Comments on: Obama Induces Chinese to Cut GHG 40% and Share Electric Car Tech http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/ What is the future of fuel? What's new? What's next? Since 2007, Gas 2 has covered a rapidly changing world coming to terms with its oil addiction. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 03:49:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Brett Rasmussen http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-12907 Brett Rasmussen Fri, 04 Dec 2009 06:13:09 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-12907 @ChuckL --- Sorry, but you are 100% wrong on your bowing information. I happen to live in Japan and had a discussion with a group of Japanese friends on this very topic following Obama's bow. A bow in Japan does not indicate superiority/inferiority, it is a gesture of respect. The idea that our nation does not need to show respect for others is a primary reason that our worldwide reputation is in it's current state. @ChuckL — Sorry, but you are 100% wrong on your bowing information. I happen to live in Japan and had a discussion with a group of Japanese friends on this very topic following Obama’s bow.

A bow in Japan does not indicate superiority/inferiority, it is a gesture of respect.

The idea that our nation does not need to show respect for others is a primary reason that our worldwide reputation is in it’s current state.

]]> By: Brett Rasmussen http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-36732 Brett Rasmussen Fri, 04 Dec 2009 06:13:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-36732 @ChuckL --- Sorry, but you are 100% wrong on your bowing information. I happen to live in Japan and had a discussion with a group of Japanese friends on this very topic following Obama's bow. A bow in Japan does not indicate superiority/inferiority, it is a gesture of respect. The idea that our nation does not need to show respect for others is a primary reason that our worldwide reputation is in it's current state. @ChuckL — Sorry, but you are 100% wrong on your bowing information. I happen to live in Japan and had a discussion with a group of Japanese friends on this very topic following Obama’s bow.

A bow in Japan does not indicate superiority/inferiority, it is a gesture of respect.

The idea that our nation does not need to show respect for others is a primary reason that our worldwide reputation is in it’s current state.

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-12906 Susan Kraemer Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:42:08 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-12906 @Tech@Chuck: Talk is cheap? "Cheap talk" under Kyoto legislation has led EU fossil energy co BP to build advanced CCS hydrogen fuel plant http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/01/kyoto-accord-to-hydrogen-power-california/ @Chidemont Yeah, that's other whole article; comparing various pledges and baselines. I'd do that at cleantechnica where I write in more depth about policy design, but the link I supply in the story in "That calculates out to the equivalent to 5% below 1990 (Kyoto’s baseline year)." can get you some initial comparisons. Bottom line is anything works. You'd be surprised how many flaws a study I wrote a summary of found in the ETS system, http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/28/what-the-senate-should-know-about-cap-and-trade-in-europe/ ...yet they cut their CO2 13% with it http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/13/eu-on-track-to-meet-or-exceed-original-kyoto-goals-estimate-139-below-1990/ some by almost half! http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/21/eu-paper-industry-has-cut-carbon-pollution-by-42-exceeded-kyoto-goals/ @Tech@Chuck: Talk is cheap? “Cheap talk” under Kyoto legislation has led EU fossil energy co BP to build advanced CCS hydrogen fuel plant

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/01/kyoto-accord-to-hydrogen-power-california/

@Chidemont Yeah, that’s other whole article; comparing various pledges and baselines.

I’d do that at cleantechnica where I write in more depth about policy design, but the link I supply in the story in “That calculates out to the equivalent to 5% below 1990 (Kyoto’s baseline year).” can get you some initial comparisons.

Bottom line is anything works. You’d be surprised how many flaws a study I wrote a summary of found in the ETS system,

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/28/what-the-senate-should-know-about-cap-and-trade-in-europe/

…yet they cut their CO2 13% with it

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/13/eu-on-track-to-meet-or-exceed-original-kyoto-goals-estimate-139-below-1990/

some by almost half!

