The president-elect should understand that America needs to shoulder global responsibilities, and that in doing so America will benefit by owning the technologies of the future

On climate change, like so many other things, the world is going one way and Donald Trump is going the other. On Twitter the president-elect has claimed manmade global warming was a hoax invented by China to increase its trade surplus with the US. However, for most Americans, like most other people on the globe, daily life is increasingly impacted by extreme weather. In 2016, for the third year running, the world exceeded the previous record temperature. A remarkable 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have been this century, which scientists attribute to human activities.

President Obama did much to roll back the pre-enlightenment approach to climate science that had polluted political discourse in America – giving global warming top billing during his second term, and even calling it an immediate threat to national security. His parting shot was to send $500m to prop up the Paris international accord to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Mr Trump vowed to renege on the Paris agreement and said he would cancel further payments.

Political leadership has an important role to play, especially when leaders must act now to avert a crisis that will pose the gravest risks long after they have left office. The biggest obstacle to action on climate remains, as it has been for more than 20 years, the US political system which has embedded climate scepticism into public debate. President-elect Trump’s cabinet nominations give rise to big fears and small hopes. His nomination of Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s attorney-general, as head of the Environmental Protection Agency – tasked with reining in fossil fuel pollution – puts a man in charge of an institution he spent years fighting. Mr Pruitt sings a climate-denying tune, claiming scientists continue to disagree about global warming’s “connection to the actions of mankind”.

However, Rex Tillerson, a former oilman nominated as Mr Trump’s secretary of state, favoured remaining in the Paris climate change agreement. He accepted that the risks of climate change exist but downplayed the size of them. This feels closer to Mr Trump’s position. The president-elect’s style lends itself to whimsical dissembling, and the weight of scientific evidence is such that even the Tweeter-in-chief has admitted there is “some connectivity” between human activity and climate change.

There’s no doubt the world will lose out if America decides to relinquish global leadership on battling climate change. But Mr Trump’s fossil fuel plans are likely to flounder without higher hydrocarbon prices. No one will frack for gas unless profits can be made. Coal mines won’t reopen while shale gas is cheap. Instead, self-interest will undergird the fight against global warming. China will decarbonise to ensure its citizens don’t choke to death in its cities. The costs of clean energy are tumbling too, keeping nations on the path towards decarbonisation. The price of electric vehicles is dropping; offshore wind power has become dramatically cheaper. For the first time, the costs of wind and solar power have dropped to match those of fossil fuels. Last year was the first in which renewable energy surpassed coal as the world’s biggest source of power-generating capacity. Countries such as India have ambitious plans for renewable energy. As we report, experts say that the best way for Mr Trump to make America great is to create the well-paid, fulfilling jobs that the “technologies of the future” promise.

If he does not, then there’s a threat made in a language that Mr Trump understands: protectionism. Politicians in nations such as France and Mexico threaten punitive carbon tariffs on American exports if the United States, the world’s second biggest polluter, attempts to free-ride on the efforts of others when it comes to global warming. This would not be a good idea, but the lack of leadership from Mr Trump’s team has engendered worldwide exasperation. With or without the US, the fight against climate change will go on. It’s just that victory will be harder to deliver.