Climate Change

Trump and the Climate Activist Freakout

Whistling past the graveyard by climate activists at Morocco climate conference

|

MarrakeshImage
COP-22

On Monday, the 22nd conference of the parties (COP-22) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change convened in Marrakesh, Morocco to discuss the next steps for activating the Paris Agreement on climate change that just came into force on November 4. The assembled diplomats and climate change activists at COP-22 were, to say the least, stunned by Donald Trump's victory last yesterday. Below are excerpts from various statements issued by various climate change activists at COP-22 in reaction to the impending Trump presidency.

"Donald Trump now has the unflattering distinction of being the only head of state in the entire world to reject the scientific consensus that mankind is driving climate change. No matter what happens, Donald Trump can't change the fact that wind and solar energy are rapidly becoming more affordable and accessible than dirty fossil fuels. With both the market and grassroots environmental advocacy moving us toward clean energy, there is still a strong path forward for reducing climate pollution even under a Trump presidency. Still, this is a time for tough choices. Trump must choose whether he will be a President remembered for putting America and the world on a path to climate disaster, or for listening to the American public and keeping us on a path to climate progress. Trump better choose wisely, otherwise—we can guarantee him the hardest fight of his life every step of the way."—Michael Brune, Executive Director, The Sierra Club

"The Paris Agreement was signed and ratified not by a President, but by the United States itself. As a matter of international law, and as a matter of human survival, the nations of the world can, must, and will hold the United States to its climate commitments."—Carroll Muffett, President, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

"From infrastructure to foreign aid, every decision the next President makes should be made through the lens of bold climate action. It's not enough to just admit climate change is real, we need a President who will dramatically accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to 100% renewable energy for all."—May Boeve, Executive Director, 350.org

"The outcome of the US election clearly implies potential shifts in climate policy of the new US administration. While this creates uncertainty in a domestic and international context, a pragmatic assessment is called for. Notwithstanding short term changes in US posture and policy, the global economy has already begun to shift its focus towards a low carbon future. Markets and economics are likely to moderate any future US policy shift as US companies and investors assess what will keep America's economy competitive and in business in a global market—given that some its largest trading partners and competitors are already heavily investing in low carbon technologies and infrastructure."—Achim Steiner, Director of Oxford Martin School and former Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme

"President-elect Trump has the opportunity to catalyze further action on climate that sends a clear signal to investors to keep the transition to a renewable-powered economy on track. China, India, and other economic competitors are racing to be the global clean energy superpower, and the US doesn't want to be left behind."—Tina Johnson, Policy Director, US Climate Action Network

I will be reporting from the climate change conference beginning next week. It should be interesting.

NEXT: Californians Reject Condoms in Porn, Defeat Proposition 60

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “The Paris Agreement was signed and ratified not by a President, but by the United States itself. As a matter of international law, and as a matter of human survival, the nations of the world can, must, and will hold the United States to its climate commitments.” – Carroll Muffett, President, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

    The agreement has been altered. Pray we do not alter it further.

    1. The great thing about having the most powerful military in the world is the ability to tell these people to fuck off, and if they don’t like it do something about it.

    2. *applause*

      +1 leave a garrison

    3. I do not believe thst is how the US ratifies international agreements Ms. Muffet. The president is not the state, and tbe Senate did not vote on it. The US is not legally obligated to the Paris accords.

      1. Somehow I don’t think Little Miss Muffett cares about trivia like rule of law, after all this is a matter of human survival.

        1. But, but, but, it’s “international” law. He hasta do what we sez!

        2. a matter of human survival.

          Whooooa! Nobody choosed anything!

          *I* didn’t choose anything. Did you choose anything?

  2. “The Paris Agreement was signed and ratified not by a President, but by the United States itself.”

    Oh? How’s that?

    1. We’re all in this together. Your opinion has been chosen for you, serf.

      1. “Social contract”
        /Tony

      2. I missed the plebiscite, obviously.

    2. Stupid motherfuckers wanted a king to issue decrees. New king, new decrees.

      Of course they still don’t get it.

      1. Oh, they get it. They just expected a long parade of Democrats on the Throne since they are the only rightful heirs of Democracy. It’s right there in the name, you see.

    3. All 300 some odd million of us signed it.

      Oh, you didn’t?

  3. “I will be reporting from the climate change conference beginning next week. It should be interesting.”

