Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Politics

What You Didn’t Hear at the Second GOP Debate

Despite appearing in a building damaged by a brush fire, the candidates weren’t asked a single question about climate change.

Republican debate participants.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The second Republican presidential debate was defined more by what it lacked than by what it had. Undoubtedly the biggest absence was former President Donald Trump, who skipped the debate entirely and campaigned in Michigan instead. (Despite media reports that he would address the striking United Autoworkers, he spoke at a non-union auto-parts company, where he trashed electric vehicles at length.)

The second biggest absence was any question about climate change. Although moderators at the first Republican presidential debate asked about climate change within the first 20 minutes, this debate all but pretended it didn’t exist.

When Vivek Ramaswamy said that he joined TikTok in order to reach young people and win the election, Danielle Butcher Franz, the conservative CEO of the American Conservation Coalition, tweeted: “If Vivek wants to reach young Americans, he doesn't need to make TikToks with cringe influencers. He could simply address the issues they care about. Climate is a good place to start.”

It was only towards the end of the debate that the moderators even addressed a climate change-adjacent topic that Republicans of all stripes should be very comfortable asking: How are you going to ramp up oil drilling even, as Stuart Varney said, you would run into opposition from the courts?

Vivek Ramaswamy, who in the last debate said the “climate change agenda is a hoax,” instead launched into a familiar litany of his grab bag of economic policy ideas: He would “run through” the courts and the administrative state; he would end the scourge of “using taxpayer money to pay more people to stay at home than to go work,”; scrap regulations; and reform the Federal Reserve to give it a mandate of maintaining the value of the dollar.

Get one great climate story in your inbox every day:

* indicates required
  • Pence counterposed the achievements of the Trump administration — namely an energy export boom — against the “war on energy” that he accused the Biden administration of waging (tell it to the climate activists outraged at the administration’s approval of the Alaskan Willow drilling project). “We’re going to open up federal lands, we’re going to unleash American energy, we’re going to have an all-of-the-above-energy strategy,” Pence said.

    Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis proceeded to fight over DeSantis’ energy record in Florida.

    There were two odd things about this whole portion of the debate.

    The first was that it was a discussion of energy policy with no mention of climate change. The debate was being held at the Reagan Library in the scrubby hills of Simi Valley in Ventura County. In 2019, the library suffered half a million dollars worth of damage thanks to a brush fire. The next Republican debate will be held in Miami, Florida, perhaps the major city most exposed to sea level rise. Fires, floods, energy policy, and no climate change?

    Even Donald Trump, in his hour-plus rant against electric cars and the Biden White House, at least had an explanation for why Democrats in power implemented environmental and energy policies he disagrees with. He even tried to argue that actually he’s better on the environment because of his opposition to electric car subsidies and attendant rare earth mining and, of course, the threat wind turbines pose to birds (and whales).

    For the Republicans debating each other on stage, it was just a hurried recital of talking points that have been barely updated since the days of “drill, baby, drill.”

    And none of the major candidates seemed particularly comfortable with the details of energy policy. Doug Burgum, governor of the state that’s sixth in the nation in total energy production and third in oil production, had to insist on his right to talk about oil production “as the only person leading an energy state,” but the moderator redirected the question to Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, a state that ranks 26th in energy production and has no hydrocarbon industry to speak of.

    This stands in contrast to past Republican contests, which have featured candidates like George W. Bush, who worked in the oil industry, or John McCain, who supported cap-and-trade, or Bush’s successor in serving as governor of America’s major energy producer, Rick Perry.

    Now, it appears, climate change is at best an afterthought in Republican politics, while energy policy is either an issue of sleepy consensus within the party or an adjunct to the culture war against the Democratic Party.

    Read more about the debate:

    DeSantis Actually Did Want to Ban Fracking in Florida

    Yellow

    You’re out of free articles.

    Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
    To continue reading
    Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
    or
    Please enter an email address
    By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
    Politics

    The Only Path to Permitting Reform Runs Through Trump

    Congressional Democrats will have to trust the administration to allow renewables projects through. That may be too big an ask.

    Donald Trump.
    Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

    How do you do a bipartisan permitting deal if the Republicans running the government don’t want to permit anything Democrats like?

    The typical model for a run at permitting reform is that a handful of Republicans and Democrats come together and draw up a plan that would benefit renewable developers, transmission developers, and the fossil fuel industry by placing some kind of limit on the scope and extent of federally-mandated environmental reviews. Last year’s Energy Permitting Reform Act, for instance, co-sponsored by Republican John Barrasso and Independent Joe Manchin, included time limits on environmental reviews, mandatory oil and gas lease sales, siting authority for interstate transmission, and legal clarity for mining projects. That passed through the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee but got no further.

    Keep reading...Show less
    Hotspots

    Trump Administration to ‘Reconsider’ Approval for MarWin

    And more of the week’s most important conflicts around renewable energy.

    The United States.
    Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

    1. Sussex County, Delaware – The Trump administration has confirmed it will revisit permitting decisions for the MarWin offshore wind project off the coast of Maryland, potentially putting the proposal in jeopardy unless blue states and the courts intervene.

    • Justice Department officials admitted the plans in a paragraph tucked inside a filing submitted to a federal court in Delaware this week in litigation brought by a beach house owner opposed to the offshore wind project.
    • DOJ stated in the filing that more time was “necessary as Interior intends to reconsider its [construction and operations plan] approval” for MarWin, and that it plans to “move” for “voluntary remand of that agency action” in a separate case filed by Ocean City, Maryland against the project.
    • “The outcome of Interior’s reconsideration has the potential to affect the Plaintiff’s claims in this case,” the filing stated. “Continuing to litigate this case before any decision is made in the [Ocean City case] would potentially waste considerable time and resources for both the parties and the Court.” As of today, no new filings have been made in the Ocean City case.

    2. Northwest Iowa – Locals fighting a wind project spanning multiple counties in northern Iowa are opposing legislation that purports to make renewable development easier in the state.

    Keep reading...Show less
    Yellow
    Q&A

    Should Renewable Energy Companies Sue Trump?

    They don’t have much to lose, Heiko Burow, an attorney at Baker & Mackenzie, tells me.

    Heiko Burow.
    Heatmap Illustration

    This week, since this edition of The Fight was so heavy, I tried something a little different: I interviewed one of my readers, Heiko Burow, an attorney with Baker & Mackenzie based in Dallas, Texas. Burow doesn’t work in energy specifically – he’s an intellectual property lawyer – but he’s read many of my scoops over the past few weeks about attacks on renewable energy and had legitimate criticism! Namely, as a lawyer who is passionate about the rule of law, he wanted to send a message to any developers and energy wonks reading me to use the legal system more often as a tool against attacks on their field.

    The following conversation has been abridged for clarity. Let’s dive in.

    Keep reading...Show less
    Yellow