The Paris Agreement: Good News? Bad News? A Bad Deal For The United States Of America?
With 48% of Americans believing that global warming is a human-caused problem, and 49% of Americans believing that an international agreement to limit carbon emissions would make a big difference to the global warming problem, the Paris Agreement seems to be the perfect solution and good news all around: this could be true, but then why did the United States of America later decide to withdraw from the agreement? In this writing #DavidWest28 takes a closer look at the Paris Agreement, including why it was formed, to answer whether the agreement is good news generally, bad news generally, or a bad deal for the United States of America.
Authored by The #DavidWest28 Company
20 December 2017
What would you like? Rising sea levels and flooded coastal communities? No? Well how about an intense heatwave including a lengthy drought? No? Well how about an increase in insect activity and insect-borne diseases? If those aren’t enough for you then how about the extinction of one quarter of the Earth’s species by the year 2050? Are you still there? Which would you like? None of the above? Perhaps your responses are predictable. The above are examples of the many threats offered by global warming, according to the United Nations, but they say it may be possible to avoid those things if a resilience to global warming is set up and taken seriously.
Global warming is a type of climate change, but it is a product calculated to be a reality on the basis of a scientific theory’s correctness. The theory in question is the greenhouse effect theory.
The greenhouse effect theory states that when carbon dioxide begins entering the earth’s atmosphere at a rate that exceeds the rate at which the earth absorbs it, that the carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere shall build up and its ability to trap heat from sunlight shall cause an increase in the Earth’s surface temperature – global warming. The global warming is expected then to cause the melting of the Earth’s ice, the rising of sea levels, the loss of land to water, increases in natural disasters, and ultimately, decreases in the Earth’s human population.
The greenhouse effect theory suggests that the more carbon dioxide entering the earth’s atmosphere within a shorter space of time, the greater risk there is of global warming.
The greenhouse effect theories originate with 19th century scientists, Thomas Chrowder Chamberlain, Svante Arrhenius, and John Tyndall.
Carbon dioxide enters the Earth’s atmosphere in numerous ways, but the global warming issue is concerned with the ways that this occurs unnaturally – anthropogenic activities. An example of an anthropogenic activity is the burning of fossil fuels. Humans burn fossil fuels to acquire their energy properties, for use in creating electricity, for transport, and for heating. Deforestation is another example of an anthropogenic activity; carbon dioxide for photosynthesis is released into the Earth’s atmosphere by deforested trees.
Fossil fuels are energy sources that were formed within the Earth across millions of years in the past: coal, oil, and natural gas. As resources of the Earth that take so long to form, fossil fuels are treated and termed as being non-renewable energy sources and limited supplies of the Earth’s natural resources.
Greenhouse gases are emitted when fossil fuels are burned, with carbon-dioxide being the most emitted gas, but methane and nitrous oxide are examples of other greenhouse gases.
A gas’ ability to absorb infrared radiation so that it traps and holds heat in the Earth’s atmosphere is the factor which makes it a greenhouse gas. The USA’s Environmental Protection Agency’s website confirms the potential of various greenhouse gases for absorbing heat, comparing them with the ability of carbon dioxide. While their records show that there are greenhouse gases far more capable of absorbing infrared radiation than carbon-dioxide, their records also show that carbon dioxide tends to form over 80% of the greenhouse gases emitted by the USA. Generally, whenever fossil fuels are burned, anywhere in the world, the gas most emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere is carbon dioxide.
The greenhouse effect theory is saying that a continuing need to increase the burning of coal, oil and natural gas, which we do for energy, will emit gases into the Earth’s atmosphere that are capable of trapping heat, and that these gases shall increase in volume to trap enough heat to cause increases in the Earth’s surface temperature and then cause disasters.
Following its presentation to the world as a solution to global warming on 15 December 2015, the Paris Agreement became international law on 5 October 2016 having been accepted by the majority of the world some days earlier. With projected estimates for the volumes of greenhouse gases to enter the Earth’s atmosphere following future-estimates for energy demands, the world felt that the threat of global warming had become imminent. The Paris Agreement is for causing the world’s cooperation to, permanently reduce greenhouse-gas-emissions consequent of human activities, into the Earth’s atmosphere, in light of the greenhouse effect theory and its threats. We can expect the Paris Agreement’s laws to begin being acted on from 2018, with the first review of its progress occurring five years later in 2023.
Following the majority of the world’s acceptance of the Paris Agreement in October 2016, in the following June (June 2017), the United States of America announced its decision to abandon the agreement, which is to mean that the United States shall not participate in the United Nations’ co-operation for preventing global warming. As the leader of the United States of America, President Donald Trump shocked the world with his announcement and many people believe that President Trump’s choice for the USA, itself, demonstrates a disaster to the world’s future.
With high percentages of people believing that global warming (also referred to as ‘climate change’) is a human-caused problem, President Trump took a brave risk against his democratic popularity in the USA and his international standing as a world leader, but what many people have been unaware of and have remained unaware of, are the many points of education that argue against climate change being a human-caused problem, and also, points which argue against calculated climate changes being real possibilities.
In research that he carried out personally to understand global warming, weatherman and retired meteorologist, John Coleman, found that there was no unusual warming of the Earth, nor any unusual droughts, nor an increase in tornados or heat waves, and he began to ask why what he had found differed so much to the things reported by the media to influence the world. Mr. Coleman traced the reason back to a research paper written by professors Roger Revelle and Hans Suess in 1957. The Revelle and Suess paper was mostly theoretical discussion, but it mentioned a risk that alarmed the American government and prompted the American government to spend and spend on researching the greenhouse effect theory. Mr Coleman found, that with the American government being prepared to spend billions per year on researching the greenhouse effect that it had become an interest of many to continuously fuel the American government’s reasoning towards further spending, and that despite the presentation of new, reliable and relevant information that would relieve the American government of its fears, that the American government insisted on ignoring the new information to cease upon opportunities to influence and lead other nations. To encourage other nations to become equally as concerned as they had been, the American government would rely on the United Nations organisation.
Mr. Coleman’s research also led him to 9000 PhD scientists who disagree with and oppose the greenhouse effect theory basing the global-warming/climate-change movement to influence the world.
Scientist and Nobel Peace Prize winner of 1973, for physics, Ivan Giaver, has shown that between the years 1898 and 1998, that the Earth’s surface temperature rose by 0.8 degrees Kelvin, coinciding with carbon dioxide concentration increases of 295 ppm (parts per million) to 367 ppm. Further, Professor Giaver has also shown that since 1998, carbon dioxide concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere increased from 367 ppm to 403 ppm, but that the 50% increase in carbon dioxide’s presence was not followed by an increase in the Earth’s surface temperature of 0.4 degrees Kelvin as would be expected if the global warming theories were correct. The professor has since explained that scientists follow their results for conclusions to their theories, so that where an experiment’s results offends/disagrees-with a theory, scientists dispose of the theory accepting it as being incorrect. If what Professor Giaver has said is how scientists behave, then the global warming movement being followed by the world is not being led by scientists – it is people with an agenda extraneous to science who are leading the way.
In 2011 Professor Giaver resigned from the American Physical Society when the organisation insisted on behalf of its members that the evidence in support of global warming is beyond denial and beyond questioning. The professor has since compared the global warming movement to a religion, finding that the refusal to discuss a theory such as global warming, which any real scientist would doubt, question, test, and discard, gives the global warming movement a religious characteristic.
Having observed the public’s receipt of global warming theories by individuals who are not scientists, and the world’s reaction to their campaigns, Professor Giaver has understood the global warming movement to be the work of alarmists and deniers of the truth.
