What do you do if you are running out of oil, and your neighbour’s President, who has plenty of oil, seems to hate you?

The answer is that you develop a renewable-powered economy as fast as you can.

That Mexico’s proved oil reserves have declined by more than a third since 2013 is very bad news for the Mexican economy. The country will run dry in less than nine years if there are no new discoveries.

Better news is that going renewable fast, including in transport where most oil is used, is eminently feasible in the current world. A great global transition from fossil fuels to clean energy is under way, much faster than most people think.

As a consequence, those choosing to stay addicted to fossil fuels, even if they have a lot of them, are heading for trouble. This is because they are entering a time where much oil, gas and coal will end up un-needed, whether they like it or not.

An economy going renewable fast like the one I advocate for Mexico can show a fossil-mired economy – like the one President Trump hopes for – where the future lies. Mexico can match Trump’s ignorance with inspiration.

An example: Mexico could build its own wall, made of solar panels. Such a wall, 6 metres high along the full length of the border, would generate well over 2 gigawatts of electricity. It would be a glittering money-maker, making a mockery of Trump’s uneconomic coal mines and the fading debt factories that are his shale gas and shale oil regions.

Renewables outpacing fossil fuels across the world

Trump fears Mexican migrants, though they contribute so much to his economy. If he and his tribe stay in power and get their carbonaceous way, Mexico would be welcoming skilled American migrants, attracted to its clean-energy industries as America’s shrivel.

A Mexico going renewable fast would be far from alone. Middle East oil producers are intent on the same. Dubai wants all roofs solar by 2030. Abu Dhabi intends to be exporting no more oil within fifty years.

City governments worldwide see what is coming. More than a thousand target 100% renewable power, some like Canberra as soon as 2020. So do more than 80 of the biggest global corporations, in Google’s case as soon as 2017.

New global renewable power generation capacity exceeded new fossil fuel capacity for the second year running in 2016. This is because solar and wind are cheaper than any other form of generation in many markets already, sometimes by a wide margin.

Plunging battery and electric vehicle costs ensure this megatrend will spread, displacing fossil fuels not just in the electricity sector but in transport.

Going with the smart money …

Investors increasingly understand what is coming, and are beginning to move their money accordingly.

Some big energy companies are seeing the writing on the wall. Much of the utility industry has already embarked on 180 degree U-turns in business model, switching from fossil-fuel supply to decentralised renewables.

The oil and gas industry, clocking up trillions in debt in dogged pursuit of their status quo, cannot be far behind. Even at $50 oil, the oil majors can’t cover their costs. Some say American shale will help save them. But of the three main oil-producing shale belts, production has already peaked in two against industry expectations.

Meanwhile, the clean energy technologies race ahead, surprising even their most ardent supporters – like me – with the speed of their cost reductions. Some Silicon Valley gurus now expect that by 2030 all new energy will be solar and wind, and all new vehicles will be electric.

What we are witnessing is a total system change. It has happened before, in not much more than a decade, when the horseless carriage replaced the horse-drawn carriage.

And this system change is capable in principle of changing the face of civilisation: much for the better. Renewables have so many social advantages over fossil fuels, from the bottom of the energy ladder to the top.

Mexico can be a pace-setting leader in this global transition. In fact, it has no choice. 

Dr Jeremy Leggett is a British green-energy entrepreneur, author and advocate who is founding director of Solarcentury, one of the most respected international solar companies; founder and Chairman of SolarAid, a charity set up with 5% of Solarcentury’s annual profits; and Chairman of CarbonTracker, a financial sector think-tank warning of carbon fuel asset-stranding risk to the capital markets.

This article was originally published on on Energiahoy, with some editing from the Spanish.

A recent violent attack on a group of indigenous people in the Amazon rainforest of northern Brazil is seen by environmentalists as a symptom of a new climate of hostility towards such groups, fuelled by conservative congressmen’s attempts to undermine land rights.

As indigenous reserves, which occupy 23% of the greater Amazon region, are spaces where most of the rainforest is still intact, this represents a growing threat to the forest’s future – and therefore could impact on climate change.

