Even the PREAMBLE is ideologically driven. Is Obama’s Climate ‘victory’ really worth keeping?
Reports are that Trump is planning to Pull out of the deal have got people talking, and is just looking for the right day to do it.
I will be announcing my decision on the Paris Accord over the next few days. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 31, 2017
Here is one of the paragraphs from the preamble of the Paris Accord. It sets the tone, doesn’t it? (Full text here, for those interested.)
Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties
should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their
respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples,
local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable
situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of
women and intergenerational equity,
It even used the phrase ‘Mother Earth’ in the documents.
What’s the objective? ARTICLE 2
(a) Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C
above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C
above pre-industrial levels, …
(c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas
emissions and climate-resilient development.
Yes… it’s about money. And global warming.
We are agreeing to CURB emissions. Which means industry will have to pay the piper, one way or another. That’s why places like Canada are taxing Carbon.
(This means, critics say, that the price of anything delivered by truck, as well as most forms of home heating will have a surcharge. Each of those would be an added cost that would either be passed on to the consumer or result in forcing businesses to look at other cost-saving measures, like layoffs.)
Here’s another gem:
3. Each Party’s successive nationally determined contribution will represent a
progression beyond the Party’s then current nationally determined contribution and reflect
its highest possible ambition, reflecting its common but differentiated responsibilities and
respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances.
4. Developed country Parties should continue taking the lead by undertaking economywide
absolute emission reduction targets. Developing country Parties should continue
enhancing their mitigation efforts, and are encouraged to move over time towards
economy-wide emission reduction or limitation targets in the light of different national
Translation? Places like the US have to obey ABSOLUTE reduction targets. But OTHER countries, like China? They face no such absolutes. So WE hamstring ourselves, and they can build their economies.
Should that surprise us? The deals Obama ‘negotiated’ routinely gave away the store to the other party right at the outset where we ‘might’ get what WE were promised. (Russia? Iran?) Why would Paris be different?
And one more brick from Obama’s legacy gets flung onto the ash heap of history.
Which makes us ask.
How will YOU be celebrating this decision?