US President Donald Trump has announced $700 million in support for coal-related projects, marking a renewed push to expand reliance on one of the most polluting fossil fuels. The move has triggered renewed debate over why the US is turning further towards coal despite global climate concerns.<h2>Trump doubles down on coal push</h2>The funding will be deployed to keep more than a dozen coal plants running across ten US states and support 42 coal mines. The plan also includes building two new coal plants and developing a coal export terminal.&nbsp;The initiative will be executed using the Defence Production Act, a Cold War-era law passed in 1950 that allows the US president emergency authority over domestic industries.&nbsp;"Today, we're taking historic action to bring down the price of energy and the cost of living for all Americans, with the power of clean, beautiful coal," Trump said.&nbsp;The announcement comes as Trump continues to roll back environmental regulations and dismisses human-induced climate change as "a hoax". Coal remains the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel and a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/hezbollah-rejects-truce-israeli-strikes-in-lebanon-kill-eight-a-day-after-ceasefire-announcement-1780616954076">Lebanon ceasefire unravels as Hezbollah rejects truce; Israeli strikes kill eight a day after announcement</a><h2>Why the US is pushing coal again</h2>The administration has justified the move by pointing to rising electricity demand driven by artificial intelligence, data centre expansion and electric vehicles. Officials argue that renewable energy sources such as wind and solar cannot provide consistent, round-the-clock baseload power required for growing digital infrastructure.&nbsp;Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have said that maintaining coal plants is necessary to prevent future power shortages and ensure grid reliability. The Department of Energy has already issued emergency orders to keep ageing coal units operational despite planned retirements.&nbsp;The White House has also warned that electricity demand is rising faster than grid expansion, raising the risk of blackouts by 2030 if dependable power sources are reduced.<h2>National security angle</h2>The administration has further framed coal expansion as a national security issue. By invoking the Defence Production Act, officials argue that the United States must reduce dependence on foreign supply chains, particularly those linked to China in the renewable energy sector.&nbsp;The policy is being positioned as part of a broader strategy to strengthen domestic energy independence and secure critical infrastructure for emerging technologies.&nbsp;Trump has previously withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement twice. The first exit was announced in 2017, while the second followed an executive order after his return to office in 2025.

Trump, who has dismissed human-induced climate change as “a hoax,” has also withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement twice, once during his first term and again during his second term.

US President Donald Trump has announced $700 million in support for coal-related projects, marking a renewed push to expand reliance on one of the most polluting fossil fuels. The move has triggered renewed debate over why the US is turning further towards coal despite global climate concerns. Trump doubles down on coal push The funding will be deployed to keep more than a dozen coal plants running across ten US states and support 42 coal mines. The plan also includes building two new coal plants and developing a coal export terminal. The initiative will be executed using the Defence Production Act, a Cold War-era law passed in 1950 that allows the US president emergency authority over domestic industries. "Today, we're taking historic action to bring down the price of energy and the cost of living for all Americans, with the power of clean, beautiful coal," Trump said. The announcement comes as Trump continues to roll back environmental regulations and dismisses human-induced climate change as "a hoax". Coal remains the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel and a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions. Also Read: Lebanon ceasefire unravels as Hezbollah rejects truce; Israeli strikes kill eight a day after announcement Why the US is pushing coal again The administration has justified the move by pointing to rising electricity demand driven by artificial intelligence, data centre expansion and electric vehicles. Officials argue that renewable energy sources such as wind and solar cannot provide consistent, round-the-clock baseload power required for growing digital infrastructure. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have said that maintaining coal plants is necessary to prevent future power shortages and ensure grid reliability. The Department of Energy has already issued emergency orders to keep ageing coal units operational despite planned retirements. The White House has also warned that electricity demand is rising faster than grid expansion, raising the risk of blackouts by 2030 if dependable power sources are reduced. National security angle The administration has further framed coal expansion as a national security issue. By invoking the Defence Production Act, officials argue that the United States must reduce dependence on foreign supply chains, particularly those linked to China in the renewable energy sector. The policy is being positioned as part of a broader strategy to strengthen domestic energy independence and secure critical infrastructure for emerging technologies. Trump has previously withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement twice. The first exit was announced in 2017, while the second followed an executive order after his return to office in 2025.

Trump, who has dismissed human-induced climate change as “a hoax,” has also withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement twice, once during his first term and again during his second term.

Wion Decodes: Trump announces $700 mn support for coal projects; why the US president is pushing the most polluting fossil fuel

The United States will officially withdraw from the Paris climate agreement on January 27, 2026, the United Nations confirmed on Tuesday (January 28). Watch this report for more details!

UN confirms US withdrawal from Paris climate agreement

Eight summers ago, the world leaders converged together and ratified the 2015 Paris climate accords, setting a goal of holding global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.

Eight summers ago, the world leaders converged together and ratified the 2015 Paris climate accords, setting a goal of holding global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F) of preindustrial levels. Fast forward today and it appears that the goal is no longer achievable as global average temperatures hover around 1.0-1.3 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. Now, World Meteorological Organisation and Britain’s Met Office have already said there is a 48 per cent chance that the world may miss the target once in the next five years at least. In January, a research report published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) using artificial neural networks (ANNs) trained on climate model output also stated that global warming is already on the verge of crossing the 1.5 °C threshold in the next decade. Experts are of the view that the target will be breached before the United Nations-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) comes out with its next report - expected at the end of this decade. What did the IPCC report say? Last month, IPCC released a damning report, suggesting that time for saving the planet was running out. The report, compiled after five years of research made no qualms about the fact that there is very little chance of keeping the world from warming by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. According to the report, approximately 3.3-3.6 billion people are “highly vulnerable” to climate change while increasing weather and climate extreme events have exposed millions of people to acute food insecurity and reduced water security. ALSO READ | Explained | UN report delivers ‘final warning’ on climate crisis. Here are some key takeaways With the planet still excessively reliant on fossil fuels, the Paris signatories who have pledged to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 may have to start showing immediate results. According to research, to reach the said target, 43 per cent of emissions will have to be cut by 2030 using 2019 as a baseline. Is there hope? Despite the gloom, the IPCC report had one sliver of hope. It noted that the climate narrative was still being written and the rate of increase in greenhouse gas emissions between 2010-2019 was notably less than the rate of increase in the previous decade. Moreover, in March, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a landmark resolution under which an opinion would be sought from the UN's highest court i.e. the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding legal obligations that nations are under to protect climate systems and people affected by it. EXPLAINED | UNGA adopts landmark resolution on climate justice. What does it mean? According to experts, ICJ's influence might encourage the nations to 'take bolder and stronger climate action' steps to protect the world. Additionally, ICJ can help shape international laws and bring international legal instruments, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child — which, incidentally, have the power and force of law for countries that have ratified them. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Was Paris 1.5C unrealistic? Are we going to miss climate change target?

A study, published in the journal Science on Thursday, found that 80 per cent, or 4 out of every 5 glaciers, would likely disappear by the end of this century at current&nbsp;climate change&nbsp;trends. The findings showed that the world's glaciers are shrinking and disappearing faster than scientists previously thought and in the coming years, that could be a key contributor to sea level rise, a threat to the millions of people living near the coastlines.

But if the world manages to fulfil international goals and meet the best-case climate scenario,&nbsp;technically possible but unlikely according to several experts, less than half the globe's glaciers will move towards extinction, the study concluded. Well-known and small glaciers will be the first to go extinct, the authors of the study stated.

The study examined all of the world's 215,000 land-based glaciers, except the ones on ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, with the help of computer simulations that calculate, using different levels of warming, how many glaciers could disappear and how much it would contribute to sea level rise.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lifestyle/news-science-backed-tips-for-sticking-to-your-new-year-2023-resolutions-549041">Science-backed tips for sticking to your New Year 2023 resolutions</a>

Projected glacial mass loss by 2100 ranges from 38.7 trillion metric tonnes to 64.4 trillion tonnes, which depends&nbsp;on several factors including&nbsp;how much the globe warms and how much coal, oil and gas is burned.

Since the world is currently on track for a 2.7-degree Celsius (4.9-degree Fahrenheit) temperature rise since pre-industrial times, we could be losing 32 per cent of the world’s glacier mass or 48.5 trillion metric tonnes of ice by 2100. This means that about&nbsp;68 per cent of the glaciers might disappear by the end of this century.

The study calculates that all that melting glaciers can raise the world’s sea level anywhere from 90mm (3.5 inches) in the best-case scenario to 166mm in the worst-case scenario, which is an increase of four per cent to 14 per cent to previous projections. The study’s lead author David Rounce confirmed that&nbsp;the sea level can rise by 115 millimetres (4.5 inches) in present scenarios.

Researchers also stated that&nbsp;future sea level rise will be driven more by melting ice sheets than glaciers. And, added that&nbsp;the loss of glaciers is about more than just rising seas. It means increased risk from flood events, shrinking water supplies&nbsp;and losing historic ice-covered spots from Alaska to the Alps to the area near Mount Everest’s base camp.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

A study, published in the journal Science on Thursday, found that 80 per cent, or 4 out of every 5 glaciers, would likely disappear by the end of this century at current climate change trends.

A study, published in the journal Science on Thursday, found that 80 per cent, or 4 out of every 5 glaciers, would likely disappear by the end of this century at current climate change trends. The findings showed that the world's glaciers are shrinking and disappearing faster than scientists previously thought and in the coming years, that could be a key contributor to sea level rise, a threat to the millions of people living near the coastlines. But if the world manages to fulfil international goals and meet the best-case climate scenario, technically possible but unlikely according to several experts, less than half the globe's glaciers will move towards extinction, the study concluded. Well-known and small glaciers will be the first to go extinct, the authors of the study stated. The study examined all of the world's 215,000 land-based glaciers, except the ones on ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, with the help of computer simulations that calculate, using different levels of warming, how many glaciers could disappear and how much it would contribute to sea level rise. Also read: Science-backed tips for sticking to your New Year 2023 resolutions Projected glacial mass loss by 2100 ranges from 38.7 trillion metric tonnes to 64.4 trillion tonnes, which depends on several factors including how much the globe warms and how much coal, oil and gas is burned. Since the world is currently on track for a 2.7-degree Celsius (4.9-degree Fahrenheit) temperature rise since pre-industrial times, we could be losing 32 per cent of the world’s glacier mass or 48.5 trillion metric tonnes of ice by 2100. This means that about 68 per cent of the glaciers might disappear by the end of this century. The study calculates that all that melting glaciers can raise the world’s sea level anywhere from 90mm (3.5 inches) in the best-case scenario to 166mm in the worst-case scenario, which is an increase of four per cent to 14 per cent to previous projections. The study’s lead author David Rounce confirmed that the sea level can rise by 115 millimetres (4.5 inches) in present scenarios. Researchers also stated that future sea level rise will be driven more by melting ice sheets than glaciers. And, added that the loss of glaciers is about more than just rising seas. It means increased risk from flood events, shrinking water supplies and losing historic ice-covered spots from Alaska to the Alps to the area near Mount Everest’s base camp. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

4 out of 5 glaciers projected to disappear by 2100, study finds

According to the CDP, a non-profit disclosure platform and Oliver Wyman global management consultancy, companies in the G7 economies are failing to meet the Paris climate agreement objectives. They were based on the current corporate pledges to cut emission.

WION Climate Tracker | Study: Company emissions falling short of global climate goal

&nbsp;A decade ago, Joe Biden strode into a reception room in Athens for a meeting with the president of Greece, a country then drowning in debt and locked in tense negotiations with the European Union.

“This man represents the Treasury Department,” a deadpan Biden said to his host as he gestured to a gray-suited member of his delegation. “He’s brought hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/republicans-call-for-senate-review-before-us-re-enters-paris-climate-deal-358336/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The room broke up in laughter. It was clear the vice president had not come with a briefcase of cash to pay off Greece’s debts. But his joke captured a deeper truth: In 2011, many still viewed the United States as the ultimate guarantor of the international order. And Biden clearly saw himself as a steward of that legacy, his easy self-confidence the product of four decades as a globe-trotting senator.

As Biden took the oath of office Wednesday, vowing to “repair our alliances and engage with the world once more,” the question for many overseas is whether they will see this man of the world anytime soon.

In capitals from Europe to Asia, diplomats and foreign policy experts have questioned whether the United States is too divided, too weakened and too preoccupied by internal convulsions to play the kind of leadership role that Biden took for granted as a senator and vice president.

Yet there are reasons to believe as president Biden will be more visible and more of an activist than many expect, even as he grapples with the pandemic, a massive economic recovery effort and the deep divisions left by the Trump era. From the people he has chosen for key foreign policy posts to the travel opportunities he has this year, those who know Biden say he is unlikely to stay off the global stage for long.

“This is a guy who spent 40 years getting to know foreign leaders around the world,” said Peter Westmacott, who lived next door to Biden as British ambassador to Washington during the Obama administration. “Once you’ve got a flavor for international relationships, you don’t turn your back on all that.”

Wolfgang Ischinger, a former German ambassador to the United States, said he expected Biden to draw on his personal relationships to mend bonds with European allies that had been sundered by former President Donald Trump.

“Joe Biden is a master of networking, and he will easily repair the lack of trust,” said Ischinger, who now runs the Munich Security Forum.