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/21/eu-paper-industry-has-cut-carbon-pollution-by-42-exceeded-kyoto-goals/

]]> By: Susan Kraemer http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-36731 Susan Kraemer Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:42:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-36731 @Tech@Chuck: Talk is cheap? "Cheap talk" under Kyoto legislation has led EU fossil energy co BP to build advanced CCS hydrogen fuel plant http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/01/kyoto-accord-to-hydrogen-power-california/ @Chidemont Yeah, that's other whole article; comparing various pledges and baselines. I'd do that at cleantechnica where I write in more depth about policy design, but the link I supply in the story in "That calculates out to the equivalent to 5% below 1990 (Kyoto’s baseline year)." can get you some initial comparisons. Bottom line is anything works. You'd be surprised how many flaws a study I wrote a summary of found in the ETS system, http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/28/what-the-senate-should-know-about-cap-and-trade-in-europe/ ...yet they cut their CO2 13% with it http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/13/eu-on-track-to-meet-or-exceed-original-kyoto-goals-estimate-139-below-1990/ some by almost half! http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/21/eu-paper-industry-has-cut-carbon-pollution-by-42-exceeded-kyoto-goals/ @Tech@Chuck: Talk is cheap? “Cheap talk” under Kyoto legislation has led EU fossil energy co BP to build advanced CCS hydrogen fuel plant

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/12/01/kyoto-accord-to-hydrogen-power-california/

@Chidemont Yeah, that’s other whole article; comparing various pledges and baselines.

I’d do that at cleantechnica where I write in more depth about policy design, but the link I supply in the story in “That calculates out to the equivalent to 5% below 1990 (Kyoto’s baseline year).” can get you some initial comparisons.

Bottom line is anything works. You’d be surprised how many flaws a study I wrote a summary of found in the ETS system,

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/28/what-the-senate-should-know-about-cap-and-trade-in-europe/

…yet they cut their CO2 13% with it

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/13/eu-on-track-to-meet-or-exceed-original-kyoto-goals-estimate-139-below-1990/

some by almost half!

http://cleantechnica.com/2009/11/21/eu-paper-industry-has-cut-carbon-pollution-by-42-exceeded-kyoto-goals/

]]> By: Chidemont http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-12905 Chidemont Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:43:19 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-12905 Susan, You might want to read the L.A. Times' correction page - http://tinyurl.com/yl7dg9p <i>Emission goals: An article and graphic in Friday's Section A about China's pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions stated that the nation had vowed to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020. China promised to reduce its "carbon intensity," a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40% to 45% by 2020, compared with 2005 levels. A headline accompanying the article was also incorrect in saying that "China meets, beats U.S. on emission reduction goals." Whereas the U.S. plans to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to below 2005 levels, China's emissions could actually increase, depending on its economic growth.</i> Susan,

You might want to read the L.A. Times’ correction page – http://tinyurl.com/yl7dg9p

Emission goals: An article and graphic in Friday’s Section A about China’s pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions stated that the nation had vowed to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020. China promised to reduce its “carbon intensity,” a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40% to 45% by 2020, compared with 2005 levels. A headline accompanying the article was also incorrect in saying that “China meets, beats U.S. on emission reduction goals.” Whereas the U.S. plans to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to below 2005 levels, China’s emissions could actually increase, depending on its economic growth.

]]> By: Chidemont http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-36730 Chidemont Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:43:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-36730 Susan, You might want to read the L.A. Times' correction page - http://tinyurl.com/yl7dg9p <i>Emission goals: An article and graphic in Friday's Section A about China's pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions stated that the nation had vowed to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020. China promised to reduce its "carbon intensity," a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40% to 45% by 2020, compared with 2005 levels. A headline accompanying the article was also incorrect in saying that "China meets, beats U.S. on emission reduction goals." Whereas the U.S. plans to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to below 2005 levels, China's emissions could actually increase, depending on its economic growth.</i> Susan,

You might want to read the L.A. Times’ correction page – http://tinyurl.com/yl7dg9p

Emission goals: An article and graphic in Friday’s Section A about China’s pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions stated that the nation had vowed to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020. China promised to reduce its “carbon intensity,” a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40% to 45% by 2020, compared with 2005 levels. A headline accompanying the article was also incorrect in saying that “China meets, beats U.S. on emission reduction goals.” Whereas the U.S. plans to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to below 2005 levels, China’s emissions could actually increase, depending on its economic growth.

