Money and Politics: The Drive for Climate Change Action

[Sigmetnow]

Silkman wrote:  "Sigmetnow, this story fortunately relates to the Welsh Assembly, not Westminster.”


Thank you for the clarification! 

Smaller entities (cities, states, countries) often surprise us with their goals and successes.  A little protest can go a long way. 

[Sigmetnow]

Re comment #498 above:

Bill McKibben: 

The Democratic energy platform is essentially the opposite of what Obama's done the last 8 years. Because science changes, policy must too

https://twitter.com/billmckibben/status/751954114028957697

No more all of the above. No more bridge to the future. Sun and wind are now above natural gas

https://twitter.com/billmckibben/status/751952026217619460

[skanky]

UK assigns climate skeptic to head climate change committee

UKIP to chair assembly climate change committee despite scepticism

Wales Green Party leader Alice Hooker-Stroud said putting a UKIP politician in charge of a climate change committee was "absolutely ridiculous".

"It makes a complete mockery of Welsh politics and today I am ashamed to be governed by a group that could make this decision," she said.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-36651136

Sigmetnow, this story fortunately relates to the Welsh Assembly, not Westminster.

That said, anything is possible should the increasingly odious Andrea Leadsom become our next Prime Minister with the support of the climate sceptic right wing of the Tory party!

Wales, of course, is a country the size of, well, Wales😊. However, they did unlike England, get to the semi-finals of the EURO 2016 football tournament, just edging out the mighty Iceland in the process.

Good things sometimes come in small parcels, it seems.

In the post Brexit gloom here, just 35 miles from the Welsh border, we could do with some good things right now.

Things change quickly, but the latest is that, with May's new cabinet, DECC no longer exists and instead Energy has now become part of the Business department, while Leadsome is the Environment minister. Something tells me that neither of those will be positive moves. :/

[Sigmetnow]

U.S.:  Amazing to think (Republican) conservatives used to strongly support conservation. President Nixon created the EPA!

Republican platform, which calls coal ‘clean’, would reverse decades of U.S. energy and climate policy
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/07/19/gop-platform-which-calls-coal-clean-would-utterly-reverse-decades-of-u-s-energy-and-climate-policy/

[Sigmetnow]

Hillary Clinton has chosen former Virginia governor Tim Kaine to run as her Vice President.  He has fought for the environment -- but has also supported off-shore drilling and natural gas.

Hillary Clinton's Choice of Kaine as VP Tilts Ticket Toward Political Center

Hillary Clinton's choice of Sen. Tim Kaine as her running mate was largely considered a safe political choice, adding a moderate Democrat from the swing state of Virginia to her ticket. Kaine has mostly shared Clinton's views on climate and clean energy, but his selection unsettled those who wanted a vice president with more appeal to ardent environmentalists who flocked to Bernie Sanders' campaign.

Groups like the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation came out strongly in his support, but others such as 350.org and Climate Hawks Vote were more skeptical. The latter summed up its view in one terse, laconic word: "Meh."

According to the green group 350.org, "Tim Kaine won't energize the climate base, so it's up to Hillary to start staking out some clearer positions."

The League of Conservation Voters, however, celebrated the decision, calling Kaine "an environmental leader." The Sierra Club called it "the strongest environmental ticket we've ever seen."

"Kaine has not yet earned the support of climate voters," said RL Miller, cofounder of Climate Hawks Vote, in a statement. "Kaine might be a fledgling climate hawk - this month he participated in the Web of Denial speech-a-thon, calling out the fossil-fuel industry's decades of climate deception. But Kaine needs to stop advocating for clean coal, fracked gas, and offshore oil, and start advocating for clean solar and offshore wind, if he wants the United States to be the clean energy superpower of the world."

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22072016/hillary-clinton’s-choice-kaine-vp-tilts-ticket-toward-political-center

[Sigmetnow]

Fossil Fuel Money Still a Dry Well for Trump Campaign

Six weeks after Trump appeared before petroleum producers in North Dakota and made a speech that seemed tailor-made to win their support, the fossil fuel industry appears to remain on the sidelines in the presidential campaign.

