For planet Earth, these are worrying times. Not least because Myron Ebell, a notorious global warming sceptic, is now leading the effort to flesh out President-elect Donald Trump鈥檚 talk of dismantling US climate change regulation.
Trump and Congressional Republicans campaigned on a pledge to undo all of Barack Obama鈥檚 major climate change-related actions, including rescinding the 鈥渏ob destroying鈥� Environmental Protection Agency rules limiting emissions from coal plants. They have even called for the agency to be abolished. Ebell is overseeing plans for its fate.
Between now and 20 January, when Obama steps aside, Trump, Ebell and the rest of his transition team will also name senior leaders of the federal government鈥檚 major scientific agencies including NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. These political appointees are likely to work with Republicans in Congress to follow through on Trump鈥檚 pledge to eliminate more than $50 billion in 鈥渨asteful climate change spending鈥�.
Advertisement
Event:
Sarah Palin, who popularised the , is , which sets policy on oil and gas drilling and the development of federal lands.
Behind the scenes at scientific and regulatory agencies, political appointees from the fossil fuel industry and conservative think tanks are likely to block or delay other existing climate change and environmental regulations, to edit or censor scientific agency reports, and to restrict the ability of federal scientists to communicate with the public and the media.
Climate science under attack
Emboldened by Trump having called climate change a 鈥渉oax鈥�, Congressional Republicans are likely to intensify their efforts to intimidate and attack climate scientists, and to demand their private email records.
Over the next few years, if there is any possible silver lining, it will be that other US leaders wake up to the even more profound, dire crisis that the climate now faces. As Trump takes office, there is a need for greater collaboration among centrist green groups and the left flank of the environmental movement, who have been at odds in the past on policy, technologies and strategy.
We can only hope that the threat posed by a Trump presidency brings unity and catalyses a stronger commitment to shared goals, new ideas and the building of a broader movement.
For future presidential candidates, Bernie Sanders set the standard to emulate, demonstrating the commitment we must demand of our politicians. He repeatedly emphasised that climate change was the defining issue of our age and required revolutionary policy to solve, winning huge support among young people.
In Democrat-leaning states such as California, New York and Massachusetts, governors, mayors and state legislators need to demonstrate a similarly courageous resolve to tackle climate change. State and local elected officials must lead the dramatic change we need, or step down 鈥� the stakes are that high.
Action stations
Such action means taking risks by: advocating for carbon taxes and other pricing mechanisms to curb emissions; pouring new revenues into expanding renewable energy; greening cities and transport systems; investing in public education; making agriculture more sustainable; and by considering a bigger role for nuclear energy.
The private sector must also lead, including major banks and insurance companies, manufacturers such as General Electric, tech industry giants such as Google and Facebook, utilities, car-makers, food companies, retailers such as Walmart and Amazon, and the growing wind and solar industries. These and others have staked the future of their businesses around innovation, efficiency and sustainability. Their profits and the stability of the world economy depend on a lower-emission, climate-resilient future.
None of this will be possible unless journalists and major news organisations elevate climate change to the top of the media agenda. We need journalists to step up on this. They must fulfil their professional duty to focus on and cover issues no matter how complex or divisive they are, to replace their cynicism about what is possible with analysis of what is necessary, and to alert the public to what truly matters.
