Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Donald Trump’s plans to wreck the planet

Posted on 9 November 20168 February 2017
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Email this to someone
email

Donald Trump’s election victory is bad news for all sorts of reasons. For climate change it’s a disaster. The United States is going to have a president who thinks that global warming is a Chinese hoax.

When Hillary Clinton confronted him with this during a presidential debate, he said “I did not. I do not say that.” But he did. Here’s the tweet:

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 6 November 2012

Trump is a climate change denier

It’s not easy to know what Trump thinks. As Noam Chomsky points out in an interview with Democracy Today,

It’s not even clear that he knows what he thinks. He’s kind of a loose cannon. All kinds of statements come out, sometimes some statement plus the negation of that statement within a few minutes.

But on climate change Trump is consistent. And wrong. He’s tweeted about climate change almost one hundred times.

Here he is on Fox News telling us that “the scientists are having a lot of fun” with the global warming “hoax”:

Trump wants to “cancel” the Paris Agreement

Trump has said he’ll “cancel” the Paris Agreement. He says it’s “bad for US business” and that the Paris Agreement allows “foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use”.

Of course, the Paris Agreement is way too weak to address climate change. Climate scientist James Hansen describes it as a “fraud”, because there is “no action, just promises”.

But if the USA pulls out, it will make the Paris Agreement even weaker.

Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, countries can only pull out three years after it came into force (4 November 2016). It would then take one year from when the USA gave the UN notice that it was leaving.

Or, the USA could pull out of the UNFCCC. That would take one year.

What’s more likely is that under Trump, the USA will just make little or no effort to reduce its emissions. This matters for two reasons. First, the USA accounts for 13% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Second, if the USA doesn’t reduce its emissions, India, China and other countries are less likely to reduce theirs.

China has criticised Trump’s plans to pull out of the Paris Agreement.

Zou Ji, deputy director general at China’s National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation, is reported in the Guardian as saying that,

“China’s climate strategy and policy is in accordance with China’s national interest, and is not dependent on the US presidency.

“The fundamental incentive is China’s need to drive growth by escalating the economic transition, improving air quality, boosting growth rate by efficiency improvement, and strengthening energy security. After all, it is a matter of innovation of development path.”

Hopefully, then, Trump will not be able to increase China’s emissions. But he can certainly increase the USA’s.

Trump plans to increase the USA’s emissions

While climate change hardly featured as a topic during the election campaing, Trump has mentioned his plans to wreck the planet a few times:

  • April 2016: Trump said he would close down the Environmental Protection Agency, although he managed to get the name wrong, calling it the Department of Environmental.
     
  •  

  • May 2016: Trump called for reducing restrictions on energy exploration, opening up more federal lands to drilling, reopening negotiations to build the Keystone XL pipeline, and reopening coal mines.
  •  

  • October 2016: Trump said he would raise money for inner city infrastructure by stopping funding for climate change:
     

    I will also cancel all wasteful climate change spending from Obama-Clinton, including all global warming payments to the United Nations. These steps will save $100 billion over 8 years, and this money will be used to help rebuild the vital infrastructure, including water systems, in America’s inner cities.

  •  

    Tweet about this on Twitter
    Twitter
    Share on LinkedIn
    Linkedin
    Share on Facebook
    Facebook
    Email this to someone
    email

    Related

4 thoughts on “Donald Trump’s plans to wreck the planet”

  1. Suryanarayana Reddy says:
    10 November 2016 at 4:58 am

    If he adopts that kind of attitudes and plans it will become nothing but ‘Suicidal Act’ to the Land of America in particular and others in general.

  2. Chris Lang says:
    10 November 2016 at 12:31 pm

    Trump’s Energy Plan has disappeared from his campaign website. But here’s an archive copy.

    Here’s what we can look forward to from Trump over the next 100 days:

  3. Chris Lang says:
    10 November 2016 at 9:40 pm

    Carbon Brief has lots of reactions from climate scientist to Trump’s election win:

    US election: Climate scientists react to Donald Trump’s victory

  4. Chris Lang says:
    10 November 2016 at 9:42 pm

    And 376 scientists warning back in September 2016, that a Trump win really wouldn’t be such a good thing:

    An Open Letter Regarding Climate Change From Concerned Members of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

REDDisms

“But the big elephant in the room is the fact that if you want to use market mechanisms you need the demand. Until the countries pledge to legally binding targets to reduce their emissions, it’s all somewhat of a moot discussion.”

— Dan Barry, Global Director of Clean Energy, Gazprom Marketing & Trading Limited, July 2011

Recent Posts

  • The Durban Declaration on Carbon Trading
  • Book review: “Forest Conservation and Sustainability in Indonesia” by Bernice Maxton-Lee
  • Plant for the Planet: Felix Finkbeiner’s fake forests
  • Open letter to the lead authors of ‘Protecting 30% of the Planet for Nature’: “This paper reads to us like a proposal for a new model of colonialism”
  • Robert Walker predicts Amazon tipping point by 2064

Recent Comments

  • Alan Potkin on The Durban Declaration on Carbon Trading
  • Sabhrina Gita Aninta on Book review: “Forest Conservation and Sustainability in Indonesia” by Bernice Maxton-Lee
  • Erin on Savraj Gata-Aura sentenced to four years in prison for his role in the Bar Works investment scam
  • Lesley Walford on Blackmore Bond collapse: Financial Conduct Authority is “responsible for every penny lost”
  • Vic on Blackmore Bond collapse: Financial Conduct Authority is “responsible for every penny lost”

Issues and Organisations

AB 32 Boiler rooms Bonn California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer Sustainable Forest Management The Nature Conservancy Ulu Masen UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Luxembourg Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2021 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!