Disturbing developments that indicate climate change is getting worse keep surfacing, even as the consequences for planet Earth seem to fall farther off the public radar.
That much seems clear, but here’s what isn’t any longer: the political divide over the future of renewable energy.
Republican U.S. senators increasingly are trying to put the brakes on President Donald Trump’s efforts to upend the renewable energy industry.
More specifically, they are expressing concern about the scuttling of tax credits for such things as solar and wind energy projects in the massive Trump-backed tax and spending bill approved by the House just before Memorial Day.
The GOP senators aren’t issuing dire warnings about what discouraging clean energy may mean regarding the changing climate, but for the thousands of jobs that may be lost in their states if the tax credit cuts remain in their version of the bill.
Reasons aside, their positions have altered what had been a fairly clear distinction between Republicans and Democrats on alternative energy sources.
It’s no secret that red states have benefitted mightily from clean energy investments and the tax breaks that encourage them, many of which were ed under President Joe Biden. Trump likes to target climate policies in blue states, particularly California, but that push will result in collateral damage to more politically friendly areas.
Texas, for instance, leads the nation in renewable energy production, ahead of California.
The jostling in the halls of the Capitol comes on the heels of yet another downbeat report about climate change that continues the trend of those before it. Some researchers say an important climate goal may have fallen.
Policymakers and nations agreed years ago that if global warming could be held to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times, a climate catastrophe and major rise in sea levels might be avoided.
But a study published last week in Communications Earth & Environment concluded that even if warming stops at that level, or slightly below it, polar ice sheets will probably continue to quickly melt, causing seas to rise and displacing coastal communities, according to The Washington Post.
Even without the Trump action, fossil-fuel-generated greenhouse gas emissions and global temperatures have continued to rise for years.
“Greenhouse gas levels are record high. Global temperatures are record high. Sea level rise is record high. Antarctic sea ice is record low. It’s a deafening cacophony of broken records,” said Petteri Taalas, former secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organization.
The WMO released a report this week said the planet seems certain to blow past the 1.5 degree limit in the next couple of years.
The 1.5-degree threshold was ed for a while last year, according to numerous international agencies, though there was some disagreement about that.
The repetitive nature of the dire warnings and the notion that some of the far-reaching impacts will occur years from now may have numbed the public to the crisis somewhat. Understandably, the upheaval and uncertainty in the economy, politics and the international order have more immediacy.
Still, not a hurricane or wildfire season goes by without reminders that they already have become more intense due to the changing climate.
Senate Republican reaction to the House bill has ranged from caution to outspoken opposition.
Some have expressed broad worries that the House bill will dangerously expand the federal debt. But there has been a strong undercurrent about the renewable energy credits. At the very least, some argue for a slower phaseout of the subsidies.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is facing a potentially tough re-election campaign next year, said an immediate phaseout would “have a chilling effect” on “future investments” in the domestic energy sector.
“I’m concerned about the direction the House takes,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, told Bloomberg regarding the tax credits. “Obviously we have our work cut out for us.”
In all, the bill would take away $522 billion that is scheduled to be injected into local economies across the country, according to The Washington Post.
“The majority of the government spending is creating jobs and manufacturing capacity in red states,” said Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. “So this puts Republicans, generally and now in the Senate, in the position of having to choose whether to the party line or maintain for government programs that are creating a lot of economic activity in their states.”
An unusual merging of interests is emerging between climate activists and some Republican senators.
Some of the economic warnings about the renewable energy cuts have somewhat of a parallel tone to the climate-doom scenarios: Investments could drop sharply or shift abroad, particularly to China. Cuts could threaten the stability of the power grid, which has become increasingly reliant on solar and wind power. U.S. communities could face blackouts. Utility bills will increase.
“House budget bill effectively halts US clean energy boom,” was the headline of a Reuters news analysis.
However, the nuclear industry gained some relief in the bill, receiving some limited extensions for tax credits on new plants. Still, that’s not enough for some GOP senators. Trump also signed executive orders to encourage nuclear power by streamlining the permitting process for projects and reducing regulations.
At the moment, some Republicans in the upper house suggest they’re ready to oppose various provisions in the House bill, including the clean energy cuts.
Their majority margin in the Senate is razor-thin, potentially providing them with leverage. But that was the same dynamic in the House, for a while.
After some relatively modest concessions were made, virtually all House Republicans fell in line behind Trump.
