A the timeline aggregating States' climate commitments (NDCs) following the Paris Agreement

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate Policy > A the timeline aggregating States' climate commitments (NDCs) following the Paris Agreement

A the timeline aggregating States' climate commitments (NDCs) following the Paris Agreement15-02-2022 12:42
Npred ☆☆☆☆☆ (4)	Hi everyone ! We created a timeline bringing together on a search engine all the concrete and precise climate commitments in the NDCs following the Paris Agreement (updated as of 02/09/2022), accessible here : https://npredictions.com/?cid=&s=&scope=&tid=1&del=&yid=0&lang=en This could be an useful tool for people working on Climate issues policies. Please let me know what to you think about it and how it could be improved ! Yours !
15-02-2022 17:37
gfm7175★★★★★ (3340)	Npred wrote: Hi everyone ! We created a timeline bringing together on a search engine all the concrete and precise climate commitments in the NDCs following the Paris Agreement (updated as of 02/09/2022), accessible here : https://npredictions.com/?cid=&s=&scope=&tid=1&del=&yid=0&lang=en This could be an useful tool for people working on Climate issues policies. Please let me know what to you think about it and how it could be improved ! Yours ! Hi Npred! Welcome to the forum. I have some questions before I even bother with looking at the link that you provided: [1] You make mention of something called "climate commitments". What is a "climate commitment"? [2] You also make mention of something called "climate issues". What is a "climate issue"? [3] What specific "issues" with regard to "climate" need to be addressed, and how do you suggest alleviating them? After you adequately answer those questions, so that I understand what you are talking about, I look forward to working with you to make Earth a better place.
15-02-2022 18:34
Npred ☆☆☆☆☆ (4)	gfm7175 wrote: Npred wrote: Hi everyone ! We created a timeline bringing together on a search engine all the concrete and precise climate commitments in the NDCs following the Paris Agreement (updated as of 02/09/2022), accessible here : https://npredictions.com/?cid=&s=&scope=&tid=1&del=&yid=0&lang=en This could be an useful tool for people working on Climate issues policies. Please let me know what to you think about it and how it could be improved ! Yours ! Hi Npred! Welcome to the forum. I have some questions before I even bother with looking at the link that you provided: [1] You make mention of something called "climate commitments". What is a "climate commitment"? [2] You also make mention of something called "climate issues". What is a "climate issue"? [3] What specific "issues" with regard to "climate" need to be addressed, and how do you suggest alleviating them? After you adequately answer those questions, so that I understand what you are talking about, I look forward to working with you to make Earth a better place. Hi gfm7175, Thanks for your answer. Sorry in advance if my english is not perfect - this is my second language. 1) The Paris Agreement requests each country to outline and communicate their post-2020 climate actions, known as their NDCs (Nationally determined contributions). These NDCs are the "commitments" of the States to achieve the ecological transition objectives that they set for themselves. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs 2) "Climate issue" = I am talking here about human-caused climate change and its adverse consequences for living beings in general on Earth 3) The timeline I am talking about is not the result of personal opinion or judgment on the causes of climate change and how to fix it. We only read in detail the 190 NDCs drafted by the States, and extracted the concrete measures and objectives. At present, if someone wants to know what goals the State of Belize, Colombia or Vietnam set to themselves in terms of ecological transition (energy, waste, forestry, etc.), the only solution is to read its entire NDC (often dozens pages and a lot of useless chatter). Similarly, it is impossible to have an overall view of the actions for example in terms of deforestation or agroforestry,etc. planned by the States. Our work is only a tool to facilitate/make possible these thematic, cross-cutting or country-specific research. Please also note that I am not selling anything: we are a group of researchers doing this work on a voluntary basis. We are not forcing anyone to take an interest in it, but we do think that this work could be useful to some researchers. That said, we are at your disposal if you have any criticism or suggestions to improve this tool and make it more useful, Best Regards,
16-02-2022 03:31
