U.S. President Barack Obama keeps promising he’s going to lower America’s greenhouse gas emissions, linked to climate change.

But by the time his presidency ends on Jan. 20, 2017, U.S. energy-related emissions will have increased in every year of his second term of office, from 2013 to 2016.

Yes, you read that right.

That means Obama will be handing his successor, whether a Republican or Democrat, an impossible task when it comes to fulfilling his promise — announced last year with great fanfare as part of a deal with China — to lower U.S. emissions by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2025.

Contrary to the claims we’re bombarded with by environmentalists and Canada’s opposition parties, Obama talks a good game, but hasn’t delivered.

In 2013, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. emissions rose by 2.5%, the fourth-largest annual increase since 1990.

(Canadian emissions increased 1.5% in 2013, according to Environment Canada.)

Since 1990, U.S. emissions have only risen faster in 1996, 2000 and 2010 compared to 2013.

In 2014, U.S. emissions rose another 1%.

The EIA predicts emissions will increase “slightly” in 2015 and 2016 by 0.1% a year.

It took the U.S. 10 years, from 2005 to 2015, to reduce its emissions to 10% below 2005 levels.

That means Obama’s successor will have to cut emissions by at least 16% to 18%, in nine years — almost double the rate of Obama’s presidency — to achieve Obama’s promised 2025 target.

Even reaching Obama’s less ambitious target of cutting emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 — announced before his non-binding deal with China — will be a huge challenge.

In that case, the next president will have to cut emissions by 7% in four years, compared to the 10 it took to reduce them by 10%.

None of this is surprising.

Under Obama, the U.S. has become the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas, surpassing Saudi Arabia and Russia, respectively.

U.S. coal exports, the dirtiest fossil fuel, are at record levels.

North America’s dirtiest oil doesn’t come from Canada’s oilsands — despite Obama’s refusal to approve the Keystone XL pipeline — but from California.

Obama has boasted about laying enough oil and gas pipeline during his presidency to more than encircle the Earth.

He isn’t the only leader whose promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are hot air.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper also promised to reduce Canada’s emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020.

Since our emissions are 3% below 2005 today, that would mean cutting them by another 14% within five years, which is absurd.

Then again, former PM Jean Chretien promised to reduce Canada’s emissions to an average of 6% below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.

When the Liberals lost power in 2006, they were 30% over that target.

Harper would have had to wreck our economy to achieve it.

But while other political leaders are criticized for missing unrealistic targets, Obama is lauded as a green saint in Canada.

It’s nonsense, and something to keep in mind at the next UN meeting on climate change in Paris in November.

That ‘s when Obama, a lame-duck president, will again be falsely praised as a jolly green giant at a meeting to set new global emission reduction targets, which will again be ignored.