Happy Nice Mall

Four years in the administration of US President Donald J. Trump stopped but all at the federal level trying to combat climate change. Mr Trump is no longer in office, but he has left the country far behind in an already hard-to-win race for the presidency.

A new report from researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities shows that the environmental performance of the United States has fallen relative to other countries – a reflection of the fact that while the United States squandered nearly half a decade, many of its peers acted on purpose.

But even this move was insufficient, underscoring the major barriers to cutting greenhouse gas emissions fast enough to avert the worst effects of climate change. The depressing conclusion of the report is that while nearly every country is committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050 (the point at which their activities no longer add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere), almost none are on track to do so.

The report, called the Environmental Performance Index, or EPI, found that only Denmark and the UK are on a sustainable path to eliminating emissions by the middle of the century, based on their trajectories from 2010 to 2019.

Namibia and Botswana seemed to be on the right track with the caveats: They had stronger records than their peers in sub-Saharan Africa, but their emissions were minimal to begin with, and researchers didn’t call their progress sustainable because it wasn’t clear the current situation was clear. policies will suffice as their economy develops.

The other 176 countries in the report were poised to fall behind net zero targets, some by large margins. China, India, the United States and Russia were on track to account for more than half of global emissions by 2050. But even countries that implement more comprehensive climate policies, like Germany, are not doing enough.

“We think this report will be a wake-up call to a large number of countries, many of whom may have dreamed of doing what they were supposed to do, and many who have not actually done so,” said Daniel C. Esty. He is the director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, which produces the EPI every two years.

A United Nations report this year found that there is still time, but not much, for countries to change course and achieve their goals. The example of the United States shows how many years of inactivity can seriously derail a country from its course and steepen the slope of the emissions reductions needed to get back.

The 2022 edition, which was provided to The New York Times before the index was published Wednesday, scored 180 countries across 40 indicators of climate, environmental health and ecosystem vitality. Individual metrics were extensive, including: loss of tree cover, purification of wastewater, fine particulate matter contamination and lead exposure.

The United States is ranked 43rd with a score of 51.1 out of 100, with a score of 69.3 out of 24. in the 2020 edition. Its decline can be largely attributed to its falling base from climate policy: It fell to 101st place in climate measurements. from the 15th and followed all the wealthy Western democracies except Canada, which was 142nd.

The climate analysis is based on data up to 2019 and the previous report is based on data up to 2017; This means that the change stems from Trump-era policies and does not reflect President Biden reinstating or expanding regulations.

American emissions have dropped significantly over the entire 10-year period studied, which includes much of the Obama administration and efforts to regulate emissions, and the nation continues to outperform other major polluters.

However, the pace of the decline fell short given the extremely high starting point of the US. The USA is the second largest emitter of greenhouse gases after China. If the current trajectory continues, it will be the third largest in 2050 after China and India, the lowest ranked country in the overall index.

At the other end of the spectrum is Denmark, which ranks #1 in climate and overall, where Parliament has committed to reducing emissions by 70 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The country gets about two-thirds of its electricity from clean sources. , and its largest city, Copenhagen, aims to achieve carbon neutrality within the next three years.

Denmark has expanded Wind powerset a date for end oil and gas exploration Carbon dioxide emissions taxed in the North Sea and agreements negotiated with leaders in transport, agriculture and other sectors. Its economy grew as emissions fell.

“This is such a sweeping transformation in our entire society that there is no single tool you can use, no single policy you can use in general, and then that will only solve the problem,” said Danish climate minister Dan Jorgensen. Denmark has shown that “it is possible to make this transformation without harming your societies”.

“It’s not something that makes you less competitive,” said Mr. Jorgensen. “Actually, it’s the opposite.”

The report’s methodology distinguishes between countries like Denmark that have deliberately switched to renewable energy, and countries like Venezuela, whose emissions have fallen only as a side effect of the economic collapse.

One of the good news he found was that many countries, including the United States, were starting to “separate” emissions from economic growth, meaning their economies no longer depend directly on the amount of fossil fuels they burn.

In general, richer countries still emit much more than poor ones. But two countries with similar GDPs can have very different emission levels.

“The key idea right now is that policy matters and there are specific paths towards a more carbon-neutral and climate-friendly future,” said Alexander de Sherbinin, one of the report’s co-authors, deputy director and senior research fellow. Scientist at the Columbia International Geoscience Information Network Center. “But a really high-level policy agreement is needed.”

The report is the first edition of the Environmental Performance Index to predict future emissions, and its methodology has limitations. Most obviously, it does not take into account more recent actions, as it is based on data up to 2019. Nor does it take into account the possibility of removing carbon already released from the air; this technology is currently limited, but could make a significant difference in the future. And it only reflects what would happen if countries continued to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions at the same rate instead of adopting stronger policies or conversely losing steam.

This explains a striking disagreement between the EPI researchers who found the UK on the road and the UK’s independent Climate Change Committee, which advises the British government. told Current policies are insufficient. (There’s also a technical distinction: in addition to local emissions, the Committee takes into account what other countries emit when producing the goods the UK imports, and the EPI does not.)

EPI’s project director, Martin Wolf, said the UK’s recent cuts were largely due to the switch from coal to natural gas, and the Climate Change Committee was “a little pessimistic that the trend will continue now that the lows are reaping.” “I see the rapid expansion of renewable energy capacity in the UK as a sign that the country is still on track.”

Tanja Srebotnjak, director of Williams College’s Zilkha Center for Environmental Initiatives and environmental statistics expert, said he saw the projection methodology as a “reasonable first attempt” that could be improved later.

Working on past EPI editions but not involved in this year’s report or developing the new metric, Dr. How best to predict current trends is a matter of debate, Srebotnjak said. However, he added, “I think it would help policymakers to have another tool in their toolbox to keep track of how they’re doing and compare themselves to their peers, maybe learn from each other.”