French diplomacy and the major countries have made the greatest efforts in drafting the text of the Paris Convention, which helped bring up the climate summit as a turning point “historic” in relation to the climate deal the world , while the real challenges the reality, as the agree- and contrary to what is marketed by the powers reassured by the results of the conference-was not fair nor binding, so it did not understand the commitments nor decisions, nor measures may represent an introduction to sanctions in a long journey, which will force pollutants to meet their commitments.
Defenders of the energy industry in the United States for example, have asserted that “the climate agreement is unenforceable, suffers from a lack of funding and is not binding,” while Thomas Pyle, president the American Energy Alliance, considered that “there is nothing historical in this case and it is clear that management by Obama does not enjoy the support of Congress or the American people.”
The American newspaper “The Washington Times” has already noted that the agreement does not provide for the amount that each country should take to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, but requires each country to determine its purpose and to create its own plan to achieve the reduction targets and these targets must be increased over time. Thus, and after the year 2020, the agreement requires countries to present their objectives progressively higher and plans to carry out every five years, but the problem is embodied in the absence of a functioning mechanism to punish countries that do not reach their goals.
The deal did not raise many doubts and there are people who have expressed reservations about what has been achieved, the chairman of the “Swedish Left Party” Jonas Sjöstedt considered that “reach agreement represents good news, but the bad is that we do not know how to reach the goals outlined in the agreement, “which means you have to implement the agreement and meet the commitments, especially because the agreement does is not legally binding.
It is true that the agreement specified unprecedented principles to reduce global warming but we need these principles are really applied and the temperatures begin to drop effectively. As well as the Paris Agreement has not adopted the most important point, including the determination of the carbon price, then impose a certain amount of money at international level which will be paid for each tonne of carbon, either through the tax system or through carbon quota system. The reason for this is due not to the opposition of oil producing countries only, but also to that of developing countries, China and India.
Similarly, the lack of text on the carbon price in the agreement means obviously the absence of an effective mechanism to regulate emissions and reduce greenhouse gases. The real fears expressed by some experts who felt that while the implementation of all planned national contributions is completely done, emissions in 2030 will remain approximately 12 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, this means first catastrophe such as increasing the temperature will be – in this case – 3 ° C by 2100, successive generations will then know that the “Paris agreement” is an extension of the planet destruction of politics!