On August 4, 2017, the Trump administration sent an official notice to the United Nations stating that the United States intended to withdraw from the Paris Agreement as soon as it was legally allowed to do so.  The withdrawal request could only be submitted once the agreement for the United States had been in force for 3 years, on November 4, 2019.   On November 4, 2019, the U.S. government deposited the notice of withdrawal with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, depositary of the agreement, and formally withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement a year later, when the withdrawal took effect.  After the November 2020 election, President-elect Joe Biden promised to join the United States under the Paris Agreement from his first day in office and to renew the United States` commitment to mitigate climate change.   The initial commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol has been extended until 2012. This year, delegates at COP18 in Doha, Qatar, agreed to extend the agreement until 2020 (excluding some developed countries that had withdrawn). They also reaffirmed their 2011 commitment at COP17 in Durban, South Africa, to create a new comprehensive climate agreement by 2015 that would commit all major emitters not included in the Kyoto Protocol – such as China, India and the United States – to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The new treaty – which would later become the Paris Agreement – is expected to completely replace the Kyoto Protocol by 2020. However, the Paris Agreement entered into force earlier than planned, in November 2016. As a contribution to the objectives of the agreement, countries have submitted comprehensive national climate protection plans (nationally defined contributions, NDCs). These are not yet sufficient to meet the agreed temperature targets, but the agreement points the way for further action.
This provision requires the “coupling” of different emissions trading schemes – since measured emission reductions must avoid “double counting”, the transferred mitigation results must be recorded as a gain in emission units for one party and as a reduction in emission units for the other party.  As NDCs and national emissions trading schemes are heterogeneous, ITMOs under the auspices of the UNFCCC will provide a format for global linkages.  The provision therefore also creates pressure on countries to implement emission management systems – if a country wants to use more cost-effective cooperative approaches to achieve its NDCs, it must monitor carbon units for its economies.  It is rare that there is consensus among almost all nations on a single issue. But with the Paris Agreement, world leaders agreed that climate change is driven by human behavior, that it poses a threat to the environment and all of humanity, and that global action is needed to stop it. It also created a clear framework for all countries to make emission reduction commitments and strengthen these measures over time. Here are some key reasons why the agreement is so important: While the Paris Agreement ultimately aims to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius this century, numerous studies evaluating each country`s voluntary commitments in Paris show that the cumulative effect of these emission reductions will not be large enough to keep temperatures below this ceiling. In fact, the targets set by countries are expected to limit the future temperature increase to 2.7 to 3.7 degrees Celsius.
At the same time, recent assessments of how countries are behaving in the context of their Paris climate goals suggest that some countries are already failing to meet their commitments. Another key difference between the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol is their scope. Although the Kyoto Protocol distinguishes between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries, this division is unclear in the Paris Agreement, as all parties must submit emission reduction plans.  While the Paris Agreement still emphasizes the principle of “shared but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities” – the recognition that different countries have different capacities and obligations for climate action – it does not provide for a specific separation between developed and developing countries.  It therefore seems that negotiators will have to continue to address this issue in future rounds of negotiations, even if the discussion on differentiation could take on a new dynamic.  The Indian INDC highlighted the challenges of eradicating poverty and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. About 24% of the world`s population without access to electricity (304 million) lived in India. Nevertheless, the country planned to “reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33-35% by 2030” from 2005 levels.