Trump promised to scrap the Obama administration's climate plan and environmental regulations, open up federal lands to drilling, and revive the Keystone XL pipeline project—themes echoed in the GOP platform. Still, the oil and gas industry, historically a top backer of GOP presidential candidates, had forked over relatively little by the end of June to Trump's campaign or to the Super PACs that support him, financial disclosures filed late Wednesday night show.
...
Another factor dampening giving: They don't think he's going to win. They don't want to be seen pouring money into Trump's campaign, and then be left with Hillary Clinton in charge.
...
... Charles Koch told a business conference that a contest between Trump and Clinton would be like a "choice between cancer and a heart attack."

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22072016/donald-trump-fossil-fuel-campaign-contributions-republican-oil-money


Also:
Mike Pence considers bailing on Koch summit
Trump’s running mate had planned to appear at a Koch brothers’ donor gathering, but now might cancel.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/mike-pence-koch-summit-trump-226165

[Sigmetnow]

Democratic Platform Calls For WWII-Scale Mobilization To Solve Climate Crisis
By Joe Romm

This month, the full Democratic Platform Committee approved the strongest statement about the urgent need for climate action ever issued by a major party in this country.
...
[The Democratic Party] has finally embraced the blunt — and scientifically accurate — language of climate hawks as to what those measures actually entail:

We believe the United States must lead in forging a robust global solution to the climate crisis. We are committed to a national mobilization, and to leading a global effort to mobilize nations to address this threat on a scale not seen since World War II. In the first 100 days of the next administration, the President will convene a summit of the world’s best engineers, climate scientists, policy experts, activists, and indigenous communities to chart a course to solve the climate crisis.

James Hansen, America’s leading climatologist, and his colleagues have been make such a call for a while. In 2008, in The Open Atmospheric Science Journal, they explain why the effort needed is “herculean, yet feasible when compared with the efforts that went into World War II.” So have activists like 350.org founder, Bill McKibben. McKibben is on the 15-member Platform Drafting Committee — as is Neera Tanden, who is President and CEO of the Center for American Progress (CAP) and the CAP Action Fund (where I have worked for 10 years), and as is Carol Browner, who is a former EPA Administrator and on the CAP Board.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/22/3801094/democratic-platform-climate-wwii-mobilization/

[Sigmetnow]

Carbon Brief has collected the climate and energy views of the candidates, their vice presidents, their energy advisors and their parties’ platforms in an interactive grid. This will be constantly updated as the election approaches:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/us-election-tracker-republicans-democrats-energy-climate

[Sigmetnow]

Article and TED Talk video.

Voting With Our Dollars And Investing In Change

“Today we have more choices and more opportunity to make our voices heard than ever before,” says Audrey Choi, head of Morgan Stanley’s Institute for Sustainable Investing. And collectively, we have the power to change the way companies and other institutions approach environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues. Finance, she says, “can be one of the most powerful forces for positive social change at our disposal – if we ask it to be.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/morganstanley/2016/06/06/voting-with-our-dollars-and-investing-in-change/

[Sigmetnow]

The Houston Chronicle, in the heart of Oil Country in a deeply Republican State, endorses Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, on every issue they examine.

We could go on with issues, including her plans for sensible gun safety and for combatting terrorism - her policy positions are laid out in detail on her campaign web site - but issues in this election are almost secondary to questions of character and trustworthiness. We reject the "cartoon version" of Hillary Clinton (again to borrow her husband's phrase) in favor of a presidential candidate who has the temperament, the ability and the experience to lead this nation.

http://www.chron.com/opinion/recommendations/article/For-Hillary-Clinton-8650345.php

[wili]

"The Houston Chronicle, in the heart of Oil Country in a deeply Republican State, endorses Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, on every issue they examine."

...which suggests, does it not, that she is now essentially a Republican (or at least what would have up until a few months ago been recognizable as a mainstream Republican)?

[Sigmetnow]

"The Houston Chronicle, in the heart of Oil Country in a deeply Republican State, endorses Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, on every issue they examine."

...which suggests, does it not, that she is now essentially a Republican (or at least what would have up until a few months ago been recognizable as a mainstream Republican)?

I would say it is more that the Houston Chronicle is leaning more Democratic. 

There are a couple issues (Wall Street, fracking) important to Republicans where Hillary Clinton is not yet fully aligned with the Democratic playbook.  But I don't think anyone would call her Republican, in any sense of the word.  My hope is that she is hanging onto those issues in order to be acceptable to enough Republicans to get their vote in November -- then will progress to the Democratic party line.

