Essay by Eric Worrall
“… The 2024 election was not a referendum on climate change – Americans believe in climate change, worry about climate change and support action on climate change …”
US public still favours action on climate change despite Trump’s fossil fuel drive
Two-thirds of Americans say they are worried about climate but level of media coverage does not reflect this
Oliver Milman
Wed 17 Jun 2026 22.00 AESTUS political and media discourse has drifted away from the climate crisis amid a frontal assault by Donald Trump upon policies to limit global heating and the president’s pugnacious demands to “drill, baby, drill” for more oil and gas.
Yet while elite attention on climate has waned, even among some previously vocal Democrats who have wound back on criticism of the fossil fuels that are overheating our planet, the American public remains concerned about the climate crisis and continues to favour action to deal with it, according to experts and polling.
“The 2024 election was not a referendum on climate change – Americans believe in climate change, worry about climate change and support action on climate change,” said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the climate communication program at Yale University. “That didn’t change before, during or after the election.”
…
“Voting priorities haven’t changed much in terms of climate but other issues have leapfrogged over it, such as the Iran war, and the lack of coverage in the media means that people aren’t hearing or talking about it as much,” said Leiserowitz.
“There is this spiral of climate silence. I’ve even heard some leaders of climate groups say, ‘Don’t mention climate change.’ I don’t know why they’d make that decision, there’s absolutely no evidence that people care about this less than they did.”
…
“This war on renewables isn’t even shared by his own base. Climate is still very polarized in the US. But, on the whole, Americans have positive views of clean energy and pretty negative views of fossil fuel energy, which they think is dirty and polluting.”
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jun/17/climate-change-public-opinion-trump-fossil-fuel
…
I think get it – believers in the “everyone wants climate action” theory think the reason voters elected President Trump in 2024 is they hate his climate policies.
But you would expect an active imagination from people who think we’re in the midst of a climate crisis.
Exactly what one would expect a Liberal Socialist Yaley Professor to say. Must maintain the false message at all costs.
There’s more: the UK Grauniad would have their reading audiences believe this Anthony Leiserowitz guy was some kind of nice, benign, unbiased Yale University authority. At my April 2021 blog post, “Yale Program on Climate Change (YPCCC) Helps Facebook Debunk Climate Change Myths,” Anthony Leiserowitz was one the main characters I detailed on how YPCCC was not helping anybody debunk climate miyths, their clear goal was to reinforce unsupportable talking points about ‘settled science’ and ‘industry-corrupted skeptic climate scientists.’ YPCCC is little more than a propaganda effort to keep CAGW alive by any means possible. And here we are today, with the above days-old disinformation / gaslighting quote from Leiserowitz,
Polls for years have shown climate change at the bottom of the list of priorities.
Claiming every one is worried about climate change is not supported by the facts. It’s propaganda.
“…there’s absolutely no evidence that people care about this less than they did.”
It would be hard to show that they care less about something that they cared very little about before.
That is, after all, what climate communications programs are designed for. Things that really matter and are obvious generally do not require vast advertising campaigns with convoluted logic attached.
The Guardian is much, much worse than CNN, when it comes to fakery-writing about issues.
The UK is ill served to have such publications spread their filth and support dysfunctional Starmer’s clique and his traitorous demise of the native UK people.
The Guardian glorifies the fast-breeding, mostly Islamic, walk-in/float-ins/fly-ins by the millions, the dregs of Third World countries.
The next PM better come in on a landslide, because he has to declare a national emergency to save Britain.
The only change in climate we want is all the climatards driven out of our government and academia at every level.
As a conservative I believe I should endeavor to be a good steward of the land, air, and water. But the government’s involvement should be quite limited, not picking winners and losers and not using my tax money for the questionable scams and schemes as it now does to supposedly mitigate “damage” caused by “carbon”.
I’d think very few conservatives would agree that The Grauniad speaks for them, and certainly not some lefty from Yale who directs their climate propaganda program.
As a conservative Trump supporter I’m LMAO. What is that loony bin media smoking?. I smell desperation. Getting rid of our invaders and fraudsters was a huge reason the left was squashed. Dumping climax hoax another one.
Still?
You just got burnt by MyUsernameReloaded. U gonna take that Junkgirl???
Must suck when trump promised you cheaper gas prices and then got into the Iran War. almost like he didn’t keep his promise!!
Oil is down to $79.44 bbl which places it square inline with prewar 2024 prices. Gas prices rise ahead of pricy oil spikes but hang until the more.expensive oil Jas left the system. Give it a little time pumpkins.
