Data collected by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication show that almost 75% of Americans believe climate change is happening, and a similar majority believes it will harm plants and animals as well as future generations of humans.
If Donald Trump were to be elected this November, what would the American people have voted for when it comes to addressing global warming and environmental degradation?
This question is most urgent as the world approaches several likely tipping points for catastrophic changes affecting human society.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that climate change is a “make-believe problem, nonexistent, and a hoax.”
While Trump was president, he dismantled or reversed more than 100 environmental protections and rules put in place by the Obama administration governing clean air, water, wildlife, and toxic chemicals.
Trump plans to “drill, baby drill” and extract “the liquid gold that is right under our feet” to burn more oil, gas, and coal. He’d open areas currently off limits to drilling, such as the Arctic.
Trump aims to greenlight “the construction of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of brand-new, beautiful power plants that actually work” and grant more fossil fuel subsidies.
President Biden’s policies for cutting pollution from fossil-fuel-burning power plants would be canceled. (They are responsible for a quarter of the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the United States.)
Much of the Inflation Reduction Act, including the clean energy credits signed into law in 2022, would be gutted. (It is the nation’s largest investment in fighting climate change and contributing to major green job booms around the country.)
Trump would dismantle the carbon capture tax credit that allows fossil fuel-burning plants to remain active while also reducing emissions. He’d gut the program to assist cash-strapped nuclear reactors at a time when some of his fellow Republicans are touting nuclear power as an alternative fuel source to oil, gas, and coal.
Trump vows to withdraw from international climate agreements such as the United Nations COP29 and the Paris Agreement (for a second time), repeal Biden’s electric car mandates, and scuttle key programs like the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (a source of grants for climate tech venture capital investors).
Trump, however, presently lacks unanimous support of House Republicans; some members are adamant about working on policies alongside Democrats to combat climate change while also protecting the economic prosperity of the United States.
Among the stalwart Republican members dedicated to confronting climate change, building up climate resiliency and addressing natural resource conservation are Reps. John Curtis (Utah), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), and Marc Molinaro (N.Y.). Even former House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy is credited with having created an opening for his party to move away from climate science denialism.
Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), whom McCarthy put in charge of the Conservative Climate Caucus, said, “It would be a huge mistake for Republicans to forgo, give up or cave on this fight, because the data and the science on this issue are so much on our side, and I think it’s a battle we should actually lean into.”
Were Trump to implement his policies, it is estimated that 4 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions would be added to the atmosphere placing Americans’ health at the mercy of polluters and badly damaging the effort to address the climate crisis while alienating America’s allies on this front.
U.S. voters will soon get the chance to vote for two candidates who have very different views about what stewardship of the environment entails. However, there is one important caveat: The results of this election will have an impact on all citizens everywhere around the world.
Dr. William Kolbe, an Andover resident, is a retired high school and college teacher, former Peace Corps volunteer in Tonga and El Salvador. He can be reached at bila.kolbe9@gmail.com.