Start learning the deep details of the science and economics instead of letting extremists dictate what you’re allowed to think or say.
Last year was the year the climate issue took a sharp turn towards extremism. Let’s hope 2020 is the year sanity makes a comeback.
There have long been three groups occupying the climate issue. To avoid pejoratives, I will call them A, B and C.
The A group are the doubters. They don’t believe greenhouse gases (GHGs) do much harm and they don’t support expensive climate-policy interventions. If we must choose between climate policy and the continued use of inexpensive fossil energy, they readily choose the latter.
The C group think the opposite; they fear a climate catastrophe, they foresee a crisis and they want urgent action, regardless of cost, to stop it.
The B group are in the middle. They believe, or say they believe, that GHG emissions are a problem and must be reduced. They are vague on the question of how much and when, but in general they try to balance environmental goals with the provision of inexpensive energy and robust economic growth.
The leaders in business, government and the bureaucracy tend to be in this group. They have spent the last 20 years verbally acknowledging the concerns of group C and even borrowing their slogans, while quietly letting the A agenda mostly win out, which the underlying economics pretty much necessitates.
This uneasy compromise fell apart last year.
Despite A being a more natural ally for B, the B group long ago marginalized the A crowd and instead tried to ingratiate themselves with the Cs. They funded them, welcomed the more congenial elements into their circles and adopted their rhetoric about sustainability, the low-carbon transition and the imperative for climate leadership.
To the B crowd, these were just nice-sounding sentiments – a bit of green window-dressing to help sell the growth agenda. But their new friends in the C crowd meant every word.
Thanks to 20 years of patronage and endorsement from the B crowd, group C is now in control and has dropped any pretense of commonality with B. They raised a generation convinced the apocalypse is nigh and they proved over the past year they can dictate terms of surrender to politicians everywhere.
To take one example, the decision by the European Investment Bank to phase out all investments in fossil fuel projects – even natural gas – by 2022 and redirect a trillion euros into “climate action and environmental sustainability” is a clear signal that the Cs are not only at the table, they run the show.
Likewise, the worldwide declarations of a “climate emergency” and the embrace of net-zero targets means the B group is officially sidelined, at least in the West.
The exception among developed countries is the United States, where the Bs long ago recognized the true aspirations of the Cs and aligned themselves with the A crowd. They realized in the process that it’s a surprisingly large and energetic constituency, thus creating a coalition capable of keeping the U.S. energy sector alive and the economy growing.
Other exceptions include the developing powerhouses of China, Russia (who both must relish the prospect of their democratic Western rivals abandoning world economic and energy leadership for climate’s sake) and India.
To those in the B group who are bewildered by the turn of events, I say this: you must win this fight and right now you are losing badly. At stake are the livelihoods of millions of ordinary people whose jobs and living standards will be destroyed if C prevails, not to mention the hopes of billions of people who want to rise out of poverty.
The old compromise is dead. Stop using C jargon in your speeches. Start learning the deep details of the science and economics instead of letting the C crowd dictate what you’re allowed to think or say. Figure out a new way of talking about the climate issue based on what you actually believe. Learn to make the case for Canada’s economy to survive and grow.
You, and by extension everyone who depends on your leadership, face an existential threat. It was 20 years in the making, so dig in for a 20-year battle to turn it around. Stop demonizing potential allies in the A camp; you need all the help you can get.
Climate and energy policy has fallen into the hands of a worldwide movement that openly declares its extremism. The would-be moderates on this issue have pretended for 20 years they could keep the status quo without having to fight for it. Those days are over.
Originally published on WattsUpWithThat.com.
Dan Gibbs says
Please consider buying a few shares of XOM and addressing the ExxonMobil shareholder meeting in May, 2020. Thank you.
David Stahl says
As one who is solidly in the A group largely by way of the excellent resources provided by Cornwall Alliance I want to simply comment that I understand and appreciate what you write. I pray spiritual warfare about it almost daily. I can’t talk about it much anymore because of the volatile, emotional, closed minded response from the other side. I’m a musician. We need the A group (and B?) scientists to scream out loud! But then they’re afraid of losing respect and funding.
But I think truth and nature will win out in the end and have the last word.
Danos says
Your final sentence is correct. Despite all the willful attempts to sow disinformation, if nothing is done to address human made climate change, then nature will simply run its course and humanity will suffer greatly, and civilization will likely collapse. Your grandchildren will have you, Cornwall and and others to blame, who for whatever reasons – be they financial gain, stubborn contrarianism, or just “owning the libs” – chose to blind themselves to the overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is real and very dangerous. If anything SARS-COV2 should show you that these things are indeed real, civilization is not impervious to reckless toying with nature, and despite Trump’s best efforts to talk it away over the first few weeks, he eventually had to recognize it was a real threat. Climate change will be the same, just over the course of decades instead of weeks. Eventually the right will also start to take it seriously, but at that point they will have done so much serious harm, (and the left has really only given lip service to the issue, or done foolish things like decommission nuclear reactors which will be essential to meeting civilization’s needs for carbon neutral energy).
Ron S. says
Refreshing to read a logical response to both the Government and the extreme let’s rhetoric.
Logic and real science has seemed to fall to the wayside as “emotions” and hidden agendas prevail.
Time for politely turning the other cheek to these fear-mongering falsehoods is over. Do we need to be a responsible Stewart of this planet? Absolutely! Yet the greatest threats, mounting non-biodegradeable garbage dumped into our Oceans and water ways is pretty much ignored. Time for a refocus of our priorities and direction is in order.
Frank Clarke says
There are none as blind as the ones who cannot see because they don’t want to see.
Jack Snyder says
I appreciate Ross McKitrick’s perspective. He has solidified my “A” position and encouraged me to be more proactive. This is spiritual warfare. God created our (climatically) stable planet for the flourishing of mankind (Isa 45:18). He gave man dominion to be a wise steward of the resources He provided (Gen 1:28). In His sovereign providence, even in judging mankind with a global flood, He buried untold amounts of fossil fuels for the future benefit of man (us). Carbon dioxide levels were much higher in the past and the earth flourished. Sadly, the alarmists (Group C) have fallen into one of Satan’s traps, which will cause more death and harm to man (Prov 8:36b).
Rcik Williams says
So much time wasted on justifying belief when all you have to do is read the facts of science.