The implementation of the Paris agreement will require a massive shift in the production and storage of energy to stabilize the levels of atmosferic CO2 . It is on this moment naive to assume that the necessary decarbonization of the economy could be compensated with only green energy. Currently most western states are phasing out nuclear fission reactors, with no real intent on building new ones, mainly out of irrational fear of disaster. However with no nuclear fusion or other miracle tech on the horizon, increasing in nuclear fission power seems to be the only way to go. Have the signing states pledged to significantly increase nuclear power? If not what real value has the accord other than a nice speech, good PR story and a pat on each others back.

  • 1
    If this is an area you're interested in, I'd recommend a look at the peer-reviewed literature on the subject. It may not always accord with your preconceptions, but if you don't mind a bit of challenging reading, I think you'll find it rewarding. And we've got Q&A sites where you can ask about the Economics, the Engineering; or ask about pretty much any aspect of clean energy and decarbonisation on Sustainable Living.
    – 410 gone
    Jan 12, 2016 at 13:07

1 Answer 1


No, it is not because states choose for themselves how to work towards the targets set in the Paris Agreements. This is well articulated in this part about financial support to developing countries:

  1. Decides that, in the implementation of the Agreement, financial resources provided to developing countries should enhance the implementation of their policies, strategies, regulations and action plans and their climate change actions with respect to both mitigation and adaptation to contribute to the achievement of the purpose of the Agreement as defined in Article 2;

Otherwise, most likely there wouldn't have been an agreement at all. Some countries make renewable energy a priority (Germany), while others expand nuclear energy production (UK, India,..).

Many have criticised the lack of concrete measures, concrete targets for each country, so yeah it indeed can be seen as a document of good will – but one that is sending a strong signal. Quote John Kerry:

We are sending literally a critical message to the global marketplace. Many of us here know that it won’t be governments that actually make the decision or find the product, the new technology, the saving grace of this challenge. It will be the genius of the American spirit. It will be business unleashed because of 186 nations saying to global business in one loud voice: We need to move in this direction. And that will move investment. That will create new, greater research and development, and the next great product will come that will change our lives.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .