Let me start by apologizing to Alexander Diaz, a student at Catholic University of America, and other young Americans for the appalling but extremely telling answers our generation received during this week’s Republican debate when asked about climate change. During the debate Alex asked the following astute question:
“Polls consistently show that young people’s number one issue is climate change. What would you do as President of the United States and leader of the Republican Party to calm their fears that the Republican Party does not care about climate change?”
The Fox News co-moderator, Martha MacCallum, then asked the candidates “for a show of hands” in response to her question: “Do you believe that human behavior is causing climate change?”
Sadly, none of the eight candidates on the stage vying for the Republican primary nomination raised their hands. Alex (and the rest of us) deserve each candidate’s answer on this profoundly important topic.
Acting like, well, a spoiled schoolboy, Florida’s Governor, Ron DeSantis, hastily then interrupted the moderator by outright avoiding the question and, instead, announcing:
“We’re not school children! Let’s have the debate.”
When asked again if that meant he was raising his hand he responded by saying “I don’t think that’s the way to do it” before railing on about the “corporate media’s treatment of Republicans versus Democrats” and talking about how he’s responded to hurricanes in our state rather than answering the actual question. The moderator and other candidates then repeatedly asked him if that was a “yes” or “a hand raise,” yet he remained silent. Silent to a generation, our country, and the world beyond.
Sadly, the governor of the state widely seen as ground zero for our climate crisis here in the United States, a place where large portions of our region face extinction from sea level rise, not only missed an incredible opportunity to show leadership on the most important topic on young people’s mind but, by repeatedly avoiding the question, he sent the clear message that he does not believe that humans are causing climate change nor is he interested in addressing the foundational cause of the problem: fossil fuel use and its resulting pollution.
Amidst the DeSantis comments, fellow candidate Vivek Ramaswamywas so eager to share his answer to Alex’s question he could not control himself, gleefully and smugly blurting out “my hands are in my pocket!” before taking over the answer by saying the following:
“It’s a hoax. Let us be honest as Republicans. I am the only person on the stage that’s not bought and sold for so I can say this! The climate change agenda is a hoax. The climate change agenda is a hoax. The anti-carbon agenda is the wet blanket on our economy. More people are dying of bad climate change policies than they are of actual climate.”
And, in the event it was not already crystal clear, later in the discussion Ramaswamy reiterated his position that oil and gas production should be increased, not reduced or eliminated as we transition towards sustainability, by touting: “drill, frack, burn coal, and embrace nuclear!”
If you were looking for hope from the Republican field, no matter how limited, then it came in the form of former South Carolina Governor and United Nations Ambassador under the Trump Administration Nikki Haley’s (the only female candidate in the race) comments when she said;
“Is climate change real? Yes, it is. But if you want to go and really change the environment, then we need to start telling China and India that they have to lower their emissions.”
The limited discussion on climate change from a group of supposed prospective leaders, like the rest of the “debate,” was disappointing and often even condescending to listeners intellect. As a country our leaders, no matter their political affiliation, need to be far better than what I watched and heard, especially on the reality of our climate change crisis and its foundational cause.
If you want to be disappointed by the Republican candidates, click the image below so you can watch the full five minute “climate change” discussion:
The good news is that under President Biden’s leadership, the bipartisan supported Inflation Reduction Act passed and was signed into law about a year ago. That bill, supported by both Republican and Democrat legislators, included the promise of an initial $400 million green energy stimulus package, much of which is in the form of tax credits. The IRA is by far the biggest step towards shifting our economy from one based upon fossil fuels to one fueled by sustainable energy.
The best news is that according to a study by the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School and Goldman Sachs, the bill’s tax credits have been so popular over the past year that the actual impact is now estimated to be approximately $1.2 trillion. And, while even that staggering amount will not solve our climate crisis, it’s most certainly a positive step into the future and a far better reflection of where we need to go than was evident in last week’s rhetoric-filled Republican debate.