The attack, by farmers armed with guns, knives and machetes in the northern state of Maranhão left up to 13 Gamela Indians in hospital with bullet and knife wounds.

The Gamela, who number about 1,200 people, have been occupying cattle farms established on what they claim is their traditional land. In the disputed areas, forest has been cleared and replaced with cattle pasture.

Rainforest preservation

The attack is part of a disturbing trend in Brazil that indirectly threatens the preservation of large areas of the Amazon rainforest.

Satellite maps produced by ISA, an environmental NGO, clearly show the relation between indigenous areas and the preservation of the forest. The Indians preserve the forest because they need its natural resources.

A 2014 study by Imazon, another Brazilian NGO, showed that in the Amazon region indigenous reserves accounted for under 2% of deforestation, while privately-owned areas accounted for 59%. Even in government-run conservation areas it was 27%, because of the frequency of illegal invasions by loggers and farmers.

But by October 2016, satellite images from INPE, the Brazil Space Research Institute, that is responsible for monitoring the Amazon region, showed that deforestation in indigenous reserves had almost tripled, mainly due to illegal logging and invasions. INPE detected an overall increase of almost 30% in deforestation for the region.

A study carried out in 2015 by IPAM, an NGO set up after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to produce scientific knowledge about the Amazon  – found that the indigenous areas, estimated to contain 13 billion tonnes of carbon, will have avoided 431 million tonnes of carbon emissions between 2006 and 2020.

In addition to their role in absorbing carbon and their low rates of deforestation, indigenous areas have a healthy effect on their surrounding areas, according to IPAM researcher Paulo Moutinho. He says: “Forests maintained by the Indians function like natural air conditioning and as climate regulators of the region they are in.”

Yet in spite of the obvious advantages of respecting indigenous areas, not just for their inhabitants but for the whole of Brazil and for the global climate, government and politicians seem more interested in clearing the forest for agricultural and mining projects.

Sonia Guajajara, a co-ordinator at the Network of Indigenous Peoples in Brazil (APIB), says: “Although the whole world is discussing the reduction of deforestation to contain global warming, and Brazil has presented targets for reducing illegal deforestation, we are not even managing to do this. It is very worrying.”

She blames the relaxation of environmental laws, the advance of agribusiness, the building of dams that lead to deforestation of large surrounding areas, and the government’s development policies, as well as an increase in illegal logging in the reserves.

Reducing land rights

In order to free more land for cattle ranchers and soy producers, the powerful landowners’ lobby, which now dominates both the congress and the government, has tabled 189 bills aimed at reducing the land rights and autonomy of indigenous and other traditional communities. Other proposed bills will also relax environmental legislation.

A parliamentary committee of inquiry dominated by the rural lobby has also accused anthropologists and missionaries who work with indigenous groups of being in the pay of foreign interests, and has proposed that Brazil’s Indian affairs agency, Funai, should be closed down.

A peaceful demonstration by more than 3,000 indigenous people from all over Brazil in front of the congress building in Brasilia on 24 April was met with teargas and rubber bullets, and the demonstrators were prevented from entering the Senate to take part in a public hearing.

Funai’s budget has been cut by 44% as part of the government’s austerity programme.

The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for Funai, is reported to have held over 100 meetings with farmers and producers, but none with representatives of Brazil`s indigenous people, who number about 900,000 out of a total population of just over 200 million. The 252 groups speak over 150 languages.

The Amazon contains not only the largest indigenous community, the 50,000 strong Ticuna, but also small groups of ‘isolated’ Indians, who still shun contact with the outside world.

One of Funai’s tasks is to protect these groups from the advance of loggers and miners, but the cuts have led it to close most of its forward posts in the region, leaving up to 5,000 isolated Indians on Brazil’s border with Peru at the mercy of invaders.

Jan Rocha is a freelance journalist living in Brazil and is a former correspondent there for the BBC World Service and The Guardian. She now writes for Climate News Network where this article was originally published (CC BY-ND).

A recent violent attack on a group of indigenous people in the Amazon rainforest of northern Brazil is seen by environmentalists as a symptom of a new climate of hostility towards such groups, fuelled by conservative congressmen’s attempts to undermine land rights.