Research carried out by Dr. Judith Curry, a climatologist, has indicated that the consensus of scientists alleging that global warming is real (1000 scientists), which the United Nations has relied on to convince the world’s leaders of global warming, was actually created by bullying.
Dr. Curry’s additional research has helped her to explain that within the community of scientists there is uncertainty and disagreement on issues such as: (1) whether the Earth’s warming has been caused by human activity or the Earth’s natural temperature variability, (2) how much the planet shall warm during this 21st century, and (3) whether warming is dangerous. Dr. Curry uses her research to explain that the chief issue amongst scientists is the extent to which recent and future warming is caused by human activity versus natural climate variability, and, that while research, efforts and funding have focused on understanding how humans may be affecting the planet’s climate, that misunderstanding has been inevitable for a failure to give sufficient attention towards understanding natural causes of climate variability, particularly in relation to the sun and oscillations that concern the oceans.
Dr. Curry has expressed that it has become expected of climate scientists to support the global warming movement, with the expectation being extended from the publishers of reliable science information and the organisers of important science events. It has been a concern of Dr. Curry’s that as a consequence of the efforts to sell the global warming movement using science, that the reputation of scientists will be tarnished, for understating uncertainties, and for relying on the reputation of scientists to advance political agendas.
Dr. Don Easterbrook, a geologist of 50 years’ experience and zero business interests has relied on research to show: (1) that ice-sheets at the Antarctic are growing and not melting, (2) that carbon dioxide cannot cause global warming (it forms just 0.004 % of the Earth’s atmospheric gases), and (3) that global warming began occurring before there were increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – meaning that neither carbon dioxide or human activity can be said to be the warming’s cause.
Dr. Eastbrook’s research shows 1936 as being the hottest year of the 20th century with the 1930s being the hottest decade of the 20th century, that the ice at the north pole is only 3 metres in thickness, and that it is virtually impossible for the ice at Antarctica to melt – analysis of the Antarctic’s ice shows that for 15 million years the ice caps at Antarctica have never melted or disappeared despite the Earth’s temperature being considerably higher in the past.
One of Dr. Easterbrook’s most interesting findings is that carbon dioxide is a product of global warming and not its cause: as temperatures increase in the Earth’s atmosphere, carbon dioxide increases, it being released from the Earth’s oceans. Dr. Easterbrook relies on data to know but asks that if carbon dioxide causes global warming, then why did the Earth experience 30 years of global cooling while carbon dioxide levels in the Earth’s atmosphere were increasing.
Despite Dr. Easterbrook’s references to carbon dioxide instead of other greenhouse gases, the data which Dr. Easterbrook relies on is sufficient to discard the possibility of global warming occurring as a consequence of human activities so that it barely matters if he refers to carbon dioxide or any other greenhouse gas – there is simply no scientific evidence supporting a relationship between human activities and the varying of the Earth’s temperature.
The explanations of the scientists above coupled with the USA’s ignorance of reliable and relevant information adverse to their concerns about global warming indicate the possibility of the Paris Agreement being introduced to the world for reasons other than to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into the Earth’s atmosphere.
The United Nations’ Paris Agreement 2015 (hereafter also referred to as “the Agreement”) creates international laws for its entrants, with its general aim and purpose being expressed within its Article 2.
Article 2: the Agreement is for furthering and improving the Agreement’s formation and movement (throughout the world), including its aims, so that the force and movement against the threat of climate change grows and increases to diminish the threat of climate change itself, where this is to be done by relying on energy which does not cause reductions to the Earth’s supply of natural resources, and, by preventing poverty from acting as an obstacle to the agreement’s aims.
The general aim of the agreement is to prevent an outcome anticipated by the greenhouse effect theory; an increase in the Earth’s surface temperature. It is understood that fossil fuel energy releases carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere to cause increases in the Earth’s temperature; the agreement therefore calls for reductions in the world’s reliance on fossil fuel energy.
Fossil fuel energy causes reductions to the Earth’s supply of natural resources, increasing their value(s), so the agreement also means to cause the world’s reliance on energy which: (1) does not emit greenhouses gases, and (2) does not increase the value of the Earth’s limited natural resources.
Article 2: preventing a significant two degree increase in the Earth’s temperature is the direct aim of the Agreement.
Article 3: each nation of the Agreement must set and state ambitious targets for itself towards meeting the Agreement’s direct aim, and the efforts of all entrants to the agreement must show progress towards the Agreement’s direct aim across time.
Article 3: developed nations agree to provide support to developing nations for the effective operation of the agreement.
Article 4: as a token towards meeting the Agreement’s direct aim, each nation agrees to begin an immediate reduction in its use of fossil fuels for energy, and shall begin relying on the best available science (and technology) for new sources of energy.
Article 4: each nation’s successive nationally-determined-contribution shall represent a progression beyond its previous nationally-determined-contribution and reflect its highest possible ambition.
Article 4: nations shall give account for their nationally-determined-contribution progress: in giving account for their anthropogenic emissions and removals (as contributions) they shall ensure the accuracy of the data that they provide.
Article 4: nations shall propose new nationally-determined-contributions every five years and be informed by the global stock-take.
Article 4: each nation shall calculate and communicate a long-term low-greenhouse-gas-emission development strategy, mindful of the Agreement’s direct aim, taking into account its capabilities and responsibilities.
Article 4: developed nations shall support developing nations for furthering the Agreement; it shall be impossible for poverty to prevent the achievement of the Agreement’s ultimate goal.
Article 5: nations are encouraged to introduce methods supporting the agreement’s framework, including payments for results and positive incentives towards: activities to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries.
Article 5: nations shall act to conserve and enhance their stores (sinks and reservoirs) of greenhouse gases, including forests.
Article 7: nations shall strengthen efforts to comply with the agreement by sharing info, good practices, experiences, and lessons learnt concerning their nation’s efforts, and developed nations agree to strengthen scientific knowledge of the climate for assisting informed decisions.
Article 7: nations accept the importance of international cooperation for adaptation efforts and the importance of taking the needs of developing nations into account, especially those vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.
Article 7: nations understand that adaptation involves and should be based on the best available science, and, where appropriate, traditional knowledge, knowledge of indigenous people and local knowledge systems, for integrating adaptation into relevant socioeconomic and environmental policies and actions, where appropriate.
Article 9: developed nations shall provide financial resources to help developing nations with mitigation, adaptation, and the continuance of their obligations under the agreement.
Article 9: the global stock-take measurement shall take into account relevant info provided by developed country nations.
Article 9: the nations agree for developed nations to provide financial assistance to developing nations, for assisting their commitments to the Agreement and also for assisting their continuance under the Agreement.
Article 9: developed nations shall provide transparent and consistent information about support they are able to offer to developing nations.
Article 9: developing nations are encouraged to provide support on a voluntary basis.
Article 10: nations appreciate the importance of technology development and transfer for improving the force and movement against climate change and for reducing greenhouse emissions.
Article 10: the nations agree to strengthen cooperative action on technology development and transfer because they appreciate technology’s usefulness to the Agreement’s aim.
Article 10: the Agreement has a technology framework for providing guidance to its Technology Mechanism that promotes and facilitates enhanced action on technology development and transfer to support the Agreement’s implementation for success in its long-term vision.
Article 10: support which may include financial support shall be provided to developing country nations for implementing the agreement but also technology development.