“The plaintiffs ‘have a fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment, which includes climate as part of the environmental life-support system.'” Montana District Court Judge Kathy Seeley’s in Held v. Montana, August 14th, 2023
Once again, it is young people that are leading our country and civilization towards our sustainable energy future and away from its fossil fuel polluting past. The news this week and what kids and young adults in Montana have just accomplished is a very big deal indeed. Please join me in congratulating the 16 young people ages 5 to 22 that just won their historic, truly groundbreaking case (Held v. Montana) when Montana Circuit Court Judge Kathy Seeley ruled that her state’s agencies were violating their state established constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment by allowing fossil fuel development. The Judge’s ruling is the first of its kind in the United States of America.
The ruling followed a two week-long trial in response to a lawsuit that the children filed in March, 2020 that simply demanded that the state’s government follow its own constitutional wording by protecting its citizens from the causes of our climate change crisis. Their case asserted that, by supporting a fossil fuel-driven energy system that is contributing to our climate crisis, the State of Montana is violating the youth’s constitutional rights to a clean and healthy environment; to seek safety, health, and happiness; and to individual dignity and equal protection under the state law while also having argued that the state’s fossil fuel energy based system is degrading and depleting the state’s constitutionally protected public trust resources including the atmosphere, rivers, and lakes, as well as fish and wildlife.
In addition to the incredible news of the Judge’s favorable ruling itself is the fact that the trial introduced public testimony related to the impact our climate crisis has been having on the youth plaintiffs along with powerful, factual science and expert testimony on how the state’s policies are contributing to increasing carbon dioxide emissions that are, in turn, causing hotter temperatures, drought, wildfires, and decreased snowpack among other detriments to Montana’s environment. Not only will the experts’ testimony and factual data that was presented help guide Montana to a more sustainable future but many of those facts can now be used in other cases around the United States. The Court’s 103 page Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order includes 84 pages of Findings of Fact, a virtual treasure trove of policy and scientific facts that support the damage that Montana’s government’s policies have been allowing and that must now be corrected.
As just one random example of the type of facts included in the ruling you will find this one, number 262, that explains that while the state authorizes four coal power plants generating 30% of the state’s power, the state has historically done this without consideration of how green house gas emissions pollute and change our climate despite Montana’s Constitution making it clear that the state should have been considering such things and that it has had an (unfulfilled) obligation to protect people’s rights including the right to a clean atmosphere. Here’s the 262nd Finding of Fact (you can read the entire document by clicking here):
As we celebrate this ruling allow me to share an article that the University of Miami published a few days ago about the Montana case that offers perspective from a diverse group of thought leaders from our campuses, including some of my own thoughts. What I love about the following article is that it not only features many of my heroes, passionate professors that I am privileged to study with both at our School of Law (where I am about to start my third and final year and the Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science (where I am about to start my second year of Ph.D. studies), but that it illustrates the breadth of expertise that the University of Miami has focused on and devoted to the most important issue my generation will ever face: our climate crisis.
Score one for youth on climate ruling
Sixteen young people, ranging in age from 5 to 22, prevailed in a first-of-its-kind climate change trial in Montana. University of Miami experts weigh in on what the verdict means and on the ripple effects it could have.
In this photo, gas emissions rise from a coal-burning power plant in Colstrip, Montana, in 2013. Photo: The Associated Press
It was late afternoon Monday, and the University of Miami graduate student had taken a break from kayaking in the lower Florida Keys to read an email news alert that had come over her cellphone.
In a landmark decision, a Montana state court sided with a group of 16 young environmental activists, ruling that the state violated their constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment” by allowing fossil fuel projects without considering the effects on climate.
Reynolds paused, took a deep breath, and cried out in joy, “Finally.”
Three years ago, it could very well have been her celebrating a youth-led climate victory on the steps of a courthouse. But the lawsuit she and seven other young people filed in 2018 in Leon County Circuit Court, asserting that Florida, in causing climate change, threatened their right to a livable future, was dismissed by a circuit judge in 2020.
Never one to give up, Reynolds, described as everything from an eco-warrior to “an incredibly valuable force of nature,” continued her fight against climate change, speaking to environmental groups around the nation.
She has given a TEDx Talk, addressed the United Nations General Assembly, appeared with actor Jack Black on the National Geographic Channel’s “Years of Living Dangerously,” and founded the NGO the Sink or Swim Project.
