Download Background information

EUCERS/KAS Energy Talks 2017
Energy and Climate Policy between the Trump
Presidency and the Paris Agreement
The Paris Agreement came into force on the 4th November 2016. Its successful negotiation
concluded in Paris in December 2015 and subsequent ratification process taking place in 2016
shows there is a strong international commitment to fighting climate change. The Agreement aims
to hold ‘the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial
levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels’
(Parties to the Agreement 2015, Article 21). In order to reach this goal, major economies will have
to transform their energy systems. Governments will have to work with the energy industry,
environmental and consumer groups in turning the implementation of the agreement into a success
story. It is beyond doubt that the Paris Agreement will impact the global energy system.
Before the 8th of November 2016, one might have even claimed that the Paris Agreement will
determine a revolution in the global energy system. Then the elections in the United States took
place and the Republican candidate, Donald J Trump, was elected President. Donald Trump’s
position on climate change has been inconsistent over the last years, but he remains known for
claiming in 2012 that: ‘the concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order
to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive’ (Trump, quoted in Bump 20162). Trump also
openly rejected the Paris Agreement in its current form, promising to cancel the US participation
in the agreement and to stop the US payments to the UN fund supporting the mitigating of climate
change (The Telegraph 20163). In his campaign, Trump also seemed to favour increasing the US
energy independence by tapping into domestic resources such as gas, oil and coal. Donald Trump
started his mandate by appointing climate sceptics in key positions. The US Environmental
Protection Agency will be led under the Trump administration by Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s
Attorney General, who legally fought recently new regulation on air and water pollution, including
1
http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/22/whats-donald-trumps-position-on-climatechange-all-of-them/
3
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/27/donald-trump-ill-cancel-paris-climate-agreement-and-stop-allpay/
2
EUCERS/KAS Energy Talks 2017
the Clean Power Plan, an Obama policy aiming to reduce carbon dioxide emissions generated by
power plants (US Environmental Protection Agency 20164).
Whether or not the US keeps its climate commitments taken under the Obama Administration has
implications for the degree to which the Paris Agreement is properly implemented globally. The
Agreement will remain legally binding for the US for other three years from the moment in which
the US officially withdraws from it. However, meanwhile, the US might not meet its GHGs
reduction targets (by 2025, 26% to 28% reduction by contrast to 2005 levels) as there are no
penalties for lack of compliance (Dingwerth 20165). Such a position might reduce the complying
rate of other large polluters and US economic competitors, such as China. Governments will be
under the pressure of national industries arguing that national climate commitments determine
them to lose competitiveness to American firms. It is very unlikely that China would have taken
the commitments it took at Paris in the absence of a similar commitment taken by the US. As a
proof of this shared commitment the US and China, leading generators of greenhouse gases,
ratified the Paris Agreement on the same day, 3 September 2016 (The Guardian 20166).
A proper implementation of the Paris Agreement by the US and China that would lead to the
global taxation of carbon will make renewable energy, as well as natural gas, more
competitive by comparison with coal, although on the very long term it might reduce the
prospects of natural gas. A gas and fossil fuels friendly President Trump might encourage
similar positions around the world. Discussing the implications of the Trump Presidency on
the energy systems on the mid and long term is a very timely topic.
For now, the US remains a party to the Agreement that already produces policy effects
especially in countries or regions that are strongly committed to fighting climate change.
This is the case with the European Union, where there has been a lot of controversy in recent
years over energy security and the way to achieve it. Scholars and policy-makers tend to
agree that energy security entails access to energy, at reasonable prices and by causing
limited harm to the environment in the process of accessing and using energy (Proedrou
20127 investigating also the work done by other scholars on the topic). The Paris Agreement
will most likely increase attention for the latter dimension of energy security. So it is
pertinent to ask: Is energy security redefined in Europe in the context of the Paris
4
https://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan/clean-power-plan-existing-power-plants
http://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/opinion/how-trump-can-quit-the-paris-agreement/
6
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/03/breakthrough-us-china-agree-ratify-paris-climatechange-deal
7
Proedrou, Filippos (2012) EU energy security in the gas sector: evolving dynamics, policy dilemmas and
prospects (Ashgate: Farnham)
5
EUCERS/KAS Energy Talks 2017
Agreement? How is this redefinition translated in specific policies and the priority that these
policies receive?
Forecasts originating in the intergovernmental and corporate sector argue that less carbon
intensive sources of energy will constitute an increasingly important part of the energy mix
(International Energy Agency 20168). How will this impact the relative power that fossil fuels
exporting countries have? Will the reduction in revenues trigger unrest and instability in
certain major oil and gas exporting countries? Will this change regional and global
geopolitical landscapes? In addition, forecasts are showing that climate considerations will
promote renewable energy in our future energy mix, especially in power generation which
will be dominated by renewables by 2040 (International Energy Agency 20169). Is this a
realistic prospect, especially for Europe? Will renewable energy help regions such as the EU
achieve their energy independence and acquire more leverage in their political relations with
their current energy suppliers? What will be the impact of these changes on the energy policy
leadership? Will the renewable energy industry become more influential in global and
regional energy governance processes?
The first EUCERS/KAS Energy Talk of 2017 constitutes an excellent opportunity to address
these questions. Our panel gathers experts of high standing from different sectors (academia,
think-tanks, industry, etc.) that will attempt to provide answers to the questions set above and
assess the degree to which the Paris Agreement coupled with recent political developments in
the Unites States can influence global climate and energy policy. The audience will also be
invited to engage the panellists on concerns regarding climate and energy policy related. The
event aims to foster debate and generate policy recommendations that can help the world
respond to future climate and energy challenges. Hopefully you will join us for a very
promising event!
8
9
https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2016/november/world-energy-outlook-2016.html
https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2016/november/world-energy-outlook-2016.html