Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/11/nations-miss-paris-targets-climate-driven-weather-events-cost-billions/

The majority of the carbon emission reduction pledges for 2030 that 184 countries made under the Paris Agreement aren’t nearly enough to keep global warming well below 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius). Some countries won’t achieve their pledges, and some of the world's largest carbon emitters will continue to increase their emissions, according to a panel of world-class climate scientists.

“Countries need to double and triple their 2030 reduction commitments to be aligned with the Paris target,” says Sir Robert Watson, former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and co-author of the report that closely examined the 184 voluntary pledges under the Paris Agreement.

“We have the technology and knowledge to make those emissions cuts, but what’s missing are strong enough policies and regulations to make it happen,” Watson says in an interview. “Right now the world is on a pathway to between 3 and 4 degrees C (5.5 and 7F) by the end of the century.”

I can of course point to some local progress and how this place or that place has gone renewable, but that doesn't mean anything REAL is happening globally.  It's spin, and I'm allergic to spin, having lived in a spin world for most of my career.  The Paris Targets are insufficient, and the planet is not going to meet them anyway.

Every year makes this more and more evident and makes the problem worse and worse.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/only-2-countries-are-meeting-their-climate-pledges-heres-how-the-10-worst-could-improve

Those 10 countries account for approximately 70 percent of the world’s emissions, and all except one — India — are not on pace to meet the climate goals needed to prevent 2 degrees Celsius of warming. (Reminder: Two degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels would be catastrophic, but even 1.5 degrees could make Earth inhospitable to human life and the planet is already halfway there.)

. Germany remains Europe’s biggest consumer of coal, and energy transition to renewables has arguably stalled.

Even though the country continues to roll out bids to have net-zero emissions by 2050 and new climate policies like carbon prices for economic sectors, transportation and buildings, Hohne said what Germany lacks is a long-term vision.

Yes, it is happening to SOME EXTENT around the world.  But, it clearly is not happening nearly fast enough.  That is a simple fact.

As to what miracles may ensue in the future, we shall see.  I'm backing my projections up with pretty solid data, not wishful thinking.

It's not going to be nearly enough nearly soon enough to alter the trajectory in any measurable way, so in 20 years or so we should have pretty obvious information as to how good the models have been.

I mentioned I worked most of my career in a "spin world".  Early on, I bought into the spin, all the projections and promises.  I thought they were great.  That couldn't last of course because none of them were met, ever.  It was just opiate for the masses.  The company spent huge sums on various and sundry failed projects, I'm talking billions.  And while the spin sounded exciting to the inexperienced, after a while seasoned folks could just run the numbers and see "Hey, this isn't going to happen."  And it never did, never, not once.

I was directly involved in one of those efforts and got into considerably trouble for pointing out the obvious.  My boss' boss told me to zip it, even though he knew what I was writing was dead on the Truth.  There were PTBs behind this effort at a much higher level than me, and TRUTH did not matter, spin mattered, and perception.

That project ingloriously disappeared about two years later.  No epitaph, no analysis, not "what went wrong", it just disappeared.  And the Senior VP who "led" it got promoted.  I wasted about four years of my career on the absurdity of it.  It was technically interesting, so there was that.

There was another smaller project that was being reviewed and our head of the patent division asked me to come with him.  I think everyone in the room was 4-6 levels above me.  I planned to sit quietly and listen to what I KNEW would be rosy burfle, and it was, but the patent guy after one of the VPs claimed to have a great patent protection on the project turned to me and asked "Is that true?".  I just said "No."  It wasn't remotely true.  There was this silence in the room for about 5 seconds and then someone else picked up the "discussion" as if nothing happened.  I realized he had brought me along knowing what would happen.

Sure enough in about a year that stupid project also died.  I don't know how they stay in business.

The message is Life is Tough, and it gets tougher if you believe in Fairy Tales instead of the Cold Hard Truth.  It also pays to keep your mouth shut at times.

I know I'm not going to change your mind. My point is just that there is that economic considerations favor shutting down coal, investing heavily in renewables, electrification, energy efficiency, and other emerging technologies, where there are already a lot and will be an increasing number of jobs, especially blue collar ones. This is happening faster in Europe and elsewhere, of course, but it's happening to some extent throughout the world.

None of those articles are from this year, and we'll see what happens in the aftermath of the pandemic. That is not only having a temporary impact on reducing emissions but there should be some longer-term benefits, as people travel less (especially by plane) and more people work from home, which I think will accelerate the growth for roof-top solar as residential energy bills increase while commercial demand goes down.

There are other factors that are unpredictable right now, of course, with the elections being a big one.

How big an impact do you see the elections making?

How much closer will we be to our goals by 2030 if the right people win in 2020?  10%?  1%?  0.1%?

It was an interview with her, that's all.  She has an interesting on line blog.  She is a thorn in the side of many because she's not a kook and has serious credentials.

I appreciate her expressions of doubt.

It wasn't an interview.  It was some audio of her answering questions that we did not hear being asked of her, with the "interviewer" injecting his voice-over skepticism in between playing bits of her comments.

32 and snow on the roofs this morning it melted on the wamer ground.Hi today 43 and cloudy - cold.More snow maybe tommorow,at least football season is warming up