96 As one observer in Paris put it: “You can also agree that all fairies should also ride unicorns.” Jeff Goodell, Will the Paris Climate Deal Save the World?, Rolling Stone (January 13, 2016), on www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/will-the-paris-climate-deal-save-the-world-20160113?page=2. The Paris Agreement has an “upward” structure unlike most international environmental treaties, which are “top down”, characterized by internationally defined standards and objectives that states must implement.  Unlike its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol, which sets legal commitment targets, the Paris Agreement, which focuses on consensual training, allows for voluntary and national objectives.  Specific climate targets are therefore politically promoted and not legally binding. Only the processes governing reporting and revision of these objectives are imposed by international law. This structure is particularly noteworthy for the United States – in the absence of legal mitigation or funding objectives, the agreement is seen as an “executive agreement, not a treaty.” Since the 1992 UNFCCC treaty was approved by the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to enter into force.  19 At the United Nations signing ceremony on 22 April 2016, 175 countries signed the Paris Agreement, which seems to have most often ever signed an international treaty in a single day. A list of signatories can be accessed at www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/04/parisagreementsingatures/. Only Nicaragua expressed objections to the agreement at the last cop-21 plenary session and at the signing ceremony. See statement by Paul Oquist Kelley, Minister, Private Secretary for National Policy to the President of Nicaragua, at the high-level signing ceremony (22 April 2016) in webtv.un.org/search/paul-oquist-kelley-nicargua-high-level-signature-ceremony-for-the-paris-agreement-national-statements/4858083079001?term=Nicaragua. How each country is on track to meet its obligations under the Paris Agreement can be constantly monitored online (via the Climate Action Tracker  and the climate clock). In addition, countries are working to reach “the global peak in greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible. The agreement has been described as an incentive and engine for the sale of fossil fuels.
  In the end, all parties recognized the need to “prevent, minimize and address losses and damages,” but in particular any mention of compensation or liability is excluded.  The Convention also takes up the Warsaw International Loss and Damage Mechanism, an institution that will attempt to answer questions about how to classify, address and co-responsible losses.  Negotiators of the agreement stated that the INDCs presented at the time of the Paris conference were insufficient. concerned that aggregate greenhouse gas emission estimates for 2025 and 2030, resulting from projected national contributions, are not covered by the most cost-effective scenarios at 2oC, but result in a forecast level of 55 gigatonnes. By 2030, and acknowledging “that much greater efforts will be needed to reduce emissions in order to keep the increase in the average global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or 1.5 degrees Celsius.   [Necessary Clarifications] 200 Z.B., Henrik Selin – Adil Najam, Paris Agreement on Climate Change: Good, Evil and Ugly, The Conversation (14.12.2015), described in theconversation.com/paris-agreement-on-climate-change-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-52242 (and Paris described as “refreshing transparency”).