Hilary Clinton and Ecological Survival


Hilary Clinton at the 2014 National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas. Photo: John Locher/AP

Although clearer and more progressive on climate policy and environmental issues than Donald Trump, presidential candidate Hilary Clinton is by no means a friend of the environmental movement. Her role in politics will now be a lesser one after the victory of Trump’s presidential campaign.

This was a politician who made clear that she supported fracking and fossil fuel pipelines in order to “fuel our economy”, supporting renewable energy alongside oil and gas extraction in a confused “all of the above” approach (Norton, 2016). As Secretary of State it was Clinton’s staff who cooperated with TransCanada on the Keystone XL pipeline and she had accepted the false dogma of using natural gas as a “bridge fuel”towards a renewable economy (Cousins, 2016 – see also McJeon et al., 2014 and Hausfather, 2016).

The International Energy Agency has predicted that the majority of the world’s energy will still come from fossil fuels in the next few decades (Tweed, 2016), and a politician who had received “more than $6.9 million from the fossil fuel industry” would have likely ensured that this pattern continued in the USA (Coleman, 2016). Clinton had, in fact, raised more money from the oil industry than her presidential rival (Harder & Mullins, 2016).

Her support for continued fossil fuel extraction occurred with a backdrop of climate chaos. Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have recently surpassed the symbolic 400 parts per million (ppm) threshold (Kahn, 2016) with the fear that “today’s greenhouse gas levels may already commit Earth to an eventual total warming of 5 degrees Celsius” over the next millennia (Snyder, 2016). The devastation of Hurricane Matthew, according to CNN, “looks a lot like the future of climate change” (Sutter, 2016). Heedless of this devastation, like the rest of the US political system, Clinton continued to promote the orthodoxy that capitalism is compatible with a stable climate.

Ultimately Clinton shares the same hypocritical approach to climate change that her democrat predecessor Obama had – “tackling [climate change] aggressively on the consumption side but continuing to boost fossil fuel supplies” (Adler, 2015). This involved maintaining a “studied silence” when it came to the controversy of Standing Rock and the Dakota Access Pipeline (McKibben, 2016; Ortega, 2016).

The issue however, is now moot. Donald Trump has already begun planning his climate policy, which largely revolves abolishing the Clean Power Plan (Worland, 2016), wanting to “cancel” the Paris Agreement (Mufson & Dennis, 2016), and abolishing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Plumer, 2016). This, despite the fact that climate change has been recognised as a “major national security risk” by the Climate Security Consensus Project (Papenfuss, 2016).

Indeed, to the rest of the world, “the U.S. citizens’ choice to elect Donald Trump seems like a death sentence” (Chemnick, 2016). We must now support the efforts of Blockadia (Martin & Fruhwirth, 2013) and stand in solidarity with indigenous nations and migrants in the fight against climate chaos (Out of the Woods, 2015; Bosworth, 2016). Climate change is not just a sociogenic process – it is violence:

“That’s a tired phrase, the destruction of the Earth, but translate it into the face of a starving child and a barren field – and then multiply that a few million times. Or just picture the tiny bivalves: scallops, oysters, Arctic sea snails that can’t form shells in acidifying oceans right now. Or another superstorm tearing apart another city. Climate change is global-scale violence, against places and species as well as against human beings. Once we call it by name, we can start having a real conversation about our priorities and values. Because the revolt against brutality begins with a revolt against the language that hides that brutality.” (Solnit, 2014)

With that in mind, we must contend with the fact that this is not just something “on a list of things to worry about” – in order to prevent climate chaos in the new right-wing political landscape “we have to remake the world, and we have to talk about it” (Battistoni, 2012).


