On The Withdrawal Of The US From The 2015 Paris Agreement - Honolulu Civil Beat

About the Author

Chip Fletcher

Dr. Chip Fletcher, author of “Climate Change: What the Science Tells Us” (J. Wiley, 2019) is associate dean of the School of Ocean and Earth Science, and Technology, and Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Hawaii Manoa, and vice-chair of the Honolulu Climate Change Commission.

Hidden under the exciting news of Tuesday’s political events, is the withdrawal of America from the United Nations 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.

The agreement aims to limit global warming to “well below 2 C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 C.”

Success in hitting these targets would mean a lot. With warming stopped at 1.5 C, the four entirely atoll nations would have more time to prepare for the unavoidable 1 meter of sea level rise that we’ve already set in motion. Waikiki, Kakaako, Ewa Beach, Haaula and other coastal communities and commercial districts will still need to figure out how to “live with water,” but the probability of multi-meter sea level rise would be much less.

With warming stopped at 1.5 C, wildfires, drought, hurricanes, heat waves, and extreme rain and flooding would continue to build. But many states, and the federal government, might avoid the all-out bankruptcy they are headed for because of exploding extreme weather events.

Tuvalu, an island nation 2,500 miles southwest of Hawaii, is on the forefront of feeling the impacts of climate change. Tomoaki Inaba/Flickr

Over the past 40 years the U.S. saw an average of six billion-dollar disasters each year (adjusted for inflation). In the past five years, the annual average was 13 disasters. The first nine months of 2020 ties the annual record of 16 events set in 2011 and 2017.

Under the Paris Agreement, 189 sovereign nations pledged to restrict their greenhouse gas emissions, and to increase those restrictions in 2020. As of today, only 12 have stepped forward, collectively representing about 2% of the global emissions problem. A poor showing, and indicative of weaknesses in the agreement.

The annual “Gap” Report from the UN Environmental Program reveals that prior to the pandemic, global emissions rose an average 1.5% per year. If announced reductions are met, temperatures nonetheless can be expected to rise a horrific 3.2 C this century.

This level of warming would severely disrupt human civilization. Specifically, 3.5 billion people would be exposed to annual temperatures only found today in 0.8% of the global land surface, mostly concentrated in the Sahara, but in 2070 projected to cover 19% of the global land. The migration of one-third of humanity to find new and tolerable living conditions would place irreparable stress on social, political, and economic systems. Global security would likely collapse.

Because of the pandemic, carbon emissions from energy use are expected to drop about 8% in 2020. Modeling by BloombergNEF projects that economic recovery will raise emissions toward 2027, then decline an average 0.7% per year to 2050. 2019 may turn out to have been the peak year for greenhouse gas release to the atmosphere. In total, COVID-19 subtracts some 2.5 years worth of aggregate emissions over the next 30 years, and, as it turns out, this puts global temperature on track for 3.3 C by 2100.

Solutions to a nightmarish future are already in hand and being deployed at record rates. These include removing fossil-fuel subsidies and incentivizing renewable energy, divesting from assets linked to fossil fuels, strengthening climate education and engagement, pricing the true cost of carbon, regenerative agriculture that allows soil to store carbon, protecting and restoring natural environments on land and in the ocean, carbon sequestration, refusing to eat animals that are the product of deforestation, increasing the efficiency of all machines that draw power … the list is as long as human ingenuity.

Unfortunately, data show that in 2019, as in every previous year, the growth in fossil fuel use outpaced the growth in renewables. Although renewable energy grows rapidly, it primarily adds to, rather than displaces, coal, oil, and natural gas. The truth is that the need for new energy to support rising global GDP has meant that renewable sources are helping to meet demand, and are not actually replacing dirty fossil fuels.

While the Paris Agreement is clearly flawed, it took two decades of effort to bring all nations to consensus. The agreement is, in fact, filled with promise, and our signature will always be on the original agreement, for when we are ready to finally get serious about solving this problem.

Community Voices aims to encourage broad discussion on many topics of community interest. It’s kind of a cross between Letters to the Editor and op-eds. This is your space to talk about important issues or interesting people who are making a difference in our world. Column lengths should be no more than 800 words and we need a photo of the author and a bio. We welcome video commentary and other multimedia formats. Send to news@civilbeat.org. The opinions and information expressed in Community Voices are solely those of the authors and not Civil Beat.

Read this next:

Lee Cataluna: We Don't Mind Standing In Line In Hawaii — If We Want To

Local reporting when you need it most

Support timely, accurate, independent journalism.

Honolulu Civil Beat is a nonprofit organization, and your donation helps us produce local reporting that serves all of Hawaii.


About the Author

Chip Fletcher

Dr. Chip Fletcher, author of “Climate Change: What the Science Tells Us” (J. Wiley, 2019) is associate dean of the School of Ocean and Earth Science, and Technology, and Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Hawaii Manoa, and vice-chair of the Honolulu Climate Change Commission.

Latest Comments (0)

My understanding is that the US, not a party to this agreement, actually had the best year over tear results in terms of reducing carbon emissions. Not so with China and India. I mean, compared to those guys, the US is doing more than its fair share. Why join an agreement that disadvantages our country in favor of China, India and others?

CatManapua · 2 years ago

 Nov 19-21 in Assisi a summit by Pope Francis called "the economy of Francesco" is proposing an economic model not premised on GDP growth.  It puts human flourishing in the context of a flourishing planet at the center of  a model called the "donut model" by British economist Kate Raworth.  As long as we operate on and economy driven by blind faith in Milton Friedman's conception of an isolated selves in competition with each other for stuff--fear based and scarcity based  we are doomed.  Kate's model fits our deep Hawaiian values that places the common life above individual greed at the center. Land and people and community before greed.  With out education and conversion we will not make it. Thanks for your voice. I wish this was at the center of our curriculum in schools instead of SAT scores and sports.

JM · 2 years ago

No to the Paris Agreement.Or, if you are actually concerned about climate change take it up with China first.

pueobeach · 2 years ago

Join the conversation


IDEAS is the place you'll find essays, analysis and opinion on every aspect of life and public affairs in Hawaii. We want to showcase smart ideas about the future of Hawaii, from the state's sharpest thinkers, to stretch our collective thinking about a problem or an issue. Email news@civilbeat.org to submit an idea.


You're officially signed up for our daily newsletter, the Morning Beat. A confirmation email will arrive shortly.

In the meantime, we have other newsletters that you might enjoy. Check the boxes for emails you'd like to receive.

  • What's this? Be the first to hear about important news stories with these occasional emails.
  • What's this? You'll hear from us whenever Civil Beat publishes a major project or investigation.
  • What's this? Get our latest environmental news on a monthly basis, including updates on Nathan Eagle's 'Hawaii 2040' series.
  • What's this? Get occasional emails highlighting essays, analysis and opinion from IDEAS, Civil Beat's commentary section.

Inbox overcrowded? Don't worry, you can unsubscribe
or update your preferences at any time.