Even as the US officially pulled out of the Paris Agreement earlier this week, it might be too soon to lose hope on the country's long-term commitments to climate action. If a Democrat wins the upcoming presidential elections, which are set for November 2020, a reaccession process could begin shortly after the withdrawal is complete. In the meantime, however, the effect on trade policy could be significant.
US President Donald Trump confirmed on Monday (4 November) that he would trigger the process needed to withdraw America from the Paris Agreement, the earliest possible date under the landmark accord’s legal provisions. The current timetable means that the US will terminate its involvement the day after 2020’s presidential election on 4 November. If a Democrat is elected, “they could technically relaunch accession to the Paris Agreement as soon as they come to power in January”, confirmed Paul Watkinson, chairman of the UNFCCC’s Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice.
The US climate negotiating team remains part of the negotiations until then and will participate in the COP25 discussions in Madrid, which they have never previously blocked.“It is a technical team that’s very concerned about respecting the framework of the Paris Agreement, which facilitates a possible US return,” Watkinson stressed. Among the US priorities, any reference to loss and damage should avoid being introduced, as this would compromise American participation in the future.
A commercial tool as reinforcement?
If Trump is re-elected, it will be business as usual. Parties will meet in November 2020 in Glasgow to announce their new commitments but the pressure will be reduced. With this in mind, the EU has tried to work with the biggest carbon emitter, China, but also with other US actors, like California.
The debate on the use of other tools is also progressing. With trade issues at the forefront, the US could be the first in the crosshairs of a Paris-Berlin-backed idea, supported by the next Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen. Both countries are in favour of a carbon border tax, which could be imposed on the least environmentally sensitive countries. “The fact is that we could have our first climate dispute with the US, and I don’t think that it’s desirable for anyone,” Spain’s environment chief, Teresa Ribera, told the New York Times. Spain took over COP25 hosting duties after Chile pulled out.
At commercial level, tensions rose between the two blocks thanks to a tax imposed by the US on hundreds of mainly European agri-food products. The US is mainly worrying German car manufacturers though, threatening them with extra taxes. Every year, the EU exports nearly $60 billion worth of cars to the US. “It is the ultimate weapon, so if the EU pretends to impose a carbon tax on US products, they will roll it out. But it is unlikely that the EU will shoot first,” a source from the European institutions said.
“It is the ultimate weapon, so if the EU pretends to impose a carbon tax on US products, they will roll it out. But it is unlikely that the EU will shoot first,” a source from the European institutions said. The irony of this trade war is that it could ultimately be quite beneficial to the climate cause, as Germany would produce fewer large cars, due to lack of market, and the US, which exports mainly to Europe, would be forced to slow down its carbon-heavy exports.
[This article originally appeared on euractiv.com]
EURACTIV
Time has come to build a ‘climate coalition of the willing’
As we step into 2020, time has come to implement the Paris Agreement and raise climate ambition, but the geopolitical tide seems to be against it. The best way forward at this crucial juncture might be to forge a ‘climate coalition of the willing’ – recognising and streamlining actions of all actors at all levels.
For the first time in the survey’s 10-year outlook, the top five global risks in terms of likelihood are all environmental. They are: extreme weather events, failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation, major natural disasters, major biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, and human-made environmental damage and disasters.
Climate change and conflict could fuel hunger in 2020
Millions of people across Sub-Saharan Africa could face grave hunger in the first half of 2020 because of armed conflict, political instability and climate change-linked disasters, a report says.
The report published by the UN World Food Programme (WFP) this month says that the countries affected will require life-saving food assistance and investment to prevent humanitarian catastrophes.
Australia’s bushfires and climate change: A media analysis
Australia is currently experiencing one of its worst bushfire seasons, with swathes of the southern and eastern coastal regions having been ablaze for weeks. As the fires have spread, there has been extensive media coverage both nationally and internationally documenting – and debating – their impacts. This Carbon Brief overview summarises how the fires – and the political response to them – have been covered by the media.