Adler, B. (2015). 8 things you need to know about Hillary Clinton and climate change http://grist.org/climate-energy/8-things-you-need-to-know-about-hillary-clinton-and-climate-change/. Accessed 8th November 2016

Battistoni, A. (2012). The Flood Next Time https://www.jacobinmag.com/2012/12/the-flood-next-time/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Bosworth, K. (2016). Voices Against the Pipeline — “Five Lessons from Pipeline Struggles” http://nobakken.com/2016/09/05/voices-against-the-pipeline-five-lessons-from-pipeline-struggles-by-kai-bosworth/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Chemnick, J. (2016). No Plan B at Climate Talks, Given Trump Win https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-plan-b-at-climate-talks-given-trump-win/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Coleman, J. (2016). Hillary Clinton’s Connections to the Oil and Gas Industry http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/. Accessed 8th November 2016

Cousins, F. (2016). Hillary Clinton Is Raking In Fossil Fuel Money At An Alarming Rate http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/09/07/hillary-clinton-raking-fossil-fuel-money-alarming-rate. Accessed 8th November 2016

Harder, A., Mullins, B. (2016). Hillary Clinton Raises More Than Donald Trump From Oil Industry http://www.wsj.com/articles/so-far-hillary-clinton-raises-more-than-donald-trump-from-oil-industry-1473190849. Accessed 8th November 2016.

Hausfather, Z. (2016). Is Natural Gas a Bridge Fuel? http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2016/08/is-natural-gas-a-bridge-fuel/. Accessed 8th November 2016

Kahn, B. (2016). The world passes 400ppm carbon dioxide threshold. Permanently https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/28/the-world-passes-400ppm-carbon-dioxide-threshold-permanently. Accessed 8th November 2016

Martin, M. J., Fruhwirth, J. (2013). Welcome to Blockadia! http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/welcome-to-blockadia-enbridge-transcanada-tar-sands. Accessed 9th November 2016

McJeon, H., Edmonds, J., Bauer, N. Clarke, L., Fisher, B., Flannery, B. P., Hilaire, J., Krey, V., Marangoni, G., Mi, R., Riahi, K., Rogner, H., Tavoni, M. (2014). Limited impact on decadal-scale climate change from increased use of natural gas. Nature 514, 482-485

McKibben, B. (2016). The Climate Movement Has to Elect Hillary Clinton—and Then Give Her Hell https://www.thenation.com/article/the-climate-movement-has-to-elect-hillary-clinton-and-then-give-her-hell/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Mufson, S., Dennis. B. (2016). Trump victory reverses U.S. energy and environmental priorities https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/09/trump-victory-reverses-u-s-energy-and-environmental-priorities/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Norton, B. (2016). Leaked email: Hillary Clinton told “radical environmentalists” to “get a life,” defended fracking and pipelines http://www.salon.com/2016/10/18/leaked-email-hillary-clinton-told-radical-environmentalists-to-get-a-life-defended-fracking-and-pipelines/. Accessed 8th November 2016

Ortega, O. (2016). Clinton’s Troubling Silence on the Dakota Access Pipeline http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/24/clintons-troubling-silence-on-the-dakota-access-pipeline/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Out of the Woods (2015). 6 Ways to Fight Climate Chaos http://novaramedia.com/2015/05/30/6-ways-to-fight-climate-chaos/. Accessed 9th November 2016

Papenfuss, M. (2016). Climate change poses major national security risk to US, warn military experts http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/climate-change-poses-major-national-security-risk-us-warn-military-experts-1581419. Accessed 9th November 2016

Plumer, B. (2016). There’s no way around it: Donald Trump is going to be a disaster for the planet http://www.vox.com/2016/11/9/13571318/donald-trump-disaster-climate. Accessed 9th November 2016

Snyder, C. W. (2016). Evolution of global temperature over the past two million years. Nature 538, 226-228.

