Being true to many people’s expectations, among the first things done by the US government was the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in 2017 when President Donald Trump first came into power. With this, the US joined Iran, Yemen, and Libya as the countries that have not ratified the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Trump announced his withdrawal with the comment, "I'm immediately withdrawing from the unfair, one-sided Paris climate accord rip-off", jeopardizing the decades-long efforts of climate crisis activists, who expressed distress, stating that “climate change does not care what he (Trump) thinks”.
Considering the past, this action was expected based on the Trump administration’s approach in 2017. Some of the key features of Trump's climate change denial policies from 2017 to 2021 included the Paris Agreement withdrawal, which was later rejoined by Biden; the repeal of the Clean Power Plan; flexibility in fuel efficiency standards; weakened methane regulations; and increased fossil fuel drilling.
The US is the world’s biggest historical emitter of greenhouse gasses, emitting 431.85 million tonnes of cumulative CO2 in 2023, which accounts for a 23.83% share, as compared to 16.47%, 15.04%, 4.4%, and 3.47% by the European Union, China, the United Kingdom, and India, respectively. This decision created a wave of worry among climate warriors, as the world is fast-paced toward a 3 degree Celsius rise despite efforts by activists to keep it under 1.5 degree Celsius. There are several consequences of this deliberate action, ranging from trade tensions to increased vulnerability of marginalized populations and developing nations.
Firstly, the US has always held a leading position in global dynamics and power decision-making, particularly regarding climate change, which is critical to the future of the planet. This decision also created a power vacuum, shifting the axis of climate leadership toward other major players, such as China, the EU, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil. The US has joined the short list of countries that have been relegated to observer status in the world's foremost climate treaty, effectively demoting it to the sidelines of global deliberations.
Secondly, this decision is also threatening the reliability of the US and its markets, as the EU is emerging as the climate crisis management leader, significantly regularizing global trade through measures like the European Green Deal. Moreover, the Green Deal, with its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D), will impose tariffs on imports from countries with less stringent climate policies.
US exporters may face higher costs when trading with the EU, which would reduce competitiveness unless industries adopt greener practices. This could lead to economic polarization, as other countries would have to align their standards with European standards in order to maintain market access, resulting in trade tensions. The retaliatory approach adopted by Trump toward such measures could leave the world at a crossroads in the coming years.
The third most important consideration is the massive toll of neglect, which includes floods, hurricanes, and wildfires. Moreover, Trump’s decision has put his administration and a significant group of US cities, states, and businesses – representing two-thirds of the population and three-fourths of the economy – who have already pledged to meet the 2035 climate target set by the Biden administration, at a crossroads.
Also, at the end of Biden’s tenure, the Inflation Reduction Act was introduced, setting aside $74 billion on climate-conscious and sustainable projects, which will leave the Trump administration struggling to undo some of the progress that had been made.
It would be extremely detrimental for the world's largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and halt efforts to combat climate change. The decision would disproportionately impact countries and communities most vulnerable to climate change. Moreover, it would also have serious consequences for the United States itself, both environmentally and economically.