As indigenous reserves, which occupy 23% of the greater Amazon region, are spaces where most of the rainforest is still intact, this represents a growing threat to the forest’s future – and therefore could impact on climate change.

The attack, by farmers armed with guns, knives and machetes in the northern state of Maranhão left up to 13 Gamela Indians in hospital with bullet and knife wounds.

The Gamela, who number about 1,200 people, have been occupying cattle farms established on what they claim is their traditional land. In the disputed areas, forest has been cleared and replaced with cattle pasture.

Rainforest preservation

The attack is part of a disturbing trend in Brazil that indirectly threatens the preservation of large areas of the Amazon rainforest.

Satellite maps produced by ISA, an environmental NGO, clearly show the relation between indigenous areas and the preservation of the forest. The Indians preserve the forest because they need its natural resources.

A 2014 study by Imazon, another Brazilian NGO, showed that in the Amazon region indigenous reserves accounted for under 2% of deforestation, while privately-owned areas accounted for 59%. Even in government-run conservation areas it was 27%, because of the frequency of illegal invasions by loggers and farmers.

But by October 2016, satellite images from INPE, the Brazil Space Research Institute, that is responsible for monitoring the Amazon region, showed that deforestation in indigenous reserves had almost tripled, mainly due to illegal logging and invasions. INPE detected an overall increase of almost 30% in deforestation for the region.

A study carried out in 2015 by IPAM, an NGO set up after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to produce scientific knowledge about the Amazon  – found that the indigenous areas, estimated to contain 13 billion tonnes of carbon, will have avoided 431 million tonnes of carbon emissions between 2006 and 2020.

In addition to their role in absorbing carbon and their low rates of deforestation, indigenous areas have a healthy effect on their surrounding areas, according to IPAM researcher Paulo Moutinho. He says: “Forests maintained by the Indians function like natural air conditioning and as climate regulators of the region they are in.”

Yet in spite of the obvious advantages of respecting indigenous areas, not just for their inhabitants but for the whole of Brazil and for the global climate, government and politicians seem more interested in clearing the forest for agricultural and mining projects.

Sonia Guajajara, a co-ordinator at the Network of Indigenous Peoples in Brazil (APIB), says: “Although the whole world is discussing the reduction of deforestation to contain global warming, and Brazil has presented targets for reducing illegal deforestation, we are not even managing to do this. It is very worrying.”

She blames the relaxation of environmental laws, the advance of agribusiness, the building of dams that lead to deforestation of large surrounding areas, and the government’s development policies, as well as an increase in illegal logging in the reserves.

Reducing land rights

In order to free more land for cattle ranchers and soy producers, the powerful landowners’ lobby, which now dominates both the congress and the government, has tabled 189 bills aimed at reducing the land rights and autonomy of indigenous and other traditional communities. Other proposed bills will also relax environmental legislation.

A parliamentary committee of inquiry dominated by the rural lobby has also accused anthropologists and missionaries who work with indigenous groups of being in the pay of foreign interests, and has proposed that Brazil’s Indian affairs agency, Funai, should be closed down.

A peaceful demonstration by more than 3,000 indigenous people from all over Brazil in front of the congress building in Brasilia on 24 April was met with teargas and rubber bullets, and the demonstrators were prevented from entering the Senate to take part in a public hearing.

Funai’s budget has been cut by 44% as part of the government’s austerity programme.

The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for Funai, is reported to have held over 100 meetings with farmers and producers, but none with representatives of Brazil`s indigenous people, who number about 900,000 out of a total population of just over 200 million. The 252 groups speak over 150 languages.

The Amazon contains not only the largest indigenous community, the 50,000 strong Ticuna, but also small groups of ‘isolated’ Indians, who still shun contact with the outside world.

One of Funai’s tasks is to protect these groups from the advance of loggers and miners, but the cuts have led it to close most of its forward posts in the region, leaving up to 5,000 isolated Indians on Brazil’s border with Peru at the mercy of invaders.

