Climate Agreement Withdrawal Sends a Message to South Florida
President Donald Trump declared that the Paris Climate Agreement is a bad deal for the United States and that the economic disadvantages of the agreement outweigh the uncertain environmental benefits. But the withdrawal also sends a clear message to South Florida, a region at particular risk to the effects of climate change. The message for South Florida is: you are on your own, writes Stephen Tilbrook.
July 20, 2017 at 02:45 PM
6 minute read
It was the withdrawal heard around the world. On June 1, President Donald Trump sent a clear message to the world with his dramatic announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement. President Trump declared that the agreement is a bad deal for the United States and that the economic disadvantages of the agreement outweigh the uncertain environmental benefits. But the withdrawal also sends a clear message to South Florida, a region at particular risk to the effects of climate change. The message for South Florida is: you are on your own. South Florida is at the forefront of planning for the effects of climate change. But the solutions will be complex, the costs will be significant, and don't look to Washington for guidance or support.
|The Paris Climate Agreement
On Dec. 12, 2015, representatives from 195 nations entered into the Paris Climate Agreement with a goal to adapt energy sources, cut down on climate change emissions and limit the rise of global temperatures. The agreement acknowledges that the threat of climate change is “urgent and potentially irreversible” and can only be addressed with the “widest possible cooperation by all countries.” However, the agreement is an aspirational document; it is not a binding treaty and there are no implementing regulations. The central goal of the agreement is to limit the rise in global average temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius as compared to pre-industrial levels. Each participating country is required to set goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but each country's plan to reach the goals is left to their discretion. The agreement merely provides a framework to gain momentum in combatting climate change and adapting to its effects. Through the agreement, the United States pledged to reduce U.S. emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 26 percent by 2025. The United States also pledged to contribute $3 billion to the effort, and has already invested over $1 billion.
|Impact of U.S. Withdrawal
The United States is the largest economy in the world and the second largest producer of greenhouse gasses. Accordingly, the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement is a major setback for international efforts to avert global warming. Because the agreement was not ratified by the Senate, the United States will face few barriers for withdrawal. President Trump intends to invoke the formal withdrawal mechanism within the agreement, a legal process that will take four years to complete and will lead to an official exit on Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the next presidential election. While a future administration could choose to rejoin the agreement, President Trump has already begun efforts to reverse the climate change initiatives of the Obama administration, including cancelling the Clean Power Plan and regulations that capped the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted from power plants. Meanwhile, over 30 states and 88 cities, as well as many large corporations, have pledged to adhere to the terms of the Paris Agreement despite the formal U.S. withdrawal.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250