While it makes sense for the U.S. to pull out of the Paris Accord, it would be better if they had instead started proceedings to withdraw from the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change which would end any and all American obligations on climate.
The Paris Accord has no teeth, it is voluntary and has no penalties and it's doubtful whether any signatories will adhere to it in the long run. Moreover, it has no legal standing in the U.S. because, although it was signed by President Obama, it was never ratified by the Houses of Congress and amounts to no more than a personal commitment by the person formerly sitting in the Oval Office.
Trump could simply have ignored it.
The idea that the U.S. will now be left behind by the rest of the world as Todd Whitcombe says (Citizen, June 12) denies reality. Embracing the agenda contained in that agreement is extremely costly, as can readily be seen by examining the results in those jurisdictions of the world that have rushed headlong into green technology.
In Alberta, Canada's oldest wind farm has reached the end of its life and after 23 years is about to be torn down and sold for scrap. TransAlta Corp., owner of the site, says replacing the windmills is not economically feasible, and unless there is a government subsidy they will not be replaced.
In Britain, with biomass generators being subsidized to the tune of 43/MWh and offshore wind producers to the tune of 89/MWh, generation costs have been effectively doubled.
In Germany, with the cost of consumer-borne subsidies at 25 billion euros per annum and surcharges of 6.88 euro cents per kWh, or twice the market price of a kilowatt, Germans pay three times more than Americans. This has already done tremendous damage to the German standard of living, with 300,000 households each year having their electricity turned off for non-payment. As if that wasn't bad enough, according to the German consumer agency NAEB, by 2020, they will be paying 45 euro cents per kWh, compared to 10 cents for the U.S. To accomplish 80-95 per cent share of renewables by 2050 as they plan, according to one source, would mean one 200-meter-high turbine every 2.7 km in the entire country.
It won't happen.
The fact is being a world leader in alternative energy is a ticket to economic downfall. How can industry compete when energy costs are so much higher than their competitors? By allowing science and industry to work in a free marketplace, Trump is ensuring that the U.S. will maintain and strengthen its position of world economic leadership and also ensuring that when alternative energies are eventually developed that are capable of replacing fossil fuels, they will be economically viable and will need no government subsidies.
It is doubtful that Europe, Canada or any other developed country can long maintain their commitments to the Paris Accord, and after much initial bluster and posturing, it will fade away as did the prior Kyoto Accord. Already, Prime Minister Trudeau is back-peddling on Canada's participation.
Unfortunately, with our NDP/Green coalition government waiting in the wings, it's almost certain that B.C. will suffer the depredations of delusional green economics in the near term.
Art Betke
Prince George