Jan Rocha is a freelance journalist living in Brazil and is a former correspondent there for the BBC World Service and The Guardian. She now writes for Climate News Network where this article was originally published (CC BY-ND).

A recent violent attack on a group of indigenous people in the Amazon rainforest of northern Brazil is seen by environmentalists as a symptom of a new climate of hostility towards such groups, fuelled by conservative congressmen’s attempts to undermine land rights.

As indigenous reserves, which occupy 23% of the greater Amazon region, are spaces where most of the rainforest is still intact, this represents a growing threat to the forest’s future – and therefore could impact on climate change.

The attack, by farmers armed with guns, knives and machetes in the northern state of Maranhão left up to 13 Gamela Indians in hospital with bullet and knife wounds.

The Gamela, who number about 1,200 people, have been occupying cattle farms established on what they claim is their traditional land. In the disputed areas, forest has been cleared and replaced with cattle pasture.

Rainforest preservation

The attack is part of a disturbing trend in Brazil that indirectly threatens the preservation of large areas of the Amazon rainforest.

Satellite maps produced by ISA, an environmental NGO, clearly show the relation between indigenous areas and the preservation of the forest. The Indians preserve the forest because they need its natural resources.

A 2014 study by Imazon, another Brazilian NGO, showed that in the Amazon region indigenous reserves accounted for under 2% of deforestation, while privately-owned areas accounted for 59%. Even in government-run conservation areas it was 27%, because of the frequency of illegal invasions by loggers and farmers.

But by October 2016, satellite images from INPE, the Brazil Space Research Institute, that is responsible for monitoring the Amazon region, showed that deforestation in indigenous reserves had almost tripled, mainly due to illegal logging and invasions. INPE detected an overall increase of almost 30% in deforestation for the region.

A study carried out in 2015 by IPAM, an NGO set up after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to produce scientific knowledge about the Amazon  – found that the indigenous areas, estimated to contain 13 billion tonnes of carbon, will have avoided 431 million tonnes of carbon emissions between 2006 and 2020.

In addition to their role in absorbing carbon and their low rates of deforestation, indigenous areas have a healthy effect on their surrounding areas, according to IPAM researcher Paulo Moutinho. He says: “Forests maintained by the Indians function like natural air conditioning and as climate regulators of the region they are in.”

Yet in spite of the obvious advantages of respecting indigenous areas, not just for their inhabitants but for the whole of Brazil and for the global climate, government and politicians seem more interested in clearing the forest for agricultural and mining projects.

Sonia Guajajara, a co-ordinator at the Network of Indigenous Peoples in Brazil (APIB), says: “Although the whole world is discussing the reduction of deforestation to contain global warming, and Brazil has presented targets for reducing illegal deforestation, we are not even managing to do this. It is very worrying.”

She blames the relaxation of environmental laws, the advance of agribusiness, the building of dams that lead to deforestation of large surrounding areas, and the government’s development policies, as well as an increase in illegal logging in the reserves.

Reducing land rights

In order to free more land for cattle ranchers and soy producers, the powerful landowners’ lobby, which now dominates both the congress and the government, has tabled 189 bills aimed at reducing the land rights and autonomy of indigenous and other traditional communities. Other proposed bills will also relax environmental legislation.

A parliamentary committee of inquiry dominated by the rural lobby has also accused anthropologists and missionaries who work with indigenous groups of being in the pay of foreign interests, and has proposed that Brazil’s Indian affairs agency, Funai, should be closed down.

A peaceful demonstration by more than 3,000 indigenous people from all over Brazil in front of the congress building in Brasilia on 24 April was met with teargas and rubber bullets, and the demonstrators were prevented from entering the Senate to take part in a public hearing.

Funai’s budget has been cut by 44% as part of the government’s austerity programme.

The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for Funai, is reported to have held over 100 meetings with farmers and producers, but none with representatives of Brazil`s indigenous people, who number about 900,000 out of a total population of just over 200 million. The 252 groups speak over 150 languages.

The Amazon contains not only the largest indigenous community, the 50,000 strong Ticuna, but also small groups of ‘isolated’ Indians, who still shun contact with the outside world.

