Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumYoung Republican Environmentalists Disappointed By Complete Absence Of Climate From GQP Platform
EDIT
It is difficult to predict how these and other decisions could affect the level of carbon emissions in Earths atmosphere, the main driver of global warming. But a recent analysis by Carbon Brief, a United Kingdom-based climate policy and science publication, found that a Trump win in November could cause an additional 4 billion metric tons of carbon emissions by 2030 equivalent to the combined annual emissions of the European Union and Japan.
A Republican sweep in Novembers election would avoid congressional roadblocks to Trump rolling back all of Bidens climate legacy, Simon Evans, deputy editor and senior policy editor at Carbon Brief, said in an email. Under those conditions, Trump could push the U.S. towards the extra 4 billion tons of CO2 emissions by 2030 that we modeled and potentially beyond.
At the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee on Monday, the party formally adopted a platform that makes no mention of climate change. Instead, it proclaims that America should DRILL, BABY, DRILL, referring to oil and gas as liquid gold under our feet. By contrast, the draft Democratic Party platform mentions climate or clean energy 141 times, including in a seven-page chapter devoted to climate solutions, according to an analysis by the environmental group Evergreen Action.
Some Republicans who have pushed their party to accept climate change criticized the platform for neglecting the issue. I would have liked to see at least a mention of the Republican legacy of environmental stewardship and conversation, said Chris Barnard, president of American Conservation Coalition Action, a group of young Republicans who support climate action. Barnard noted that polls consistently show climate change ranks as a top concern for younger Republican voters. The party ignores the issue, he said, at its own peril. Our message to Republicans continues to be that they cant just be saying drill, baby, drill, he said.
EDIT
Ed. - Yes, Chris, and people in Hell would like to see ice water. WTF is WRONG with you?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/07/18/republican-election-sweep-climate-policy/
yardwork
(64,332 posts)Charging Triceratops
(310 posts)Like Jews for Jesus, Gypsies for Hitler, and Chickens for the Colonel.
Freethinker65
(11,134 posts)Along with deregulation (self policing of industry and businesses to do the right thing), the Republicans are out to exploit, deplete, and exhaust all public resources they cannot just sell off.
CanonRay
(14,858 posts)Racist /Environmental stripe, or Misogynist/Environmentalist wing?
LW1977
(1,395 posts)Dont be a fking Republican!
Mister Ed
(6,352 posts)If not, they should expect that their party will continue to ignore them.
GreenWave
(9,167 posts)Botany
(72,476 posts)N/t
Lovie777
(15,001 posts)Raven123
(6,037 posts)If my memory is correct, the GOP stopped having any interest in the climate after Nixon, who established the EPA. His understanding of recent history is inaccurate
kansasobama
(1,493 posts)These young environmentalists are just like some pro-choice people who, despite destruction, vote Republican. What can I say if young black male, Hispanics, and others decide they should vote Republican, even if that means dictatorship. It is almost like the nation has lost character.
hatrack
(60,920 posts)They think they can find sweet think-tank and Congressional staff jobs by professing their love for "conservative environmental solutions" (whatever the hell that means).
And they're more than willing to cast off any sense of shame if working with the American Conservation Coalition might help them find those jobs.
Materially there's no difference between these clowns and the Conservative Climate Caucus, another useless talking shop, other than age and photogenic status.
mountain grammy
(27,271 posts)Like the kid on the roof.
ramapo
(4,724 posts)Well...not really. But he thought passing Clean Air, Clean Water and other environmentally friendly laws was good politics.
hatrack
(60,920 posts)He wanted an airport in the middle of the Florida Everglades larger than O'Hare, Los Angeles International, JFK and Dulles combined.
"Nixons public rhetoric on the environment and his private beliefs were very much at odds, as historian and journalist Rick Perlstein has noted. Nixons personal opinions were caught on tape during an Oval Office meeting with automotive executives, when he said that environmentalists wanted to 'go back and live like a bunch of damned animals.'"
https://environmentalhistory.org/2013/01/07/nixon/
He knew which way the wind was blowing as a politician and went along with the wind, but beyond that didn't really give a damn about anything environmental.
ramapo
(4,724 posts)I didn't remember the veto of the CWA just him taking some pro-environment actions cause the wind blew him that way.