This is a summary of commentary originally published by the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University on August 25, 2017.

In a new article published in Nature Energy, Director Jason Bordoff writes that although the Trump administration’s domestic plans would have curtailed U.S. climate action even had we stayed in the Paris Agreement, the decision to leave undermines U.S. international energy and climate leadership and the prospects of ramping up global climate policy ambition. Bordoff outlines five key reasons why leaving the Paris Agreement matters, including:•Withdrawing from the Paris Agreement undermines U.S. international credibility and leadership, upsets important diplomatic relationships, isolates the U.S., and gives a key tool of diplomatic and economic leadership to other nations, notably China, which has indicated its intention to fill the void. It reflects a different view of foreign affairs whereby American prosperity derives from competition with other nations, not strategic cooperation and alliance. 

• Prospects for ratcheting up ambition to fight climate change across countries are more remote. Other nations will worry about bearing a greater cost to reduce emissions to make up for the U.S. withdrawal. 
• For all of Trump’s talk of an unfair deal, the U.S. secured some key victories in the Paris negotiations that will be undermined. Key among these was the recognition among both developed and developing nations that all countries have a responsibility to address climate change. 
• The U.S. now risks being left behind in the race to develop the energy technologies of tomorrow — from advanced nuclear reactors and carbon capture, storage, and utilization technology to next-generation solar cells and grid-scale energy storage. Additionally, crucial issues such as intellectual property, transparency, and trade will be decided without anyone looking out for U.S. commercial interests.
• Ancillary efforts will also be undermined. For example, the U.S. committed US$3 billion of a total US$10 billion by developed nations to the Green Climate Fund since 2013, but the U.S. has only paid US$1 billion. Other multilateral climate negotiations, such as agreements to limit aviation emissions or heat-trapping refrigerant emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), will also be negatively affected by withdrawal.

The piece concludes by noting that in the diplomatic realm, withdrawal from the Paris agreement was the proverbial own goal, a historic blunder that upsets key diplomatic partnerships, cedes leadership in tomorrow’s energy technologies to other nations, and stymies the ability to ratchet up the ambition of international action on climate change as time runs ever shorter to address this threat.

 

Read the full article

Jason Bordoff

The statements, opinions and data contained in the content published in Global Gas Perspectives are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s) of Natural Gas World