Article 10: Technology Mechanism and Financial Mechanism; the technology mechanism – supports/enables innovation and progression of the agreement’s aim; the financial mechanism – supports innovation by provision of funding; support for innovation may include support from these mechanisms, but the support for these are also available from outside of these mechanisms
Article 11: capacity building is the enhancing of a developing nation’s or a vulnerable nation’s capabilities to take effective climate change action: technology development dissemination and deployment, access to climate finance, relevant education, training and public awareness, and the transparent, timely and accurate communication of information.
Article 11: all nations must cooperate to cause the Agreement’s proper and effective operation within developing nations.
Article 12: nations shall co-operate for providing climate-change education, training, public awareness, public participation and public access to information for improvement of steps under the agreement.
Article 13: each nation shall regularly provide a report on anthropogenic emissions by sources, and the removal of greenhouse gases, and info useful for tracking progress in achieving its ambitions/goals.
Article 13: developed nations shall provide information on finance, technology and other support provided by them under the agreement, and, developing nations shall provide information on finance, technology and other support received under the agreement.
Article 14: a measurement of the general progress made (the global-stock-take) towards achieving the Agreement’s purpose shall occur every five years, with the first occurring in 2023.
Article 18: bodies for (1) scientific and technological advice and (2) for implementation – these bodies are to be educated on what the best of science has to offer (these two bodies are established by Articles 9 and 10 of the Agreement).
Article 25: where matters that concern the Agreement’s entrants require a decision, each nation, unless stated otherwise, shall have one vote towards reaching the decision.
Taking the provisions above into account, the nations in acceptance of the Agreement have agreed to begin and maintain action for lowering the volume of greenhouse gases emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere by their respective nations, where this is to be done gradually by means of mitigation and sustainability, and then, reliant on the best offerings of science and technology, rapidly, where energy sources that produce zero greenhouse gas emissions are relied on for energy instead of fossil fuels. The efforts of each individual nation coupled with their co-operation and support for other nations towards the same goal also counts as a joint responsibility for causing the greenhouse-gas-emissions of the world as a whole to be lowered.
The actions of the three modes of reduction requested by the Agreement will lead to the maximum (peak) greenhouse gas emissions of the Agreement’s nations being reached, to be followed by their gradual lowering towards zero emissions, mainly due to increasing the use of technology that produces zero emissions to provide energy and produce power.
With each nation of the Agreement (195 nations) performing their part (following the same pattern of action), the global volume of greenhouse gas emissions shall decrease to act as a resilience to the outcomes forecasted by the greenhouse effect theory, and the Agreement’s aim shall be being met.
The three modes of reduction requested by the Agreement are mitigation, sustainability, and rapid reductions.
Mitigation is where greenhouse gases are emitted but actions to cause the emissions to be withdrawn from the Earth’s atmosphere are taken. An example of mitigation is ‘Carbon Capture and Storage’ [CCS] technology which is able to capture around 90% of the carbon dioxide emitted during electricity generation and industrial processes to prevent its entrance into the Earth’s atmosphere. Another example is the replanting of greenlife so that by photosynthesis it feeds on the emitted carbon dioxide – this is said to be a process that makes biomass a renewable energy type.
Sustainability is where individuals or companies responsible for contributing emissions into the atmosphere are encouraged to emit less, by making less use of their emitting sources. This could be by encouraging the use of public transport instead of personal vehicles, or where a family rely on a single vehicle to travel and make fewer trips despite owning numerous vehicles. By encouraging less use of sources that make greenhouse emissions, the emissions into the atmosphere are lowered, within a nation, and within the Earth as a whole.
Rapid reductions are able to occur where technology that produces zero greenhouse-gas emissions are used to replace fossil fuels as energy sources, so that the energy required is provided but the emissions that fossil fuels would have emitted if relied on for the energy are not emitted at all. An example of a rapid reduction action is reliance on hydrogen-fuel-cell technology to power vehicles. Vehicles reliant on hydrogen for fuel are able to emit zero greenhouse emissions, instead the hydrogen gas’ waste is drinkable water and heat. Another example of a rapid reduction action is reliance on geothermal energy for generating electricity for homes and buildings, again, this source of energy and power generation produces zero greenhouse-gas-emissions.
Generally, the Agreement asks for nations to rely on mitigation and sustainability while rapid reductions are in less frequent use, but until rapid reductions are increased enough to no longer need to mitigate or sustain, after which human activities requiring energy shall no longer produce greenhouse gas emissions. This is to be done in conjunction with a plan which demonstrates the gradual reduction of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, including volumes of emissions, where each nation is to do as much as they can to cause absolute-emission-reduction.
Nationally-determined-contributions will be a nation’s declaration of how much a nation can do within a period of five years to lower the volume of their greenhouse gas emissions, with a goal of causing the nation to become zero-emissions in as short a space of time as possible. A nation’s nationally-determined-contribution is also known as its ‘ambition’ by the Agreement.
For the purpose of the Agreement’s aim the Agreement creates three things: (1) a community of nations working towards a single goal, (2) an international industry for alternative energy, and (3) an international marketplace where every nation can receive offers, from other nations or from companies.
From its provisions, the Paris Agreement creates a revolution on the world’s fossil fuel industry, where the fossil fuel industry should fade away after being heavily devalued in favour of the alternative energy industry which is to expand to replace it.
If the Agreement is performed perfectly, then as citizens of the world we can expect to notice a gradual decrease of interest in fossil fuel energy.
As an invitation to the alternative energy industry to begin replacing the fossil fuel energy industry as the world’s provider of power, and with the Agreement’s encouragement towards the development of new technology, we can expect to see companies offering power produced by, wind energy, solar energy, hydroelectric energy, hydrogen energy, geothermal energy, tidal energy, and in ways yet to be invented or discovered.
Wind-energy-formed power: produced when the wind’s kinetic energy forces the movement of turbines on windmills and then generators convert the movement into electricity. Technology has helped wind energy become the world’s fastest growing alternative energy source, by lowering its price and making it more competitive against other energy sources. Countries with large investments in wind energy technology include Germany, Denmark, Spain, Japan, and the USA.
Ocean-wave/tidal-energy-formed power: the density of the energy transported under the waves beneath the ocean’s surface is said to be around five times higher than the wind energy that forms it, meaning that there is a great amount of energy in a single ocean wave. In 2001 over 1000 different methods for acquiring wave energy from oceans were patented by wave energy companies, most of which failed to work. There remains a demand for methods of acquiring energy from oceans.
Hydroelectric-energy-formed power: flowing water creates energy that can be captured and turned into electricity, typically from a higher reservoir to a lower one. This is most commonly achieved by a dam on a river to store the water into a reservoir. Water is released from a reservoir to force a turbine to spin, which activates a generator to produce electricity. It has been found that a small canal is able to substitute a dam. Where a lower and higher reservoir are used instead of a dam, water released into the lower reservoir, for power, can be machine-pumped back into the higher reservoir again. The pumping system becomes a consumer of electricity due to the hydraulics and losses of electricity whilst pumping upwards, but still the system is very efficient (over 80%), and, with peak and off-peak price differences, can be very economical.
Solar-energy-formed power: solar panels consist of photo-voltaic (pV) cells able to convert sunlight into ‘direct-current’ [DC] electricity during times of sunlight. An inverter device converts the DC electricity that is generated, into ‘alternating-current’ [AC] electricity. The AC electricity is then sent from the inverter to an electrical panel, to power lights and appliances with what was solar energy. Sometimes an ‘electrical panel’ is called a ‘breaker box’.