[sidd]

"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

[Sigmetnow]

Citizens Climate Lobby:  Want climate action? Tweet your reps to join the bipartisan U.S. Congress Climate Solutions Caucus  http://citizensclimatelobby.org/climate-solutions-caucus/

https://twitter.com/citizensclimate/status/763540508065067008

[Sigmetnow]

Washington D.C. Pension Fund Announces Full Fossil Fuel Divestment
The nation's capital had pledged to make its largest public pension fund's $6.4 billion in investments more socially responsible.

The largest public pension fund in Washington, D.C. has purged its $6.4 billion fund of all direct holdings in fossil fuels, city council members and climate activists announced Monday.

The District of Columbia Retirement Board (DCRB) spent the last few years quietly selling off $6.5 million in oil, natural gas and coal investments, amounting to a mere one-tenth of 1 percent of the organization's total holdings, but made the public announcement at a press conference on Monday.

While other American cities including San Francisco have pledged to clear their pension funds of fossil fuels, Washington D.C. may be the largest fund in the nation to complete this step, though the amount divested was small. The DCRB joins more than 500 cities, philanthropies, universities and other organizations worldwide with assets totaling more than $3.4 trillion that have divested from at least some fossil fuels or pledged to do so.

"This is a decision that is morally and ethically the right thing" from a climate perspective, said D.C. council member Charles Allen at a recent press conference. "It is also financially the right thing," he added.

Some of the companies culled from the D.C. pension fund include Peabody Energy and Arch Coal, which both filed for bankruptcy this year, as well as ExxonMobil Inc., an oil giant being investigated by several attorneys general for possibly misleading the public and shareholders on the business risks associated with climate change.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06062016/washington-dc-pension-fund-announces-divestment

[Sigmetnow]

Hillary Clinton's climate army

Hillary Clinton has assembled a virtual army of formal and informal advisers on energy, the environment and climate change — and the names on the list indicate she fully aims to continue President Barack Obama's push to green the economy and take on global warming.

The team of nearly 100 informal advisers, who have spent the past year compiling recommendations on everything from chemical safety and Everglades restoration to nuclear power and climate finance, includes holdovers from the Obama administration such as former White House advisers Carol Browner and Heather Zichal.

Besides offering a rough picture of who might claim high-level jobs in her administration, the massive collection of Clinton advisers contrasts sharply with Trump's campaign, which is relying on just a few outside experts such as Oklahoma oilman Harold Hamm to help chart his energy agenda.
...
Along with climate change, the campaign is also expected to make a major general election theme out of environmental justice, which focuses on the way environmental problems such as dirty air and water disproportionately affect poor and minority communities.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/hillary-clinton-climate-team-226930

[Sigmetnow]

Wind Takes Center Stage in Vermont Governor's Race
Sue Minter's victory in the Democratic primary came over an opponent of big wind projects. She now faces another anti-wind Republican opponent in November.

The issue of wind power began to take an outsized role in the primary after Matt Dunne, a leading candidate, switched his position on the siting of new turbines on July 29, just 10 days before the primary.

That was followed by  a debate among the three leading candidates on Aug. 4 that opened with a discussion on wind power that consumed nearly a quarter of the entire, 50-minute debate.

"Large-scale ridgeline wind projects should only take place with the approval of the towns where the projects are located," Dunne said in a press release.  "As governor, I will ensure that no means no."

Two days later, Bill McKibben, a leading international environmental activist who lives in Vermont, withdrew his support for Dunne and endorsed Minter.

"Towards the end of last Friday afternoon, something happened that convinced me I'd made a mistake," McKibben said in a statement. "Wind power is not the only, or even the most important, energy issue of the moment. But it is important. And its importance means [a] candidate's basic positions on it shouldn't shift overnight."

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11082016/wind-power-vermont-governor-sue-minter-matt-dunne-phil-scott

[AbruptSLR]

The linked New Yorker editorial concludes that while denialist may confuse some of people, they never fool Mother Nature; and time is slipping away to take effective climate change action:

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/space-climate-change-and-the-real-meaning-of-theory

[budmantis]

Great article, thanks for posting.

