Screw Washington: Massachusetts to join alliance for Paris Agreement

Matt Viser posts a copy of Gov. Baker's statement that Massachusetts will join the new US Climate Alliance, announced yesterday by the governors of New York, California and Washington state to uphold and go beyond the Paris Agreement on climate change. Baker is, of course, a Republican; the other governors are Democrats.

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

Comments

Talk is cheap

If he continues to play the "I'm a climate guy game" while continuing to fellate the Koch brothers on destroying our transit system, I ain't going to trust him.

You up past your bedtime, dear?

" "I'm a climate guy game" while continuing to fellate the Koch brothers on destroying our transit system"

No need to do anything with the Koch brothers. Just wait for a snowy day. It'll destroy itself. Unless you believe the MBTA signaling problems are caused by global warming or Koch (a word I haven't heard in a while...) or Russians or something other than old signaling systems that need a good upgrade.

You new here DMC honey?

The reason the T falls apart is ... CHARLIE BAKER!

Go look it up, darling - his looting and bathtub drowning of the T goes back to the Weld Administration.

CHARLIE BAKER is the father of FORWARD FUNDING - the way that BIG DIG CAR TUNNEL CONTRACTOR OVERRUN DEBT ended up with the MBTA and the MITIGATIONS that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REQUIRED (cough GLX cough) were never built!

Sorry if history and facts are as tough for you as reality and citations. http://archive.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/06/13/b...

Yes, dear...

...that's a perfect explanation of why AG's such an accomplished rhyming headline writing fool...
Although, I'm still waiting patiently for him to rhyme with 'Orange', a line that's had its share of problems.

Now, get some sleep, you're having problems controlling your caps key.

What?

By on

We don't need Orange to rhyme.
The trains just have to run on time.

Just looked through

the Globe article.

My take? Baker did a good job of keeping the Big Dig from turning into an epic clusterf*ck of fail.

Course, that's just a Globe article and not a real analysis of the financing situation at the time...to use your eponymous standard. The Globe is hardly a 'citation'.

The Big Dig is a clusterf**k, as it is.

By on

While I understand the objectives of the Big Dig (i. e. to re-route the traffic around the periphery of town, as opposed to right through the heart of town), the whole thing has made already-horrible situations far worse, and depressing the Central Artery by putting it underground, really didn't help much, if at all.

Well, the elevated roadway is

By on

Well, the elevated roadway is gone. We now have the greenway instead. Along with a better view and more open access towards the water? That's all good in my eyes. Yes, I'm focusing on the positives here. I know the financial burden on the T never should have happened and it along with inept management is killing the T.

If we don't control co2, Seaport will get wet sometimes

As far as I can see it seems like the big problem for Boston will be that the buildings in the seaport will see a little more flooding. At least that's what they are showing by building 100 year structures down there. The mitigation is they need to be pumped out occasionally.

Of course they will cooperate with the city to regulate everybody else out of their waterfront office land, and regulate the middle class off ownership of houses on the cape.

If you really want to worry about something look up the Carrington Event. That will wipe out 90% of Bostons population. Climate change, a little warmer, a little wetter, much greener.

Your qualifications

In climate science, mitigation, adaptation, etc. - your qualifications are ... what again?

Opinions and beliefs (the way I see it!) have limitations ... for more important understanding of the subject TRY SCIENCE!

Who should I trust here

The actions of giant corporations spending $100m on their corporate headquarters or somebody with enough free time to babble on the internet all day?

So you don't trust yourself?

Honey, I've been way too busy at my JOB as a CLIMATE and HEALTH scientist to babble like you do.

I challenge you to find even lunchtime posts as of late ... but ... oh ... wait ... that would mean that you would have to produce actual data and facts to support your beliefs and opinions. You seem quite incapable of understanding anything like that...

Here's a tip: maybe you should educate yourself about the likely effects of climate change so that you can prepare for them? Perhaps look into the many websites that have tools for projecting the effects and consequences? That discuss mitigation (that's reduction of emissions) and the adaptations (ways to limit or protect ourselves from the effects of changes currently underway) that our rapidly changing climate require?

That's most of what states are doing - adaptation - because we are in for it even if you and others top emitting - and producing - CO2 today. It also isn't going to be "just a little wet sometimes". We are already there. We are also averaging 15-20 days over 90F a year now (6 year average), while the historic number (pre 2000) was 8-10. Expect 22-25 by mid century.