One of Funai’s tasks is to protect these groups from the advance of loggers and miners, but the cuts have led it to close most of its forward posts in the region, leaving up to 5,000 isolated Indians on Brazil’s border with Peru at the mercy of invaders.

Jan Rocha is a freelance journalist living in Brazil and is a former correspondent there for the BBC World Service and The Guardian. She now writes for Climate News Network where this article was originally published (CC BY-ND).

A recent violent attack on a group of indigenous people in the Amazon rainforest of northern Brazil is seen by environmentalists as a symptom of a new climate of hostility towards such groups, fuelled by conservative congressmen’s attempts to undermine land rights.

As indigenous reserves, which occupy 23% of the greater Amazon region, are spaces where most of the rainforest is still intact, this represents a growing threat to the forest’s future – and therefore could impact on climate change.

The attack, by farmers armed with guns, knives and machetes in the northern state of Maranhão left up to 13 Gamela Indians in hospital with bullet and knife wounds.

The Gamela, who number about 1,200 people, have been occupying cattle farms established on what they claim is their traditional land. In the disputed areas, forest has been cleared and replaced with cattle pasture.

Rainforest preservation

The attack is part of a disturbing trend in Brazil that indirectly threatens the preservation of large areas of the Amazon rainforest.

Satellite maps produced by ISA, an environmental NGO, clearly show the relation between indigenous areas and the preservation of the forest. The Indians preserve the forest because they need its natural resources.

A 2014 study by Imazon, another Brazilian NGO, showed that in the Amazon region indigenous reserves accounted for under 2% of deforestation, while privately-owned areas accounted for 59%. Even in government-run conservation areas it was 27%, because of the frequency of illegal invasions by loggers and farmers.

But by October 2016, satellite images from INPE, the Brazil Space Research Institute, that is responsible for monitoring the Amazon region, showed that deforestation in indigenous reserves had almost tripled, mainly due to illegal logging and invasions. INPE detected an overall increase of almost 30% in deforestation for the region.

A study carried out in 2015 by IPAM, an NGO set up after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro to produce scientific knowledge about the Amazon  – found that the indigenous areas, estimated to contain 13 billion tonnes of carbon, will have avoided 431 million tonnes of carbon emissions between 2006 and 2020.

In addition to their role in absorbing carbon and their low rates of deforestation, indigenous areas have a healthy effect on their surrounding areas, according to IPAM researcher Paulo Moutinho. He says: “Forests maintained by the Indians function like natural air conditioning and as climate regulators of the region they are in.”

Yet in spite of the obvious advantages of respecting indigenous areas, not just for their inhabitants but for the whole of Brazil and for the global climate, government and politicians seem more interested in clearing the forest for agricultural and mining projects.

Sonia Guajajara, a co-ordinator at the Network of Indigenous Peoples in Brazil (APIB), says: “Although the whole world is discussing the reduction of deforestation to contain global warming, and Brazil has presented targets for reducing illegal deforestation, we are not even managing to do this. It is very worrying.”

She blames the relaxation of environmental laws, the advance of agribusiness, the building of dams that lead to deforestation of large surrounding areas, and the government’s development policies, as well as an increase in illegal logging in the reserves.

Reducing land rights

In order to free more land for cattle ranchers and soy producers, the powerful landowners’ lobby, which now dominates both the congress and the government, has tabled 189 bills aimed at reducing the land rights and autonomy of indigenous and other traditional communities. Other proposed bills will also relax environmental legislation.

A parliamentary committee of inquiry dominated by the rural lobby has also accused anthropologists and missionaries who work with indigenous groups of being in the pay of foreign interests, and has proposed that Brazil’s Indian affairs agency, Funai, should be closed down.

A peaceful demonstration by more than 3,000 indigenous people from all over Brazil in front of the congress building in Brasilia on 24 April was met with teargas and rubber bullets, and the demonstrators were prevented from entering the Senate to take part in a public hearing.

Funai’s budget has been cut by 44% as part of the government’s austerity programme.