Ischinger’s immediate goal is to persuade the president to attend his influential annual conference. He has a decent chance of landing him; Biden has been a staple in Munich for years, most memorably in 2009, when he announced that former President Barack Obama wanted to hit the “reset button” with Russia.

In his inaugural address, Biden said the “world is watching.” He promised that the United States had “come out stronger” from its recent stress test. And he pledged a restoration of American leadership in which, he said, “we’ll lead not merely by the example of our power, but by the power of our example.”

Biden is likely to make his formal debut at a meeting of Group of 7 leaders in June, which Britain is hosting at a seaside resort in Cornwall. He may expand that trip to include other European destinations, including Germany, where he could bid farewell to Chancellor Angela Merkel before she steps down after 16 years.

In the fall, Biden is expected to attend a Group of 20 meeting in Rome and the United Nations’ climate change conference in Glasgow, Scotland, where he could showcase his decision to rejoin the Paris climate accord.

Beyond dates in the diplomatic diary, experts contend that Biden’s appointments do not suggest an inward-looking White House.

His choice of Kurt Campbell to serve as a high-level coordinator of Asia policy, for example, could foretell a tough line with China coupled with an energetic effort to reassure U.S. allies Japan and South Korea. As a State Department official in the Obama administration, Campbell devised the so-called “pivot” to Asia.

“Biden has chosen people who understand and are committed to strategic competition,” said Thomas Wright, a foreign policy expert at the Brookings Institution.

Some experts argue that the chaos at the Capitol had compromised the nation’s traditional role as a champion of democracy and that the cascading domestic crises would consume Biden’s energy, distracting from world affairs.

“Ambitious foreign policy goals are completely out of step with the realities of the country’s domestic political and economic dysfunction,” Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, wrote in Foreign Policy. “How can the United States spread democracy or act as an example for others if it barely has a functioning democracy at home?”

But Wright argued that the homegrown threats to democracy should strengthen the Biden administration’s resolve to fight human rights abuses by China, Russia and other autocratic governments.

“I’ve never understood the trade-off between ambition at home and ambition overseas,” he said. “It’s precisely because democracy is challenged at home that the U.S. needs to be more energetic in defending democracy overseas.”

The links between domestic and foreign policy were reinforced by the appointment of Susan Rice, who served as national security adviser to Obama, as director of Biden’s domestic policy council. Key domestic priorities like the pandemic, experts pointed out, are also global challenges.

Another top Biden aide, Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, used Twitter to weigh in on sensitive issues before his boss took office. He condemned Russia’s arrest of opposition leader Alexei Navalny, appealed to the European Union to think twice before signing an investment treaty with China, and said Trump’s designation of the Houthi rebels in Yemen as a terrorist group “will only inflict more suffering on Yemeni people.”

Whether the Biden administration will back up those words with action remains to be seen, of course. But some say that Biden’s instincts, temperament and background as a longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee make him unlikely to shrug off chances to command the world stage.

As vice president, he reveled in his access to world leaders. On a trip to Turkey in 2011, there were doubts that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who was recuperating from a medical procedure, would see him. Instead, Erdogan invited him to his private residence, where the two men, wearing slippers, spoke for two hours about Syria and Iran.

“I don’t want to sound like I’m inflating my importance or relationship with him,” a chuffed Biden told reporters, “but we have listened to each other. And he was genuinely listening to my perspective and wasn’t challenging it.”

At other times, Biden has taken pride in his readiness to speak bluntly to foreign leaders. He famously walked out of a dinner with Afghanistan’s president, Hamid Karzai, in 2009 after a rancorous exchange over corruption.

In 2012, Biden was assigned to play host to Xi Jinping, then China’s vice president and designated future leader, when he visited the United States. Toasting Xi at a Valentine’s Day lunch, Biden ran through a litany of grievances, from Chinese theft of intellectual property to human rights abuses.

“Cooperation, as you and I have spoken about, can only be mutually beneficial if the game is fair,” Biden said as Xi looked on.

On a trip to China the following year, Biden publicly criticized China for refusing to say if it would renew the visas of American correspondents and for blocking the websites of U.S.-based news media. Several years later, China expelled correspondents for The New York Times and other publications.

Speaking as a president, to be sure, is different from as vice president. During his trip to Greece in 2011, Biden ruminated about the risks of commenting on the fiscal tensions between Greece and the European Union.

“You know, in the good old days when I was a senator, I was my own man,” Biden told reporters at the time. “I could just tell you my views. But now whatever I say is attributed to the administration.”

“I finally learned that,” said the man who now leads his own administration. “It took me about six months, but I got it down.”

 
&nbsp;

A decade ago, Joe Biden strode into a reception room in Athens for a meeting with the president of Greece, a country then drowning in debt and locked in tense negotiations with the European Union.

A decade ago, Joe Biden strode into a reception room in Athens for a meeting with the president of Greece, a country then drowning in debt and locked in tense negotiations with the European Union. “This man represents the Treasury Department,” a deadpan Biden said to his host as he gestured to a gray-suited member of his delegation. “He’s brought hundreds of millions of dollars.” Watch | The room broke up in laughter. It was clear the vice president had not come with a briefcase of cash to pay off Greece’s debts. But his joke captured a deeper truth: In 2011, many still viewed the United States as the ultimate guarantor of the international order. And Biden clearly saw himself as a steward of that legacy, his easy self-confidence the product of four decades as a globe-trotting senator. As Biden took the oath of office Wednesday, vowing to “repair our alliances and engage with the world once more,” the question for many overseas is whether they will see this man of the world anytime soon. In capitals from Europe to Asia, diplomats and foreign policy experts have questioned whether the United States is too divided, too weakened and too preoccupied by internal convulsions to play the kind of leadership role that Biden took for granted as a senator and vice president. Yet there are reasons to believe as president Biden will be more visible and more of an activist than many expect, even as he grapples with the pandemic, a massive economic recovery effort and the deep divisions left by the Trump era. From the people he has chosen for key foreign policy posts to the travel opportunities he has this year, those who know Biden say he is unlikely to stay off the global stage for long. “This is a guy who spent 40 years getting to know foreign leaders around the world,” said Peter Westmacott, who lived next door to Biden as British ambassador to Washington during the Obama administration. “Once you’ve got a flavor for international relationships, you don’t turn your back on all that.” Wolfgang Ischinger, a former German ambassador to the United States, said he expected Biden to draw on his personal relationships to mend bonds with European allies that had been sundered by former President Donald Trump. “Joe Biden is a master of networking, and he will easily repair the lack of trust,” said Ischinger, who now runs the Munich Security Forum. Ischinger’s immediate goal is to persuade the president to attend his influential annual conference. He has a decent chance of landing him; Biden has been a staple in Munich for years, most memorably in 2009, when he announced that former President Barack Obama wanted to hit the “reset button” with Russia. In his inaugural address, Biden said the “world is watching.” He promised that the United States had “come out stronger” from its recent stress test. And he pledged a restoration of American leadership in which, he said, “we’ll lead not merely by the example of our power, but by the power of our example.” Biden is likely to make his formal debut at a meeting of Group of 7 leaders in June, which Britain is hosting at a seaside resort in Cornwall. He may expand that trip to include other European destinations, including Germany, where he could bid farewell to Chancellor Angela Merkel before she steps down after 16 years. In the fall, Biden is expected to attend a Group of 20 meeting in Rome and the United Nations’ climate change conference in Glasgow, Scotland, where he could showcase his decision to rejoin the Paris climate accord. Beyond dates in the diplomatic diary, experts contend that Biden’s appointments do not suggest an inward-looking White House. His choice of Kurt Campbell to serve as a high-level coordinator of Asia policy, for example, could foretell a tough line with China coupled with an energetic effort to reassure U.S. allies Japan and South Korea. As a State Department official in the Obama administration, Campbell devised the so-called “pivot” to Asia. “Biden has chosen people who understand and are committed to strategic competition,” said Thomas Wright, a foreign policy expert at the Brookings Institution. Some experts argue that the chaos at the Capitol had compromised the nation’s traditional role as a champion of democracy and that the cascading domestic crises would consume Biden’s energy, distracting from world affairs. “Ambitious foreign policy goals are completely out of step with the realities of the country’s domestic political and economic dysfunction,” Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, wrote in Foreign Policy. “How can the United States spread democracy or act as an example for others if it barely has a functioning democracy at home?” But Wright argued that the homegrown threats to democracy should strengthen the Biden administration’s resolve to fight human rights abuses by China, Russia and other autocratic governments. “I’ve never understood the trade-off between ambition at home and ambition overseas,” he said. “It’s precisely because democracy is challenged at home that the U.S. needs to be more energetic in defending democracy overseas.” The links between domestic and foreign policy were reinforced by the appointment of Susan Rice, who served as national security adviser to Obama, as director of Biden’s domestic policy council. Key domestic priorities like the pandemic, experts pointed out, are also global challenges. Another top Biden aide, Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, used Twitter to weigh in on sensitive issues before his boss took office. He condemned Russia’s arrest of opposition leader Alexei Navalny, appealed to the European Union to think twice before signing an investment treaty with China, and said Trump’s designation of the Houthi rebels in Yemen as a terrorist group “will only inflict more suffering on Yemeni people.” Whether the Biden administration will back up those words with action remains to be seen, of course. But some say that Biden’s instincts, temperament and background as a longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee make him unlikely to shrug off chances to command the world stage. As vice president, he reveled in his access to world leaders. On a trip to Turkey in 2011, there were doubts that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who was recuperating from a medical procedure, would see him. Instead, Erdogan invited him to his private residence, where the two men, wearing slippers, spoke for two hours about Syria and Iran. “I don’t want to sound like I’m inflating my importance or relationship with him,” a chuffed Biden told reporters, “but we have listened to each other. And he was genuinely listening to my perspective and wasn’t challenging it.” At other times, Biden has taken pride in his readiness to speak bluntly to foreign leaders. He famously walked out of a dinner with Afghanistan’s president, Hamid Karzai, in 2009 after a rancorous exchange over corruption. In 2012, Biden was assigned to play host to Xi Jinping, then China’s vice president and designated future leader, when he visited the United States. Toasting Xi at a Valentine’s Day lunch, Biden ran through a litany of grievances, from Chinese theft of intellectual property to human rights abuses. “Cooperation, as you and I have spoken about, can only be mutually beneficial if the game is fair,” Biden said as Xi looked on. On a trip to China the following year, Biden publicly criticized China for refusing to say if it would renew the visas of American correspondents and for blocking the websites of U.S.-based news media. Several years later, China expelled correspondents for The New York Times and other publications. Speaking as a president, to be sure, is different from as vice president. During his trip to Greece in 2011, Biden ruminated about the risks of commenting on the fiscal tensions between Greece and the European Union. “You know, in the good old days when I was a senator, I was my own man,” Biden told reporters at the time. “I could just tell you my views. But now whatever I say is attributed to the administration.” “I finally learned that,” said the man who now leads his own administration. “It took me about six months, but I got it down.”

Will Biden be an activist president on the world stage?

Climate activist Greta Thunberg on Saturday lashed out at world leaders for failing to take action to prevent adverse consequences related to climate change.&nbsp;

Referring to the Paris climate deal signed in 2015, Thunberg said that since the world leaders committed themselves to limit global temperature, a lot has happened, but the "action needed is still nowhere in sight".

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/according-to-experts-climate-change-is-responsible-for-wildfires-in-us-know-the-science-behind-it-328290/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In the video released ahead of the fifth anniversary of the accord, the Swedish activist also warned that "we are still speeding in the wrong direction."

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/climate-change-is-making-winter-ice-more-dangerous-344406">Climate change is making winter ice more dangerous</a>

"Hypothetical targets are being set and big speeches are being given, yet when it comes to the immediate action we need, we are still in state of complete denial," Thunberg said. &nbsp;

According to the deal, all the signatories pledged to cap global warming at 2 degrees C and if possible 1.5 degrees C, as compared to the pre-industrial era.

However, the United Nations on Wednesday said the temperatures are on track to record a rise of over 3 degrees C, despite a fall in emissions due to the lockdowns imposed to control the coronavirus pandemic.&nbsp;

The UN's Environment Programme, in its annual report, found that a seven per cent fall in carbon pollution would have a "negligible impact" on global warming if a broad and rapid approach to move away from fossil fuels is not undertaken.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

Climate activist Greta Thunberg on Saturday lashed out at world leaders for failing to take action to prevent adverse consequences related to climate change. Referring to the Paris climate deal signed in 2015, Thunberg said that since the world leaders committed themselves to limit global temperature, a lot has happened, but the "action needed is still nowhere in sight".

Climate activist Greta Thunberg on Saturday lashed out at world leaders for failing to take action to prevent adverse consequences related to climate change. Referring to the Paris climate deal signed in 2015, Thunberg said that since the world leaders committed themselves to limit global temperature, a lot has happened, but the "action needed is still nowhere in sight". Watch | In the video released ahead of the fifth anniversary of the accord, the Swedish activist also warned that "we are still speeding in the wrong direction." Also read | Climate change is making winter ice more dangerous "Hypothetical targets are being set and big speeches are being given, yet when it comes to the immediate action we need, we are still in state of complete denial," Thunberg said. According to the deal, all the signatories pledged to cap global warming at 2 degrees C and if possible 1.5 degrees C, as compared to the pre-industrial era. However, the United Nations on Wednesday said the temperatures are on track to record a rise of over 3 degrees C, despite a fall in emissions due to the lockdowns imposed to control the coronavirus pandemic. The UN's Environment Programme, in its annual report, found that a seven per cent fall in carbon pollution would have a "negligible impact" on global warming if a broad and rapid approach to move away from fossil fuels is not undertaken.

