Why American Climate Change Policy Isn’t Able to Deal Effectively with the Problem

Early-stage of Hurricane Ida       California Caldor fire

As hurricane after hurricane slams into Atlantic and Gulf coast Southern states, flooding and pushing howling wind-blown massive devastation across the Eastern Seaboard, as wildfires in the western United States consume record breaking mega-acreage and towns, as droughts (really desertification) render increasing farmland dust-ridden and fallow, and as searing heatwaves inflict intolerable and often fatal temperatures plus unsustainable pressures on our power grid, all clearly and scientifically the products of man-induced climate change, you’d think American attitudes would demand climate change action that truly works.

While younger demographics, those individuals who will face the worst of the worst in terms of climate change devastation, are the fiercest proponents of action now, the rest of the nation is not so firmly committed to the necessary expenditures and sacrifices to insure that our planet truly remains habitable. The rising American rejection of medical and scientific evidence, underscored many times over in the remaining vaccine resistance that is so pronounced even to this day as Delta variant casualties and deaths explode in “vaccination lite” regions, tells us the looming climate battle that will be fought for years to come… but will it come too late?

As reinforced in so many of my prior blogs, our system of government effectively gives rural conservative voters de facto control of all major policy decisions. Whether it is the continuous efforts to suppress opposing voters in GOP-controlled states (from making voting difficult for minorities, etc. to simple exclusion through Census manipulation and gerrymandering) or even the structure of our federal legislature (Wyoming, with fewer than 600,000 residents, and California with more than 39 million residents, each have two US Senators, such that 50% of all Senators are now elected by 30% of all voters), the necessary decisions are stymied by the disproportionate power of a conservative minority. The Senate filibuster rule effectively gives a distinct minority the controlled vote. We are the only democracy where a majority vote by the central legislature cannot pass a law. That conservative, often religious fundamentalist minority calls the shots.

Some evangelicals – a bastion of the GOP – believe that that after the “Great Flood” (time of Noah and his ark), God promised the earth that He would never again inflict such a global natural disaster. Thus, the notion that God would allow a massive climate change disaster is simply deemed impossible. This fundamental religious belief, linked with many more used to discredit science, is reflected in statistical analysis, polling results summarized in a May 26th Pew Research Center report (“Key findings: How Americans’ attitudes about climate change differ by generation, party and other factors”):

“There are wide – and growing – differences between Democrats and Republicans in these judgments. Since 2016, the last time Pew Research Center asked, Democrats have become more likely to rate climate scientists positively in their understanding of whether climate change is occurring and why, while Republicans have become less likely to give these scientists positive marks on these questions. For example, 57% of Democrats now say climate scientists understand ‘very well’ whether climate change is occurring, compared with just 14% of Republicans. That 43-point gap is up from a 25-point difference in 2016. 

“Previous Pew Research Center surveys have found growing partisan differences when it comes to trust in scientists more generally and – since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak – in medical scientists to act in the best interests of the public. The Center has also recently found a substantial decline in the share of Republicans who say science has had a mostly positive effect on society, from 70% in 2019 to 57% this year.” 

Some conservatives simply shrug their shoulders with the belief that the United States cannot do much against a global problem. Others cling stubbornly to outdated notions of the value of our carbon-based fuel reserves (coal, oil and gas), protecting industries that are the mainstay of the problem. For example, in 2014, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signed a ‘solar surcharge’ bill permitting utilities to charge an extra fee to any customer using distributed power generation, such as rooftop solar or a small wind turbine. Oklahoma a major fossil fuel producer. Such minority conservatives govern gun control, women’s control over their own bodies and even who votes and who cannot… in additional to pushing back on meaningful climate change measures.

But as noted above, younger Americans are more likely to adopt energy-saving measures and are clearly targeting fossil fuel power as a technology whose time has passed: “Attitudes on these questions differ substantially by generation. A majority of Gen Zers (56%) and Millennials (57%) support a move to phase out gasoline-powered vehicles, compared with smaller shares in older generations. Younger generations are also significantly more likely than older ones to support phasing out the use of oil, coal and natural gas entirely, though about half or more across all generations favor using a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy sources going forward… Phasing out gas-powered vehicles and fully phasing out the use of oil, coal and natural gas are among the measures that a new report from the International Energy Association suggests will be needed to reach net-zero carbon dioxide emissions globally by 2050.” Pew Research.

But given the level of hard economic cost, added to the loss of life, we are clearly experiencing an exponential increase in climate related mega-disasters, both in numbers but more importantly, in intensity. “In a summer marked by deadly flash flooding, extreme drought, wildfires and unprecedented heat waves, a new report concludes that as global temperatures continue to rise, weather-related disasters are occurring four to five times more often than 50 years ago. 

“While the planet averaged 711 weather disasters a year in the 1970s, that number grew to 3,536 per year from 2000 to 2009, the report by the World Meteorological Organization found, before dropping slightly to 3,165 per year in the decade beginning in 2010 [but with increasing intensity]…

“Weather disasters accounted for losses totaling $175 billion globally in the 1970s, a figure that rose to $1.38 trillion in the decade from 2010 to 2019… According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, since 1980 the U.S. alone has experienced 298 climate disasters for which damages exceeded $1 billion. In total, those events cost $1.975 trillion. The five most expensive weather disasters since 1970 have all occurred in the U.S., topped by Hurricane Katrina's $163 billion in losses. Katrina also resulted in more than 1,800 deaths. 

“As of July 9, the U.S. had already seen eight weather disasters this year with losses surpassing $1 billion. Not yet added to that list were the August flooding in Tennessee, the devastation caused by Hurricane Ida and the ongoing tally of losses caused by raging wildfires in California and the West… Numerous scientific studies have firmly established a link between rising global average temperatures and extreme weather events.” Yahoo News, September 1st. Do parents and grandparents feel comfortable in fighting against true climate change control policies… when the just might be choking their children and grandchildren to death? Time’s up!!!

I’m Peter Dekom, and when it comes to climate change containment, we have long since passed a “red alert” reality.