The U.S. Withdraws from the Paris Agreement

Gabriella Sandoval, Events Liaison and Manager 

The United States initially signed into the Paris Agreement upon its formation in 2016. In 2020, following the dictation of President Trump, it withdrew. Upon the election of President Biden, the U.S. signed back into the treaty again in 2021. However, due to recent political changes, powered by the inauguration of President Trump, serving his second term as the country’s president, the U.S. has once again withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, as of 2025. Trump’s decision to retract the U.S. from the agreement has sparked criticism from environmentalists, scientists, religious organizations, neighboring countries, and the American people. The U.S. is the second largest emitter of carbon dioxide emissions. This means that Trump’s decision to separate the country from the treaty contradicts any form of positive concepts by initiating change.

What is the Paris Agreement? 

The Paris Agreement is an international treaty on climate change that was implemented in 2016, aiming to help countries adapt to climate change effects, and provide financial assistance for necessary changes. The primary goal of this treaty is to maintain the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C, and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C. These temperatures are above pre-industrial levels. Simply put, the lower the temperature increases, the smaller the effects of climate change can be expected. 

This multilateral treaty serves as a landmark in action addressing the climate change problem. The Paris Agreement is a radical concept that is one of the first initiatives to foster widespread agreement and shared country initiatives. This is done through bringing almost all of the nations together to take effective measures and combat climate change effects. 

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicates that crossing the 1.5°C line bears risks including: far more severe climate change impacts such as more frequent and severe droughts, heatwaves, and rainfall. Moreso, 2024 was the hottest year on record, with a global average temperature above 1.5 °C. 

To stay below a temperature of 1.5 °C, emissions need to be cut by roughly 50% by 2030 according to the United Nations Climate Change. All active countries partaking in the treaty are required to determine, plan, and report transparently on actions taken to progress in climate change mitigation, as well as explanation of adaptive measures and support provided or received. This is to ensure that effective measures are taking place and that they’re making an impact. 

The Importance of the Paris Agreement

The importance of this treaty signifies contribution, consistency, and coordination; but above all, this treaty recognizes the need for deliberate effort from all parties involved to combat disastrous climate change effects. Although climate change action needs to be massively increased to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, the years since its inception have already launched low-carbon solutions and new markets. More and more countries, regions, cities and companies are establishing carbon neutrality targets and zero-carbon solutions which represent 25% of emissions. By 2030, zero-carbon solutions could be competitive throughout all sectors, representing over 70% of global emissions according to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

While some may argue that climate change is inevitable due to human evolution, the conduction of further research is necessary to show the impact human life has on the environment. Data collected from various scientific sites such as the United Nations Climate Change Panel conclude that:

• Climate change and its effects could be irreversible by 2030

• Greenhouse gas levels are at an all-time high 

• Humans utilize more of the earth’s resources than it can renew

• This past decade has been recorded as the hottest period in the last 125,000 years

There’s no argument that varying opinions can’t exist, however as inhabitants of our one and only earth, it would make more sense to be alarmed about our current state of climate. Although we may feel powerless at times in regards to how we can assist and care for our earth, the first and most important step is educating yourself on current issues and possible solutions.

Citizens Climate Lobby: Harvesting the North Wind Conference

By Josie Weiler, Staff Photographer

Located in Waubay, South Dakota, the Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL) had their annual conference for the North Wind Region. This region includes Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Nebraska. This was a place for climate activists to come together, have conversations, and listen to speakers. The speakers talked about Geothermal Energy, Copper Mining, Agro Farming and Silvopasture, Carbon Taxing, and so much more.

The CCL is educating citizens on The Carbon Fee and Dividend Act. This is an act that, if passed, would set up a tax on carbon directly at the source and then distribute that money to citizens that are reducing their personal carbon emissions. Taxing at the source would reduce carbon emissions because major fossil fuel industries care only about money. At this conference we learned that a CO2 tax would, by far, be the most effective step towards slowing down the rate of climate change. If you're passionate about climate policies, or just want to learn more, definitely look into upcoming CCL meetings. CCL is always looking for young people to provide a different perspective. Go green!

