4 ms·
We usually call that "weaseling". You could say it is why CO2 emissions continue increasing at a sharply increasing rate. But presumably any behavior within an
by pencilguin 4y ago
We usually call that "weaseling".
You could say it is why CO2 emissions continue increasing at a sharply increasing rate. But presumably any behavior within an "agreement" is better than identically the same behavior with no agreement. Somehow.
- jaspax 4y agoOne wonders if this isn't the esoteric reason for writing the paper in the first place. The "victories" involve getting parties to agree to subtle linguistic changes to various documents which have no impact at all on the actual problem they're supposedly addressing, and writing a paper that points this out sure seems like a way of making the whole enterprise look ridiculous, even if the explicit frame is one of praise.
- _3u10 4y agoEmissions are increasing at a decreasing rate and are in the declining in absolute terms in the largest economies, except for China and India.
- 1letterunixname 4y agoToo little, too late. Without extreme carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), we're boned.
- moistly 4y agoWe need to CCS at greater than the rate we are extracting ancient carbon… IOW, sequestering more than 90 million barrels a day. We are dead men walking.
- pencilguin 4y agoMost people think displacing CO2 production is a much more cost-effective course than building out carbon capture. After we have deployed enough carbon-neutral energy production, we will then need to do massive carbon capture. But in the meantime, carbon capture mostly just enables polluters.