The only people who have gotten burned are those who have bet against Trump.
Gas prices are still cheaper than they were under Biden and dropping fast.
Trump did not start the Iran war, Iran did that 47 years ago…
… but no President, until Trump, has had the guts to try and end it.
The Iran was is over and Iran will no longer be on the way to a nuclear power with intercontinental missiles aimed at the USA. That would seem to be more important than temporary $5.50 gas prices in California.
Yes, MUCH more important.
The only things burned by Loaded User are fossil fuels and brain cells.
Temporarily higher gas prices are a side effect of larger changes to the global dynamic, unlike the intended-to-be permanent higher prices engineered by the Obama/Biden regime’s attack on the energy source in favor of alternatives to energy; but perhaps short attention spans are necessary for you and User to continue to function.
tuffest comment ever
About as tuff as a giant StayPuff marshmallow man!
It doesn’t take much to impress a socialist.
Being burnt by MUR, is like being savaged by a dead sheep.
H/T Denis Healey
I agree, as far as the geological definition of “tuff” applies:
“Tuff is a relatively soft, porous volcanic rock formed from the consolidation of volcanic ash and debris, exhibiting diverse textures, compositions, and classifications.”
CNN’s Harry Enten reveals Trump has 100% MAGA approval and 90% backing for Iran strike
For those who don’t like to follow links, here is an image…
MyUsernameReloaded
Reply to
Junkgirl
June 18, 2026 12:11 pm
Still?
Still… StaunchDespite the lies told by the left, Trump is doing a good job.
Just because people are brainwashed into thinking there’s a climate change problem, doesn’t mean that there’s a problem.
Yes, it just means the propaganda has purchase.
Of course Leiserowitz, director of the climate communications program at Yale, would assert such an obvious falsehood. Else he would be out of a job. Apparently at Yale, communications equals prevarication.
His problem remains indelible reality.
47 ran on ‘drill, baby drill’ and won in a landslide. The US is now the world’s largest producer of oil and gas.
47 promised to get rid of the climate nonsense. Obama’s endangerment finding is now repealed. Offshore wind leases have been terminated. US EV subsidies have ended, as a result of which auto manufacturers have written off $87 billion of EV investment.
47 also started the Iran war. 47 is also a racist. 47 is also using the office for his personal purposes. 47 is also putting up his cronies in public office. youre happy about 87 billion dollars gone in ev investment? that’s 87 billion dollars gone from the economy, regardless of whether or not you support climate action! Let me remind you that 47 also promised cheaper prices for Americans. Gas especially.
Smart people know when to stop digging, Stupid people say “hand me the shovel.”
The Iran war started 47 years ago… by Iran.
Trump is trying to end it. !
Trump is NOT a racist.. that is just a fake far-left yap.
Having your own supporters in office, is what all Presidents and leaders do.
Your comment is a nonsense, pertaining to nothing.
And 46 (Otto Penn) used the office to Grift money into Democrat coffers through fake child care centers and fake health care centers via Government Grants, The Inflation Reduction Act and USAID!
Socialist really do seem to believe the lies they tell each other.
As always, you ignore the actions of Iran for the last 40+ years. It’s almost as if you are being paid to ignore reality.
Can you think of any president who hasn’t put people he knows in cabinet positions. Yet somehow it’s only sinister when a Republlcan does it. It’s almost as if you were being paid to ignore reality.
Gas is still cheaper than it was under Biden, so Trump didn’t lie and gas prices have already started back down. It’s almost as if you are being paid to ignore reality.
Mark, I don’t think it is “paid” to be ignorant. !
Although it is a socialist.. so maybe. !
Uh, regardless of what you want to believe, I’m paying the highest prices for a gallon of unleaded I’ve ever paid, at the moment. Gas prices are not lower than under Biden.
You must live in California.
Gasoline prices were definitely higher under Biden, by about a dollar per gallon.
I expect I’ll be paying around 3.50 per gallon shortly, and prices will go lower.
This is the second time in the last 20 years that Iran, because of its threats against oil shipping, has been the primary cause of temporary price spikes. We finally have a president with the courage of his convictions to end the Iranian threats. Once the spike returns to normal very soon, with the exception of stupid states like California and New York, adjusting for inflation we will be paying no more for gasoline than we did in 1960 and no more than the long-term average over the last 65 years. While prices of many other products and services have inflated over the years, oil and gas prices have been incredibly stable.
