Obama Signs Historic, Game-Changing Climate Accord With China

Posted by | November 12, 2014 08:00 | Filed under: Planet Politics Top Stories

Republish
Reprint


China and the United States, the world’s two biggest economies and emitters of greenhouse gas, have signed an historic climate change agreement to reduce carbon pollution. President Obama made the deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

According to the plan, the United States will reduce carbon emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, nearly twice the existing target—without imposing new restrictions on power plants or vehicles.

Tuesday’s announcement is equally remarkable for China’s commitment. For the first time, China has set a date at which it expects its emissions will “peak,” or finally begin to taper downward: around 2030. China is currently the world’s biggest emitter of carbon pollution, largely because of its coal-dependent economy, and reining in emissions while continuing to grow has been the paramount challenge for China’s leaders…

The announcement also sets the stage for conflict with the Senate’s new Republican leadership, which just today signaled that attacking Obama’s climate initiatives will be a top priority in 2015.

The agreement calls for:

  • Expanding funding for clean energy technology research at the US-China Clean Energy Research Center, a think tank Obama created in 2009 with Xi’s predecessor Hu Jintao.
  • Launching a large-scale pilot project in China to study carbon capture and sequestration.
  • A push to further limit the use of hydroflourocarbons, a potent greenhouse gas found in refrigerants.
  • A federal framework for cities in both countries to share experiences and best practices for low-carbon economic growth and adaptation to the impacts of climate change at the municipal level.
  • A call to boost trade in “green” goods, including energy efficiency technology and resilient infrastructure, kicked off by a tour of China next spring by

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

64 responses to Obama Signs Historic, Game-Changing Climate Accord With China

  1. Anomaly 100 November 12th, 2014 at 08:20

    Obummer’s pallin’ around with Commies!

    • Tommy6860 November 12th, 2014 at 08:21

      Back to Obummer huh? It was Barack Ebola just last week :P

      • R.J. Carter November 12th, 2014 at 08:32

        I designed a modification for South American throwing weapons to include a tracking chip in them in case your prey runs off with the weapon around their ankles. It also had a voice chip that would tell you when the optimal time to throw would be, after the camera lens locked onto the target. And it had a USB port that would help transfer records of hit/miss ratios to your Excel spreadsheet. It was completely electronic.

        For some reason, I couldn’t get any marketing traction for my eBola.

      • Anomaly 100 November 12th, 2014 at 10:29

        Well the elections are over, so that whole Ebola virus isn’t a thing anymore. Also, Benghazi.

  2. Tommy6860 November 12th, 2014 at 08:20

    So, I guess the GOP changes it’s reasoning from, “Oh, those other countries won’t reduce their emissions, why should we?“, to, “We need to wait until we get solid proof they are standing by the agreement before we abide by the same standards”. :/

    • Roctuna November 12th, 2014 at 08:44

      Just replay video of St. Ronnie saying “Trust but verify”. If we could do it with the Soviets and nukes, we can do it with the Chinese and CO2.

  3. Anomaly 100 November 12th, 2014 at 09:20

    Obummer’s pallin’ around with Commies!

    • Tommy6860 November 12th, 2014 at 09:21

      Back to Obummer huh? It was Barack Ebola just last week :P

      • R.J. Carter November 12th, 2014 at 09:32

        I designed a modification for South American throwing weapons to include a tracking chip in them in case your prey runs off with the weapon around their ankles. It also had a voice chip that would tell you when the optimal time to throw would be, after the camera lens locked onto the target. And it had a USB port that would help transfer records of hit/miss ratios to your Excel spreadsheet. It was completely electronic.

        For some reason, I couldn’t get any marketing traction for my eBola.

      • Anomaly 100 November 12th, 2014 at 11:29

        Well the elections are over, so that whole Ebola virus isn’t a thing anymore. Also, Benghazi.

  4. Tommy6860 November 12th, 2014 at 09:20

    So, I guess the GOP changes it’s reasoning from, “Oh, those other countries won’t reduce their emissions, why should we?“, to, “We need to wait until we get solid proof they are standing by the agreement before we abide by the same standards”. :/

    • Roctuna November 12th, 2014 at 09:44

      Just replay video of St. Ronnie saying “Trust but verify”. If we could do it with the Soviets and nukes, we can do it with the Chinese and CO2.

  5. R.J. Carter November 12th, 2014 at 08:30

    Welp, there goes the neighborhood.

