News

Dozens rally against Trump's withdrawal from Paris climate agreement

The Trump administration's decision provokes swift local response

President Donald Trump's announcement on Thursday that the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement drew strong reactions from the local community.

The Paris Agreement is a pact by 195 nations to limit increasing global temperatures, reduce climate change emissions and finance pathways towards climate-resilient development. It was adopted by consensus in December 2015. Part of the agreement requires developed countries to provide developing countries with funds for adapting to greener sources of energy.

During a press conference Thursday at the White House, Trump said that the agreement is "costing the U.S. a vast fortune." He is open to renegotiating a "deal that's fair," he said.

More than 30 people gathered for a rally Thursday evening on the corner of El Camino Real and Embarcadero Road. Holding signs that read "Shame," "Protect the Planet" and "The seas are rising and so are we," they stood at the intersection for about an hour and a half. Cars passing through the streets honked in support of the rally, and poster paper and markers were available for participants to make their own signs. Four women who call themselves the Raging Grannies sang a song to the tune of "Home on the Range," having rewritten the lyrics to include lines such as "Home home on the earth / Your beauty's beginning to fade / We have to act fast" and "Today Mr. Trump / put us down in the dumps." At one point, a driver stopped at the intersection to relay enthusiasm for their cause. A participant responded, "The future is yours — let's save it now."

The rally was organized by the Peninsula Peace and Justice Center (PPJC), a grassroots activist organization. Paul George, director of the PPJC, said he drafted an email calling for a rally early Thursday morning and shared through the group's email list in addition to sharing through throughout social media and by word of mouth.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support Palo Alto Online for as little as $5/month.

Join

"The president needs to see such an outpouring of support for addressing climate change that he will realize he's made a mistake and reverse his decision," George said. "It's just utterly insane to ignore all the scientific evidence when the entire world has agreed to this accord and he's taking us out of it."

According to Noah Diffenbaugh, Stanford professor at the School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences, the United States' withdrawal could increase the risk of climate impact in the country, including heat waves, heavy downpours and intense droughts such as the recent California drought.

Not only will the probability of extreme events increase, but a lack of commitment to climate solutions will also damage the U.S. economy, George said. The future of jobs in America is clean energy, he said, and Trump will not bring back coal jobs "no matter what he does."

According to a 2015 report by the Environmental Defense Fund, job creation in the renewable energy sector has outstripped that in the fossil fuel industry, with solar-energy jobs growing at a rate 12 times faster than the rest of the U.S. economy.

"The president is foreclosing the future by pulling out of this global climate agreement," George added.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

PPJC board of directors President Stephanie Reader, who attended the rally, also said that the country has solutions for the impacts of climate change that would be "good for the economy and the future," such as clean technology, electric cars and solar energy.

"People (in the Silicon Valley) want to work on those things," she said. "So the economy of the United States would be far better off focusing on developing and innovating the kind of technologies that will make people's lives better and protect the planet from carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases."

Chris Field, Stanford University professor and director of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, didn't attend the rally but said that his reaction to Trump's announcement "is truly one of profound sadness."

Each citizen, however, can make lifestyle choices that nevertheless make a difference in climate change solutions, he said.

"Support for clean energy at the city levels is incredibly important," Field said. "That's sort of the main leverage we have, really demanding that we be allowed to participate in climate solutions, and a lot of those are consumption decisions about where the electricity comes from, what kind of vehicle you drive, what kind of efficiency measures are in your home."

Palo Alto Mayor Greg Scharff announced in a statement Thursday that he has joined at least 60 other mayors across the country as a member of the Mayor's National Climate Action Agenda, which will continue to "support, lead and uphold the commitments to the goals of the Paris Agreement."

"Palo Alto has ... taken actions that have led to a carbon neutral electricity supply at a lower cost than competitors, and adopted a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a rate 20 years ahead of the state," he wrote. "Those are the actions of a city that views climate change as a defining issue for the future, and critical to our quality of life and economic vitality."

Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, also released a statement on Thursday condemning Trump's decision, calling it a "deeply irresponsible and dangerous" motion that prioritizes politics over country.

"With this action, the President has surrendered that leadership and put our planet at greater risk of catastrophic sea level rise, severe weather and other impacts which threaten our health, environment and national security," she said.

The world only gets one planet, George said, and Palo Alto is on that planet.

"Anyone who lives on this planet should care," he added. "This is a global crisis."

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now

Follow Palo Alto Online and the Palo Alto Weekly on Twitter @paloaltoweekly, Facebook and on Instagram @paloaltoonline for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Dozens rally against Trump's withdrawal from Paris climate agreement

The Trump administration's decision provokes swift local response

by / Palo Alto Weekly

Uploaded: Fri, Jun 2, 2017, 9:48 am

President Donald Trump's announcement on Thursday that the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement drew strong reactions from the local community.

The Paris Agreement is a pact by 195 nations to limit increasing global temperatures, reduce climate change emissions and finance pathways towards climate-resilient development. It was adopted by consensus in December 2015. Part of the agreement requires developed countries to provide developing countries with funds for adapting to greener sources of energy.

During a press conference Thursday at the White House, Trump said that the agreement is "costing the U.S. a vast fortune." He is open to renegotiating a "deal that's fair," he said.

More than 30 people gathered for a rally Thursday evening on the corner of El Camino Real and Embarcadero Road. Holding signs that read "Shame," "Protect the Planet" and "The seas are rising and so are we," they stood at the intersection for about an hour and a half. Cars passing through the streets honked in support of the rally, and poster paper and markers were available for participants to make their own signs. Four women who call themselves the Raging Grannies sang a song to the tune of "Home on the Range," having rewritten the lyrics to include lines such as "Home home on the earth / Your beauty's beginning to fade / We have to act fast" and "Today Mr. Trump / put us down in the dumps." At one point, a driver stopped at the intersection to relay enthusiasm for their cause. A participant responded, "The future is yours — let's save it now."

The rally was organized by the Peninsula Peace and Justice Center (PPJC), a grassroots activist organization. Paul George, director of the PPJC, said he drafted an email calling for a rally early Thursday morning and shared through the group's email list in addition to sharing through throughout social media and by word of mouth.

"The president needs to see such an outpouring of support for addressing climate change that he will realize he's made a mistake and reverse his decision," George said. "It's just utterly insane to ignore all the scientific evidence when the entire world has agreed to this accord and he's taking us out of it."

According to Noah Diffenbaugh, Stanford professor at the School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences, the United States' withdrawal could increase the risk of climate impact in the country, including heat waves, heavy downpours and intense droughts such as the recent California drought.

Not only will the probability of extreme events increase, but a lack of commitment to climate solutions will also damage the U.S. economy, George said. The future of jobs in America is clean energy, he said, and Trump will not bring back coal jobs "no matter what he does."

According to a 2015 report by the Environmental Defense Fund, job creation in the renewable energy sector has outstripped that in the fossil fuel industry, with solar-energy jobs growing at a rate 12 times faster than the rest of the U.S. economy.

"The president is foreclosing the future by pulling out of this global climate agreement," George added.

PPJC board of directors President Stephanie Reader, who attended the rally, also said that the country has solutions for the impacts of climate change that would be "good for the economy and the future," such as clean technology, electric cars and solar energy.

"People (in the Silicon Valley) want to work on those things," she said. "So the economy of the United States would be far better off focusing on developing and innovating the kind of technologies that will make people's lives better and protect the planet from carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases."