Solnit, R. (2014). Call climate change what it is: violence https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/07/climate-change-violence-occupy-earth. Accessed 9th November 2016

Sutter, J. D. (2016). Hurricane Matthew looks a lot like the future of climate change http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/07/opinions/sutter-hurricane-matthew-climate-change/index.html Accessed 8th November 2016

Tweed, K. (2016). Leaked Clinton Emails Mention Climate Change More Than Obamacare http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Leaked-Clinton-Emails-Mention-Climate-Change-More-Than-Obamacare. Accessed 8th November 2016

Worland, J. (2016). Donald Trump’s Victory Could Mean Disaster for the Planet http://time.com/4564224/donald-trump-climate-change/. Accessed 9th November 2016


Donald Trump and the Environment


Source: Huffington Post


So, it’s election day in the US and the world is waiting to see who will be their next president: Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton. In this article focus on Donald Trump  and what he has (or hasn’t) said regarding the environment if he ends up in office. Sources for all the information are listed at the end.

Denial of Climate Change

Firstly, Trump doesn’t outline any environmental policy on the issues section of his campaign site. To my mind this indicates he doesn’t think the environment is a worthwhile issue and there is information to back up this theory; he denies climate change. It is well known that back in 2012 he tweeted “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” He hasn’t deleted this tweet, so presumably he still believes this. In fact, if he were to be elected he would be the only leader of a country to deny climate change. Trump has also stated that he would remove the US from the Paris agreement which, as outlined on the European Commission’s website, is “the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal”. This deal is ever more important than the Kyoto agreement and would be a devastating blow for the planet if the US left.

Abolishment of the EPA

The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) would be abolished under a Trump presidency. To put this into perspective this is the equivalent of the UK doing away with the Environment Agency. Trump believes the EPA has created too much red tape over the years limiting the ability of companies to operate. I admit that no environmental agency is perfect, but the red tape is usually there for good reason: to protect the environment from humans and their activities. The strange thing is, whilst he wishes to destroy the EPA, he wants to improve water and air quality, aims that are surely at odds with one another. At an oil conference in Bismarck, North Dakota he states:  “My priorities are simple: clean air and clean water.” He hasn’t deemed to outline how he aims to do that without the EPA, and I don’t think I need to point out the irony of him making this statement at an oil industry conference. He has also been accused of using the ongoing water crisis in Flint, Michigan, for self promotion and not out of real concern for the residents. 

Energy Policy

Trump supported the Keystone XL pipeline before it was rejected by Obama due to climate change concerns, and it has now emerged he owns stocks in two fossil fuel companies involved in the Dakota Access pipeline. One of his energy advisers is an oil billionaire and CEO of the largest US fracking company, Harold Hamm. It should therefore come as no surprise that he wishes to increase oil and gas production and he recently stated “We’re going to save the coal industry”.  This all sounds rather worrying in an age where we should be moving to renewables, but there have been warning signs that he isn’t a fan of renewable energy. For example, has been waging a battle for some years now against the proposed building of an offshore windfarm near his Aberdeenshire golf course. 

Trump has also stated he would relax the Clean Power Plan, which includes stricter fuel efficiency standards for vehicles in the US. How would he prioritise making the air cleaner whilst at the same time allowing vehicles to be more polluting?

Other Environmental Issues

Trump has proposed a wall is built along the entire Mexican/US border. Whilst the aim of this idea is clearly to prevent illegal immigration I don’t think anyone has considered the environmental impact this would have. Animals don’t keep to borders. Birds can fly over a wall, but what are others to do? Tunnels could be put in the wall for them to move through however that is no substitute for the freedom of populations to roam. Any species that is already low in numbers could be split in two, reducing the gene pool further and making extinction more likely. I imagine cougars and desert bighorn sheep wouldn’t be able to have tunnels built, as they would be large enough for humans to fit through, and therefore render the wall pointless.


Whether it be the denial of climate change, proposed abolition of the EPA or his energy policy it is clear that Donald Trump has scant regard for the environment. It can be hard to cover everything in one post, but I hope this at least makes you aware of the basics. I for one don’t think he is fit to be in charge of a country, but it is up to each of you to make up your minds. If you are an American citizen I hope you have gone out and voted, and remember, only if you vote do you have the right to criticise the outcome.

P.S. There was meant to be an article on Hilary Clinton to portray a balanced view on both of the Democratic and Republican candidates. Unfortunately, we have run out of time, but hope to bring you that one at a later date regardless of the outcome of the election.