Hydrogen-energy-formed power: hydrogen is the simplest and the most abundant element in the universe, but on Earth it does not occur naturally as a gas, instead it is found within organic compounds (hydrocarbons, like gasoline, natural gas, methanol and propane) including water. In specific conditions hydrogen is also produced by some algae and bacteria, relying on sunlight energy. Hydrogen is high in energy while producing zero pollution when burned. Hydrogen fuel cells are able to convert hydrogen’s chemical energy into electricity, with pure water and heat being the only by products. The hydrogen fuel cell technology has been expensive, but costs are expected to be resolved when demands cause that the technology is produced in mass.
Geothermal-energy-formed power: a renewable energy source reliant on the Earth’s heat. The heat can be obtained from close to the Earth’s surface or from heated rocks and reservoirs of hot water miles beneath the Earth’s surface. Geothermal power plants convert the Earth’s heat into electricity. A geothermal heat pump system is capable of obtaining geothermal energy from just 10 feet beneath the Earth’s surface to use for supplying heating to a nearby building, in the winter, or to keep it cool, during the summer. It is reported that 25% of Iceland’s electricity production comes from geothermal energy. Reports confirm that in 2013, geothermal energy accounted for just 0.04% of the electricity generated in the United States.
Renewable energy is generated from natural processes that continually replenish themselves, including sunlight, geothermal heat, wind, tides, water, and various forms of biomass. Renewable energy is energy that cannot be exhausted for constantly being renewed.
The types of power listed above are ‘alternative energy’ types as opposed to being ‘renewable energy’ types. The Paris Agreement requests that the nations distinguish between energy types to select alternative energy for producing their power.
The ‘alternative’ in alternative energy denotes that the energy is a direct alternative to fossil fuel energy. Alternative energy is harmless to the environment, differing to renewable energy which may or may not harm the environment. Biomass is an example of a renewable energy that harms the environment.
Of the power types listed the type likely to be the most noticed in the world is the hydrogen-energy-formed power, this is because this technology is capable of efficiently powering aircraft, watercraft and vehicles of the land too. If this technology becomes affordable, and we can expect that it shall, then crude oil will be made redundant very quickly, as there shall be far less demand for it. Similarly, the hydrogen-fuel-cell technology is capable of replacing coal for generating electricity too. If hydrogen-fuel-cell technology is the best technological offer of science as a replacement for fossil fuels, then by the Agreement it is this technology that the nations of the agreement are to support and promote and bring into general acceptance by the public for consumption.
Of the power types listed, the type most likely to go unnoticed despite being a smart option for replacing coal and natural gas for homes, is geothermal-energy-formed power. President of the Geothermal Resources Council board of directors, Maria Richards, explains that new homeowners may remain unaware for some time that their homes are powered by geothermal energy if it is the case. Jay Egg, a consultant for heating, ventilation and air conditioning, explains that unlike wind and solar farms, that geothermal energy gives no signs of its existence or its being of service once it has been installed.
Geothermal-energy-formed power is a thing for house buyers/sellers to think about, and it is something for individuals concerned with housing and construction to consider at the planning stage of their constructing, especially where housing is being constructed in a single area in multiples, because installation costs are minimised where geothermal energy is acquired to serve a community.
The opportunities provided by the Paris Agreement are enough to cause every alternative energy company in the world to expand nationally and internationally (including partnerships), and, where this shall occur, it will grant new job opportunities to people everywhere, and, competition between energy suppliers can be enhanced to the benefit of bill-payers.
The creation of positive-growth economics based on industries outside of a government’s territories causes governments to become concerned about the politics and affairs of other states. The Paris Agreement is capable of causing governments to focus on their own politics and affairs, to grow their economies, as jobs of the new industry become home-grown and the factors that concern their stability shall be home-based.
A reliance on geothermal energy to assist with the production of hydrogen gas may be a solution for reducing production costs. Investments in producing hydrogen may be in the interests of geothermal energy companies therefore.
As a side effect, the Paris Agreement promises cleaner air and reductions in the creation of smog, toxic air, and acid rain.
Toxic air is the concentration of poisonous gases and poisonous air particles (called ‘air toxics’) that pollute the air of a community or an area to cause serious health defects or adverse environmental effects. Air toxics can be gases, liquids or particles, and though some are released from natural sources like volcanoes and forest fires, most come about by human activity: transportation (cars, trucks and buses, etc.), outdoor power equipment, recreational vehicles, farm and construction equipment, boats, factories, refineries, power plants, building materials and cleaning solvents. Air toxics are transportable, arriving from one place to another with help from the wind. The USA’s Environmental Protection Agency lists some 187 toxic air pollutants.
Smog is formed when volatile organic compounds (sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides) that have been released into the atmosphere take part in photo-chemical reactions (reactions with sunlight) to form ground-level ozone. The compounds are released into the atmosphere as gases by numerous means, including when gasoline and diesel (fossil fuel energy) are burnt to power vehicles. Power plant and factory activities, and even consumer products (hairspray, chemical solvents, and plastic packaging) have also been known to contribute to the release of the volatile organic compounds.
Smog causes and aggravates respiratory health problems like asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis, and it has been responsible for causing eye irritations, and for reducing human resistance to colds and lung infections.
Acid rain is a term given to precipitation that has acidic components within it: precipitation can be wet (rainfall, snowfall, mist etc.) or dry (dusts); around 50% of acid rain particles fall as dry deposits. When sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide enter the Earth’s atmosphere and are moved from one place to another by wind and air currents, they react with water, oxygen and other chemicals to form sulphuric and nitric acids, and these acids mix with water and other substances before falling to the ground. Some of the sulphuric and nitric acids forming acid rain are from natural sources: volcanoes, but most come from the burning of fossil fuels to generate electricity. While acid rain is very weak in comparison to strong acids, acid rains are able to cause dying forests, dying fish, dead lakes (Scandinavia), deformed fish births, poisoned food chains (birds eat fish), damaged soil, and faster erosion (statues, buildings, pipes, cables, and vehicles). Acid rain can be considered as a single nation’s problem only, but studies have shown that 90% of one nation’s acid rain arrived to them from other nations further away, with assistance from the wind.
As a side effect, the Paris Agreement promises to devalue fossil fuels (crude oil, coal and natural gas).
In essence the Agreement calls for a revolution on the world’s use of fossil fuels, to make way for new sources of energy that do not reduce the Earth’s supplies of natural resources, boosting the alternative energy industry but marking the death of the fossil fuel industry it should replace.
The lack of interest in fossil fuels that shall come about by the Agreement’s performance may avert the need for geopolitical wars, so that the Agreement also promises some peace.
A need of energy to power transport remains one of the world’s biggest concerns, and alternative energy is able to offer a solution with hydrogen-fuel-cell technology. With the public’s educating on the many benefits of hydrogen-fuel-cell-technology, including emphasis on the benefits to the environment, where prices for electric vehicles relying on hydrogen gas are not extravagant, the public’s shift of interest towards electric vehicles of this kind can be expected.
The shift of interest towards hydrogen-powered vehicles may occur fastest in Asia where the public’s educating and preparations to offer the vehicles nationwide have already begun. The combination of interest in the vehicles and technology, and the availability of the same, multiplied within every nation reliant on fuel-powered transport, may prove to be the fastest route to reducing consumer-produced greenhouse-gas-emissions and bringing about the extinction of the fossil fuel industry for privately-owned vehicles. Steps towards meeting the Agreement’s goal of reducing the world’s interest in fossil fuels begins with shifting the public’s interest from fossil-fuel-powered transport: where the mindset of every individual is purposed to minimise and stop their use of fossil fuels, and alternative solutions are made available, a big part of the Agreement’s goal has already been achieved; if anthropogenic activity is behind the greenhouse effect then changing anthropgenic activity must form a part of the solution for preventing the greenhouse effect.
