21+ Pros And Cons Paris Climate Agreement (Explained)

 The supreme motto behind the Paris climate change is to save the nature of the earth. These days, carbon emission is widely killing Mother Nature. Thus it has become a worldwide destructing phenomenon that may present a turbulent future and environment to the incoming generation. 

Are we looking for bodily pleasures – gained from the wide use of AC, Cars, and money-related success at the cost of nature? Our nature and earth are on the verge of destruction because of the dangerous carbon emission gases.

We use our nature and natural resources extensively to earn a profit, Moreover, we are habituated to the comfort that is acquired by various types of equipment or machines in our houses that produces so many dangerous gases, and those gases harm our society as well as nature. 

Pros Of The Paris Climate Summit 

A promise save the future:

No longer is our environment secured, the society is also on the verge of a menace. The agreement prepares a long-term plan to save the earth by the appropriate precautions for saving the earth.

The melting of the icebergs in the Antarctica subcontinent can flow the nations which are situated on the bank of the seas.  Do you believe that there is a world where people are fighting the battle of climate change under one roof, forgetting their dissimilarities? Of course, heaven exists! In 2015, to make a dream come true, some great environmental activists called for an international consciousness enhancement program usually called the parish climate change.

A pool of balance between developed and developing countries:   

The countries that are fast forward and solvent towards their fiscal balances will obviously fight pollution without any such major difficulties. However, poor countries or developing nations are not equipped enough to counter the upcoming threats as those countries don’t have the financial superiority.

Even countries that are striving for basic amenities can also achieve environmentally with the fund advanced by the developing nation to save nature.

Globally supported and globally acclaimed:

Countries, likewise China, the United States, India, Japan, Germany, Brazil, Canada, South Korea, Mexico, and the United Kingdom, are willingly involved in this agreement.

195 UNFCCC members of UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) have signed the historic agreement in Paris to conserve the earth.

Major global pollution contributors, including China, the United States, India, Japan, and Germany, have committed to reducing carbon emissions by up to 50%. The agreement gives the enlightenment to mitigate the peripheral greenhouse gases that could destroy the world.

The agreement for creating sustainable jobs:  

A fine line always co-exists between the jobs which cause threats to nature and the sustainable jobs that save nature. According to the summit, the participant countries should focus on sustainable jobs or technology, such as solar energy and energy from biodegradable products.

Flexibility to the Legal bindings:

Unlike the Kyoto protocol, this summit has its flexibility towards the adjoining aspects and the implementation. The Kyoto protocol was stiff and rigid. For that reason, Canada has decided to stay out of the protocol.

Many environmental protection agreements, such as the Kyoto protocol, have been backlashed due to the high fines and tight rules. On the other hand, the agreement is comparatively flexible.

The consciousness of the government of many countries:

Observing ignorance towards the environment is very common in the world. Countries enforce efforts to spectrums financial superiority. To gain financial superiority, instances of negligence towards the environment-friendly structure and infrastructure are commonly observed.

China is the topmost carbon-emitting country and cannot change the infrastructure of the coal mines, which is the largest source of Carbon emission, as its economy relies on coal mines.

Cons of the Paris summit

Far from reality:  

The project is difficult to enforce in many countries because it needs a wide structural change, and suddenly, changing the whole infrastructure is impossible.

Different rules in different states:

The rich countries will patronize the poor countries by offering them money and equipping them with advanced technology, as sometimes it doesn’t look very objective to the developed countries

Will incur a lot of money:

A social scientist is a presumption that a huge involvement of money is related to the agreement. Sustainable technologies will be promoted, which may lay off the jobs accompanying the old technology-oriented sectors.

Possibility to harm industrialization:

The shipping industry, the manufacturing industry basically, which is dependent on fuels, may get the threats of abolishment. The actual cost of the widely acclaimed Paris Agreement for the U.S. As declared by President Trump, it might cost the U.S. $3 trillion by 2040 and $2.7 million jobs by 2025.

The leaders are keeping aside them from the issue:

The input to pollution is different in comparison to various countries. Therefore leaders are not coming forward unitedly.

For instance, the US has withdrawn its support for the agreement by saying that China is the real force of pollution. Still, China is not adopting environment-friendly technologies. 

Pushing one country’s burden to the other country:

 Often the protagonists and the critical thinkers say that the agreements are not realistic enough because of the reason that a rich country is not likely to move forward to bear the burden of another poor country

Similar Posts:

Was this article helpful?

Leave a Comment