Commentary

Trump’s argument for quitting Paris deal contains multi-trillion dollar math error

Published by

Think Progress

President Donald Trump announced Thursday that the United States would abandon the Paris climate agreement, but his justification for withdrawing was rooted in a false economic claim.

Trump claimed that U.S. commitments under the Paris accord would cost the country’s GDP $3 trillion, but the report he took that estimate from “does not take into account potential benefits from avoided emissions.”

In other words: The study did not account for any benefits of participating in a global plan to avoid the worst effects of climate change. It is a report on climate mitigation that ignores climate change. The report also does not consider the economic benefits to renewable energy industries, nor does it consider the health costs that are associated with fossil fuel pollution.

Frankly, this analysis in line with Trump’s previously articulated positions on climate change and the economy. He does not believe that climate change exists (he has famously called it a hoax perpetuated by China), and he believes that rolling back environmental regulations will help the economy.

These positions fly in the face of established science and history. For starters, climate change is happening. It is happening right now. It is happening because of the rise in greenhouse gas emissions from human activity. In addition, history has shown time and time again that protecting the environment is good for the economy — and for people, who drink water and breathe and also live in houses by the ocean.

The report Trump cited, released by NERA Consulting, is extreme. Even the conservative Heritage Foundation estimated less cost from the Paris agreement than the NERA report.

Meanwhile, non-partisan reports offer dire warnings for not addressing climate change. Earlier this year, researchers at the University of California Berkeley found that “unmitigated, climate change could reduce global GDP by over 20 percent by 2100.”

A 2015 report from Cambridge University’s Judge Business School found that the “present value of the damage caused by human-caused climate change from a moderate warming scenario is an astonishing $400 trillion.”

The same year, a report from Citibank found that not addressing climate change will cost $44 trillion by 2060, while investing in low-carbon energy would save $1.8 trillion through 2040, as compared to a business-as-usual scenario.

Source:Think Progress. Reproduced with permission.

Recent Posts

“This is waste-washing:” Waste-to-energy projects called out for being dirtier than coal

Waste-to-energy incinerators should not be called clean, renewable, or low emission because they are as…

16 July 2026

Solar contractor files big claim against Shell over disputed cost overruns at Australian PV project

One of biggest solar contractors in Australia has lodged a major claim against Shell Energy…

16 July 2026

Australia is stuck in a vicious circle of diesel fuel dependence. Chinese electric trucks offer a way out

Australia remains extraordinarily dependent on imported diesel to move freight and support much of its…

16 July 2026

Wind, solar and storage remain cheapest new-build generation, says Lazard, despite rising costs

Annual analysis by Lazard confirms wind, solar and storage remain cheapest new build, despite pressures…

16 July 2026

Australia’s biggest coal port allowed to store big batteries as it transitions to major renewable gateway

Australia's biggest coal port given approval to store big batteries on site as it continues…

16 July 2026

Biggest ever turbines set sail for Australia, headed for Fortescue’s first wind project in Pilbara

The most powerful wind turbines to be installed in Australia set sail for Fortescue iron…

16 July 2026