“The international community has done this twice. We have withdrawn twice from a climate agreement, which was largely designed around us. This makes them prudent to renegotiate with us,” larsen says. Others say the U.S. withdrawal is due in part to the Obama administration`s inability to have the U.S. Senate ratify the Paris agreement. Since then, Trump has struck down dozens of climate-related regulations, including rules on air pollution, emissions, drilling and oil and gas extraction. During his first presidential term and his re-election campaign, he made no secret of his taste for fossil fuels and the industry that supplies them. In a report released last month by the U.S. Department of Energy, oil and gas are touted as “energy security and support for our quality of life,” not to mention the climate risks associated with continued use of carbon-rich fuels. The impending exit was widely seen as the abandonment of the country`s responsibility for its role in the warming that has already taken place.
The United States had withdrawn from the Kyoto climate agreement years earlier. As president, I cannot look at the well-being of American citizens any other way. The Paris climate agreement is simply the latest example of the Washington agreement that disadvantages the United States for the exclusive good of other countries and leaves American workers – whom I love – and taxpayers to absorb costs in the form of lost jobs, lower wages, closed factories and very low economic output. Compliance with the terms of the Paris agreement and the energy restrictions it has imposed on the United States could cost America up to 2.7 million jobs by 2025, according to the National Economic Research Associates. That includes 440,000 fewer jobs in manufacturing – not what we need – believe me, that`s not what we need, including auto employment and the continued decimating of vital American industries, on which countless communities depend. They count for so many things, and we would give them so little. After ratification, the agreement requires governments to submit their emission reduction plans. Ultimately, they must play their part in keeping global temperatures well below 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial period and making “efforts” to keep them at 1.5 degrees Celsius.
And if you go down, you`ll fulfill another campaign promise to the American people. Know that I am grateful for your strength, courage and firmness in serving and leading our country. In short, the agreement does not eliminate coal jobs, it only transfers those jobs from the United States and the United States and ships them overseas. This agreement is not so much about climate as it is about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States. The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris Agreement — they went wild; they were so happy – for the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, in a very, very great economic disadvantage. A cynic would say that the obvious reason for the economic competitors and their desire to stay in the agreement is that we continue to suffer this great self-inflicted economic injury. It would be very difficult to compete with other countries in other parts of the world. And even within the United States, cities, states and businesses have effectively reduced emissions reduction targets, even with federal action. Nearly half of the U.S. states and many cities representing more than 65% of the country`s population have set significant reduction targets, and more than 4,000 cities, tribes, businesses and other organizations have pledged to maintain the goals at the Paris level.