Did the 2015 Paris accord fail? That emissions are still rising doesn’t mean no climate progress was made

But that only holds true if you’re fixated on the end goal rather than the journey. The legally binding treaty aims to limit climate change to “well below 2° Celsius above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts to keep the increase close to 1.5° Celsius.

It specifies that countries should reach a “global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible. But carbon emissions and anti-climate sentiments are both on the rise.

In 2025, the US, responsible for about 24% of all emissions ever pumped into the atmosphere, withdrew from the treaty for the second time under President Donald Trump. The EU has weakened key regulations as well, including its 2035 combustion engine ban and pollution reporting requirements.

Elsewhere, greenhushing, which plays down environmental efforts to avoid political scrutiny, is on the rise among companies. Many experts seem almost certain that the 1.5° target is toast.

Copernicus, the EU’s Earth observation service, said the last three years are set to be the first period when average temperature rise would exceed that goal. And we’re nowhere near net-zero emissions.

But then, were our expectations too high? The treaty gave us a multi-prisoners’ dilemma.

Part of the problem is that the Paris pact has no penalties for inadequate plans or action, so the incentive to free ride is high: While only those parties cutting emissions bear the costs, everyone benefits from their efforts.

Meanwhile, petro-states want to keep squeezing profits out of their businesses. Oil and gas companies have been making about $2.5 billion a day in profit for the last 50 years, according to a 2022 analysis of World Bank data. Why would they give up that revenue?

Yet, the Paris Agreement has put us in a far better position than we would have been without it. In October 2015, Climate Action Tracker calculated that policies and actions at the time put the world on track for 3.6° Celsius of warming by 2100 but projected warming is now 2.6°. This signals progress.

The idea of a net-zero goal has also sparked a flurry of innovation. If researchers didn’t believe that anyone would want green technologies, then why would they invest in them? The accord sent a signal [of net-zero-aimed demand].

Ever since, research and money have been flowing into green transition sectors at an ever-increasing pace. The EU’s Innovation Fund, created to help the bloc meet its treaty commitments, has supported the development of batteries, carbon-negative cement and advanced recycling.

But fossil-fuel emissions will dictate the fate of the planet. Demand remains at an all-time high and though the International Energy Agency forecasts that fossil-fuel use will peak before 2030, it acknowledges that if governments abandon their stated intentions, oil and gas demand will continue to rise.

Still, there is optimism that emissions would likely peak by 2030. With renewables increasingly available cheaply, it could happen. Also, consider trends in various parts of the world. Pakistan is seeing a massive solar boom.

Driven by frustration with soaring electricity prices and power failures, rooftop generation is expected to exceed demand on the grid during daytime hours in some large industrial regions for the first time next year.

Many African countries are set to replicate that expansion with solar panel imports from China.

Records were set in 20 countries, Kenya, Algeria and Nigeria included. Though Africa is responsible for only about 4% of global emissions, it has a rapidly growing population and is industrializing. Switching to cleantech now avoids huge future growth in carbon emissions.

Ethiopia and Nepal are embracing electric vehicles (EVs) like never before. More than 70% of four-wheeled passenger vehicles imported to Nepal last year were electric, and the adoption is helping to reduce Kathmandu’s air pollution crisis.

Although the Paris Agreement no doubt kickstarted the EV industry’s rapid development, in Ethiopia, the driving force behind widespread adoption is the desire to save money.

The nation spends roughly $4.5 billion importing fuel every year, while drivers have had to put up with chronic fuel shortages and rising prices. EVs eliminate that problem.

It’s shifts like these, where cleantech makes economic sense, that will power the climate transition. Whether or not the Paris Agreement still exists in its current form by then, it has done a remarkable job of sparking a green revolution, which is only just beginning to take off. That’s not a failure to me. ©Bloomberg