29
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + + + Line 7:
Line 9: − + Line 19:
Line 21: + + + + + Line 37:
Line 44: + + + +
Paris climate agreement (view source)
Revision as of 06:22, November 1, 2017
, 06:22, November 1, 2017Added stuff about legality
The '''Paris climate agreement''' (also known as the '''Paris accord''') is an international agreement intended to fight [[climate change]]. It is described as "the first universal, legally binding deal to tackle [[global warming]]."<ref name="Gosden">Gosden, Emily (December 12, 2015). [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/paris-climate-change-conference/12047909/Paris-climate-change-agreement-a-major-leap-for-mankind.html Paris climate change agreement 'a major leap for mankind']. ''The Telegraph''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>
The '''Paris climate agreement''' (also known as the '''Paris accord''') is an international agreement intended to fight [[climate change]]. It is described as "the first universal, legally binding deal to tackle [[global warming]]."<ref name="Gosden">Gosden, Emily (December 12, 2015). [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/paris-climate-change-conference/12047909/Paris-climate-change-agreement-a-major-leap-for-mankind.html Paris climate change agreement 'a major leap for mankind']. ''The Telegraph''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>
Interestingly, the actual substance of the 'agreement' was specifically worded to be non-binding, presumably to allow it to 'count' as an [[executive agreement]] rather than a treaty, thus allowing Obama to circumvent Senate approval when adopting it.
==Origins==
==Origins==
==Goals and effects==
==Goals and effects==
The Paris climate agreement is intended to "limit" global temperatures at 1.5 Celsius (2.7 [[Fahrenheit]]).<ref name="Gosden"/> The deal requires developed nations to fund poorer nations so they can develop [[Alternative energy|"green" energy]] and adapt to the supposed effects of climate change.<ref name="Rothwell"/> Numerous developing countries took advantage of this by committing to more anti-pollution/emission efforts if they are paid.<ref name="Wolfgang">Wolfgang, Ben (June 5, 2017). [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/5/paris-climate-agreement-shares-nations-wealth/ Developing nations in Paris climate accord threaten to keep polluting unless they’re paid]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref><ref>Delingpole, James (June 7, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/07/delingpole-paris-trump-just-dodged-a-2-5-trillion-bullet/ DELINGPOLE: Paris – Trump Just Dodged A $2.5 Trillion Bullet]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2017.</ref>
The Paris climate agreement is intended to "limit" global temperatures at 1.5 Celsius (2.7 [[Fahrenheit]]) above pre-industrial levels.<ref name="Gosden"/> The deal requires developed nations to fund poorer nations so they can develop [[Alternative energy|"green" energy]] and adapt to the supposed effects of climate change, which is achieved through a new organisation called the "Green Climate Fund".<ref name="Rothwell"/> Numerous developing countries took advantage of this by committing to more anti-pollution/emission efforts if they are paid.<ref name="Wolfgang">Wolfgang, Ben (June 5, 2017). [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/5/paris-climate-agreement-shares-nations-wealth/ Developing nations in Paris climate accord threaten to keep polluting unless they’re paid]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref><ref>Delingpole, James (June 7, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/07/delingpole-paris-trump-just-dodged-a-2-5-trillion-bullet/ DELINGPOLE: Paris – Trump Just Dodged A $2.5 Trillion Bullet]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2017.</ref>
China's emissions are expected to increase until 2030, while the [[European Union]] is attempting to decrease emissions by 40 percent by the same year.<ref name="Wolfgang"/>
China's emissions are expected to increase until 2030, while the [[European Union]] is attempting to decrease emissions by 40 percent by the same year.<ref name="Wolfgang"/>
===Efforts to reduce carbon emissions===
===Efforts to reduce carbon emissions===
[[France]] stopped granting licenses for oil and gas exploration in France and its territories,<ref>Bamat, Joseph (June 23, 2017). [http://www.france24.com/en/20170623-france-stop-giving-oil-exploration-licences France to stop granting oil exploration licences]. ''France 24''. Retrieved July 7, 2017.</ref> and it set a goal of ending the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles by 2040 in its effort to comply with the agreement's carbon reduction goals.<ref>Henry, Devin (July 6, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/340809-france-to-end-sales-of-gasoline-diesel-vehicles-by-2040 France to end sales of gasoline, diesel vehicles by 2040]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved July 6, 2017.</ref><ref>Samuel, Henry (July 6, 2017). [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/06/france-ban-petrol-diesel-vehicles-2040/ France to 'ban all petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040']. ''The Telegraph''. Retrieved July 7, 2017.</ref><ref>Chrisafis, Angelique; Vaughan, Adam (July 6, 2017). [https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/06/france-ban-petrol-diesel-cars-2040-emmanuel-macron-volvo France to ban sales of petrol and diesel cars by 2040]. ''The Guardian''. Retrieved July 9, 2017.</ref> The [[United Kingdom]] also set a goal of banning gasoline or diesel vehicles by 2040.<ref>Henry, Devin (July 26, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/343866-uk-to-ban-diesel-gasoline-vehicles-by-2040 UK to ban diesel, gasoline vehicles by 2040]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved July 26, 2017.</ref>
[[France]] stopped granting licenses for oil and gas exploration in France and its territories,<ref>Bamat, Joseph (June 23, 2017). [http://www.france24.com/en/20170623-france-stop-giving-oil-exploration-licences France to stop granting oil exploration licences]. ''France 24''. Retrieved July 7, 2017.</ref> and it set a goal of ending the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles by 2040 in its effort to comply with the agreement's carbon reduction goals.<ref>Henry, Devin (July 6, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/340809-france-to-end-sales-of-gasoline-diesel-vehicles-by-2040 France to end sales of gasoline, diesel vehicles by 2040]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved July 6, 2017.</ref><ref>Samuel, Henry (July 6, 2017). [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/06/france-ban-petrol-diesel-vehicles-2040/ France to 'ban all petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040']. ''The Telegraph''. Retrieved July 7, 2017.</ref><ref>Chrisafis, Angelique; Vaughan, Adam (July 6, 2017). [https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/06/france-ban-petrol-diesel-cars-2040-emmanuel-macron-volvo France to ban sales of petrol and diesel cars by 2040]. ''The Guardian''. Retrieved July 9, 2017.</ref> The [[United Kingdom]] also set a goal of banning gasoline or diesel vehicles by 2040.<ref>Henry, Devin (July 26, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/343866-uk-to-ban-diesel-gasoline-vehicles-by-2040 UK to ban diesel, gasoline vehicles by 2040]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved July 26, 2017.</ref>
==Legality under U.S. law==
The 'agreement' was specifically worded to use non-binding language for much of its contents, including the actual emissions level that the nations are meant to cut.<ref>https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/your-top-5-questions-about-the-paris-climate-agreement-answered</ref> The use of non-binding language was likely intended to allow the agreement to 'count' as an [[executive agreement]] rather than a treaty, as the Constitution stipulates that ratification of a treaty requires the supermajority consent of the Senate.
