fertilize land, then you don't have to cut down trees to heat your houses and to clear lots of land to grow food.
@Mugin16: Hey Mr. Well Read? News flash. Fossil fuels are NOT cheaper. Fossil fuels DON'T employ as many people as renewables. Fossil fuels ARE why Oklahoma went from a couple of earthquakes a year to a couple a day. Fossil fuels are not sustainable. Trees are. Fossil fuels are the PAST. Is that it buddy? Does the future scare you? Seems like fear is what drives a lot of people like you. The people who will fight against what's in their own best interests. I don't know if it's just gutlessness or malleability. Either way, you're an enemy to intelligence, reason and progress. Makes me sick.
@StepDad2: I am serious. Of course you can create jobs in renewable energy if you subsidize it. You can also create jobs in the production of pink unicorns for the Chinese market if the goernment pays you to do it. You cannot power the entire world economoy on solar power.
@Mugin16: CO2 is not dangerously low. It has been in balance with plant life on earth for thousands of years. CO2 contributed by man has upset this balance and is raising world temperatures, creating problems with sea life (shelled organisms, coral reefs, etc.), the polar ice caps, and many other things. Yes, in the past, CO2 levels were higher, such as during the Carboniferous Period hundreds of millions of years ago. Would you want to go back to that era when there were three-foot long dragonflies and no flowering plants, no mammals, which predates the dinosaurs?
Increased CO2 may indeed stimulate plant growth in some areas. In others, desertification will take productive farmland out of service and dry out other land areas, while decreasing land surface due to sea level rise. Weather patterns will shift, and while most areas will be warmer, some will become colder, with more rain or snow. Extreme events (hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.) are likely to increase as the earth tries to deal with the increased energy in the atmosphere due to warming. Are you willing to run an experiment with the planet, knowing these are all readily foreseeable consequences, in the hope that it will all work out ok?