The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for Funai, is reported to have held over 100 meetings with farmers and producers, but none with representatives of Brazil`s indigenous people, who number about 900,000 out of a total population of just over 200 million. The 252 groups speak over 150 languages.

The Amazon contains not only the largest indigenous community, the 50,000 strong Ticuna, but also small groups of ‘isolated’ Indians, who still shun contact with the outside world.

One of Funai’s tasks is to protect these groups from the advance of loggers and miners, but the cuts have led it to close most of its forward posts in the region, leaving up to 5,000 isolated Indians on Brazil’s border with Peru at the mercy of invaders.

Jan Rocha is a freelance journalist living in Brazil and is a former correspondent there for the BBC World Service and The Guardian. She now writes for Climate News Network where this article was originally published (CC BY-ND).

Seed is crucial. Nine out of every ten mouthfuls of food we eat relies on seed. Without it, we don’t eat.

Despite this knowledge the UK has become heavily reliant on importing seed.

One of this year’s three finalists in the BBC Future Food category of the BBC Food and Farming Awards – the Seed Co-operative – is bucking the trend and producing and selling organic and biodynamic open pollinated vegetable, herb and flower seed in the UK.

Based on a small Lincolnshire farm, the Co-operative is run by a small team of staff and volunteers, is currently in organic conversion, and provides a hub for a growing UK-wide network of seed producers.

As a Community Benefit Society the financial backing is provided through donations, grants and community shares.

David Price, who runs the Co-operative is passionate about his work. With a nature conservation background, he says: “I felt increasingly like I was working in a casualty unit when what is needed is long-term hospitalisation and life support. Nature reserves are critical to retaining whatever we can, but they are not going to sustain biodiversity forever.  Sustainability will need systemic change across our natural environment to achieve that. 

“I was trying to work out how I might play a part in this sort of change when I met Peter Brown (Biodynamic Association) and Hans Steenbergen (Stormy Hall Seeds) who were looking to establish the Seed Co-operative.

“Diversity is the striking thing that links my previous work with the work of the Seed Co-operative.  We only sell open pollinated seed, which is rich in genetic diversity, providing the ability to adapt due to its diversity, and this, working with natural processes, provides the basis for both a resilient food system, and a sustainable biodiversity. 

“The diversity of our food crops is falling rapidly. It is estimated that since 1900 we have lost access to over 90% of the varieties of seed available across the globe.  We now have F1 hybrid seed and biotech seed, but both of these are denuded of their genetic diversity and dependent on human intervention for development – they do not naturally evolve as open pollinated seed does.”

David believes that many people feel a sense of disconnection with the food they eat and that there is a growing number of people who want to know more about the origin of their food. He says: “We can change this. You can know the person who grew your veg, and they can tell you what variety it is and where the seed came from. If they bought the seed from us they could even tell you which farm the seed was grown on, and potentially, we could tell you the name of the farmer/plant breeder who bred the variety and where. 

“This is what can reconnect people with what is real and what sustains them. Food is not a manufacturing process; or at least it shouldn’t be. Food is not created in labs or factories by anonymous white coats in sterile conditions; or at least it shouldn’t be. Food should be grown in a living soil by ‘people who eat’ for ‘people who eat’ working with natural systems to ensure tasty, healthy and vital ingredients for three meals a day for everyone.

“Food is about people – they cannot be separated. Without seed we will have neither. As more people start to realise that today, only three global corporations sell 75% of the world’s seed it raises many questions about our food and democracy and who controls what.”

David’s idea is resonating with many people and the Seed Co-operative is based on a model that has worked in Europe. He explains: “Companies that supply us with seed have similar networks of small-scale growers. Bingenheimer Saatgut in Germany started with similar levels of imported seed but now produces 80% of the seed it selsl through its network and has a very significant turnover. 

“When people consider that open pollinated seed adapts and tunes in to the conditions in which it is grown they can see the madness of not producing our own seed and want to get involved in making it happen. They can do this through buying shares and buying seed. We now have over 230 shareholders and sales on our web site are 400% up on last year.”

