U.S. companies also know that the lack of combating climate change carries enormous financial risks because the damage is greater. Some of the world`s largest insurance companies, such as Liberty Mutual and USAA, are already warning that non-management of climate change “unnecessarily exposes Americans to greater risks to life and property and entails much higher costs for the federal government.” The head of the Reinsurance Association of America has said that the fight against climate change is a sound public policy. By quantifying the damage done to society by CO2 pollution, Trump sees America as an island apart – and we all know what climate change is doing to the islands. U.S. innovation and clean technology leadership can benefit from the Paris Agreement. The International Energy Agency estimates that the global clean energy market will exceed $60 trillion over the next two and a half decades if countries fight climate change. The more countries commit to low-carbon development, the more opportunities there are for U.S. clean energy exports. If the clean energy market is not used, companies and workers in other countries will dominate the clean energy resources and technology market for the foreseeable future. China already plans to build a national charging network for five million electric cars and has said it will spend $360 billion on renewable energy by 2020, creating more than 13 million jobs. Taking part in an election campaign promise, Trump – a climate denier who has claimed that climate change is a “hoax” perpetrated by China, announced in June 2017 his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. But despite the rose garden president`s statement that “we`re going out,” it`s not that simple.

The withdrawal procedure requires that the agreement be in effect for three years before a country can formally announce its intention to withdraw. She`ll have to wait a year before she leaves the pact. This means that the United States could formally withdraw on November 4, 2020, the day after the presidential elections. Even a formal withdrawal would not necessarily be permanent, experts say. a future president could join us in a month. According to the National Economic Research Associates, it would cost the U.S. economy $3 trillion and 6.5 million industrial jobs by 2040 if we met all of our commitments under the Paris climate agreement. We do not need to cripple our economy to protect our environment. Negotiators of the agreement stated that the INDCs presented at the time of the Paris conference were insufficient and found that “the estimates of aggregate greenhouse gas emissions in 2025 and 2030 resulting from the planned contributions at the national level are not covered by the least expensive scenarios of 2oC, but lead to a projected level of 55 gigatons in 2030.” and acknowledges that “much greater efforts to reduce emissions will be required to keep the increase in the average global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius, by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or 1.5 degrees Celsius.” [25] [Clarification required] A study published in 2018 shows a threshold where temperatures could reach 4 or 5 degrees (ambiguous expression , continuity would be “4-5 degrees Celsius”) relative to pre-industrial levels, thanks to feedback feedbacks in the climate system, indicating that this threshold is below the 2-degree temperature target agreed in the Paris climate agreement.