But, hey, what do I know - I only have a Ph.D. and get paid good money to learn about these things.

"babble on the internet all day?"

Well, since it's night time, I guess I'm in the clear. See, the problem is if it's not a 'really big crisis' then Swirl's out of a job lecturing us peons about how we should think.

OK, in no particular order...Oh ya, the Carrington event was real. We haven't been hit with such a strong magnetic blast since then. Before then? Well, we would not have had the technology to detect it. Now, I was reading something a few years ago about detecting powerful magnetic storms in the past from rock such as magnetite, but I'm not sure where the current (LOL) research is at.
It's not a planet killer if we play our cards right...a few hours notice buys us the ability to disconnect large transformers (the real Achilles Heel) from the grid to protect them from induced currents. Ground out the system or place some type of sacrificial resistor at the end to absorb the current. Much of the internet is glass fiber, so no problem there. Transportation? Well, if your car's computers are in metal boxes, they might survive. The large effects of a Carrington are in large grids. Small grids will get a lot less induced currents. If worst comes to worst, the National Guard can deliver a bunch of MRE to any stranded population. NG, like all military vehicles are EMD hardened, special grounding and stuff like shielded wiring.

See? As Douglas Adams said, 'Don't panic'.

As far as the rest of it? Well, the Paris Accord wasn't about global warming, it's about large money transfers and other shenanigans. I can spent an hour backing that up, but I'll save it for the next time I post on the subject.
The Kyoto Accord, which we shot down, called for some progress. The only country that succeeded in meeting the goals, irrelevant that they are because it wasn't passed? The US. Voluntarily. Not bad, eh?

Oh, all the carbon reduction programs in the world won't stop Boston from sinking into the ocean...See, many years ago, the seas were lower and glaciers covered New England. Because of climate change, the glaciers melted, the seas rose, the mastodons died and left a tusk in Massachusetts Bay for a fisherman to dredge up and give to the Bath Maritime Museum, and the land was relieved of all that heavy ice weight.

So, naturally, the land bounced back up, away from the ocean.
Parts of Maine are still bouncing back up, but it's not really Governor LePage's fault.
Massachusetts is sinking into the ocean. This is not caused by the Koch brothers or a lack of bicycles. It's just geology.
We're sinking about a millimeter a year, an inch in 25 years. So, I guess planning for that is a good idea no matter what.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/Q5ttc0c.jpg)

Oh, "You seem quite incapable of understanding anything like that..."
See, when she says stuff like that, she's trying to establish her superiority over you. Don't let it rattle you. Go online, read what you want. She's smart, but rather annoying. She's here to lecture, not discuss. When she has a problem making a point, she goes all personal with insults. It's how she do.

"I challenge you to find even lunchtime posts as of late ... but ... oh ... wait ... that would mean that you would have to produce actual data and facts to support your beliefs and opinions. You seem quite incapable of understanding anything like that..."

I did notice it was nicer around here for a bit.

Hey Swirl...make hay while the sun shines...

How much do you get paid?

I mean, to create distractions from factual evidence and reality with splashy graphs taken out of context and animations and stuff like that?

Probably less than I get paid to protect your sorry ass from the reality that sinking land is massively secondary to sea level rise in the need to plan for both surge and inundation events. Our land is sinking at fractional inches a year - our seas are rising already at rates above that, and we cannot discount the probability of pulses, either. Pulses may happen when ice shelves collapse and melt rapidly in little pieces.

Just because you post something "sciency" and spray it with "Smells Like Science (tm)" doesn't mean that it represents anything meaningful in terms of "dominant predictors of future apparent sea level rise" or anything but your delusional state of mind.

More than just the seaport

By on

Much of central Boston is built on filled in bays and inlets and therefore in real danger from rising seas, starting with Back Bay, most of the South End, parts of the Financial District, and the Bullfinch Triangle. If we really see 10 feet or more of sea rise, Boston will be devastated. Our kids or grandkids may have no choice but to build some kind of dam structure from Deer Island to Hull.

That can't happen.

Oh, ya, we can envision a dam across the harbor, but it cannot work. The rising tides would overflow all of Hull and sweep around it. The higher tracts of land can be defended, but the lower land will fall to the sea.
Look, they're talking inches in a century, or OMG!!FEET!!, depending on the source of information.