    I expect much wringing of hands and more hyperbolic, doom mongering non-sense. To the Trumputin, I didn’t vote for you, and I don’t expect you to do anything to change my mind about you before 2020, but here’s a chance for you to score some early points with me by telling these rent seeking parasites to piss off.

  4. With each passing left-wing shrill lunacy and idiocy outdoing the last, I can but applaud Trump for producing so many salty ham tears.

    Trump won the House, Senate and Presidency. How’s that for POLITICAL CONSENSUS, eh?

    1. Last night was one big middle finger in the face of the political establishment. I don’t know if everyone can appreciate that, but I do. It’s a start.

      1. I think most of us here appreciate the hell out of it, but then we’re mostly a bunch of white cis-male shitlords who want to turn everything into Somalia.

    2. MANDATE!!!

      … and no, I am not lighting the gay signal.

  5. If there’s one thing that would bring me great joy Ina Trump presidency it’s a blunt rebuke of this mess. Most politicians skeptical of global warming parse thier words for politics. I would love to hear someone just says its dog shit science, and we’re not funding it anymore.

    1. Even if it’s real and it’s science, the solutions they’re proposing will do so little about it and the cost in economic terms would be staggering, that it’s insane to go down that path. Taking money from productive people and handing it to cronies and 3rd world despots will not fix anything. Anyway, the sun is entering a very cool period and the coming mini-ice age is going to leave us folks in the northern hemisphere longing for some warming.

      1. The thing about their solutions is that they are the same solutions, no matter what the problem is. The solutions always involve more government control over our lives, more economic stagnation, and more redistribution of wealth. When all you have is a hammer…

        1. You’d hammer in the morning?

          1. When all you have is a hammer…
            You start wondering, “where’s my sickle?”

        2. Believe it or not, it would seem that politicians are not yet at a point where they feel they can get away with mass murder of the electorate which, while a bit of hyperbole, is more or less what is being suggested by switching over to so-called ‘sustainable’ energy sources that do not provide enough power to maintain our energy needs of even a decade ago, let alone now.

          Ergo those in very hot or very cold climates would absolutely die or require relocation in order to survive. I’ve thought for a long while that the ‘optics’ on that is enough of a thing to prohibit any democratic country from doing anything meaningful on the subject. France, while I tend to think they’re insane, actually did the one smart thing they could do and went Nuclear. No one else seems to have the balls to do the sane thing, so why listen to them?

          1. … and the Frogs have had how many thousands of nuclear meltdowns?

    2. I would not be surprised if Trump does a Schwarzenegger on this.

  6. Trump’s election will raise the sea level by *casts bones* … … …. forget the bones! He’s racist!

    1. All that hard work Barry did to make the sea level recede will be undone by President Sciencedenier!

  7. Had Hillary won Ohio and Pennsylvania, she would be giving a victory speech right now. And she lost those states because she doubled down on the Fuck You Coal Miners.

    This is reminiscent of Gore losing the south over his gun control rhetoric back in 2000. That loss made Gun Control untouchable for nearly 15 years, and the pro gun people still hold strong under the latest attacks.

    I have a strong hope that the environuts are about to become persona non grata at Democrat policy meetings, because they will be perceived as the cause of Hillary’s downfall.

    1. Hah, no way. They’re just going to double down that the unwashed masses need to be “educated” to the correct conclusion better.

  8. “Trump better choose wisely, otherwise – we can guarantee him the hardest fight of his life every step of the way.”

    Is the Sierra Club refusing to accept the results of the election? This threat of violent insurrection is terrifying. It may also be treason.

    1. I’m sure DT is just a-shakin’

  9. Hillary’s losses in OH and PA are directly attributable to her failure to perform in the Coal Counties that she shat all over in her Environmentalist speeches. This reminds me of how Gore’s Gun Control stances cost him the few electoral votes he needed to win in 2000.

    I have hope that the Dems are going to do to the environmentalists what they did to the gun grabbers in 2000- blame them for the loss, and lock them in a closet for a decade. Almost makes a Trump presidency worth it.

    1. I’ve always thought schadenfreude was an unworthy human sentiment, but the zero-sum nature of politics is such that I am enjoying the sight of freely flowing, salty progressive tears.

      1. I did too, but this is the world the left wanted and created. They wanted to turn politics into total war? Well, mission accomplished. Reap what you’ve sown, motherfuckers.