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14932)	Npred wrote: 1) The Paris Agreement requests each country to outline and communicate their post-2020 climate actions, What is a "climate action"? Npred wrote: 2) "Climate issue" = I am talking here about human-caused climate change and its adverse consequences for living beings in general on Earth What is "climate change" exactly ... and of what climate do you speak? What "adverse consequences" are you discussing here? Could you list all of them for me? Npred wrote:3) The timeline I am talking about is not the result of personal opinion or judgment on the causes of climate change and how to fix it. We only read in detail the 190 NDCs drafted by the States, and extracted the concrete measures and objectives. At present, if someone wants to know what goals the State of Belize, Colombia or Vietnam set to themselves in terms of ecological transition (energy, waste, forestry, etc.), the only solution is to read its entire NDC (often dozens pages and a lot of useless chatter). Similarly, it is impossible to have an overall view of the actions for example in terms of deforestation or agroforestry,etc. planned by the States. Our work is only a tool to facilitate/make possible these thematic, cross-cutting or country-specific research. Did you just say that your work will be effectively useless? Npred wrote:Please also note that I am not selling anything: Yes you are. Don't kid yourself. Npred wrote: ... we are a group of researchers doing this work on a voluntary basis. Too funny! One moment you are application developers and the next you are volunteer researchers. I can't wait for your explanation as to why you need to spam this board. Npred wrote:We are not forcing anyone to take an interest in it, but we do think that this work could be useful to some researchers. ... and the next moment you're back to being application developers. Npred wrote: That said, we are at your disposal if you have any criticism or suggestions to improve this tool and make it more useful, Great, I would like to point out a glaring omission in your tool. It is not enough to simply say what countries have promised. Your tool needs to make it clear each and every example of where countries have failed to meet their pledges or your tool is effectively worthless. Also you need to track each and every time a milestone is pushed back, otherwise your tool is worthless. You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. You would really be adding value if you could provide definitions for all the previous "climate" terms and get the countries to agree on them. Best Regards,
16-02-2022 10:09
Npred ☆☆☆☆☆ (4)	There may not be perfect scientific consensus on the definition of "climate change", but there is an institution that you may have heard of called the IPCC that is working on the subject - and which details the effects of climate change (rise in water, droughts, heat waves, etc.). I suggest you visit their site, they will explain all this better than me. Great, I would like to point out a glaring omission in your tool. It is not enough to simply say what countries have promised. Your tool needs to make it clear each and every example of where countries have failed to meet their pledges or your tool is effectively worthless. Also you need to track each and every time a milestone is pushed back, otherwise your tool is worthless. You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. This is a slightly more constructive reflection. This is precisely the purpose of this tool: to allow citizens/researchers/activists to see what are the mitigation actions planned by the State and allow them to discuss the state of progress. We have no vocation to control ourselves the state of reforestation in Guatemala... One moment you are application developers and the next you are volunteer researchers. I can't wait for your explanation as to why you need to spam this board. Please also note that I am not selling anything >>> Yes you are. Don't kid yourself. No, I am only here to introduce you to our work. I have absolutely nothing to gain from your visit other than the pleasure of making this work useful. But if you're starting from such a negative point of view, then maybe you can consider it spam and delete this thread. Really, I don't care because, as already said, I have NOTHING TO SELL.
16-02-2022 10:38
Npred ☆☆☆☆☆ (4)	You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. Just a clarification too: not everyone has this information. They are difficult to find (you have to dig deep into a UN sites - while our tool offers a direct link to the official source document for each mitigation action), the NDCs are often 50 or 100 pages long and are filled with useless information, which makes it difficult for citizens to find concrete actions. Moreover, nothing allows you to do cross-sectional research: you can go and find out what one country or another wants to do in terms of reforestation or solar panel installations etc. - but if you want to compare 10 countries at the same time, it is extremely complicated. This is why we wanted to aggregate all this information within a search engine.
