Piers Forster, director of the Priestley International Centre for Climate at the University of Leeds, called the decision to withdraw “a sad day for evidence-based policy” and expressed hope that some Americans, businesses and states would choose to decarbonize. Climate scientist Dave Reay, from the University of Edinburgh, said, “The United States is coming to the streets today.” The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) said in a statement by its president Antonio Busalacchi Jr. that the decision to withdraw “does not mean that climate change will disappear” and warned that “the increased potential for greenhouse gas emissions poses a significant threat to our communities, our businesses and the military.” The Foundation for Information Technology and Innovation called the decision to withdraw “very disheartening” and said it would reduce confidence in international efforts to combat climate change; The technology think tank called for federal efforts on “smart grid, energy storage, carbon capture and sequestration, as well as advanced nuclear and solar energy,” and warned, “Without a smart and aggressive clean energy innovation strategy, the world will not avoid the worst consequences of climate change.”  But U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement is not yet definitively over. The U.S. could opt for a comeback, and Democratic candidate Joe Biden has promised to reinstate the deal “on the first day” if he wins the election. If it does, the United States could officially resume its role under the Paris agreement in mid-February. The delay is due to the complex rules introduced in the Paris agreement to deal with the possibility that a future US president will decide to withdraw the country from the agreement. We do not apologize to other nations for our environmental responsibility.
Finally, before the signing of the Paris Agreement, America had reduced its carbon footprint to a level in the early 1990s. In fact, between 2000 and 2014, the United States reduced its CO2 emissions by 18%. And this was not done by a government mandate, but by innovation and technology in the U.S. private sector. If there has been a decision contrary to our country`s commercial and economic interests – not to mention our global image and the impact on the poor countries most affected by climate change – that could be the case. The bad news is that current commitments are not enough to reduce emissions in line with the Paris Agreement targets. Nor is enough done to create communities that are resistant to the inevitable effects of climate change. Right now, as a result of the climate crisis, we continue to see increasing emissions from global warming, rising sea levels, chronic floods, extreme heat, intense drought, worsening forest fires and hurricanes, devastating food shortages and other negative effects that affect environmental communities around the world first and worst.