Paris Climate Change Agreement 2016

Since Trump`s announcement, U.S. envoys – as well as on behalf – have continued to participate in U.N. climate negotiations to shore up the details of the agreement. Meanwhile, thousands of heads of state and government have intervened across the country to fill the void created by the lack of federal climate leadership, reflecting the will of the vast majority of Americans who support the Paris agreement. City and state officials, business leaders, universities and individuals included a base amount to participate in initiatives such as America`s Pledge, the United States Climate Alliance, We Are Still In and the American Cities Climate Challenge. Complementary and sometimes overlapping movements aim to deepen and accelerate efforts to combat climate change at the local, regional and national levels. Each of these efforts focuses on the willingness of the United States to work toward the goals of the Paris Agreement, despite Trump`s attempts to lead the country in the opposite direction. The Kyoto Protocol, a pioneering environmental treaty adopted at COP3 in Japan in 1997, is the first time nations have agreed on country-by-country emission reduction targets. The protocol, which only came into force in 2005, set binding emission reduction targets only for industrialized countries, based on the fact that they are responsible for most of the world`s high greenhouse gas emissions.

The United States first signed the agreement, but never ratified it; President George W. Bush argued that the agreement would hurt the U.S. economy because developing countries such as China and India would not be included. In the absence of the participation of these three countries, the effectiveness of the treaty was limited, as its objectives covered only a small fraction of total global emissions. There is a lot of misinformation about the Paris agreement, including the idea that it will hurt the U.S. economy. It was a series of unsubstantiated assertions that Trump repeated in his rose garden speech in 2017, arguing that the deal would cost the U.S. economy $3 trillion in jobs by 2040 and $2.7 million by 2025, making us less competitive with China and India. But, as the auditors pointed out, these statistics come from a March 2017 unmasked study that exaggerated the future cost of reducing emissions, underestimated advances in energy efficiency and clean energy technologies, and was completely unaware of the enormous health and economic costs of climate change itself.