“Bjorn Lomborg writes in the WSJ, in an election characterized by bitter clashes”

Our Take, With Doug Sheridan

Bjorn Lomborg writes in the WSJ, in an election characterized by bitter clashes, it's notable that one typically divisive topic has gone almost unmentioned—climate change. Trump doesn't have much to say on the subject. But Harris's silence is revealing... not only about voters, but the fundamental problem of climate policy.

You might think Harris could use the partisan divide on climate policy to her advantage. If she hammered Trump's frequent recitations of “drill baby, drill," it could drive turnout from liberal voters who fear he would increase fossil fuel production. She has hardly been neutral on this issue in the past. She personally made the most expensive US climate policy in history into law when she cast the deciding vote for the IRA in 2022.

Yet Harris merntioned climate just once in her acceptance speech. The environment hardly figured in her debate with Trump. Harris used her time to champion domestic gas production and make it “very clear" she won't ban fracking.

One reason for her silence is that, despite a media and elite fixation on climate, the issue can easily becomea vote loser. Across the country, Americans rank climate change far down among their priorities—below the availability and cost of energy.

For politicians, climate policy was much easier to sell when it involved far-off, monumental promises. This is the first US election in which it has become evident that though benefits remain distant, the costs are increasingly large and immediate. Voters see that. And by staying silent, it's clear that Harris does too.

Our Take: The political left has pulled out all the stops when it comes to actions toward, and claims about, fixing climate change. Obama said his election was "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal." Later in his presidency, the Paris Agreement was passed by virtually every nation on the planet. Solar and wind are now everywhere, subsidized and mandated to the hilt. Led by California and Norway, EVs have been favored by gov'ts for over a decade. Auto companies went all in, too. The academic and scientific communities are united in their support for all things green—even to the point of zealotry. Our youngest generations have been successfully brainwashed to protest against fossil fuels and vote for netzero. The financial sector was on board... ESG, climate credits, green investing have had ever opportunity to take off. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DOE and other gov't agencies have put out anti-fossil fuel rules and regulations regularly. So has the EU. More courts are inclinded to force what politicians can't pass. The entire world hears constantly about the energy transition as an imperative. Yet greenhouse gas concentrations... and temps... rise seemingly unabated.

Our Take 2: The massively expensive effort to fix the climate has been a colossal failure. The wrist part is that it was destined to be so from the beginning.