It used to seem easy to understand the climate denier: it was all about greed. When you rummage through the records of a researcher who contradicted the scientific consensus, or a group of experts who tried to block action on climate change, or a politician who declared global warming was a hoax, you almost always discovered a significant financial one Support for the fossil fuel industry. Those were simpler, more innocent times and I miss them.
It is true that greed remains an important element of anti-environmentalism. But the climate denier, too, has become a front in the Kulturkampf, with the right rejecting science in part because they dislike science in general, and opposing emission control measures out of deep opposition to anything liberals support. And this cultural dimension of the climate argument has come at the worst possible time, at a time when both the extreme danger of uncontrolled emissions and the path to reducing them are clearer than ever.
A bit of history: The scientists who began warning decades ago that rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere would have dangerous effects on the climate are largely legitimate. July was the hottest month on record globally, with devastating heat waves in many parts of the planet. Extreme weather events are increasing. At the same time, technological advances in renewable energy have made it possible to achieve significant emission reductions at little or no cost to economic growth and living standards.
When Democrats tried but failed to take meaningful action on climate change in 2009, their policy proposals consisted largely of sticks: caps on emissions in the form of allowances that companies could buy and sell. When the Biden administration finally managed to pass a big climate bill in 2022, it consisted almost entirely of carrots: tax breaks and green energy subsidies. However, thanks to the revolution in renewable energy technology, energy experts believe this no-fuss approach will yield significant results in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
But not if Republicans can do anything about it. The Heritage Foundation is leading an initiative called “Project 2025,” which will likely set the agenda if a Republican wins the White House next year. As the New York Times reports, she is calling for “almost all of the federal government’s clean energy programs to be phased out and fossil fuel production to be boosted.” What is behind this destructive effort? Project 2025 appears to have been largely created by the usual suspects: think tanks like the Heartland Institute and the Fossil Fuel-Powered Institute for Competitive Enterprises, which have long championed science and action to combat climate change.
But the political power of this campaign has a lot to do with the fact that science in general, and climate science in particular, has become a front in the culture war. As for attitudes toward science, in the mid-2000s Republicans and Democrats had similar levels of trust in the scientific community. Since then, Republican confidence has plummeted while Democrat confidence has risen; now there is a difference of 30 points between the two parties.
We saw the impact of this anti-science trend when the Covid-19 vaccines became available: vaccination was free, so there was no financial cost to the individual, but the general perception was that vaccination was something that ” Experts” and liberal elites wanted us to do it. As a result, Republicans disproportionately refused to get vaccinated and suffered significantly higher death rates than Democrats.
Does anyone seriously doubt that it is attitudes like these that are driving the Republican base to resist action on climate change? My colleague David Brooks argued that many Republicans question the reality of climate change and are pushing for fossil fuels to “insult the elites.” And he’s right. Look at the hysterical reaction probable gas cooker regulations have provoked; While there was no doubt that the special interests were “stuffing the fire,” so to speak, there was also a strong element of the Kulturkampf: the elites want you to buy an induction hob, but real men cook with gas.
The fact that the climate war is now part of the culture war worries me greatly. Special interests can cause great damage, but can be bought out or thwarted by other special interests. In fact, a key part of President Joe Biden’s climate strategy is the idea that renewable energy investments, which have skyrocketed since his bill passed, will give many businesses and communities an incentive to continue the green transition. But these rational, if self-serving, considerations will do little to persuade those who believe green energy is a conspiracy against the American way of life. With that, the culture war has become a serious problem in the fight against climate change, a problem that is really the last thing we need right now.
Paul Krugman He is a Nobel laureate in economics. © The New York Times, 2023. Translated from news clips.
Follow all information from Business And Business on Facebook and Twitteror in our weekly newsletter
Five Day Agenda
The day’s major economic dates, with the keys and context to understand their scope.
RECEIVE IT BY MAIL
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits