Which Countries Left The Paris Agreement
In a June 1, 2017 televised address in the White House Rose Garden, Trump said, “To fulfill my solemn duty to protect the United States and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement,” adding, “Ultimately, the Paris Agreement at the highest level is very unfair to the United States.”  He said that the agreement, if implemented, would cost $3 trillion in GDP and 6.5 million jobs in the United States.  He added that it would “undermine our economy, cripple our workers” and “effectively decapitate our coal industry.”  He said he was open to renegotiating the agreement or negotiating a new agreement, but European and UN leaders said the pact “cannot be renegotiated at the request of one party.”  Trump also criticized the Green Climate Fund and called it a program to redistribute wealth from rich to poor countries.  “What Obama did at the end of his second term was fundamentally undemocratic to sign a Paris agreement without going to the Senate and Congress and doing it instead via an executive,” said yvo De Boer, former UN climate chief. Turkey and three major oil-exporting nations are among the seven countries that have yet to ratify the 2015 Paris climate agreement. Angola joined Kyrgyzstan and Lebanon and ratified in 2020, meaning the 190-nation agreement was formally approved by 197 nations. In short, the agreement does not eliminate coal jobs, it only transfers those jobs from the United States and the United States and ships them overseas. This agreement is not so much about climate as it is about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States. The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris Agreement — they went wild; they were so happy – for the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, in a very, very great economic disadvantage. A cynic would say that the obvious reason for the economic competitors and their desire to stay in the agreement is that we continue to suffer this great self-inflicted economic injury. It would be very difficult to compete with other countries in other parts of the world. Many of the major auto companies and airlines had already invested billions in emissions reductions and are unlikely to change course.
General Motors, the largest automaker in the United States, immediately stated, “Our position on climate change has not changed… We are publicly committed to climate protection,” reaffirming our support for various climate commitments. Analyst Rebecca Lindland also pointed out that automakers did not have any specific restrictions under the agreement and that nothing had changed. Even if Trump relaxed other restrictions on the auto industry, allowing the production of less polluting cars, these cars still had to meet the standards before being exported to other continents, or even some states. Jason Bordoff, an energy policy expert at Columbia University, agreed that a withdrawal would make no difference to the economy and argued that it would be determined by market conditions such as oil prices and gas prices. At the same time, airlines have spent billions to find more fuel-efficient flight options – fuel is a company`s second-biggest effort after work, and therefore using less fuel (meaning less emissions) is in their financial interest.  Kabir Nanda and Varad Pande, senior consultant and partner at Dahlberg, argued that despite the U.S. withdrawal, the U.S. private sector continues to engage in renewable energy and technology.
It is also remarkable that solar energy has become cheaper than coal in more and more countries.  The 2015 pioneering agreement aims to limit global warming to a level “significantly below” 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. But in June 2017, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States – the world`s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases – would step down
Categorised as: Uncategorized