I’m actually of the opinion that this doesn’t actually matter all that much at the end of the day in terms of actual impact.
As everyone mentioned the Paris accords is mostly toothless and there was zero chance Trump’s cabinet would make progress towards these goals anyway, so I see formal withdrawal more of a formality than anything else. The damage was done the moment Trump was elected.
It might actually be better (for pro-climate folks) for the US to withdraw and get all the backlash vs. staying on and make zero progress.
I disagree, symbolic losses are still losses. If it was toothless, then why leave? If it wasn’t, then what was the true purpose of leaving?
There is validity to keeping a good face for your country in public perception. The current administration has thrown caution to the wind related to US image. If the result is one less brilliant mind wanting to immigrate here or one less foreign company wanting to bring production here or one less US company able to sell a product globally because of poor image, then truly there WAS an impact, and this and similar actions do indeed matter.
I actually agree with you - I was thinking more in terms of damage to the administration vs the country.
The way I view the options is something like this
-> Stay in Paris Accords
Likely progress on Paris Accord agreements : None
Impact on US Reputation/Credibility : Negative
Impact on Trump : Neutral / Positive.
-> Leave Paris Accords
Likely progress on Paris Accord agreements : None
Impact on US Reputation/Credibility : Very Negative
Impact on Trump : Negative.
Leaving the accords cleanly does kill the “Hey, Trump isn’t making progress on anything climate change related but remember he purposefully kept us in the Paris accords! He cares about climate change!” argument to bed, which I count as a plus.
“Americans are not walking away from the Paris Climate Agreement,” Bloomberg said. “Just the opposite — we are forging ahead. Mayors, governors, and business leaders from both political parties are signing on to to a statement of support that we will submit to the U.N. — and together, we will reach the emission reduction goals the United States made in Paris in 2015.”
Bloomberg also called for Americans to lead an effort “from the bottom up,” while also noting that “there isn’t anything Washington can do to stop us.”
So far, Bloomberg has recruited the governors of California, Washington and New York to pledge to help meet the carbon emissions reductions goals set out by the Paris agreement.
To your point, he could turn it into a win with actually following through on a new and better agreement. I’m too jaded to think he will though, given his track record.
For his administration to have cared about it in the first place was me just having wishful thinking that either he or and advisor would somehow come to their senses on how the agreement makes for a positive future.
Sounds like we have some years before it would happen, I guess we will see how it goes.
If only they had the prescience to have named it “Trump Saves the World: The New York Real Estate Disaster Prevention Accord”, I can’t help but believe we would still be in it.
Exxon, Conoco Philips, BP, and a bunch of other oil companies supported the Paris agreement. The CEO of Exxon (America’s largest oil producer) wrote a personal letter to Trump urging him to stay in the agreement. So lets not just blame big oil.
I suppose you could say it was still for shareholders long-term benefit, but they want the world to operate on a fair and consistent basis. Chances are they want to run an efficient, environmentally-compliant operation anyway, and this could open the door to more competition that isn’t efficient or compliant. The price of oil is falling today.
It’s literally bad for everyone on multiple levels.
I think Grunwald’s Politico article is by far the best on why Trump did what he did.
Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement was not really about the climate. And despite his overheated rhetoric about the “tremendous” and “draconian” burdens the deal would impose on the U.S. economy, Trump’s decision wasn’t really about that, either. America’s commitments under the Paris deal, like those of the other 194 cooperating nations, were voluntary. So those burdens were imaginary.
No, Trump’s abrupt withdrawal from this carefully crafted multilateral compromise was a diplomatic and political slap: It was about extending a middle finger to the world, while reminding his base that he shares its resentments of fancy-pants elites and smarty-pants scientists and tree-hugging squishes who look down on real Americans who drill for oil and dig for coal. He was thrusting the United States into the role of global renegade, rejecting not only the scientific consensus about climate but the international consensus for action, joining only Syria and Nicaragua (which wanted an even greener deal) in refusing to help the community of nations address a planetary problem. Congress doesn’t seem willing to pay for Trump’s border wall—and Mexico certainly isn’t—so rejecting the Paris deal was an easier way to express his Fortress America themes without having to pass legislation…
…
Of course, trolling the world is the essence of Trump’s America First political brand, and Thursday’s announcement reinforced his persona as an unapologetic rebel who won’t let foreigners try to tell America what to do, even when major corporations, his secretary of state, and his daughter Ivanka want him to do it. He was also leaning into his political identity as Barack Obama’s photographic negative, dismantling Obama’s progressive legacy, kicking sand in the wimpy cosmopolitan faces of Obama’s froufrou citizen-of-the-world pals.
Substantially, the Paris accord was a border line, meaningless gesture.
The non-binding nature, no mechanism for measuring goals, different standards for India and China. Hell the fact the Bloomberg can pay America’s share ($15 million) from the change he finds in his couch cushions. (.03% of his net worth) show just how little there is there.
The one thing I learned from David McKay’s terrific book on energy policy Sustainable Energy without the hot air. is that token gestures aren’t worth doing.
We all know that right way to react to an internet Troll is to not feeding the troll. I fear that over reaction by the liberal to the withdrawal is accomplishing exactly what President Bannon is hoping for.
A way for countries to communicate and coordinate on what future standards and target goals should be.
Getting the entire planet to agree on something and sit at the same table on it is pretty hard. Put another way, if this is a token gesture, what isn’t one? We can’t command everyone by holy writ to reduce their emissions. Maybe the standards need to be higher and enforcement mechanisms strengthened but you have to start somewhere. I don’t really see an alternative to this approach other than throw up your hands and hope for the best, punt to private industry, etc.
This shit isn’t even with repeating, and I’ve heard it from multiple members of the GOP.
It’s such fucking nonsense, this idea that Trump is doing to follow through on something. He doesn’t like doing work. He’s a lazy fuck. And he doesn’t understand any of this crap anyway.
On one hand “A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.”
On the other hand unless there is a plan/mechanism to take the remaining 1.7 milion steps why even start? I have not studied the framework of the Paris agreement to know if it really puts a mechanism place to complete the journey.
Certainly, the goals are so modest and the measuring process so poor that they fall well within in the error range of any climate models. Meaning if we get 2100 (I won’t of course) and the climate isn’t a disaster we will have no way of knowing if the Paris impact had any impact at all But if the climate is a disaster in 2100, then we know that it wasn’t enough. The problem with feel good, symbolic gestures is they give people a false sense of security, I don’t which group the Paris accord falls into an important step or feel good gesture.
Trump’s Razor applies to the Paris agreement same as it does everything else.
What is the stupidest reason for him to want to get out of the Paris agreement? It’s that he literally thinks it has something to do with Paris. And then Macron attacked him. So Trump goes “fuck Macron and fuck Paris, we’re out!”
I hadn’t considered this justification from his supporters’ demographic. Government is bad, bigger government is worse, national governments all agreeing must be a disaster, whatever the content of the agreement. Only by keeping everyone at each others’ throats do the govts become distracted enough to let the little guys have their freeeeeeeeeeedom.
