“Gov. Abbott, we would like to bid you a political adieu. Perhaps you can devote your time to rebuilding Houston and taking night classes in climate science.”
“And to ExxonMobil, Chevron, Koch Industries, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, and other oil giants doing your business in Texas: You put up the first $25 billion in Houston disaster relief. Call it compensation for your emissions. Tell the truth about growing climate threats. Then, as citizens seeking the common good, we will match your stake.”
Jeffrey Sachs, “Sachs: Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott Needs to Resign,” CNN Opinion, August 29, 2017.
“Sachs: Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott Needs to Resign,” screams the headline at CNN Opinion.
The author is Jeffrey Sachs, head of Columbia University’s The Earth Institute, which defines itself as “blend[ing] research in the physical and social sciences, education, and practical solutions to help guide the world onto a path toward sustainability.”
Sachs is not interested in bottom-up subsoil privatization and free-market capitalism to advance local, national, and global energy markets and to democratize wealth for ‘sustainability.’ He is a central planner who uses the rational of global climate change and other environmental nostrums to promote his view of ‘sustainability.”
And he is mad, heaping mad, at Houston and at Texas.
Sachs has let his hurricane of emotions overflow the rational banks of his mind. The new federal approach to the science, economics, and public policy of climate change has him incensed. Add the (worst-case path) of Hurricane Harvey (blamed on CO2 emissions) and you get a very angry, hateful editorial.
If Sachs and the Church of Climate thinks this will help their cause, it will not. It offends and will only add to the polarization with the great middle unmoved.
It remains to be seen if there is enough backlash to get Sachs to apologize. But in any case, he has scored negative political points.
Excerpts from the August 29th editorial follow:
“It’s important to politicize Hurricane Harvey. Not politics in the sense of political parties, or politics to win elections. Politics to protect America.”
“Once the immediate crisis ends, the governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, should resign with an apology to his state and his country. Then the Texas delegation in Congress should make a public confession. They have lied to their constituents for too long, expecting the rest of America to keep bailing them out.”
“Texas politics aims to bring profits to the oil and gas industry, but it does this at high cost and dire threat to Texas residents and the American people.”
“Abbott, for example, was the governor to sign a new law in 2015 that prevents cities and municipalities in Texas from setting their own regulations that might rein in oil and gas drilling activities. On his watch, Texas supported withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement.”
“Over many years, he has raked in millions in campaign contributions from the oil industry, including in his former role as Texas attorney general, where he sued the Environmental Protection Agency repeatedly over rules designed to curb carbon emissions.”
” … climate change is making it all worse. The rise in the sea level, roughly a foot during the past century, means more flood surges. The warming of the Gulf of Mexico means more energy for hurricanes. The global warming also means more moisture in the atmosphere, enabling the catastrophic rains now inundating Houston and environs.”
“Gov. Abbott, we would like to bid you a political adieu. Perhaps you can devote your time to rebuilding Houston and taking night classes in climate science.”
“Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, you will soon be asking us for money to help Texas. My answer will be yes, if you stop spewing lies about climate dangers, agree to put US and Texas policy under the guidance of climate science, back measures to lower carbon emissions and stay in the Paris Climate Agreement. Then, of course, let’s help your constituents to rebuild.”
“And to ExxonMobil, Chevron, Koch Industries, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, and other oil giants doing your business in Texas: You put up the first $25 billion in Houston disaster relief. Call it compensation for your emissions. Tell the truth about growing climate threats. Then, as citizens seeking the common good, we will match your stake.”
To be fair, Sach’s editorial weaves in a quite separate issue of flood control and flood protection.
There were countless reasons to fear the worst with Harvey, in addition to the obvious fact that Houston is a low-lying coastal region situated deeply within the Gulf of Mexico’s hurricane strike zone. Houston has been growing rapidly without attention to flood risk. Houston has experienced several serious floods in recent years. Houston narrowly dodged a bullet in 2008 when Hurricane Ike swerved away from a direct hit on the city just before landfall.
But this is a separate issue from exaggerated views of the human influence on climate. The issue is economics and incentives created by public authorities versus private parties.
Insurance companies will adjust their premiums because of this worst case event, and yes, government should not subsidize insurance to (government) socialize the costs of risky building. But to spew hate toward Texas politicians who rightly reject climate alarmism is beyond the pale.
Iowa Climate Science Education 