The Paris Accords and the Zombie Apocalypse

Did Sen. Chuck Schumer or any Senator voted for the Paris Accords?  No.  The Paris Accords were signed unilaterally by President Obama.  They were never sent to the Senate for ratification as a treaty.  Too bad, a treaty can’t be negated by Presidential fiat.  So why didn’t Obama take that step? Evidently Trump isn’t the only POTUS who doesn’t play well with others.

            Since Trump has pulled us out of the Paris Accords we have been told we are all going to die a horrible death.  A Zombie invasion is not out of the question.  There will certainly be demonic clowns—wait, I see one now—no, false alarm, it is just Nancy Pelosi running for a Capitol elevator.  Nevertheless, we are all doomed.

            The Paris Agreement was designed to keep the planet from warming by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.  It does not specify what the term “preindustrial” means.  The period from 1720-1800 is generally given as the beginning of the industrial age, so if that is what you are aiming for it means you want our industrial emissions to be equal to those before the United States was a nation, and in an era when our population was essentially crowded between the Alleghany Mountains and the Atlantic coast.  Good luck with that one.  Does that kind of ambiguity sound realistic?  Does it sound sustainable?  Does that kind of life style sound desirable? 

            Despite the goal any nation sets for itself, be it 1800, 1900 or 2000, there is no mechanism to force a country to stick to its self-determined goals.  The “stocktake” which is designed to be a meeting held every five years (starting in 2023) to see how well things are going looks not at individual members, but only how well the world at large is doing.  Every other country could do nothing at all, but if the United States lowers its emission by our Obama mandated 26% by 2025, then everybody gets to congratulate themselves. 

            That fact leads us to Paragraphs 6.2 and 6.3 (dull reading, but the Devil is always in the details).  These paragraphs govern the international transfer of mitigation outcomes (ITMOs).  Essentially, this means that parties to the agreement get to count emission reductions outside their own jurisdiction (and control) as a part of their emission reductions.  It is like “cap and trade” on an international level.  Now, environmentalists have always raged against this practice when it is advanced by Congress, but somehow when it is part of the Paris Accord it becomes gospel.

            So, lets sum this up, no one is accountable in this agreement, right?  Wrong!

            The United States is accountable for providing $1 billion each year to the Green Climate Fund.  It turns out that that money is really why we are wanted or needed in the Paris Agreement.  Our exit does not keep any country (or state in our union, or individual in their daily life) from moving toward green living. 

            Even the Indian press says that its climate programs carry on independently of the Paris Accords.  In fact, an examination of the press from the affected countries all say they don’t need the United States to fulfill their obligations, they just want our money.  Once again, we are footing the bill so others can feel good about meeting emissions goals that they, themselves, may not meet at all. 
            If the Paris Accords were essential to life on this planet, they would have been sent to the Senate for ratification, if not anointing with oil.  Negotiate a new treaty and keep the faith.