Cedars, December 2019

December 2019 10 OFF-CAMPUS #ExxonKnew, But Does Trump? The United States takes climate to trial by Breanna Beers F rom Dec. 2-13, the world’s leaders gathered in Madrid, Spain, to discuss national commitments and global collaboration to counteract the advance of climate change. This is COP25, or the 25th Conference Of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and it comes at an interesting time for the United States. Online creators are band- ing together under #TeamTrees, President Donald Trump is withdrawing the U.S. from the landmark Paris Agreement, and multi- national oil and gas corporation Exxon Mo- bil is facing climate-related charges in New York. Several states first brought charges against Exxon in 2015, demanding an in- vestigation into claims from InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times that the company had deliberately concealed evi- dence of global warming from the public. The media quickly drew the comparison to the tobacco industry’s strategic funding of research denying the health risks of ciga- rettes, and #ExxonKnew was born. However, the waters of this inquiry quickly muddied, and the investigation piv- oted instead to accusations of fraud: New York claims the company had two separate sets of numbers when projecting its future revenue. One set was internal, and account- ed for the possibility of increased environ- mental regulations, while the set Exxon disclosed to its investors was based on the continuation of the status quo. According to the state, Exxon false- ly represented to its investors that climate change was factored into its future costs, which made its share price seem more se- cure than was accurate. Exxon countered that the two sets of numbers have different internal purposes, and New York’s compari- son of the two is both unfair and inaccurate. The company has dismissed the claims as politically motivated while pointing to its decades of climate change research as its political defense. This convoluted case is expected to set a precedent for the over 1,000 other cli- mate-related cases currently on hold in the U.S. While the trial will be decided on the dicey details of fraud allegations, the case brings several underlying issues to light: for instance, what role invested companies should have in scientific research, whether they should be required to report what they find, and the role of politics in the judicial system. Meanwhile, on Nov. 4, 2019, President Donald Trump fulfilled his promise to ini- tiate the U.S.’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. The UNFCCC assembled the Paris Agreement in 2016 to establish a road map for mitigating the effects of climate change, in part by limiting the change itself to only 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. In 2016, each participating country established its own goals for mitigating climate change, which they regularly report on to the Con- ference. These nationally determined con- tributions (NDCs) vary from emissions tar- gets to renewable energy infrastructure to financial support for least developed coun- tries. Trump first announced his intentions to withdraw in June 2017, citing the agree- ment as unfairly detrimental to the U.S. economy — specifically, the manufacturing, coal and fossil fuel industries. However, he had to wait the full three years since the agreement was ratified in November 2016 before beginning the one-year process of withdrawing. Supporters of Trump’s move claim that former president Barack Obama over-com- mitted the U.S. to aggressive climate goals when the agreement was formed in 2016, such as reducing overall greenhouse gases by 26-28% by 2025 as compared to 2005 levels. Many believe this trapped the na- tion in a lose-lose situation: either redirect finances and legislation into an ambitious push to meet Paris goals, or face the criti- cism of the global community for not pull- ing enough weight. Trump’s move is a third option: don’t even pretend to try, and take the reprobation as it comes. Others criticize the agreement itself: some question whether the cumulative goals laid out in the Paris Agreement are signifi- cant enough to combat the effects of climate change. Additionally, as international stud- ies professor Dr. Glen Duerr said, the UN- FCCC lacks any enforcement mechanism beyond the disapproval of fellow member states. A pair of studies in the journal “Na- ture” found that as of 2017, none of the large developed nations were implementing their pledged policies. “It kind of falls apart without an en- forcement mechanism,” Duerr said. How- ever, Duerr continued, giving the UN real power to coerce countries who fail to com- ply comes with its own set of problems. Trump’s critics argue that regardless of the efficacy of the agreement, withdrawing outright not only abdicates environmental responsibilities, but removes the U.S. from the table for discussion and progress. Mak- ing the U.S. the single country to not only not participate in this agreement, but to actively withdraw from it, reaps increasing global disfavor and cedes American leader- ship in the UNFCCC to China. One week after Trump officially with- drew from the agreement, Beijing hosted a conference of energy leaders from across the globe at which the Chinese government announced the launch of clean energy ini- tiatives and environmental partnerships with various governments. French presi- dent Emmanuel Macron and Chinese presi- dent Xi Jinping reaffirmed the “irreversible” Paris Agreement following their $15 billion trade contract this summer; the pair is now widely considered the face of the Paris Agreement. Trump has expressed that he is open to re-entering the Paris Agreement under new terms, but this has mostly been met with skepticism by climate advocates with low expectations for what those new terms would look like. Interestingly, however, the one-year process of officially withdrawing will be completed exactly one day following the 2020 election. Most of the Democratic candidates have promised to re-enter the agreement if elected, while the boldness of Trump’s move makes it difficult for Repub- lican candidates to address environmental issues with anything but a similar hard-line approach. Meanwhile, online influencers are go- ing around the political system altogether. YouTuber Jimmy “MrBeast” Donaldson started the #TeamTrees initiative in part- nership with the Arbor Day Foundation and over 600 fellow YouTubers. Their goal? Twenty million trees by the end of 2020. One dollar equals one tree. On Oct. 25, YouTubers large and small, from PewDiePie to the Ten Minute Bible Hour, posted videos raising awareness for the initiative. They’ve gained the attention of not only the YouTube community, but billionaires like Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Tesla’s Elon Musk — or Treelon, his temporary Twitter handle during the first week of the project. So far, they’ve raised money to plant over 16 million trees, 80% of the way to their goal. During a time when partisan polar- ization is at its peak, the initiative crosses political and social boundaries to form the largest collaboration in YouTube’s history. While studies continue to show a widen- ing divide between Republicans and Dem- ocrats, interest in climate issues is on the rise generally in the U.S., especially among younger Americans. Breanna Beers is a junior Molecular and Cellular Biology major and the campus news editor for Cedars. She loves exercis- ing curiosity, hiking new trails, and quot- ing “The Princess Bride” whether it’s rele- vant or not.