Fox News Grills Pruitt Over Climate Denial in Must-See Interview
Fox News anchor Chris Wallace confronted new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Scott Pruitt on Sunday about his controversial statement last month that carbon dioxide is not "a primary contributor" to climate change.
"Mr. Pruitt, there are all kinds of studies that contradict you," the Fox News Sunday host remarked. "The UN's panel on climate change says it is 95 percent likely more than half of the temperature increase since the mid-20th century is due to human activities."
Wallace also cited the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's findings that there is more carbon dioxide now than in the last 400,000 years and that 2015 and 2016 are the two hottest years on record.
"Mr. Pruitt, are we supposed to believe that's all a coincidence?" Wallace asked.
Remarkably, Pruitt's response acknowledged that there is a "warming trend" and that human activity increases global temperatures "in some measure." However, he contended that the EPA should not have the power to regulate greenhouse gasses.
Wallace then shot back, "But sir, you're kind of sugar-coating what you have said."
"You said that you would not agree that carbon CO2 is a primary contributor to global warming," Wallace continued. "And the question I have is, what if you're wrong? What if, in fact, the earth is warming, what if it is causing dramatic climate change and that we as humans through carbon emissions are contributing to it?"
"Don't you think the fact that we have these coal power plants belching carbon emissions into the air, you don't think that plays a role?" Wallace pressed.
Pruitt replied, "I think that we've done it better than anybody in the world at burning coal clean, in clean fashion."
The tense 14-minute interview covered a number of topics including the Trump administration's devastating environmental rollbacks and the proposed 31 percent spending reduction for the EPA, the biggest cut of any federal agency.
Watch the interview here:
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›