iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Tim Profeta

GET UPDATES FROM Tim Profeta
 

The Climate Post: Romney, Obama Make History With Failure to Mention Climate Change in Last Debate

Posted: 10/26/2012 9:31 am

The final foreign-policy-focused presidential debate made history Monday when candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama failed to mention climate change. Despite historic drought and record melting of Arctic sea ice, failure to visit the topic marked the first time since the 1980s climate change hasn't come up in a presidential debate. Some argued the climate should have come up, as almost every major international issue -- food prices, military operations and energy access -- have an embedded climate component. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an audience in Georgetown recently, energy, climate and foreign policy are all really deeply intertwined.

Energy -- the yin to climate's yang -- did come up Monday, it was not nearly as dominant a topic as it was in the second debate last week. Clean energy was mentioned in a short exchange, with Obama and Romney examining the role basic research funding plays in keeping pace with other nations.

It took getting away from the Republicans and Democrats, but three of the four third-party presidential candidates -- Gary Johnson, Virgil Goode, Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson -- did treat climate change as a serious issue. In a debate televised on C-SPAN Tuesday, Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party called climate change "a greater long-term security risk to the United States than terrorism."

Is the U.S. Helping Asian Economies Save on Energy Costs?

So far in 2012, U.S. coal exports are setting a record pace. In fact, they are forecasted to reach near 125 million tons -- surpassing the previous all-time high of 113 million tons set in 1981. Growing demand in Asia may be a factor, raising the question of whether taxpayers are essentially helping Asian economies save on energy costs. ThinkProgress breaks down the issue ultimately concluding "Americans are paying for large companies to dig up coal at bargain prices, sell it to other countries at market prices, and subsidize their global warming pollution."

The world's largest producer of oil, meanwhile, plans to switch to 100 percent renewable energy. Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud said he sees solar playing a large role in the transition -- with the nation's vast oil reserves being used to create other goods such as plastics and polymers, rather than burned in power plants. It turns out that Saudi Arabia's days as world's largest oil producer may be numbered: The U.S. is now on track to take the spot after a recent surge in production that included the largest one-year gain in over 60 years.

In the U.S., more than 200 scientists are protesting the use of two invasive grasses for advanced biofuel feedstock under the nation's Renewable Fuel Standard. In a letter sent to the Obama administration, they write:

"While we appreciate the steps that federal agencies have made to identify and promote renewable energy sources and to invest in second- and third-generation sources of bioenergy, we strongly encourage you to consider the invasive potential of all novel feedstock species, cultivars, and hybrids before providing incentives leading to their cultivation."

The New York Times says the authors fear a repeat of what happened when government-financed programs introduced kudzu -- "the vine that ate the South" -- in the 1930s.

Convictions a "Fundamental Misunderstanding of Science"

An Italian court this week sentenced a group of scientists to six years in prison for failing to properly communicate the risk ahead of a deadly 2009 earthquake. Mother Earth called the courts actions a "fundamental misunderstanding of what science can and can't do." The verdict outraged those in the scientific community, who claim predicting the absolute date, time and risk is nearly impossible." The real problem is helping people understand how risk works," Erik Klemetti, a geoscientist at Denison University in Ohio, told LiveScience. "You can't expect that scientists can come in and tell people 'an earthquake will happen here on Oct. 28, 2013.' Instead, they must understand that there is an increased probability of earthquakes or eruptions in certain areas -- and that they must take responsibility for understanding the risks of where they live."

The Guardian reports these claims may be a bit overstated, noting:

"... the prosecutors, and the devastated families they represent, are well aware that scientists cannot predict earthquakes. The accusation they make is not that experts failed to predict the earthquake, but that they failed to properly assess and communicate the risks, telling residents they were safe without any scientific basis for doing so."

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

 

Follow Tim Profeta on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NichInstitute

FOLLOW GREEN
The final foreign-policy-focused presidential debate made history Monday when candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama failed t...
The final foreign-policy-focused presidential debate made history Monday when candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama failed t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:37 PM on 10/29/2012
I'm now actually hearing people say that Hurricane Sandy was fabricated by high flying planes with a secret storm-forming technology so as to convince us that climate change is real. Maybe, if we ignore climate change, or create some elaborate conspiracy theory, the problem will just go away.....Nice try people. Climate change is real, not a hoax, and something we in the US cannot solve alone either. This is why I encourage interested citizens to support the Ecocide is a Crime campaign. We've either got to be all for all or none for all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Brockman
09:48 PM on 10/28/2012
Face it: the news media got bored with climate change.

