User:Steffany21/sandbox

-The Obama administration was responsible for funding $3 billion U.S dollars to the Green Climate Fund, that will no longer be available to be used towards climate change research. Therefore, a decrease in funds by the US will lessen the chances of being able to reach the Paris Agreement goals. Climate mitigation has a strict time frame that needs to be followed in order to have its goals met without having irreversible consequences, which are now at jeopardy due to Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. In addition, the U.S was responsible for more than 50% of the papers referenced to for climate change in 2015, so a cut in funding will impact U.S's contribution to the IPCC reports. Trump's termination of its funding to the Green Climate Fund can also have an impact on underdeveloped countries that are in need of that aid for its climate change projects.

-However, President Trump's decision to withdraw does not necessarily mean that it will affect US emissions since there is no direct link, but instead would mean that the U.S will no longer be regulated by the Paris Agreement once officially withdrawn. On the other hand, if the US is not regulated this can affect the carbon emission space. For example, "[u]nder the NDC target, the withdrawal of the U.S. will lead to increasing its own emission space by 14%, 28%, and 54% in the 20, 13, and 00 scenarios, respectively." Trump's withdrawal will also increase the carbon price for other countries while reducing its own carbon price.

When the withdrawal takes effect, the U.S. will be the only UNFCCC member states who is not a signatory to the Paris Agreement. At the time of the original withdrawal announcement, Syria and Nicaragua were also not participants; however, both Syria and Nicaragua have since ratified the agreement, leaving the U.S. the only UNFCCC member state intending to not be a party to the Agreement.

Luke Kemp of the Australian National University's Fenner School of Environment and Society wrote in a commentary for Nature that "withdrawal is unlikely to change US emissions" since "the greenhouse gas emissions of the US are divorced from international legal obligations." However, he added that it could hamper climate change mitigation efforts if the U.S. stops contributing to the Green Climate Fund. Kemp said the effect of a U.S. withdrawal could be either good or bad for the Paris agreement, since "a rogue US can cause more damage inside rather than outside of the agreement." Finally, "A withdrawal could also make the US into a climate pariah and provide a unique opportunity for China and the EU to take control of the climate regime and significantly boost their international reputations and soft power."

-On the other hand there is belief that China is not capable of taking control of the climate regime and instead should, "help rebuild global shared leadership by replacing the Sino–U.S. G2 partnership with a Climate 5 (C5) partnership that comprises China, the EU, India, Brazil, and South Africa."