During the holiday season there was no respite.
The international press and bloggers have been asking a lot of questions about Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House.
Two axes were privileged: the impact of customs duties on global activity and the evolution of international relations, in particular tensions that could be exacerbated between China and the United States. An FT article last weekend set the tone, indicating that according to Xi, not implementing retaliation for American measures would be interpreted as a sign of weakness.

Yet that’s not the angle that has me most concerned.
A January 2 Wall Street Journal article suggests that 2025 could be the year the carbon neutrality goal ends. This target, set for 2050 in Europe and the United States and for 2060 in China, reflects the need to no longer emit net carbon into the atmosphere by that date.
In the WSJ article, the arguments put forward are the cost in jobs, the constraints caused for the consumer and the complexity of management for companies. And to quote an OECD study (OECD Employment Outlook 2024) indicating that the energy transition would destroy millions of jobs. The OECD also indicates that millions of jobs will be created as with all technological transformations.
The WSJ criticizes the gap between job destruction and creation, indicating that ultimately convergence towards carbon neutrality could only take place with a significant drop in income and that consequently no one could wish for such an outcome.
Up to future generations to find solutions to climate issues.

The WSJ is generally not very hostile to the Republican camp and one can fear that this position is that of the tenant of the White House.
In this form of radical change, it should be noted that Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley have left the Net Zero Banking Alliance (a group of banks in favor of convergence towards neutrality) since the election of November 5.

This change in the perception of climate issues, frankly stated in the USA, is not an American specificity. In October 2024, a survey by “Parlons Climat” for France showed that the share of climate skeptics was between 35 and 43% of those questioned according to various methods compared to 20 to 32% in 2020.
As climate events multiply and the points of no return increase due to global warming, this wave of skepticism and questioning forces us to rethink our strategies because we cannot take the risk of making our children bear all the problems under the pretext that it would cost us too much.
Source The Wall Street Journal Joseph C. Sternberg –
Link: https://on.wsj.com/3C9yXON