The non-binding and unenforceable Paris Climate Agreement goes into full force today and the U.S. election is sparking worries among the world’s top climate alarmists. One candidate, Republican presidential nominee #Donald Trump, has vowed to cancel the #Climate Change accord if it costs American jobs. The other, Democratic presidential nominee #Hillary Clinton, plans to expand on it, despite her split personality on fossil fuels in private speeches.
The Paris Climate Agreement was reached after enough countries signed and ratified it to go into full force, three years sooner than its forefathers expected. Many countries rushed to ratify it because of the upcoming 2016 election being such a close call between two very distinct candidates. One says he’ll put America first while the other talks (privately) about a governing global authority.
Trump has threatened to “renegotiate” the climate accord and cancel future payments to the United Nations Green Climate Fund (GCF). Trump disputes the link between man-made emissions and changes in global temperatures while Clinton uses any weather event to push the catastrophic global warming narrative.
‘Cancel wasteful spending’
Trump also promised this week a “New Deal for Black America” where he vowed to “cancel all wasteful climate change spending from Obama-Clinton." Rather, the money earmarked for the U.N.’s green slush fund would be redirected to fix America’s crumbling infrastructure and put Americans back to work. Even the U.N.’s world poll ranks climate change as a dead-last issue despite the escalating climate puffery and propaganda.
The U.S. has promised $3 billion to the United Nations' GCF between now and 2020 and has already sent the agency $500 million. Experts say another $500 million will be appropriated before the next president is sworn in on Jan. 20. Unless the Senate blocks any future allocations. In fact, GOP senators are slamming Obama for misleading the international community about the legally non-binding climate treaty.
Trump’s focus on economy
Trump said he would also drop U.S. involvement from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). Republicans said any participation by the U.S. is unlawful because the agency allowed Palestine to join as a non-member state. Also gone: President Obama’s onerous climate programs such as the Clean Power Plan, currently given a 'stay' by the Supreme Court.
The U.S. has agreed to cut emissions at least 28 percent by 2025 to pre-2005 levels. A heavy order considering top greenhouse-gas emitters like China and India don’t have to start emission reductions until 2030. In fact, China has ramped up its coal-plant building production rate to one per week. Because the climate accord is non-binding, China and India can withdraw at any time before 2030, giving it an unfair advantage over the U.S. in manufacturing.
‘Pay a heavy price’
That may be why China’s climate negotiator Zou Ji said it was “unwise” for Trump to withdraw from the climate accord. That's rare coming from a country not required to participate in the climate accord for another 15 years. Ji also said Trump “would pay a heavy price both politically and diplomatically” despite China being exempt from having to curtail its own emissions.
Senate ratification of climate accord
Myron Ebell, who heads the EPA transition team for Trump, said they’ll submit the Paris accord to the Senate for ratification (currently it’s the equivalent of a gentlemen’s agreement on a global scale). Ebell said that such a move would effectively withdraw the U.S. from the accord, as it's unlikely to pass the Senate.
Meanwhile, Clinton has promised to “put a lot of coal miners out of business” and add even more regulations to fracking. She also said she will ensure the U.S. kept its commitment to the climate accord even if it is forecasted to cost jobs and hamper the U.S. economy. This is likely to be one of the most historic elections where pundits believe every vote will count.