What's new

Donald Trump says U.S. will withdraw from Paris climate accord

MenInG

PakPassion Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Runs
217,993
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange-trump-idUSKBN18R1J4

President Donald Trump on Thursday said he will withdraw the United States from the landmark 2015 global agreement to fight climate change, spurning pleas from U.S. allies and corporate leaders in an action that fulfilled a major campaign pledge.

"We're getting out," Trump said at a ceremony in the White House Rose Garden in which he decried the Paris accord's "draconian" financial and economic burdens.

"In order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord," Trump said. But he added that the United States would begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris accord or "a new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers."

With Trump's action, the United States will walk away from nearly every nation in the world on one of the pressing global issues of the 21st century. The pullout will align the United States with Syria and Nicaragua as the world's only non-participants in the accord.

The United States was one of 195 nations that agreed to the accord in Paris in December 2015, a deal that former U.S. President Barack Obama was instrumental in brokering.

Supporters of the accord condemned Trump's move as an abdication of American leadership and an international disgrace.

"At this moment, when climate change is already causing devastating harm around the world, we do not have the moral right to turn our backs on efforts to preserve this planet for future generations," said U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, who sought the Democratic presidential nomination last year.

"Ignoring reality and leaving the Paris agreement could go down as one of the worst foreign policy blunders in our nation's history, isolating the U.S. further after Trump's shockingly bad European trip," Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse added.

Under the pact, which was years in the making, nations both rich and poor committed to reducing emissions of so-called greenhouse gases generated by burning fossils fuels and blamed by scientists for warming the planet.


The United States had committed to reduce its emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025. The United States, exceeded only by China in greenhouse gas emissions, accounts for more than 15 percent of the worldwide total.

Trump, who campaigned for president last year with an "America First" message, promised voters an American withdrawal.

U.S. supporters of the pact said any pullout by Trump would show that the United States can no longer be trusted to follow through on international commitments.

International leaders had pressed Trump not to abandon the accord. At their meeting last month, the pope gave Trump a signed copy of his 2015 encyclical letter that called for protecting the environment from the effects of climate change and backed scientific evidence that it is caused by human activity.

Despite pressure from allies in the Group of Seven rich nations at a meeting in Italy last week, Trump had refused to endorse the agreement, rebuffing leaders from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Britain.

Virtually every nation voluntarily committed to steps aimed at curbing global emissions of "greenhouse" gases such as carbon dioxide generated from burning of fossil fuels.

Leading climate scientists say the emissions trap heat in the atmosphere and have caused a warming planet, sea level rise, droughts and more frequent violent storms.

Last year was the warmest since records began in the 19th century, as global average temperatures continued a rise dating back decades that scientists attribute to greenhouse gases.

They warned that U.S. withdrawal from the deal could speed up the effects of global climate change, worsening heat waves, floods, droughts and storms.


During the campaign, Trump said the accord would cost the U.S. economy trillions of dollars with no tangible benefit. Trump has expressed doubts about climate change, at times calling it a hoax to weaken U.S. industry.

CAMPAIGN PROMISE

The Republican vowed during the campaign to "cancel" the Paris deal within 100 days of becoming president on Jan. 20, part of an effort to bolster U.S. oil and coal industries.

China, which overtook the United States as the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in 2007, and the European Union will seek on Friday to buttress the Paris agreement, with Li meeting top EU officials in Brussels.

In a statement backed by all 28 EU states, the EU and China were poised to commit to full implementation of the agreement, officials said.

Trump has already moved to dismantle Obama-era climate change regulations, including the U.S. Clean Power Plan aimed at reducing emissions from main coal-fired power plants.

Some U.S. states, including California, Washington and New York, have vowed to continue to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and continue engaging in the international climate agreement process.

Oil majors Shell and ExxonMobil Corp supported the Paris pact. Several big coal companies, including Cloud Peak Energy, had publicly urged Trump to stay in the deal as a way to help protect the industry's mining interests overseas, though others asked Trump to exit the accord to help ease regulatory pressures on domestic miners.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/3g5LYO9Osj">pic.twitter.com/3g5LYO9Osj</a></p>— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/870407981044834304">June 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
:broad
 
Watch out for more droughts similar to the one in Horn of Africa. More and more people will be migrating due to this.
 
