Are you denying there is a private right of action under the Clean Air Act which could be used to force the US to abide by the Paris Agreement?

Here is a detailed explanation of how it works: https://elr.info/sites/default/files/articles/13.10309.htm

Yes, that is ipso facto evidence it will cost the US more as there are not analogous provisions in other signatory powers.

Are you denying China doesn't have to cut emissions until 2030? While I don't have the original Mandarin-language statement handy since I haven't used my Chinese in over 10 years, there is agreement in the press on China's commitments. They pledged their carbon dioxide emissions would reach their maximum by around 2030.

Here: http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/01/china-is-sticking-to-the-paris-agreement-in-name-only-their-plans-show-a-much-different-intent/

Here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/asia/chinas-role-in-climate-change-and-possibly-in-fighting-it.html

And, of course, here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/paris-climate-discord-1496272448?mod=e2fb

Considering that Obama already made cuts but was only able to hit 40% of our goal, it does disproportionately hit us because we would have to implement serious, deep and immediate cuts in emissions, whereas China's emissions increase until its "peak" in 2030. That DOES ipso facto hurt us with respect to China.

If that isn't evidence I don't know what is. You're either brain damaged after a fall or intentionally fucking with me.