16-02-2022 17:14
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14932)	Npred wrote:There may not be perfect scientific consensus There is no such thing as "scientific consensus." Science is not determined by consensus. Science is not a subjective matter of opinion. Npred wrote: ... on the definition of "climate change", but there is an institution that you may have heard of called the IPCC that is working on the subject The IPCC is a religio-political organization. They have nothing to do with science ... and they all apparently suck at math. The bottom line is that the IPCC has deliberately not defined any terms surrounding Global Warming because the IPCC is a ministry for the Climate Change religion. They won't touch any science nor will they accept any input from actual scientists. Npred wrote:- and which details the effects of climate change (rise in water, droughts, heat waves, etc.). What water is rising? Droughts and heat waves are weather. Have you heard of weather? Npred wrote:I suggest you visit their site, they will explain all this better than me. Are you saying I should talk to your minister because he explains it so much better than you do? I have combed the IPCC website for decades. It's all crap. There is no science there. Npred wrote:This is a slightly more constructive reflection. Of course. I cannot be constructive in any of your areas of denial. Npred wrote: This is precisely the purpose of this tool: to allow citizens/researchers/activists to see what are the mitigation actions planned by the State and allow them to discuss the state of progress. ... except that no State has any mitigation planned. They might have particular actions planned but they are not actions that mitigate anything. Npred wrote:We have no vocation to control ourselves the state of reforestation in Guatemala... ... but you should be noting that planting trees doesn't mitigate anything except tree loss. Npred wrote:No, I am only here to introduce you to our work. ... which is to proselytize the Climate Change faith, like you are missionaries doing Climate's work. What if I were to tell you that your religion doesn't make any sense to me? You avoid science, you won't define your terms, you pay homage to the IPCC, your religion is full of physics violations ... and you are asking us to take an interest nonetheless. Npred wrote: I have absolutely nothing to gain from your visit other than the pleasure of making this work useful. Are you ready for some bad news? If you really are application developers, you picked a very poor application to develop. Climate Change is a religion. You are trying to track the progress of planned "miracles" by governments looking to appear as though they control nature ... all in order to gain more power and to more easily control the citizenry. This is what you are selling. Npred wrote:But if you're starting from such a negative point of view, then maybe you can consider it spam and delete this thread. Really, I don't care because, as already said, I have NOTHING TO SELL. Why would I want to delete this particular thread? I want everyone to read it.
16-02-2022 17:16
Into the Night★★★★★ (22820)	Npred wrote: There may not be perfect scientific consensus on the definition of "climate change", Science does not use consensus. There is no such thing as 'scientific consensus'. There is no voting bloc in science. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Nothing more. That's it. That's all. Npred wrote: but there is an institution that you may have heard of called the IPCC that is working on the subject The IPCC is a government agency. Science is not a government agency. Npred wrote: and which details the effects of climate change You are going to have to define 'climate change' first, before you can describe the 'effects' of it. Npred wrote: (rise in water, droughts, heat waves, etc.). It is not possible to measure the global ocean level. Droughts and heat waves are weather, not climate. Npred wrote: I suggest you visit their site, they will explain all this better than me. Been there. Done that. Didn't even get the T shirt. Npred wrote: Great, I would like to point out a glaring omission in your tool. It is not enough to simply say what countries have promised. Your tool needs to make it clear each and every example of where countries have failed to meet their pledges or your tool is effectively worthless. Also you need to track each and every time a milestone is pushed back, otherwise your tool is worthless. You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. This is a slightly more constructive reflection. This is precisely the purpose of this tool: to allow citizens/researchers/activists to see what are the mitigation actions planned by the State and allow them to discuss the state of progress. Mitigation of what? Progress of what? You still haven't defined The Problem or the term 'climate change'. Npred wrote: One moment you are application developers and the next you are volunteer researchers. I can't wait for your explanation as to why you need to spam this board. Please also note that I am not selling anything >>> Yes you are. Don't kid yourself. No, I am only here to introduce you to our work. I have absolutely nothing to gain from your visit other than the pleasure of making this work useful. So your work isn't useful now? It depends on a forum like this one to make it useful somehow? How can your work be useful if you can't even define what 'climate change' is? Npred wrote: But if you're starting from such a negative point of view, then maybe you can consider it spam and delete this thread. Really, I don't care because, as already said, I have NOTHING TO SELL. Yes you do. You are selling a religion. Define 'climate change'. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-02-2022 17:21