The really disappointing element was when he said that America does not have a responsibility to the rest of the world, it needs to look after itself.

Yes, the American President needs to represent American interests - but if you are the leading the world's richest and most prosperous, powerful country, and a Global "Super-Power", you should feel very responsible for the world outside of your own borders.

America's behaviour and influence stretches so far that refusing to back something like an environmental treaty could have a genuinely negative impact on the whole planet.

Donald Trump is an Alpha Male leader, but not even he can rule over Mother Nature. You can't be the most powerful person on the planet if there is no planet to do it on.
 
Who cares about those petty small islands in Pacific and Indian ocean.Let them all drown except for Diego Garcia .
 
Who cares about those petty small islands in Pacific and Indian ocean.Let them all drown except for Diego Garcia .

Its not just about rising sea levels. Look how much the monsoon cycle of India has been fluctuating in the past 10 -15 years. Tamil Nadu, Kerala etc had their biggest droughts in 100-150 years, monsoons are arriving late, even when they do its in sudden burst of heavy showers, instead of steady rains like in the past , so its not helpful for agriculture or groundwater recharge.

Climate change is causing a whole lot of fluctuations around the world, lucky for trump, his country is placed geographically at such a good position that , it hasn't started to feel the effects. Africa and south asia which are very close to the equator are already facing some of the effects. Its the coastal or part of South India and east which will face the brunt of the changes upfront. We have to take it very seriously .

Already there are huge refugee population in Africa due to the drought, this will lead to a continuous exodus of people trying to move to more livable countries, which frankly isn't much of an option for most of our people.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A quick look at, following Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement today, where the rest of the earth stands <a href="https://t.co/cwP8FOFD8n">pic.twitter.com/cwP8FOFD8n</a></p>— DJ Judd (@juddzeez) <a href="https://twitter.com/juddzeez/status/870362342487465988">June 1, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Putting the humanity and the "right thing to do" aside. How much was this costing us the American tax payer?
 
One thing you have to admire about Trump. He keeps his promises and never back tracks under pressure. This is a very attractive trait and i don't blame people for being mesmerized by him.
 
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] we need more of this to get attention from the masses around the world!
 
I am no Trump fan but I don't think this was such a bad decision .This and withdrawing form TPP will be good for the American worker who is already suffering.
 
I am no Trump fan but I don't think this was such a bad decision .This and withdrawing form TPP will be good for the American worker who is already suffering.

Not really, now the likes of China, Europe and India will press ahead in growing their renewables sector whereas the US will be losing out.

Solar energy is starting to become more affordable and is growing faster than other energy-based industries. There are 10 times as many people working in solar than coal. There are 90,000 jobs in clean energy in Michigan alone. This is big opportunity missed by the US with major companies like Tesla, General Electric and even the CEO of Exxon Mobil opposing Trump's move.

Even if you thought it was a bad deal, at least keep your seat at the negotiating table.

Putting the humanity and the "right thing to do" aside. How much was this costing us the American tax payer?

Firstly the Paris Agreement is voluntary and non-binding, the US decides for itself how it wants to meet emissions targets so the effect on jobs, the economy and taxpayers depends on government policies.

Last year, the number of people working in the solar energy sector increased by 25%. The wind energy workforce increased by 32%. So Trump's argument about losing jobs doesn't make sense.

Secondly, this is a short sighted view. In the long run, if the effects of climate change cannot be mitigated then American taxpayers will pay an even greater price !

Already Americans on the coast and elsewhere are having to deal with rising sea levels and droughts. The US would also not be immune from the deleterious effects of climate change abroad in developing countries where it could trigger waves of mass migration and create climate refugees. Again, even if you thought it was a bad deal, at least keep your seat at the negotiating table.

71% of Americans support the Paris Agreement according to polls so if Trump claims he has the US taxpayers' interests at heart, he might want to try listening to them instead of the Koch Brothers and fossil industry lobbyists who he actually represents.
 
[MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION]

Firstly the Paris Agreement is voluntary and non-binding, the US decides for itself how it wants to meet emissions targets so the effect on jobs, the economy and taxpayers depends on government policies.

So in theory if Trump wanted he could still go about his way to tackle the issue of climate change right, what is the real point of the agreement since it is non-biding and more of a collective speech from countries who could say we're gong to try our best to deal with the issues our planet faces and then decide for themselves how much effort they want to put in more then being affected by the pressure or implications of an agreement
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wow.<br><br>Syria is signing the Paris accord.<br><br>That means the U.S., under Trump, is now the only nation on Earth to refuse climate action. <a href="https://t.co/t2xLZO6nrD">https://t.co/t2xLZO6nrD</a></p>— Eric Holthaus (@EricHolthaus) <a href="https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/927867966078808064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 7, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
We've seen the threads about smog in Lahore and Delhi, I can't imagine it being a lot better in other rapidly industrialising countries like China. How do these developing nations stack up against the US when it comes to commitment to the climate accord?

Maybe Trump has a point when he looks around at what's going on in the rest of the world?
 
Thought he had changed his mind on this one?
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trump says fairer deal might coax U.S. back into the Paris climate accord <a href="https://t.co/YeDnmrlgCz">https://t.co/YeDnmrlgCz</a> <a href="https://t.co/DMioXCQO27">pic.twitter.com/DMioXCQO27</a></p>— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) <a href="https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/951224674775715843?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 10, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Love him loathe him, Trump is the most entertaining politician ever!

Should have been in the circus business then. US policies impact the whole globe and with this joker at the helm things look pretty grim in the foreseeable future.
 
Should have been in the circus business then. US policies impact the whole globe and with this joker at the helm things look pretty grim in the foreseeable future.

The reality is Trump, in fact any leader for that matter, is nothing without their supporters. Pragmatically we should not be blaming Trump, we should be blaming the American electorate and the politicians more so. USA is so disconnected from reality it is unreal. I base this on anecdotal evidence too.

In the UK we have a similar situation with Jeremy Corbyn. Personally, I do not think he is that bad, but he managed to close the gap between the Tories and Labour in the infamous General Election last year, resulting in PM May to lose her majority. The same applied to the EU referendum. The issue was that politicians didn’t see outside of London, where the picture is very different. The same applies to Trump. East & West Coast, voted for Killary Clinton, but middle USA voted for Trump. (For reference the East & West coast are predominantly immigrants since it’s where immigrants land first.

I do not blame Trump for winning. Credit to him. He represents the American dream in many ways than one, the real issue is that politicians are disconnected with the electorate and reality.

Austerity breed fascism and right-wing populous politics, history has documented evidence of this phenomena, but alas politicians as per usual are only interested in money and ignore history.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump won his second term, but there are other reasons for that which perhaps deserve a separate thread. Needless to say, Trump has the full support of the Israeli occupied territories namely, The Senate, The House, and Congress. Evangelical Christians and Zionists have realised that Trump is truly a muppet and will dance to their tune. After all, there was a reason why Trump recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel – he had to get his Tax Bill passed.

However saying this, his story is unbelievable, and no doubt Movie scripts and TV series are currently being written in honour of Trump representing the American Dream!

Time to stack up on Guns, Gold, and Ammo! ;)
 
Joe Biden could bring Paris climate goals 'within striking distance'

The election of Joe Biden as president of the US could reduce global heating by about 0.1C, bringing the goals of the Paris agreement “within striking distance”, if his plans are fulfilled, according to a detailed analysis.

Biden’s policy of a target to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050, and plans for a $1.7tn investment in a green recovery from the Covid crisis, would reduce US emissions in the next 30 years by about 75 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide or its equivalents. Calculations by the Climate Action Tracker show that this reduction would be enough to avoid a temperature rise of about 0.1C by 2100.

However, Biden is likely to face stiff opposition to many of his proposals, from the Republican party nationally and at state level, while his room for manoeuvre will be limited by the Democrats’ showing in the Senate. If legal challenges to his plans are brought, they will be decided by a heavily conservative supreme court.

