Of Cats and Climate
I have only one serious argument with Vice President Kamala Harris’ debate presentation. The elephant in the room wasn’t Trump, it was and is Climate.
It is not that Harris was silent on climate. When debate moderators asked both candidates about their plans regarding climate change, Harris did observe that homeowners are losing their insurance or facing skyrocketing insurance rates as the result of extreme weather and wildfires.
Climate change is “very real,” Harris said. “You ask anyone who lives in a state who has experienced these extreme weather occurrences who now is either being denied home insurance or it’s being jacked up; you ask anybody who has been the victim of what that means in terms of losing their home, having nowhere to go.”
Climate was the final question posed during the hour and a half debate. ABC News moderator Linsey Davis said climate was “important for a number of Americans, in particular younger voters.”
“We know that we can actually deal with this issue,” Harris said, but did not take the opportunity to expand on the fact that the outcome of this election will determine the behavior of the United States, one of the largest greenhouse gas emitters on earth. Instead, Harris fastened on the financial and household economic benefits of federal subsidies for wind and solar power, creating new, well-paying jobs.
Then she praised the Biden administration record highs in gas production.
As the production and burning of fossil fuels is the single greatest source of climate change and as the United States last year joined 200 other nations in a pledge to transition away from coal, oil and gas, I must ask how this simple, honest mind is supposed to interpret that statement.
Mme. Vice President, could you unpack this contradiction for me, please?
I am going to guess that Ms. Harris’ campaign advisors have told her that the American people do not care as much about climate change as they do about their incomes now and predictable, and the cost of living now and predictable, and therefore the best approach to climate change is to frame it as money.
So how does this presentation square with contradictory facts?
And as for burning gas, California, the state with the largest energy demand in the USA, has shown that the entire grid can be supplied with wind and solar for days on end.
The California Independent System Operators (CAISO) tells us that
“With Senate Bill 100 guiding the state toward a carbon-free power grid, energy agencies predict that thousands of megawatts of new solar, wind, and battery resources need to be built each year through 2040 to meet both increasing electric demands and state greenhouse gas reduction targets.
Installed renewable resources as of 8/6/2024
Solar 19,638 MW
Wind 8,352 MW
Small hydro 1,179 MW
Geothermal 1,610 MW
Biofuels 691 MW
I do hope that Vice President Harris’ campaign team will take these facts, possibly new to them, as beneficial to the Harris campaign’s credibility. Street cred matters, even when you’ve got a lock on the vote.
I’ve seen this kind of movie before. I’d like to see this candidate, endorsed by cat ladies and Swifties, progressives and suburbanites, people of all colors, bravely recognize that most of us, according to Yale, want strong climate action.
There’s no Obi-Wan Kenobi here. Just us.