Chris Field, Stanford University professor and director of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, didn't attend the rally but said that his reaction to Trump's announcement "is truly one of profound sadness."

Each citizen, however, can make lifestyle choices that nevertheless make a difference in climate change solutions, he said.

"Support for clean energy at the city levels is incredibly important," Field said. "That's sort of the main leverage we have, really demanding that we be allowed to participate in climate solutions, and a lot of those are consumption decisions about where the electricity comes from, what kind of vehicle you drive, what kind of efficiency measures are in your home."

Palo Alto Mayor Greg Scharff announced in a statement Thursday that he has joined at least 60 other mayors across the country as a member of the Mayor's National Climate Action Agenda, which will continue to "support, lead and uphold the commitments to the goals of the Paris Agreement."

"Palo Alto has ... taken actions that have led to a carbon neutral electricity supply at a lower cost than competitors, and adopted a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a rate 20 years ahead of the state," he wrote. "Those are the actions of a city that views climate change as a defining issue for the future, and critical to our quality of life and economic vitality."

Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, also released a statement on Thursday condemning Trump's decision, calling it a "deeply irresponsible and dangerous" motion that prioritizes politics over country.

"With this action, the President has surrendered that leadership and put our planet at greater risk of catastrophic sea level rise, severe weather and other impacts which threaten our health, environment and national security," she said.

The world only gets one planet, George said, and Palo Alto is on that planet.

"Anyone who lives on this planet should care," he added. "This is a global crisis."

Comments

LaNell
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:01 am
LaNell, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:01 am

This sounds like a perfect time to step up and do what is right in our minds. We do not need a European group to tell us to be conservative.
Let's step it up and clean up our act.


Joe
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:03 am
Joe, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:03 am

Greg Scharff should tell us if he has actually read any of the IPCC documents or the Paris Accords.

Interesting that out of the 125,000 to 150,000 people living/working in Palo Alto, only 30 people showed up to protest the removal of the US from the Paris Accords. Wonder how many of them have actually read, and understand, these documents and agreements?


DZ
Fletcher Middle School
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:45 am
DZ, Fletcher Middle School
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:45 am

Please don't miss the big picture here. Climate change is actually caused by overpopulation and globalization that causing too many people using too much energy. Simple put it, earth just cannot afford so many people living the way western countries lives.
That is what politicians won't tell you.


38 year resident
Old Palo Alto
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:54 am
38 year resident, Old Palo Alto
on Jun 2, 2017 at 11:54 am

There is nothing stopping the U.S. from continuing to be a leader in the reduction of carbon emissions or anything else that contributes to a healthier planet. Withdrawal from the Paris accord means we won't be footing the bill for other countries to do likewise and we won't be forced to outperform every other country that signed on. A redo is appropriate. The executive agreement signed by President Obama was not binding and had an expiration date.


Beth
College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Beth, College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:00 pm

If the global warming alarmists were serious about CO2 they would support nuclear power, but they don't. It is basically a secular religion that does not tolerate non-believers.


Online Name
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:24 pm
Online Name, Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:24 pm

If Palo Alto really cared about climate change, it wouldn't be pushing so hard to increase the number of jobs, number of commuters and the number of residents here. It obviously doesn't matter how much a single individual can conserve since there are more than twice as many commuters here -- all of whom the city wants us the residents -- not the businesses -- to subsidize while they preach at US to conserve energy and then raise our rates because we're conserving too much.


Ur neighbor
Midtown
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:33 pm
Ur neighbor, Midtown
on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:33 pm

Thank you to all the "30" people who took time to express the sentiments and values of many of us. I encourage all us to read the agreement. It was signed in Paris, but agreed upon by most of the world. United States played a key role in its development. Look up the definition of agreement. What President Trump has done is not in the long term interest of Americans


stanhutchings
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:15 pm
stanhutchings, Old Palo Alto
Registered user
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:15 pm

So here is my reaction to Trump's announcement
2017-06-01 email to Mark Warner, Feinstein, Harris, Eshoo
Congress MUST override President Trump's unwise decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord. This should be a nonpartisan issue, because the future of our environment is at stake. All inhabitants of the earth and our descendants must live in the environment we create. Therefore, it is critically important to ensure a safe, healthy, livable environment worldwide. To accomplish this, the Precautionary Principle (Web Link) must be invoked by both the House and the Senate to take all steps necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic global climate disruption, evidence of which is already apparent.


2017-06-01 email to President Trump
I am extremely disappointed in your decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, because the future of our environment is at stake and the whole world has a vested interest in avoiding climate disaster. All inhabitants of the earth and our descendants must live in the environment we create. Therefore, it is critically important to ensure a safe, healthy, livable environment worldwide. To accomplish this, the Paris Climate Accord is a necessary first step. You and I may not expect to live past 2050, when climate disruption becomes extreme, but your (and my) descendants, and the rest of humanity, will be trying to cope with an environment that is becoming increasingly hostile to human life. The USA and other countries must immediately take all steps necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic global climate disruption, evidence of which is already apparent and documented.

I also sent a thank you to Governor Brown for vowing California's support of the Paris Climate Accord.


hysteria
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:36 pm
hysteria, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:36 pm

More hysteria from the left over this decision, 99% of whom haven't a clue what's buried in the fine print. The United States has actually been a leader reducing carbon emissions over the past few years. This will continue as we move to alternative energy sources and to natural gas rather than coal. Trump won't be able to stop this trend as people seem to fear given the relatively high cost of producing coal. Meanwhile the Paris accord allows huge polluters such as China and India to grow their carbon emissions even while ours declines. Lastly, states and corporations will continue to do their part to limit carbon irrespective of Trump's actions.


Gunn community
College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:51 pm
Gunn community, College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:51 pm


A big thank you to Stan Hutchings for your opinions and your letters!


Chris
University South
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:58 pm
Chris, University South
on Jun 2, 2017 at 1:58 pm

This decision won't have any short term effect on the climate. It will take 4 years to completely leave Paris and hopefully Trump will no longer be President. In the meantime, it will open the door for China to exert more world leadership.


member
Greenmeadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:22 pm
member, Greenmeadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:22 pm

When the headline indicated dozens, I thought that consisted of more than 30 people. The person drafting the headline for the article, should be more careful. Some people would consider the headline "fake news". Why should the US be punished while reducing CO gases. For the last 12 years we have reduced our output, and then we have to basically payoff poor countries. The previous administration had no trouble spending our money, why don't they spend there own.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:27 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:27 pm

"If the global warming alarmists were serious about CO2 they would support nuclear power, but they don't."

Lots of us alarmists do advocate nuke juice, thank-you. Look around and pay attention.


" More hysteria from the left over this decision, ..."

You get distracted by the wonk bait and completely miss the point. It's all about hocus-pocus. With yuuuge bluster and bombast, Trump removed the US from any vestige of global leadership in order to cater to his regressive Base. That should bother any thinking person--both of them--who swallowed his Make America Great Again line.

Trump's America cannot go back to the past, and it resolutely will not move forward. Great greatness, huh?


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:36 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:36 pm

" The previous administration had no trouble spending our money, why don't they spend there own."

Spelling and punctuation aside, they are. Michael Bloomberg is putting up the $15M US share of the Paris Accord Web Link . He can do that easily; his net worth way exceeds Trump's, financially and morally.


