If you are still uncertain about Donald Trump’s stance on climate change, then the fact that fossil-fuel companies are helping to pay his legal bills should clear it up.
To be fair, the amount of oil money going to keep the once and possibly future president out of jail is kind of a pittance — somewhat less than $128,000 so far this year, or 2% of the $6.4 million Big Oil has given to Trump’s fundraising committee, according to the news organization Heatmap’s analysis of data provided by the communications group Climate Power. That’s barely enough for one porn-star hush-money trial.
But the sector is gearing up to give a lot more, The Washington Post reported, especially after Trump has promised to cater to its every desire in a second term. Environmental rules and tailpipe emission standards? Gone. Carte blanche to drill, baby, drill from Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico? You got it.
“They got a great return on their investment during Trump’s first term, and Trump is making it crystal clear that they’re in for an even bigger payout if he’s reelected,” Climate Power Senior Adviser Alex Witt told the Post.
“Big Oil Gives Money to Republican” is about as dog-bites-man as news headlines can get. But it’s notable in this case for a couple of reasons.
First, despite President Joe Biden having done more to fight climate change than any other U.S. president, and despite Trump having done possibly the least since we first realized “climate change” was a thing, Americans still don’t seem to think there’s a drastic difference between the two on the issue. It is true that Biden’s climate action hasn’t kept the U.S. from producing more oil and gas than ever before or prevented fossil-fuel companies from turning record profits. But voters need to understand just how stark the choice in November truly is, and following the money can help.
Second, the oil industry’s embrace of Trump comes when its brand is comparably toxic to his. As the warming caused by burning fossil fuels leads to more devastation and suffering, we will keep pushing for alternatives. Renewable sources such as solar and wind generated 30% of the world’s electricity for the first time last year, according to the energy think tank Ember. It predicted fossil-fuel power generation and emissions will fall this year, even as energy demand grows.
The oil and gas sector naturally wants to protect its assets in the ground and keep those record profits coming for as long as possible. But perhaps it could avoid a future of even harsher environmental regulation and political backlash around the world by trying to work with this transition rather than fighting a rear-guard action against it, particularly under the banner of a man out of touch with not only climate science but popular opinion.
Meanwhile, America’s laboratories of democracy are cooking up some powerful weapons against the industry. Vermont is on the verge of passing a law that would force oil and gas companies to help cover the damage caused by global warming, creating a kind of superfund for recovery and adaptation. It would use the rapidly advancing science of weather-event attribution to come up with precise dollar amounts for companies to pay for every new event like last summer’s deadly floods. It remains to be seen whether America’s conservative courts let such laws stand, but other states with bigger populations and greater climate-change risks are watching closely.
The industry also faces a mountain of litigation from states and other local governments, including one from California that has aims similar to Vermont’s superfund law. Some of those cases will go to trial soon in state courts after years of delay, which could inspire still more lawsuits and lead eventually to a huge tobacco-style settlement. Big Oil may sympathize with Trump’s many legal headaches, but joining forces with him isn’t the answer.
Mark Gongloff is a Bloomberg Opinion editor and columnist covering climate change. He previously worked for Fortune.com, the Huffington Post and the Wall Street Journal.