The mood amongst environmentalists has been somewhat gloomier than usual in the year or so since Donald Trump took office. In a move that set a pit in the stomach of the timid environmental optimists that began to emerge in the wake of COP 21, President Trump proudly announced that he would withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement within his first 100 days in office.
The fear was manifold.
As the second largest global emitter of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) the immediate concern was that the US dropping emissions targets would make it that much harder for the international community to make any headway at all.
The second fear was concerning the massive amount of development money the US had pledged to support the mitigation and resilience initiatives of lower-income countries. Since the USA has contributed the most to the total amount of GHGs in the atmosphere, it was seen as appropriate by President Obama that the USA contribute the most to funding of green initiatives in countries that could ill afford them on their own. President Obama committed $3bn of which he was only able to transfer $1bn. It is considered extremely unlikely that the outstanding $2bn will be made available by the Trump administration.
The third fear, and perhaps the greatest of all, was the fear that the USA walking away from the table would inspire others to follow suit.
But let’s stop catastrophizing here and take a step back. Is the USA really out? Does Trump really have that power?
The answer is perhaps a surprising, “not really”.
Yes, Donald Trump has tremendous authority over America’s federal government, but what about the states? What about the cities?
The fact remains that most rational people see the writing on the wall. The climate is changing, it’s not a good thing, and it’s something that needs to be addressed. What Trump unwittingly highlighted is the fact that the climate movement has reached sufficient momentum such that most actors act to fulfil a moral imperative rather than for bureaucratic box-ticking.
In other words, set the rules how you wish Mr.Trump, you can’t stop the train anymore.
Take C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group as an example. The C40 group began as a network of 40 mayors from around the world that wanted to make their cities more sustainable and more resilient to the changing climate.
Today, over ten years later, it’s a network of over 90 cities, representing over 650 million people and about 25% of the global economy.
C40 is now a sophisticated network that focuses on fostering the effective sharing of knowledge and best practices on climate action between its member cities. It encompasses 17 topical sub-networks in 6 focus areas like green buildings and waste management, and offers direct assistance to city leaders pushing for climate action policy.
There are currently 12 American C40 member cities, 2 of which (Boston and Los Angeles) are on C40’s steering committee.
Another example is the US Climate Alliance, a consortium of 14 American states who explicitly restate their commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement on June 1st 2017, the day President Trump announced withdrawal from the very same.
Alone, these states comprise about one third of America’s population and 40% of it’s GDP. When combined with the other states who have also either committed to upholding the goals set by the Paris Agreement or otherwise have active emissions reduction policies in place, the number of states with climate action policy stances soars to 30 – a group that represents over half of the US population, GDP, and total emissions.
So, statistically speaking, it seems like the US is still “in”.
Yes, support from America’s federal government would surely improve the American climate action effort. But to those who worried that Trump would undo what precious little progress has been made, I ask you to look again and see that instead of a nation that is floundering, you will find one galvanised.