Scotty
Green Acres
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:48 pm
Scotty, Green Acres
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:48 pm

Wow...Dozens huh? I think I'll go work on my tan.


hysteria
Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:30 pm
hysteria, Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:30 pm

@curmudgeon

you missed my point and got distracted as well i guess. Clean air and water will come from market forces, new technologies and innovation. Focus on that not some bloated agreement that is not even enforceable.


@hysteria
another community
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:36 pm
@hysteria, another community
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:36 pm

"Clean air and water will come from market forces, new technologies and innovation."

How? These are the same market forces that caused the problem in the first place.

You honestly think that they would look for a solution on their own, *without* being forced to do so? Exactly when did that *ever* happen?


hysteria
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:45 pm
hysteria, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:45 pm

@Chris

China taking a global leadership on climate change? what a joke, have you been to Beijing in the winter? Wonder why so much of their middle class can't wait to get out and breath fresh air.

And for those of you who think Europe is such a global leader on carbon emissions the reality is different.

Web Link

I think we an all agree reducing carbon emissions is a worthy goal but let's take the emotion and Trump bashing out of this people.


hysteria
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:49 pm
hysteria, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:49 pm

@hysteria

I didn't realize Elon Musk was "forced" to introduce an attractive and popular electric vehicle.


@hysteria
another community
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:52 pm
@hysteria, another community
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:52 pm

Nice dodge there, sport. But you still haven't my question, have you?

Then again, you quote from something called the "Institute for Energy Research," which is nothing more than a front for the energy lobby. If you're going to use those "sources," you don't have a case. At. All.


hysteria
Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:28 pm
hysteria, Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:28 pm

@hysteria

Well sonny it's hard to answer a question when it's not clear what you are asking. Who is "they" Evil corporations, corrupt politicians?

Not surprised you didn't like the link to the article given it's actually long on facts and data and short on ill informed opinions. So if you don't like the facts blame the source, I guess.

Time to jump into my diesel powered VW that the green Germans built for me and start the weekend!!


Gale Johnson
Adobe-Meadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:34 pm
Gale Johnson, Adobe-Meadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:34 pm

I tend to be agnostic on this issue, for now. If we stayed in we would be hailed as a leader of a pact that had no enforcement. The job loss argument is debatable. Coal mining has changed so much. It doesn't take a lot of miners down in holes in the ground to bring it back up to the surface. Robots with high tech tools can do that. I applaud all the efforts CA is making, and other states and countries, in the effort. If, as some reports show, we can have our cake and eat it too, so much the better. But the cake might cost us more. Climate control comes with a price to the consumer, now. That could change. And if it is true that all the new solar, wind, and other alternate energy source suppliers, create more jobs, then double kudos. Let's see real evidence of that.

And to all the temperature rise predictions, that vary widely depending on who does the analysis and prediction...I won't be around long enough to sell my property as beach front property, I'm pretty sure. Was that a .0158 degree temperature rise or a .02 degree temperature rise by the next century? Oh, now I know, should have known, this will get into a Celcius/Fahrenheit debate. Sorry I brought it up.

For the now, I think Trump made the right decision, and for good reason...but we all know Trump. Today's decision could be history tomorrow. lol!

Let the Trump haters carry on with their doomsday predictions. I only have a few more years left so I think I'll make it. So many of the signers probably have no intention of working towards the goals. I'll keep spending more money for my cleaner gas here in CA. No problem.


Sanctimonious City
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:39 pm
Sanctimonious City, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 4:39 pm

The liberal progressives are panicking because the spigot to their tax payer subsidized globalist elitist gravy fountain is finally getting turned a few twists to the right.

Fewer private jet pilgrimages and bureaucratic boondoggles to climate conferences where they can stay at Four Season hotels, network for crony capitalism windfalls and share non-peer reviewed propaganda pieces.

Not to worry. They can still take solace in their faith.

God is dead, nations are virtual and the new religion is Climate Change.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:32 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:32 pm

"you missed my point and got distracted as well i guess."

Nope. My point is that your point is beside the point. The point is that Make America Great Again is now officially dead, killed by its own huckster. Nobody pays serious attention to the USA out there anymore. China and Germany/Europe are the new world leaders.

That's probably why First Daughter Ivanka kept her factories in China instead of heeding her daddy's campaign rhetoric about employing American workers. Those Rust Belt Trumpies snookered themselves royally.


"If we stayed in we would be hailed as a leader of a pact that had no enforcement."

A pact which The Donald cannot actually exit from until after the next election has no enforcement? Whoooo boy. Gotta try believing that logic pretzel before breakfast.


Objective journalism ?
Adobe-Meadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:34 pm
Objective journalism ?, Adobe-Meadow
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:34 pm

Article leads with "strong reactions from the local community" . This is based on "dozens" rally but honestly to me that means 30-40. Based on photos looks like 10-15. I'm not sure why this "event" even was considered as news quite frankly.


Joe
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:49 pm
Joe, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 5:49 pm

> Climate change is actually caused by overpopulation and globalization
> that causing too many people using too much energy

Climate change has been going on since the Earth disgorged gasses to make an ocean and an atmosphere. This happened between 4B and 3.8B years ago. Since that time, the climate has continuously changed with absolutely no people, and very little life, on its surface.

It is a national crime that people still believe that climate change is caused only by human beings.


hysteria
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:13 pm
hysteria, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:13 pm

@curmudgeon

You might want to read my original post again. When did I endorse Trump or Make America Great Again? I just tried to make some reasoned arguments about climate change. You've ended up digressing to Ivanka Trump and factories in China! Thanks for endorsing my handle


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:43 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:43 pm

I am so tired of every time the Left has a consistent reasoned argument for something, in this case against "Planetary Hotboxing" all the Right wingers think they have to do is call us all hysterical?

If there was any balance here on PAO these types of posts would be deleted, but there rarely are, and practically never without a lot of reporting.

The facts are laid out very well, and who really sums this up nicely was PBS Shields and Brooks on this issue, here: Web Link

Our own Governor Brown made a strong case against Trump on PBS Newshour as well, here: Web Link

There is way more leadership, economic growth and jobs in alternative energies.

Nothing bad happens by staying in the Paris Climate Agreement except perhaps that Donald Trump loses even more of his base who think he doesn't have a clue what he is doing.

Donald Trump is a guy who just cannot do this job. Maybe he can stay in, maybe he can make it to the end, but in our American leadership position we need someone who is in most ways exceptional. This is a guy who is not up to the task and is wasting the country's time in this critical era where we need leadership.

I do want to mentioned the comment about nuclear above, that if environmentalists were serious about reversing "Planetary Hotboxing" they would support nuclear power. I am a Liberal, a tepid Democrat, and an environmentalist and i have supported nuclear power. More accurately I support the IDEA of nuclear power, but the experience and reality of nuclear power is that the way these plants are conceived, designed, built, managed and run has proven that we cannot manage nuclear technology. I don't know what the best thing to do to move forward with nuclear is, but I know it is not covering the country with hundreds of new nuclear reactors and hoping for the best. I was said to see CA shut down our nuclear reactors, i think that was a big mistake.