Greta Thunberg lashes out at world leaders, says 'action needed not in sight'

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking at G20 summit Climate Change event has highlighted that India is "exceeding" its Paris Agreement targets and New Delhi is taking a number of "concrete actions" such as making LED lights popular which is saving 38 million tons of Carbon Dioxide emissions per year and smoke-free kitchens being provided to 80 million households.

He said, "Climate change must be fought not in silos but in an integrated, comprehensive and holistic way."

Explaining, "Inspired by our traditional ethos of living in harmony with the environment, and the commitment of my Government, India has adopted low-carbon and climate-resilient development practices."

Also read | At G20 summit, PM Modi pitches for 'global index' for post-COVID world

India has taken several measures such as elimination of single-use plastics, expansion of forest cover, restore 26 million hectares of degraded land by 2030, achieve 175 gigawatts of renewable energy aimed at reducing carbon footprint and prevent climate change.&nbsp;

Indian Prime Minister batted for the International Solar Alliance, pointing out how it is "among the fastest-growing International Organizations, with 88 signatories" and has plans to mobilise billions of dollars to train thousands of stake-holders, and promote research and development in renewable energy, the ISA will contribute to reducing carbon foot-print.

The Gurugram-headquartered alliance is an India initiated project aimed at using solar energy to reduce dependency on fossil fuel.&nbsp;

He said, "This is the best time for further increasing research and innovation in new and sustainable technologies. We should do so with a spirit of cooperation and collaboration."

The side event saw the participation of Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud who is the host of G20, along with Italy's PM Giuseppe Conte, Japan's PM Yoshihide Suga, Australia's PM Scott Morrison, Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump.

 
&nbsp;

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking at G20 summit Climate Change event has highlighted that India is "exceeding" its Paris Agreement targets and New Delhi is taking a number of "concrete actions" such as making LED lights popular which is saving 38 million tons of Carbon Dioxide emissions per year and smoke-free kitchens being provided to 80 million households.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking at G20 summit Climate Change event has highlighted that India is "exceeding" its Paris Agreement targets and New Delhi is taking a number of "concrete actions" such as making LED lights popular which is saving 38 million tons of Carbon Dioxide emissions per year and smoke-free kitchens being provided to 80 million households. He said, "Climate change must be fought not in silos but in an integrated, comprehensive and holistic way." Explaining, "Inspired by our traditional ethos of living in harmony with the environment, and the commitment of my Government, India has adopted low-carbon and climate-resilient development practices." Also read | At G20 summit, PM Modi pitches for 'global index' for post-COVID world India has taken several measures such as elimination of single-use plastics, expansion of forest cover, restore 26 million hectares of degraded land by 2030, achieve 175 gigawatts of renewable energy aimed at reducing carbon footprint and prevent climate change. Indian Prime Minister batted for the International Solar Alliance, pointing out how it is "among the fastest-growing International Organizations, with 88 signatories" and has plans to mobilise billions of dollars to train thousands of stake-holders, and promote research and development in renewable energy, the ISA will contribute to reducing carbon foot-print. The Gurugram-headquartered alliance is an India initiated project aimed at using solar energy to reduce dependency on fossil fuel. He said, "This is the best time for further increasing research and innovation in new and sustainable technologies. We should do so with a spirit of cooperation and collaboration." The side event saw the participation of Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud who is the host of G20, along with Italy's PM Giuseppe Conte, Japan's PM Yoshihide Suga, Australia's PM Scott Morrison, Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump.

India exceeding Paris climate targets: PM Narendra Modi at G20 climate event

Pope Francis on Tuesday asked countries to continue fighting global warming as per the 2015 Paris climate accord.

"Modern society had pushed the planet beyond its limits and the time to fix a climate emergency was running out", he said.

"Our constant demand for growth and an endless cycle of production and consumption are exhausting the natural world," Francis said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/pope-francis-appeals-for-justice-to-be-respected-in-belarus-320981" hreflang="en">Pope Francis appeals for justice to be respected in Belarus</a>

"Forests are leached, topsoil erodes, fields fail, deserts advance, seas acidify and storms intensify. Creation is groaning!", he added.

He was speaking on the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, when he urged countries to be more mindful of the planet.

"We need to do everything in our capacity to limit global average temperature rise under the threshold of 1.5°C enshrined in the Paris Climate Agreement, for going beyond that will prove catastrophic, especially for poor communities around the world," he added.

Recently, United States President Donald Trump began the process of removing US from the Paris agreement. US is the world's second largest emitter of greenhouse gases, just behind China.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/pope-francis-urges-international-solidarity-for-lebanon-319249" hreflang="en">Pope Francis urges international solidarity for Lebanon</a>

Trump had called the mitigation process too costly.&nbsp;

On the other hand, his rival Joe Biden from the Democratic party said that he intends to return the US to a leadership role on climate change. He expressed a desire to reenter the US in all potential climate negotiations, and to work on the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.

Pope Francis added that&nbsp;biodiversity loss, climate change induced disasters, and the unequal impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the poor were all a "wakeup call in the face of our rampant greed and consumption".

Pope Francis on Tuesday asked countries to continue fighting global warming as per the 2015 Paris climate accord. "Modern society had pushed the planet beyond its limits and the time to fix a climate emergency was running out", he said.

Pope Francis on Tuesday asked countries to continue fighting global warming as per the 2015 Paris climate accord. "Modern society had pushed the planet beyond its limits and the time to fix a climate emergency was running out", he said. "Our constant demand for growth and an endless cycle of production and consumption are exhausting the natural world," Francis said. Also read: Pope Francis appeals for justice to be respected in Belarus "Forests are leached, topsoil erodes, fields fail, deserts advance, seas acidify and storms intensify. Creation is groaning!", he added. He was speaking on the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, when he urged countries to be more mindful of the planet. "We need to do everything in our capacity to limit global average temperature rise under the threshold of 1.5°C enshrined in the Paris Climate Agreement, for going beyond that will prove catastrophic, especially for poor communities around the world," he added. Recently, United States President Donald Trump began the process of removing US from the Paris agreement. US is the world's second largest emitter of greenhouse gases, just behind China. Also read: Pope Francis urges international solidarity for Lebanon Trump had called the mitigation process too costly. On the other hand, his rival Joe Biden from the Democratic party said that he intends to return the US to a leadership role on climate change. He expressed a desire to reenter the US in all potential climate negotiations, and to work on the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. Pope Francis added that biodiversity loss, climate change induced disasters, and the unequal impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the poor were all a "wakeup call in the face of our rampant greed and consumption".

'Creation is groaning': Pope Francis urges countries to follow Paris Climate Agreement

NGO delegates at the UN's COP25 conference expressed anger on Sunday (December 15) at the lack of progress by participating world governments to act on climate change.

"Our lives...future generations are in your hands and you are failing us," says NGO at COP25

France said it will not accept a final <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trade-and-horsetrade-top-five-hot-button-g20-issues-230484">G20 communique that does not</a> mention the Paris climate change agreement, as President Emmanuel Macron hardened his position on climate change ahead of the G20 meeting.

Japanese media reported on Wednesday that leaders of the G20 top economies will call this week for the promotion of free trade to achieve strong global growth, as the United States and China seek to resume talks to resolve a bitter trade dispute.

In preparing a joint communique, Japan, the chair of the meetings, seeks common ground between the United States, which opposes language denouncing protectionism, and other nations, which want a stronger warning against the risk of trade tension.

However, France was adamant that any final G20 communique must also mention the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/pm-modi-to-leave-for-g20-summit-today-first-bilateral-meeting-with-japan-pm-shinzo-abe-230584">2016 Paris Climate Change</a> agreement that was set up to protect the environment.

"I've heard a lot of people say 'I have red lines', and there are a lot of people who are saying that they no longer want to sign G7 or G20 communiques because there are these red lines," Macron told an audience of French expats in Tokyo.

"As for myself, I have one red line. If we don't talk about the Paris Agreement and if we don't get an agreement on it amongst the 20 members in the room, we are no longer capable of defending our climate change goals, and France will not be part of this, it's as simple as that," he added.

France was the driver behind the 2016 Paris Agreement to limit global warming, and the French parliament is now debating an energy bill that targets net zero emissions by 2050.

The G20 group of 20 major economies hold a summit in Japan this weekend.

France said it will not accept a final G20 communique that does not mention the Paris climate change agreement, as President Emmanuel Macron hardened his position on climate change ahead of the G20 meeting.

France said it will not accept a final G20 communique that does not mention the Paris climate change agreement, as President Emmanuel Macron hardened his position on climate change ahead of the G20 meeting. Japanese media reported on Wednesday that leaders of the G20 top economies will call this week for the promotion of free trade to achieve strong global growth, as the United States and China seek to resume talks to resolve a bitter trade dispute. In preparing a joint communique, Japan, the chair of the meetings, seeks common ground between the United States, which opposes language denouncing protectionism, and other nations, which want a stronger warning against the risk of trade tension. However, France was adamant that any final G20 communique must also mention the 2016 Paris Climate Change agreement that was set up to protect the environment. "I've heard a lot of people say 'I have red lines', and there are a lot of people who are saying that they no longer want to sign G7 or G20 communiques because there are these red lines," Macron told an audience of French expats in Tokyo. "As for myself, I have one red line. If we don't talk about the Paris Agreement and if we don't get an agreement on it amongst the 20 members in the room, we are no longer capable of defending our climate change goals, and France will not be part of this, it's as simple as that," he added. France was the driver behind the 2016 Paris Agreement to limit global warming, and the French parliament is now debating an energy bill that targets net zero emissions by 2050. The G20 group of 20 major economies hold a summit in Japan this weekend.

No G20 agreement if Paris climate change not mentioned: Macron

House Democrats passed its first major piece of legislation addressing climate change on Thursday, aiming to prevent the US from leaving the Paris climate agreement. Watch full video to know more.

House Democrats pass major climate change bill

By Richard Zuber

Even though the outcomes of the UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland, are to be celebrated as a step in the right direction despite all odds, a somewhat bitter aftertaste remains. In the wake of news that our species has merely 12 years to pull the ship around by making swift changes to global energy infrastructure, it was clear that something had to be done. This year’s COP24 talks resulted in huge fossil fuel divestments, yet the uncomfortable truth is that fighting climate change can only progress with them. It is impossible to abandon fossil fuels overnight, so a more realistic and humane approach to reducing carbon emissions has to be found.

It was a difficult task from the outset. The reporting of the international and domestic media on the horrors of climate change and the use of coal has effectively stifled debate and the ability to formulate clear thinking on the subject. The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement in its current form has become untouchable, notwithstanding that its goals were highly Western-centric and near impossible to implement on a global scale. Pundits now cheer that COP24 represents a common move of institutions to cut ties to fossil fuel producers — “this most destructive of industries.” But things never are that simple.

In order for the Paris goals to be met, global emissions from power plants, factories, transport and deforestation would have to be eliminated entirely in short order. Ironically, not only is this ignorant of the realities on the ground, but, more damningly, it completely misses the point: Developing countries rely on coal and other cheap resources for economic growth, electricity and poverty alleviation. Still, activists and the media chose to focus on the political game rather than the actual situation, thereby exposing their immaturity when it comes to dealing with pressing issues like climate change.

A case in point is the vicious reaction to US President Donald Trump’s announcement to pull out of the agreement and his ongoing support for the continued use of coal through the promotion of high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) solutions. Even if it is hard to accept, the weight of evidence in concerned countries suggests that favouring technology conducive to reducing the carbon-intensity of fossil fuels is a viable compromise. Which is why the push for HELE is so important. The US hosted a forum at COP24 to advocate the use of this tech and to promote the Clean and Advanced Fossil Fuel Alliance. Originally presented after last year’s climate conference in Bonn, Germany, the alliance is exploring the benefits of more efficient fossil fuel technologies, as well as those — such as carbon capture and storage (CCS)— that have a part to play in reducing emissions in the long term.

Unlike the conventional approach that seeks to cut out all fossil fuels no matter the cost, this initiative sticks out because it takes into account the needs of developing countries. One billion people, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, live without electricity. It’s a problem that adversely impacts development indicators such as health, education, food security and poverty reduction. Furthermore, electrifying the poorest countries and thus improving living conditions is, notably, the primary objective of the UN Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7).

It’s a cruel irony then that the same people who agreed on the SDG7 are also those who now undermine their own good intentions by denying developing countries access to the one energy resource that can bring about these changes. In a move dripping with hypocrisy, global institutions like the World Bank have stopped coal financing, thereby denying access to affordable electricity for millions — a dynamic this COP has only reinforced.

The accusation of hypocrisy weighs even heavier considering that African leaders directly confronted World Bank President Jim Yong-kim in October, lamenting how the West is outraged about climate change but strangles African countries out of using fossil fuels. Their outrage is even more understandable since very little has actually been achieved by those who demand radical action and brand themselves as climate saviours. Far from raising the billions promised to help poor nations fight climate change, rich countries have continually failed to mobilize the $100 billion a year promised by 2020 to developing states for climate finance. Instead of the money, developing countries only get self-righteous finger-wagging and preachy talks for insisting on using cheap energy sources. But rich countries are willfully ignoring that without funds to finance emission-mitigating technologies like HELE, developing nation’s CO2 emissions will only keep rising.