  10. “The Paris Agreement was signed and ratified not by a President, but by the United States itself. As a matter of international law, and as a matter of human survival, the nations of the world can, must, and will hold the United States to its climate commitments.” – Carroll Muffett, President, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

    Evidently the CIEL president is clueless about the US Constitution, and thinks he can cash a forged check.

    1. The thing about international environmental law is that it isn’t beholden to anything that even remotely resembles law forged by the people that will bear the brunt of it’s effects.

  11. “stunned by Donald Trump’s victory last yesterday” My goodness Ron you’re starting to talk like GWBush… also I’m totally stealing that… Last yesterday I tasted the salty ham tears of “progressives” scare quotes intentional

  12. “Donald Trump can’t change the fact that wind and solar energy are rapidly becoming more affordable and accessible than dirty fossil fuels”

    Oh come now, the Donald does not want to stop this. Only libertarians want to stop solar panels and wind turbines. You know, along with roads and bridges. /derp

    1. It never ceases to amaze me that such TOP MEN (and WOMEN) can seem to hold positions of such prestige, while at the same time, being so completely ignorant to basic economics, and science.

      If wind and solar are rapidly becoming more affordable and accessible, then guess what? The market will support that and people will choose those wherever possible. But the fact is, the only reason they are becoming “more affordable” is due to fucking govt subsidies.

      1. It never ceases to amaze me that such TOP MEN (and WOMEN) can seem to hold positions of such prestige, while at the same time, being so completely ignorant to basic economics, and science.

        Keep in mind, these people didn’t see Trump coming and are *still* doubling-down on their climate derp. Completely oblivious to not only the fact that now policy is stacked against them (while still cutting emissions) but that all the models of a relatively well-defined, understood and closed system like an election, generated by teams experts, were so terribly wrong.

        For all their understanding of reality, at this point, they might as well be hitting the tables.

  13. “President-elect Trump has the opportunity to catalyze further action on climate that sends a clear signal to investors to keep the transition to a renewable-powered economy on track. China, India, and other economic competitors are racing to be the global clean energy superpower, and the US doesn’t want to be left behind.”

    Can we get them to take Musk off our hands? Steyer?
    That’s a ‘race’ I’m happy to lose.

    1. Can we get them to take Musk off our hands?

      *sniffs fingers*

    2. It’s also not entirely true. Sure, China is adding as much solar and wind as they can and has more of each than any other nation. However, renewables still make up a small percentage of their overall power production. They’re doing whatever they can to make more energy for their people. They’re not doing it for a deep-seated environmentalist concern and they’re not going to hamstring their economy to please anyone.

      1. They also ignore that China as a long and storied history of exploiting international agreements to get more cash for themselves, and pretty much do whatever the fuck they want with the cash.

        I wouldn’t put it past China to build massive solar farms out in the middle of nowhere, connected to no power grid at all, and collect checks from the international community for their ‘forward thinking’.

        This is, after all, the same State that built massive urban cities from whole cloth in the middle of nowhere that are populated by literally no one at all. It’s eerie, and senseless.

  14. Guess you really wish you’d sent this thing through the senate now don’t you Dems. They really couldn’t imagine that they wouldn’t hold the reigns of power in the future could they.

  15. http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotki…..8fed879a8b

    This is a very informative article explaining why Trump won.

    Clinton’s support for climate change legislation, a lower priority among the electorate than other concerns, was seen as necessary to shore up support from greens threatening to attack her from the left. Yet the issue never caught on the heartland, which tends to see climate change mitigation as injurious to them.

    This may have proven a major miscalculation, as the energy economy is also tied closely to manufacturing. Besides climate change, the heartland had many reasons to fear a continuation of Obama policies, particularly related to regulation and global trade, which seems to have been a big factor in Trump’s upset win in normally moderate to liberal Wisconsin.

    1. and

      Class has been a bigger factor in this election than in any election since the New Deal era. Trump’s insurgency rode largely on middle- and working-class fears about globalization, immigration and the cultural arrogance of the “progressive” cultural elite. This is something Bill Clinton understands better than his wife.

      Trump owes his election to what one writer has called “the leftover people.” These may be “deplorables” to the pundits but their grievances are real ? their incomes and their lifespans have been decreasing. They have noticed, as Thomas Frank has written, that the Democrats have gone “from being the party of Decatur to the party of Martha’s Vineyard.”

      So if you want to thank or blame anyone for Trump being President, thank or blame Al Gore or Jon Stewart because those two did more than anyone to create those two forces.

      1. Hey John.

        How’s it goin’?