It has to be addressed, but there's no need for blind panic. Unless you're writing for the New York Times.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/OOJtME1.gif)

You wish

It isn't about what you *believe* - it is about what is really happening, as in collapsing ice shelves and increasingly violent storms and surges.

You might know that if you had bothered to take or pass a science class sometime in your lifetime.

Subjective vs objective

-- collapsing ice shelves and increasingly violent storms --

Ice shelves have been collapsing for millions of years and the "violence" of a storm is an infantile measure of absolutely no scientific value. These are scare tactics used by propagandists and hack "scientists" who suck various things for grant money.

"And on the Piper-DuChamp violence scale, this storm rates a 40.3 which is 6 violence points higher than the last violent storm. This is Norbert McSissy reporting for NPR and I have to admit, I just wet my pants thinking about violent storms".

More on neurotic "scientist" behavior at this link:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160412-ice-sheet-collapse-ant...

Reality vs. Fantasy

By on

Scientists are working together to figure out reality.

Your beliefs are based on fantasy.

Reality always wins.

Congratulations

By on

Ice shelves have been collapsing for millions of years

Well, at least you're not a "young Earther".

But picking apart Swirly's comments as if she's presenting all of the various meaningful ways in which climate change and rising planetary temperatures are measured is pointless and witless. She's speaking in generalities. It's not that ice shelves are collapsing. It's that they are doing so much earlier and later in the year. They're doing so in increasing numbers. They're doing so at the farthest receding positions on the glaciers than ever seen in history (yes, even millions of years ago)...and that itself is exacerbating further glacier recession meaning less and less ice is staying on land and more and more of it is ending up melting into the water when it would otherwise stay frozen and extremely slow-moving ice.

I'm not sure why you think your NatGeo link supports your argument about neurotic scientists being somehow fraudulent and/or overly alarmist. They are describing exactly what is going on in that article. I don't think you're reading comprehension is great. Antarctica is melting at an increasing pace bolstered by the fact that as it melts it actually speeds up its own fracturing process and melts faster as a result.

How about instead of assuming you know better than the scientists, you assume scientists know their topics of expertise. People who study things like glaciers their entire lives, using research from people who also studied glaciers before them, are telling you that the glaciers aren't healthy. The planet's ice is not healthy.

When your mechanic tells you that your car isn't healthy, do you call him neurotic and drive it until it breaks...wait...don't answer that...I think I already know the answer.

As a Republican who voted for

By on

As a Republican who voted for Baker this is the last straw. He should leave the party and become a Democrat.

He should become independent

I don't agree with everything he's done but I'll admit he's done better then I expected. (Except for the T where he has only made things worse.) Much like Bloomberg and Bernie, he's better off without the baggage of either national party.

Good point, BostonDog.

By on

Becoming an Independent would be a better thing for Baker to do.

Btw, Bernie Sanders already is an Independent.

If you have cancer

You can't just leave your body and get a new one.

The GOP desperately needs chemo, surgery, and radiation to kill off this virulently neoplastic growth that is eating it and threatening to consume the country as well.

Right. They hold the

By on

Right. They hold the Presidency, both houses of Congress, and the majority of state legislatures and governorships. Truly the GOP is done for.

Shakey foundations

By on

Their success is predicated on apathy from 48% of the eligible voting population. It's why they've pushed the both sides and voting doesn't matter narrative so hard, all the while courted their base in a solid always vote block of constituents. Ditto to scaling back easy voting and attacking the voting Rights act.

Even their gerrymandering is built on the idea of that solid block, if just 2% more people vote it crumbles into a landslide Dem win in many safe red districts.

The entire strategy is build on low turnout, very partisan elections. The second that not the case anymore, they're in a heap of trouble nationally.

But the real question is how do the Democrats break through to that 48% that have been conditioned for a generation that "voting doesn't matter".

You should leave the state

By on

Kansas is a utopia I've heard. Give up your terrible job and existence here and move to the promised land oh pious one!

Politics change.

By on

This is the same state that gave this country our greatest president who was also a Republican. Calvin Coolidge.

Heh

By on

That filthy socialist? - today's GOP

People seem to think Kansas

By on

People seem to think Kansas is some sort of apocalyptic wasteland just because the state government cut taxes and budget.