When it comes to a state’s decision for managing its prosperity and acting in the best interests of its citizens to increase its prosperity so that its citizens may benefit, the decision in question is best left to its officials and positioned individuals, those with the knowledge and vision of what the state intends to achieve and the best ways of bringing about the achievement of those things – especially if the decision makers have been democratically elected by the state’s citizens into their positions. So, as the President of the United States of America, President Trump was perfectly entitled to find that the Paris Agreement is unsuitable for the United States, and to act on his finding. President Trump’s decision itself also remains perfectly entitled to respect.
While the Paris Agreement may grant a wide range of benefits and opportunities to its entrants, it is an issue of management whether the benefits and opportunities are capitalised on, and in this respect the opportunities available to the entrants of the Agreement are equal where entrants of the Agreement are equal (developed/developing nation); entrants must compete for opportunities.
For a developed nation the Agreement would like to offer:
Prosperity for helping itself to become greenhouse-gas-emission free
Prosperity for helping developing nations to become greenhouse-gas-emission free
Access to business opportunities with a community of 190+ other nations to network with
Opportunities to show competence in achieving an agreed goal
Opportunities to demonstrate how its success can be achieved, to the 190+ other nations
Opportunities to demonstrate how its success might be improved, to the 190+ other nations
Opportunities to promote the innovation and inventions offered by its companies
Growth within the worldwide alternative-energy market
Access to reared developing-nation customers having a wide range of needs
The Agreement is best able to reward nations that show the fastest rates of progress within their own nations, so that achieving more will become an advantage to those nations that do so.
The Agreement’s primary reward to a nation is an increased independence from international suppliers of energy, which shall become 100% independence once fossil-fuels are no longer relied on for energy. The transition towards 100% independence from international suppliers of energy shall create home-grown jobs and employment reliant on home issues for the nation.
The demands for commodities such as electricity, heating, and fuel, are unlikely to fade; our lives require them, but, the demand for the energy that creates these commodities is destined to change, for numerous reasons. The world’s change from fossil fuel energy to alternative energy can be expected to occur gradually and not overnight, so, an example of good management for a person whose work is currently within the fossil fuel industry but who does not want to become a victim of the changes, could be to renew their skills in favour of another industry or the new industry, where this is done in advance of the change’s completion. The world’s leaders are aware of the strong possibility of changes to the energy-supplying industry due to the advancement of technology; their good management may ensure that opportunities for workers of the fossil fuel industry to renew their skills are made available.
While a resilience to expected increases in the Earth’s temperature is a direct goal of the Agreement, and while perfect performance of the Agreement may offer a minute reduction in temperature across 100 years, there are other good outcomes that would follow the world’s pursuit of a world free from greenhouse-gas emissions, such as cleaner and healthier and more natural air for the entire Earth, the reduced demand for fossil fuel energy and our independence from it (what is a geopolitical conflict?), the eradication of smog, the eradication of toxic air, and less occurrences of acid rain, these things plus the world’s updated technological advancement.
Nations have a lot to benefit from the Paris Agreement and may see it as being a great deal worth diving into for prosperity and other benefits, in which case the Paris Agreement’s reflection of offers gives the impression that as an agreement it is very good news.
Looking back at why the Paris Agreement is here now, John Coleman has provided details of the history; an academic article authored by a scientist alarmed the US government and prompted their undertaking of research into the greenhouse effect and global warming, it later led to a United Nations initiative program, and, despite the scientist said to have alarmed the US government producing new research that responded to his previous work and the US government’s fears, the US government chose to ignore what he said so that instead of calming down to grow they would continue with their alarm and alarm others too. These facts indicate that the US government has had an alternative agenda to the one that they have presented to the world about global warming.
If we analyse the information of climatologists who are able to explain that there has been no significant global warming despite increased rates of greenhouse-gas emissions in recent years, and who can explain, that despite increases in greenhouse-gas emissions that there has been global cooling, then we are able to ask ourselves what possible data could the “scientists” informing the world about global warming possibly be relying on?
If we analyse the situation of scientists rebelling against the global warming movement in their thousands, we can ask ourselves if we have been being lied to by the United Nations and the US government who have for years fed us with the global warming stories to alarm the world. Again, what data could be being relied on to convince the world that global warming is real?
Any agreement that is able to offer an improvement to the prosperity of its entrants gives reason to be seen as good news, and the Paris Agreement is able to offer its entrants new and greater interests in products from the alternative energy and fossil fuel industries, new employment opportunities for their companies, national and international growth for their alternative energy companies, improved job security through home-grown jobs, international trade opportunities and renewed international relations, cleaner air, new and exciting technology, and access to a world of other business opportunities.
The origin of the world’s interest in the paris agreement goes back to theories about a greenhouse effect that would cause global warming if volumes of carbon dioxide emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere become so much that the volume of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere becomes too much for the Earth to absorb. This is a theory that was less possible to test during the 1950s when it was reintroduced, but which has been testable since and has been tested by many scientists to find that there is no connection between carbon dioxide levels (or greenhouse gas levels) and variations of the Earth’s temperature as thought. As a theory, the very scientist who reintroduced it and suggested that a time in the future was likely to provide perfect circumstances for testing it, also doubted its correctness.
Numerous scientists who have analysed data concerning the greenhouse effect theory have found that the theory is flawed and fails, they have also speculated as to why the theory has been relied on in light of evidence disproving its correctness, and they have noted the theory’s use for causing the world to fear what the future holds for the Earth’s inhabitants.
Scientists have not been leading the world’s global warming movement, it has been the US government; they created it and caused its momentum, deceiving the world for an agenda that exists but which has remained unclear to most people.
With high percentages of people in belief of global warming being a real threat and that it is caused by human activities, the Paris Agreement comes as a welcomed solution to the problem, and as a stand against doing nothing to resolve the perceived problem.
As entrants to an agreement based on a scientific theory that real scientists have already exposed as a falsity, nations should consider the influence that led them into the agreement and why they have been invited to agree, since the apparent reason is certainly not the actual reason.
Entrants to the Paris Agreement are able to notice that the agreement wants to offer a great amount of prosperity, but it could be wise to consider why, and why the offer has been made available at this time.
The incentives into the Paris Agreement include: the needs/circumstances of nations deemed vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, the eradication of poverty, food security and the ending of hunger, and the importance of education, training, public awareness and public participation.
Sir Henry is a writer of literature that concerns biblical scriptures and his writings are available for reading and free downloading via his twitter account ‘@PublishedBy_Sir’. Sir Henry advocates for a religious kind of doctrine that justifies a belief that Jesus Christ is not really the Son of God but that another person is. Sir Henry frequently refers to Psalm 37, but has also referred to Psalm 109 and Malachi 3 and 4 to make points.
Sir Henry’s views make the Paris Agreement interesting because the agreement seems to respond to things that have been prophesied in prophecies that he has highlighted as being important. For example, in Psalm 37, it is mentioned that it shall be a punishment from God when food becomes less available in some geographic locations, and, that while some locations are without food for its people that others shall be satisfied with food, as a way of differentiating between those who are wicked from those who are righteous. Readers are left to speculate as to how God might bring these things about during the appointed time.
There may be a similarity between the greenhouse effect theory and the punishments that can be expected from God in accordance with Psalm 37. For example, in order to cause food shortages, can increased temperatures and decreased volumes of rain be expected in some places? The Paris Agreement’s drafters had food shortages in contemplation when it was drafted – they have mentioned that prevention of hunger and the creation of food safety as an aim.