Monday’s ruling in a courtroom more than 2,000 miles away in Helena, Montana, gives her hope that climate change can be conquered, and the Earth saved.
“It is indisputable that our local, state, and federal governments can and do influence energy policy and that the current laws and rules that are in place overtly support the use of the very fossil fuels that are destroying our atmosphere and oceans,” Reynolds said. “Until young people force change, as has happened in Montana, this antiquated system will not change. The good news is that young people all over our country and planet understand that fossil fuels are killing Earth’s environment; that this must stop during our lifetimes; that each of us logically have a constitutional right to a clean, healthy, atmosphere; and that we will use every avenue possible to force the change that is needed before it’s too late.”
Our Children’s Trust, the Oregon-based nonprofit public interest law firm that brought Reynolds v. Florida, also brought the Montana case on behalf of the 16 young clients who range in age from 5 to 22.
“I certainly know firsthand the hard work, ridicule, and profound sacrifices the youth in Montana have had to endure for years to see this case go to trial, the same has happened here to my friends and I in Florida a few years ago,” Reynolds pointed out. “But I also know countless young people that are dedicating their lives to solving this problem. And, within the story of one’s time here on Earth, what could be more important than solving our climate crisis? The science is clearly on our side. And increasingly the courts are on our side.”
The Montana ruling, which comes as heat waves continue to envelope the nation and as wildfires rage in the West, means that the state must now consider climate change in its approval or renewal of fossil fuel projects.
“This ruling is a huge victory for climate activists,” said Jessica Owley, an environmental law expert at the University of Miami School of Law, who went on to explain the Montana decision in detail. “It is based on Montana’s state constitution, which contains an affirmative right to a healthy environment. Outside of the United States, such provisions in national constitutions have provided an avenue to alleviate environmental harms. However, legal experts have long wondered whether such provisions have any meaning inside the United States. Our U.S. Constitution has no such right, but a few states do, including Montana, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and New York.
“This case,” Owley continued, “demonstrates that these provisions can have substantive meaning. Because the state of Montana recognizes a right to a healthy environment, it was unconstitutional for a state statute to prohibit consideration of climate impacts during required environmental review processes.”
Held v. Montana, as the case is officially known, may inspire more states to add such provisions to their constitutions, Owley said.
“A massive win for the climate movement” is how Abigail Fleming—associate director of the School of Law’s Environmental Justice Clinic, which has worked with Our Children’s Trust—describes the Montana case. “The court created an extraordinary evidentiary record that shows the detrimental impacts of the climate crisis. More importantly, [the ruling] highlights that there are alternatives and that there can be a shift in the economy. It shows that enforcing a right to a safe and healthy climate is possible.”
Geoffrey Supran, associate professor of environmental science and policy at the Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science, who investigates climate change disinformation and propaganda by fossil fuel interests, said “climate lawsuits have been banging at the door of governments and oil companies for several years now. This ruling blows the door wide open. It’s a major milestone in climate litigation and the fight for climate accountability and justice.”
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen’s office is planning to appeal the ruling. But even if the case is overturned, “the favorable district court opinion is highly significant in itself,” said Daniel Suman, a professor of environmental science and policy at the Rosenstiel School, who holds an adjunct appointment in the School of Law.
“Judge Seeley’s long opinion gives credence to climate change science and has certainly elevated the threats of climate change and the absence of government action in the public eye,” he said. “Her ruling will also encourage further litigation against greenhouse gas emitting industries and governments that fail to act to address these threats.”
The rise in such lawsuits has already begun, Owley pointed out. Our Children’s Trust, for example, has taken legal action on behalf of young people in all 50 states. The firm also has cases pending in four other states.
“And there are youth-led climate cases gaining traction across the globe,” Owley said. “A notable aspect of this case in Montana is that the court found that the youth plaintiffs had standing. This is the first climate case like this to make it to trial. Usually, they are dismissed for lack of standing or other threshold issues. ‘Standing’ asks whether the people before the court are qualified as plaintiffs, meaning that they must demonstrate that they will suffer an actual injury caused by the defendant’s actions,” she added. “Here, the youth plaintiffs were able to present stories of battling asthma, dealing with heat and fires, and other concrete harms. The court recognized that all carbon emissions contribute to these harms and any reduction possible will help alleviate the harm.”