In reality, the state's cuts don't have a heck of a lot of impact. It's still a big state where you can buy a thousand acres of land for a million bucks and people farm and ranch and work in office towers and are generally ok. Oh and people are not terribly worried about sea level rise.

Nope, no impact, not a bit of it

By on

In reality, the state's cuts don't have a heck of a lot of impact.

This the same Kansas whose state supreme court recently voted that education funding was unconstitutionally low?

Nope, those budget cuts have no impact, or at least not on anything you care about, like having an educated population, nothing to see here, move along...

Lol at people who have never

By on

Lol at people who have never been to Kansas saying it's anything but a hellscape of cow and pig shit.

Kansas, like much of the Midwest, is suffering from severe brain drain as anyone with potential flees the state. Where do you think all these new bright yuppies who are driving up costs in all the coastal cities are actually COMING from??

LOL at you

By on

I've lived in Kansas.

It IS a hellscape of tornado-whirled cow and pig shit.

Faith-based fantasies of glory and prosperity just make it stink more.

Oh goody, I have a coupon!

Assuming that, like The Globe's fake Trump front page, this is another last straw for O-Fish I can get a 10% discount on Gentle Giant Movers for him so that he can finally move to a red state and enjoy the bounty of freedom there. I can also promise him that when he calls the movers to make arrangements he will not be speaking to someone in "Manilla" [sic].

Conditions can cause harbor water to lap onto the seaport land

By on

I've seen this only once but the sight was impressive: The Harborwalk around the Federal Courthouse was flooded a few years ago when there was a combination of a full moon, high tide and a storm further out at sea.

The problem with once in a century predictions is when the once in a century events happen back to back at the end and the beginning of two 100 year periods.

The damage done by Sandy should be sufficient warning that the Boston area could suffer tremendous flooding if a hurricane traveled up the coast.

I am convinced that we are closer to than further from a devastating hurricane. It's been decades since a good whopper came through.

Another consideration are the frequency of heavy snow years. In 1994 and I think 1996 there were 2 years where the total snow fall was over 90 inches. Then cometh the Iceman of 2015 which beat the record.

Seems to me that the frequency of exceptionally powerful storms is increasing. Perhaps it's due to the how the sun affects the Earth (as the Harvard-Smithsonian go to scientist for Congress theorized). Perhaps we are entering a normal period of climate shift.

But what can not be denied is that for a century far more CO2 has been released from vast amounts of fossil fuels which sat inside the Earth for millennia. Add that vast amounts of land have been turned into what amount to concrete deserts. Consider as well that the is a finite quantity of fossil fuel. Renewables such as timber are also limited since they take a lot of time.

So perhaps to continue using fossil fuels at all (which the Koch Brothers would want since that is where their fortunes are based) is foolish.

The other way of looking at the question is to ask what will be the largest new industry? Where will the greatest investments, risks, number of jobs and wealth creation exist? I would not be surprised if the next big industry will involve environmental protection, restoration, recycling, clean energy production and every other industry related to reducing our human footprint on the globe while maintaining a reasonable standard of living, whether in shelter, food, health or culture. Our choice is to either embrace the inevitable future or fail by letting the rest of the world grab the next big industry while the U.S. just piddles along.

Intel lost out on a major shift in chips when they didn't not push their way into manufacturing chips and especially processors for cell phones. Now they have to play catch up. They should have seen the future in computing devices was not in full fledged computer but in the small devices. Thanks to Trump the same may happen here. Because he is blind to reality and is incapable of seeing beyond his narcisstic and narrow minded vision (and possibly is beholden to Russia) he has taken the step of leaving what may be the next big thing to China and the rest of the world. To think that the U.S. could shift to a 2nd world nation because many Americans were myopic and selfish.

Thank you, Governor Baker

Your next logical step is to recognize that you no longer belong in the Republican Party, and to run for re-election instead as an independent. You have much more to gain than to lose by doing this.

Maybe

By on

I am impressed at his efforts to purge and restructure the state party away from teaparty nihilism and Catholic fundamentalists. Maybe one day when the national party civil war happens, it'll be a sane moderate template forward.

One can hope. But I know groups in the MA GOP are actively working to get rid of him.

I will say this, it's obvious that Baker grew up here and cares deeply for his home. I might disagree with him on several points, but he isn't making moves like Patrick/Romney did that obviously hurt the state to just check off political points for a future runs at national offices.