The global thermostat is a tricky thing to manage. When news broke that the US withdraws from Paris Accord under the Trump administration, it felt like the air went out of the room at the United Nations. One day, the world’s second-largest emitter was in; the next, it was heading for the exit. It wasn't just a paperwork change. It was a massive shift in how the world's superpower viewed its responsibility to the planet. People were furious. Others were relieved. Most were just confused about how a country could just "quit" a global pact that took decades to build.
Actually, it wasn't a sudden break-up. It was more like a long, drawn-out legal divorce that took years to finalize.
The Paris Agreement, if we’re being real, is basically a massive pinky-promise. There aren't any "climate police" who come to your door if you miss your targets. Each country sets its own goals, called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). So, when the US decided to walk away, it wasn't breaking a law so much as it was breaking a collective sense of trust. The move sent shockwaves through the diplomatic community, leaving leaders like Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel scrambling to keep the rest of the world from following suit.
The Long Road to the Exit Sign
You can’t just snap your fingers and leave a global treaty. Article 28 of the Paris Agreement specifically laid out a "cool-down" period. A country had to wait three years from the date the agreement entered into force before they could even apply to leave. Then, there was a one-year waiting period after that.
Donald Trump announced the intent to withdraw in the Rose Garden in June 2017. He argued that the deal was "unfair" to American workers and businesses. He claimed it would cost the US economy trillions of dollars while letting other big polluters like China and India off the hook. Whether those numbers were totally accurate is a matter of heated debate—most economists at the time, like those at the London School of Economics, argued that the costs of not acting on climate change would be much higher—but the political message landed hard.
The US didn't actually, officially, legally leave until November 4, 2020.
Think about that timing. It was literally the day after the 2020 Presidential Election. While the votes were still being counted, the US was technically, for a brief moment, the only country in the world to have signed and then fully exited the pact. It was a weird, lonely spot to be in.
Did the US Withdrawals From Paris Accord Actually Stop Progress?
You’d think everything would have ground to a halt. It didn't.
🔗 Read more: Citizen Death Notices: What Most People Get Wrong About Finding Recent Obituaries
Oddly enough, when the federal government stepped back, a bunch of other people stepped up. This is the part people often forget. A movement called "We Are Still In" formed almost immediately. It was a ragtag but powerful coalition of over 3,000 CEOs, governors, mayors, and tribal leaders. Basically, they said, "The White House might be out, but California isn't. New York isn't. Google and Microsoft aren't."
- Michael Bloomberg became a huge figure here. He basically offered to pay the US share of the UN Climate Secretariat’s budget out of his own pocket.
- The "California Effect" kicked in. Because California has such a massive economy, its strict emissions standards for cars often become the de facto national standard anyway.
- Market Forces. This is the big one. Coal didn't suddenly become king again just because the US left the accord. Natural gas was cheaper. Wind and solar were getting cheaper by the minute.
Economics, it turns out, cares a lot less about treaties than it does about the bottom line. Even without the Paris mandates, US emissions actually continued to drop during some of those years, mostly because utilities were switching from coal to gas and renewables for purely financial reasons.
The Diplomacy Problem
The real damage wasn't necessarily in the carbon tons. It was in the "soft power."
When the US withdraws from Paris Accord, it loses its seat at the table. It loses the ability to tell China to be more transparent with its data. It loses the ability to pressure Brazil into stopping deforestation in the Amazon. Diplomacy is a game of "I will if you will." When the biggest guy in the room leaves, everyone else starts looking at the door.
Special Envoy John Kerry later noted that regaining that trust wasn't as simple as just signing a new piece of paper. You have to prove you won't just leave again in four years. That "yo-yo" diplomacy makes other nations hesitant to make big, expensive bets on green tech if they think the US might pivot back to fossil fuels every election cycle.
The 107-Day Gap
Then came 2021. On his first day in office, President Joe Biden signed the executive order to rejoin.
Because of the way the rules are written, it only took 30 days to get back in. By February 19, 2021, the US was officially a party to the Paris Agreement again. Total time spent "outside" the tent? About 107 days.
In the grand scheme of geological time, 107 days is nothing. In the world of international politics, it was an eternity. It forced a conversation about "climate sub-nationalism"—the idea that cities and states can do the heavy lifting even if the federal government is paralyzed.
Why This Still Matters Today
We’re still feeling the ripples. The US is now pushing the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which is the biggest climate bill in history. It’s basically the US trying to "make up for lost time" and prove to the world that it’s serious.
But there’s a catch. The Paris Agreement relies on every country constantly "ratcheting up" their goals. Every five years, you’re supposed to come back with a more ambitious plan. Because the US was out for a while, it’s now playing a massive game of catch-up to meet the 2030 goal of cutting emissions by 50-52% below 2005 levels.
Some folks still think the withdrawal was the right move. They argue that the US shouldn't be bound by international agreements that might hamper domestic energy production. They point to the fact that the US has plenty of natural gas and that energy independence is a national security issue. It’s a tension that isn't going away.
👉 See also: Trump Announcing 6 Months of School: What Most People Get Wrong
Moving Forward: Actionable Insights for the Future
The saga of the US and the Paris Accord taught us that global climate policy is fragile, but local action is surprisingly resilient. If you’re looking at how to navigate this landscape, whether you’re a business owner or just a concerned citizen, here is how the world has changed since that withdrawal:
Watch State Policies, Not Just Federal Ones If the federal government pivots, look to the "Climate Alliance" states (like Washington, California, and Massachusetts). These states often set the bar that the rest of the country eventually follows, regardless of who is in the Oval Office.
Follow the Money, Not the Treaties The most significant shifts in emissions during the US withdrawal period came from the private sector. Investors are increasingly using ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) metrics. If you are managing a portfolio or a business, the market is moving toward decarbonization because it's becoming more profitable, not just because of a treaty signed in France.
Understand the "Ratchet Mechanism" The Paris Agreement is designed to get stricter over time. Even if a country leaves and comes back, the global expectations for 2030 and 2050 targets don't move backward. They only get tougher. Organizations that prepare for a "carbon-constrained" future now will be ahead of the curve when the next round of international regulations inevitably kicks in.
Diversify Your Energy Intelligence Don't rely on a single political narrative. The US energy mix is governed by a complex web of FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) rulings, state utility commissions, and global commodity prices. The Paris Accord is the North Star, but the actual navigation happens on the ground in local markets.
✨ Don't miss: Who Fired First Israel or Iran: What Really Happened in the 2024 Escalation
The withdrawal was a historic moment of disruption, but it also proved that the global momentum toward a lower-carbon economy is much harder to stop than a single signature on a page. The "Paris" goals are now baked into the strategic planning of most major global corporations. That's a reality that exists regardless of the current diplomatic status of the United States.