The US is the world’s biggest economy and second biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, but Donald Trump reversed measures taken by Barack Obama to reduce greenhouse gases, and rejected the Paris agreement on climate change, which binds nations to hold global heating to well below 2C, with an aspiration to limit temperature rises to 1.5C.

Trump’s stance left the US increasingly isolated among major economies. In recent weeks, China’s president, Xi Jinping, surprised the world by pledging to reach net zero emissions by 2060, and to cause emissions to peak by 2030. That would be enough to reduce the world’s projected temperature rise by 0.2C to 0.3C, according to Climate Action Tracker.

Japan has also recently endorsed a net zero target, as has South Korea, and the EU has its £1tn green deal. If Biden’s pledges were to be followed through, that would mean economies producing more than half of global carbon emissions had a publicly stated pledge of reaching net zero emissions by about 2050.

This adds up to the potential for a “historic tipping point” on the climate, according to Climate Action Tracker. The US and China’s pledges would be enough to reduce global heating to about 2.3C or 2.4C by the end of the century. That is about 25-40% of the effort needed to limit heating to 1.5C, the aspirational goal of the Paris agreement.

Bill Hare, of Climate Analytics, one of the partner organisations in the Climate Action Tracker, said: “This looks like an historic tipping point: with Biden’s election, China, the US, the EU, Japan, South Korea – two-thirds of the world economy and over 50% of global greenhouse gas emissions – have net zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century commitments. These commitments are very close, if not within, 1.5C-consistent pathways for this set of countries and for the first time ever puts the Paris agreement’s 1.5C limit within striking distance.”

Biden has promised to rejoin the Paris agreement and to invest in low-carbon technology that would put the US on a path to drastically lower emissions in the next decade.

Rejoining Paris will be a boost to international climate action, but domestically the president will face a deeply divided nation and may struggle to push forward his climate plans. Many states, cities and local governments are signed up to strong climate action, although some face legal challenges to doing so.

Under the Paris agreement, all countries must come forward every five years with strengthened national commitments – called nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – to curb greenhouse gas emissions, which means new NDCs stipulating fresh targets for 2030 are due by the end of this year. Biden will not be able to meet that deadline, but will be under pressure to draft a US NDC in time for the postponed UN climate summit, Cop26, which was scheduled to begin on Monday but will take place next November because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden will face stiff opposition from some business interests and from Republican climate sceptics emboldened by four years of Trump’s presidency. This may make it impossible to realise the full emissions reductions’ policies that Biden endorsed in his presidential campaign.

However, if under his presidency the US adopts a clear stance on the climate internationally, the impact will be much greater around the world than just the contribution from its own emissions reductions, say experts. The influence of the US is such that it would have a multiplier effect on other economies.

“It is the US driving the world in this direction that will be most important,” said Todd Stern, who served as the US special envoy for climate change under Obama. “If you have got the US, the EU, China working together you can expand to the whole world. It is not just about the US’s domestic emissions, but the US position as a world leader.”

Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser, now a lecturer at American University in Washington, said Biden could also push other countries to take faster action on the road to the 2050 goal. “Biden intends to reanimate the Paris process and much else, likely committing the US to a zero net emissions goal by 2050, while focusing on more aggressive 2030 targets, not just for the US, but by compelling China and other emitters towards more serious 2030 goals,” he said. “These are just the beginning of what promises to be an extraordinarily ambitious Biden international climate agenda, trying to make up time for the lost Trump years and prevent climate destabilisation.”

To seize the initiative, Biden should quickly set out a pathway to stiff emissions cuts by 2030, said Nat Keohane, senior vice-president for climate at the Environmental Defense Fund. “This is not just about the US re-entering the Paris agreement, but about a credible and ambitious target for 2030,” he said. “The Paris agreement is no longer about agreement, but about meeting the commitments and raising [countries’] ambition. To have the US back in the game rather than on the sidelines is critically important.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/joe-biden-paris-climate-goals-0-1c
 
Back
Top