Besides the obvious concerns about the impact on the climate, I'm really surprised that Trump doesn't recognize (or prioritize) the economic costs to pulling out of the agreement.
A new axis between the EU and China could jeopardize US efforts to become a leader in the research, development, sales, and services of clean tech. As costs of clean technology naturally drop to be equal or less than fossil fuels (as is already happening), this will become a massive market that ultimately shrinks the size of the oil/gas and coal industries.
The decision to pull out of the agreement could have a large negative impact on the ability to attract leading researchers and funding, which then affects future jobs and US competitiveness in what will clearly be a massive growth industry. This will lead to job loss in oil and gas, with no commensurate increase in the jobs in replacement fields.
Trump seems to take a "public company-esque" view of governing: focus on short-term gains rather than long-term R&D and strategic planning to win the long game.
> Trump seems to take a "public company-esque" view of governing: focus on short-term gains rather than long-term R&D and strategic planning to win the long game.
Rational, if you view for governing as a tool of electoral politics rather than vice-versa.
What economic cost? Rather silly view as much of the production of the beloved solar panel is in China... Have you been to any industrial cities there recently?
Certainly not advocating RPB approach, but we're simply not competitive
At least 195 other countries are joining ( except Syria and Nicaragua ), even China is joining. US is now 1 of the three countries that doesn't join. What's at stake, at least an effort to change the future.
Missed opportunity for Trump / US, i think it also reflects the change that is happening between the US and it's current partners in a very fast pace.
PS. All the jobs that Trump is talking about in the mining industry, are all getting automated
As stated in the article, Nicaragua did not sign the Paris agreement because they thought it was not enough. So it's a good opportunity to learn where this country is, because they owned it.
I think you can't extrapolate your lack of education or knowledge of basic geography to everyone else. I'm also from Europe and of course I knew Nicaragua.
Read the agreement. The US would be giving billions to other countries yearly as part of this agreement. Of course every country on the receiving end is joining!
"To help developing countries switch from fossil fuels to greener sources of energy and adapt to the effects of climate change, the developed world will provide $100 billion a year," NPR's Chris Joyce, who has been covering the climate conference, reports.
But that amount is identified as a "floor," not a ceiling.
"Developed countries won inclusion of language that would up the ante in subsequent years," Chris explains, "so that financial aid will keep ramping up over time."
Fair enough, but who's to say the reusable energy industry wouldn't absorb those jobs over the next few years? Seems like we're putting that industry on life support and moving future industries out 10 years, which would be more globally competitive.
Even if you add in all the transportation and power plant jobs, it's still only about the size of the #10 fast food chain. For example, Domino's Pizza (#8) employs more people than all of coal mining, transport and power generation combined plus another 90,000.
A new axis between the EU and China could jeopardize US efforts to become a leader in the research, development, sales, and services of clean tech. As costs of clean technology naturally drop to be equal or less than fossil fuels (as is already happening), this will become a massive market that ultimately shrinks the size of the oil/gas and coal industries.
The decision to pull out of the agreement could have a large negative impact on the ability to attract leading researchers and funding, which then affects future jobs and US competitiveness in what will clearly be a massive growth industry. This will lead to job loss in oil and gas, with no commensurate increase in the jobs in replacement fields.
Trump seems to take a "public company-esque" view of governing: focus on short-term gains rather than long-term R&D and strategic planning to win the long game.