      2. I think rejection of climate change solutions from the left is more about a rejection of elitism generally.

        The election was a referendum on elitism.

        Climate change legislation has been all about elites trying to bully average people into sacrificing their standard of living–often by calling them stupid.

        Rejection of climate change solutions is just another variation on the same anti-elitist theme.

        1. Yes it was. Ed nailed it this morning — I’ve realized for several months that people supported Trump not because they liked him, but because he was so clearly anti-establishment. People get tired of being talked down to, of being treated like naive gullible idiots, and calling half the populace “deplorable” just reinforces their belief, as does all the claptrap about global warming, safe spaces, trigger warnings, gun control, everything the elites want in the face of popular opinion.

          Gun control is a really interesting example of how smug they were and how blind they were. 40+ states have relaxed their gun control laws, including seven (I think) which don’t require any permit to carry. Yet they kept predicting blood in the streets enough to make that ancient Greek boy seem like a wolf-lover.

          They were so full of themselves, it showed, and that’s why they lost.

          1. When Vox Magazine is writing articles about liberals being too smug, you know it’s obvious to literally everyone on the planet.

    2. Washington, D.C., heavily black and the seat of the bureaucracy and pundit class, delivered an almost Soviet-style 93% to 4% margin.

      A lot of those crooked federal parasites are going to get fired, and it’s going to be great.

  16. It is a shame that I only have two middle fingers.

    1. Don’t worry, Suthenboy, I raise mine beside yours.

      1. Fine, southern, farm-raised middle fingers, direct to your table.

  17. “Trump must choose whether he will be a President remembered for putting America and the world on a path to climate disaster, or for listening to the American public and keeping us on a path to climate progress. Trump better choose wisely, otherwise – we can guarantee him the hardest fight of his life every step of the way.” – Michael Brune, Executive Director, The Sierra Club

    Trump just won a stunning victory from average Americans over the objections progressive bullies and bullies in the pres.

    When The Sierra Club tries to bully Trump, I can guarantee that precisely zero fucks are given.

  18. “The Paris Agreement was signed and ratified not by a President, but by the United States itself. As a matter of international law, and as a matter of human survival, the nations of the world can, must, and will hold the United States to its climate commitments.” – Carroll Muffett, President, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

    This lady needs a civics lesson.

    There’s this thing called the Constitution.

    There’s this thing called the Senate.

    Carrol Muffett can shove it up her tuffet.

  19. i was coming down from my schadenfreude high but this put me back over the top.

  20. “President-elect Trump has the opportunity to catalyze further action on climate that sends a clear signal to investors to keep the transition to a renewable-powered economy on track. China, India, and other economic competitors are racing to be the global clean energy superpower, and the US doesn’t want to be left behind.”

    – Tina Johnson, Policy Director, US Climate Action Network

    That lady is the queen of denial.

    This is precisely the sort of bullying, manipulative, elitist, bullshit spin the American people rejected last night.

    If phony environmentalists can’t think of a way to protect the environment in ways that enhance rather than destroy our standard of living, then they should shut up and get out of the way for real environmentalists who can.

    P.S. Despite what you may have heard, China is still building new coal plants at an alarming rate–even though the Chinese electricity market is overbuilt and oversupplied.

    And that’s according to Greenpeace.

    http://energydesk.greenpeace.o…..ty-policy/

    1. It’s almost as if China’s expanding energy infrastructure doesn’t need ‘renewable’ energy at all, and that by building those installations they might be getting a little something extra from the U.N.

      if not in cash, then in favors of some sort for sure. The most probable, in my book, being favorable trade contacts.

  21. “Markets and economics are likely to moderate any future US policy shift as US companies and investors assess what will keep America’s economy competitive and in business in a global market – given that some its largest trading partners and competitors are already heavily investing in low carbon technologies and infrastructure.””

    I think he has it backwards. If other countries hold down their consumption of fossil fuels that reduces the demand, which makes fossil fuels less expensive, which makes shifting away from them less attractive to U.S. companies.

    If recyclables continue to be a more expensive source of power than fossil fuels, then the decision of other countries to use recyclables means that their energy costs will be higher, which means that the cost of energy intensive goods on the world market will be higher, which increases the incentive for U.S. businesses to use cheap power from fossil fuels to produce such goods.

    Of course, if alternatives becomes less expensive as a source of energy than fossil fuels, it will pay to switch to them, but that isn’t a result of other countries using them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.