Alternative Facts Won’t Bring the Polar Bears Back

Katie Silvestri

Let’s face it:

At this point, no one can really ignore the attack Donald Trump plans to bring against environmental policies so carefully crafted throughout the Obama administration.  For instance, his appointment of Myron Ebell (a climate change skeptic) to lead the EPA transition team seems about as intuitive as hiring a well-trained wolf to babysit your children on a Friday night. 

One major contradiction in Trump’s policies is his broken-record chorus of “Clean Coal, Clean Coal, Clean Coal.”

First off, this anthem is misleading because “Clean Coal” is not some special substance lurking deep within the mines of Indiana.  Rather, “Clean Coal” is a concept; specifically, it involves ways to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂), other greenhouse gases (GHGs), and radioactive materials which arise from the combustion of coal (typically for electrical power generation) through the application of clean coal technology.

Sounds decent so far, right?

Well, when you really think about it, the question you have to ask is:  what drives “clean coal” technology?  Short answer is:  laws.  Particularly, all those important regulations which Trump now vows to do away with.  Statutes and regulations enacted during the Obama administration, such as the Clean Power Plan (CPP) are intended to have a “technology-forcing” effect, meaning that while they may set perceptively stringent limitations in the short-term, the laws also promote the advancement of better technology for the future, working not only to reduce pollution, but to lead us away from reliance on coal, toward better energy sources.  

The CPP sets a basis for the first-ever national standards to address carbon pollution from power plants, cutting significant amounts of power plant carbon pollution, as well as pollutants that cause soot and smog which are extremely harmful to public health.  At the same time, the CPP encourages clean energy innovation, development and deployment, establishing a foundation for the long-term strategy needed to tackle the threat of climate change. 

Simply put, if a Trump administration repeals the allegedly “burdensome” and “unnecessary” environmental regulations on the coal industry, there will be more pollution, fewer incentives to develop newer, cleaner technology, and effectively no “clean coal” at all.

What Trump fails to realize is, the enactment of all those “burdensome” laws hindering coal production was long overdue.  There is a price to pay for rampant pollution, and we’ll have to pick up the bill sooner or later.  

Finally, I’ll leave you with one last point to consider:  how much damage can Trump really do? 

Consider it for a minute:  environmental issues are not truly partisan in politics, no matter how much the Trump administration paints them out to be.  Coal is no longer the robust source of industry it once was – it doesn’t employ a lot of Americans, and it doesn’t promote significant investment anymore.  One day, coal will become obsolete.  And if Trump wants to be re-elected, his war on environmental policy has to end at some point. 

From there, the next burden will be on us as voters to bring these issues to light, in whatever way we can.

 

Katie Silvestri is a law student at Penn State University who feels uncomfortable writing about herself in the third person.  She zealously studies environmental and natural resources law, as well as other fields of law with comparatively mild zeal.  Katie works for Levene Gouldin & Thompson LLP, and hopes to become a member of their Energy Law and Litigation Group, or to someday work in the field of environmental defense.