While it may be hard for us to understand in the plentiful West, in countries like Indonesia, energy production — not climate change — is the most pressing concern. The government seeks to build more than 100 coal-fired power plants, and projections suggest that within 10 years, energy will be the largest contributor to Indonesian emissions. And it’s not an isolated case: Across Asia, hundreds of gigawatts of new coal-fired power generation is under construction, showing that the growing appetite for coal is unlikely to diminish any time soon.

Developing nations are rightly indignant that Western powers who are responsible for most of the carbon emissions to date — and who are failing on their own climate pledges — are lecturing them on cutting fossil fuel use. Instead of berating the lack of progress in fighting climate change, it would be best to accept that impact could be mitigated without compromising on economic prosperity. More efficient HELE and CSS technologies are the way to go. If COP24 and its successors want to create a lasting impact, rational thought and realistic appraisals of global conditions must prevail over myopic ideological fervour.

(Richard Zuber is a New York-based policy adviser who specialises in US foreign policy)

(This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/more/environment/cop24-katowice-poland-climate-change-technology-solutions-news-81762/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Richard Zuber Even though the outcomes of the UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland, are to be celebrated as a step in the right direction despite all odds, a somewhat bitter aftertaste remains.

By Richard Zuber Even though the outcomes of the UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland, are to be celebrated as a step in the right direction despite all odds, a somewhat bitter aftertaste remains. In the wake of news that our species has merely 12 years to pull the ship around by making swift changes to global energy infrastructure, it was clear that something had to be done. This year’s COP24 talks resulted in huge fossil fuel divestments, yet the uncomfortable truth is that fighting climate change can only progress with them. It is impossible to abandon fossil fuels overnight, so a more realistic and humane approach to reducing carbon emissions has to be found. It was a difficult task from the outset. The reporting of the international and domestic media on the horrors of climate change and the use of coal has effectively stifled debate and the ability to formulate clear thinking on the subject. The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement in its current form has become untouchable, notwithstanding that its goals were highly Western-centric and near impossible to implement on a global scale. Pundits now cheer that COP24 represents a common move of institutions to cut ties to fossil fuel producers — “this most destructive of industries.” But things never are that simple. In order for the Paris goals to be met, global emissions from power plants, factories, transport and deforestation would have to be eliminated entirely in short order. Ironically, not only is this ignorant of the realities on the ground, but, more damningly, it completely misses the point: Developing countries rely on coal and other cheap resources for economic growth, electricity and poverty alleviation. Still, activists and the media chose to focus on the political game rather than the actual situation, thereby exposing their immaturity when it comes to dealing with pressing issues like climate change. A case in point is the vicious reaction to US President Donald Trump’s announcement to pull out of the agreement and his ongoing support for the continued use of coal through the promotion of high efficiency, low emissions (HELE) solutions. Even if it is hard to accept, the weight of evidence in concerned countries suggests that favouring technology conducive to reducing the carbon-intensity of fossil fuels is a viable compromise. Which is why the push for HELE is so important. The US hosted a forum at COP24 to advocate the use of this tech and to promote the Clean and Advanced Fossil Fuel Alliance. Originally presented after last year’s climate conference in Bonn, Germany, the alliance is exploring the benefits of more efficient fossil fuel technologies, as well as those — such as carbon capture and storage (CCS)— that have a part to play in reducing emissions in the long term. Unlike the conventional approach that seeks to cut out all fossil fuels no matter the cost, this initiative sticks out because it takes into account the needs of developing countries. One billion people, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, live without electricity. It’s a problem that adversely impacts development indicators such as health, education, food security and poverty reduction. Furthermore, electrifying the poorest countries and thus improving living conditions is, notably, the primary objective of the UN Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7). It’s a cruel irony then that the same people who agreed on the SDG7 are also those who now undermine their own good intentions by denying developing countries access to the one energy resource that can bring about these changes. In a move dripping with hypocrisy, global institutions like the World Bank have stopped coal financing, thereby denying access to affordable electricity for millions — a dynamic this COP has only reinforced. The accusation of hypocrisy weighs even heavier considering that African leaders directly confronted World Bank President Jim Yong-kim in October, lamenting how the West is outraged about climate change but strangles African countries out of using fossil fuels. Their outrage is even more understandable since very little has actually been achieved by those who demand radical action and brand themselves as climate saviours. Far from raising the billions promised to help poor nations fight climate change, rich countries have continually failed to mobilize the $100 billion a year promised by 2020 to developing states for climate finance. Instead of the money, developing countries only get self-righteous finger-wagging and preachy talks for insisting on using cheap energy sources. But rich countries are willfully ignoring that without funds to finance emission-mitigating technologies like HELE, developing nation’s CO2 emissions will only keep rising. While it may be hard for us to understand in the plentiful West, in countries like Indonesia, energy production — not climate change — is the most pressing concern. The government seeks to build more than 100 coal-fired power plants, and projections suggest that within 10 years, energy will be the largest contributor to Indonesian emissions. And it’s not an isolated case: Across Asia, hundreds of gigawatts of new coal-fired power generation is under construction, showing that the growing appetite for coal is unlikely to diminish any time soon. Developing nations are rightly indignant that Western powers who are responsible for most of the carbon emissions to date — and who are failing on their own climate pledges — are lecturing them on cutting fossil fuel use. Instead of berating the lack of progress in fighting climate change, it would be best to accept that impact could be mitigated without compromising on economic prosperity. More efficient HELE and CSS technologies are the way to go. If COP24 and its successors want to create a lasting impact, rational thought and realistic appraisals of global conditions must prevail over myopic ideological fervour. (Richard Zuber is a New York-based policy adviser who specialises in US foreign policy) (This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

It’s time for a new climate compromise

Nations on Sunday struck a deal to breathe life into the landmark 2015 Paris climate treaty after marathon UN talks that failed to match the ambition the world's most vulnerable countries need to avert dangerous global warming.

Delegates from nearly 200 states finalised a common rulebook designed to deliver the Paris goals of limiting global temperature rises to well below two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit).

"Putting together the Paris agreement work programme is a big responsibility," said COP24 president Michal Kurtyka as he gavelled through the deal after talks in Poland that ran deep into overtime. &nbsp;&nbsp;

"It has been a long road. We did our best to leave no one behind."&nbsp;

<img alt="COP24 president Michal Kurtyka jumps at the end of the final session of the COP24 summit on climate change in Katowice, southern Poland." data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="21b3a6ab-742e-4ea2-bc2b-7e4f39d653f3" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%2814%29.jpg" />

(COP24 president Michal Kurtyka jumps at the end of the final session of the COP24 summit.)

<img alt="(From L to R) UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa, Iran's head of delegation Majid Shafiepour Motlagh, China's top climate negotiator Xie Zhenhua, European Union's climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete, COP24 president Michal Kurtyka react at the end of the final session of the COP24 summit on climate change in Katowice, southern Poland." data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="9ddc6a61-1f96-47f7-990e-68ffd8d5804f" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%2815%29.jpg" />

(UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa, Iran's head of delegation Majid Shafiepour Motlagh, China's top climate negotiator Xie Zhenhua, European Union's climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete, COP24 president Michal Kurtyka after the end of the final session of the COP24 summit.)

But states already dealing with devastating floods, droughts and extreme weather made worse by climate change said the package agreed in the mining city of Katowice lacked the bold ambition to cut emissions the world needed.

Egyptian ambassador Wael Aboulmagd, chair of &nbsp;G77 &amp; China negotiating bloc, said the rule book saw the "urgent adaptation needs of developing countries relegated to a second-class status."

The executive director of Greenpeace Jennifer Morgan said: "We continue to witness an irresponsible divide between the vulnerable island states and impoverished countries pitted against those who would block climate action or who are immorally failing to act fast enough."&nbsp;

The final decision text was repeatedly delayed as negotiators sought guidelines that could ward off the worst threats posed by our heating planet while protecting the economies of rich and poor nations alike.

"Without a clear rulebook, we won't see how countries are tracking, whether they are actually doing what they say they are doing," Canada's Environment Minister Catherine McKenna told AFP.

At their heart, negotiations were about how each nation funds action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, as well as how those actions are reported.&nbsp;

Report controversy

Developing nations wanted more clarity from richer ones over how the future climate fight will be funded and pushed for so-called "loss and damage" measures.

This would see richer countries giving money now to help deal with the effects of climate change many vulnerable states are already experiencing.

Another contentious issue was the integrity of carbon markets, looking ahead to the day when the patchwork of distinct exchanges -- in China, the Europe Union, parts of the United States -- may be joined up in a global system.

The Paris Agreement calls for setting up a mechanism to guard against practices, such as double counting emissions savings, that could undermine such a market.

A major sticking point, delegates eventually agreed Saturday to kick the issue down the road until next year.

One veteran observer told AFP Poland's presidency at COP24 had left many countries out of the process and presented at-risk nations with a "take it or leave it" deal. &nbsp;

Progress had "been held up by Brazil, when it should have been held up by the small islands. It's tragic."

One of the largest disappointments for countries of all wealths and sizes was the lack of ambition to reduce emissions shown in the final COP24 text.

Most nations wanted the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to form a key part of future planning.&nbsp;

'The system must change'

It highlighted the need to slash carbon pollution by nearly half before 2030 in order to hit the 1.5C target.

But the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait objected, leading to watered-down wording.

The final statement from the Polish COP24 presidency welcomed "the timely conclusion" of the report and invited "parties to make use of it" -- hardly the ringing endorsement many nations had called for.&nbsp;

"There's been a shocking lack of response to the 1.5 report," Greenpeace's Morgan, told AFP. "You can't come together and say you can't do more!"

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who made three trips to Katowice over the course of the talks, said the world's climate fight was just beginning.

"From now on my five priorities will be: Ambition, ambition, ambition, ambition, ambition," he said in a message read out by UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa.&nbsp;

With the political climate process well into its third decade sputtering on as emissions rise remorselessly, activists have stepped up grassroots campaigns of civil disobedience to speed up action.

"We are not a one-off protest, we are a rebellion," a spokesman for the Extinction Rebellion movement, which disrupted at least one ministerial event at the COP, told AFP.

"We are organising for repeated disruption, and we are targeting our governments, calling for the system change needed to deal with the crisis that we are facing."

Nations on Sunday struck a deal to breathe life into the landmark 2015 Paris climate treaty after marathon UN talks that failed to match the ambition the world's most vulnerable countries need to avert dangerous global warming.

Nations on Sunday struck a deal to breathe life into the landmark 2015 Paris climate treaty after marathon UN talks that failed to match the ambition the world's most vulnerable countries need to avert dangerous global warming. Delegates from nearly 200 states finalised a common rulebook designed to deliver the Paris goals of limiting global temperature rises to well below two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit). "Putting together the Paris agreement work programme is a big responsibility," said COP24 president Michal Kurtyka as he gavelled through the deal after talks in Poland that ran deep into overtime. "It has been a long road. We did our best to leave no one behind." (COP24 president Michal Kurtyka jumps at the end of the final session of the COP24 summit.) (UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa, Iran's head of delegation Majid Shafiepour Motlagh, China's top climate negotiator Xie Zhenhua, European Union's climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete, COP24 president Michal Kurtyka after the end of the final session of the COP24 summit.) But states already dealing with devastating floods, droughts and extreme weather made worse by climate change said the package agreed in the mining city of Katowice lacked the bold ambition to cut emissions the world needed. Egyptian ambassador Wael Aboulmagd, chair of G77 & China negotiating bloc, said the rule book saw the "urgent adaptation needs of developing countries relegated to a second-class status." The executive director of Greenpeace Jennifer Morgan said: "We continue to witness an irresponsible divide between the vulnerable island states and impoverished countries pitted against those who would block climate action or who are immorally failing to act fast enough." The final decision text was repeatedly delayed as negotiators sought guidelines that could ward off the worst threats posed by our heating planet while protecting the economies of rich and poor nations alike. "Without a clear rulebook, we won't see how countries are tracking, whether they are actually doing what they say they are doing," Canada's Environment Minister Catherine McKenna told AFP. At their heart, negotiations were about how each nation funds action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, as well as how those actions are reported. Report controversy Developing nations wanted more clarity from richer ones over how the future climate fight will be funded and pushed for so-called "loss and damage" measures. This would see richer countries giving money now to help deal with the effects of climate change many vulnerable states are already experiencing. Another contentious issue was the integrity of carbon markets, looking ahead to the day when the patchwork of distinct exchanges -- in China, the Europe Union, parts of the United States -- may be joined up in a global system. The Paris Agreement calls for setting up a mechanism to guard against practices, such as double counting emissions savings, that could undermine such a market. A major sticking point, delegates eventually agreed Saturday to kick the issue down the road until next year. One veteran observer told AFP Poland's presidency at COP24 had left many countries out of the process and presented at-risk nations with a "take it or leave it" deal. Progress had "been held up by Brazil, when it should have been held up by the small islands. It's tragic." One of the largest disappointments for countries of all wealths and sizes was the lack of ambition to reduce emissions shown in the final COP24 text. Most nations wanted the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to form a key part of future planning. 'The system must change' It highlighted the need to slash carbon pollution by nearly half before 2030 in order to hit the 1.5C target. But the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait objected, leading to watered-down wording. The final statement from the Polish COP24 presidency welcomed "the timely conclusion" of the report and invited "parties to make use of it" -- hardly the ringing endorsement many nations had called for. "There's been a shocking lack of response to the 1.5 report," Greenpeace's Morgan, told AFP. "You can't come together and say you can't do more!" UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who made three trips to Katowice over the course of the talks, said the world's climate fight was just beginning. "From now on my five priorities will be: Ambition, ambition, ambition, ambition, ambition," he said in a message read out by UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa. With the political climate process well into its third decade sputtering on as emissions rise remorselessly, activists have stepped up grassroots campaigns of civil disobedience to speed up action. "We are not a one-off protest, we are a rebellion," a spokesman for the Extinction Rebellion movement, which disrupted at least one ministerial event at the COP, told AFP. "We are organising for repeated disruption, and we are targeting our governments, calling for the system change needed to deal with the crisis that we are facing."

