newfie
Well-Known Member
Don't waste your time , he takes losing positions and goes down with the ship on them.co2 is down, not sure what your arguing
Don't waste your time , he takes losing positions and goes down with the ship on them.co2 is down, not sure what your arguing
it was down under obama 2 thoughDon't waste your time , he takes losing positions and goes down with the ship on them.
Analysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005 | Carbon Briefusually when the economy is going good emissions are suppose to go up but their not
yesAnalysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005 | Carbon Brief
A pipeline for the distribution of natural gas, with wind turbines in the background; Texas, US. Credit: Jim Parkin / Alamy Stock Photo
EMISSIONS
15 August 2017 17:38
Analysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005
ZEKE HAUSFATHER
08.15.17
EMISSIONSAnalysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005
Before 2005, US carbon emissions were marching upwards year after year, with little sign of slowing down. After this point, they fell quickly, declining 14% from their peak by the end of 2016.
Researchers have given a number of different reasons for this marked turnaround. Some have argued that it was mainly due to natural gas and, to a lesser extent, wind both replacing coal for generating electricity. Others have suggested that the declines were driven by the financial crisis and its lasting effects on the economy.
Here Carbon Brief presents an analysis of the causes of the decline in US CO2 since 2005. There is no single cause of reductions. Rather, they were driven by a number of factors, including a large-scale transition from coal to gas, a large increase in wind power, a reduction in industrial energy use and changes in transport patterns.
Declines in US CO2 have persisted despite an economic recovery from the financial crisis. While the pace of reductions may slow, many of these factors will continue to push down emissions, notwithstanding the inclinations of the current administration.
Analysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005 | Carbon Brief
A pipeline for the distribution of natural gas, with wind turbines in the background; Texas, US. Credit: Jim Parkin / Alamy Stock Photo
EMISSIONS
15 August 2017 17:38
Analysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005
ZEKE HAUSFATHER
08.15.17
EMISSIONSAnalysis: Why US carbon emissions have fallen 14% since 2005
Before 2005, US carbon emissions were marching upwards year after year, with little sign of slowing down. After this point, they fell quickly, declining 14% from their peak by the end of 2016.
Researchers have given a number of different reasons for this marked turnaround. Some have argued that it was mainly due to natural gas and, to a lesser extent, wind both replacing coal for generating electricity. Others have suggested that the declines were driven by the financial crisis and its lasting effects on the economy.
Here Carbon Brief presents an analysis of the causes of the decline in US CO2 since 2005. There is no single cause of reductions. Rather, they were driven by a number of factors, including a large-scale transition from coal to gas, a large increase in wind power, a reduction in industrial energy use and changes in transport patterns.
Declines in US CO2 have persisted despite an economic recovery from the financial crisis. While the pace of reductions may slow, many of these factors will continue to push down emissions, notwithstanding the inclinations of the current administration.
Again no government data to backup that claim.
Again a chart that has no data to back it up says it's down. You cuckservatives will fall for anything. Lmao!
And the chart AEI posted was made by BP. Lmao!A website in the UK, Correct...lmao!
Quick edit.A website in the UK, Correct...lmao!
And the chart AEI posted was made by BP. Lmao!
So what's your point?
You might want to try and read the whole article next time.My point was obvious. You diminished the other poster's post because he didn't post "government data to back up that claim" and then post a website that does the same thing, no government data to back it up.
I actually liked your information but thought you should have stuck to your claim.
We know that with many, what the government says is the end all be all, right?
My point was obvious. You diminished the other poster's post because he didn't post "government data to back up that claim" and then post a website that does the same thing, no government data to back it up.
I actually liked your information but thought you should have stuck to your claim.
We know that with many, what the government says is the end all be all, right?
Next time I'll post a meme or gif so you can understand.I've lost the train of this argument.
Ivanka letting her inner self shine?
I thought you climate change deniers didn’t care about carbon emissions? Isn’t it all a hoax by the Chinese? Why be proud of shrinking carbon emissions if they don’t matter?I've lost the train of this argument. It appears you both agree carbon emissions are down?
Next time I'll post a meme or gif so you can understand.
I thought you climate change deniers didn’t care about carbon emissions? Isn’t it all a hoax by the Chinese? Why be proud of shrinking carbon emissions if they don’t matter?
Gesundheit.Lügenpresse