]]> By: usd777 http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-12904 usd777 Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:26:02 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-12904 Pls, try to avoid politics here... it doesn't really matter, what they signed, history tells. Pls, try to avoid politics here… it doesn’t really matter, what they signed, history tells.

]]> By: usd777 http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-36729 usd777 Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:26:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-36729 Pls, try to avoid politics here... it doesn't really matter, what they signed, history tells. Pls, try to avoid politics here… it doesn’t really matter, what they signed, history tells.

]]> By: Captain Morgan http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-12903 Captain Morgan Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:20:39 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-12903 You're absolutely right. The trip was an unqualified success ... you're just the only one who sees it. China and India will promise this and that until the cows come home. In the end, though, they will do whatever is in their best interests (economically) to do. If that means ditching these meaningless emissions reduction pledges, then they'll do it. Governments can make statements like this because there is no one to hold them accountable. It's a PR stunt ... the whole trip was essentially one big photo op. From what I see, Obama's biggest achievement was agreeing to freely export U.S. technology on EV development to a country that hasn't yet figured out how to make a decent automobile (electric or otherwise). Nice job, Barack! Why not give some of that stimulus cash to the Chinese to build EV's that we can then import back to the U.S.? It was a good idea for wind turbines, why not cars too? I guess it's only fair that the stimulus money go to China ... it's their money, after all. Once again, nice job, Barack! You’re absolutely right. The trip was an unqualified success … you’re just the only one who sees it. China and India will promise this and that until the cows come home. In the end, though, they will do whatever is in their best interests (economically) to do. If that means ditching these meaningless emissions reduction pledges, then they’ll do it. Governments can make statements like this because there is no one to hold them accountable. It’s a PR stunt … the whole trip was essentially one big photo op.

From what I see, Obama’s biggest achievement was agreeing to freely export U.S. technology on EV development to a country that hasn’t yet figured out how to make a decent automobile (electric or otherwise). Nice job, Barack! Why not give some of that stimulus cash to the Chinese to build EV’s that we can then import back to the U.S.? It was a good idea for wind turbines, why not cars too? I guess it’s only fair that the stimulus money go to China … it’s their money, after all. Once again, nice job, Barack!

]]> By: Captain Morgan http://gas2.org/2009/11/29/obama-induces-chinese-to-cut-ghg-40-percent-and-share-electric-car-tech/#comment-36728 Captain Morgan Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:20:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=4199#comment-36728 You're absolutely right. The trip was an unqualified success ... you're just the only one who sees it. China and India will promise this and that until the cows come home. In the end, though, they will do whatever is in their best interests (economically) to do. If that means ditching these meaningless emissions reduction pledges, then they'll do it. Governments can make statements like this because there is no one to hold them accountable. It's a PR stunt ... the whole trip was essentially one big photo op. From what I see, Obama's biggest achievement was agreeing to freely export U.S. technology on EV development to a country that hasn't yet figured out how to make a decent automobile (electric or otherwise). Nice job, Barack! Why not give some of that stimulus cash to the Chinese to build EV's that we can then import back to the U.S.? It was a good idea for wind turbines, why not cars too? I guess it's only fair that the stimulus money go to China ... it's their money, after all. Once again, nice job, Barack! You’re absolutely right. The trip was an unqualified success … you’re just the only one who sees it. China and India will promise this and that until the cows come home. In the end, though, they will do whatever is in their best interests (economically) to do. If that means ditching these meaningless emissions reduction pledges, then they’ll do it. Governments can make statements like this because there is no one to hold them accountable. It’s a PR stunt … the whole trip was essentially one big photo op.

From what I see, Obama’s biggest achievement was agreeing to freely export U.S. technology on EV development to a country that hasn’t yet figured out how to make a decent automobile (electric or otherwise). Nice job, Barack! Why not give some of that stimulus cash to the Chinese to build EV’s that we can then import back to the U.S.? It was a good idea for wind turbines, why not cars too? I guess it’s only fair that the stimulus money go to China … it’s their money, after all. Once again, nice job, Barack!

]]>