menu close menu


Should The Us Join The Paris Climate Agreement

Trump`s exit from the Paris accord will have an impact on other countries by cutting financial assistance to the Green Climate Fund. [12] The end of US funding of $3 billion will have a final impact on climate change research and will reduce society`s chances of meeting the Paris Agreement goals and omit U.S. contributions to future IPCC reports. [13] [14] Trump`s decision will also affect CO2 emission space and carbon prices. [15] The withdrawal of the United States will also mean that the place where the global climate regime can be adopted will be accessible to China and the EU. [16] But without the United States, the balance between the parties that signed the Paris Agreement shifts in China`s favor on key issues that have not yet been resolved. According to Michael Oppenheimer, a climatologist at Princeton University in New Jersey, China could resist demands for follow-up and detailed reports on how countries implement their policies and achieve their goals. ”It doesn`t bode well for the effectiveness of the Paris agreement,” he says. 7. Continuing to act in the Paris Agreement is what the Americans want: if, for no other reason (and I hope we have given you six compelling reasons!), the US administration should stay in the Paris agreement because that is what American citizens want. A representative poll of the country, conducted after the 2016 elections, showed that Americans supported U.S. participation in the Paris accord by an overwhelming 5-1 majority.

The Paris Agreement has been essential for many corporate promises, including Amazon and Cargill. The historically right-wing group of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the president`s decision to withdraw from the agreement. Some fear that the U.S. withdrawal will lead other countries to take a slow stance, at a time when scientists say efforts need to be accelerated. The White House said Trump would end the implementation of former President Barack Obama`s CO2 reduction targets,[35] and that the withdrawal would be consistent with the years of withdrawal processes under the agreement. [4] On September 16, 2017, an EU official said that the Trump administration had apparently weakened its position on exiting the agreement. The White House informed the press that it had not changed its position on the agreement. [37] [38] USA Today said in an editorial: ”There was no grandeur in the decision it made on Thursday, but only the increased prospect of a climate-stricken globe left for future generations.” [188] The New York Times called it ”outrageous” and said that Trump ”knew nothing or cared little about the science that understugs with the strong warnings about environmental disorders.” [189] The next challenge for the government will be the 2030 target it intends to present for next year`s international climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland.


Comments are closed.