A political system that has failed to respond to the climate crisis in a way that mitigates environmental damage is one of the primary reasons for the uptick in such lawsuits, said Douglas Ruley, the newly appointed director of the School of Law’s Environmental Justice Clinic, who has three decades of experience in environmental law and litigation.
“For all the good things that have occurred, carbon pollution is still increasing across the world,” he said. “So, folks are doing what they can to try to wake the system up. And maybe in some respect, this [Montana] decision can play a role in that.”
Ruley read much of the 103-page Held v. Montana ruling, becoming particularly struck by the fact that more than 80 of the pages are findings of fact in which the judge found the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses to be credible. “The court basically goes through the science of the climate crisis, its general effects, and its specific effects on Montanans,” explained Ruley. “The plaintiffs really marshaled a solid, factual case that was persuasive to the judge. And in response, the state didn’t have a whole lot to say.”
Is the historic verdict a wake-up call for the fossil fuel industry? “I wish it were,” Ruley said. “But judging from the last 30 years, I have very little hope that it will be. I would expect the industry to continue with the strategy that it’s had of denial and avoidance and creating confusion where possible and using its vast financial resources to influence politicians to keep on ignoring the problem as long as possible.
“There are positive things happening, though,” Ruley added. “The Inflation Reduction Act and the investments that are flowing from that will accelerate the transition toward a cleaner energy system and a less polluting economy. But here, again, as big a step as that was, a lot more needs to be done.”
Allow me to end this post by again congratulating the young people in Montana who were the plaintiffs in this case. From my own such case here in Florida a few years ago, I know first-hand how hard it is to fight the powerful adult leaders that are in charge today and who are focused on profits over pollution, the sacrifices one must make by participating in such a case, and the ridicule you face over years of your young life when you are simply trying to make things better for future generations. I am in awe of you and so very thankful.
Allow me to also congratulate the truly amazing team at Our Children’s Trust for their hard work, dedication, and passion in representing young people in the fight of our lives. Each of you should be proud of this news and while the fight is far from over you have taken an incredible step towards solving the climate crisis. Bravo to each of you. You are, without a doubt, heroes in the front line of this fight. (You can learn more about Our Children’s Trust, this case, and others by clicking here).
It is without a doubt shameful that we are forced to fight so hard, and from such a young age, against such powerful interests but I assure you that young people all over the world are up for the challenge. That I know for sure. And the Montana ruling makes clear, once again, that young people and our passion on this topic cannot be diminished. It is indisputable that morality and the science are on our side. We know that solving our climate crisis is the most important challenge that our generation will face during our time on earth and that we must solve it by shifting society from a fossil fuel-based economy to a sustainable one. For those businesses, leaders, products, and, yes, governments that are allowing the damage to continue, the Montana case sends you a loud message that young people will not sit idly by and allow you to perpetuate the damage.
Although the year is only slightly more than half over many of my colleagues in the scientific community are already predicting that there’s a good chance that 2023 may become the hottest year in Earth’s history. Record breaking high temperatures and the duration of that heat has rightfully alarmed people, while also damaging environments all over the planet. And nowhere should those alarms be louder than right here in Florida where we are amidst what could very well be a coastal catastrophe caused by that heat. Heat, I dare say, that is largely fueled by man-kind’s use of fossil fuels.
Miami, where I principally live, experienced over three weeks in a row of Excessive Heat Warningsfrom the National Weather Service last month (July 2023). The prior record for such warnings were three days. In fact, for 46 scorching hot days (June 11 to July 27) this summer, Miami sizzled under heat index temperatures that topped 100 degrees every afternoon. That broke the prior record (from 2020) of 32 days in a row above 100 degrees. A heavy rainstorm on July 28th ended the streak by producing a downright cool 98-degree day. During those 46 days Miami set 10 daily temperature records, 27 daily heat index records, received its first-ever excessive heat warnings from the National Weather Service, and was subject to 23 days of heat advisories. What did the rest of the planet do during that time frame this summer? Well, it set a new all-time temperature record and then broke it three times.
