Direction for the future

The Agreement held in Paris was a remarkable achievement for the international politic as well as the economy in the global aspect. The global environment and the global economy have improved from this remarkable step. This turned out to be the culmination of almost five years of universal climate agreement that was signed by all the 196 parties. This is a universal climate agreement that was under the framework of United Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNGCCC). This is known as remarkable one as it involves many countries and this was one of the largest signing of an international agreement and it was the largest meet in order to head towards a better environment (Olah and Prakash 2016). The results of the meeting would come into effect in the year 2020. The notable point of the meet was that it was designed to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol was the international law that existed to control the global emissions reduction. However this was one of the biggest changes of the future (Rogelj et al. 2016).

The agreement designs the future on the climate change for the global collective action. This is a new and innovative approach towards the UNFCCC. This is more inclusive and it leads the nations towards self-determination. This also gives the market a signal towards the global economy to reduce down to the economy of low emission. The objective and aim behind this is to encourage the peer group to set some ambitious target. The Paris agreement sets as an effective guide to them. However there are some gaps in the agreement. The gap is due to the process that is mentioned in the agreement. The agreement states the process that should be adopted but it failed to state the way of doing it. This states a framework but this did not provide the guidance or it did not mention about any obligation on how to carry on with the action. However there are five key outcomes that can be extracted from the agreement (Parker, Karlsson and Hjerpe 2017).

The first and foremost outcome is the direction for the future. The individuals are motivated to set commitments. This is intended towards setting a long term goal. The aim of the agreement is to reduce the temperature that is caused due to Global Warming aiming to have it within 1.5 degree Celsius (Northrop and Ross 2016).

Regular review and progression of commitments

The other goal is the regular review that keeps a track of the progress and it aims at the progression of the commitments. A system of review was introduced that is found to stanch by a five years cycle. This review intends the parties to revise the targets set by them and it determines the contribution made by them. This step ensures the highest amount of contribution made by them. The sole intention of this is to keep a track of the progress (Mazur 2016).

The other outcome is the self-differentiation. The Paris Agreement tries to be more flexible than the Kyoto Protocol (Robbins 2016). A variability of the developed countries and the developing countries is the intention of the agreement. The developing nations are expected to be more responsible over time (Mace and Verheyen 2016). This also promotes the collective action. All the countries are expected to submit NCDs and they are expected to adhere to the earlier mentioned requirements of reporting and the compliance of the same. The framework can help all the countries to head towards the attainment of the same requirements. This often leads them to the sharing of the technical knowledge. This acts as a bridge between the developed countries and the developing countries. The transparency of the framework will ensure the feasibility of the political factors (Koehl and Hess 2016).

The interaction of the factors like lucidity and fulfillment of the articles ingrained the accountability of the agreement. This encourages competition and cooperation between the developed and the developing nations. This also includes the recognition of the UNFCC principle of the common as well as the differentiated responsibility. All the parties must report religiously about their progress. This is one of the necessary aspects included in the project. The loophole that lies in the Paris Agreement is the compliance power that it has. The compliance power in the agreement is comparatively weak and it is not in line with the project (Falkner 2016).

Apart from all these outcomes the other things that can be extracted from this is the goal for adaptation. The emissions reductions are the centerpiece of the Paris Agreement and the objective of the UNFCCC (Eckmann 2016). The need for the global adaption is clear in COP2. The global forest is the natural resources that should be treasured by the nation. This was one of the important motives of the agreement. It directed towards reduce of the greenhouse gases and the reduction of the gas emissions in order to save the global forest. The Paris agreement clearly signals towards reducing of the use of carbons (Dimitrov 2016).

Self-differentiation

The quarry that emerged after analyzing the outcomes of the Paris Agreement was that whether there were certain loopholes in the project that needs to be rectified and some innovations that should have been made? The positive points state the fact that the agreement attempts to involve many countries and bring out a collective action. This has adopted flexible actions in order to meet the different targets and the different capacities and responsibilities set by the parties. There is a risk in that. The potential for collective action could be undermined due to too much flexibility or at the most it might fail to deliver the reduction of the emission that is required to limit the global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.  These are the main analysis of the Paris agreement (Collado 2016).

This should be considered as a sustainable policy because of few important aspects that it holds. The scientists came up with the warning that the poisonous gases that are emitted due to greenhouse will continue to rise until a serious check is kept on them. The global warming will become disastrous and if it is kept unchecked it might become permanent and the entire nation might cross the threshold of the same. The agreement that was signed by the leaders tried to make some amendments in order to eradicate the problems related to the environment. This is the reason that COP21 can be treated as an effective policy that would help the nation to head through a pollution free environment (Christopher 2017).

The other importance lies in the fact that earlier many such efforts were made to think work on this but all were not successful. The Paris agreement has made efforts to bring the developing as well the developed nation together in making the nation a sustainable place to dwell in. Global warming has not yet stopped and this is the reason such actions should be encouraged and they should be followed by every individual. The Kyoto Protocol is the example of one such agreement. It was a pact but Paris agreement acted as a much effective pact compared to Kyoto Protocol (Christopher 2017). This had some practical objectives and it had the flexibility to report about the progress. This is the reason it should be supported by many countries and by every individual. The other factor that should be considered is the accountability. The poorer countries usually want the rich world to provide them with the financial help that would enable them to invest in the clean technology to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. It also includes the adaption of the infrastructure to the likely damage from the climate change. This is being given to the poorer countries as it was mentioned in the Paris agreement. The key question that arises is the question of security. The nations can meet under the best security condition in France and this can triumph for the international cooperation for the wellbeing and the security of the nation. This would enable faith in the future. This is certainly an effective platform for the sustainable development. This can be treated as an important forum for dealing the development of leading a sustainable life. This can therefore be treated as an effective action as well as policy (Christoff 2016).