Prices around here are already down a about 50 cents a gallon.
Lenin knew that useful idiots would do it for free.
Are you a pedo too?
Come out with the truth – are you a Muslim originating from the Indian subcontinent.
The assertion that Iran – the exceedingly petrodollar rich Shia nation which has been the origin of murderous activity against Israel both Gaza through HAMAS and Southern Lebanon through Hezbollah – did not start several wars including the present one is obviously false and defies all evidence.
47 is not a racist, 47 is doing the job he was elected to do. 47 is putting people who will do the job in office, 87 billion in EV investment is not gone, it is simply not necessary in a 1.5 trillion industry, 47 gas prices are temporarily up due to ending the Iran nuclear problem and will come down again.
According to those on the left, anyone who believes that minorities don’t need to be led by white liberals, is a racist.
“The White Man’s Burden”
Rudyard Kipling
That was $87b of taxpayers money – governments don’t have their own money – so 47 saved $87b of taxpayers money
Chuckle. I would say someone’s med dose needs adjustment.
The first three do not even merit consideration. As for the $87 billion, it is not gone from the economy; it is simply freed up to be redirected toward productive use.
Forced EV production, or any other item not in real market demand, is no more stimulating to the economy than hiring people to dig holes and then refill them (though I am tempted to conclude that this is the sort of economic activity you and your ilk are best suited for).
Look, when ideology smothers rationality in a person’s mind, they will continue with the etched-in dogma that has captured them, regardless of the observational realities that confront them.
On our human species’ evolutionary journey to (supposedly) develop reason and logic, we also picked up a capacity for irrationality.
Proving once again that nature is constantly out to get us and all living things on this earth in one way or another.
Gaining control of the MSM is instrumental in the Marxist plan and AGW is a HUGE part of it. It’s the best way to spread propaganda. If Americans don’t wake up we’ll be in the same boat as the UK.
Exactly right.
“There is this spiral of climate silence.”
They don’t get it yet. “Climate” is spiraling as an issue because it has has been Flushed. Swirlied. Down the Tubes, as they say.
That is all for now.
It’s definitely headed for the chute at the bottom of the Porcelain Throne
“because it has has been Flushed”
Around the “S” bend, and out to the sewer, whence it came from…. Its natural home.
There is an old story that applies perfectly to CAGW. Something about crying wolf!
Story tip!
Another study about consumption and inequality. The ‘Rich’ have should pay more carbon taxes.
– – – – – – – – –
‘Mega-consumers’ of food and energy cost environment $5.7tn a year, study finds
Top 10% generate climate and biodiversity damage bill that exceeds economies of most countries, say researchers
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jun/18/mega-consumers-food-energy-damage-cost-environment
More CO2 emissions and models.
Environmental damages of the top ten percent consumers exceed global climate and biodiversity funding gaps
The top 10% of global consumers is disproportionately responsible for transgressing planetary boundaries, causing damages for which broader society bears the costs.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44458-026-00079-x
FYI The top 10% is ANYONE with a net worth of more than $12M. Once they move out YOU will have to pick up their slack.
FYI The top 10% pay upwards of 76% of annual Income Tax Revenue collected by the government the bottom 90% pay only 24% of the annual revenue collected.
The bottom 50% pay less than 1%.
The bottom 20 to 30% get refund checks that exceed the amount of taxes they paid during the year.
There’s no evidence CO2 or mega-consumers are causing any climate or biodiversity damage.
Just saying it is so doesn’t make it so.
Hey Guys!
I do not agree with The Guardian. I was just pointing out another stupid story, based on CO2 emissions and models. The Guardian is always publishing stories about solving ‘evil capitalism’, and wealth redistribution.
“Environmental damages” by wind and solar FAR outweighs any damage done by hydrocarbon fuels.
They actually produce very little of the world’s energy, and have caused a lot of environmental damage.
What in the world is a so-called ”mega consumer”? Elon Musk puts his pants on one leg at a time and probably eats and burns about the same daily calories as just about anyone. Or do they mean the morbidly obese people are the world’s mega consumers?
The 10% that the writer is attempting to demonize are not mega consumers, they are mega producers.
Mr Leiserowitz lives in his own little world.
and apparently, so do you.
Poor little socialist, it can’t think of anything intelligent to say, but still has to earn it’s paycheck.
I’m beginning to wonder how old you are and if your parents know that you’re on the internet unsupervised.
Disney even has a ride perfectly resembling it!
