[PASSED] Greenhouse Gas Cap and Trade Program

[Auralia]

It is pretty chock full of false equivilences from the word go and is a frankly bizzare piece of supporting evidence to use. It also utterly fails to (or deliberatley misunderstands) how scientific models work. On top of that it conflates very real threats with make believe sci fi fantasy about AI, likely as an attempt to categorise a threat the author themselves recognises as in the same category.

It says very little new, and does not provide adequate support for what little it does add to the discussion. At best it is a fluff piece likely aimed at stating the blindingly obvious in a slightly more comforting way to allow those too well educated to buy the whole chinese hoax line but looking for an excuse to basically take more or less the same stance.

It accuses international bodies of having alterior motives (see misunderstanding scientific modelling) and yet fails to acknowledge the institution the author writes as a member of is bankrolled by the kind of weathy elite who stand to lose should climate change be taken seriously.

It is dross that barely supports its own argument, let alone yours.

Again, not much I can say in response. You claim the article uses false equivalencies and misunderstands scientific models, but don't explain how. You argue that climate change is a "true threat" in a way that runaway artificial intelligence is not, but again don't explain how. You call it a "fluff piece" that does not provide "adequate support" for its claims, even though it cites multiple specific models on the economic effects of climate change from the IPCC and other sources. You deploy ad hominems against what you perceive as the target audience. You criticize the notion that international bodies can have ulterior motives while simultaneously arguing that the author is primarily driven by them.

Ultimately, you're simply dismissing the article without actually addressing its core argument, which is that "the impacts expected from climate change over the next hundred years look similar to those through which both civilization and our planet have successfully muddled over the past hundred and continue to struggle with today."

[Albertstadt]

The 15th Reichstag, in it's final act before the President dissolved it and ordered new elections for 03 December 2018, rejected the resolution by a 75% majority because of these requirements:

"Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant member nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflict with religious or moral beliefs;"

This is a punitive measure on people that may support the idea personally, but have to represent the democratic government's point of view. Horribly unfair and violates the convention of human rights.

Notes that individual nations will determine how to best meet their preferred target internally.

Nations that do not want participate in this will not set any levels. If it is truly to be effective, it would require set numbers for each nation.

That is a joke, and WASP and ACE are responsible for setting targets. Just say you opposing doing anything about global warming.

(ooc) It is not that I am opposed to doing anything about global warming. It is that parts of this are nonsense, force physical attacks on ambassadors, and bigger nations will tell smaller ones what to do. Now in the real world. here in Washington State we will be voting on a tax measure that will have a stronger effect locally than any cap/trade system would do. (https://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Init ... sure_(2018)). We will be voting Yes.

[Zakuvia]

The Imperial Legate blots a bit of garlic butter from his vermillion sash and takes the floor.

While the Senate has directed me to move towards the right direction, which we feel this bill is in the spirit of, it must protest that this bill has such a glaring loophole for one of the greatest producers of greenhouse gases on the planet...cattle! We respect that those nations gifted with natural wonders such as volcanoes should not be punished when their natural resources occasionally...emit... if we're going to be serious as a legislative body when it comes to this, we cannot afford half measures. The fact that cows are natural, but cattle agriculture isn't exactly leaves a grey area in this bill larger than an overcooked T-Bone!

Methane is triply as destructive to the environment as carbon dioxide, and if my dinner last night was any indication, cattle remains a growth industry. And let's not talk about ammonia, it might unsettle my stomach.

- Legate Alrig Durmer

[Ransium]

The Imperial Legate blots a bit of garlic butter from his vermillion sash and takes the floor.

While the Senate has directed me to move towards the right direction, which we feel this bill is in the spirit of, it must protest that this bill has such a glaring loophole for one of the greatest producers of greenhouse gases on the planet...cattle! We respect that those nations gifted with natural wonders such as volcanoes should not be punished when their natural resources occasionally...emit... if we're going to be serious as a legislative body when it comes to this, we cannot afford half measures. The fact that cows are natural, but cattle agriculture isn't exactly leaves a grey area in this bill larger than an overcooked T-Bone!

Methane is triply as destructive to the environment as carbon dioxide, and if my dinner last night was any indication, cattle remains a growth industry. And let's not talk about ammonia, it might unsettle my stomach.

- Legate Alrig Durmer

Give me a break, your looking for loop holes where there are none. While aurochs are natural, cows and agriculture are in no way natural. There’s no gray area, methane emissions due to cattle are covered.

[Ransium]

That is a joke, and WASP and ACE are responsible for setting targets. Just say you opposing doing anything about global warming.

(ooc) It is not that I am opposed to doing anything about global warming. It is that parts of this are nonsense, force physical attacks on ambassadors, and bigger nations will tell smaller ones what to do. Now in the real world. here in Washington State we will be voting on a tax measure that will have a stronger effect locally than any cap/trade system would do. (https://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Init ... sure_(2018)). We will be voting Yes.

You can also give me a break. An itchy sweater is not an attack it’s an inconvenience. If it in anyway endagers an ambassadors health there’s an exception right there. Bigger nations will not tell smaller nations what to do. The committee is not staffed by member nations, but perfectly efficient and impartial gnomes. Population is taken into account in the initial cap so big nations in no way can tell small nations what to do. While I believe that you aren’t anti everything climate change, your definitely grasping for straws as to why you are against this.

I like the idea of a (supposedly) revenue neutral tax, and your certainly welcome to implement that within your nation to meet the cap, but I don’t think that’s eorkable internationally for the WA. We do after all operate on “donations”.