Accountability and the UNFCCC principle of common and differentiated responsibility

Hsrii.org. (2018). Health Research Initiative India. Available at: https://hsrii.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Gopalan-et-al-DSF-LMIC_SSM.pdf Online  [Accessed 19 Feb. 2018].

The above journal contains the research done by some Indian researchers. The article contains the fact that in the low-and middle income countries the health sector is poor. Due to low financial records the poor countries were unable to maintain the high standards of environment as well as the health standards.

The above article opines the fact that cooperation from all the countries is required to improve the access and the sustainability of the effectiveness of antimicrobials. The financial record is standard in this case.

The above journal contains the analysis of the building energy that already exists in the saving of the policies in countries like Japan and China. However it brings out the fact that it is easier for the developed and the financially stabled countries to have this.

The above article contains some aspects regarding the barriers that have been faced by Kuwait in the sustainable construction due to poor financial condition.

The use of hydraulic fracturing has been used to extract the oil and the natural gas from the earth. This can be dated back in the past times. The extraction of the mineral resources for using in huge scale has become a necessary process. This has become a necessary process and therefore the fracking process has become an emergent process. The fracking process include the high pressure injection of water and chemicals and sand into shale deposits in order to release the gas and oil trapped within the rock in recent years has been combined with the horizontal drilling and other improvements in technology in order to harvest stores of gas and oil that previously were thought commercially unfeasible to access. There are various positive impacts of this process. The countries having more natural resources can adopt the process of fracking. This would enable the countries that are having fewer resources to get the resources from the ones who have that in abundance. However apart from the positive impacts there are some negative impacts that are exist in this process. It poses high risk to the environment. The quality of air gets affected due to this. This is due to the engine exhaust from the increased the truck traffic. The gas is burned and it is released directly into the atmosphere which is harmful for the environment. The faulty equipment process leads to unintentional emissions of pollutants. This poses a risk to the underwater. It contaminates the groundwater and also the surface water (Castillo, Fanini and Baker Hughes 2017).

Goal for adaptation

This was however an important requirement in the environment. The emergence of this process was first seen in the year 1862. It was during the Civil War. The battle of Fredericksburg was witnessed the process of fracking. Veteran Col. Edward A.L Roberts saw what could be completed while firing the explosive artillery into a narrow canal that could obstruct the battlefield. The new sources of energy should be weighed against the environmental, health and safety concerns that are related to the new technology. While analyzing the entire process it can be said that the negative aspects are more than the positive aspects. The extraction of the natural resources is quite important but it certainly leads to air pollution as it openly exposed to the air that increases the pollution. The extraction of the natural resources led to the emergence of the process of fracking (Castillo, Fanini and Baker Hughes 2016).

References

Castillo, H.C. and Fanini, O.N., Baker Hughes Inc, 2016. One trip multi-interval plugging, perforating and fracking method. U.S. Patent 9,506,333.

Castillo, H.C. and Fanini, O.N., Baker Hughes Inc, 2017. Providing a pressure boost while perforating to initiate fracking. U.S. Patent 9,540,919.

Christoff, P., 2016. The promissory note: COP 21 and the Paris Climate Agreement. Environmental Politics, 25(5), pp.765-787.

Christopher, J., 2017. US withdrawal from the COP21 Paris Climate Change Agreement, and its possible implications. Science Progress, 100(4), p.411.

Collado, J.R.N., 2016. Ethics of the Dominican Republic intended nationally determined contribution (DR-INDC) for the COP21 Paris Agreement. Ethics.

Dimitrov, R.S., 2016. The Paris agreement on climate change: Behind closed doors. Global Environmental Politics, 16(3), pp.1-11.

Eckmann, T.C., 2016. Revisiting Laudato si’in the Context of the COP21 Paris Climate Agreement. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 58(5), pp.38-42.

Falkner, R., 2016. The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs, 92(5), pp.1107-1125.

Koehl, A. and Hess, J.S., 2016. Potential non-environmental benefits of the COP21 Paris Agreement.

Mace, M.J. and Verheyen, R., 2016. Loss, damage and responsibility after COP21: all options open for the Paris agreement. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 25(2), pp.197-214.

Mazur, A., 2016. How did the fracking controversy emerge in the period 2010-2012?. Public Understanding of Science, 25(2), pp.207-222.

Northrop, E. and Ross, K., 2016. After COP21: what needs to happen for the Paris agreement to take effect?. Geominas, 44(70), pp.133-137.

Olah, G.A. and Prakash, G.S., University of Southern California (USC), 2016. Fracking with co2 for shale gas reforming to methanol. U.S. Patent Application 15/036,506

Parker, C.F., Karlsson, C. and Hjerpe, M., 2017. Assessing the European Union’s global climate change leadership: from Copenhagen to the Paris Agreement. Journal of European Integration, 39(2), pp.239-252.

Robbins, A., 2016. How to understand the results of the climate change summit: Conference of Parties21 (COP21) Paris 2015.

Rogelj, J., Den Elzen, M., Höhne, N., Fransen, T., Fekete, H., Winkler, H., Schaeffer, R., Sha, F., Riahi, K. and Meinshausen, M., 2016. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 C. Nature, 534(7609), p.631.