Nations reach deal to bring landmark 2015 Paris climate treaty to life

India Wednesday said the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/paris-climate-agreementtrump-says-india-china-pay-too-little-to-help-poor-countries-15022">Paris climate agreement</a> was "non-negotiable" and there could be no compromise on the basic principles such as equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDRRC).

"We all agree that the Paris Agreement is non-negotiable. Therefore, the delicate balance reached between developed and developing countries must be retained, and the principles such as equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibility and Respective Capabilities must be given its due," India said at the ministerial session of the UN Climate Conference here.

It said the outcome at Katowice should be inclusive, consensus-based and an integrated package, including all the components of the Paris Agreement Work Programme, to reflect the global consensus reached three years ago on this very day while adopting the Paris Agreement.

"Most importantly, we must stand with the poor, marginalised and vulnerable communities who would be most impacted by climate change to show that 'WE CARE'," India said in a statement.

It added that it was time we focussed on finding common grounds and supporting each other, based on the principles of equity and climate justice, so that "no one is left behind".

"It is important to ensure equitable access to global commons for all. The Paris Agreement signifies progress towards enhanced implementation of the Convention. While we do so, we have to maintain continuity in action by fulfilling pre-2020 commitments.

"While we continue to take stock of pre-2020 action and ambition next year as well, we expect that developed countries shall honour their pre-2020 commitments so that no undue burden is shifted to the post-2020 period. We also look forward to see the Doha Amendment coming into force as soon as possible," said the statement made on behalf of Environment Minister Harsh Vardhan.

The statement on behalf of Vardhan was made by A K Mehta, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, late Wednesday night.

The statement came amid a move by the developed countries, led by the US and the EU, to dilute CBDR-RC, a principle within the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that acknowledges the different capabilities and differing responsibilities of individual countries in addressing climate change.

India and the other developing countries strongly resisted their move, citing the historical responsibility of the developed nations in emitting carbon dioxide, contributing to global warming.

India welcomed the recent IPCC Special Report, which says human activities are estimated to have caused approximately one-degree Celsius of global warming above the pre-industrial levels and is currently increasing at 0.2-degree Celsius per decade.

"The vulnerable populations are the worst hit by extreme weather events due to a lack of resources to cope with them. The report enjoins upon us to collectively address the issues of climate change with the urgency that it deserves," India said, days after the UN scientific report was blocked by countries, including the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait, at the ongoing climate conference here.

Earlier, India, along with three other nations, had said the UN scientific report should be taken into account in the climate negotiations.

The BASIC group of nations comprising Brazil, South Africa, India and China had made its stand clear on the UN report on limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial levels at a joint-press conference held on the sidelines of the UN climate talks here.

India Wednesday said the Paris climate agreement was "non-negotiable" and there could be no compromise on the basic principles such as equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDRRC).

India Wednesday said the Paris climate agreement was "non-negotiable" and there could be no compromise on the basic principles such as equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDRRC). "We all agree that the Paris Agreement is non-negotiable. Therefore, the delicate balance reached between developed and developing countries must be retained, and the principles such as equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibility and Respective Capabilities must be given its due," India said at the ministerial session of the UN Climate Conference here. It said the outcome at Katowice should be inclusive, consensus-based and an integrated package, including all the components of the Paris Agreement Work Programme, to reflect the global consensus reached three years ago on this very day while adopting the Paris Agreement. "Most importantly, we must stand with the poor, marginalised and vulnerable communities who would be most impacted by climate change to show that 'WE CARE'," India said in a statement. It added that it was time we focussed on finding common grounds and supporting each other, based on the principles of equity and climate justice, so that "no one is left behind". "It is important to ensure equitable access to global commons for all. The Paris Agreement signifies progress towards enhanced implementation of the Convention. While we do so, we have to maintain continuity in action by fulfilling pre-2020 commitments. "While we continue to take stock of pre-2020 action and ambition next year as well, we expect that developed countries shall honour their pre-2020 commitments so that no undue burden is shifted to the post-2020 period. We also look forward to see the Doha Amendment coming into force as soon as possible," said the statement made on behalf of Environment Minister Harsh Vardhan. The statement on behalf of Vardhan was made by A K Mehta, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, late Wednesday night. The statement came amid a move by the developed countries, led by the US and the EU, to dilute CBDR-RC, a principle within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that acknowledges the different capabilities and differing responsibilities of individual countries in addressing climate change. India and the other developing countries strongly resisted their move, citing the historical responsibility of the developed nations in emitting carbon dioxide, contributing to global warming. India welcomed the recent IPCC Special Report, which says human activities are estimated to have caused approximately one-degree Celsius of global warming above the pre-industrial levels and is currently increasing at 0.2-degree Celsius per decade. "The vulnerable populations are the worst hit by extreme weather events due to a lack of resources to cope with them. The report enjoins upon us to collectively address the issues of climate change with the urgency that it deserves," India said, days after the UN scientific report was blocked by countries, including the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait, at the ongoing climate conference here. Earlier, India, along with three other nations, had said the UN scientific report should be taken into account in the climate negotiations. The BASIC group of nations comprising Brazil, South Africa, India and China had made its stand clear on the UN report on limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial levels at a joint-press conference held on the sidelines of the UN climate talks here.

Paris climate agreement non-negotiable, no compromise on basic principles: India

By Henry D Jacoby and Jennifer Morris

A mounting sense of urgency will greet negotiators as they arrive at this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference in Poland. In 2015, after 20 years of trying and failing to reach a global accord on climate-changing emissions, 195 nations hammered out a deal, the Paris Agreement, that all of them could accept.

Three years on, it’s becoming increasingly clear that national decisions about climate action, which country negotiators will convey in Poland and over the next two years, will determine whether the breakthrough Paris pact succeeds both on a political and emissions reduction front.

As scholars at the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, we have closely followed the global climate change agreements and studied their implications. Based on our analysis of nations’ commitments to cut emissions, getting the world on track to achieve the agreement’s signature goal – to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius – will require far more ambitious climate action than what countries have pledged so far. This action must begin sooner rather than later to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, from severe droughts to extreme flooding.

Climate change won’t wait for humanity’s response

Climate change is the type of problem where delay is especially costly. It is not like other pollution such as dirty urban air or a putrid stream. For these, people might clean up a polluted area this year, but if they put off the task, there will probably still be the same opportunity to get it done the following year.

Not so with greenhouse gases, which hang around for decades to centuries. So if societies delay revising our current practices – burning fossil fuels, chopping down forests, planting more polluting crops like rice, as well as raising cows – the total amount in the atmosphere will grow. The goals for limiting global warming will get steadily more difficult to achieve.

In addition, as the nations’ representatives gather in Poland to pursue their effort to gain control of this process, a crucial decision point is rapidly approaching.

Brutal timing

In the Paris Agreement, each nation is to make a pledge (what the agreement calls a Nationally Determined Contribution) to achieve a level of emissions control by a target date. For most countries, this is the year 2030. They will also submit to a review of whether they did what they said they would do every two years.

Our analysis shows that, fortunately, meeting these Paris pledges will halt emissions growth at least to 2030, though without additional action growth will resume thereafter. This voluntary system of pledge and review represents real progress on this difficult issue. Experts in international affairs argue that it is perhaps the best deal possible for a 195-nation agreement.

The pledges for 2030 are just the first step, however. Getting the globe onto a path to the 2°C Paris goal, much less to meet its stretch objective of 1.5°C, will require stronger action beyond 2030.

How tough the emissions restrictions must be in the next decade or two depends on the pace of reduction that may be feasible later in the century – and here emerging technology could possibly play a role. For example, a significant effort is underway to develop techniques to suck carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air and store it underground. If we could count on this option becoming available and affordable in the future, participating nations in the Paris Agreement could relax their emissions controls a bit now and the temperature goal could potentially still be met.

We take the view, however, that it is not wise to bet the planet on the chance of a late-century technical fix. To avoid this risky bet, our analysis shows that meeting the Paris 2°C goal requires a dramatic turnaround in emissions in the very near future.

Why 2020 is a crucial date 
 
The Paris Agreement sets up a five-year cycle of updates and specifies that in 2020 nations should revise their pledges for 2030, increasing ambition if possible. Also in 2020, nations are to pledge emissions reductions to be made by the next target date, likely to be 2035.

Whether there is financial aid for less-wealthy countries could have a big effect on the outcome. For 2030, and likely for future target dates, the pledges of many developing nations assume aid will be provided to help with the task. The richer countries have agreed to provide it, but the flow of funds thus far has been small in relation to the need.

This assistance will be increasingly important in the future because a growing share of global emissions will come from rapidly growing developing countries. We project these countries to represent over three-quarters of global emissions by 2030, and to continue to grow after that.

Failure to achieve substantial increases in ambition in these 2020 declarations, and the financial assistance to support them, would be bad news for the climate. Delay in starting the turn-down of emissions suggested in our analysis will further add to the collection of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As their concentration grows, the path of reduction leading to a 2°C outcome will become steeper, and thus more costly, potentially putting temperature goals out of reach.

All this means that a wimpy response by participating nations in 2020 will threaten the credibility of the hard-won Paris Agreement. The willingness of nations to participate in such a volunteer control effort depends on confidence in the fairness and effectiveness of the global effort. Are others doing their part? Is the overall regime working? If countries don’t meet their Paris Agreement commitments to cut emissions and then, further, don’t ratchet up their ambitions, the entire agreement risks unravelling.

Time pressure

The current absence of the US in global climate talks doesn’t help, but fortunately, most other nations recognise the global risk and are making a serious effort to ensure that the agreement succeeds.

And all negotiators recognise that substantial new pledges in 2020 will help build confidence in the effort, besides encouraging everybody to make sure they meet their 2030 goals. There is great time pressure between now and 2020, given all that needs to be done. But this is nonetheless a time of great opportunity. Negotiated deals and national decisions made in these few months may determine whether or not the world’s nations will get on track to meeting this global challenge.

(Henry D Jacoby is Professor of Management, MIT Sloan School of Management;&nbsp;Jennifer Morris is Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Henry D Jacoby and Jennifer Morris A mounting sense of urgency will greet negotiators as they arrive at this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference in Poland.

