From day one, my administration has made it a top priority to ensure that America has among the very cleanest air and cleanest water on the planet. We want the cleanest air. We want crystal clean water. And that’s what we’re doing.
These are laudable goals and central to the Environmental Protection Agency’s mandate since its inception almost 50 years ago. They’re also at odds with the broad thrust of the administration’s actual policies. But they are potentially politically useful.
The environmental issue dominating discussion is climate change. Yet this barely got a few mentions in either Trump’s remarks or those of the other officials who spoke, including EPA chief Andrew Wheeler and Energy Secretary Rick Perry. The White House fact sheet had exactly one bullet point on it, noting U.S. carbon emissions had increased in 2018 but were forecast to decline again this year and next.
People care about the environment in general, but carbon emissions are a tougher sell. Invisible, diffuse and acting on climate at a glacial pace, they lack the poisonous immediacy of, say, a flaming Cuyahoga River or choking urban smog. Mobilizing action on climate change would be much easier if carbon dioxide was a bilious green.
Even so, climate change has forced its way onto the political agenda, thanks in part to the sheer audacity of the “Green New Deal” and growing awareness of fires and floods around the U.S., including recent deluges in Washington, D.C. (both factors name-checked by Trump in his remarks). And as demands for government to do something on climate change have both intensified and broadened in scope, so previous opponents of action have begun to reposition themselves, including oil majors and even senior Republican politicians.
A recent Gallup poll of attitudes toward environmental issues found 65% of Americans think environmental protection should take priority even if it risks curbing economic growth, versus just 30% with opposite priorities. That spread has been widening since 2015 and is now the widest since 2000. Meanwhile, 59% of respondents view Trump as doing a “poor job” of protecting the nation’s environment, compared with 33% for President Barack Obama and 43% for President George W. Bush at the same stage of their administrations.
Trump’s remarks should be set in this context as well as the record of his administration. Since his presidential campaign, the president has shown no real interest in curbing U.S. carbon emissions, in keeping with a broader approach that prioritizes fossil-fuel production and curtails regulatory powers. Among other things, he trumpets “energy dominance” built on shale oil and gas as well as rolling back fuel-efficiency standards that could provide more sustainable energy security for the U.S. (and cut emissions). He is particularly given to waxing lyrical about “beautiful”, “clean” coal, despite it being neither of those things.
Focusing instead on “clean” air and water provides a way of showing interest in environmental issues without dirtying his hands on climate change. It isn’t uncommon to hear fuel producers talk about “clean” fuels without acknowledging that, even with fewer particulates or other nasties, burning that fuel still puts carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Above all, it’s a useful term denoting responsible stewardship unless you are of a mind to look at the details.
That same Gallup poll asked respondents about their attitudes toward a series of environmental threats. Climate change worried 44% of them a “great deal,” up from 37% before Trump’s election. Another 21% said it worried them a “fair amount,” so almost two-thirds are concerned to some degree. That’s a solid majority.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
TICTOC ON SOCIAL:
Follow TicToc on Twitter:
Like TicToc on Facebook:
Follow TicToc on Instagram:
Watch all of TicToc’s videos:
Listen to TicToc’s podcast:
Subscribe to our newsletter:
TicToc by Bloomberg is global news for the life you lead. We are a 24/7 news network that covers breaking news, politics, technology, business and entertainment stories from around the globe, supported by a network of Bloomberg’s 2,700 journalists across 120 countries.
0 Comments