“That’s a powerful signal to the market that they better continue to adjust their investment decisions and their production to meet the standards under this amendment,” said Durwood Zaelke, president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, an advocacy group in Washington.
The United States has not yet ratified the measure, nor has the Trump administration said whether it plans to. The United States is one of the world’s biggest makers of HFCs, and if it fails to ratify the agreement, it could potentially hinder the ability of American companies to sell coolants to other countries that have ratified the agreement.
“Now the question is, will the U.S. ratify the amendment so American chemical companies can gain full access to new global markets for replacement chemicals,” said Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser.
China, a leading manufacturer of household appliances that contain HFCs, hasn’t yet ratified it either, but is expected to, Mr. Zaelke said.
According to the treaty, rich countries are to start phasing out HFCs by 2019, while lower-income countries have more time.
Achim Steiner, head of the United Nations Development Program, said in a September 2017 speech that a drawdown of HFCs, according to the Kigali Amendment, “could avoid up to 0.5°C of global warming by the end of the century — making it one of the single largest opportunities to reduce emissions.”
Environment ministers from a group of countries championing the ban on HFCs applauded those that ratified the treaty to cross the 20-country threshold. They include Britain, Canada, and…