Into the Night★★★★★ (22820)	Npred wrote: You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. Just a clarification too: not everyone has this information. They are difficult to find (you have to dig deep into a UN sites - while our tool offers a direct link to the official source document for each mitigation action), the NDCs are often 50 or 100 pages long and are filled with useless information, which makes it difficult for citizens to find concrete actions. Moreover, nothing allows you to do cross-sectional research: you can go and find out what one country or another wants to do in terms of reforestation or solar panel installations etc. - but if you want to compare 10 countries at the same time, it is extremely complicated. This is why we wanted to aggregate all this information within a search engine. What does reforestation or solar panels have to do with 'climate change'? Define 'climate change'. There are already more trees than have ever existed in the States of America now. Tree farmers are most commonplace. Solar panels are the most expensive method of generating electricity, watt for watt. They don't work at night, they are subject to damage from moss, sandstorms, hail, critters, or the just the aging effects of exposing them to sunlight. Why do you have a problem with using a nuclear power plant, hydroelectric sources, coal fire plants, oil fired plants, or natural gas fired plants? These are much cheaper sources of electrical energy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-02-2022 17:31
gfm7175★★★★★ (3340)	Npred wrote: There may not be perfect scientific consensus What is a "scientific consensus" and how is it any different than a consensus? Since when has consensus been a part of what science is? Npred wrote: on the definition of "climate change", but there is an institution that you may have heard of called the IPCC that is working on the subject The IPCC hasn't defined "climate change" either... It remains meaningless until a valid definition is provided for it. I would love to join in on your objectives, but first I need to know what you're even talking about. Npred wrote: - and which details the effects of climate change (rise in water, droughts, heat waves, etc.). So "climate change" is a synonym for weather? Is that what you're saying? Why not just keep calling it 'weather'? Npred wrote: I suggest you visit their site, they will explain all this better than me. I highly doubt that they'd do any better. Npred wrote: This is a slightly more constructive reflection. This is precisely the purpose of this tool: to allow citizens/researchers/activists to see what are the mitigation actions planned by the State and allow them to discuss the state of progress. We have no vocation to control ourselves the state of reforestation in Guatemala... How can there be any "progress" when the problem itself hasn't even been unambiguously defined? Npred wrote: No, I am only here to introduce you to our work. I have absolutely nothing to gain from your visit other than the pleasure of making this work useful. But if you're starting from such a negative point of view, then maybe you can consider it spam and delete this thread. Really, I don't care because, as already said, I have NOTHING TO SELL. You need not lie to us. --- And why would I want this thread deleted? I enjoy conversation about these things and I am an ardent supporter of free speech. I want you to be heard, even if I happen to disagree with your point of view. Edited on 16-02-2022 17:37
16-02-2022 19:32
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Npred wrote: You need to have stoplights (green, yellow, red) for the statuses of programs, and clearly show missed promises in all milestones that are pushed to the right. That is what tells the big picture. Otherwise all you have is just an overly busy and unusable graphical representation of the list of promises that everyone already has. Just a clarification too: not everyone has this information. They are difficult to find (you have to dig deep into a UN sites - while our tool offers a direct link to the official source document for each mitigation action), the NDCs are often 50 or 100 pages long and are filled with useless information, which makes it difficult for citizens to find concrete actions. Moreover, nothing allows you to do cross-sectional research: you can go and find out what one country or another wants to do in terms of reforestation or solar panel installations etc. - but if you want to compare 10 countries at the same time, it is extremely complicated. This is why we wanted to aggregate all this information within a search engine. It's politics, not science. The use technobabble, catch-phrases, buzzwords to enthrall the morons, into joining the movement/cult. Politicians will promise anything to get votes, and do very little that doesn't fill their bank account. Reforestation, really? They have to clear the land used to plant solar and wind farms. Seedlings take about 14 years to fully mature. Even that is pitiful, compared to the trees removed, to get that 'free' energy. None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. Our 'President' Joe Biden. The president of many 'first's', is likely to put a quick end to all the nonsense crisis's pretty soon. He's likely going to be the first president to play nuclear football. Not sure if he'll nuke Russia, Ukraine, or both. If he even cares, or even aware. Biden screws everything up... But, at least we'll forget climate change, covid, Southern border, crackhead son.