[Zakuvia]

The Imperial Legate blots a bit of garlic butter from his vermillion sash and takes the floor.

While the Senate has directed me to move towards the right direction, which we feel this bill is in the spirit of, it must protest that this bill has such a glaring loophole for one of the greatest producers of greenhouse gases on the planet...cattle! We respect that those nations gifted with natural wonders such as volcanoes should not be punished when their natural resources occasionally...emit... if we're going to be serious as a legislative body when it comes to this, we cannot afford half measures. The fact that cows are natural, but cattle agriculture isn't exactly leaves a grey area in this bill larger than an overcooked T-Bone!

Methane is triply as destructive to the environment as carbon dioxide, and if my dinner last night was any indication, cattle remains a growth industry. And let's not talk about ammonia, it might unsettle my stomach.

- Legate Alrig Durmer

Give me a break, your looking for loop holes where there are none. While aurochs are natural, cows and agriculture are in no way natural. There’s no gray area, methane emissions due to cattle are covered.

I would ask where in the wording things such as agriculture are mentioned in the legislation. At all. In point of fact, section four states, and I will quote:

"Clarifies that greenhouse gas emissions through natural sources, such as volcanoes, will not be considered by ACE for the purposes of this resolution."

Representative of Ransium, surely you must have heard the adage to be as wise as serpents? We in the Empire have our own emissions controls standards which meet or, we expect, will exceed the WASP targets, but other, more bovine-dependent nations, will tear this loophole you're refusing to look through apart! At what point, I'm sure they will ask, will it be more than two cows? Will free-range cattle not be as strictly looked at compared to 'factory' farms? Should indigenous populations that hunt four-legged creatures be expected to tithe into these caps?

We're not asking for a complete re-write of the legislation, merely for an amendment or addendum that clarifies where it draws the thin, spotted black and white, line.

[FT-Wank Empire]

Give me a break, your looking for loop holes where there are none. While aurochs are natural, cows and agriculture are in no way natural. There’s no gray area, methane emissions due to cattle are covered.

I would ask where in the wording things such as agriculture are mentioned in the legislation. At all. In point of fact, section four states, and I will quote:

"Clarifies that greenhouse gas emissions through natural sources, such as volcanoes, will not be considered by ACE for the purposes of this resolution."

Representative of Ransium, surely you must have heard the adage to be as wise as serpents? We in the Empire have our own emissions controls standards which meet or, we expect, will exceed the WASP targets, but other, more bovine-dependent nations, will tear this loophole you're refusing to look through apart! At what point, I'm sure they will ask, will it be more than two cows? Will free-range cattle not be as strictly looked at compared to 'factory' farms? Should indigenous populations that hunt four-legged creatures be expected to tithe into these caps?

We're not asking for a complete re-write of the legislation, merely for an amendment or addendum that clarifies where it draws the thin, spotted black and white, line.

Aha! Yes, as I was explaining to Lt Bonesmasher McLazerface here, our spacefleet depends on methane for its sol broadcast beacon currently orbiting Uranus!

Of course, then McLazerface kindly pointed out that this resolution is - as all resolutions are - written to accommodate modern technology nations and not far futuristic nations such as ours or indeed subsistence hunter gathering tribes and that I might be making unreasonable demands on the part of the author for no purpose other than to force loopholes where none exist.

They also went on to mention - much to my disappointment - that indeed, the methane produced by a hunter gatherer tribe would (unless someone's been foraging for an awful lot of beans) be negligible to the point of nonexistence compared to a factory cattle ranch - and the resolution itself would take that into account. They then (remarkably smart chap this McLazerface) pointed out that given the resolution is bound to consider population and economic output. Again, the tribe of stone age cave dwellers remains pretty much untouched, but the massive, country spanning cattle ranches would of course not.

Zorg damn it, this author's a wily one! Every time I try to use the subdimensional folding array to pull an argument out of thin air they have an answer!

Anyway, McLazerface has an important meeting in the captain's quarters for me to attend. Something to do with a wooly sweater. Don't know what a superintelligent cloud of hydrocarbon gasses is going to do with one of those...

[Kenmoria]

We're not asking for a complete re-write of the legislation, merely for an amendment or addendum that clarifies where it draws the thin, spotted black and white, line.

(OOC: Amendments are illegal, as it is impossible to change a passed resolution for technical reasons relating to stat effects. However, I think the clarification you are seeking is best dealt with via the “reasonable nation” theory, which states, as the name suggests, that nations will be reasonable when dealing with the WA.)

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

The leader of Borovan, a moderate liberal has gotten drunk on the weekend and is rambling about how humans matter over climate change and yelled at the WA ambassador to vote AGAINST. Atmelia hesitated and requestioned whether she wanted it, and she kept demanding yes. Any press response from the government about the illogical deliberation is to be responded with that the resolution was just to mired over national soveirnty.

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Resolution passed 13741 to 2606

[Lord Dominator]

"Ah, my congratulations ambassador. A well-deserved win for you and your country."

[Kenmoria]

"Ah, my congratulations ambassador. A well-deserved win for you and your country."

“I look forward to the new rise in the sales and use of fibre-based clothing. I wonder what colours some of the ambassador said here will decide to wear.”

[Ru-]

"I ultimately voted in favor of this, as it really is an excellent piece of climate legislation overall. But that sweater thing made the decision more difficult then it had any right to be. I think that there are a few of my fellow ambassadors that really need to grow up. We are politicians, not comedians."

"Congratulations are in order regardless."