The US government has insisted on pushing an education about global warming upon the Earth’s people despite evidence proving that the theory is incorrect. Could it be that the US government is waiting for the prophecy within Psalm 37 to come to pass to say yes they were right and global warming is proved correct as a theory? If so it would mean that the US government is relying on the greenhouse effect theory to mis-educate the Earth’s people from understanding acts of God, which would be an intention to meddle with the conscientiousness of mankind to prevent our knowledge of God.
According to Sir Henry, Psalm 109 says that helping the nation or nations that God selects for punishment, because he has judged them for their wickedness, will be an offence to God and a punishable offence.
Sir Henry has relied on Malachi 3 to explain that God has a program for causing repentance, which could mean that where blessed nations begin helping nations that God has punished, that they shall be interfering with God’s program for repentance.
The Paris Agreement was chiefly introduced by President Obama, one of the United States’ most popular presidents, if not the most popular, but its deemed importance was worked on by the US government long before Barack Obama became President. As the very first black president in the lifetimes of many black people, ‘miraculous’ and ‘heaven-sent’ might be the dreamy idea, and the influence of President Obama has certainly been respected and far-reaching. If things remain as they are, then history will record that the United States and President Obama led the world into disobeying God, which is the beginning of a rebellion.
The Paris Agreement obligates its entrants to provide help of all sorts and kinds to nations that may be victims of God’s anger, in which case, these are nations that it shall be punishable to provide assistance to. It means that Sir Henry’s understanding of biblical scriptures indicates that the Paris Agreement shall be an instrument that causes curses from God to be received by individuals or nations or both, for helping nations that God insists should not be helped.
The Paris Agreement mentions the educating of the public and public participation. These call for the mis-teachings about the greenhouse effect to be echoed further in order to blind more people about the truth, to inspire more people to commit offences against God.
Sir Henry has relied on biblical information to understand that God is called ‘JAH’.
The Agreement can very easily be presented as a special deal for its entrants, and as unbelievably good news too, because on analyse it appears to offer gifts of prosperity to every nation and it appears to offer gifts of improved living to every inhabitant of the Earth too, but the views granting these appearances are caused by a false alarm; the greenhouse effect is an incorrect theory and its acceptance as a correct theory opposes a consciousness of God. The likelihood of the greenhouse effect being accepted as a correct theory is enhanced by a lack of knowledge of prophecies which detail God’s plans including how he intends to punish and cause repentance, and where this occurs there is a danger for world leaders and their nations because they shall be completely blind to the consequences of perfectly performing the Agreement.
From the perspective of one who is aware of the Agreement as well as the relevant prophecies, the idea of a mirage called ‘prosperity’ is plausible, because what prosperity can there possibly be where the very “prosperity” creates condemnation from God? The Agreement looks like a mouse trap – it is too good to be true.
The initiative to reduce carbon emissions is likely to be perfectly acceptable for the reason of producing cleaner air, but also for devaluing fossil fuel energy. For these reasons the actions for introducing the alternative energy industry on an international level are acceptable without need of deceit, and actions for this purpose ought to occur at some stage.
The Paris Agreement is capable of causing offences to God and a wise nation ought to be mindful of causing offences, so, since the Agreement cannot be performed perfectly without offending God, it requires redrafting. The modernisation of the energy industry is not a bad thing, but if it cannot be done without offending God then it would be better not to engage with it at all.
On the face of it, the Agreement appears to offer prosperity, but it needs to be realised that the agreement is capable of causing great poverty.
The Paris Agreement is a lot of good news but a lot of bad news too, with the bad news capable of outweighing the good. In its current draft, the Agreement is a bad deal for every nation that shall be obligated to provide help in defiance or ignorance of things requested by God.
The global warming theory had been proved false long before the Paris Agreement was introduced to the world as a solution to global warming, and, the world’s motivation to act on the basis of a theory known to be false is an example of the world being misled.
The alternative energy industry, from what science says, is perfectly good, offering products that are capable of improving our lives and the world too
Based on the world’s interest in the Paris Agreement, the world is greatly interested in the alternative energy industry’s international expansion.
The Paris Agreement is mostly good because it helps to bring around the alternative energy industry, but it is flawed for being based on a falsity, and because it encourages the re-teaching of that falsity to the rest of the world in order to conceal the truth of God’s work as explained in Psalm 37 and Psalm 109.
The Paris Agreement is flawed because it shall prompt nations that God blesses, to ruin their relationship with God by helping other nations that he has not blessed and that he either wants to punish or cause to repent.
World leaders should become acquainted with the knowledge of God’s plans and the way that he intends to bless, punish and communicate, this will help them to make decisions that are beneficial to the people that they lead and represent.
The world should acknowledge the incorrectness of the global warming theory, and it should also acknowledge who its misleader is and has been. While it may be unclear why the misleader misleads during the present, the future may make why perfectly clear.
The Paris Agreement should be re-drafted to omit the false ideas and the educating of others into accepting the false ideas, and to omit every obligation or inspiration to do acts that would be responded to by God in ways that are unfavourable.
Where world leaders are unable to discriminate so that they do not become responsible for punishable acts, it would be best if they would abandon the Paris Agreement and any agreement that forbids the same.
The Paris Agreement is good news as an initiative that brings about a revolution of the world’s energy industry so that the whole world can begin relying on alternative energy for creating power, but the Paris Agreement is bad news because it is based on a lie that it encourages to be re-taught and retold in order to conceal God from the world during a time when the people of the world ought to be increasing their consciousness of God in order to become closer to God. The main reason why the Paris Agreement is bad news is because God can be expected to react to the world’s disobedience and rebellion against him. In business and in economics, God matters.
The health of our planet’s people could be increased so that we generally live for longer and so that we live more healthily during our lifetimes. For these reasons an initiative that causes the devaluation of the tobacco industry so that it fades like the fossil fuel industry is calculated to, would also be a great initiative.
Covering the subjects within this writing was made easier due to the efforts of many others having expertise where #DavidWest28 does not. #DavidWest28 would like to thank every person who has contributed to the subjects within this writing, including each of our sources listed below. We hope that reading this writing was as fun for you as it was for us to write.