By Henry D Jacoby and Jennifer Morris A mounting sense of urgency will greet negotiators as they arrive at this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference in Poland. In 2015, after 20 years of trying and failing to reach a global accord on climate-changing emissions, 195 nations hammered out a deal, the Paris Agreement, that all of them could accept. Three years on, it’s becoming increasingly clear that national decisions about climate action, which country negotiators will convey in Poland and over the next two years, will determine whether the breakthrough Paris pact succeeds both on a political and emissions reduction front. As scholars at the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, we have closely followed the global climate change agreements and studied their implications. Based on our analysis of nations’ commitments to cut emissions, getting the world on track to achieve the agreement’s signature goal – to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius – will require far more ambitious climate action than what countries have pledged so far. This action must begin sooner rather than later to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, from severe droughts to extreme flooding. Climate change won’t wait for humanity’s response Climate change is the type of problem where delay is especially costly. It is not like other pollution such as dirty urban air or a putrid stream. For these, people might clean up a polluted area this year, but if they put off the task, there will probably still be the same opportunity to get it done the following year. Not so with greenhouse gases, which hang around for decades to centuries. So if societies delay revising our current practices – burning fossil fuels, chopping down forests, planting more polluting crops like rice, as well as raising cows – the total amount in the atmosphere will grow. The goals for limiting global warming will get steadily more difficult to achieve. In addition, as the nations’ representatives gather in Poland to pursue their effort to gain control of this process, a crucial decision point is rapidly approaching. Brutal timing In the Paris Agreement, each nation is to make a pledge (what the agreement calls a Nationally Determined Contribution) to achieve a level of emissions control by a target date. For most countries, this is the year 2030. They will also submit to a review of whether they did what they said they would do every two years. Our analysis shows that, fortunately, meeting these Paris pledges will halt emissions growth at least to 2030, though without additional action growth will resume thereafter. This voluntary system of pledge and review represents real progress on this difficult issue. Experts in international affairs argue that it is perhaps the best deal possible for a 195-nation agreement. The pledges for 2030 are just the first step, however. Getting the globe onto a path to the 2°C Paris goal, much less to meet its stretch objective of 1.5°C, will require stronger action beyond 2030. How tough the emissions restrictions must be in the next decade or two depends on the pace of reduction that may be feasible later in the century – and here emerging technology could possibly play a role. For example, a significant effort is underway to develop techniques to suck carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air and store it underground. If we could count on this option becoming available and affordable in the future, participating nations in the Paris Agreement could relax their emissions controls a bit now and the temperature goal could potentially still be met. We take the view, however, that it is not wise to bet the planet on the chance of a late-century technical fix. To avoid this risky bet, our analysis shows that meeting the Paris 2°C goal requires a dramatic turnaround in emissions in the very near future. Why 2020 is a crucial date The Paris Agreement sets up a five-year cycle of updates and specifies that in 2020 nations should revise their pledges for 2030, increasing ambition if possible. Also in 2020, nations are to pledge emissions reductions to be made by the next target date, likely to be 2035. Whether there is financial aid for less-wealthy countries could have a big effect on the outcome. For 2030, and likely for future target dates, the pledges of many developing nations assume aid will be provided to help with the task. The richer countries have agreed to provide it, but the flow of funds thus far has been small in relation to the need. This assistance will be increasingly important in the future because a growing share of global emissions will come from rapidly growing developing countries. We project these countries to represent over three-quarters of global emissions by 2030, and to continue to grow after that. Failure to achieve substantial increases in ambition in these 2020 declarations, and the financial assistance to support them, would be bad news for the climate. Delay in starting the turn-down of emissions suggested in our analysis will further add to the collection of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As their concentration grows, the path of reduction leading to a 2°C outcome will become steeper, and thus more costly, potentially putting temperature goals out of reach. All this means that a wimpy response by participating nations in 2020 will threaten the credibility of the hard-won Paris Agreement. The willingness of nations to participate in such a volunteer control effort depends on confidence in the fairness and effectiveness of the global effort. Are others doing their part? Is the overall regime working? If countries don’t meet their Paris Agreement commitments to cut emissions and then, further, don’t ratchet up their ambitions, the entire agreement risks unravelling. Time pressure The current absence of the US in global climate talks doesn’t help, but fortunately, most other nations recognise the global risk and are making a serious effort to ensure that the agreement succeeds. And all negotiators recognise that substantial new pledges in 2020 will help build confidence in the effort, besides encouraging everybody to make sure they meet their 2030 goals. There is great time pressure between now and 2020, given all that needs to be done. But this is nonetheless a time of great opportunity. Negotiated deals and national decisions made in these few months may determine whether or not the world’s nations will get on track to meeting this global challenge. (Henry D Jacoby is Professor of Management, MIT Sloan School of Management; Jennifer Morris is Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Why the next two years are critical for the Paris climate deal’s survival

The actor and former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said the United States is committed to the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/world-way-off-course-un-warns-at-crunch-climate-summit-181200"> Paris Climate Agreement </a>to curb global warming despite US president Donald Trump's decision to walk away from the agreement.

Addressing delegates gathered for United Nations climate talks in Poland, Schwarzenegger urged global leaders to involve local governors who are still committed to tackling climate change and its impact in future talks. He also called Trump "meshugge" in his address.&nbsp;

"I have to say that you have a little bit of a blind spot. And that is, every time you talk about America you're right when you say that our leadership in Washington is a little bit backwards, but you're wrong when you say that America dropped out of the Paris Agreement,"&nbsp; Schwarzenegger said.

"Because if you look a little bit beyond Washington you will see that it is the states and the cities, its local governments that control seventy per cent of our emissions. And you will see all the extraordinary work that is going on at a state and city level in America. So, the states and the cities are still in. In the Paris Agreement, our financial institutions are in, our academic institutions are still in, the governors and the mayors are still in. The United States is still in. And we're doing an extraordinary job there at staying in. Yes we have a meshugge leader in Washington, that is not in, that is out. But remember, America is more than just Washington and one leader," he added.

President Trump announced his decision to withdraw from the Paris deal in 2017, saying the accord would have cost America trillions of dollars, killed jobs, and hindered the oil, gas, coal and manufacturing industries.

But he also, at the time, said he would be open to renegotiating the deal, which was agreed by nearly 200 nations over the course of years - drawing ridicule from world and business leaders who said that would be impossible.

The earliest date for the United States to completely withdraw from the agreement is November 4, 2020, around the time of the next U.S. presidential election.

The actor and former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said the United States is committed to the Paris Climate Agreement to curb global warming despite US president Donald Trump's decision to walk away from the agreement.

The actor and former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said the United States is committed to the Paris Climate Agreement to curb global warming despite US president Donald Trump's decision to walk away from the agreement. Addressing delegates gathered for United Nations climate talks in Poland, Schwarzenegger urged global leaders to involve local governors who are still committed to tackling climate change and its impact in future talks. He also called Trump "meshugge" in his address. "I have to say that you have a little bit of a blind spot. And that is, every time you talk about America you're right when you say that our leadership in Washington is a little bit backwards, but you're wrong when you say that America dropped out of the Paris Agreement," Schwarzenegger said. "Because if you look a little bit beyond Washington you will see that it is the states and the cities, its local governments that control seventy per cent of our emissions. And you will see all the extraordinary work that is going on at a state and city level in America. So, the states and the cities are still in. In the Paris Agreement, our financial institutions are in, our academic institutions are still in, the governors and the mayors are still in. The United States is still in. And we're doing an extraordinary job there at staying in. Yes we have a meshugge leader in Washington, that is not in, that is out. But remember, America is more than just Washington and one leader," he added. President Trump announced his decision to withdraw from the Paris deal in 2017, saying the accord would have cost America trillions of dollars, killed jobs, and hindered the oil, gas, coal and manufacturing industries. But he also, at the time, said he would be open to renegotiating the deal, which was agreed by nearly 200 nations over the course of years - drawing ridicule from world and business leaders who said that would be impossible. The earliest date for the United States to completely withdraw from the agreement is November 4, 2020, around the time of the next U.S. presidential election.

US committed to Paris agreement despite 'meshugge' Trump walking away: Arnold

President Donald Trump would be willing to sign the US back up to the Paris climate accord, but only if the treaty undergoes major change, he said in comments published today.

Trump was met with global condemnation when he announced in June 2017 that the United States was pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, painting it a &quot;bad deal&quot; for the US economy.

While the president remains firm in his criticism of the historic accord, which was signed by his predecessor Barack Obama, he said he would be willing to sign up to a revamped deal.

&quot;The Paris accord, for us, would have been a disaster,&quot; he told Britain&#39;s ITV channel in an interviewed to be aired late Sunday.

&quot;If they made a good deal... there&#39;s always a chance we&#39;d get back,&quot; Trump added, describing the current agreement as &quot;terrible&quot; and &quot;unfair&quot; to the US.

The landmark treaty was agreed by 197 nations in 2015 after intense negotiations in Paris, where all countries made voluntary carbon-cutting pledges running to 2030.

&quot;If somebody said, go back into the Paris accord, it would have to be a completely different deal because we had a horrible deal,&quot; Trump said, according to extracts of the interview.

&quot;Would I go back in? Yeah, I&#39;d go back in... I would love to.&quot;

Earlier this month Trump said the US could &quot;conceivably&quot; return to the deal under more favourable terms, raising questions about whether he was bluffing about pulling out of the Paris deal in a bid for easier emissions targets.

The landmark treaty was agreed by 197 nations in 2015 after intense negotiations in Paris, where all countries made voluntary carbon-cutting pledges running to 2030

President Donald Trump would be willing to sign the US back up to the Paris climate accord, but only if the treaty undergoes major change, he said in comments published today. Trump was met with global condemnation when he announced in June 2017 that the United States was pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, painting it a "bad deal" for the US economy. While the president remains firm in his criticism of the historic accord, which was signed by his predecessor Barack Obama, he said he would be willing to sign up to a revamped deal. "The Paris accord, for us, would have been a disaster," he told Britain's ITV channel in an interviewed to be aired late Sunday. "If they made a good deal... there's always a chance we'd get back," Trump added, describing the current agreement as "terrible" and "unfair" to the US. The landmark treaty was agreed by 197 nations in 2015 after intense negotiations in Paris, where all countries made voluntary carbon-cutting pledges running to 2030. "If somebody said, go back into the Paris accord, it would have to be a completely different deal because we had a horrible deal," Trump said, according to extracts of the interview. "Would I go back in? Yeah, I'd go back in... I would love to." Earlier this month Trump said the US could "conceivably" return to the deal under more favourable terms, raising questions about whether he was bluffing about pulling out of the Paris deal in a bid for easier emissions targets.

Donald Trump willing to sign a revamped Paris climate deal

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump &quot;believes the climate is changing,&quot; US&nbsp;Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said on Saturday after Trump&#39;s decision to take the United States out of the Paris climate accord sparked dismay across the world.

&quot;President Trump believes the climate is changing and he believes pollutants are part of the equation,&quot; Haley said during an excerpt of a CNN interview released on Saturday. The interview will be broadcast on CNN&#39;s &quot;State of the Union&quot; on Sunday.

Trump &quot;knows that it&#39;s changing and that the US&nbsp;has to be responsible for it and that&#39;s what we&#39;re going to do,&quot; Haley said.

On Thursday, Trump announced the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate change pact, tapping into his &quot;America First&quot; campaign theme. He said participating in the pact would undermine the US&nbsp;economy, wipe out jobs, weaken national sovereignty and put his country at a permanent disadvantage.

&quot;Just because the US&nbsp;got out of a club doesn&#39;t mean we aren&#39;t going to care about the environment,&quot; Haley said.

Later on Saturday, Vice President Mike Pence said that remaining in the accord would have proved costly to US economic growth and to the working-class Americans at the core of Trump&#39;s political base.

&quot;By withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, President Donald Trump chose to put the forgotten men and women of America first. And he always will,&quot; Pence told a political rally in Iowa.

On Friday, nobody at the White House was able to say whether Trump believed in climate change. In recent years, he has expressed scepticism about whether climate change is real, sometimes calling it a hoax. But since becoming president, he has not offered an opinion.

The decision to take the United States out of the pact prompted a negative reaction around the world, and world leaders redoubled their commitment to an accord agreed to by every country on the planet save Nicaragua and Syria.

China and Europe on Friday pledged to unite to save what German Chancellor Angela Merkel called &quot;our Mother Earth,&quot; standing firmly against Trump&#39;s decision.

The vast majority of scientists believe global warming is mainly the result of human activities, including power generation, transportation, agriculture and industry.

A small group of sceptics, some of them in the White House, believe the Paris Pact threatened business.

(Reuters)

Trump 'knows that it's changing and that the US has to be responsible for it and that's what we're going to do,' Haley said

US President Donald Trump "believes the climate is changing," US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said on Saturday after Trump's decision to take the United States out of the Paris climate accord sparked dismay across the world. "President Trump believes the climate is changing and he believes pollutants are part of the equation," Haley said during an excerpt of a CNN interview released on Saturday. The interview will be broadcast on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday. Trump "knows that it's changing and that the US has to be responsible for it and that's what we're going to do," Haley said. On Thursday, Trump announced the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate change pact, tapping into his "America First" campaign theme. He said participating in the pact would undermine the US economy, wipe out jobs, weaken national sovereignty and put his country at a permanent disadvantage. "Just because the US got out of a club doesn't mean we aren't going to care about the environment," Haley said. Later on Saturday, Vice President Mike Pence said that remaining in the accord would have proved costly to US economic growth and to the working-class Americans at the core of Trump's political base. "By withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, President Donald Trump chose to put the forgotten men and women of America first. And he always will," Pence told a political rally in Iowa. On Friday, nobody at the White House was able to say whether Trump believed in climate change. In recent years, he has expressed scepticism about whether climate change is real, sometimes calling it a hoax. But since becoming president, he has not offered an opinion. The decision to take the United States out of the pact prompted a negative reaction around the world, and world leaders redoubled their commitment to an accord agreed to by every country on the planet save Nicaragua and Syria. China and Europe on Friday pledged to unite to save what German Chancellor Angela Merkel called "our Mother Earth," standing firmly against Trump's decision. The vast majority of scientists believe global warming is mainly the result of human activities, including power generation, transportation, agriculture and industry. A small group of sceptics, some of them in the White House, believe the Paris Pact threatened business. (Reuters)

Trump 'believes the climate is changing', says UN ambassador Nikki Haley

President Donald Trump complained on Thursday that the United States was being unfairly treated in the Paris Climate Agreement and told Reuters he would announce a decision in about two weeks on whether Washington would remain in the accord.

The Republican Trump, elected in November, had vowed during his campaign to withdraw from the Paris accord within 100 days of becoming president, part of a broader plan to sweep away Obama administration environmental protections he said were hobbling the economy.

He has since said he is open to staying in the pact if Washington gets better terms, and scores of large U.S. companies and several Republican lawmakers have urged him to stay in the deal as a way to protect American industry interests overseas.

Trump, who will mark the 100th day of his presidency on Saturday, told Reuters in an interview he would announce his decision &quot;in about two weeks,&quot; but complained that China, India, Russia and other countries were paying too little to help poorer countries battle climate change under the agreement&#39;s Green Climate Fund.

&quot;It&#39;s not a fair situation because they are paying virtually nothing and we are paying massive amounts of money,&quot; he said.

Asked for a hint of what his decision might be, he said: &quot;I can say this, we want to be treated fairly.&quot;

An administration source told Reuters earlier that Trump administration officials would likely meet in May to decide whether to keep the United States in the climate deal, having had an initial meeting on Thursday at the White House.