However, binding executive agreements are only allowed within the President's authority. The Paris Agreement does not entirely fall into the President's authority, so its binding articles are problematic. As a result, some analysts and commentators have argued that the binding articles of the Paris Agreement (such as its 4 year exit period) make it a treaty that cannot be ratified without the consent of the Senate, which would make the agreement unratified and Obama's executive order unconstitutional.<ref>http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-paris-agreement-treaty-and-should-be-submitted-the-senate</ref><ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/01/the-u-s-cant-quit-the-paris-climate-agreement-because-it-never-actually-joined/</ref>
==U.S. withdrawal==
==U.S. withdrawal==
Although many environmentalists opposed the Paris agreement for not being strong enough, they opposed the U.S. withdrawal, with some accusing President Trump of committing "environmental racism."<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/trump-accused-of-environmental-racism-in-withdrawal-from-paris-agreement/ Trump Accused of ‘Environmental Racism’ in Withdrawal from Paris Agreement]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>
Although many environmentalists opposed the Paris agreement for not being strong enough, they opposed the U.S. withdrawal, with some accusing President Trump of committing "environmental racism."<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/trump-accused-of-environmental-racism-in-withdrawal-from-paris-agreement/ Trump Accused of ‘Environmental Racism’ in Withdrawal from Paris Agreement]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>
Some, such as EU Commission President [[Jean Claude-Juncker]],<ref>https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-climate-juncker-you-cant-leave-paris-deal-overnight/</ref> said that Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal because the supposedly non-binding agreement had a clause that does not allow countries to leave until 4 years after its ratification.<ref>https://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/</ref> As stated earlier in the 'legality' section, the argument that the clause is binding would defeat the argument that Obama had the authority to enter the agreement without the consent of the Senate. Some respond that the authority for the legally binding elements of the agreement are derived from the UNFCCC, a prior agreement that was ratified by Congress,<ref>https://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/</ref> but the UNFCCC does not mention many of the binding elements in the Paris Agreement, such as the requirement for emission 'targets'.<ref>http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-paris-agreement-treaty-and-should-be-submitted-the-senate</ref>
A very small minority believe that President Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal due to the fact that it was performed unilaterally with an executive order. Even ignoring the obvious hypocrisy in their beliefs, the Supreme Court essentially legalised the unilateral withdrawal from any agreements by refusing to hear a case against President Carter's decision to withdraw from the China-US Mutual Defense Treaty, which was a binding agreement ratified by the Senate.<ref>https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-02/trump-paris-climate-change-and-constitutional-realities</ref>
According to a [[Washington Post]]–[[ABC News]] poll, 59% of Americans opposed the decision to withdraw from the agreement versus 28% in support.<ref>Savransy, Rebecca (June 5, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/336408-poll-public-opposes-trumps-withdrawal-from-paris-deal-by-21-margin Poll: Public opposes Trump's withdrawal from Paris deal by 2:1 margin]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref> However, a Rasmussen poll found that 41% of Americans believed the Paris agreement would have increased energy costs versus 20% thinking the opposite and 23% saying it would have no effect.<ref>Starr, Penny (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/poll-americans-agree-with-trump-on-paris-agreement-41-say-deal-would-increase-energy-costs/ Poll: Americans Agree with Trump on Paris Agreement: 41% Say Deal Would Increase Energy Costs]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>
According to a [[Washington Post]]–[[ABC News]] poll, 59% of Americans opposed the decision to withdraw from the agreement versus 28% in support.<ref>Savransy, Rebecca (June 5, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/336408-poll-public-opposes-trumps-withdrawal-from-paris-deal-by-21-margin Poll: Public opposes Trump's withdrawal from Paris deal by 2:1 margin]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref> However, a Rasmussen poll found that 41% of Americans believed the Paris agreement would have increased energy costs versus 20% thinking the opposite and 23% saying it would have no effect.<ref>Starr, Penny (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/poll-americans-agree-with-trump-on-paris-agreement-41-say-deal-would-increase-energy-costs/ Poll: Americans Agree with Trump on Paris Agreement: 41% Say Deal Would Increase Energy Costs]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>