http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2016/11/economist-explains-8?zid=297&ah=3ae0fe266c7447d8a0c7ade5547d62ca
Recently, The Economist, attempted to explain what may happen to environmental policies during Trump's presidency. The article referenced the United Nation's Paris Agreement we discussed in class. The Agreement went into effect on November 4th of this year; thus far 193 nations have adopted it. However, Barack Obama only committed to the plan using his "executive authority", which could easily be abandoned by Mr. Trump. Withdrawing from the agreement would technically take four years, unless Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the framework UN convention under which the Paris Agreement appeared would take about a year. However, this is not ideal as it would "set a poor example for other countries." Despite Mr. Trump's support of coal, the author believes it will not be viable due to the glut of fossil fuels in recent years. Mr. Trump can also not expand defend coal and deteriorate America's air and water quality. The Environmental Protection Agency will continue to enforce laws which were previously established. The influence of Green groups should also not be underestimated in our nation's environmental policies. Regardless of what happens during the Trump administration "2016 is set to be the hottest year ever recorded."
Many younger Americans are concerned with global warming, yet it is a phenomena which is difficult to curb as it requires international cooperation. As the article mentions, the Paris Agreement does not outline how nations should best meet their obligation to lessen the negative results of global warming. This is like because members of the United Nations recognize and value national sovereignty. Even if the nations were obligated to adhere to certain environmental goals or face some kind of consequence this could heighten tensions; few want to fuel conflict between the United States and China.
Unlike terrorism global warming is an issue which is largely unseen by the average American or European Union citizen. These nations' political clout far outweighs developing nations yet they are the least effected by environmental degradation. Without visible problems it is more challenging to achieve collective action. Certainly, we can each do our "part" but Mr. Trump's administration must recognize that global warming is an issue which Americans take seriously. If he wishes to be reelected Trump may have to consider their voice and opinions as well and reconsider the promises he made during his campaign to "rip up the Paris agreement" and eliminate America's Clean Power Plan.
Thanks for reading! Looking forward to hearing what you guys think!
-Hattie
Hey Hattie! Great article!
ReplyDeleteI am curious to see what Trump will decide to do with the Paris Agreement. I think there might be a lot of political pressure from the public to not disregard measures that may act as a safeguard to the environment, especially in an international context. But i'm sure there is also political pressure from coal companies and others that have interest in the fossil fuel industry to disregard the Paris Agreement.
I agree with you that is often hard to achieve collective action to support environmentally friendly regulations and standards when we can't necessarily see all of the effects that global warming has in our everyday lives. But do you think we are starting to get to a point where we can see some effects? And if not, are there ways in which we can bring to light the impact that global warming has round the world and get people to care about it?
Thanks,
Julia
Hi Hattie!
ReplyDeleteReally great post! I liked how you addressed the issue that because people with the U.S. don't see the effects of global warming to the extent people in other countries might be able to, that it is easier to ignore. I certainly never thought global warming would directly affect me or my future family until I saw that chart and saw the data. It was very alarming and I wish more people could view global warming in this way because then there might be more urgency put into place on how to stop its effects.
As Julia said above, I'm hoping there will be enough political pressure from individuals and Green groups that will persuade Trump in taking this issue seriously. While individuals can certainly banned together and create significant change, it can be very useful to have your political leader on your side of the court defending your claims to the rest of the world. His influence is great so therefore it's useful to the Earth's benefit if he uses it. Again, great post! Thank you!
Marissa Jordan
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAlso, do you think the fact that the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of ExxonMobil, Rex Tillerson, who is now Trump's Secretary of State will be a competing interest to how people would like Trump to become more serious on his policies with the environment? Tillerson doesn't completely reject global warming, but he certainly doesn't accept it to the full extent it needs to be accepted. Sorry, realized I forgot to ask that question. Thank you!
DeleteHey Hattie! Great post.
ReplyDeleteI am curious to see what Trump and Rex Tillerson are going to do with this agreement, as well as all the others. If the US does remove itself from the agreement, I hope that the other countries can continue to move forward. The agreement is critical, and the effects are very real. While it would be unfortunate for the US to not be a part of the agreement, it must continue to move forward.
Again, well done.
Ben