  6. R.J. Carter November 12th, 2014 at 09:30

    Welp, there goes the neighborhood.

  7. edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 09:02

    Thanks to:

    Adam Smith ♻️ ‏@Millennial_

    I can’t wait for Ted Cruz to say this climate agreement is like Obamacare for the environment

  8. edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 10:02

    Thanks to:

    Adam Smith ♻️ ‏@Millennial_

    I can’t wait for Ted Cruz to say this climate agreement is like Obamacare for the environment

  9. mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 09:22

    The republicans better not fight this. I think one of the things that could trigger a world war in the future is the environment. Non-polluting countries going after the polluting countries poisoning the air and disrupting the climate we all rely on. We need to be on the correct side of this issue.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 09:45

      States have been fighting over water rights for years, wonder what it will look like when the xl pipeline pollutes the Ogallala aquifer?

      • mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 09:52

        States can be reined in by federal government. If fighting between nations breaks out over air quality, there is no higher government to reign things back into line. All out war could ensue.

        Keystone pipeline may not ever get built over the aquifer, cheap energy supplies are already hurting it’s prospects and as technology progresses on other forms of energy from renewables it is only going to get worse for the prospects of the pipeline getting built.

        • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 09:59

          The countries where water is a critical factor right now are too weak militarily to do anything globally unless a rogue outfit like isis gains a radioactive weapon. Countries like India Pakistan China have enough water if thy build the right dams.

        • R.J. Carter November 12th, 2014 at 10:07

          Nothing improves the quality of air like a few nukes going off.

  10. mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 10:22

    The republicans better not fight this. I think one of the things that could trigger a world war in the future is the environment. Non-polluting countries going after the polluting countries poisoning the air and disrupting the climate we all rely on. We need to be on the correct side of this issue.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 10:45

      States have been fighting over water rights for years, wonder what it will look like when the xl pipeline pollutes the Ogallala aquifer?

      • mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 10:52

        States can be reined in by federal government. If fighting between nations breaks out over air quality, there is no higher government to reign things back into line. All out war could ensue.

        Keystone pipeline may not ever get built over the aquifer, cheap energy supplies are already hurting it’s prospects and as technology progresses on other forms of energy from renewables it is only going to get worse for the prospects of the pipeline getting built.

  11. Khary A November 12th, 2014 at 09:47

    Hey did anyone else see that Putin was there as well? I don’t see much mention of it anywhere but the images are floating around.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 09:55

      China took some of his footage down,guess they didn’t like him putting “the move” on china’s 1st lady.

      • Khary A November 12th, 2014 at 10:01

        Ahhhh I see now, just watched the footage. Wow China that’s messed up, I don’t think you should hang with that dude anymore. Rule number one…”never rub another man’s rhubarb”.

  12. The last of the Thousad Sons November 12th, 2014 at 10:47

    Hey did anyone else see that Putin was there as well? I don’t see much mention of it anywhere but the images are floating around.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 10:55

      China took some of his footage down,guess they didn’t like him putting “the move” on china’s 1st lady.

      • The last of the Thousad Sons November 12th, 2014 at 11:01

        Ahhhh I see now, just watched the footage. Wow China that’s messed up, I don’t think you should hang with that dude anymore. Rule number one…”never rub another man’s rhubarb”.

  13. eyelashviper November 12th, 2014 at 10:26

    The Koch Bros are gonna be really pissed off….

  14. eyelashviper November 12th, 2014 at 11:26

    The Koch Bros are gonna be really pissed off….

  15. Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 13:10

    Read the ‘agreement’, notice anything one-sided? While we promise to reduce our emissions each year to reach a shade over 25%(a huge & costly endeavor) by 2025, reduce mind you, China doesn’t even have to stop adding to their amount(meaning they can put out more next year, even more the next year, so on and so on) until 2030.
    Also keep in mind, nothing is binding nor are there hard-wired result targets w/consequences.
    This gives china a huge advantage in the production category simply because we’ll try to abide and hit the targets while they have no incentive or need to.
    Foggy bottom calls this a ffv.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 13:26

      Maybe you should just check some facts before adding unnecessarily to our carbon footprint.

