IF the US was represented, it will be interesting to find out IF the Biden Administration will go through the Constitutionally mandated Treaty process or just implement it in the undemocratic process of Executive Orders and new regulatory rules (e.g., citizens having no input at all).
Grok, when you were reading the recommendations were you thinking to yourself, “This is a bunch of word salad gobbledygook!”? I sure did.
The reason why is because all that these decrees contain are nothing more than keywords for making political gains … but ultimately without any substance or meaningfulness. What the heck does 90% of that wishlist look like in the real world? It’s one thing to push talking points but another entirely to provide concrete, practical solutions that have had a ROI benefit analysis done on it.
At least Will Arnold wrote like an engineer - straightforward for the most part.
However, when he drifted to:
"Establish an “Intergovernmental Council for Buildings and Climate” gathering governments and facilitated by the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, to exchange insights, share achievements, address obstacles, formulate recommendations, discuss follow-ups and assess the implementation of this Declaration and, for the concerned, other intergovernmental initiatives, recommendations and action plans."
He lost me. At least we'll know that nothing will happen quickly because GOVERNMENT! and you know what happens when number of communicants rises, the discussion time goes logarithmic and the possible outcomes become more odious and awful as each faction tries to outdo the other in concentrating all Power to Govt...
I should add that for such a document to become law here in the US, the document MUST be presented to the US Senate to be voted upon (the "consent" part in our Constitution). Otherwise, it's just a stupid piece of paper from a legal perspective.
That's why the Paris Accord was only wishful thinking; even labeled a "Treaty", any such handling means that the next President can easily override any E.O.'s to "turn back the clock". The fact that Obama did even bother to try to use the Constitution proscribed process showed it had no political juice on which agreement could be created.
Did Canada endorse the declaration? If we did, do you know who will be leading the change? Surely we must change the laws around demolition, establish incentives for re-use and recycling of whole buildings, as well as capturing and reusing material from waste streams.
IF the US was represented, it will be interesting to find out IF the Biden Administration will go through the Constitutionally mandated Treaty process or just implement it in the undemocratic process of Executive Orders and new regulatory rules (e.g., citizens having no input at all).
Grok, when you were reading the recommendations were you thinking to yourself, “This is a bunch of word salad gobbledygook!”? I sure did.
The reason why is because all that these decrees contain are nothing more than keywords for making political gains … but ultimately without any substance or meaningfulness. What the heck does 90% of that wishlist look like in the real world? It’s one thing to push talking points but another entirely to provide concrete, practical solutions that have had a ROI benefit analysis done on it.
At least Will Arnold wrote like an engineer - straightforward for the most part.
However, when he drifted to:
"Establish an “Intergovernmental Council for Buildings and Climate” gathering governments and facilitated by the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, to exchange insights, share achievements, address obstacles, formulate recommendations, discuss follow-ups and assess the implementation of this Declaration and, for the concerned, other intergovernmental initiatives, recommendations and action plans."
He lost me. At least we'll know that nothing will happen quickly because GOVERNMENT! and you know what happens when number of communicants rises, the discussion time goes logarithmic and the possible outcomes become more odious and awful as each faction tries to outdo the other in concentrating all Power to Govt...
...instead of other solutions. Don't doubt me!
I should add that for such a document to become law here in the US, the document MUST be presented to the US Senate to be voted upon (the "consent" part in our Constitution). Otherwise, it's just a stupid piece of paper from a legal perspective.
That's why the Paris Accord was only wishful thinking; even labeled a "Treaty", any such handling means that the next President can easily override any E.O.'s to "turn back the clock". The fact that Obama did even bother to try to use the Constitution proscribed process showed it had no political juice on which agreement could be created.
Did Canada endorse the declaration? If we did, do you know who will be leading the change? Surely we must change the laws around demolition, establish incentives for re-use and recycling of whole buildings, as well as capturing and reusing material from waste streams.