[AbruptSLR]

The linked article in the Rupert Murdoch controlled WSJ was written by US White House representatives (Mr. Deese is a senior adviser to President Obama. Mr. Zients is director of the White House’s National Economic Council).  While it seems obvious that the global market place should standardize its climate risk disclosure process, I image that market pressures will force the recognized risk to match lukewarmer assessments (like Moody's $2 Trillion in bond risk) rather than the true risks, which will bring the international market place to its knees between 2050 & 2060 (even considering likely extensions to the Paris Pact):

http://www.wsj.com/articles/enlist-the-market-in-the-climate-change-fight-1471561052

Extract: "Enlist the Market in the Climate-Change Fight -
Standardized disclosure of climate risk will help secure long-term value for investors and taxpayers
…
Whether you are an investor assessing the $2 trillion in bonds that Moody’s found carry elevated near-term climate risk, one of the nearly two million U.S. homeowners facing significant risk from climate-related flooding, or a U.S. taxpayer staring at $360 billion in direct government costs from extreme weather over the past decade—these threats are looming, large and increasing.
This year’s World Economic Forum Global Risks Report declared the “failure of climate-change mitigation and adaptation” the “risk with the greatest potential impact in 2016.” Yet financial markets suffer from an alarming lack of standardized and comparable climate-risk information, which keeps investors and policy makers from accurately incorporating these risks into their decisions. Combating climate change requires not only leveraging bold action by governments to cut carbon pollution, but also harnessing the power of market forces with clear, uniformly disclosed assessments of climate-related economic risks.
…
The good news is there is a broad and growing bipartisan consensus for these types of aggressive actions, including from major global companies, former Republican and Democrat U.S. Treasury secretaries, and large institutional investors representing trillions of dollars in capital. Yet some Republicans in Congress continue to advocate for a strategy of keeping taxpayers and investors in the dark by preventing the government from updating flood standards or enforcing disclosure of common-sense information to the public.

The stakes for our economy are too high to stand still or move backward. This is the moment to accelerate efforts to understand, measure and standardize disclosure of climate risk and put that understanding to use. Doing so will help to secure long-term value for investors and taxpayers; improve market efficiency and stability; strengthen the resilience of our communities; and help the world combat climate change."

[Sigmetnow]

"Pretending that climate change isn’t real was politically expedient in the past. Today it’s dangerous for millions of Americans, and it dooms the Republican Party to irrelevance in climate discussions."
As Louisiana floods rage, Republicans are blocking modest climate action
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/19/louisiana-floods-climate-legislation-nepa-republican-opposition

[AbruptSLR]

Jerry Brown has scored a major victory in California in the fight against climate change:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-pol-sac-california-climate-change-assembly-vote-20160824-snap-story.html

Extract: "A controversial measure to extend California’s target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions was approved by the Assembly on Tuesday, clearing a major hurdle in a battle at the Capitol over the future of the state’s environmental programs.

White House officials and Gov. Jerry Brown cranked up the pressure on Assembly members to support the legislation, while oil industry lobbyists huddled with sympathetic lawmakers in an attempt to stall an effort that once seemed unlikely to gain traction this year.


The legislation would require slashing greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, an easier target than the current goal of hitting 1990 levels by 2020.

[Sigmetnow]

BBC News looks at climate change in the U.S. presidential race, and how it plays out in the swing state of Ohio.

Global warming and the race for the White House
Two starkly different visions of global warming are offered by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in their race for the White House.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37034052

[sidd]

The bbc article about ohio could use some detail.

Robert Murray, the coal magnate interviewed is a blowhard and ohioans know it. The EPA is not universally hated, there are people around the bend in the river who DuPont systematically poisoned with C8 and other chemicals, the coal industry ruined their air and water. They know exactly what industry has done to them. If anything, they blame the EPA for not acting sooner.

Toledo, which is distinctly more than "a hundred miles west," is far from the sunny solarpowered city it is implied to be. Toledo is deep in the rust belt, was whacked in the seventies, the nineties, in the 2000s and the city is closing down whole blocks.

The biggest population centers are Cleveland, Columbus and Cinci. The last is still quite segregated, has a huge police corruption/violence problem and is republican. Columbus is democrat, as is Cleveland. 

