Topic: Explain Your Letter that urged Trump to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

Senator Roberts urged President Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord. Our senator talks about how much he cares for our rural farmers and if he truly did, he would support everything in his power to stop this global phenomena. Because if it isn't stopped, it will create more droughts, leading to less crop yields and more economic anxiety. We need to let him know our thoughts and concerns about this action.

On June 1st, the President announced that the United States will withdraw from the Paris Agreement (PA). The President’s statement was full of specious claims, falsehoods, and misunderstandings. There’s a breakdown of the dishonesty here. Senator Pat Roberts was among a group of 21 Republican senators who signed a letter to Trump in support of withdrawal. The letter argues that staying in the PA would pose a legal threat to the Trump administration’s efforts to unwind the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan (CPP), which they dislike because of its regulatory burden. It also argues that withdrawal will not jeopardize our ability to have a voice in future discussions. Both the CPP and international diplomacy can be complicated, but here is some information for Senator Roberts to think about and some questions for him to answer:

• The CPP was projected to decrease the nation’s reliance on coal. Kansas is not a coal state. It contains less than 1 % of the country’s demonstrated reserve of coal. It had one small coal mine in operation as of February 2017.

• The CPP was projected to maintain the country’s use of natural gas for electricity generation. Kansas produces about 1.5 % of the country’s oil and gas. The state’s oil and gas production is not projected to be appreciably cut under the CPP. In fact, if the future yields more abundant domestic natural gas resources and better gas technology, the national use of gas would likely increase under the CPP. Under almost no scenario will the country’s use of natural gas for power generation significantly decrease. The CPP does not seem likely to pose a threat to gas jobs in Kansas.

• The CPP calls for a significant expansion of U.S. renewable energy capacity. Kansas has a high potential for renewable energy development. It ranks among the top five states for wind energy generation and potential. Kansas is also among the top 10 states in solar energy potential, with the same solar potential as Florida. The CPP’s expansion of renewables represents an excellent opportunity for Kansas to develop its renewable potential!

• All things considered, the CPP appears to be a quite positive policy for energy development in Kansas. Does Senator Roberts know things that the U.S. Energy Information Administration does not or that we do not? Why does he oppose a policy that would bring renewable energy jobs to Kansas without sacrificing its oil and gas jobs? Anyway, there is evidence that reducing greenhouse gas emissions does not have to stifle the economy.

• Putting jobs aside, exiting the PA indicates that the United States is not interested in cooperating with a global community of nations to solve global problems. It certainly indicates that the United States is uninterested in leading the problem-solving efforts. Does Senator Roberts dispute that climate change is a pressing global problem? If not, why should the U.S. step out of a leadership role and continue alienating our allies?

• The letter to President Trump supporting withdrawal from the PA, signed by Senator Roberts, reads like it was written by Koch lobbyists. It vaguely laments overregulation without a balanced view of policy pros and cons (the facts). Can Senator Roberts please explain why the greenhouse gas regulations will be a net negative for Kansas and/or the country? Why did he sign an angrily worded No Climate Tax Pledge for a Koch funded organization?

Sources that are not linked above:

1. https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=KS#78

2. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=21392