So, maybe we should get rid of the term Climate Change as people can claim the climate has always changed, which is true. What is happening now is "Planetary Hotboxing" whereby human activity is generating marginal amounts of gases that are causing the Earth to heat up like an oven. Republicans need to get it through their heads that changing the branding, labelling or framing doesn't really solve or deal with important issues.


hysteria
Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:52 pm
hysteria, Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 6:52 pm

@crescent park anon

your quote

"If there was any balance here on PAO these types of posts would be deleted, but there rarely are, and practically never without a lot of reporting."

so if you don't like comments they should be deleted. Sounds like the reactions we are seeing on our college campuses to alternative view. What is going on with this country when people aren't able to speak their minds? Scary........


Sanctimonious City
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:08 pm
Sanctimonious City, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:08 pm

The Paris Climate agreement has a very interesting structure. The U.S. bears the entire cost and the other parties are not required to do anything. There are no monitoring or enforcement mechanisms and we also have to pay $100B so the others will participate. In the end, nothing changes except the US is weaker and the other countries are richer.

It kinda reminds me of the Iran nuclear deal.

This kind of global leadership is more expensive than even a Democratic congress can afford.

This whole


Beth
College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:16 pm
Beth, College Terrace
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:16 pm

"Lots of us alarmists do advocate nuke juice, thank-you. Look around and pay attention."

OK Curmudgeon, please name those who do in Palo Alto.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:44 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 7:44 pm

"When did I endorse Trump or Make America Great Again? "

I never said you did. It's nothing to get hysterical about anyway.


" The U.S. bears the entire cost..."

Trumped-up hysteria. Michael Bloomberg is personally covering what the US share is anyway--see the citation in my earlier post. Geez, you'd think a self-alleged fabulously rich kid like Trump would chip in a bit, tho.


"OK Curmudgeon, please name those who do in Palo Alto."

Nuts. I did my job. I refuted your false blanket statement. You dig up the rest of the critical mass (Google that). I don't care where.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:39 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:39 pm

The US role in this is to provide a huge amount of money and leave us open to scrutiny by foreign nations. This is not a treaty and was not agreed to by Congress - did you forget about them? Only Congress can really approve huge expenditures of money (budget) and any interference by foreign nations - AKA TREATY.
It was a poorly written and executed document. As Trump said there is no accounting for the money provided - where does it go? It is a symbolic activity that has no real impact on climate change. The economy is what drives innovation and adjustments to climate change.
China and India are the main polluters and have no responsibility to reduce the carbon footprint until 2030.
Let's note here in California there was an effort to ship Utah Coal to Oakland Port by train to ship to China. IAW Bloomberg China is no longer mining coal - it is selling it to North Korea and India. If coal was sitting in the Oakland Port it would contaminate the area and bay. This was a Jerry Brown effort that was voted down by the city of Oakland. We still have to deal with the gasoline trains that may come through Silicon Valley to go to San Luis Obispo. Why not by ship? We have direct challenges right here to deal with and Jerry Brown better step up to the plate to help out - he has failed on the dams.


Joe
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:49 pm
Joe, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:49 pm

> the way these plants are conceived, designed,
> built, managed and run has proven that we
> cannot manage nuclear technology

According to the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), there are 449 nuclear reactors in the world:
Web Link

There have been approximately 57 accidents/incidents, according to a Wikipage:

Web Link

with Chernobyl as the world’s most consequential nuclear meltdown. The Fukishimi failure was due to an earthquake/tsunami, but none the less, a lot of cleanup will be required to either refurbish the plant, or to disassemble it. Apparently, few people have been killed in these accidents, with the possible exception of Chernobyl.

In 2014, about 11% of the world’s electricity was provided by nuclear power (see link below):

Web Link

Given the data provided by the nuclear energy providers, it is difficult to support comments about the inability to build, and manage, nuclear reactors.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:51 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:51 pm

In every aspect of infrastructure within the state there is failure after failure - and it is in part attributed to drought overcome by heavy rain. If the state is serious about managing climate change then it needs to put money into the infrastructure to keep roads intact, dams from collapsing, etc.
Throwing money at a symbolic effort in which was not agreed to by congress does nothing to actually address the issues we have right now. We have direct issues that need direct action. So get to it Gov. Brown.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:55 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 8:55 pm

The problem with nuclear is the residue and water. Buried in Nevada - not working out so well. The bad water in Japan is going into the ocean and contaminating the area - can't fish there. Nuclear is still an experiment that needs more work.


john_alderman
Registered user
Crescent Park
on Jun 2, 2017 at 9:22 pm
john_alderman, Crescent Park
Registered user
on Jun 2, 2017 at 9:22 pm

@resident - Coal is vastly more dangerous, worse for the environment, and creates more environmental radiation than nuclear power. Would call coal an experiment that still needs work?

Web Link

The only problem with burying waste in Nevada was Harry Reid blocking it. Thankfully he is gone.


Joe
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 9:31 pm
Joe, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 2, 2017 at 9:31 pm

The following is a lengthy writeup on Yucca Mountain, NV:

Web Link

While the details of its history are tedious, the key point that comes out of the reading is the Yucca Mountain was closed down for political, not safety, reasons.

The Wikipage notes that since the 1960s there have been over 3,000 shipments of radioactive waste without incident.

As to the Fukushima event, Cesium-134, Cesium-137 and Iodine-131 are found in the waters off the reactor. Cesium-137 has a half-life of about 30 years. Whereas, Cesium-134 has a half-life of about two years. So far, the level of both is thousands of times less than levels considered dangerous.

The following link to a Woods Hole Web-page offers a lot of information on Fukushima radiation:

Web Link





zap
Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:01 pm
zap, Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:01 pm

Posted by @hysteria
a resident of another community
"How? These are the same market forces that caused the problem in the first place. "


Clearly you ARE from another area, since you haven't seen that in Palo Alto it's Prius after Prius after Prius after Prius after Prius.... Not to mention Tesla, Tesla, Tesla Tesla....



zap
Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:10 pm
zap, Charleston Gardens
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:10 pm

whew, that only took 0.95 seconds:

“The Palo Alto community's strong environmental ethic began in the 1950s when major commitments were made to invest in hydroelectric resources rather than nuclear power,” said John Ulrich, City of Palo Alto Utilities Director . “We are proud of the awards we have won for having the highest percentage of customers signing up for our green power marketing program and by securing long-term contracts such as the Shiloh Wind Project, we can continue to reliably and responsibly serve our customers through our ongoing commitment to renewable energy in the future.”


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:16 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:16 pm

I am not for coal. For some reason the state of Utah voted to mine coal and was trying to establish a relationship with the port of Oakland for shipment to China. That got voted down. There was also an effort in Oregon in which coal would be transported to the head of the Columbia River and barged to the ocean port for shipment to China. Conservation groups sued to shut that down. Since China already is mining coal this does not make sense except they are now selling it to North Korea and India. Bloomberg said that China has a stockpile of coal so are no longer mining it themselves. Turns out there are all types of coal that have different qualities related to clean burning to dirty burning. I don't think that they have set up any other type of power system except coal because oil would work better. They don't have a power system that uses oil? The bottom line is that coal is what China and India are looking for and we have it. Need to check this out on Google / Wikipedia as to why they are not upgrading their systems.

As to Japan there was recently a large storm in which the dirty water holding areas were invaded by ocean water which created a bad situation and resulting contamination in the area.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:39 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:39 pm

" The Fukishimi failure was due to an earthquake/tsunami,..."