Both Clinton and Trump are held in contempt throughout the state. Bernie supporters have peeled away to Jill Stein in Columbus, and seem to have quit caring/will not vote in Cleveland. In Cinci, I suspect regardless of repub governor Kasich dislike of Trump they will hold their nose and vote for him. Dayton and Appalachian ohio, likewise. Smaller towns like Youngstown, Mansfield, Canton (more rustbelt stories)  have seen thousands of previously democratic voters register republican this year.

I think turnout will be low all over ohio, and the state will eventually not matter as much as is thought. But i could be wrong.

sidd

[budmantis]

It may turn out as you say SIDD because Hillary has a lot of unfavorables working against her. However, Kasich is highly regarded and I think and hope that Ohio will be in her column. However it ends up, Ohio's electoral votes will be very important in putting the successful candidate over the top. I'm in Florida and I'll be holding my nose while voting for Hillary, because a Trump presidency is unimaginable. If Hillary does win, It is quite possible that her term will face as much scrutiny as her husband's. I'm hoping that will not be the case.

[Sigmetnow]

Thanks for the details, sidd.

The "experts" currently call Ohio a toss-up state, with a slight Democratic edge.  Will be interesting to see how it goes in the weeks ahead.

[sidd]

Clinton will see more difficulty in Pennsylvania than ohio. Time was, Pittsburgh and Philly were solidly democratic and the rest of the state was republican. This year i see the entire west of PA going trump, even in Pittsburgh, Clinton appears weak. As she does in just across the river  in ohio in little towns like Steubenville. She will have to win big in eastern PA, but it will have to be in the belt from Harrisburg to Philly in the southeast, since even in eastern towns like Scranton (Biden hometown) and Allentown sentiment seems against her. But the southeast is the most populous, so it may be enough.

Amish, as usual, sitting out in both PA and OH.

sidd

[ghoti]

For those still wondering about the presidential "race" you should visit the Princeton Election Consortium http://election.princeton.edu/

Top of the page summary shows this isn't a race anymore.

Also OH is showing +4% for Clinton and PA +9% for Clinton on the sidebar today.

[sidd]

Re: OH, PA presidential polling

Agreed that Clinton leads current polls.

But, I'm not polling. I'm telling you what i see and hear on the road in OH and PA. I talk to a lot of people, including long and short haul drivers, who talk to people too.

What i can tell you is that a majority are angry this election season to an extent i have not seen before. Are they angry enuf to take the time to go vote ? No clue. But most of the angry people will vote Trump if they vote.

sidd

[budmantis]

Sidd:

There are a lot of angry people out there. In Florida, I've encountered many as well but I'm wondering if these represent a broad cross-section of voters or if they are more representative of a certain demographic.

Personal observation; it is my opinion that if the democrats had a better candidate, a landslide would be the outcome in November. OTOH, if the republicans had a moderate candidate, perhaps like John Kasich, I think he would win by a comfortable margin against Clinton.

[TerryM]

FWIW
Bill was the first, (and still only), President to be elected that I would have been excited to voted for. My initial hope was that Hillary would have been the nominee back in 2008 and that she would be ending her second term this November.
Hillary's words and actions over the last few years have given me pause. I hope my fears are just a reaction to the negatives pushed by the far right.


For most I'm afraid that this election will be about voting against the Greater Evil, a roll Trump seems born for.
Terry

[budmantis]

I know a few people who would have voted for Hillary in 2008, but now they're voting for Trump.

[Sigmetnow]

Tweet from @HillaryClinton includes the image below:

The choice in November: a president with real plans to combat climate change—or one who calls it a hoax.
https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/770432675672887296

[Sigmetnow]

By wide margin, Florida voters add solar tax break to state Constitution

The runaway winner in Tuesday’s primary election was at the end of the ballot, as voters in Florida overwhelmingly approved a tax break to encourage businesses to go solar.

The amendment, which will become part of the Florida Constitution, exempts solar and other renewable energy devices on business and industrial property from property taxes for 20 years. The same tax break already exists for residential property owners.

The amendment also exempts renewable energy devices from Florida’s tangible personal property tax.

Amendment 4, the only ballot question in Tuesday’s primary, won more than 70 percent of the vote, according to early returns by the Florida Division of Elections.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article98929157.html

[ghoti]

Might be more effective to pass a measure preventing the monopoly utility from charging excessive fees to customers that have solar PV systems. The preferred method of killing solar in several states.