“This isn’t just Miami in July heat. Miami isn’t just breaking its record heat index values — we’re absolutely obliterating the previous records on a daily basis. Miami is well on its way to recording the hottest year meteorologists have seen in 130 years of keeping weather records. Thanks to climate change, this summer is likely a preview of summers to come.”
NBC 6 Hurricane Specialist, Meteorologist, John Morales
My friend and fellow CLEO Institute Board Member, NBC 6 Hurricane Specialist John Morales, was widely quoted in recent days as explaining, “This isn’t just Miami in July heat. Miami isn’t just breaking its record heat index values — we’re absolutely obliterating the previous records on a daily basis.” John went on to say that “Miami is well on its way to recording the hottest year meteorologists have seen in 130 years of keeping weather records. Thanks to climate change, this summer is likely a preview of summers to come. This summer should repeat with much greater ease here in South Florida because of the trend of hotter temperatures all around the planet, which is undeniable, and undeniably linked to mankind and our continued burning of fossil fuels”. John, I could not agree (nor thank you for your sensible analysis) more.
As I write this post I am home here on No Name Key in the Florida Keys after a summer of travel to many of America’s iconic western National Parks (you can read a bit about that trip here). Florida, where I live, is a peninsula with 1,350 miles of mainland coastline abutting the Atlantic ocean to our east and the Gulf of Mexico to the west with the waters of Florida Bay to the South. The Florida Keys is a magical chain of about 1,700 islands running from the southern “tip” of Florida’s mainland where Miami, Naples, and the Everglades National Park are located to the west through the Gulf and Ocean waters before culminating in the Dry Tortugas National Park. Needless to say, most of mainland Florida and all of the Florida Keys are surrounded by water and it’s in those coastal waters that the catastrophe I write about today is brewing.
In its July 2023 Marine Heatwave (MHW) discussion post, the National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) concluded that in 2023 44% of the global ocean is experiencing a Marine Heatwave. That percentage, 44%, ranks firstsince such conditions began being measured in 1991. NOAA expects that this figure will grow in the months ahead and that approximately 50% of Earth’s oceans will experience a Marine Heat Wave in September-October of this year. Here’s the MHW data from 1991 when records were first kept through last month (notice that as time passes the temperatures have increased?):
Now closer to home, consider Manatee Bay, a shallow basin just off the southern tip of mainland Florida near Everglades National Park, where a temperature of 100.2 degrees was recorded one night last week only to be followed by a temperature of 101.2 degrees the very next day. In 2010 the temperature there hit triple digits (100 degrees) for the first time and then in 2017 set a record at 102 degrees so last week’s 101.2 reading appears to continue a trend that portrays triple digit temperatures taking place more often. Here are the historic water temperatures from 2004 through last week, 2023 in Manatee Bay.
But it’s not just Manatee Bay that’s boiling. It’s all the waters around South Florida including the Florida Keys. According to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) typical water temperatures for the region this time of year should be between 73 degrees and 88 degrees (23 and 31 degrees Celsius), yet they have been averaging about 91 degrees (33 Celsius) in recent weeks, thus much higher than the normal mid-July average of 85 degrees. NOAA and its partner Coral Reef Watch have prepared this excellent graph which displays that sea surface temperatures in the Florida Keys have been well above average for much of 2023:
And it’s not just in Florida that sea temperatures have increased, but this is happening all over the world. Travel up the eastern coast, for example, to Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, places I visited in 2019 as part of a geology expedition, and you will find sea temperatures that are 9 to 11 degrees hotter than is historically normal. One or two degrees would be alarming but 9, 10, 11 degrees portrays a catastrophe. Perhaps of even greater concern is that the worst might be ahead of us in August or September when water temperatures typically peak. In fact, NOAA’s experimental Ocean Heat Wave Forecast tool that I shared earlier in this post now suggests that there is a 70-100% chance that the extreme heat in the North Atlantic will continue through September or even October. And, as noted above, NOAA believes that 50% of Earth’s oceans will experience a Marine Heat Wave in September / October of this year.