The Fukishimi failure was due to improper placement of the onsite backup generators powering the emergency post-shutdown reactor cooling system. The tsunami flooded and disabled them, leading to overheating and failure of the reactor cores due to accumulated heat created by the radioactive decay of fission products. It was a completely foreseeable, foreseen, avoidable catastrophe.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:53 am
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:53 am

Your best friend on most topics is Wikipedia which gives you the history and current status on most topics and people of note. Check it out on your google search for Paris Accord to understand the basic tenants. As to the hysteria understand that any country makes decisions based on their current political and business factors.

Vicente Fox is busy touring with speeches at SU and the Commonwealth Club discussing our relationship with Mexico. He makes comments on the Wall but fails to note that Mexico has a very heavy wall on it's southern border that is protected with military forces. He also fails to note that the current political party is in trouble due to the cartels dueling for control, and the governors of the individual states absconding with public funds.

Venezuela is in trouble because it has replaced it's food crops with drug crops and people are starving. Note this is similar to what happened in Europe when successful countries had their hierarchy replaced by government favorites that had no knowledge of food production. James Michener chronicles many countries that show the dynamics that result from war.

And Jerry is now in China discussing coal - the main problem in that country affecting the health of the inhabitants. But they have no requirement to reduce their dependence on coal and want more to sell to others.

Glad that Trump walked away from that set of chaos outside our borders, we need to get our act together, get our infrastructure built up to withstand the next years of heavy rain. Many people in CA and over the country that are hurting due to flooding. Flooding affects our ability to farm crops for food and grow herds of animals. We have out hands full here.


Resident
Midtown
on Jun 3, 2017 at 8:48 am
Resident, Midtown
on Jun 3, 2017 at 8:48 am

What I like about Trump is that whether he's right or wrong, he has brought an opposing view to the highest office and it's ultimately healthy for our country not to have blind, lockstep adherence to a rapidly progressive agenda.

The "environment" is all-encompassing. You can't act like one or two things affect the environment, and MUST be dealt with -- and go to ANY lengths through taxes and stultifying regulations while ignoring the big picture -- sacrifycing individual humans' livelihood to save a sea turtle or so that the crops WILL grow. This reminds me of ancient Paganism and the justifications for human sacrifice.
Over-regulation hurts the environment in ways that are less direct and harder to detect, but shouldn't be ignored.


Alternative Factoids
Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jun 3, 2017 at 10:21 am
Alternative Factoids, Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jun 3, 2017 at 10:21 am

@Resident, what "blind, lockstep adherence to a rapidly progressive agenda" when it was the GOP's stated position to oppose everything and everyone proposed by Obama, including Supreme Court justices?

Political labels are meaningless when we have an allegedly Democratic City Council that only supports business-friendly policies and our commissions are dominated by folks from Palantir, a Trump-friendly company that opposes net neutrality in Silicon Valley! Are they "tax-and-spend" Democrats or business-friendly Republicans?

Instead of saving sea turtles, Trump and his surrogates have made being female a pre-existing conditions. They're pushing religion and working to ban BIRTH CONTROL -- not abortion but CONTRACEPTION -- and here in PA -- a supposedly educated place -- we've got parents trying to ban sex education even though Palo Alto and Stanford and Silicon Valley are tops in assault and sex discrimination.

Political labels are meaningless.


MikeCrescentPark
Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 11:06 am
MikeCrescentPark, Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 11:06 am

I guess we won't always have Paris after all.

This extreme hysteria about the Paris Accord is really puzzling. It was undertaken entirely by the Obama administration and was never submitted for congressional approval. It's an accord that has no real requirements or penalties. And one that certainly most countries plan to ignore except for things they planned to do anyway.

The current tendency to make a maximum disruption about anything that Trump does should be an embarrassment for the left. But of course it is not.

If you are concerned about greenhouse gasses get concerned about population.


Beth
College Terrace
on Jun 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm
Beth, College Terrace
on Jun 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm

There are new forms of nuclear energy that avoid major mega structure. They are sometimes referred to as nuclear batteries, and they do not require active cooling. They are also designed to be placed in individual cities below ground, and no maintenance is required. Future designs include using existing nuclear waste as the fuel.

I think it is pretty crazy that so many 'environmentalists' refuse to consider nuclear, at least as a base load.


Joe
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:08 pm
Joe, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:08 pm

John Ulrich, the disgraced and side-lined Director of Utilities, was prone to making statements that he felt people wanted to hear, more than the simple truth.

History will show that Palo Alto was able to secure a 50-year contract with the Federal Government from the Federal government in the mid-late 1950s because its city manager, Jerry Keithley, was able to convince the Federal Government (the Bonneville Power Administration, if memory serves) that Palo Alto was a rural community (which it sort of was) at the time. The Federal Government was trying to electrify rural communities, and Keithley was known for having a keen eye for a good deal.

Palo Alto signed a forty-year contract with the Western Area Power Administration in 1964. The cost of power to Palo Alto was about 2 cents a KWH, which the city resold to its residents/customers at a small profit up until the end of the contract.

Web Link

While there are some archived newspapers from that era, and possibly some archived city council meeting records, there doesn't seem to be much readily available that suggests that Palo Alto was anti-nuclear at the time, as much as interested in securing cheap electricity.

The city had been generating its own electricity until the late 1930s, when the capacity of its generation station could not keep up with the demand for power. (The generator was across the street from the library on Newell Road.) The city then contracted with PG&E for power, and its generator was kept operational for a few years as a "peaker"--providing peak-time power that PG&E could not. At a later point in time, the generator station was decommissioned and the facility torn down.
There had been a fair amount of animosity between the Palo Alto Utility and PG&E, or possibly the other way round, since the Utility had taken through eminent domain PG&E's business and distribution equipment in the Mayfield area when Mayfield was fully annexed by 1932. At any rate, seeking a power supply that was not PG&E sourced was far more likely a reason for Keithley's decision than any attempt to avoid a nuclear source.

It is true that PG&E was beginning to want to build nuclear plants here in California--and it is true that there was some opposition to the siting of some of these plants. There is no evidence that the people of Palo Alto voted to not purchase power from any nuclear facilities at the time. There was such a vote around 1988 to keep all nuclear-generated power out of Palo Alto. Folks from EPRI, and Stanford, as well as many sane Palo Altans argued successfully against this crazy idea--and the proposition was voted down.

The following Weekly article adds a little to the discussion about Palo Alto's investment in "hydro" power--

Web Link

But it is expensive power.

At 10 cents per kilowatt hour, it is approximately five times the cost of what Palo Alto can buy on the open market, said Randy Baldschun, Palo Alto's assistant utilities director. That's the primary reason Palo Alto gets only about 10 percent of its energy from Calaveras at present. The other 90 percent comes from the federally-operated Western Area Power Administration and from the open market.

The decision to invest in Calaveras was made back in the early 1980s when oil prices were sky high and everybody thought it would shoot up to $100 a barrel or more.
----
There is very little evidence from what is available on-line about Palo Alto's decision to go "hydro" that indicates it is anti-nuclear.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:15 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:15 pm

We in CA are having Sanctuary City rules jammed down our throats with no vote from the citizens. We are allowing farms and companies to function without getting the proper H2 visas for their workers. Companies who get H2 visas have to be OSHA compliant, provide ACA and a minimum wage. Most don't want to go to that trouble as it hurts the bottom line. And if I look at SF they have homeless people all over - truly a sad place to go. The structures for an organized society are in place but no one wants to make the effort to follow through - rather make signs and complain.
We have to work the problems we have here now. Other countries are in turmoil as we are. We cannot fix the other countries we have to fix ours.

