Art of the Climate Deal: How Trump Should Renegotiate Paris

If he’s really going to renegotiate, here’s the only deal that makes sense.

Art of the Climate Deal: How Trump Should Renegotiate Paris
By Steve Milloy
June 2, 2017, PJMedia.com

While a coalition of leftists, globalists, and rent-seekers rage about President Trump’s awesome decision to withdraw America from the Paris climate hoax, a key aspect of the president’s announcement is being overlooked — his offer to renegotiate.

In his Rose Garden speech, Trump stated:

So we are getting out. But we will start to negotiate and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.

As a leader in the climate skeptic movement, I was at first disappointed to hear about the possibility of renegotiation. But upon further reflection, I considered that Trump had simply included it as one might use “sure, I’ll call you” following a bad date.

Yet now, I’ve concluded that his renegotiation offer may actually be brilliant, and could possibly be utilized to help American businesses, to solve real environmental problems, and even to assuage climate alarmists.

Thanks to fracking, America has a surfeit of natural oil and gas. So much so that our glut has depressed global oil prices.

Although Obama’s war on coal was wrong, it was made possible by the gas glut. There would have been no way for utilities to switch from coal to gas without the surfeit provided by fracking. But as a result, America’s carbon dioxide emissions are back down to 1990s levels. So fracking is a tried-and-true way to reduce emissions while keeping electricity prices low.

Our problem, though, is that the gas glut is not only hurting the coal industry, but it’s also hurting the oil and gas industry by keeping prices so low. If prices are too low, incentives for greater production are limited. Prices are hurting ExxonMobil so much, for example, the oil giant actually supports a carbon tax as a means of raising prices.

That’s bad business, bad policy, and bad politics.

A much better policy: Look to Europe and China, two large economies that have major problems which American natural gas can solve.

Europe is dependent on Russia for a large part of its gas supply, and is therefore vulnerable to the whims of Vladimir Putin on energy — and just about everything else. In China, the dirty way it burns coal for residential heating and cooking befouls its air, especially during the winter, to the point where deadly accidents occur because of visibility problems.

President Trump should sit down with the Europeans and the Chinese and offer them America’s natural gas.

Natural gas would wean Europe off of Russia.

Natural gas would help clean Chinese air and reduce its carbon dioxide emissions — if you worry about that sort of thing — by 50 percent. Remember, China is the world’s largest emitter of CO2.

The United States would benefit from the end of the gas glut. Oil prices would rise, which is good for all, and, ironically, the coal industry would come back to life. Higher gas prices would also raise coal prices, helping a beleaguered industry and coal communities recover.

This deal makes America wealthier, strengthens national security, “reduces emissions,” and goes a long way towards resolving China’s air quality problems. It’s a real win for everyone — even those who believe in the climate hoax.

10 thoughts on “Art of the Climate Deal: How Trump Should Renegotiate Paris”

  1. I probably should have read your article first but the title captured me. There will be no re negotiation. None of those countries want a fair deal, they were all hopeing to feed off of the American teat or gain a competitive advantage over the United States. It was our money they wanted and without that, this entire agreement will quickly collapse.

  2. If America doesn’t “give ’till it hurts”, Europe has nothing to gain with any other deal.

  3. Most of these countries were given money to join, although likely some future commitment to borrow money to buy windmills etc…Its all about the money..Mostly US and European money heading towards swiss bank accounts..

  4. As the entire “climate change” scam is a European/North American suicide pact intent on driving us back to the stone age and eventual human extinction, there’s no way the religious globalist zealots are going to want to negotiate.
    They demand total surrender and nothing short of it will do, that’s what zealots do.

  5. I’m flabbergasted at this whole thing. On the one hand it’s voluntary and without enforcement penalties, so why does anyone care if the US goes along …. or not? But for the same reasons, why not sign up?

    Now I think we should have withdrawn because that’s what Trump ran on and he won. And I certainly don’t think we should have Congress decide as they have plenty to do already. Anyway the outcome would be the same — “we pass.”

  6. And how will you send natural gas to Europe and China? In weather balloons? And why would they need it? Europe already has its fair share of non-polluting renewables and nuclear. Natural gas is better than coal, but still contributes to green house gases. China seems to be taking the photovoltaic path, a much cleaner way than natural gas. And your solution would only make the “gas glut” even worse. Keep your oil and natural gas, you may need it locally much more than other countries, and help develop a fleet of natural gas vehicles if you don’t want to be overtaken by electric vehicles using renewable energy.

  7. A bit of dissent:
    1. Higher prices are ONLY good for the producers. They are bad for the rest of us. A free market will find the lowest price that supports continued production.
    2. China’s recent discovery of a way to recover frozen methane (I forgot the name) may crash world energy prices and lead to a new era of permanent low energy prices.
    3. The lower energy prices go, the less money for terrorists.

  8. “Yet now, I’ve concluded that his renegotiation offer may actually be brilliant”

    Agreed! Not only the renegotiation, which Europe will agree to after they get off their high horse, but then a “real” treaty can be argued through the Senate.

    And we should not make silly remarks about how to transport natural gas, or who will buy it. It is a valuable commodity, of which we have a lot, and transportation is already done. Just Google “LNG Carrier”.

    Brilliant, as expected from an intelligent president.

  9. Chimel do you propose that we us unicorn flatulence to power our cars, there as much reality in that as to what you think renewables are going to do!

Comments are closed.