Comments on: Blocking Obama’s mission to reduce emissions http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/2014/11/14/blocking-obamas-mission-to-reduce-emissions/ Mon, 23 Mar 2015 20:11:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: mtracy9 http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/2014/11/14/blocking-obamas-mission-to-reduce-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-392 Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:01:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/?p=1986#comment-392 Hooray! Global warming deniers, flat-earthers, and hick creationists are in charge of public policy.

]]>
By: nkirv http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/2014/11/14/blocking-obamas-mission-to-reduce-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-378 Sat, 15 Nov 2014 06:54:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/?p=1986#comment-378 That a U.S President and Chinese President have even voiced such sentiments together is a HUGE step forward, are you kidding? Recall under Bush the federal government could not even acknowledge global warming, and government scientists were censored from saying anything about it.

Hooray for Obama! He recognizes that China has to be treated as a partner in combating climate change, and he’s plowing forward. This President with a long-term vision, sure and steady. I’m ecstatic!

If Kentucky wants to fall behind rather than updating themselves, while China goes forward with getting the price of solar cells cheaper, well, that’s Kentucky’s problem that Senator McConnell is going to have to swallow. Status quo or progress? Head in sand or go with the flow? The flow of the rest of the world is toward renewable energy, so get with it! I prefer to follow what California is doing, not a backward state like Kentucky!

]]>
By: JohnOfOnt http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/2014/11/14/blocking-obamas-mission-to-reduce-emissions/comment-page-1/#comment-374 Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:15:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/data-dive/?p=1986#comment-374 The table and map are a bit misleading – it implies that one way for a country to get off the chart would be , if it contained 50 states as the US does but a similar argument applies to other countries , if the US , or China or any jurisdiction broke up into 50 states, that would decrease the average CO2 contribution of those states ( by 95% on average ) ; therefore smaller states , that have lower CO2 outputs , don’t get the bad rap on this chart even though several small gulf states, for e.g. , have high CO2 output per head ( by the same token , the fact that Canada makes the chart despite its very low population would indicate that’s a problem ) .

]]>