Kerry says Trump’s views on climate might change when in office

The White House presented a plan in Marrakesh, in the works long before Trump’s victory, for a “deep decarbonization” of the US economy by 2050 that foresees an 80 percent cut in emissions from 2005 levels.

At the Marrakesh Climate Convention Meeting, world leaders will be discussing and negotiating more than words on paper. Though the deal boasts almost 200 signatories, its future without US leadership is in question.

Over 300 US businesses have signed a statement calling on President-elect Donald Trump to support the Paris Agreement on climate change – including General Mills, eBay, Intel, Unilever, and dozens of other Fortune 500 companies. However, given the impending exit of the USA from the Paris agreement, this seems unlikely now. Failure to build a low-carbon economy puts American prosperity at risk. “This is in stark contrast to the aviation and shipping sectors, where there is no overall global vision on how to achieve zero emissions”.

Though a Trump administration cannot legally block other countries from fulfilling their Paris agreement commitments, it can choose to, not carry out the Paris plan in America.

The UK is poised to ratify the world’s first comprehensive agreement on tackling climate change.

The group also said the USA government should follow the recommendations put forth by the Climate and Security Advisory Group, a “voluntary, non-partisan group of 43 US -based military, national security, homeland security, intelligence and foreign policy experts from a broad range of institutions”, according to its website.

Browne also said that in order to fulfill the commitments of the universal Climate Change Agreement, the resources of the Global Environmental Fund and the Green Climate Fund must be replenished.

According to the Kentucky Coal Association, the state remains America’s third largest producer of coal and supplied 77.4 million tons in 2014 to support power stations across the US, primarily in the southeast. Breaking a promise by pulling out of this agreement or by removing domestic regulations would profoundly erode global trust in an arena in which collective action and cooperation is crucial.

These, as well as a slew of other climate policies, could be reformed under a Trump administration. Under this plan the US will sacrifice any form of leadership or authority it has had on the climate agenda.

Q: How would it be harmful internally?

“Business and government leaders must urgently work together to drive a thriving, low-carbon economy”.

One key issue is to ensure that the $100 billion, pledged by developed countries, is provided in the run up to 2020 support a world-wide climate transformation.

According to the report, there are three ways the USA can “deeply decarbonize” the economy by 2050: to switch to a low-carbon energy system; to pull carbon dioxide out of the air through both natural methods such as reforestation and CO2 removal technologies; and to reduce non-carbon emissions such as methane and potent pollutants from refrigeration.

Q: How could it be damaging internally? The threat of climate in change in the Pacific is already very real. Abandoning the climate agenda essentially equates to abandoning the physical security of Americans located in climate-vulnerable communities. A National Climate ChangePolicy, and aNational Climate Change Adaptation Strategyhave been formulated; and a high-level coordination body led by the President has been setup to align our policies with our global commitments on environmental issues.