When 196 nations adopted the momentous Paris climate accord, the British prime minister at the time, David Cameron, wrote on Twitter: “Our grandchildren will see we did our duty.”
Ten years later, what would those grandchildren think? Because the Paris Agreement has started to look like a failure. However, that only holds true if you are fixated on the end goal rather than the journey.
The legally binding treaty aims to limit climate change to “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts to keep the increase close to 1.5°C. It specifies that countries should reach a “global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible. However, carbon emissions continue to grow and, although climate impacts have intensified, anti-climate sentiments are growing.
Illustration: Yusha
This year, the US — which is responsible for about 24 percent of all emissions ever pumped into the atmosphere — withdrew from the international treaty for the second time and has undergone almost a full year of anti-climate policies under the leadership of US President Donald Trump. The EU has weakened key environmental regulations as well, including its 2035 combustion engine ban and pollution reporting requirements. Elsewhere, greenhushing, which plays down environmental efforts to avoid political scrutiny, is on the rise among companies.
Many experts are almost certain that the 1.5°C temperature target is toast. Copernicus, the EU’s Earth observation service, said the past three years were set to be the first period when average temperature rise would exceed that goal. And we are nowhere near reaching net zero emissions.
As Cameron Hepburn, an environmental economics professor at the University of Oxford’s Smith School, said: “Paris is only a disappointment if you had inappropriately high expectations in the first place.”
The treaty gave us a multi-time period, multi-prisoner dilemma. Part of the problem is that the Paris Agreement includes no penalties for inadequate plans or action, so the incentive to free ride is high: While only those parties cutting emissions have to bear the costs, everyone benefits from their efforts.
It is too tempting for petrostates to keep squeezing profits out of their businesses. After all, oil and gas companies alone have been making about US$2.5 billion a day in profit for the last 50 years, according to a 2022 analysis of World Bank data. Why would oil and gas-producing countries give up that revenue? So if we are judging the accord on emissions alone, it was practically doomed to fail from the start.
Looking at the bigger picture, however, the Paris Agreement has put us in a far better position than we would have been without it. In 2015, Climate Action Tracker, an independent science-based project, calculated that policies and actions at the time put the world on track for 3.6°C of warming by 2100. Projected warming is now 2.6°C. Although that is still too high for comfort, it signals huge amounts of progress.
By creating “a whole new idea of going to zero” emissions, as Niklas Hohne, co-founder of NewClimate Institute, said that the Paris Agreement sparked a flurry of innovation. If researchers did not believe that anyone would want green technologies, then why would they invest time and money in them? The accord sent a signal that appetite existed for net zero materials and processes.
Ever since, research and money have been flowing toward green transition sectors — and at an ever-increasing pace. For example, the EU’s Innovation Fund, created to help the bloc meet its commitments under the treaty, has supported the development of batteries, carbon-negative cement and advanced recycling.
However, what happens to fossil-fuel emissions would ultimately dictate the fate of the planet. Demand remains at an all-time high, and although the International Energy Agency forecasts that fossil-fuel use would peak before 2030, it acknowledges that if governments abandon their stated intentions, oil and gas demand would continue to rise.
Still, everyone I spoke to was optimistic that emissions would likely peak by 2030, although that is later than many climate scientists would like. Hohne believes that with renewables’ increasing availability and decreasing costs, we can reduce carbon dioxide pollution much faster than we thought.
For another sign that the climate treaty has done its job, consider trends in often-overlooked parts of the world. Pakistan is experiencing a massive, unanticipated solar boom. Rooftop power generation is expected to exceed demand on the grid during daytime hours in some large industrial regions for the first time next year. Driven by residents’ frustration with soaring electricity prices and power failures, the adoption of photovoltaics has allowed businesses and consumers to access reliable, cheap power.
Many African countries are replicating that expansion: Solar panel imports from China to Africa rose 60 percent in the 12 months to June, according to a report from think tank Ember. Records were set in 20 countries, including Kenya, Algeria and Nigeria. Although the continent is responsible for only about 4 percent of global emissions, it has a rapidly growing population and is industrializing. Switching to cleantech avoids huge future growth in carbon dioxide emissions.
Ethiopia and Nepal are embracing electric vehicles like never before. More than 70 percent of four-wheeled passenger vehicles imported to Nepal last year were electric, and the adoption is helping to reduce Kathmandu’s air pollution crisis, which caused about 19 percent of all deaths in 2021.
And although the Paris Agreement no doubt kick-started the EV industry’s rapid development, in Ethiopia, the driving force behind widespread adoption is the desire to save money. The nation spends roughly US$4.5 billion importing fuel every year, while drivers have had to put up with chronic fuel shortages and rising prices. EVs eliminate that problem.
It is shifts like these, where cleantech makes economic sense, that could power the next decade or longer of the climate transition. Whether or not the Paris Agreement still exists in its current form by then, it has done a remarkable job of sparking a green revolution, which is only just beginning to take off. That is not a failure to me.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
Taiwan-India relations appear to have been put on the back burner this year, including on Taiwan’s side. Geopolitical pressures have compelled both countries to recalibrate their priorities, even as their core security challenges remain unchanged. However, what is striking is the visible decline in the attention India once received from Taiwan. The absence of the annual Diwali celebrations for the Indian community and the lack of a commemoration marking the 30-year anniversary of the representative offices, the India Taipei Association and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center, speak volumes and raise serious questions about whether Taiwan still has a coherent India
Recent media reports have again warned that traditional Chinese medicine pharmacies are disappearing and might vanish altogether within the next 15 years. Yet viewed through the broader lens of social and economic change, the rise and fall — or transformation — of industries is rarely the result of a single factor, nor is it inherently negative. Taiwan itself offers a clear parallel. Once renowned globally for manufacturing, it is now best known for its high-tech industries. Along the way, some businesses successfully transformed, while others disappeared. These shifts, painful as they might be for those directly affected, have not necessarily harmed society
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
RSS