In the run-up to the forthcoming US elections, there is a legitimate chance of seeing Donald Trump reappointed as the occupant of the Oval Office. Such an outcome would undoubtedly be astonishing, at least to international observers, but what is perhaps even more bewildering is the apparent lack of media analysis regarding the possible implications of a second Trump term for our logging climate crisis.
There is a stark contrast between a presidential hopeful who endeavours to heed the warnings of climate scientists to some degree, and a contender who brands global warming as a farce. Recent comments from Trump do not show a better comprehension of the subject matter.
Regrettably, the critical issue of climate change has been largely overlooked in the media’s coverage of the White House race. Given the notable increase in severe weather occurrences – from severe hurricanes in North Carolina to flash floods in Florida – you might have expected reporters to question candidates on this issue. However, these important topics got scant mention throughout the election.
The lack of consideration for the climate crisis is not a phenomenon that is only seen in the media or in the United States. For instance, the previous European elections displayed a pronounced move away from Green Party candidates and policies across the continent.
This transition, unfortunately, does not represent any reduction in global warming. On the contrary, surface temperatures continue to increase in line with escalating greenhouse gas emissions. As such, a majority of climate scientists now believe that the Paris goal of keeping the rise in global average temperature below 2 degrees from pre-industrial times is no longer achievable. This violation will undoubtedly result in serious implications for populations globally.
The question is, how has such a disconnect occurred between scientific findings and the perceptions of politicians and the public? My belief is that this largely originates from the immersion in a post-truth media world, wherein there is a growing unwillingness amongst media platforms to differentiate between biased views and established facts.
Within the media landscape, the propagation of misleading information is commonly connected to social media platforms. However, I propose that several mainstream news organisations – ranging from the sensationalist newspapers to the weightier broadsheets – have long participated in similar practices. A number of renowned publications, including the Sunday Times, the Telegraph, and the Wall Street Journal, to name just a few, rarely produce objective and fully accurate pieces on climate change. These outlets share one key trait – a dominant conservative editorial stance that routinely overlooks the inconvenient truths unveiled by contemporary climate science.
Donald Trump’s potential for a second presidential term is viewed as exceedingly threatening for exactly this reason. It isn’t the often outlandish statements, his self-absorption or even his fascistic leanings that are the chief concern for the majority of scientists. Instead, they are troubled by his blatant corruption and his manifest commitment to prioritise the profit-driven motives of his business alliances over the welfare of the public.
It is important to remember that during Trump’s first term in office, key roles in federal institutions, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, were filled with political representatives lacking technical expertise. These replacements triggered a large-scale degradation of essential environmental regulations. Even more worryingly, Trump’s remarks of late insinuate that such conduct would intensify if re-elected.
One could argue that both the United States and the world managed to weather the storm of his former presidency. However, there’s an increasing perception that Trump has grown more erratic and more autocratic in recent times. Simultaneously, the urgency of the climate crisis has escalated, with increases in surface temperatures, sea levels, and polar ice caps, realising the apprehensions of scientists.
Under a renewed Trump administration, one would likely witness a reversal of all American laws aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. This would likely be accompanied by an upsurge in the number of permissions granted for oil and gas drilling. Moreover, Trump has indicated his intent to withdraw the US from all global climate pacts, a move that risks provoking similar responses from other major countries.
Summing up, a second term for Trump poses a significant threat to the endeavours taken to tackle climate change. Unfortunately, this peril has received little to no attention within the US press, a deficiency that could have profound global repercussions.
Dr Cormac O’Raifeartaigh, a senior lecturer in physics at the South East Technological University in Waterford and a Fellow of the Institute of Physics, affirms this.