14-12-2024 13:30
jackjack53 ☆☆☆☆☆ (6)	None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. Edited by branner on 27-12-2024 23:04
22-12-2024 19:02
Im a BM ★★★★☆ (1622)	jackjack53 wrote: None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. jackjack53, you put up eight posts in the space of 15 minutes. It had been more than seven or eight months since a new member joined and posted more than once. You are now officially the newest member to have joined climate-debate.com At least, according to the "last 10" registrations, you are new here. Into the Night says about you, and I quote, "He is not a new member". It does defy plausibility that in the space of just fifteen minutes, a brand new member tracked down a couple of threads from SIX YEARS AGO and replied to them. So, why HarveyH55's first thread? "Why I'm skeptical" If you had put up these 8 posts just nine months earlier than this, HarveyH55 would have still been here to see them and reply. While your positions on the issues would seem to make you a soulmate of the "define your terms, you scientifically illiterate moron, because climate change doesn't even exist" cult at climate-debate.com, I suspect that there is some animosity. In any case, only one of them replied at all to your 8 posts in 15 minutes. Edited by branner on 27-12-2024 23:09
22-12-2024 20:12
Im a BM ★★★★☆ (1622)	CORRECTION: jackjack53 did NOT pull up HarveyH55's "Why I'm Skeptical" thread from six years ago. jackjack53 pulled up the six years old thread "Satellite Measurements -- Sea Level Rise" thread, the "Climate and our Youth" thread from 5 years ago, and some other old ones. But he did NOT single out HarveyH55's first thread from six years ago. jackjack53 wrote: None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. jackjack53, you put up eight posts in the space of 15 minutes. It had been more than seven or eight months since a new member joined and posted more than once. You are now officially the newest member to have joined climate-debate.com At least, according to the "last 10" registrations, you are new here. Into the Night says about you, and I quote, "He is not a new member". It does defy plausibility that in the space of just fifteen minutes, a brand new member tracked down a couple of threads from SIX YEARS AGO and replied to them. So, why HarveyH55's first thread? "Why I'm skeptical" If you had put up these 8 posts just nine months earlier than this, HarveyH55 would have still been here to see them and reply. While your positions on the issues would seem to make you a soulmate of the "define your terms, you scientifically illiterate moron, because climate change doesn't even exist" cult at climate-debate.com, I suspect that there is some animosity. In any case, only one of them replied at all to your 8 posts in 15 minutes. Edited by branner on 27-12-2024 23:09
22-12-2024 22:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (22820)	Im a BM wrote: jackjack53 wrote: None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. jackjack53, you put up eight posts in the space of 15 minutes. It had been more than seven or eight months since a new member joined and posted more than once. You are now officially the newest member to have joined climate-debate.com At least, according to the "last 10" registrations, you are new here. jackjack53 is not a new member. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited by branner on 27-12-2024 23:10
23-12-2024 01:34
Im a BM ★★★★☆ (1622)	If Into the Night were to post "pH is not a chemical", it would be the most comprehensive explanation he has given so far to answer the question: What is pH? Well, pH is not a chemical, and that's all there is to say. At least Into the Night would display knowledge of what pH is NOT. It would be consistent with the kind of thorough explanations he gives on nearly every chemistry related question. All you need to know is that pH is not a chemical. That's probably why it is not ALLOWED to be less than or equal to zero. Into the Night wrote: Im a BM wrote: jackjack53 wrote: None of the countries will ever come close to their commitment. It's an empty pronise, a carrot they can dangle endlessly, to justify taking a bigger chunk of your paycheck, to spend as they please. They are truly worried about the planet. They know there is no crisis to fix. jackjack53, you put up eight posts in the space of 15 minutes. It had been more than seven or eight months since a new member joined and posted more than once. You are now officially the newest member to have joined climate-debate.com At least, according to the "last 10" registrations, you are new here. jackjack53 is not a new member. Edited by branner on 27-12-2024 23:10

Join the debate A the timeline aggregating States' climate commitments (NDCs) following the Paris Agreement:

Threads	Replies	Last post
For those of you who voted for Kimballa Paris, there are free services to help you cope	0	07-11-2024 18:59
Paris Climate Accord - Orange Messiah and Divine Intervention	87	17-10-2024 19:11
Deadline Pass Without Money, The United States USD Is Officially Gone Now !	2	14-11-2023 16:29
You may not wave the American flag at any school, in the new Communist states of America	1	28-08-2023 13:22
USD US Dollar, USA United States Are Deserved To Be Gone Forever !	2	20-07-2023 22:43