Attendees of the North Wind Conference gather in unity. Photo by Josie Weiler.

The Effect of COVID-19 on Climate Change

By: Vivian Pham, Staff Writer

COVID-19 pandemic caused the shut down of the majority of businesses as well as the dramatic decrease of fossil fuels exploitation. Waste-emission was practically ended because hundreds of thousands of factories stopped working, millions of vehicles stopped operating, which helped improve air quality in many places across the planet. Even the carbon emission was dramatically dropped globally. In short, all the measures in an effort to prevent the COVID-19  pandemic have had a positive impact on the climate and the environment within such a short time. But will this pandemic have a positive or negative impact in the long terms? 

Short-term positivity, long-term negativity

COVID-19 was, and is, an obvious catastrophe: overflown hospitals, increasing unemployment rate due to economic recession, etc. This pandemic crisis is also a turning point for another upcoming global crisis, which happens slowly but affects deeply. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterrres stated: “Whilst the disease is expected to be temporary, climate change has been a phenomenon for many years, and will remain with us for decades and require constant action.” 

Our reaction toward this pandemic will be the precursor for the climate change crisis in the upcoming decades. Efforts in recovering the economy – including economic boost policy, aiding funds, and programs for unemployment – will contribute in the shaping of the future economy and stabilize people’s lives. However, the carbon emission amount will undoubtedly remain on this planet for the next thousands of years to come. 

Changes in individual consumerism are not enough

It has been suggested that COVID-19 will be the main catalyst for the shift from consumerism to other concerns regarding climate change. However, quarantine and social distancing even contribute to an increase in consumerism since everyone rushes to grocery stores and stock up necessities. This is an iconic behavior of consumerism – the reason behind climate change.

Changes in individual consumption habits make people think that this is actually a positive sign for the environment. Some thought that after stocking up all the necessities, people might stop buying things uncontrollably. Changes in personal habits, especially in countries that have low consumption per capita, can lead to a lower waste emission. Nevertheless, this could only be a temporary consequence of peer pressures.

To make a better impact on decreasing global waste emission, changes in consumerism should not be limited at a personal scale, it needs to expand to a systemic scale. In China, a 25% decrease of waste emission was not because a person decided not to buy more toilet paper than needed, but because of the shutdown of industrial factories. 

COVID-19 is still a catastrophe to climate

1.     A declination in temporary waste emission.

According to Trafigura, a Singapore-based multinational commodity trading company, COVID-19 could cause the lowest oil demand in history, approximately 10 million b/d. This would have been good news for global pollution, however, it could signal a catastrophe because no one could guarantee whether the waste emission from oil consumption can still be maintained at such a low rate in the future. After such a long period of lockdown and social distancing, the economy will continue to operate, manufacturers will be recovered, and thus the pollution rate will increase again.

2.     A delay in shifting from traditional energy sources to renewable energy. 

The Economic recession due to COVID-19 has delayed the shift from traditional energy sources to renewable sources. Lockdown caused the markets and companies to close, which made some companies unable to maintain their budget for renewable energy projects such as solar panels and wind turbine installation. 

Suggestions for new projects have also been pushed back due to the discontinuation of the global supply chain (the majority of solar panels and wind turbines are produced in China). Bloomberg NEF, a strategic research provider covering global commodity markets and disruptive technologies driving the transition to a low-carbon economy, has lowered their expectations for the year 2020 in regards to the solar energy and electric vehicles market, indicating a deferral in the process of renewable energy shifting from traditional energy sources.

Regis Sustainability Club Caravaned to Participate in the Denver Climate Strike Along with Millions of Global Demonstrators

Photo Source // Triston Singleton

By: Lizzie Brown, Highlander Reporter

On Friday, Sept. 20, Denverites of all ages, races, and identities skipped school or work to assemble at Union Station and participate in the global climate strike. This was a student-led strike, the #FridaysForFuture movement coordinated and registered more than 5,000 events worldwide and over 4 million people participated according to their website (https://fridaysforfuture.org/news). 