So what’s the big deal with a warmer ocean? Well, aside from the dire impact warmer water has by increasing the melting rate of glaciers which, in turn, causes seas to rise, such temperatures also harm animals within the water and can damage or destroy habitats forever. Warmer water houses less oxygen and that can lead to mass fish kills. It can also kill sea grass, especially in shallow beds such as those that are prevalent here in the Florida Keys, that many species rely upon for food and shelter. And warmer water can help algae grow more quickly which, in turn, can lead to algal blooms that cause added environmental damage.
And speaking of the threat to animals, coral for example, is a living, breathing organism that is vital to our marine environment, protecting the mainland, and to our economy. Florida’s coral reefs annually produce billions of dollars in economic benefit from tourism and fishing. They are a vital natural buffer from hurricanes. They are also, of course, habitat for countless marine life on which our ecosystem depends. They are, in short, a critical natural resource and yet, like so much of our natural environment, they are at dire risk of extinction because of mankind’s love affair with fossil fuels and the resulting warming temperatures from those fuel emissions pouring into our atmosphere and oceans.
You see, algae lives (or tries to, temperature permitting) inside the coral and provides coral its color and food. Coral is, however, highly susceptible to higher temperatures which, when present, can lead to what is called bleaching, which is what happens when coral expels the algae due to higher temperatures than the coral can tolerate. It’s a bit like throwing a blanket off yourself in the middle of a warm summer night’s sleep to try and cool down. When coral expels its algae to cool itself, it’s also throwing its food away and, thus, can starve.
Depending on the amount of heat and its duration, some corals can recover from brief bleaching events but as waters increasingly warm and last longer these events can kill the coral. The stark white coral in the picture above and the one below are examples of what bleached coral looks like.
Up until about 40 years ago bleaching was rarely observed but as our water temperatures have continued to rise from climate change it has become more and more prevalent in recent decades. Certainly what we are seeing this year, both in the temperature and how early bleaching is taking place, is the earliest since satellite records began being used in 1985. Perhaps worse yet is that the warmer waters we would normally expect in August or September appear to be arriving earlier and earlier each year. Higher temperatures combined with longer durations of those higher temperatures are catastrophic for coral. The chart below, also from NOAA / Coral Reef Watch, illustrates stress on coral based both on record high temperatures and setting a record for how early the warming took place.
And what do I see here in the waters off No Name? A lot of dead and dying coral struggling for survival. And snorkeling in the shallow waters around the island in recent weeks is akin to stepping into a hot tub.
“What we found was unimaginable – 100% coral mortality.”
Sadly, others in the region are sharing similarly grave news.
Consider Sombrero Reef, off of Marathon Key just to my east above the Seven Mile Bridge, where the folks from the Coral Restoration Foundation visited their decade old coral restoration site last week and reported the following: “What we found was unimaginable – 100% coral mortality.” Or consider their coral nursery at Looe Key here in the Lower Keys, a favorite dive spot of mine over the years that’s just a short boat ride from No Name, where the Foundation sadly now reports “We have also lost almost all the corals.”
The news, what with warming oceans and warming lasting longer and longer, is not (to say the least) good. That said, and as dire as this situation is, allow me to end with some positive news… at least as positive as is possible given the threat our coral reefs are facing.
First, if our society will only ever take these threats seriously and quickly transition from using fossil fuels to alternative energy sources, we can very likely overcome the current threat to coral from increased temperatures. But we need to act quickly and demand that our political “leaders” set aside the polluting politics of the past and demand change right NOW. If you are worried about what’s happening and want to play a role in fixing the problem please contact your state and federal representatives and demand action by eliminating fossil fuel use.
Secondly, I am deeply proud to report that scientists, environmentalists, and many other concerned citizens have sprung into action (and into the water) in recent weeks to save as much juvenile coral as possible by moving it into climate-controlled labs or into deeper, cooler water. As rising temperatures threaten our coral populations, a variety of amazing stakeholders including our government, universities, and non-profits have been growing new coral and planting them all along our coast to attempt to replenish dead and dying coral. To save that coral, countless folks are in the water right now trying to protect those “babies” by working literally around the clock as I type these words, as well as working to find ways to temporarily protect as many established reef sites as possible.
If we are to ever save our incredible coral reefs here in South Florida, we will most certainly have science and scientists to thank, so please join me with a HUGE Shout Out to everyone who is in the water and their labs right now trying to avert this brewing coastal catastrophe.