And the good news is that they realize that we are not providing the funds so they have to actually work and organize on their own to make things happen. I think this is great that all of the other countries have to make it happen for themselves without "direction" from other people..


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:43 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:43 pm

Most, if not all, of the arguments used on both sides of this debate
are the same arguments. There are some arguments that seem to
favor one side or the other making the Trump decision appear one
way or the other, but this is mainly just symbolic, and symbolic BS
is what the country have been at each other's throats for over a
generation now over.

Everything is a deal to Trump, which he is supposed to be so good
at, but why start out aggravating people who hope to work with?
Is China really going to forget and forgive so quickly Trump calling
Taiwan in the midst of negotiations, or charges of currency manipulation.
Or does everyone now just not bother to listen to anything this man says?

The money-losing shot here is symbolic, and Trump has chosen to
continue to pander to his base, mostly people who have been duped
by symbolic actions that most of them apparently do not understand
the significance of and that will hurt most of them, their families, friends
and states.

It doesn't seem to me to be a bold new brilliant strategy to be the one
major super-power in the world that sides stands out in a negative way
forgoing leadership on this issue and stands company with Syria and
Nicaragua.

These actions of Trump just seem to be designed to roil everyone, the
people, the media and business for a quick appeal to his zombie
followers before he finally caves and says something like "who would've
known". I like a President who avoids wasteful unnecessary drama.

The bottom-line is our President is wasting the time and energy of the
world to grab attention that is not really well-deserved, like the boy who
cried wolf, people just tune him out and it makes our country appear
irrelevant. Like a little child brilliant at using every means possible to
get attention, this guy is just not suited to be President and leader of the
free world.

Sure other Presidents have made mistakes or not negotiated every deal
perfectly, and nothing changes because the people do not seem to pay
attention or care - but that does not excuse our system from getting worse,
not better. What does being intractable, stubborn and egotistical do that
is positive. What does pushing people around and jutting out your lower
jaw like Mussolini really do to improve things?

What would really impress me is if the majority of Republicans marched
over to the White House and said to Trump ... enough, start doing the
job or resign.


Resident
Midtown
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:53 pm
Resident, Midtown
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:53 pm

"this guy is just not suited to be President and leader of the
free world."

You gotta admit -- at least he's better than ole Dubya


Trump_but_Verify
Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:58 pm
Trump_but_Verify, Crescent Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 1:58 pm

New York Times video: Fact Check: Trump’s Exit From the Paris Climate Accord - HERE: Web Link


Flatlined
Barron Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 3:03 pm
Flatlined, Barron Park
on Jun 3, 2017 at 3:03 pm
Sanctimonious City
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:05 pm
Sanctimonious City, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 3, 2017 at 7:05 pm

@CrescentParkAnon is right. Not all Liberal Progressives have reacted with hysteria. It is just the rent-a-thugs that smash windows on campus and paid-for-pundits hyperventilating on TV.

The more common reaction is what I call the half mouth frown. :-/|
This is when publicly they chant the party line and then privately admit the claims are absurd.

You know the expression. When confronted with the truth, the left corner of the mouth stays clenched while the other side drops exposing the rear teeth. The eyes bulge out in a mild look of panic and next quickly dart from side to side and then away. Finally, the weak side foot lifts up and the big toe draws circles sheepishly on the ground. In extreme situations, the expression is sometimes followed by the sound Yeesh.

Recent examples:
Hillary lost the election due to Russian hackers in Macedonia. :-/| half side frown. Yeah, that was pretty ridiculous. We all know she lost because of the email scandal, global foundation corruption and has a sense of entitlement so big it makes Marie Antoinette seem like Saint Mother Theresa.

The PCA was good for the world even though it was an obvious rip-off and the best case temperature reduction was estimated at less than the margin of error - half faced frown. :-/| Yeah, nobody really believes that but we like bashing trump.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 3, 2017 at 8:23 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 3, 2017 at 8:23 pm

" There are new forms of nuclear energy that avoid major mega structure."

Right. Those are the future of nuclear. The Navy has used variants of them on ships and subs for decades without incident. Solar and wind can only go so far before they destabilize the grid.

"I think it i s pretty crazy that so many 'environmentalists' refuse to consider nuclear, at least as a base load."

Not all by any means. I suggest you dump the ideology that's kept your cause stagnant for years, find your friends in this community, and form alliances.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 6:26 am
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 6:26 am

CPA - your man Obama wrote us into an agreement that is illegal - Congress has to agree on large items of expenditure in a BUDGET. And congress has to agree within a TREATY to allow any other country government to make decisions as to how we internally function. It is the document that is the problem and the fact that we - the US - is footing the bill for all of this. If he had gone to Congress first then they would have torn it apart and rejected it.
And if Gov. Brown wants to pursue this then he is have to figure out where the money comes from. Gov. Brown is part of the problem in that selling coal to China is part of his game plan - and China is just then reselling to North Korea and India.
There is nothing that prevents other countries from pursuing better ways of generating energy except their own internal political problems - which in many cases includes a bunch of "rebels" which are busy trying to undo whatever the country government is trying to do. If each country now has to work out how they will approach their internal issues to produce results then they will be better off. The knowledge is out there - it is just the implementation and funding that they need to work on. We are not the Dr. Phil of the energy world.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 10:16 am
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 10:16 am

Resident from Charleston Meadows ... (so a original name)

If you mean by this sarcastic statement "We are not the Dr. Phil
of the energy world" that thanks to Donald Trump's ADHT and
the political necessity for him to pander to his base of deplorables,
that the US has probably lost the last vestiges of credibility, dignity
and leadership in the world, I'd reluctantly agree. It always seems
to most appear that way when Republicans are in charge.

I see though that you are going through gyrations to phrase it in a
way that disguises the reality of the issue. [Portion removed.]

Using the weapon of mobilizing the disinformed and appealing to
peoples' worst natures is one of those things that Republicans
love to associate by media repetition with the Left, but in fact the
right-wing think tanks have invested the most money in that technology
and use it with the results that they can now win elections without the
popular vote. Not exactly the intent or the Founders or the meaning
of democracy, to force plutocracy on Americans, especially that which
is supported from abroad, is it? But Republicans seem fine with subverting
the will of the country by whatever it takes to put money in the pockets
to those to whom government is a commodity to be marginalized.
Their real slogan should be "one dollar, one vote". Or "more carbon,
more votes"?


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:01 am
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:01 am

CPA - your sign-in is not original. Reading the book "Shattered" right now. You all picked the wrong candidate. Total discombobulation from the beginning - feel sorry for the staff that was continually dismissed every time Bill or Bernie interjected some points. Then trying to fit into Obama's "legacy".
A totally reactive person. When she came to CA they would not put her front of a crowd - only high paying people. And they spent the whole time on the "numbers' - how many they were getting. It was a numbers game - not a people game. That is in part why she lost. And now she is on TV trying to blame everyone else for her loss. There are many names for that type of personality - none of which is appealing.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:18 am
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:18 am

EDITOR ... thanks for all your hard work, but can I not express
and remind people the well known fact that ...

- typical for an extreme right-wing polemicist; appealing to the
- uninformed with emotionally charged words that stand for incoherence.
- Wild claims of illegality directed at the Left when it suits you, and
- when Republicans do the same or worse, complete silence.

