Strange, that's not what was said at the UN last week. How could that be?
Nor what the noted experts in this thread have been saying - so who is correct President Obama claiming the US has reduced emissions the most or those world renown soon-to-be IPCC contributors Medhead & Moody?
Seems you just can't trust the "yes we can" (lie, mislead, misrepresent, deceive and deny any responsibility) President in this case can we?
U.S. carbon emissions rise despite Obama climate plan
USA TODAY 5:19 p.m. EDT September 26, 2014
U.S. emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide have risen 6% in the last two years despite the Obama administration's efforts to curb global warming, federal data show.
Reversing several years of declines, its emissions from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) rose 2.7% during the first half of this year, compared to the same period in 2013, and 6% compared to 2012, according to the Energy Information Administration's "Monthly Energy Review."
This increase is a setback for President Obama, who touted U.S. progress in cutting emissions at this week's historic U.N. Climate Summit in New York, attended by representative from more than 120 countries.
"Over the past eight years, the United States has reduced our total carbon pollution by more than any other nation on Earth," he said, adding the U.S. is on track to meet his 2009 pledge to cut carbon emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020.
Indeed, until 2013, the U.S. was well on its way toward meeting that goal. Its
energy-related carbon emissions had fallen 13.4% from 2005 through 2012, according to the EIA data. But given increases in the last 18 months, that decline since 2005 now stands at 10.7%. {
Very clever editing here - increase in ALL US SOURCES of carbon emissions is greater due to increased transportation, industrial and commercial use in addition to electricity generation}
In his U.N. speech, Obama cited the U.S. surge in non-polluting energy sources such as wind and solar. While power generated by
solar panels doubled during the first six months of this year compared to 2012 and that of
wind turbines rose 31% in that two-year period,
they remain a tiny share of U.S. energy production.
US carbon emissions have been stable or declined over the last decade. By contrast,
Chinese emissions have increased over 170 percent while
Indian emissions have increased over 90 percent. Therefore, climate policy requires a comprehensive approach incorporating coordinated legislation, international diplomacy and a thorough deliberative process. However, this proposal is risky, expensive, and will do nothing to address the global nature of carbon emissions. EPA’s proposal comes with real risks for the health and economic well-being of our country, and the proposal should not be finalized as currently drafted.
This graph finishes in 2010. Updated for the figures to the end of 2013 would see it 10-11% higher.
... So putting up costs for Australian businesses and consumers, hastening the demise of energy intensive sectors was just a rounding error in the global equation.