It’s a world of crime
and a world of fears.
It’s a world of shame
and a world of tears.
It’s a world not so great
and a world full of hate.
It’s a small minded world!
I can’t think of any Trump supporters who have drunk the climate KoolAid.
None I know either.
im sorry, is it a good thing? are trump supporters like the epitome of the average citizen?
Obviously they are way smarter than the average lo-IQ, lo-intelligence Democrat voter. !
I mean, they didn’t vote for the drunken Kamal, did they…
… how incredibly dumb would you have to be, to do that ! !!
Yes, you have to be pretty dumb to vote for Kamala.
She is so dumb she would end up hurting everyone including the Dumocrats who voted for her.
She’s so dumb that blondes are telling Kamala jokes.
I’m trying to sound if you actually are as dumb as you sound, or if you are trying to pull a false flag operation to make socialists look stupid?
Occam’s Razor suggests the former.
First and foremost Trump supporters Love Their Country
Secondly 90% of Republicans Love Their Country
Only 24% of Democrats Love Their Country
The other 76% ??? Probably raised to Hate Everything not considered liberal.
77 million people voted for Trump. I’d say as a demographic sample across the US, it’s about as average as you can get. Dumbass.
No, More like the median. The leftist half is more stupid, uninformed, and gullible.
And as a Trump supporter do you feel let down by this deal with Iran? Just wondering?
The actual deal, or the lies about it that are being pushed by the left?
The deal? Love to know what you think of the deal Mark. You a fan? If so be specific. What do you think is good about it?
I like most of the deal that Trump signed.
As to the lies that the left has been spouting, I consider the source.
Be specific Mark. What do you like?
Trump signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Simon.
Now the haggling over “the deal” will begin.
There is no deal yet, that is still to be worked out.
At this stage it’s a lot like the Paris Accords. Nothing’s final until Congress accepts it. And Congress never voted on Paris.2015
And no doubt Trump will be getting a lot of advice from Congress on how to proceed.
Did Eisenhower (D) seek Congressional approval before Viet Nam in 1955?
NOPE!
Did Kennedy (D) seek Congressional approval to continue the conflict during his term 1960-1963?
NOPE!
Did Johnson (D) seek Congressional approval upon assuming presidential duties in 1963?
NOPE!
In fact, it wasn’t until the Viet Name war had been raging for more than 9 years that a (D) Democrat, on August 7, 1964 finally sought Congressional Approval to increase military involvement.
.
And it ultimately took a Republican to end US involvement.
OK well Tom maybe you can tell me what you like about the MOU? No one seems to want to support it.
And to be clear though, whatever you call it, both sides have agreed to do the things contained in it. That is an expectation from here.
Well, I think Trump is taking a number of things into consideration including the plight of the innocent Iranian citizens. So he lifts the embargo on Iran’s ports.
This will give the religious fanatics money, which is what is the main complaint of members of Congress. But Treasury Secretary Bessent knows all about how they spend any money they get and if they don’t spend it properly it will be stopped.
Trump is also listening to the Gulf Arab nations who fear more Iranian attacks on their oil and gas infrastructure if a deal isn’t made.
Trump is also thinking about the larger economic impact of the war on the economies of the whole world.
Plus, Trump is not bloodthirsty. He does not want to attack unnecessarily.
The main fear of intelligent people is that these religious fanatics have not changed their behavior, and I agree, and giving them money is not a good idea. But I think Secretary Bessent can successfully ride herd on the money, and Trump is going to be holding a gun to the fanatics head at all times.
So we will see.
The thing I hate about this is the endless uninformed speculation by friend and foe alike. I feel like I’m listening to people who speculate endlessly about CO2 and climate change. Everybody has an opinion, but not many actually have the facts.
Good for you Tom. You are a legend. The only one here who gave it a go and you did so without the childish name calling. But…. you didn’t really say what you liked about it.
From my point of view, I think the real question is, given all the disruption to the global economy and the cost in human lives, how is this an improvement on the agreement Trump ripped up? I think it is probably worse.
It looks like the Iranians are going to toll the strait after the 60 day stand down.
The Iranians are going to get a whole lot more money.
The regime in charge (it is said) is a lot more crazy than the ones the Americans/Israelis killed.
Sanctions are being lifted on Iranian oil meaning they will be able to make a good deal of money going forward.
There is a new generation of Iranians who are hell bent on getting revenge. We know this lot don’t forget.
