Scott Pruit, US Environmental Protection Agency chief, made headlines for his recent denial that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is the primary control knob for Earth’s climate. Of course, the truth is that growth in CO2 emissions is the main contributor to the climate change we see. Without emissions abatement it seems inevitable that pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere will be catastrophic for most, if not all, nations.

Pruitt’s appointment makes that reshaping less likely. This is not about the science. It is not about economic priority setting nor conflicting values. It is not about a desire for small government, the primacy of individual freedom or myopic belief in capitalism. The only fact that matters is that solving the climate issue means killing the fossil fuel industry – arguably the most influential on the planet.

Zero-carbon technology is now cheaper and easier to install. Renewables promise individual freedom through energy self-sufficiency. The world economy is at a crucial inflection point, and the US is well placed to ride the storm and capitalise on the next economic revolution. But vested interests dominate the landscape and US policy could delay the revolution.

The Russian economy is, on the other hand, a basket case. Apart from oil and gas, it produces little anyone wants to buy. Clean energy is likely to put its economy in a death spiral.

Serious questions have been asked about the role of Russia, the world’s fifth largest greenhouse gas emitter and the largest oil producer, in the election of Donald Trump. Perhaps it’s time to expend more effort asking why it wanted him in power.
(The above, edited, article, by Owen Gaffney, appeared the New Scientist under the headline “Putin’s real prize?”)

Trump might (have) genuinely wanted a reset with Russia, and it suited him to have the Russians interfering with the election, undermining Hillary. Putin, for his part, as the article above suggests, wants a climate change denier in the White House. Protecting his oil revenue is his biggest objective, even though Trump said he wanted to reduce energy prices by promoting fracking, which is hardly in Russia’s short-term interests. The financial stakes are huge, not only for Russia, but also for the Americans, mostly of Republican persuasion, who have financially fed off the largesse of the oil industry and have sublimated their better instincts and their morality in favour of accepting jobs and cash from Exxon and others. It’s a sordid story, illustrating why Epicurus warned us against too close an involvement with politics. Meanwhile, what were those Trump supporters doing talking on the phone to the Russians, overheard by most of the West’s secret services?