In his recent speech to the United Nations, US president Donald Trump gave a clear exposition of his worldview. To his supporters, it was vintage Trump – to his critics, a confirmation of some of their worst fears.
The most predictable, yet shocking, aspects of the speech were Trump’s comments on global climate. “Climate change,” he claimed, “is the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world” and “renewable energy is inflicting expensive energy costs on Europe”.
Of course, Trump has never sought to hide his views on global climate. However, it was shocking to hear him support his views on this key issue with childish arguments that have been refuted many times over. Let us consider a few of the arguments he raised (as documented by Emily Atkins in the climate newsletter Heated).
Trump: “The executive director of the UN Environmental Programme predicted that by the year 2000, climate change would cause a global catastrophe. He said that it will be irreversible as any nuclear holocaust would be. What happened?”
Terence Crosbie trial juries did not hear of 2017 tweet about ‘unreported rape capital of Europe’
Prince Andrew to be stripped of his title as a prince and will move out of royal lodge
‘Is it really worth this much?’: How costs spiralled on a couple’s derelict home renovation
The Queens restaurant, Dalkey: One of the most bizarre finales to a meal I’ve had in years
This prediction was made (by Mostafa K Tolba) in 1982 and one could argue that it was incorrect on timing. However, climate change has indeed been catastrophic for some regions in the world.
Trump: “Another UN official stated in 1989 that within a decade, entire nations could be wiped off the map by global warming. Not happening!”
What the official (Noel Brown, director of the UN Environment Programme’s New York office) actually said was entire nations could be wiped off Earth if the global warming trend was not halted before the year 2000. This prediction has proved accurate, as the populations of island nations such as Tuvalu and Fiji are now being forced to evacuate due to rising sea levels.
Trump: “You know, it used to be global cooling. If you look back years ago, in the 1920s and the 1930s, they said, ‘Global cooling will kill the world. We have to do something’.”
In the 1950s, a number of research groups considered the stability of global climate and concluded that, should the world gradually become warmer or cooler, there was no known mechanism to counteract the trend. This research was reported in the popular press as “ice-age imminent”, a famous example of how inaccurate reporting of science in the media can give rise to serious misinformation.
[ How Trump’s UN speech revealed US claim of total power over people’s livesOpens in new window ]
Trump: “So now they could just call it climate change, because that way they can’t miss. Climate change, if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, it’s climate change. ”
In climate science, the term “global warming” is used to describe the rise in average global surface temperature, while the term “climate change” is used when other effects of the warming are included, such as ice-melt or rising sea levels. In the 1970s, the political strategist Frank Luntz suggested conservative politicians and journalists should adopt the term “climate change” as it was more suggestive of a natural phenomenon.
Trump: “We’re getting rid of the falsely named renewables. By the way, they’re a joke. They don’t work. They’re too expensive.”
A great many reports show renewable energy is more cost-effective for electricity generation than fossil fuels worldwide. On average, solar is currently 41 per cent cheaper than the lowest-cost fossil fuels and offshore wind is 53 per cent cheaper, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency and the UN.
Trump: “You lose money, the governments have to subsidise [renewable energy]. You can’t put them out without large subsidies.”
In fact, fossil fuels receive far more government subsidies than renewable energy. In 2023, global fossil fuel subsidies amounted to $620 billion (€532 billion), compared with $70 billion for renewables, according to the International Energy Agency.
There were many other specious arguments in Trump’s speech. Overall, he is of course right. Climate change is indeed the greatest con ever perpetrated on the world. However, the con is not the predictions and careful measurements of climate scientists, it is the refusal of fossil fuel companies to accept that their industry is causing irreversible damage to global climate.
Worse, the heavy influence of the fossil fuel industry on politicians worldwide has proven highly effective in obstructing any meaningful attempts to turn away from the path to climate breakdown.
Dr Cormac O’Raifeartaigh is a senior lecturer in physics at the South East Technological University in Waterford and a fellow of the Institute of Physics
