We're going to need some learned assertiveness

What does dog food and aircraft design have in common? And what have they both got to do with the Trump administration confirming this week it is quitting the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)?

One of the many nefarious goals of the Trump administration, both domestically and on the international stage, is to inculcate a sense of learned helplessness in its opponents - and even in its supposed allies. Trump and his apologists repeatedly seek to assert such power and demonstrate such visible contempt for anything others hold dear in such a chaotic way that opponents start to think resistance is at best highly risky and at worst totally futile.

This playbook is apparent in pretty much everything the Trump administration does - witness the revelling in the brazen breaches of international law at the heart of the US resource grab in Venezuela - but it is particularly obvious in its approach to climate change and the environment. The full spectrum contempt for climate action evident in the withdrawal from the UNFCCC is designed to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, where talk of an 'ESG backlash' and assertions that decarbonisation is pointless prompt businesses and the public to comply in advance and roll back environmental efforts even when they are not required to do so.

But it does not have to be this way.

There is no point being delusionaly optimistic in the face of these challenges. US isolationism, obstructionism, and imperialism present a grave threat to global climate action. There are huge obstacles in the way of a Venezuelan oil boom - obstacles the Trump administration is trying to wish away - but any uplift in oil production threatens a further increase in emissions at a time when they are meant to be falling if there is to be any hope of averting some of the worst climate scenarios. It will become far harder to convince carbon intensive economies to invest in decarbonisation if the world's largest historic emitter by a country mile will not even turn up at UN climate talks. Military adventures and the chaos they engender are a less than ideal backdrop for executing a global green industrial revolution.  

But it is critical to remember there are still actions governments, businesses, and individuals can take to cut emissions and accelerate the clean technology transition. Which brings us back to the dog food and the aircraft. 

New research yesterday revealed that while dog food may be responsible for a mind-blowing one per cent of UK emissions, the carbon intensity of different dog food products varies enormously. Different consumer choices, aided by better labelling or even modest regulation, could unlock massive emissions savings with little to no impact on the well-being of any dog or its owner.

At a more industrial level, separate research this week explained how proven technologies and approaches could more than halve global aviation emissions if only airlines would deploy them. Trump cannot stop airlines opting for the most efficient aircraft models or configuring planes to improve passenger carbon footprints.

The same pattern is evident in multiple sectors as clean technologies, efficiency measures, and climate resilience upgrades offer clear commercial and economic benefits. Meanwhile, CDP yesterday published its annual A list report, providing a timely reminder that, for all the talk of an ESG backlash, investors with $127tr of assets want more environmental data from corporates, and companies with over half of global market capitalisation are trying to provide it. They are doing so because climate risks and clean tech opportunities are real, regardless of what the US President says to the contrary. 

The news cycle at the start of this year has been almost unbearably bleak, but it is critical to remember that no organisation is helpless in the face of attacks on climate action, even when those attacks emanate from some of the most powerful people in the world. Governments and businesses will understandably want to tread carefully when dealing with a Trump administration that increasingly behaves like a rogue state. But it is possible to continue to take steps to cut emissions without antagonising the President - just witness the clean tech investments of many of the Silicon Valley companies that have so visibly sought to ingratiate themselves with the man in the White House. The political zeitgeist in favour of sustainability will swing back again, because reality will always assert itself eventually. But in the meantime action can, and must, still be taken.