But…Yes there are some positives. The Iranian forces are depleted and will take some time to rebuild, but they will and with the new money may well be better and stronger.
On a positive note I see the US soccer team had a good win this morning. They looked good.
I think it gives both sides room for fair treatment, and it implies greater oversight of compliance than earlier agreements did.
As for getting revenge, I wonder, against whom that rage might be directed, considering that the regime slaughtered tens of thousands of its own citizens while the US and Israel practiced considerable restraint in that regard.
“I think it gives both sides room for fair treatment, and it implies greater oversight of compliance than earlier agreements did.”
Forgive me, but I’m wondering what wording in it gives you this confidence?
I did not express confidence; rather, hope. It offers Iran carrots rather than sticks, such as termination of sanctions and financial assistance, with caveats making the US the grantee, or by corollary, the denier of those carrots.
Section 5 addresses mutual cooperation with neighboring states regarding the passage of Hormuz:”The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”
From Section 6 regarding monetary incentives: “All required licenses, waivers and permissions needed for the relevant financial transactions will be granted by the United States of America.”
From Section 10: “US Department of Treasury will issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives, and all associated services, including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, etc.”
And Section 11:”Such funds, whether retained in the original account or transferred, shall be made fully usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America undertakes to issue all necessary licenses and authorizations accordingly.”
It is a crude framework. We shall see if it leads to a more concrete and mutually beneficial situation. I choose to be hopeful. Perhaps even the hardliners have shed enough blood to hope the same.
I think most of us share your hope, but not so much your optimism. The problem as I see it, is both sides have shown themselves to be unreliable partners and that is not a good base to build an agreement on, particularly one that relies on trust. Let’s not forget Iran had a deal with the US, that without consultation, was ripped up. And when you add Israels eagerness to bypass any ceasefire clauses, it looks even worse.
But you just never know….
I can’t disagree with your assessment of the difficulties, but I don’t think trust has anything to do with it. The hope lies in diligent scrutiny and, in the end, self-interest.
The biggest hurdles remain prejudice and rigid ideology. Those have been overcome before.
Do you still there was collluuusion ?
That is the answer
Your question doesn’t make sense (what a surprise). But while you are here mr Derg… do you think Trump has got the US a good deal here?
Depends on how long until the Iranians break their word.
Then Trump just pulls out his big stick and hacks them again. Iran has no neighbors that like their work.
“Depends on how long until the Iranians break their word.”
So, are you saying you shouldn’t make deals with them? But… Trump just has, so are you saying he was silly to????
Are you trying to play stupid, or are you just this stupid.
He likes moving the goalposts. Ignore him.
We agree that you are too stupid to understand. The US will always be great under Trump spectacularly so.
So nothing specific just insults. Clever….
You have been this site for a long time and have never retracted your belief in Colluuuusion. We see you for what you are.
So you don’t want to talk about the deal? Maybe you don’t like it but can’t say?
It doesn’t matter. Trump holds all the cards.
Can’t argue with someone who believes that. Have a nice day.
You will always have your colluuuusion 😉
Only reason Iran hasn’t been completely obliterated….
.. is because Trump doesn’t want to.
He wants them to become part of civilised society.. something Simon can never understand.
There is no deal. Do you feel let down for being such an idiot?
Playing with words huh? The memorandum of understanding then. Maybe you can tell me what you like about it? No one here seems to be able to.
The $300B fund is an INTERNATIONAL fund for the rebuilding of Iran and will be ADMINISTERED by the US. Trump has said that no US money will be put into the fund.
I don’t know what “Trump supporter” means. I am not one for identity politics. I have more faith in and hope for Mr. Trump’s motives than any other who has sought the office in my lifetime (with the exception of Ron Paul).
I think the outcome, as far as can be determined at this point, is by and large the best that can likely be expected. Not only has the Iranian regime (and its proxies) been systematically weakened, but the region has undergone a positive transition toward greater cooperation, and perhaps China’s influence has been reduced.
Let us not forget that the tensions of the region predate this administration, indeed, this nation. It will take God only knows how much effort to untangle the mess. I would never expect one person, even one as dynamic as Donald Trump, to be a sole saviour of the planet.
It is statements like this from Lieserowitz and others like him that give many of us little to no reason to listen to academics and other so called experts and professionals.