The movement formed after Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish climate activist, and online sensation, went viral in August 2018 when she used Twitter and Instagram to advocate for political action in the face of our climate crisis while she skipped school for three weeks and set up a one-man picket fence outside of the Swedish parliament building, and spoke at the U.N Climate Action Summit (can be found on NBC, CBS or on Youtube).

 A sizable herd of Regis students and faculty partook in the march as well. Regis’ Sustainability Club handed out fliers the days proceeding the strike and mobilized a group of about 12 Regis students and faculty to ride the bus idowntown; other Regis folks biked and met up before the march began, some met at the Colorado Capitol. 

Ryan Harris, a senior at Regis, discussed his perspective around the climate crisis and his views on the empowerment of individuals within a group using their voices for change.

 “As an individual, you can make a change,” he said. “As a group, we have a microphone and as an individual, we kind of have a whisper, right? So it’s kind of using your individual mindset to be a part of a bigger community.” 

Nikki Best, a sophomore at Regis, talked  about what the climate crisis means to her and how it felt to have the Regis community at the event.

“I’m fighting for government policies to help fight climate change, to make the U.S. reduce carbon emissions,” Best said. “It makes me feel really good; it makes me feel like Regis is wanting to do something about our climate and like I’m not alone.”

Above the demonstration, looking towards the sky, you could see construction workers and folks in parking garages taking photos and hollering hoots of support-- luncheon munchers stared out windows to the street and some passers-by simply raised a fist in solidarity-- point being, no one could ignore the plurality of beating drums and zealous chants ringing throughout Denver as the demonstration marched to the Colorado Capital. As the crowd settled, highschoolers performed songs, Dr. Maria Michael, an indigenous elder, led a prayer. An 8-year-old advocated for policy that limits the production single-use plastic, and the crowd roared for every single one and those to follow. It was an energetic, peaceful and passionate demonstration of the youth drive to sustain, or save, the planet.

National Climate Assessment Paints Bleak Future for America

Photo source: Chicago Tribune

By: Paul Hunter, Practicum Reporter

Despite years of scientists’ warnings, the United States has neglected to make combatting climate change a priority. According to the National Climate Assessment, a report released by the government, the United States is headed for economic, health, and environmental disaster by 2100. The report also clarified the role of humans in climate change and highlighted recent events that were exacerbated by the effects of climate change. 

For the past 12 years, scientists have measured the effects of climate change to predict the outcomes of current degradation. The report is released every four years. This year, the report, which was commissioned by the Administration, paints a bleak picture. In the first paragraph of the report summary, it states, “Climate change creates new risks and exacerbates existing vulnerabilities in communities across the United States, presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth.” The following section highlights the ways climate change disproportionately affects the poor and marginalized around the world. 

Released on the popular American holiday called Black Friday, the report has been scrutinized by some as having been buried. Al Gore, former Vice President and creator of the documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” called out President Donald Trump on Twitter saying, “The President may try to hide the truth, but his own scientists and experts have made it as stark and clear as possible.”

The release of the report follows comments by Trump claiming that forest fires in California are happening more often because the National Forest Service fails to rake its forests. 

Just before the release of the climate assessment, Trump posted on twitter, “Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS - Whatever happened to Global Warming?” The tweet has close to 30,000 retweets and 115,000 likes. 

The climate assessment describes climate change’s effects on communities, the economy, water, health, indigenous peoples, ecosystem services, agriculture, infrastructure, oceans and coasts, and tourism and recreation. It links them all together in a final section titled “Interconnected Impacts.” In this section, the report shows how all effects are not singular; they are all interconnected and affect one-another.

The report predicts that annual deaths due to climate change will rise to the thousands by 2100. It also calculates the economic impacts of climate change on the United States, claiming that losses due to climate change will increase from the current $280 billion to $500 billion per year if we remain on the current path. On a local level, the report predicts detrimental impacts on the water supply for the West. Lake Meade has already witnessed a 60 percent loss in volume since the turn of the millennium. 

The National Climate Assessment ended the report with recommendations on strategies, claiming that local governments will be the primary drivers of the green movement and adaptation. It addresses perceived challenges with potential solutions. From much of the content, it’s clear the biggest challenge for policy-makers will be getting taxpayers to agree to costly, but necessary adaptation policy.