[mati]

Texas is a fine place to drill for help on climate denial. A recent Texas Public Policy Foundation  (TPPF)T Austin conference attracted oil/coal executives,  economists, lawyers,  think tankers and perhaps potential funders. Peabody Energy “donated” $40K to TPPF during 2014-2015, according to recent bankruptcy documents (p.776).
Politicians included Senator Ted Cruz  by video, and in person, Attorney General Ken Paxton, Senate Majority Whip John Corbyn and Rep. Lamar Smith.

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/08/05/will-happer-drills-for-support-with-lamar-smith-ted-cruz

[sidd]

tomdispatch.com is worth reading regularly. The latest is

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176183/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_a_9_11_retrospective%3A_washington%27s_15-year_air_war/

His fourth point on American Jihad is,  I think, the most perceptive  but the worst argued.

[Sigmetnow]

tomdispatch.com is worth reading regularly. The latest is

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176183/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_a_9_11_retrospective%3A_washington%27s_15-year_air_war/

His fourth point on American Jihad is,  I think, the most perceptive  but the worst argued.

Must add an asterisk * to his "75% success rate" of the 9/11 attacks:  we don't know how many other potential hijackers were thwarted by the rapid, quickly-accomplished (and safely successful!) shutdown of the entire U.S. airspace, begun minutes after the first attacks, along with the "cockpit intrusion" warnings sent by carriers and Air Traffic Control to planes in flight.

[AbruptSLR]

The linked article is entitled: "Chevron’s Lobbyist Now Runs the Congressional Science Committee"

http://www.republicreport.org/2014/chevron-science-committee/

Extract: "With little fanfare, one of Chevron’s top lobbyists, Stephen Sayle, has become a senior staff member of the House Committee on Science, the standing congressional committee charged with “maintaining our scientific and technical leadership in the world.”"

[Sigmetnow]

Boston University to divest coal, tar sands oil investments

In a letter to members of the BU community, university President Robert A. Brown said the board's Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Investing proposed, and the board agreed, that “the university should, within its endowment, prohibit new and divest of any existing direct investments in those companies that continue to explore for new fossil fuel reserves of any kind … or extract coal and tar sands.”

Mr. Brown added: “The endowment investment office should seek to include managers who specialize and have expertise in renewable energy sources and/or technologies focused on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.”

http://www.pionline.com/article/20160921/ONLINE/160929970/boston-university-to-divest-coal-tar-sands-oil-investments

[Sigmetnow]

HOW THE REACTION TO TRUMP COULD BE GOOD FOR THE CLIMATE
Mark Pischea, a Republican political strategist based in Michigan, agreed. “We don’t really talk about climate change overtly—not because we’re afraid to but because it’s not that relevant,” he said. At this point, Pischea added, there are enough reasons to persuade conservatives of the need for clean energy—the economy, national security, faith, their grandchildren’s health—that engaging them on science isn’t productive. Instead, according to Dozier, climate-conscious conservatives are trying to “change the narrative from one of a dire emergency to an opportunity for solving a challenge.”
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-the-reaction-to-trump-could-be-good-for-the-climate

[Sigmetnow]

Marco Rubio Once Again Denies Climate Change as Florida’s King Tides Inundate Streets
(Includes video of Del Ray Beach flooding.)

Sen. Marco Rubio refused to acknowledge human-caused climate change at a Florida Senate debate Monday even as a foot of water inundated city streets and sewers throughout South Florida, driven by the annual king tide combined with rising seas.
...
Rubio argued for an "all-of-the-above" energy strategy, including oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear energy, and said he favored mitigation strategies, "if in fact sea levels are rising."

Patrick Murphy, Rubio's Democratic challenger, responded in the debate by saying, "Look out your window, right? There's two or three inches of saltwater on the roads right now. They were not built underwater. Go down to the Florida Keys. The reefs are dying from acidification and bleaching."
...
According to the website Dirty Energy Money, Marco Rubio, who grew up in West Miami, has accepted $637,273 from oil and coal companies and those who promote carbon-based business. Fivethirtyeight.com gives Rubio a 71 percent chance of retaining his Senate seat.

http://www.ecowatch.com/marco-rubio-florida-climate-change-2051834533.html

HuffPost polls put Rubio ahead 48% to 42%.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-florida-senate-rubio-vs-murphy

[Sigmetnow]

The WikiLeaks emails reveal why Hillary Clinton wouldn’t support a carbon tax

During the Democratic primary, one of the major climate policy differences between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton was a carbon tax. He supported one. She didn’t. Now we have a little insight into why, via WikiLeaks’ recent release of thousands of hacked personal emails from Clinton campaign manager John Podesta.