      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-21/china-beats-u-s-in-per-capital-pollution-for-first-time.html

      Each person in China produced 7.2 tons of carbon dioxide on average compared with 6.8 tons inEurope, 16.4 tons in the U.S. and 1.9 tons in India in 2013, according to the study by the Tyndall Center and the University of Exeter’s College of Mathematics and Physical Sciences.

      http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.VEH.NVEH.P3

      The US leads the world w/782 cars per 1000 while China comes in at a measly 70, are you prepared to give up your car for a bike?

      • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 13:37

        “before opening your piehole”
        LOL, well now, there is that friendly/compassionate liberal attitude I hear so much about…ever try just having a civil conversation before trying to be obnoxious just for the sake of it?

        Any how, the topic is the agreement, and I notice you didn’t address the topic and what was said about the agreement.

        Any chance of you being civil and discuss just the topic?

        • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 13:43

          As stated we far out weigh what anyone else is pumping into the atmosphere is it reasonable to expect citizens of the world to accept a lower quality of life while we continue to be a bigger source of the causes of climate change?

          • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 14:22

            Thank you.

            “is it reasonable..”
            Good question. I believe timing is an issue pertaining to this, as well as ‘reasonably balanced’.
            How ‘critical’ is timing due to rate of climate change? I’ve seen from ‘too late’ to ‘all have to act now or it is too late’ to ‘there is time but must start now’ timing.

            Your figures are per capita, but china as a country surpassed us co2 back in 2006, by about 8%(at least according to Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency). So that is something to consider, no?

            Also, china has a growth rate of around 7%, yet usa is a shade under 2.5%. They will have no economic impact on their growth due to this(if they even live up to it) while we may very well see some hindrance. Nothing is free.

            My big point is whether taking many things into consideration, is this deal, if abided by by both sides, good for the usa as well as climate change.

            Add in the fact that not only will their be costs w/just the targets in country, but we are paying the brunt of the deal in groups that are being set up to share ideas/way&means. Solidified in this deal is wording from july prototype deal:
            “The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) intends to provide funding
            for the workshops in China designated to support this work and increase
            private sector participation.”
            (emphasis mine)
            So we are paying for us and their portion of the deal.

            There may be a reason it is considered a ffv.

            (going afk for a while, if you post i’m not ignoring you, just not at system a bit)

            • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 14:29

              There are now more people involved in the solar industry than in coal mining,the cost per kwh has dropped from over 75. to 1. and is predicted to go to .42 in 2015.Renewable energy can be a huge source of economic recovery and is less of a burden in subsidies than dirty energy.
              People in 2nd and 3rd world countries do not have the options we have available in energy resources and must rely more heavily on dirty energy than we do, we are supposed to be smarter than them,let’s show that we are.

              • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 19:44

                2nd/3rd world.. what world model are you using to determine ranking, cause the most common model is actually via sphere of influence(set up during cold war).
                China is MORE than capable of towing its own weight.

            • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 14:37

              Solar energy can be a huge source of jobs in the US if we change our ways.

              • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 19:43

                You don’t need to sell me on solar/wind/thermal, I’m all for switching to ‘renewable’ as main source, planet wide. So many benefits, very few cons, in my view.
                My caveat is getting there via a poorly thought out road.

    • mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 15:11

      It could be that we will already be reducing emissions because of new technology and market forces to meet that goal by 2025. Perhaps what we are really doing is trying to keep China from becoming really bad and incorporating the new technologies that come along as quickly as possible.

  16. Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 14:10

    Read the ‘agreement’, notice anything one-sided? While we promise to reduce our emissions each year to reach a shade over 25%(a huge & costly endeavor) by 2025, reduce mind you, China doesn’t even have to stop adding to their amount(meaning they can put out more next year, even more the next year, so on and so on) until 2030.
    Also keep in mind, nothing is binding nor are there hard-wired result targets w/consequences.
    This gives china a huge advantage in the production category simply because we’ll try to abide and hit the targets while they have no incentive or need to.
    Foggy bottom calls this a ffv.

    • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 14:26

      Maybe you should just check some facts before adding unnecessarily to our carbon footprint.

      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-21/china-beats-u-s-in-per-capital-pollution-for-first-time.html

      Each person in China produced 7.2 tons of carbon dioxide on average compared with 6.8 tons inEurope, 16.4 tons in the U.S. and 1.9 tons in India in 2013, according to the study by the Tyndall Center and the University of Exeter’s College of Mathematics and Physical Sciences.

      http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.VEH.NVEH.P3

      The US leads the world w/782 cars per 1000 while China comes in at a measly 70, are you prepared to give up your car for a bike?

      • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 14:37

        “before opening your piehole”
        LOL, well now, there is that friendly/compassionate liberal attitude I hear so much about…ever try just having a civil conversation before trying to be obnoxious just for the sake of it?

        Any how, the topic is the agreement, and I notice you didn’t address the topic and what was said about the agreement.

        Any chance of you being civil and discuss just the topic?

        • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 14:43

          As stated we far out weigh what anyone else is pumping into the atmosphere is it reasonable to expect citizens of the world to accept a lower quality of life while we continue to be a bigger source of the causes of climate change?

          • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 15:22

            Thank you.

            “is it reasonable..”
            Good question. I believe timing is an issue pertaining to this, as well as ‘reasonably balanced’.
            How ‘critical’ is timing due to rate of climate change? I’ve seen from ‘too late’ to ‘all have to act now or it is too late’ to ‘there is time but must start now’ timing.

            Your figures are per capita, but china as a country surpassed us co2 back in 2006, by about 8%(at least according to Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency). So that is something to consider, no?

            Also, china has a growth rate of around 7%, yet usa is a shade under 2.5%. They will have no economic impact on their growth due to this(if they even live up to it) while we may very well see some hindrance. Nothing is free.

            My big point is whether taking many things into consideration, is this deal, if abided by by both sides, good for the usa as well as climate change.

            Add in the fact that not only will their be costs w/just the targets in country, but we are paying the brunt of the deal in groups that are being set up to share ideas/way&means. Solidified in this deal is wording from july prototype deal:
            “The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) intends to provide funding
            for the workshops in China designated to support this work and increase
            private sector participation.”
            (emphasis mine)
            So we are paying for us and their portion of the deal.

            China accounted for 70 percent of the global increase in CO2 emissions in 2012.

            There may be a reason it is considered a ffv.

            (going afk for a while, if you post i’m not ignoring you, just not at system a bit)

            • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 15:29

              There are now more people involved in the solar industry than in coal mining,the cost per kwh has dropped from over 75. to 1. and is predicted to go to .42 in 2015.Renewable energy can be a huge source of economic recovery and is less of a burden in subsidies than dirty energy.
              People in 2nd and 3rd world countries do not have the options we have available in energy resources and must rely more heavily on dirty energy than we do, we are supposed to be smarter than them,let’s show that we are.

              • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 20:44

                2nd/3rd world.. what world model are you using to determine ranking, cause the most common model is actually via sphere of influence(set up during cold war).
                China is MORE than capable of towing its own weight.

            • edmeyer_able November 12th, 2014 at 15:37

              Solar energy can be a huge source of jobs in the US if we change our ways.

              • Spirit of America November 12th, 2014 at 20:43

                You don’t need to sell me on solar/wind/thermal, I’m all for switching to ‘renewable’ as main source, planet wide. So many benefits, very few cons, in my view.
                My caveat is getting there via a poorly thought out road.

    • mea_mark November 12th, 2014 at 16:11

      It could be that we will already be reducing emissions because of new technology and market forces to meet that goal by 2025. Perhaps what we are really doing is trying to keep China from becoming really bad and incorporating the new technologies that come along as quickly as possible.

  17. Obewon November 12th, 2014 at 16:54

    Excellent progress as both of the largest polluters reduce half of Earth’s GHG emissions by 26%+! #2 global solar producer USA delivers an additional 2% in carbon pollution reductions annually by growing our existing renewable energy industry. As #1 global solar producer China has agreed to repower most of its entire nation with clean non polluting wind turbines, solar, biomass, etc. This is a huge win for both nations consumers demanding clean renewable energy power leveraging pollution reductions.

  18. Obewon November 12th, 2014 at 17:54

    Excellent progress as both of the largest polluters reduce half of Earth’s GHG emissions by 26%+! #2 global solar producer USA delivers an additional 2% in carbon pollution reductions annually by growing our existing renewable energy industry, with US average 55 MPG fuel economy by 2023 as already legislated and signed into law.
    While #1 global solar producer China has agreed to repower most of its entire nation with clean non polluting wind turbines, solar, biomass, etc. This is a huge win for both nations consumers demanding clean renewable energy power, leveraging pollution reduction to save lives, reduce disease and create jobs!

Leave a Reply