Provide a reply to the following post below.


How successful have international agreements on limiting  greenhouse gases been in general (e.g., why was the Montreal Protocol of  1987 a success, whereas the ability to cap global greenhouse gas  emissions by a binding treaty has met with less success?)?

Incidentally, international agreements on climate change and or  limiting greenhouse gases with each nation are challenged with limited  success because every country has its own geopolitical agenda and energy  plan. Although, the Montreal Protocol of 1987 was successful due impart  to the fact that all parties were on the same accord of preserving and  lessening the GHG effects to the ozone layer. Thus, every nation and  corporation positioned human survival at the forefront of profits and  geopolitical agendas so actual international agreements were able to  transpire and bring about real-time change.
The Montreal Protocol, signed in 1987 is one shining example of  countries and companies coming together to limit and then end the  production of harmful chemicals in order to preserve the ozone layer in  the upper atmosphere (Module Notes, 2019).
With regards to why different supplementary international treaties on  GHG emissions, which are not as successful as the Montreal Protocol of  1987, on the grounds that most industrialized nations foreign and  domestic policies are wildly diverging from their global counterparts.   Hence, many nations’ international interest in global affairs  exclusively benefits that specific country; therefore, different climate  goals configure a competing course of action within the global  community. Thereupon,  many international climate change accords that address the GHG produce low success rates.

International relations theory speaks to the difficulties of  foregoing self-interest for the common good, implying there are  elements of tragedy in preserving public good. In your view, is the  current state of the international agreement on limiting greenhouse gas  emissions tragic? Of the optimistic solutions put forward by Michael  Bradshaw, Tim Wirth, Tom Daschle, and David Victor, which do you find  most likely to succeed?

In discussions of greenhouse gas emissions, one controversial issue  has been a global/ international Paris Agreement and the Trump  administration withdrawing the US from the agreement making it quite  difficult to forego international interest in the common good of  stabilizing the ongoing effects of climate change. Admittedly, the  current unfortunate facet in an international coalition in the common,  good for climate change is the United Staes about-face in the global  fellowship to combat the GHG  that is contaminating the atmosphere  because of everyday fossil fuel usage.  Nevertheless, the countries that  are signed on to the Paris Agreement have the potential to make a  positive and lasting impact on the Earth ‘s ecosystem.
The Trump administration has formally notified the United Nations  that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement. The  withdrawal will be completed this time next year after a one-year  waiting period has elapsed.    Thus, a formal withdrawal is reversible,  however, if a future administration chooses to rejoin the Paris  Agreement and pick up where the U.S. left off with its emissions  reduction promises (Hersher, 2019).
Speaking about the multiple perspectives put forward by Michael  Bradshaw, Tim Wirth, Tom Daschle, and David Victor is a very reasonable  and thoughtful action plan to reduce current GHG and tackle climate  change. However, I assert that only time will tell if smart cities,  smart grids, net-zero communities, fossil fuel alternatives, and the  Paris Agreement will produce the sustainable required results that  reverse the long-term detrimental effects of climate change.
Hersher, R. ( 2019, November 4). The U.S. Formally Begins To Leave The Paris Climate Agreement. Retrieved from NPR:
Module Notes. (2019, N.D. N.D.). Module 7: Module Notes: National and International Governance of the Energy and Climate Dilemma.  Retrieved from

find the cost of your paper

philosophy13   Schechtman on Revised Personal Identity  Consider Locke’s notion that a single fixed point is required for a person to be themselves – to have a claim to….


Chapter 1 provided a high-level overview of the need for a national framework for protecting critical infrastructure. For some additional reading, take a look at the latest Presidential Order that….

short answer

1. Joseph is a member of team of trainers, community developers, and nutrition specialist that is currently working in rural Cambodia to develop an educational and action program related to….