- www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com, “Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere And Ocean And The Question Of An Increase Of Atmospheric CO2During The Past Decades”, R. Revelle and H. Suess (accessed: 22 October 2017)
- Cosmos: A Journal of Emerging Issues Volume 5, “What To Do about Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap”, R. Revelle, F. Singer, and C. Starr (accessed: 29 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Global Warming Is A Blatant Lie & This Video Scientifically Proves It”, A. Alexander (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Professor Judith Curry Quits Over Climate “Craziness””, 1000frolly (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Al Gore Sued By Over 30,000 Scientists For Global Warming Fraud John Coleman”, kduron2082 (accessed: 23 October 2017)
- Revelle Research papers
- www.youtube.com, “Tables Turned: Scientist Judith Curry And Author Mark Steyn Question, School Sen Markey On Climate”, The Harry Read Me File (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.npr.org, “So What Exactly Is In The Paris Climate Accord?”, C. Domonoske (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.wired.co.uk, “What Is The Paris Climate Agreement And Who Has Signed It?”, A. Simon-Lewis (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Dr. Judith Curry Explains The Reality Of Bad Climate Science And Bad Politics”, Oppenheimer Ranch Project (accessed: 8 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Must Watch: Climatologist Breaks The Silence On Global Warming Groupthink”, Corbettreport (accessed: 26 October 2017)
- www.uk.businessinsider.com, “Here’s What The US Actually Agreed To In The Paris Climate Deal”, R. Harrington (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.aljazeera.com, “Paris Climate Agreement: What You Need To Know”, Aljazeera.com (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.vox.com, “4 Things To Know About The Paris Climate Agreement”, B. Resnick (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.unfccc.int, “The Paris Agreement Document”, United Nations (accessed: 8 October 2017)
- www.worldwildlife.org, “Effects Of Climate Change”, World Wildlife Organisation (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.nature.org, “Climate Change Threats And Solutions”, The Nature Conservancy (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.archive.epa.gov, “Greenhouse Gases”, United States Environmental Protection Agency (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.whatsyourimpact.org, “What Are Greenhouse Gases?”, What’s Your Impact? (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “Overview Of Greenhouse Gases”, United States Environmental Protection Agency (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.public.wmo.int, “Greenhouse Gas Concentrations Surge To New Record”, World Meteorological Organisation (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.theguardian.com, “UN Warns Of ‘Unacceptable’ Greenhouse Gas Emissions Gap”, The Guardian (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.livescience.com, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Causes & Sources”, M. Lallanilla (accessed: 17 November 2017 )
- www.c2es.org, “Main Greenhouse Gases”, Center For Climate And Energy Systems (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Does Carbon Dioxide Cause Climate Change”, Philosophical Investigations (accessed: 16 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “Hazardous Air Pollutants”, United States Environmental Protection Agency (accessed: 14 November 2017)
- www.theguardian.com, “Top US Firms Including Walmart And Ford Oppose Trump On Climate Change”, R. Luscombe (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.c-span.org, “President Obama On Paris Climate Agreement”, National Cable Satellite Corporation (accessed: 9 November 2017)
- www.fortune.com, “The Real Reason Trump Left The Paris Agreement”, M. Mills (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.blog.ballard.com, “Advantages Of Hydrogen Energy For Europe: 5 Compelling Arguments”, O. Uluc (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.edie.net, “Fuel For thought: Will 2017 Be The Year Of The Zero-Emission Fuel-Cell Vehicle?”, Edie Newsroom (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.beta.marketrealist.com, “What Paris Climate Agreement Means For Fuel Cells And Solar Energy”, R. Scott (accessed: 9 November 2017)
- www.hssmi.org, “Hydrogen Fuel Cells – Where Are We Now?”, F. Harrington (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.forbes.com, “Top 10 Global Warming Lies That May Shock You”, J. Taylor (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.independent.co.uk, “Is Climate Change Real, And Is The World Actually Getting Warmer?”, I. Johnston (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.oilprice.com, “Why Is Big Oil Backing The Paris Climate Agreement?”, T. Paraskova (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.bloomberg.com, “Exxon and Conoco Reiterate Support For Paris Climate Deal”, J. Caroll and A. Nussbaum (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.fortune.com, “Energy Companies Face Big Risks From Paris Climate Deal”, V. Walt (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.motherboard.vice.com, “What The Paris Climate Agreement Means For Big Oil”, S. Emerson (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.computerworld.com, “Coal Plummets To 1978 Levels As Renewables Climb”, L. Mearian (accessed: 11 November 2017)
- www.instituteforenergyresearch.org, “Killing An American Industry: Coal”, Institute For Energy Research (accessed: 11 November 2017)
- https://cfpub.epa.gov, “Energy Use”, United States Environmental Protection Agency (accessed: 11 November 2017)
- www.prnewswire.com, “Global Coal Industry 2013-2018: Trends, Profits and Forecast Analysis”, Research and Markets (accessed: 11 November 2017)
- www.worldcoal.org, “Uses Of Coal”, World Coal Association (accessed: 1 November 2017)
- www.visualcapitalist.com, “The Oil Market is Bigger Than All Metal Markets Combined”, J. Desjardins (accessed: 10 November 2017)
- www.worldcoal.org, “Coal Market & Pricing”, World Coal Organisation (accessed: 10 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “What The Media Isn’t Telling You About Climate Change”, Skeptic Global (accessed: 4 December 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “What Is Acid Rain?”, United States Environmental Protection Agency (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.projects.ncsu.edu, “Acid Rain”, Young Peoples Trust for the Environment (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.conserve-energy-future.com, “What Is Acid Rain?”, Conserve Energy Future (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.thoughtco.com, “Acid Rain (The Causes, History, And Effects of Acid Rain)”, A. Briney (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.bbc.co.uk, “The Acid Rain Problem”, BBC GCSE Bitesize (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.mass.gov, “Toxic Air Pollutants”, The Executive Office Of Energy and Environmental Affairs (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.theguardian.com, “Global Pollution Kills 9m A Year And Threatens ‘Survival Of Human Societies’”, D. Carrington (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.thesun.co.uk, “Dirty Diesel Toxic Air Kills 40,000 People In The UK Every Year, Study Reveals”, N. McDermott (accessed: 4 November 2017)
- www.thoughtco.com, “The Causes And Effects of Smog”, L. West (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.sciencedaily.com, “Smog”, Science Daily (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.conserve-energy-future.com, “What Is Smog?”, Conserve Energy Future (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.wonderopolis.org, “What Is Smog?”, National Center for Families Learning (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.nationalgeographic.org, “Smog”, National Geographic (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.livescience.com, “What’s Smog?”, A. Thompson (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.healthline.com, “The Dangers Of Smog: What You Need To Know About Air Pollution”, Healthline Editorial Team (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.eia.gov, “FAQS: What Is The Difference Between Crude Oil, Petroleum Products, And Petroleum?”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.collinsdictionary.com, “Definition Of ‘Anthropogenic’”, Collins English Dictionary (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.dictionary.com, “Anthropogenic”, Dictionary.com (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.vocabulary.com, “Anthropogenic”, Vocabulary.com Dictionary (accessed: 2 November 2017)
- www.extension.psu.edu, “What Is Renewable Energy?”, D. Ciolkosz (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.encyclopedia.com, “Renewable Energy”, Encyclopedia.com (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.solarcity.com, “How Does Solar Energy Work?”, Solar City (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.energystorage.org, “Pumped Hydroelectric Storage”, Energy Storage Association (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.twitter.com, “What Is His Name?”, Sir Henry David Best (accessed: 8 November 2017)
- www.renewableenergyworld.com, “Hydropower Technology And Types Of Hydroelectric Power Plants”, Renewable Energy World (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.energyeducation.ca, “Energy Density”, J. Hanania, B. Heffernan, J. Jenden, R. Leeson, T. Mah, J. Martin, K. Stenhouse, and J. Donev (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.britannica.com, “Renewable Energy”, N. Selin (accessed: 30 October 2017)
- www.renewableenergyworld.com, “Ocean Energy”, Renewable Energy World (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.energyinformative.org, “How Does Ocean Wave Power Work?”, M. Maehlum (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.science.howstuffworks.com, “How Ocean Power Works”, W. Harris (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.corporate.vattenfall.com, “Facts About Ocean Energy”, Vattenfall (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.ourworld.enu.edu, “How Things Work: Ocean Energy Making Waves”, M. Esteban and D. Leary (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.altenergy.org, “Renewable Energy”, Altenergy.org (accessed: 17 October 2017)
- www.bbc.co.uk, “Renewable Energy Sources”, GCSE Bitesize (accessed: 17 October 2017)
- www.businessfeed.sunpower.com, “7 Types Of Renewable Energy To Support Commercial Sustainability”, Sunpower (accessed: 17 October 2017)
- www.phys.org, “What Are The Different Types Of Renewable Energy?”, M. Williams (accessed: 17 October 2017)
- www.express.co.uk, “’Global Warming The Greatest Scam In History’ Claims Founder Of Weather Channel”, J. Taylor (accessed: 23 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Obama Full Speech on Paris Climate Agreement”, ABC News (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.commondreams.org, “Electric Cars and Surging Solar Spell Market Doom for Fossil Fuels”, J. Corbett (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.belco.bm, “What Are Fossil Fuels?”, Ascendant Group (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.study.com, “What Are Fossil Fuels? – Definition, Advantages & Disadvantages”, R. Gillaspy (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.sciencedaily.com, “Fossil Fuels”, Wikipedia (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.britannica.com, “Fossil Fuel”, O. Kopp (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.energy.gov, “Fossil”, United States Department Of Energy (accessed: 24 October 2017)
- www.desmoblog.com, “The Deniers? The World Renowned Scientist Who Got Al Gore Started”, R. Littlemore (accessed: 23 October 2017)
- www.co2science.org, “How Long Ago Did Scientists Suspect Global Warming Might Occur From Greenhouse Gas Emissions?”, A. Moritz (accessed: 22 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Nobel Laureate Smashes The Global Warming Hoax”, 1000frolly (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “The Global Warming Is A Business, Must see. Full Documentary”, MrConsciencieux (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Founder Of The Weather Channel Explains How The Global Warming Scare Began”, Indicrat (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.obamawhitehouse.archives.gov, “Statement By The President On The Paris Climate Agreement”, President Obama of the United States (accessed: 21 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Obama Paris Agreement Speech Action On Climate Change That Trump Ended”, Tony’s – 24/7 Eyes (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “President Donald Trump Withdraw From Paris Accord Agreement Press Conference Climate Change Decision”, PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP NEWS & LIVE SPEECH 2017 (accessed: 18 October 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “Liquid Hydrogen–The Fuel Of Choice For Space Exploration”, B. Granath (accessed: 18 November 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “Fuel Cells: A Better Energy Source for Earth and Space”, J. Fitzgerald and N. O’Bryan (accessed: 18 November 2017 )
- www.nasa.gov, “Space Applications of Hydrogen and Fuel Cells”, N. Bray (accessed: 18 November 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “Technology Drives Exploration”, N. Bray (accessed: 18 November 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “Fuel Cell Use In The Space Shuttle”, K. Zona (accessed: 18 November 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “Regenerative Fuel Cells, Energy Storage Systems Being Developed for Space Applications”, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Television (accessed: 18 November 2017)
- www.brookings.edu, “Trump’s Paris Agreement Withdrawal: What It Means And What Comes Next”, W. Galston, S. Gross, M. Muro, T. Roberts, R. Tongia, D. Victor, P. Wallach, R. Winthrop, C. Kwauk, N. Hultman, T. Stern, and V. Thomas (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- www.brookings.edu, “Paris Agreement Enjoys More Support Than Donald Trump”, W. Galston (accessed: 17 October 2017)
- www.technologyreview.com, “Exiting Paris Climate Accords Would Exact A Steep Global Cost”, J. Temple (accessed: 17 November 2017)
- Renewable Energy Policies: In The Case Of The EU And Turkey by S. Şekercioğlu, T. Uyar, and M. Yilmaz (accessed: 3 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “Petroleum & Other Liquids”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “FAQ: How Much Oil Consumed By The United States Comes From Foreign Countries?”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “FAQ: How Much Petroleum Does The United States Import And Export?”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “U.S. Natural Gas Imports By Country”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “U.S. Natural Gas Imports & Exports 2016”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.epa.gov, “Where Does The United States Export The Most Coal?”, United States Energy Information Administration (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.americangeosciences.org, “How Much Coal Does The U.S. Export And Import?”, American Geosciences Institute (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.heritage.org, “Paris Climate Promise: A Bad Deal for America”, S. Groves (accessed: 25 November 2017)
- www.thehill.com, “Paris Climate Agreement Was A Bad Economic Deal”, L. Smith (accessed: 25 November 2017)
- www.washingtonexaminer.com, “The Paris Climate Agreement Was A Terrible Deal For The US”, C. Harbin (accessed: 25 November 2017)
- www.theguardian.com, “Donald Trump Confirms US Will Quit Paris Climate Agreement”, (accessed: 25 November 2017)
- www.vox.com, “Trump Is Pulling The US Out Of The Paris Climate Agreement. Some Men Just Want To Watch The World Burn.”, B. Resnick (accessed: 25 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “President Bush Calls For More Hydrogen Vehicle Research”, AP Archives (accessed: 26 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Science Proving Climate Change Is Not Man-Made”, Strengthen The US (accessed: 20 October 2017) [relevant but not relied on]
- www.skepticalscience.com, “What Is Global Warming And The Greenhouse Effect?”, K. Judd (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.livescience.com, “What Is the Greenhouse Effect?”, M. Lallanilla (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.whatsyourimpact.org, “What Is Global Warming?”, What’s Your Impact (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.nationalgeographic.com, “What Is Global Warming?”, National Geographic Society (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.columbia.edu, “The Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming”, Columbia University (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.lenntech.com, “History Of The Greenhouse Effect And Global Warming”, S.M. Enzler (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.royalsociety.org, “The Basics of Climate Change”, The Royal Society (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.ucsusa.org, “Global Warming Impacts”, Union Of Concerned Scientists (accessed: 19 November 2017)
- www.citylab.com, “Welcome To The Steam-Powered Suburbs”, A. Solomon (accessed: 15 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Climate Change Is A Real Problem. NewGenCoal Is All About Solutions”, Newgencoal (accessed: 14 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “Why Can’t We Deal With Climate Change Simply By Replacing Coal?”, Newgencoal (accessed: 14 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “How Does Carbon Capture & Storage Work?”, Newgencoal (accessed: 14 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “How Does Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Works?”, (accessed: 14 November 2017)
- www.our-energy.com, “Ocean Energy”, H. Davor (accessed: 29 October 2017)
- www.forbes.com, “Where America Gets Its Oil: The Top 10 Foreign Suppliers Of Crude To The U.S.”, R. Rapier (accessed: 28 November 2017)
- www.twitter.com, “The Thief That God Caught”, Sir Henry David Best (accessed: 9 October 2017)
- www.eia.gov, “Oil Imports And Exports”, United States Energy Information Administration (access: 28 November 2017)
- www.eia.gov, “U.S. Imports From Venezuela Of Crude Oil And Petroleum Products”, United States Energy Information Administration (access: 28 November 2017)
- www.eia.gov, “Natural Gas Imports and Exports”, United States Energy Information Administration (access: 28 November 2017)
- www.ccsassociation.org, “What Is CCS?”, Carbon Capture & Storage Association (access: 14 November 2017)
- www.theguardian.com, “EPA Ruling On Aircraft Emissions Paves Way For New Regulations”, Guardian Environment Network (accessed: 5 November 2017)
- www.nasa.gov, “NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses”, Maria-Jose Vinas (accessed: 7 November 2017)
- Journal of Glaciology Volume 61, “Mass Gains Of The Antarctic Ice Sheet Exceed Losses”, H. Zwally, J. Li, J. Robbins, J. Saba, D. Yi, and A. Brenner (accessed: 7 November 2017)
- www.notrickszone.com, “Antarctica Has Been Gaining Ice, LoweringSea Level For Centuries”, K. Richard (accessed: 7 November 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “NASA – The “Mystery” Of Antarctic Cooling”, 1000frolly (accessed: 18 December 2017)
- www.youtube.com, “TOYOTA Fuel Cell – How Does It Work?”, Toyota Europe (accessed: 20 December 2017)