The group of advisers, which includes Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, was on track to make the decision before a Group of Seven summit on May 26, the source said.

CABINET DIFFERENCES

Tillerson, the former head of Exxon Mobil Corp, and Perry have said the country should remain in the agreement. McMaster shares that view, a source outside the administration said.

Opponents of the pact include Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt, the former attorney general of oil-producing state Oklahoma, and White House chief strategist Steve Bannon.

Nearly 200 countries struck the Paris agreement to limit climate change by cutting carbon dioxide emissions and making investments in clean energy.

Many companies such as BP Plc and Microsoft Corp have urged the United States to stay in the agreement to protect their competitiveness.

A group of nine Republican lawmakers on Thursday urged Trump to stick to the pact, but to weaken the U.S. pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Congressman Kevin Cramer of oil-producing state North Dakota and eight other Republicans in the House of Representatives sent a letter to Trump urging him to use the country&#39;s &quot;seat at the Paris table to defend and promote our commercial interest, including our manufacturing and fossil fuel sectors.&quot;

If the United States is to stay in the 2015 agreement, Washington should present a new emissions cutting pledge that &quot;does no harm to our economy,&quot; said the letter from Cramer, who advised Trump on energy and climate during his 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump&#39;s Democratic predecessor, former President Barack Obama, had pledged a 26 percent to 28 percent cut in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels, by 2025. Most scientists say the world needs to curb greenhouse gas emissions to limit the effects of climate change, including rising seas, deadly heatwaves, and severe storms and droughts.

The Republican lawmakers also said Washington should retain its seat on the Green Climate Fund but not make additional transfers to it. Obama pledged $3 billion to the fund in 2014, and gave $1 billion to it, with the last $500 million payment coming in his last days as president.&nbsp;

(Reuters)

'It's not a fair situation because they are paying virtually nothing and we are paying massive amounts of money,' he said

President Donald Trump complained on Thursday that the United States was being unfairly treated in the Paris Climate Agreement and told Reuters he would announce a decision in about two weeks on whether Washington would remain in the accord. The Republican Trump, elected in November, had vowed during his campaign to withdraw from the Paris accord within 100 days of becoming president, part of a broader plan to sweep away Obama administration environmental protections he said were hobbling the economy. He has since said he is open to staying in the pact if Washington gets better terms, and scores of large U.S. companies and several Republican lawmakers have urged him to stay in the deal as a way to protect American industry interests overseas. Trump, who will mark the 100th day of his presidency on Saturday, told Reuters in an interview he would announce his decision "in about two weeks," but complained that China, India, Russia and other countries were paying too little to help poorer countries battle climate change under the agreement's Green Climate Fund. "It's not a fair situation because they are paying virtually nothing and we are paying massive amounts of money," he said. Asked for a hint of what his decision might be, he said: "I can say this, we want to be treated fairly." An administration source told Reuters earlier that Trump administration officials would likely meet in May to decide whether to keep the United States in the climate deal, having had an initial meeting on Thursday at the White House. The group of advisers, which includes Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, was on track to make the decision before a Group of Seven summit on May 26, the source said. CABINET DIFFERENCES Tillerson, the former head of Exxon Mobil Corp, and Perry have said the country should remain in the agreement. McMaster shares that view, a source outside the administration said. Opponents of the pact include Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt, the former attorney general of oil-producing state Oklahoma, and White House chief strategist Steve Bannon. Nearly 200 countries struck the Paris agreement to limit climate change by cutting carbon dioxide emissions and making investments in clean energy. Many companies such as BP Plc and Microsoft Corp have urged the United States to stay in the agreement to protect their competitiveness. A group of nine Republican lawmakers on Thursday urged Trump to stick to the pact, but to weaken the U.S. pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Congressman Kevin Cramer of oil-producing state North Dakota and eight other Republicans in the House of Representatives sent a letter to Trump urging him to use the country's "seat at the Paris table to defend and promote our commercial interest, including our manufacturing and fossil fuel sectors." If the United States is to stay in the 2015 agreement, Washington should present a new emissions cutting pledge that "does no harm to our economy," said the letter from Cramer, who advised Trump on energy and climate during his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump's Democratic predecessor, former President Barack Obama, had pledged a 26 percent to 28 percent cut in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels, by 2025. Most scientists say the world needs to curb greenhouse gas emissions to limit the effects of climate change, including rising seas, deadly heatwaves, and severe storms and droughts. The Republican lawmakers also said Washington should retain its seat on the Green Climate Fund but not make additional transfers to it. Obama pledged $3 billion to the fund in 2014, and gave $1 billion to it, with the last $500 million payment coming in his last days as president. (Reuters)

Paris climate agreement:?Trump says India, China pay too little to help poor countries

India will not be able to meet its Paris climate agreement commitments in the coming years if it carries through with plans to construct nearly 370 coal-fired power plants, according to University of California, Irvine and CoalSwarm researchers.

&quot;India is facing a dilemma of its own making,&quot; said co-author Steven Davis.&nbsp;

&quot;The country has vowed to curtail its use of fossil fuels in electricity generation, but it has also put itself on a path to building hundreds of coal-burning power plants to feed its growing industrial economy.

&quot;Further, by developing all of the planned coal-fired capacity, India would boost the share of fossil fuels in its energy budget by 123 per cent. If the nation also met its goal to produce at least 40 per cent of its power from nonfossil sources by 2030, the total power being generated would greatly exceed its own projected future electricity demand.

India has pledged to the international community to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released per unit of gross domestic product by as much as 35 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and to increase renewable energy in its power grids. The construction of 65 gigawatts&#39; worth of coal-burning generation facilities with an additional 178 gigawatts in the planning stages would make it nearly impossible for India to fulfill those climate promises, the researchers said.

&quot;In looking closely at all of India&#39;s active coal plant proposals, we found they are already incompatible with the country&#39;s international climate commitments and are simply unneeded,&quot; said lead author Christine Shearer.&nbsp;

&quot;These plants therefore risk either locking out the country&#39;s renewable electricity goals or becoming stranded assets operating well below optimal rates and leading to financial losses.&quot;

Davis added: &quot;We&#39;ve done calculations to figure out that India&#39;s Paris pledges might be met if it built these plants and only ran them 40 per cent of the time, but that&#39;d be a colossal waste of money, and once built, there&#39;d be huge incentives to run the plants more despite the nation&#39;s contrary climate goals.&quot;

India relies heavily on coal; 70 per cent of the country&#39;s power comes from plants burning the fuel. Because of its historically low cost and accessibility (India has large domestic coal reserves), it&#39;s seen as furthering India&#39;s quest to become a manufacturing and economic powerhouse and as a way to provide electricity to the roughly 300 million people in the nation who don&#39;t have it.

But the UCI and CoalSwarm researchers stressed that there are significant downsides to the fossil fuel habit. In addition to spewing harmful soot and other types of air pollution coal-burning power plants are the largest sources of carbon dioxide on Earth, accounting for 41 per cent of all CO2 emissions in 2015. Choices that individual countries make in regard to their energy mix have planetwide consequences.

&quot;India&#39;s proposed coal plants will almost single-handedly jeopardize the internationally agreed-upon climate target of avoiding more than 1.5 degrees Celsius of mean global warming,&quot; Davis said.

The study appears in the journal Earth&#39;s Future.&nbsp;

(ANI)&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

India won't able to meet its Paris climate agreement commitments if it carries through with plans to construct nearly 370 coal-fired plants

India will not be able to meet its Paris climate agreement commitments in the coming years if it carries through with plans to construct nearly 370 coal-fired power plants, according to University of California, Irvine and CoalSwarm researchers. "India is facing a dilemma of its own making," said co-author Steven Davis. "The country has vowed to curtail its use of fossil fuels in electricity generation, but it has also put itself on a path to building hundreds of coal-burning power plants to feed its growing industrial economy. "Further, by developing all of the planned coal-fired capacity, India would boost the share of fossil fuels in its energy budget by 123 per cent. If the nation also met its goal to produce at least 40 per cent of its power from nonfossil sources by 2030, the total power being generated would greatly exceed its own projected future electricity demand. India has pledged to the international community to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide released per unit of gross domestic product by as much as 35 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and to increase renewable energy in its power grids. The construction of 65 gigawatts' worth of coal-burning generation facilities with an additional 178 gigawatts in the planning stages would make it nearly impossible for India to fulfill those climate promises, the researchers said. "In looking closely at all of India's active coal plant proposals, we found they are already incompatible with the country's international climate commitments and are simply unneeded," said lead author Christine Shearer. "These plants therefore risk either locking out the country's renewable electricity goals or becoming stranded assets operating well below optimal rates and leading to financial losses." Davis added: "We've done calculations to figure out that India's Paris pledges might be met if it built these plants and only ran them 40 per cent of the time, but that'd be a colossal waste of money, and once built, there'd be huge incentives to run the plants more despite the nation's contrary climate goals." India relies heavily on coal; 70 per cent of the country's power comes from plants burning the fuel. Because of its historically low cost and accessibility (India has large domestic coal reserves), it's seen as furthering India's quest to become a manufacturing and economic powerhouse and as a way to provide electricity to the roughly 300 million people in the nation who don't have it. But the UCI and CoalSwarm researchers stressed that there are significant downsides to the fossil fuel habit. In addition to spewing harmful soot and other types of air pollution coal-burning power plants are the largest sources of carbon dioxide on Earth, accounting for 41 per cent of all CO2 emissions in 2015. Choices that individual countries make in regard to their energy mix have planetwide consequences. "India's proposed coal plants will almost single-handedly jeopardize the internationally agreed-upon climate target of avoiding more than 1.5 degrees Celsius of mean global warming," Davis said. The study appears in the journal Earth's Future. (ANI)

India's outsized coal plans put Paris climate goals at risk: Researchers

President Donald Trump&#39;s top advisers will meet on Tuesday to discuss whether to recommend that he withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord, a White House official said on Monday.

The accord, agreed upon by nearly 200 countries in Paris in 2015, aims to limit planetary warming in part by slashing carbon dioxide and other emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. As part of the deal, the United States committed to reducing its emissions by between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.

Trump in the past has said the United States should &quot;cancel&quot; the deal but he has been mostly quiet on the issue since he was elected.

A White House official said Trump&#39;s aides would &quot;discuss the options, with the goal of providing a recommendation to the president about the path forward.&quot;

White House officials, led by the National Economic Council, have recently been asking publicly-traded energy companies for advice on whether to stay in the agreement.

Major publicly traded coal companies such as Cloud Peak Energy Inc and Peabody Energy Corp confirmed to Reuters that they have told White House advisers it is in their interests for the United States to remain in the Paris agreement to ensure there was a global role for high-efficiency coal plants.

&quot;By remaining in the Paris Agreement, albeit with a much different pledge on emissions, you can help shape a more rational international approach to climate policy,&quot; Cloud Peak CEO Colin Marshall wrote in the letter dated April 6.

The advisers expected to attend Tuesday&#39;s meeting included Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Scott Pruitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Perry, a former Texas governor, at his confirmation hearings in January softened a previous position that the science behind climate change was &quot;phony.&quot;&nbsp;

Last week, Pruitt, a former Oklahoma Attorney General, said the United States should &quot;exit&quot; the agreement because it was a &quot;bad deal&quot; for the country.

The meeting comes ahead of a summit of the Group of Seven wealthy nations in late May, which White House spokesman Sean Spicer said was the deadline for the decision.

Politico on Friday first reported a possible meeting of Trump advisers.

(Reuters)

Trump in the past has said the United States should 'cancel' the deal but he has been mostly quiet on the issue since he was elected

President Donald Trump's top advisers will meet on Tuesday to discuss whether to recommend that he withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord, a White House official said on Monday. The accord, agreed upon by nearly 200 countries in Paris in 2015, aims to limit planetary warming in part by slashing carbon dioxide and other emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. As part of the deal, the United States committed to reducing its emissions by between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025. Trump in the past has said the United States should "cancel" the deal but he has been mostly quiet on the issue since he was elected. A White House official said Trump's aides would "discuss the options, with the goal of providing a recommendation to the president about the path forward." White House officials, led by the National Economic Council, have recently been asking publicly-traded energy companies for advice on whether to stay in the agreement. Major publicly traded coal companies such as Cloud Peak Energy Inc and Peabody Energy Corp confirmed to Reuters that they have told White House advisers it is in their interests for the United States to remain in the Paris agreement to ensure there was a global role for high-efficiency coal plants. "By remaining in the Paris Agreement, albeit with a much different pledge on emissions, you can help shape a more rational international approach to climate policy," Cloud Peak CEO Colin Marshall wrote in the letter dated April 6. The advisers expected to attend Tuesday's meeting included Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Scott Pruitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Perry, a former Texas governor, at his confirmation hearings in January softened a previous position that the science behind climate change was "phony." Last week, Pruitt, a former Oklahoma Attorney General, said the United States should "exit" the agreement because it was a "bad deal" for the country. The meeting comes ahead of a summit of the Group of Seven wealthy nations in late May, which White House spokesman Sean Spicer said was the deadline for the decision. Politico on Friday first reported a possible meeting of Trump advisers. (Reuters)

US: Trump's advisers to discuss commitment to Paris climate deal

The landmark Paris climate pact is&nbsp;poised to enter into force globally this week after the European Parliament joined the world&#39;s top polluters in endorsing the deal to slow the planet&#39;s dangerous temperature rise.

