The article is not about AGW. 

You note that China supports the Paris Agreement. This has anything to do with the arguments presented. Guilt by association is not an effective refutation. 'If they believe it to be true it must be wrong'. Not necessarily. Both Trump and Trudeau support the Keystone Pipeline. They could be both right or both wrong. Whether or not a policy is good or bad is not based on the advocates but rather on the arguments presented by the advocates.

There are certainly benefits to carbon. We have, as a civilization, seen a tremendous increase in prosperity, but fossil fuel use as an inherent right of a citizen is clearly not correct. I do not think you would advocate going back to the coal system of heating that lead to the Great London Smog. Smog in California was unacceptable. In both cases governments needed to curtail citizens right to use of carbon. I do not think that these measure were counterproductive. Do you?