The United States stopped trying to combat climate change at the federal level for four years under President Donald J. Trump. Mr. Trump's presidency left the country far behind in a race that was already difficult to win.
A new report from researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities shows that the United States has fallen behind other countries in its environmental performance.
Even that movement was insufficient because of the profound obstacles to cutting greenhouse gas emissions quickly enough to prevent the worst effects of climate change. Almost all of the countries that have pledged to reach net-zero emissions by the year 2050 are not on track to do so.
According to the report, only Britain andDenmark were on a sustainable path to eliminate emissions by midcentury.
Although they had a stronger record than their peers in sub-Saharan Africa, their emissions were not as high as they could have been, and the researchers did not say that their progress was sustainable because it was not clear that current policies would suffice as their economies develop.
The other nations in the report were on the verge of falling short of net-zero goals. China, India, the United States and Russia were on track to account for half of global emissions by the year 2050. Germany has enacted more comprehensive climate policies, but they are not doing enough.
This report is going to be a wake-up call to a lot of countries, who may have thought they were doing what they needed to do, but are not.
There is still time for countries to change course and meet their targets, according to a United Nations report. The case of the United States shows how a few years of inertia can cause a country to go off course.
180 countries scored on 40 indicators related to climate, environmental health and ecosystems in the new edition of the index, which was provided to The New York Times before its release on Wednesday. The individual metrics included tree-cover loss, wastewater treatment, fine-particulate-matter pollution and lead exposure.
The United States was ranked 43rd out of 100, with a score of 51.1 out of 100, compared with 24th place and a score of 69.3 in the 2020 edition. It plummeted to 101st place from 15th on climate metrics, and trailed every wealthy Western democracy except Canada, which was 142nd.
The change in the climate analysis is due to the policies of the Trump administration and does not reflect the policies of the Biden administration.
American emissions fell substantially over the 10-year period examined, which included most of the Obama administration's efforts to regulate emissions, and the nation continues to perform better than other major polluters.
The United States has an extremely high starting point. The U.S. is the second largest emitter of greenhouse gases. China and India are the lowest-ranked countries in the overall index, but if current trajectory holds, it would be the third largest in the world in the year 2050.
The Parliament ofDenmark has made a binding commitment to reduce emissions 70 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. The country gets two-thirds of its electricity from clean sources, and the largest city is aiming to become carbon neutral in the next three years.
A date to end oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, taxed carbon dioxide emissions, and negotiated agreements with leaders in transportation, agriculture, and other sectors are just some of the things that the Danes have done. As emissions have fallen, its economy has grown.
There is not one tool that you can use, one policy that you can use, and that will solve the problem, according to Dan Jorgensen. He said that it is possible to make this transformation in a way that doesn't hurt your societies.
It isn't something that makes you less competitive.
The methodology of the report distinguishes between countries that are transitioning to renewable energy and countries that are dropping emissions as a result of the economic collapse.
Many countries, including the United States, have begun to decouple emissions from economic growth, meaning their economies no longer depend on the amount of fossil fuels they burn.
wealthier countries emit more than poorer ones. Two countries can have different emissions levels.
One of the report's co-authors said that policy does matter, and there are specific pathways toward a more carbon-neutral and climate-friendly future.
The report is the first edition of the Environmental Performance Index and it has limitations. It doesn't factor in recent actions because it relies on data through 2019. It doesn't account for the possibility of removing carbon from the air, which could make a difference down the line. If countries continued to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions at the same rate, it would reflect what would happen if they lost steam.
The E.P.I. researchers found Britain on track, but the Climate Change Committee said current policies are insufficient. In addition to domestic emissions, the committee considers what other countries emit in producing goods that Britain imports, and the E.P.I. doesn't.
The Climate Change Committee is somewhat pessimistic that the trend will continue now that the low-hanging fruit has been picked.
The director of the Zilkha Center for Environmental Initiatives at Williams College said that the projection methodology was a reasonable first attempt.
Dr. Srebotnjak, who has worked on past E.P.I. editions but was not involved in this year's report or the new metric, said how best to interpret current trends is a matter of debate. She said that it will help policymakers have another tool in their arsenal for tracking how they are doing and for comparing themselves with peers.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