Although the organic market is growing rapidly, with more resistance to GMO, David says the economics of the food system are utterly broken: “If what we want is a sustainable and resilient food system that will feed people healthy, nutritious and tasty food, and a food system with natural resilience designed in then we need to use methods that harness natural processes, not fight them. This is what open pollinated seed does, and this only works in organic farming systems.”

The Seed Co-operative is at the beginning of a process.  Currently it is looking to expand the volumes of seed produced in the UK for organic production, and as it progresses farmers can again assume the role of plant breeders, developing new varieties.

Economic drivers have meant that conventional plant breeding tends to concentrate on yield, shelf life and the ability to withstand mechanical harvesting which has led to loss of flavour, texture and nutrition.

David adds: “I guess it is about what sort of future people want, who they want to control their future and how we provide for future generations. Unless of course we can give up eating, then perhaps we don’t need to worry.”

For more information on the Seed Co-operative visit http://www.seedcooperative.org.uk/

This Author

Laura Briggs is a regular contributor to the Ecologist.

Follow her here @WordsbyBriggs

It’s a sign of just how bizarre modern politics has become, but the current President of the United States has appeared in a Wrestlemania XXIII bout, where, fully suited, he body slammed World Wrestling Entertainment CEO Vince McMahon and then proceeded to shave his opponent’s head in the middle of the ring which makes it seem only fitting that we’re now awaiting a tag team showdown in the White House on the fate of the Paris Agreement between Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner vs Steve Bannon and Scott Pruitt.

Despite the world gathering in Bonn, Germany, this week to continue working on the global response to ever increasing climate change, the shadow hanging over the talks is a meeting rumoured to determine the fate of America’s involvement with the Paris Agreement.

Arguing for Trump to remain inside the historic accord signed by President Obama in 2015 is unlikely climate champion Ivanka Trump and husband Jared Kushner. Arguing for withdrawal are the climate change denial duo, Steve Bannon, the former boss of Breitbart and Scott Pruitt, Trump’s new head of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The head to head meeting was due to happen weeks ago. It was then put off until Tuesday of this week, but has just been postponed again. The debate in the White House is reportedly about the ‘ratchet mechanism’ agreed in Paris to increase national actions over time.

We all knew that the Paris deal alone would not deliver a safe climate but by upping efforts every five years the world will be able to bend that curve to deliver a planet with warming well below 2 degrees. The whole point of a ratchet is that it only moves in one direction and so we cannot allow for a scenario where the US stays in but allows the fossil fuel industry to disrupt the global consensus and slow down progress.

Yes we want to keep the USA within the Paris Agreement, for that country’s own benefit and for the rest of the world, but we cannot do so at any cost. Allowing global environment rules to be dictated by a tiny band of climate change deniers in the White House is a recipe for disaster. 

There are of course multiple benefits to Trump’s America if it keeps its commitments. As well as avoiding the massive diplomatic fallout of a US U-turn, the Paris Agreement will help to drive innovation and entrepreneurship in low carbon technology, one of the fastest growth areas in the US. There are already more jobs in American renewables than in coal, oil and gas and the green sector is generating jobs 12 times faster than the rest of the economy. No doubt that will continue to some degree whatever Trump decides, but Federal backing to the Paris Agreement will ensure pressure continues to push that progress in the right direction.

Other countries are already positioning themselves to reap the benefits of tackling climate change and embracing global decarbonisation. New French President Emmanuel Macron, not only told Trump by phone he would defend the Paris Agreement, he recorded a video inviting American climate scientists, researchers and engineers to come and work in France. 

Elsewhere China and India are already over-delivering on their Paris pledges; in recent months China cancelled more than 100 coal power plants. In India, one of the world’s fastest growing carbon emitters, a Delhi-based research centre has pointed out that the country already has enough coal capacity under construction to meet demand until 2026 by which point renewables and energy storage could be cheap enough to meet demand.

If Trump is serious about delivering his promise of creating 25 million new American jobs then he can’t ignore the clean energy sector – and the Paris Agreement will be crucial in driving that job-creating engine.

This Author

Joe Ware is an Ecologist New Voices contributor, a journalist and writer at Christian Aid

He can be followed on Twitter at @wareisjoe.