&nbsp;

In a vote watched by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the parliament voted overwhelmingly by 610 for, 38 against and 31 abstentions in favour of the EU`s fast-track ratification of the deal sealed in Paris last December.

&nbsp;

That puts the European Union on track to hand over its ratification to the United Nations on Friday, which would then take the international community above the threshold needed for implementation.

&nbsp;

&quot;I`m extremely honoured to be able to witness this historic moment,&quot; Ban said after making a special trip to the imposing European Parliament building in Strasbourg, France to watch the vote.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;I look forward to the Paris agreement entering into force as soon as possible, even in just a few days time.&quot;

&nbsp;

The Paris accord requires all countries to devise plans to achieve the goal of keeping the rise in temperatures within two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and strive for 1.5 C (2.7 F) if possible.

&nbsp;

The European Parliament, the bloc`s only elected body, backed a decision by EU environment ministers last Friday to fast-track approval of the deal, despite only seven out of 28 EU countries having themselves ratified it.

&nbsp;

Fears that China and the United States, the world`s two biggest polluters, were leaving Europe behind on ratifying last year`s historic deal pushed them into rushing through the ratification.To come into force the accord needs ratification from 55 countries, which must together account for at least 55 percent of the planet`s greenhouse gas emissions, which are responsible for climate change.

&nbsp;

With a decision in the last few days by India, the third biggest emitter, a total of 62 countries have ratified the agreement to commit to take action to stem the planet`s rising temperatures.

&nbsp;

They all account for 52 percent of the planet`s greenhouse gas emissions, and EU ratification will bring it over 55 percent threshold by including the seven EU countries who have already approved it.The seven EU countries -- Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Slovakia -- account for some five percent of global emissions.

&nbsp;

The seven EU countries -- Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Slovakia -- account for some five percent of global emissions.

&nbsp;

The entire bloc accounts for 12 percent of global emissions.

&nbsp;

In normal times, for such major international agreements, the EU and its 28 member states must deposit simultaneously their ratification documents under sometimes time-consuming procedures.

&nbsp;

However, the member states overcame differences to reach a political agreement last week to bypass the usual process.

&nbsp;

Europe has prided itself on taking a global lead on climate change issues but has watched with alarm as the rest of the world has left it behind.

&nbsp;

&quot;Europe today is demonstrating it`s capable of great things when it puts its energy and forces together,&quot; European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker said in Strasbourg at a time when the EU is buffeted by crises from migration to Brexit.

&nbsp;

Oxfam gave a cautious welcome, urging all member states they face a &quot;credibility test&quot; in sticking to the deal.

&nbsp;

US Secretary of State John Kerry, during a visit to Brussels, said &quot;the EU is making good on that pledge&quot; it made at the UN General Assembly last month to help the pact enter force by the end of the year.

&nbsp;

During a White House event on Monday to highlight his campaign to battle climate change, US President Barack Obama warned: &quot;We are really in a race against time.&quot;

&nbsp;

(AFP)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

With the threshold for impelementation crossed, the pact will go into force globally this week

The landmark Paris climate pact is poised to enter into force globally this week after the European Parliament joined the world's top polluters in endorsing the deal to slow the planet's dangerous temperature rise. In a vote watched by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the parliament voted overwhelmingly by 610 for, 38 against and 31 abstentions in favour of the EU`s fast-track ratification of the deal sealed in Paris last December. That puts the European Union on track to hand over its ratification to the United Nations on Friday, which would then take the international community above the threshold needed for implementation. "I`m extremely honoured to be able to witness this historic moment," Ban said after making a special trip to the imposing European Parliament building in Strasbourg, France to watch the vote. "I look forward to the Paris agreement entering into force as soon as possible, even in just a few days time." The Paris accord requires all countries to devise plans to achieve the goal of keeping the rise in temperatures within two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and strive for 1.5 C (2.7 F) if possible. The European Parliament, the bloc`s only elected body, backed a decision by EU environment ministers last Friday to fast-track approval of the deal, despite only seven out of 28 EU countries having themselves ratified it. Fears that China and the United States, the world`s two biggest polluters, were leaving Europe behind on ratifying last year`s historic deal pushed them into rushing through the ratification.To come into force the accord needs ratification from 55 countries, which must together account for at least 55 percent of the planet`s greenhouse gas emissions, which are responsible for climate change. With a decision in the last few days by India, the third biggest emitter, a total of 62 countries have ratified the agreement to commit to take action to stem the planet`s rising temperatures. They all account for 52 percent of the planet`s greenhouse gas emissions, and EU ratification will bring it over 55 percent threshold by including the seven EU countries who have already approved it.The seven EU countries -- Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Slovakia -- account for some five percent of global emissions. The seven EU countries -- Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Slovakia -- account for some five percent of global emissions. The entire bloc accounts for 12 percent of global emissions. In normal times, for such major international agreements, the EU and its 28 member states must deposit simultaneously their ratification documents under sometimes time-consuming procedures. However, the member states overcame differences to reach a political agreement last week to bypass the usual process. Europe has prided itself on taking a global lead on climate change issues but has watched with alarm as the rest of the world has left it behind. "Europe today is demonstrating it`s capable of great things when it puts its energy and forces together," European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker said in Strasbourg at a time when the EU is buffeted by crises from migration to Brexit. Oxfam gave a cautious welcome, urging all member states they face a "credibility test" in sticking to the deal. US Secretary of State John Kerry, during a visit to Brussels, said "the EU is making good on that pledge" it made at the UN General Assembly last month to help the pact enter force by the end of the year. During a White House event on Monday to highlight his campaign to battle climate change, US President Barack Obama warned: "We are really in a race against time." (AFP)

European Parliament endorses Paris climate pact

The United States has joined China to formally ratify the Paris agreement to curb climate-warming emissions, the world&#39;s two biggest economies said today, which could help put the pact into force before the end of the year. 
 
US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping submitted their plan to join the agreement to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who is in China to witness the announcement. 
 
Senior Obama adviser Brian Deese said the joint declaration should push other countries to formally join the agreement. 
 
&quot;The signal of the two large emitters taking this step together and taking it early, far earlier than people had anticipated a year ago, should give confidence to the global communities and to other countries that are working on their climate change plans, that they too can move quickly and will be part of a global effort,&quot; Deese told reporters on Friday. 
 
India is also poised to join the agreement this year, Deese said, adding that Obama was expected to meet Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of a Group of 20 nations meeting in Hangzhou, China, this weekend. 
 
Obama and Xi committed to cooperate on two other global environmental agreements this year - an amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down air-conditioning refrigerants and on a market-based measure to reduce carbon emissions from aviation. 
 
&quot;Today&#39;s announcement is the strongest signal yet that what we agreed in Paris will soon be the law of the land,&quot; said Mattlan Zackhras, minister-in-assistance to the president of the Marshall Islands. 
 
&quot;With the two biggest emitters ready to lead, the transition to a low-emissions, climate-resilient global economy is now irreversible.&quot; 
 
Saturday&#39;s joint statement could spur further ratifications by the likes of Brazil and Canada. 
 
&quot;We expect a surge of ratifications around the UN Climate week later in September,&quot; said Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics. &nbsp; 
 
In Paris last December, nearly 200 countries agreed on a binding global compact to slash greenhouse gases and keep global temperature increases to &quot;well below&quot; 2 degrees Celsius. 
 
Experts have said the temperature target is already in danger of being breached, with the U.N.&#39;s weather agency saying 2016 is on course to be the warmest year since records began. 
 
&#39;Light speed&#39; 
 
While 180 countries have now signed the agreement, 55 nations - covering at least 55 per cent of global emissions - need to formally ratify the treaty to put it into legal effect. 
 
Before China and the United States, 23 nations had ratified - including North Korea - but they collectively accounted for just 1.08 per cent of global emissions, according to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 
 
China represents just over 20 per cent of global emissions while the United States accounting for 17.9 per cent, Russia 7.5 per cent and India 4.1 per cent. 
 
The announcement is a major diplomatic achievement for the US president, who ends his term in January. 
 
But the ability of the United States to achieve its Paris targets could be affected by the outcome of a federal court hearing this month, in which 27 US states are trying to block the federal Clean Power Plan that slashes CO2 from power plants, the largest source of US greenhouse gas emissions. 
 
The US Republican Party Platform has also questioned the legality of the executive order used to ratify the Paris deal, saying it will need the consent of the Senate before it becomes binding. 
 
Li Shuo, a climate adviser with Greenpeace, said both China and the United States were determined to put the treaty into force as soon as possible in order to avoid the risk that any new Republican administration would reject it. 
 
&quot;It now looks like the Paris agreement will enter into force before the end of the year and that will really be light speed compared to almost all other international agreements,&quot; he said.&nbsp; 
 
US Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter of the accord, but her Republican counterpart Donald Trump has dismissed man-made climate change as a hoax and says he will abandon the Paris agreement if elected. 
 
Countries that ratify the deal will have to wait for three years after it has gone into legal force before they can begin the process of withdrawing from it, according to the agreement signed in Paris. 
 
Ratification, however, does not mean the work is over. 
 
Alden Meyer, international director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the Paris agreement&#39;s detailed rules will likely take another year or two to finalise. 
 
&quot;All countries will need to raise the ambition of their commitments under the agreement if we&#39;re to avoid the worst impacts of climate change and reach a goal of net zero global warming emissions by mid-century,&quot; Meyer said. 
 
&quot;But this is an important step forward that reinforces the US and China&#39;s continued leadership in building a robust, durable international climate framework.&quot;&nbsp; 
 
(Reuters)

They submitted their plan to join the agreement to UN Secretary-General; India is poised to join agreement this year, says top Obama adviser

The United States has joined China to formally ratify the Paris agreement to curb climate-warming emissions, the world's two biggest economies said today, which could help put the pact into force before the end of the year. US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping submitted their plan to join the agreement to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who is in China to witness the announcement. Senior Obama adviser Brian Deese said the joint declaration should push other countries to formally join the agreement. "The signal of the two large emitters taking this step together and taking it early, far earlier than people had anticipated a year ago, should give confidence to the global communities and to other countries that are working on their climate change plans, that they too can move quickly and will be part of a global effort," Deese told reporters on Friday. India is also poised to join the agreement this year, Deese said, adding that Obama was expected to meet Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of a Group of 20 nations meeting in Hangzhou, China, this weekend. Obama and Xi committed to cooperate on two other global environmental agreements this year - an amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down air-conditioning refrigerants and on a market-based measure to reduce carbon emissions from aviation. "Today's announcement is the strongest signal yet that what we agreed in Paris will soon be the law of the land," said Mattlan Zackhras, minister-in-assistance to the president of the Marshall Islands. "With the two biggest emitters ready to lead, the transition to a low-emissions, climate-resilient global economy is now irreversible." Saturday's joint statement could spur further ratifications by the likes of Brazil and Canada. "We expect a surge of ratifications around the UN Climate week later in September," said Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics. In Paris last December, nearly 200 countries agreed on a binding global compact to slash greenhouse gases and keep global temperature increases to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius. Experts have said the temperature target is already in danger of being breached, with the U.N.'s weather agency saying 2016 is on course to be the warmest year since records began. 'Light speed' While 180 countries have now signed the agreement, 55 nations - covering at least 55 per cent of global emissions - need to formally ratify the treaty to put it into legal effect. Before China and the United States, 23 nations had ratified - including North Korea - but they collectively accounted for just 1.08 per cent of global emissions, according to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. China represents just over 20 per cent of global emissions while the United States accounting for 17.9 per cent, Russia 7.5 per cent and India 4.1 per cent. The announcement is a major diplomatic achievement for the US president, who ends his term in January. But the ability of the United States to achieve its Paris targets could be affected by the outcome of a federal court hearing this month, in which 27 US states are trying to block the federal Clean Power Plan that slashes CO2 from power plants, the largest source of US greenhouse gas emissions. The US Republican Party Platform has also questioned the legality of the executive order used to ratify the Paris deal, saying it will need the consent of the Senate before it becomes binding. Li Shuo, a climate adviser with Greenpeace, said both China and the United States were determined to put the treaty into force as soon as possible in order to avoid the risk that any new Republican administration would reject it. "It now looks like the Paris agreement will enter into force before the end of the year and that will really be light speed compared to almost all other international agreements," he said. US Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter of the accord, but her Republican counterpart Donald Trump has dismissed man-made climate change as a hoax and says he will abandon the Paris agreement if elected. Countries that ratify the deal will have to wait for three years after it has gone into legal force before they can begin the process of withdrawing from it, according to the agreement signed in Paris. Ratification, however, does not mean the work is over. Alden Meyer, international director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the Paris agreement's detailed rules will likely take another year or two to finalise. "All countries will need to raise the ambition of their commitments under the agreement if we're to avoid the worst impacts of climate change and reach a goal of net zero global warming emissions by mid-century," Meyer said. "But this is an important step forward that reinforces the US and China's continued leadership in building a robust, durable international climate framework." (Reuters)

China, US ratify Paris climate agreement ahead of G20 summit

paris-climate-agreement

Paris Climate Agreement, News on Paris Climate Agreement, stories on Paris Climate Agreement, articles on Paris Climate Agreement, Paris Climate Agreement stories at Wion, Paris Climate Agreement news, Paris Climate Agreement latest news

paris climate-agreement