In 2015, the Obama Administration, along with Paris and other developed countries drafted up the Paris Climate Agreement. It is said that climate change is happening and Earth is merely a couple degrees off from reverting back into the bubbling muck of molten nothingness it once was.
The idea of heightened carbon emissions causing global temperature change is backed by mounds and mounds of scientific research to support the theory, thus the conclusion that the world must unite in order to get a grasp on the potential catastrophe of turning our precious planet into an uninhabitable rock.
Over the decades there have been attempts to address this concern like the 1997 Kyoto and the 2009 Copenhagen.
Stripped down to its basics, the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement is a way to bring developing countries into the green scene and reduce emissions while building renewable energy to reduce and eliminate overproduction of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere. In order to achieve this, top emissions producing nations (193 countries total) signed the Paris Climate Agreement as a voluntary vow to do their part in reducing global climate.
Recently, Trump joined the very small list of nations who refuse to join the ‘Climate Agreement’ that Paris is proposing. When boiled for bare bones, at the heart of the agreement, some could argue an underlying agenda to redistribute the world’s wealth.
As a businessman, President Trump backed out of the signing, not in total agreeance with spending more money to advance in a field where the US is at the forefront. Trump sees it as trivial, questioning why a nation who is trillions in debt, would donate billions to helping other countries reach predetermined emissions that are considered safe.
The problem with larger nations chipping in to aid developing countries, come in the sporadic nature of monetary relief requests without definitive values. For example, Yemen, who agreed to reduce their emissions by 1 percent, can now reduce their emissions by up to 14 percent, with financial backing. The issue comes when questions arise on exactly how much it will take to get them to that point. This scenario has become a common occurrence from many of the 193 countries to sign the Climate Agreement.
Superficially, the idea of everyone working together to create a healthier planet is merely a dream, hope, and whisper from someone who has not been introduced to capitalism. If money is to be spent, in most cases investors are expecting money to be made.
Even before Paris’ Climate Agreement and with the creation of CAFE( Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards, there were no notable changes, which raises the thought of no change being evident after the Paris Agreement, therefore the entire agreement should be null.
The real way to combat these growing concerns is to allow research to organically find solutions. It is easy to find problems and then answers to those problems, but the main dilemma comes when finding solutions that allow us, humans, to continue our lives without noticeably changing the way we partake in daily activities. This is similar to the fracking revolution when America made the big change from coal to natural gas. It was cleaner, cheaper and for these reasons did not have to be force-fed to consumers through a series of channeled mandates and subsidies.
Standing against global warming with large international agreements as tools, the battle will never be won. It ‘s only when America’s energy and technology sectors create innovative solutions that will give consumers cleaner energy, at cheaper prices, without the need to work against the grain.
While Trump’s retraction from the agreement should not be the sole reason it falls apart; it should contribute to the fuel to feed the fire of future advancements to find a tech that can solve our issues without forcing us to change our lives, regardless of Global Warming being our fault.
Should Trump reconsider putting the nation further in debt by joining the agreement, or should the US look to new methods for improving, instead of relying on upgrades of past innovations?
