Landscape Architects Split 50/50 on Paris Climate Accord

Reader’s Opinions



On Thursday June 1, Trump officially announced the U.S. would pull out of the Paris Climate Accords. That same day, LASN magazine emailed a sampling of its readers for their opinions on the pull out, and asked them to state specific reasons for their positions. Trump stated it costs U.S. jobs and is an undue burden on American taxpayers.

The response was split almost exactly 50/50 for those in agreement and those opposed to the US pulling out of the agreement. About 80% of all respondents sited the need to protect the climate regardless of which side they took. Here is a compilation of the response from across the country. We have not identified the names of the senders, only their city and state, nor edited the comments, except for a couple uses of profanity.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to the question.

The comments were posted for this article:

Do you have any to add?

Please follow and like us:

13 thoughts on “Landscape Architects Split 50/50 on Paris Climate Accord”

  1. China is the number one emitter of CO2 and yet they are given a 10-year reprieve under the Paris Agreement. The US would incur huge penalties/taxes, perhaps in the trillions within the next ten years if we had signed the agreement. Shouldn’t we negotiate an better agreement that holds everyone…China, Russia, India and any other major contributing nation to a plan that causes reductions worldwide? Ignoring their contribution for ten years while making America and only America accountable would damage US economy without effectively achieving any significant global effect. Therefore, the move (US not signing the current agreement) is a good idea to get these countries back to the negotiation table to work towards achieving a better outcome.

  2. The removal of the US for the Paris Climate Accords is another large step in the removal of the US as a leader in the world. We are now aligned with only Syria and Nicaragua (who thought the agreement did not go far enough). China has estimated that transitioning its economy to green energy will create over 13 million jobs. There have already been hundreds of thousands of green energy jobs created in the US. The energy revolution is coming regardless of the misguided actions of our current low information President. Landscape architects should embrace this revolution to help ameliorate the environmental and ecological effects of climate change, to maintain the US as a world leader in technology, political action, human rights, and other important areas, and to create the millions of jobs that come with every stage of technological evolution. Let’s be smart and ethical and not narrowly ideological and blindly partisan on this crucial issue of out time!

  3. I support President Trump in this decision. We need to spend the money on our own nation; our military, economic development, infrastructure, etc., has been underfunded for far too long.

  4. There is no question that Trump is correct. The US is not the pollution generator it once was – all you have to do is travel around the world to see that. The industries in the US have already paid for our portion, we should not be required to pay for everyone else’s. The primary focus of the Paris accord is funding…it has little to do with pollution or greenhouse gasses.

  5. As educated, trained, experienced, and licensed Professionals, our role on any of our works, opinions, and other due diligence activities is to determine the factual essence for performing work, offering opinions, and rendering due diligence findings. Therefore, I do not know the content of the Paris Agreement and am ethically without a scientific, sociological, and/or economic basis for expressing an opinion. Unless others who express opinions know the essence and implications of the Paris Agreement, it is my opinion that any such opinions are without foundation and are, therefore emotional.

  6. I think there are a lot of people in the Midwest that are glad he pulled the US out. For one, Obama & Kerry were not the most astute/competent people to be negotiating something like this. It certainly wasn’t in the best interests for the US. This is not about the US putting itself above the earth/world. It’s about the farcical notion of the whole agreement. The US can and will still seek to reduce emissions whether we are a part of this group or not.

  7. Bogus Logic…We will loose out on the new energy revolution to China and India to save a few oil and gas jobs here. Will not make gas cheaper or equipment any cheaper.

    Not to mention leaving a clean and livable planet for future generations.

  8. I am against this move! Rather than removing jobs, clean energy creates jobs by both replacing one type for another and adding new markets. His views are very short sighted and based on his own ‘fake news’. Not working to combat climate change will create that undue burden on America and the rest of the world, financially, physically, emotionally, etc. The resulting cost will be far more than our contributions to this effort would be.

  9. I personally believe that he is not listening to the greater part of America. Global warming and climate change is happening. In my own state of Minnesota, the USDA Zones have changed from 2, 3 and 4 to 3, 4 and now 5. That makes us warmer. There have been models stating that we will be what Des Moines is currently at (in temperature) in about 20 years. In my own part of the state, which has a great number of Sugar Maple trees, they think that those will disappear do to how warm the climate is becoming.

    Also, clean energy is the future. As even our own Senator Al Franken stated, there are more jobs in the clean energy sector, rather than the coal sector, and it is only growing. There are many solar panel projects, in my area, and Xcel Energy in the Midwest is pushing towards a reduction in coal and gas and increasing wind, solar and other clean energy resources.

    As far as where I work, we are seeing the desire for more recyclables, and less waste. We have more hybrids as part of the fleet, to save energy. All of this is a great thing. Even though President Trump wants to pull out, I think there has been a surge in the states continuing on the path of Paris Agreement, on their own; and while that is a good thing, I would rather see us work together as a country rather than independently. I think his vision is short sighted and while he is saying that he is looking out for American interests, he is forgetting that we’ve become a global economy and we need to look at how our actions not only affect us here at home but also abroad.

  10. I am for Trump pulling out of the Paris Agreement because I believe that “Global Warming” or now It’s called “Global Climate Change” (because you can measure temperature) is one big lie! One volcano eruption or a large forest fire puts more carbon in the atmosphere then man burning fossil fuels. Ask any “Real” scientist, that hasn’t been paid to produce only research that supports that climate change is caused by man, what they think and you will get the truth.

    Think about it, climate is the one thing we cannot predict. The trained meteorologists can’t predict the weather most of the time. Man has been keeping climate data for less than 200 years so the fact that there are telling us what happened thousands of years ago is crazy.

    Don’t get me wrong, as a landscape architect, I totally support switching to clean energy production, protecting the environment, sustainability, and taking care of our earth. But I don’t like being lied to and manipulated.

  11. President Trump’s pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord is a grave mistake. These actions have set us back as American citizens and responsible citizens of the world. We live within varied ecosystems, but share one planet, and what we do within the United States impacts all other nations that inhabit it. Turning our back on limiting and controlling consumption, urbanization and inequity we encourage the impacts of climate change to devastate the earth. Not embracing mass actions to control climate change will also cause the United States to lag behind in the development of new and sustainable technologies that will provide solutions and jobs. As put forth in the New Landscape Declaration issued by the Landscape Architecture Foundation “as landscape architects we vow to create places that serve the higher purpose of social and ecological justice for all peoples and all species”, America must do what is in the interest of the health and resiliency of all communities. We must join forces with those governors and mayors of American states and cities who support and abide by the principals of the Paris Climate Accord.

  12. Absolutely the right thing to do!!! Tired of the USA having to shoulder the vast majority of the burden and expense. Go to Beijing, China and India (I’ve been there) and see the incredible smog!!!) They don’t have to start abiding by the rule until 2030.

    I’m thrilled we have a President who is standing up for America.

  13. Why are Landscape Architects having their own opinions on Globe warming when we service clients on both sides of the issues? As professionals what we believe in our privet life should not to effect our services (Parenthetical approach). Are we going to give more or less service to people of differing opinions? We make our livings by furnishing our expertise on what the Client wants or needs and whats best for any given situation based on our training not in what the Politicians are doing or on what we read in the news papers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *