Pros and Cons of the Paris Climate Change Agreement for America
As the atmospheric temperatures rise, global leaders have charted a course of action to stabilize the climate. This agreement, known as the Paris Climate Agreement, has one main outlier in the international community: the United States. On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced his intention to withdraw from the agreement, casting doubt on the ability of the U.S. to uphold its commitments to take climate action.
In this blog post, we give an overview of the agreement including what it contains, what motivated Donald Trump’s decision, and how it has nevertheless inspired a strong show of support.
Key facts about the Paris Climate Agreement
Here’s a brief primer on the contents of the agreement.
What are the main goals of the Paris Climate Agreement?
The Paris Agreement addresses a need to reduce heat-trapping greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in order to keep the atmospheric temperature low enough to support food systems, a healthy economy and a sustainable future for people around the globe.
- The primary target is to prevent the global atmospheric temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels, with a strong recommendation for capping that limit at 1.5 degrees Celsius. With this precise target, the world has an equally precise budget for the amount of GHGs it can play around with.
- Countries that sign and ratify the agreement create their own plans, called nationally determined contributions (NDCs), for achieving GHG reductions. This way, countries can independently determine their own best course of action, so that national sovereignty is upheld.
- However, the agreement also recognizes global inequalities surrounding climate change. For instance, in terms of cumulative CO2 emissions, the United States bears the most responsibility. For this reason, the agreement recognizes the need for developed countries to support the efforts of countries that lack funds and economic incentives to establish climate change policies. This primarily means financial and technological support.
- Finally, the Agreement aims at creating a framework for tracking and reporting GHG emissions based on scientific targets in a transparent manner, to avoid unseen “gas leaks” into the atmosphere.
If you’re not familiar with the Paris Agreement, that may have been a lot to take in all at once. Its aims basically boil down to: setting a science-based target, upholding national sovereignty, balancing global inequality and ensuring accountability.
When was the Paris Climate Agreement created?
In December of 2015 at the UNFCCC’s COP21 held in Paris, France, the world adopted the Paris Agreement, the successor to the Kyoto Protocol. Compared to the Kyoto Protocol, the agreement is marked by consensus with all 197 member states signed on (for now).
From April 22, 2016 to April 21, 2017, the signing period for the Paris Agreement opened. According to the World Resources Institute, “Signing is important because it indicates a commitment by that country to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the Agreement.”
Finally, member states should formally ratify the treaty for it to take full effect. However, the Paris Agreement establishes no deadline for signatories to do so. In total, 185 member states have ratified the Paris Agreement.
How many countries have signed the Paris Agreement?
Currently, all member states of the United Nations have signed on to the Paris Agreement, totalling 197 signatories. Syria was the last to sign the Paris Agreement on November 7, 2017, which currently makes the U.S. the only country unwilling to join as a signatory following the announcement made by President Trump (see below).
Is the Paris Agreement legally binding?
For signatories to the Paris Agreement, the treaty is not legally binding. However, if a signatory ratifies the treaty, it officially agrees to hold itself responsible to meet its targets and incorporate it into national laws. As of 2018, just thirteen signatories had not ratified the Paris Agreement: Angola, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Russia, South Sudan, Suriname, Turkey and Yemen.
President Trump wants out of the Paris Climate Agreement
When Obama signed the Paris Agreement in 2016, the U.S. pledged to reduce GHGs by 26-28 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels and to pay $3 billion to financially support developing countries for the energy transition.
After President Donald Trump was elected, he announced a pledge in June 1, 2017, to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. His announcement stirred controversy, but may not have as large of an impact as he would like. In response, many states, cities and companies reaffirmed their commitment to reduce GHGs.
When can the U.S. withdraw from the Paris Agreement?
Due to formal procedures, the U.S. exit from the agreement won’t fully take effect until November 4, 2020, one day after the next presidential election.
Why does Trump want to withdraw from the Paris Agreement?
President Trump claims that the Paris Agreement will hurt job growth, manufacturing and industries such as coal, natural gas, steel and cement. He expressed concern that American obligations were higher than those of China and India, and suggested that the U.S. would consider renegotiating the agreement.
These reasons don’t all add up, however. The countries that signed the Paris Agreement already consider it a renegotiated version of the Kyoto Protocol, and these renegotiations were largely led by the U.S. Difficulties with jobs and disadvantages for certain industries don’t depend on the contents of the Agreement, but on the way that the U.S. decides to meet its own targets. Lastly, Trump’s discomfort with its weighted responsibility for climate change denies the cumulative contributions the U.S. has made to climate change.
What’s the backstory to the Paris Agreement?
Before we get into the pros and cons of the Paris Agreement itself, it helps to recall how the Paris Agreement came about.
When Climate Change entered the international spotlight
In some ways, international climate change action has always seemed too little, too late. But if we turn back the clock to the first benchmark of activity, it came quite early on. In 1979, scientists held the first World Climate Conference, exploring the potential impacts of climate change on people.
Eventually, the international community made its own formal recognition of climate change by forming the International Panel on Climate Change in 1988. The IPCC released its first report in 1990, calling upon leaders to form a global treaty on climate change.
This led to the establishment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1994. All 197 member states of the UN signed the UNFCCC and its first Conference of Parties (COP1) was held in Berlin, Germany, in 1992.
As a result of this forward-thinking activity, the world adopted its first climate treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, in 1997 at COP3 in Kyoto, Japan. The treaty foremost challenges the world’s 37 developed countries to reduce GHG emissions. For developing countries, including coal-dependent China and India, participation remains optional.
The Protocol didn’t fully enter into force until 2005 when Canada and Russia signed on. The U.S. had already withdrawn from it in 2001 and Canada later withdrew in 2011. The Kyoto Protocol is still currently active until 2020, with targets for parties (192 in total) to reduce carbon emissions from 1990 levels by 18 percent.
Meanwhile, the Paris Agreement has taken the baton, replacing the Kyoto Protocol. It sets a new net-zero international target for 2050, according to negotiations that had aimed at correcting some of the Kyoto Protocol’s flaws.
Why the U.S. withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol
Trump’s Paris Climate Agreement announcement feels a little bit like déjà vu. The first time the U.S. declined to sign an international treaty on climate happened when President George W. Bush announced his intention to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol in 2001.
George Bush’s reasons to withdraw, some of which are similar to Trump’s reasons, related foremost to the U.S. economy. He argued that not enough environmental good would come from the Protocol in comparison with the economic drain it would place on the U.S. economy.
Moreover, the strategy of targeting the world’s worst polluters (developed countries only), rather than all polluters (developing countries included), put too much pressure on the U.S. He also felt incentives rather than punishments should be used to inspire climate action.
Finally, his arguments also relied upon skepticism about the science and the lack of clear solutions, sentiments which have since been debunked by the full consensus of the scientific community that climate change is happening and it is a manmade problem.
Paris climate agreement pros and cons
While it has some perceived imperfections, the underlying purpose of the Paris Agreement--to prevent climate change catastrophe--remains a noble cause. Here are some of its pluses and minuses.
Pitfalls of the Paris Climate Agreement
Setting aside the perspective of the U.S. for the moment, I would first like to address the pitfalls of the Paris Agreement for achieving its stated aims:
- The Paris Agreement limit won’t protect all countries and locations from the strong negative impacts of climate change. For vulnerable climates close to deserts, such as the Sahel region of Africa, the climate targets don’t go far enough to protect the people living there.
- Countries have so far only voluntarily made pledges (nationally declared contributions) to keep the atmospheric temperature below 2.7-3.0 degrees Celsius, which won’t get us anywhere close to the 1.5 degree Celsius “comfort zone.”
- Rivalries and diplomatic tension makes the “balance of inequalities” portion of the Paris Agreement particularly hard to implement. For instance, the U.S. agreed to voluntarily pay $3 billion dollars under the commitments made by President Obama.
- Efforts to measure, track and monitor GHGs lack standardization and may not live up to the agreement’s stated aim of transparency.
- Not to be understated, the fossil fuel industry and its friends (gas-powered automobiles, fossil-fuel powered utilities, etc.) will likely face consequences as fossil fuels get phased out. However, it’s important to note that this transition doesn’t just result from the Paris Agreement. The price of renewable energy has dropped below the price of fossil fuels, giving developers an incentive to invest in renewable energy projects.
In short, the Paris Agreement might look like a bad deal to some, but it represents significant progress on getting the world to agree to take climate action.
Benefits of Paris Climate Agreement
While all of the premises of the Paris Climate Agreement are beneficial, there are some less obvious benefits that should also be noted.
- We have an unwieldy global climate change problem to solve, and the Paris Agreement tackles it.
- The Paris Agreement has far more international consensus than the Kyoto Protocol ever had.
- It has gained support from private entities, even from fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil, Chevron and Shell, showing broad support beyond state-level governance.
- It is compatible with other internationally recognized aims to protect the environment, such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
It comes with added health benefits, since efforts to reduce GHGs can also improve air quality. Air pollution currently kills 7 million people every year.
We are still in
Many countries that had achieved consensus on the Paris Agreement felt frustrated by Trump’s announcement. Yet, the growing level of awareness of and concern about climate change has triggered leaders to reaffirm their commitments. States, cities and corporations throughout the United States have expressed their continued support for the agreement.
What does We are Still In mean?
Following Trump’s announcement to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, a groundswell of support for the agreement erupted. As a result, a number of organizations formed to recognize formal climate change commitments in line with the Paris Agreement by local entities, organizations and businesses in the U.S. Here are a few of them.
We are Still In is an ad-hoc agreement with 3,500 signatories expressing support for the Paris Agreement, and according to its website, these signatories, “represent a constituency of more than half of all Americans, and taken together, they represent $6.2 trillion, a bigger economy than any nation other than the U.S. or China.”
America’s Pledge is designed to serve as a stand in for the federal government to help the states and organizations with their own climate commitments to coordinate and aggregate the impacts of their actions. This gives America a way to show the impact achieved by the nation as a whole.
The United States Climate Alliance helps coordinate state-level activities aimed at achieving the goals set out by the Paris Agreement commitments the United States made when it initially became a signatory.
House of Representatives Climate Change Legislation
In May, the Democrat-led House of Representatives passed its first noteworthy climate change legislation in about a decade with a 231-190 majority of votes. It aims at preventing the U.S. from withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. After it goes on to the Republican-led Senate, it could easily get voted down, however.
Whether or not the U.S. remains a signatory to the Paris Agreement, it is clear that leaders throughout America still feel the need to make climate action and commit to reduce GHGs for a sustainable future.
Don’t you love to sip on a tasty beverage while reading articles on the internet?
Sip comfortably with our long-lastingCruisers that come with their own metal straw (and straw cleaning brush!).
Compared to paper coffee cups, they’re a lot more gentle on the fingertips (no more burns) and the landfill (no more waste).