“We have done extensive polling on a carbon tax,” Podesta apparently told Clinton adviser Jake Sullivan back in January 2015. “It all sucks.”

Some of that polling can be found in this leaked presentation by Anzalone Liszt Grove Research to the Clinton campaign dating March 2015. (Note that the campaign has avoided commenting on the veracity of any of the WikiLeaks emails.) The survey found that when people initially heard about a carbon tax, 58 percent supported it. But after hearing more detailed arguments for and against, support plunged to 46 percent....
...
You can see a (hyper-cautious) logic at work here. By and large, Clinton’s climate and energy plan has focused on executive actions she can take as president without the help of Congress — it’s built around the assumption that Republicans in the House and Senate won’t cooperate anytime soon. So it seems the campaign didn’t want to go out on a limb for a policy that wasn’t likely to pass in the next two years and would cost them votes in the general election.

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2016/10/18/13317484/hillary-clinton-carbon-tax-wikileaks

Note:  The chance of Democrats regaining control of the Senate has improved (as Trump drags the GOP down with him) -- it's currently 79%.  There's even a daring bit of optimism about Democrats in the House.

[AbruptSLR]

It looks like the financial sector is starting to acknowledge the systemic risk of climate change to our socio-economic system:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-24/climate-change-may-trigger-next-financial-crisis-fisher-says

Extract: "Climate change could spark the world’s next financial crisis, according to Paul Fisher, who retired this year as deputy head of the Bank of England body which supervises the country’s banks.
“It is potentially a systemic risk,” Fisher said Monday in an interview in Sydney. A sudden repricing of assets as a result of climate change “could be the trigger for the next financial crisis,” he added."

[AbruptSLR]

The San Antonio Express-News has declined to endorse Lamar Smith for re-election, citing his bullying behavior on the issue of climate change:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/10/19/san-antonio-express-news-wont-endorse-lamar-smith-citing-bullying-tactics-climate-change/213928

[Sigmetnow]

The Trump and Clinton campaigns finally had a substantive climate debate

On Tuesday, the University of Richmond School of Law hosted a wide-ranging debate between the two campaigns’ energy advisers. On Team Clinton: Trevor Houser, an analyst at the Rhodium Group. On Team Trump: Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-ND).

The hour-long debate featured its share of depressing nonsense, like when Cramer waffled on whether humans are causing global warming. (Spoiler: They are.) But the discussion was genuinely substantive, and the advisers delved into issues like the Paris climate deal, nuclear power, and (oh yes) transmission policy.

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2016/10/26/13410944/trump-clinton-energy-advisers-debate

[budmantis]

Although this article is not about climate change, it is about money and politics, so I thought this thread was the best fit:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/koch-brothers-campaign-struggles-230325

"Behind the retreat of the Koch brothers' operation".

By Kenneth P. Vogel

[sidd]

The documentary "Before the Flood" is presently available for free viewing at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90CkXVF-Q8M&feature=youtu.be

I don't know how long it is available. I liked it.

sidd

[AbruptSLR]

The linked Rolling Stone article is entitled: "Why Republicans Still Reject the Science of Global Warming", and points-out that is you want to know why the Republican Party denies climate change then you only need to follow the fossil fuel campaign money trail:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/why-republicans-still-reject-the-science-of-global-warming-w448023

Extract: "Only one major political party in the world denies climate change, and it's in charge of the most important political body in the world."

[Sigmetnow]

Clinton Wins, The Next U.S. Energy Secretary Might Be The Current One

The next leader of the Department of Energy might be its current one.

Hillary Clinton is considering keeping Ernest Moniz on as secretary of energy, should she win the presidential election next month, a source familiar with the Clinton campaign’s planning told BuzzFeed News.

Moniz is well-liked by members on both sides of the aisle and keeping him on would allow Clinton to avoid at least one contentious confirmation. He had a brief star turn as the administration’s top salesman on the Iran deal and his memeworthy hair has earned him shoutouts on late-night talk shows.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/dinograndoni/moniz-energy-secretary