THE UNITED STATES HAVE PULLED OUT OF THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT THE WORLD?
Photograph by Din M Shibly
If people in glasshouses shouldn’t throw stones, the people creating the greatest gas emissions shouldn’t throw banter. On June 1st, President Trump decided that the USA, the world’s largest carbon emitter, would be leaving the Paris Climate Agreement. The president announced that he would leave the 2015 agreement at the Rose Garden on July 1st citing, “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”
The agreement was signed by 195 nations to collectively battle rising temperatures which are inflicting the world’s poorest countries such as Bangladesh and parts of Africa. Contrary to President Trump’s allegations, the agreement does not require nations to allocate funds to combat climate change; it makes each country aware and active regarding the level of carbon emission that they are generating. The USA is only 6% of the world’s population. However, it is responsible for 33% of the world’s total pollution making the matter much more pressing for the most powerful nation in the world.
Furthermore, the alternative energy sector is exponentially growing and is predicted to be a $6 trillion dollar industry by 2030. Trump’s act not only goes against an entirely new job market, but it also counteracts the more than 600 American investors and businesses that have signed an agreement to become more environmentally conscious in recognition of the Paris Agreement. Markets such as fossil fuels are losing jobs as alternative energy sources such as the solar industry are being recognized as more viable and sustainable sources. Therefore, the president’s “concern” for the energy sector seems to come from the small focus on the present rather than the larger scope of the future.
COLLUDED ON CLIMATE
Photograph form unsplash.com
“THE COST TO THE ECONOMY AT THIS TIME WOULD BE CLOSE TO $3 TRILLION IN LOST GDP.”
Two representatives of the main pollution generators of the USA, the US Chamber of Commerce and the American Council sponsor the report that the president has cited. The report fails to mentions any of the long-term benefits and the cost-saving mechanisms that will reduce the cost of energy consumption in the future.
“IN SHORT, THE AGREEMENT DOESN’T ELIMINATE COAL JOBS. IT JUST TRANSFER THOSE JOBS OUT OF AMERICA AND THE UNITED STATES, AND SHIPS THEM TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES.”
The president fails to recognize that the USA may be a sovereign nation but its industries will not flourish simply within the nation. The coal industry is dwindling in demand as a result of natural gases and alternative energy practices that are being implemented across the globe. So you can’t exactly heighten the demand for a dismal product through isolation.
“EXITING THE AGREEMENT PROTECTS THE UNITED STATES FROM FUTURE INTRUSIONS ON UNITED STATES’ SOVEREIGNTY AND MASSIVE FUTURE LEGAL LIABILITY.”
With the consideration that this is a legally nonbinding contract, the result of which would probably lead to the shake of the head or nod of disapproval from other nations. The president seems to be taking the matter much more seriously than the commitment the USA has made in curbing their emissions by 28%.
“YET, UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, WE ARE EFFECTIVELY PUTTING THESE (ENERGY) RESERVES UNDER LOCK AND KEY, TAKING AWAY THE GREAT WEALTH OF OUR NATION – IT’S GREAT WEALTH, IT’S PHENOMENAL WEALTH.”
Alternative sources of energy have cut the carbon footprint of the USA by 12%. Considering that there are cheap and responsible drilling techniques to procure oil and gas, the Trump’s administration blind eye to making companies responsible for their methane emissions seems to be the contrary.
“BEYOND THE SEVERE ENERGY RESTRICTION INFLICTED BY THE PARIS ACCORS, IT INCLUDES YET ANOTHER SCHEME TO REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH OUT THE UNITED STATES THROUGH THE SO-CALLED GREEN CLIMATE FUND- NICE NAME WHICH CALLS FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO SEND $100 BILLION TO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ALL ON TOP OF AMERICA’S EXISTING AND MASSIVE FOREIGN AID PAYMENTS.”
Under the Obama administration, the USA itself pledged to give $3 billion towards the agreement, and it has only given a third of that. Moreover, this amount would pay for less than 7% of the proposed wall that Trump is keen on building.
Considering the taxpayer can spend $100 million on Melania and Barron staying in NYC for the rest of the year, Trump’s finances regarding the nation are not as savvy as they are for his businesses.
BETWEEN 1850-2014
EMERGING AT THE EIFFEL
President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has brought the matter to a much wider platform. Nevertheless, the agreement is one that set motion to significant innovation and attention to reduce the irreversible detriments of climate change.
MITIGATING THROUGH MEETINGS
Though the first conference to review the plan was to take place in 2023 and future decisions will be made every five years after, numerous nations have called for a conference in 2018 to understand exactly how to tackle gas emissions.
TACKLING TEMPERATURE
The goal is to ensure that the global temperature does not exceed more than 1.5° C per year. This would suppress the effects of climate change to a time before the world had industrialized.
FINANCING THE FORECAST
The agreement calls for all developing nations to support developing nations with a collective amount of $100 billion. The financial assistance will be reviewed in 2023, when a new target may be set.
STRATEGY SPECIFIC
Each country that is participating in the climate agreement is allowed to create their individual plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This will also be reviewed for efficacy and applied amongst other nations.
ECONOMICS OF ENERGY
The Paris convention aims to make sure that renewable energy advances. For example, photovoltaic energy prices have dropped by 60% or more throughout many regions. The agreement seeks to support these ventures to upscale and optimize.