Now no one cares any more.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:04 PM on 10/26/2012
Rocky Anderson is right, climate change is a more serious long-term threat to the United States than terrorism. But most Americans are much more concerned about terrorism because it is also a short-term threat. In fact, a terrorist act could occur an any moment. It is the slow progression of climate change which makes is so difficult to for the US to address. Here politicians are focused on the next election and businesses are focused on the next quarter's report. It is basically only the environmental organizations and grassroots environmentalists who are focused on the long-term. For the Sierra Club and all other national and international environmental organizations climate change is the number one priority issue. They have it right but in our around-the-clock news world that we now live in slow moving climate change simply doesn't hold the interest of viewers to sell enough ads. Our focus on the short-term is our Achilles heel.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:48 PM on 10/26/2012
Ignored because it is a ----------------NON-----ISSUE!
05:40 PM on 10/26/2012
Going on the conspiracy theory that corporations control both the Dems and Republicans, it looks like drug companies and polluters are in control.

Drug prices, like climate change, are outrageous and also have not been discussed.
12:58 PM on 10/26/2012
Just another reason why ALL candidates for president should be allowed to debate together. That this subject was ignored at the debates is incredible.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RudyHaugeneder
11:52 AM on 10/26/2012
Obama and Romney are deniers. Period.
12:24 PM on 10/26/2012
Climate change support is political suicide unless the millions of people in the global scientific community take action, otherwise it's safe to assume scientific exaggeration. We don't WANT this misery to be real do we? That's how the voter sees it.
07:08 PM on 10/26/2012
It's political suicide because so far all we've heard as possible solutions is scam driven, unbelievable nonsense. People do not want to hear the sky is falling, they want a rational description of the problem and some realistic solutions. So far I've heard nothing about mitigation strategies for a global climate change that is not going to be stopped by green technology or banning plastic bags. It's going to happen and what we should be hearing is a plan to relocate low lying communities, build sea walls as practical, something possible. At some point in time Florida and Manhattan will be under water. When, that is the question, nobody knows. But knowing it's going to happen gives us time to think about what to do. Too many sensationalist lies cause people to tune out and question the credibility of those who should be coming up with real solutions. My guess is nothing will happen until Manhattan is under water that does not recede. A crisis. Then they will do something else that is stupid. How they handled Katrina. That's their model. The gang who couldn't shoot straight, our government, only good for stealing our assets, making war and spending all our national wealth on a police state.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
verflixed
It will come to pass
11:32 AM on 10/26/2012
Is it because they think the public does not care or is it because they don't care or is it because they do not want to frighten the people or is it cause they are "IGNORANT"?
07:15 PM on 10/26/2012
It's because they know nothing can be done. Instead they use the coming crisis to justify corporate welfare building solar panels. Or deny it's happening. They can't come out and say it's happening, nothing can be done. That would be political suicide. What they should be doing is developing mitigation strategies, but that has no priority compared to helping banks and corporations rob us blind so the 1% can move to Switzerland.
10:58 AM on 10/26/2012
Science needs to step up to the plate and be honest with us if CO2 mitigation is to ever happen:
*In all of the debates so far, Obama hasn’t planned to mention climate change once.
*Obama has not mentioned the crisis in the last two State of the Unions addresses.
*Occupywallstreet does not even mention CO2 in its list of demands because of the bank-funded carbon trading stock markets run by corporations.
*Julian Assange is of course a climate change denier.
*Canada killed Y2Kyoto with a freely elected climate change denying prime minister and nobody cared, especially the millions of scientists warning us of unstoppable warming (a comet hit).
Science has betrayed its own warnings of crisis:
The millions of people in the global scientific community that are not reacting to the world walking away from their crisis "warnings", proves climate change was just an exaggeration.
07:12 PM on 10/26/2012
People are tired of hearing bogus solutions driven by scam artists who plan to make money by generating hysteria. It's happening, polar ice caps are melting, but the question is what to do about it, is there anything that can be done. Scientists trying to push political agendas have discredited the warnings. Politicians as usual do nothing but generate crises that they use to come up with ways to help corporations get welfare to pursue ridiculous 'solutions'. What's going to happen is some real crisis, then they will react to that like they did with Katrina. Let the poor die, rescue the rich.