It’s almost certain that human-induced climate change has a solid scientific consensus behind it.
It’s just as certain that efforts by the US government to productively solve it will amount to little.
Summary: The answer to your question is uncertain.
How much consensus you have depends on exactly what questions you ask.
Just about everybody agrees that the climate is changing.
Fewer agree that humans are causing it.
Even fewer believe humans can do anything to prevent it.
And still fewer believe that climate change will spell the end of mankind as we know it.
… and others believe it’s a new punitive tax plan and a socialist (think communism) scheme to redistribute wealth.
CSA
Well one problem with CO2 emissions is that in solution it forms a weak acid called carbonic acid(which helps form caves,etc)and may help metal ions get soluble.which trees have little tolerance forl,agree about drought killing trees,but in my area some species are retreating to higher elevations,make of it what you will,but in my opinion cars have an effect on the enviroment
If we could find anyone who made it through the dust bowl maybe we should ask them how they did it. I remember seeing rabbits running rampant and they were killing them with clubs there were so many. Must have seemed like the end of the world back then. The study of history makes you realize there is not much new under the sun.
Well one problem with CO2 emissions is that in solution it forms a weak acid called carbonic acidCarbonic acid is another name for carbonated water or seltzer water if you prefer. I have often made my own seltzer water by putting chunk of dry ice into a pitcher of water and letting it mix with the water. Tastes just like Perrier.
Just like Perrier? Blah! 
Yes, but Perrier gets its CO2 from volcanic activity or something like that. It’s infused with good natural CO2, as opposed to the evil CO2 that humans create.
Doesnt matter the source,acid(ph changes) affect marine life and plant life(I think this audience is sophisticated enough to know what carbonic acid is)Oh by the way the “Deep Horizon” oil well blowout is still apparently leaking oil into one of the formerly most productive marine ecosystems in the world,the Gulf is ruined!
BPs answear to the cleanup was to spew and further pollute the waters with an extremly toxic "dispersant people can only bury their heads in the sand for so long,the "ecobomb’ is ticking
The Gulf of Mexico will recover and in fact already largely has. If nature had no way of dealing with petroleum, the Gulf would have been dead long ago. Oil has been naturally seeping into the Gulf for eons.
Somehow, whenever I read one of your posts, I imagine the song “O Fortuna” (Carmina Burana) playing in the background.
The Gulf of Mexico will recover and in fact already largely has
Says who??? It’s in the process of recovery…but has a LONG ways to go.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/20/3428269/bp-oil-spill-four-year-anniversary/
You have to agree though that this Paris affair was largely a shake down of countries that have their acts together to countries that have yet to establish themselves with effective governments. They want a commitment of $100 billion a year for the pain to go away. No not want, demand. My neighbor has more money than I do. I think it is high time I go talk to him about sending some of that cash my way. He’s polluting too much with his cars, ATV, boats, snow mobiles, etc. and should pay me. The Nigerian emails didn’t work too well so they’ll try a climate shake down.
When one side of the argument is to pound out and bleed out every scintilla of profit in the short term while turning a blind eye to collateral damage while the other side demands that we return to subsistance farming and nature worship there isn’t much effort being made to find a practical long term solution to the environmental problem. Are we to decide between driving a Hummer or pedaling a bike with no sensible alternatives? Talk radio would have us think so.
@RodKnox Yes the extremists always make the most noise. Neither Trump or Ralph Nader have the right solution for mitigation and adaptation to accommodate more severe climate conditions.
The book I mentioned in a previous past, by Bjorn Lomborg, called “Smart Solutions to Climate Change, Comparing Costs and Benefits”, identifies all the issues and sensible solutions.
The problem we have is that very few Climate Activists have any training in Chemistry or engineering and spout solutions from the hip. What might work for a farmer in Montana won’t work for the average city dweller.
Our own family reduced green house gasses by 45% below the Kyoto designated 1990 level by 2007, the UN target date being 6% by 2012. We did this simply by using all available products and technologies available and all modifications paid back within 5 years. It also meant changing from two 8 cylinder cars to two 4 cylinder cars. A side benefit was a 45% reduction in home heating costs and a similar reduction in car fuel cost.
Electric utilities have to develop smart grids if any of us can economically clad our houses with solar panels.
I gotta go along with @Docnick on that last post. I HATE paying the power company, the water company and the gasoline companies. Efficiency is the biggest bang for the buck. Every home I’ve owned has been been insulated and/or had better windows installed. Insulation resulted in 2 seasons of payoff and 40% reduction of energy. My latest window/door/slider project has netted me 15% so far. One of our cars is 14 years old 4 door sedan with a turbo 4 cylinder, just like the new cars, getting 31 mpg highway. NOT spending money on energy is its own financial reward. I just wish solar panels and inverters would drop another 30%!
Sorry BLE,the evidence says otherwise,go talk to the shrimpers and such and the people that developed a skin condition from our friend big oils answear to millions of gallons of crude pouring into the the Gulf.There is supposedly a pool of oil a thousand feet deep under the seawater(in the area where the water is deep)wanna bet you still cant find tarballs and sludge up at the EXXON Valdez site?Thats like saying the mountain top removal coal mines in West Virginia,will cure themselves in a decade(Remember clean coal and the Dan River?remember when the Snake river turned yellow a few months ago?The list goes on and on,throw a few dollars to the hungry masses,while the Fatcats retreat to Jackson Hole or favorite Gated Community,we are affecting the enviroment pure and simple,we may never destroy the sphere of the Earth,but we sure can foul up the tiny part that keeps us alive,so, as I said"believe what you will"
I get the feeling,that perhaps you dont care for any enviromental regulating agency,but the fact is that most big businesses have a poor track record of cleaning up after themselves.(I do have to agree about the Paris business,however,I consider most everything the UN sponsers,questionable)
A good summary:
There are only 2 views on mesures to protect the environment, there are those who reject any mandates and any tax funded efforts and insist that corporations will be good stewards of the environment, then there are those who insist that only when the salmon are free to swim to Denver and everyone lives in high rise communes with gardens on the roof can we begin to see a return to Nature(?).
And personally, it seems that most of the country is apathetic to any issue that doesn’t affect them significantly. I have mentioned here before that in 1968 the smog was so bad in Southern California that when driving along the San Diego freeway during the day I could only see two light poles. Beyond that distance was a wall of smog. I have visited San Diego in recent years and the air is as clear as it was in Flagstaff but many residents there now never saw the problem or have long since forgotten and They complain about how much it costs to put 95 octane in their 500 horse power muscle cars.
The CNN summary is a good one - lots of unknown remaining effects, lots of recovery in some areas. To put the spill in some perspective, the oil leaked was about the same amount as is leaked in the entire Gulf each year from naturally-occurring vents. There are lots of microbes that consume the vented hydrocarbons, and tar balls are often from those vented oils.
A terrible event, absolutely, but much recovery has occurred, much remains to happen.