 |
| Donald Trump and RFK Jr have some rather.... interesting thoughts on climate and science |
Which makes the idea of a climate policy under a Trump administration a bit of a fantasy, to say the least.
For one thing, Trump doesn't even think climate change exists, at least most of the time, as his opinion on everything under the sun is a bit of a moving target. He also has some novel thoughts on the concept.
Trump recently said that sea level rise would be great because it would create new oceanfront property.
As any logical person would know, the higher the sea levels, the less land would exist above the water. Continents would be a little bit smaller, which leaves less oceanfront property out there for savvy real estate investors, like Trump imagines himself to be.
To be Captain Obvious here, if sea levels rise a lot, it will remove existing sea front property by submerging it. Land that used to have no beach would suddenly become oceanfront property. You also have to then figure out where those people who used to live on now submerged beach front property would move.
Trump also informs us that the sea level will "rise one-eighth of an inch in the next 400 years."
Um, it's a little more than that, buddy. The sea level actually rise a full third of an inch between 2022 and 2023 and about 3.7 inches in the past 34 years.
I get it that 3.7 inches doesn't sound like much. But on flat sea coasts, it starts to make a big difference. Plus, the rate of sea level rise is accelerating. By 2050, scientists think the sea level will be up 7.9 inches compared to current levels. At that point, you're really starting to talk about the oceans headed inland.
Trump also still tilts at windmills as Kamala Harris noted the other night in the debate. He obsesses over them probably because he's annoyed at Scotland for installling them off the coast of his golf course over there? Not sure....
Meanwhile, back in August Robert Kennedy Jr, having decided to suspend his hapless presidential campaign and is now Donald Trump's problem.
Kennedy went with Trump Mostly because Harris wouldn't give him the time of day, which was probably a smart move.
Kennedy's grasp of science, to put it charitably, is tenuous, which makes the prospect of climate policy, or lack thereof under a Trump administration even worse.
He is even one of those chemtrail nuts. You know the ones, who think those icy water vapor condensation trails from high flying jets are some nefarious plot to spray the global populace with some type of chemical to..... who knows what.
"'We are going to stop this crime,' Kennedy posted on social media... in response to an X (formerly Twitter) account sharing a conspiracy theory video, which claimed that pilots use planes to secretly spray chemicals on unsuspecting populations. These pilots, according to the video are 'hardened to humanity' and 'could car less about killing off unwanted or leeching aspects of American and the world."
Whatever the hell that means.
Harris and Climate
Kamala Harris is quite a bit less, um, eccentric in her attitudes toward climate change.
Her climate policy is still slowly emerging. At least so far, her ideas are not nearly as out of whack as her opponent's positions are, to say the least.
 |
| Kamala Harris' climate positions are still an emerging issue, but at least she's trying to follow the science. She's shown here speaking at the annual UN Climate meeting in Dubai last year. |
She firmly believes climate change exists and is making weather extremes and disasters worse. So that's a refreshing difference from Trump.
I noticed Harris was against fracking back in 2019 when she first ran for president, but now is for it, as she made clear in the debate earlier this week.
This debate was in Pennsylvania, after all, where fracking is small but important.
Harris in 2022 cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the Inflation Reduction Act. Its provisions include several hundred billion dollars in government subsidies for electric vehicles and clean energy technology.
Harris enthusiastically supported President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act which also set up a huge infusion of money into tax credits for clean energy and energy efficient home projects.
She also is framing climate change as a pocketbook issue, citing rising insurance costs in climate disaster prone states as one good reason to combat the problem.
Bottom line: If you're a single issue voter and your single issue is climate change, go with Harris. At least she's coherent.
No comments:
Post a Comment