What evidence can The Guardian cite that Americans are actually taking action to combat climate change? Are they driving less? Utilizing public transit more? Increasing purchases of EVs? Reducing their air travel? Demanding more environmental taxes to help reduce carbon emissions? Reducing their red-meat consumption? Moving into more walkable neighborhoods? The reality is that none of this is occurring, but all we’re seeing in an article like this is another example of the desperation of the mainstream media which knows its climate alarmism is being increasingly ignored, so it has to resort to hyper-exaggeration and outright lies to get any attention on the issue, and even that is almost entirely dismissed.
Forget Americans, can the Guardian show that those who claim to believe in the climate myth are voluntarily doing anything about it.
Guardian who?
Utter nonsense. No more need be said.
This American grew up in 50s Texas where there was the expression, “they’ll figure a way to tax the air we breathe”. And by golly “they” did – CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming; changed to “Climate Change” because for 18 recent years while CO2 levels continued to rise, temps didn’t). So, the democrats came up with their latest completely untenable phraseology – CC. Lying requires more lying which eventually catches up to the liar(s). A problem is that the liars know that people are voting in the meantime.
Does anyone remember how “they” were going to blame and tax mankind in the 70s for “The Coming Ice Age” scam? I just remember it died on the vine before they could come up with a plausible scam.
No sane person would make the claims of the writer of this piece of nonsense. The election was a rejection of the democratic nominee and a message of positive change to come. Climate was pretty far down the list of concerns. The current concern is the high cost of everything which will cost Trump in the mid term elections if republicans lose control of the house and or senate. Climate is not an issue to most and most know nothing on the subject except the distortions and lies of the leftist democratic political machine which is about 95% of the press. I may be biased but my experience is 95% of people commenting on the subject have never actually looked up anything on the subject not in the leftist news.
“Americans believe in climate change, worry about climate change and support action on climate change,” said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the climate communication program at Yale University.
Climate change was only “top of mind” for the pols and “experts” who profiteered by sounding their alarms. Working Americans are still being punished by its pointless mandates.
Meanwhile, from a 2025 poll by the YPCCC – Yale Program on Climate Change Communication . . .
Americans …. support action on climate change
But the ridiculous thing continues to be that nothing that the Guardian advocates, nothing that the US climate activists advocate, can accurately be described as ‘action on climate change’, because it will have, on the CAGW theory itself, no effect on the climate.
All we are dealing with is totally misguided energy policies, which have nothing to do with the climate and can have no effect on it.
The plain fact is that the West as a whole is emitting too little for it to make any material difference, on the theory, if it stopped entirely. The only ones who could do anything, on the theory, are China, India, Indonesia etc, and they are determined to grow their economies as fast as they can and let the emissions go where they may. Which is up.
Its like people demanding that the UK bans underfloor heating and heated towel rails, and position this as ‘action on climate change’. Yes, that is a real proposal from Ed Miliband, Minister for Energy and Climate Change, Shortly to get out from under and become Chancellor. Or its like the NHS trying to ban some anesthetics because they contain minute quantities of GHGs.
Its extraordinary, this complete gap between what is being claimed as the rationale for these pointless measures and the real situation in the world.
The Guardian had a similar piece the other day about the FCC targeting the claims made by people offering what is called ‘gender affirming treatment’. Which, even if the alleged problem exists, is about as effective a remedy for it as bleeding was back in the day.
The correct response is: OK, then propose something the US can do that will actually have an effect on climate change. If you can find anything!
The Guardian didn’t make it to the 21st century.
Another clueless Guardian journo. Most mainstream Americans who aren’t blue city dumbocrats don’t give a rat’s patootie about the so-called “climate crisis.” What we are recovering from is a “climate policy crisis.”
I would put it differently. What we are recovering from is an energy policy crisis.
Under the excuse of doing something about the climate we have embarked on a hugely expensive program of untested and unworkable energy policies. These neither generate usable electricity nor do they have any effect on the climate, and their expense and futility is now becoming apparent.
Governments have abandoned their proper role, and simply resorted to doing whatever the latest group of activists demand, without considering either consequences, rationality or affordability.
The result is plainly visible in the UK, where there is a Minister for Energy and Climate Change. How on earth can the UK have a Minister for Climate Change? It makes as much sense as having a Minister for Mars. And what does he spend his time on? Worrying about whether people are installing underfloor heating or heated towel rails. Does this tell you anything?
No, its not climate policy that has gone off the rails. There is and cannot be any climate policy. Building wind farms is not a climate policy. Its energy policy. Moving to EVs is not a climate policy – its a transport policy.
Good God, what a load of horse hockey! Saying so doesn’t make it so, Grauniad.
No, I don’t think so.