???

I really do not understand why. You know, forewarned is forearmed.

Just a few seconds to edit that, while the unfounded.

-- CPA - your man Obama

Stays in place.

I never implied Obama was my man, or that Paris Climate Agreement
is perfect, only that it has a symbolic value and as usual the clumsy
and blundering Donald Trump acts in such a way as to have it work
against US credibility and leadership in the world. Do you not take
any context into account here?

Please check the link above at the NYT and notice how the substance of
every point Trump raised to pull out is factually incorrect. It is the very
tactics that I point out that allows this to happen on a national, and
local level ... please don't contribute to that.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:30 am
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:30 am

Resident from Charleston Meadows, you are doing all the
things I mentioned / predicted ... so forgive me if I don't
take the bait to debate the last election.

It's fine with me if you want to rebut my point, on-topic
about the Paris Agreement and its symbolism, but it should
also be fair for me to point out how you do not stick to the
point and evade the issues. Maybe it is just becoming too
difficult a task to factually defend Donald Trump any longer,
so obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate is the order of the day?

Actually, so far as I know, CrescentParkAnon., is original.
I used to go by just Anon. over a decade ago ( with the
period at the end ) but I don't think people noticed. There
are a lot of people posting as resident from wherever, so often
people see different opinions seeming to come from
different people. Or, is that you trying to work your magic
on public opinion? In either case you are again factually
incorrect.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:44 am
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:44 am

I have addressed the Paris Agreement at the front of this stream - even pointed to Wikipedia to establish a set of facts that have no political turn. My guess is that the first year of the agreement is already on the books as to the $1 Billion. This would have been voted on by Congress in the last go around for this year. That means that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer signed of on a "agreement" which provides no direct advantage to us and is illegal. It pays off France and Germany who control the funds. So that is water under the bridge. All Trump did was explain in very concise terms why this was not a good idea for the USA. Nothing he said prevents anyone from coming up with ideas to improve the situation in any of the countries. It is totally open that any country can improve their lot within their understanding of what they want to do. France and Germany can do what they want - everyone can do what they want. But they have to pay for it.
I think this came up as they were reviewing the budget for this next year coming up and discovered this anomaly. We haven't even got to HUD yet - giant pools of funds sitting there with no stated purpose. Kind of like the budget for the UC System. Same group of people.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 12:45 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 12:45 pm

Res, one final reply to your argument is that it is not up to you
and your opinion as to what it illegal or not. Look at the structure
of your arguments and all they do is substitute for real arguments
by dismissal based on the presumption of your wishful authority.

You are engaging in the same argumentation form as
- it is illegal for a Kenyan to be President
- it is illegal for the government to force people to buy insurance
These issues have to be fact checked, politically vetted and finally
weighed by the Supreme Court when and if it comes to that, so
while I consider it worth the time and energy to point that out, I
do not consider it worth the time to argue and respond to these
time wasting rhetorical inflated claims.

What can be said factually is that:
1 - the facts that Donald Trump used to rationalize pulling out of
this agreement were biased for his own personal motives and wrong.
2 - virtually everyone with authority who was acting on the science
and facts objectively urged him to stay in the agreement.
3 - what has been done has hurt America in credibility and leadership.


Beth
College Terrace
on Jun 4, 2017 at 2:59 pm
Beth, College Terrace
on Jun 4, 2017 at 2:59 pm

@ Curmudgeon: Steward Brand and some other major environmentalists have been supporting nuclear power for years...to no avail. I want to know who in Palo Alto supports nuclear power. Please do not cop out, please give me some names.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 4:58 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 4:58 pm

" I want to know who in Palo Alto supports nuclear power. Please do not cop out, please give me some names."

It wouldn't be proper for me to publish people's names without their express permission. I suggest you put out a call in this forum, or in a subject-specific website like paloaltoenergy.org, and give an email address for responses.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 5:06 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 5:06 pm

" even pointed to Wikipedia to establish a set of facts that have no political turn."

Get this: Wikipedia to establish a set of facts that have no political turn. Whoo hoo hee hee ho ho haawww gasp.


"My guess is that the first year of the agreement is already on the books as to the $1 Billion."

Guess??! Why? How about some facts? Contact Michael Bloomberg, an unfake billionaire, who has pledged to pay out of his own pocket.


Sanctimonious City
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 4, 2017 at 8:14 pm
Sanctimonious City, Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 4, 2017 at 8:14 pm

Since we are reviewing what has recently hurt America's leadership role in the world, let's go through the list shall we.

1. Leading feom behind and creating a failed state and terrorist hot bed in Libya
2. Pulling out of Iraq for a campaign talking point and creating a vacuum for ISIS to be born
3. Abandoning the gains in Afghanistan and leaving it to return to a combined ISIS and Al Queda summer camp
4.  Selling out our long term Sunni and Israeli allies by making a deal that ensures Iran gets a nuclear weapon and the intercontinental missiles to deliver them
5.  Boastfully drawing and then cowardly backing away from a red line in Syria resulting in the death (some by chemical waepons) of 100s of thousands and displacement of millions of people
6. Resetting the Russian relationship by giving away the Ukraine and dismantling the missile defense strategy in Europe
7. Watching in amazement as the Chinese build fake islands within international waters in the South China Sea to control shipping lanes and then turning them into military bases complete with airfields, anti-ship missile batteries and amphibious assault forces to threaten their tiny neighbors.
8. Waiting with strategic patience for North Korea to build nuclear bombs, test them, export the technology to other rogue nations and launch missiles ever farther into the Pacific Ocean towards the US and its allies.

Seems like Trump doesn't need to toss the PCA into the overflowing dumpster of dodgy deals Obama and Clinton made. They already did a fine job of destroying our world leadership and military deterrence a long time ago.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 9:15 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 9:15 pm

Won't even attempt to touch those loaded extreme right wing talking points designed to make any discussion of the actually issue of Paris impossible. Sure, let's go back to the dawn of time and argue pointlessly. Anyone who throws a comment out like that one is not to be taken serious.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 9:29 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 4, 2017 at 9:29 pm

" Pulling out of Iraq for a campaign talking point and creating a vacuum for ISIS to be born . Abandoning the gains in Afghanistan and leaving it to return to a combined ISIS and Al Queda summer camp. etc., etc."

OK, I get it that you concede Trump's myriad failures and want to discuss the myriad G. W. Bush debacles instead, but that's somewhat off topic.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:38 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:38 pm

Paris Agreement - hurt the economy? Read what some of the largest companies
in the world that are based in the United States are saying loud and publicly to
President Trump about that ... in a full page ad in the New York Times ....

- - - - - -

Dear President Trump,

As some of the largest companies based or operating in the United States, we strongly
urge you to keep the United States in the Paris Agreement on climate change.

Climate change presents both business risks and business opportunities. Continued U.S.
participation in the agreement benefits U.S. businesses and the U.S. economy in many ways:

• Strengthening Competitiveness: By requiring action by developed and developing countries alike,
the agreement ensures a more balanced global effort, reducing the risk of competitive imbalances for
U.S. companies.

• Creating Jobs, Markets and Growth: By expanding markets for innovative clean technologies,
the agreement generates jobs and economic growth. U.S. companies are well positioned to lead in these
markets. Withdrawing from the agreement will limit our access to them and could expose us to
retaliatory measures.

• Reducing Business Risks: By strengthening global action over time, the agreement will reduce future climate
impacts, including damage to business facilities and operations, declining agricultural productivity and water
supplies, and disruption of global supply chains.

As businesses concerned with the well-being of our customers, our investors, our communities, and our suppliers,
we are strengthening our climate resilience, and we are investing in innovative technologies that can help achieve a
clean energy transition. For this transition to succeed, however, governments must lead as well.
U.S. business is best served by a stable and practical framework facilitating an effective and balanced global
response. The Paris Agreement provides such a framework. As other countries invest in advanced technologies and
move forward with the Paris Agreement, we believe the United States can best exercise global leadership and
advance U.S. interests by remaining a full partner in this vital global effort.

Sincerely,

Adobe· Apple· Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts· Danfoss ·Dignity Health· Facebook ·Gap, Inc.· Google •
The Hartford· Hewlett Packard Enterprise· Ingersoll Rand· Intel Corporation· Johnson Controls· Levi Strauss & Co.·
Mars Incorporated· Microsoft· Morgan Stanley· National Grid· PG&E Corporation· Royal DSM • Salesforce • Schneider Electric ·Tiffany & Co.· Unilever • VF Corporation

- - - - - -

But .... who would have known ??????


Resident
Midtown
on Jun 5, 2017 at 1:49 am
Resident, Midtown
on Jun 5, 2017 at 1:49 am

CrescentParkAnon, copying+pasting something from the NY Times doesn't prove your point.

I think the likes of Facebook, Apple, Microsoft and PG&E are massively overrated and its about time smaller companies rose up to challenge them. We can't have these monoliths control all of technology and information.

God knows, once the government stops helping them monopolize the economy, they start complaining under the pretense of "investing in innovative technologies". Is the motivation:

1. Profit

or

2. Fighting Climate Change

Clearly, #1 takes precedence over #2. Everyone knows this, you know it too CPA, stop acting disingenuous because you have fun hating Trump. Like anyone else with Trump Derangement Syndrome, you simply hate Trump, you can't stop hating him, its like some kind of outlet, and you will always look for ways to justify your hate.


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:19 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:19 pm

Many of the companies listed in the above insert have cash deposited off shore they are not paying taxes on. This has already been recognized as a problem with the current tax system. So this may be new information on the Paris Agreement providing a tax loophole that comes under the "Foundation to do something good" scenario. Foundations are established to create a tax advantage and have to be able to point to some point of use. The Paris Accord creates that point of use. So whether anything is actually accomplished may be accidental to the main point of the foundation establishment. Why large international efforts are established usually has a great mission statement but many have no results to speak of.
Many large corporations have a tax write-off for contributing to and participating in government programs - suspect that this is where this all comes into play.


Beth
College Terrace
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:33 pm
Beth, College Terrace
on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:33 pm

@Curmudgeon: You refused to supply any names of environmentalists in Palo Alto who support nuclear energy. You said some do. I doubt that you know any. However, taking your suggestion, I am asking all the Palo Alto environmentalists who support nuclear energy to speak up on this blog. Thanks.


CrescentParkAnon.
Crescent Park
on Jun 5, 2017 at 1:49 pm
CrescentParkAnon., Crescent Park
on Jun 5, 2017 at 1:49 pm

%lt; CrescentParkAnon, copying+pasting something from the NY Times doesn't prove your point.

Really, Resident(s) ... what do you think my point is?

Or was it actually the NYT's point? NYT always triggers extreme right outliers.

Or was my point really the point of those horrible corporations you hate who in fact sponsored the ad?

Those corporations that provide hundreds of thousands of well paying, clean and not physically dangerous jobs that help us lead the world in technology and keep the economy moving. But to you they only act out of the profit motive. I'm again confused by your reasoning, because isn't Trump's main reason to pull out because he wrongly decided Paris is not profitable for the US?

Or, was my point that there was insignificantly little to be gained by pulling out of the PCA? Yeah.

The only gain was pandering to the far right who seem to feel good when America is marginalized by having stupid-adjacent for President. And please do not call me Liberal names; the columnist George Will, despised by the Left, a Conservative voice for decades finally called it like it is ... "Trump cannot think or speak clearly". You Trump supporters have painted yourself into a corner based on stubborn refusal to re-evaluate what more people see and admit every day. Republicans would rather see the whole country burn than admit an error of such magnitude - a massive character defect and threat to the country.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 5, 2017 at 3:12 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 5, 2017 at 3:12 pm

" Like anyone else with Trump Derangement Syndrome,

You mean there's ANOTHER person on this planet as deranged as Trump??!! Is he/she institutionalized or running loose?


Name hidden
Old Palo Alto

on Jun 5, 2017 at 3:16 pm
Name hidden, Old Palo Alto

on Jun 5, 2017 at 3:16 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:11 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:11 pm

There are many reasons why any action that includes money and regulations come into play - it is not a singular reason. As to the NYT - Carlos Slim of Mexico is the biggest shareholder in the NYT Corporation. Check him out on Wikipedia - he is one of the richest men in the world and is very busy with his globalization activities. And of course there is Jeff Bezos of Amazon Fame - who also owns the Washington Post. I am sure the Meyer family is turning in their graves at this - previous owners.
And the all-time favorite is George Soros who has provided funding to the ninja-black clad gang at UC Berkeley functions, also the inauguration in DC.
He is all over the place with his globalization activities. All of these people can be reviewed on Wikipedia.
As to Mexico the party currently in power has been there for over 30 years reeking corruption at every turn. Another party is trying to unseat them. So much going on. thank you to the internet which allows all people in all countries to see what they are missing and now demand what other people have.
Hopefully the discussions concerning Climate will provide some focus on goals. But many now just want food, water, and a place to live.


Curmudgeon
Downtown North
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:44 pm
Curmudgeon, Downtown North
on Jun 5, 2017 at 4:44 pm

" Check him out on Wikipedia - he is one of the richest men in the world and is very busy with his globalization activities."

You could refer to First Father Donald J. Trump, right, and First Daughter Ivanka who keeps her manufacturing jobs globalized in China instead of beneficently bestowing them on First Father's voter Base in America, right?

Except we have no evidence that First Father is one of the richest men in the world except that he says so, and who believes anything he says anymore, right?

So likely you do not refer to First Father.

What's your point anyway?


resident
Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 5:10 pm
resident, Charleston Meadows
on Jun 5, 2017 at 5:10 pm

[Portion removed.] The top listed richest people are continually updated in the papers - Mr. Trump's name has not appeared there - nor has yours - or a donkey. The NYT prints a biased opinion - as is the WP and SJM. Journalism is following the Hearst Model - yellow journalism.

The point is that these people have funding activities in which they can further their Globalization goals. Mr. Trump is busy with Nationalistic goals. All of the respective goals are creating chaos all over the world.

Are the Ninja black-suited goons part of the Hidden UC budget currently in contention? the Governor, Lt. Governor, now the head of the UC system have not uttered a peep about them appearing on campus. How can that be? Newsome better step up to the plate here if he thinks he is going to be the Governor.
He is a voting member of the UC Board of Regents. That is just the local slice of the bigger picture. And can't wait to see what is reported by the Governor on his China visit. Is the word COAL going to appear? Since this is a Climate visit it will be interesting to see what materializes. And who is paying for this trip? The taxpayer.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.