Such is the title of an item in Study International. To this reader, the clear implication in the title and the lead paragraph is that since the Trump administration has given up the US government’s role in dealing with climate change, universities will somehow take up the slack.  The article goes on to describe the formation of the University Climate Change Coalition whose stated purpose is to “prototype a collaborative model designed to help local communities achieve their climate goals and accelerate the transition to a low-carbon future.” (I didn’t know prototype was a verb. Did you?) Formulating and demonstrating prototypes of models by which communities can manage the transition from fossil fuel to renewables is something universities can, and should, be doing no matter who lives in the White House. Research universities, if they choose, could form interdisciplinary teams of climate scientists, economists, civil engineers, city planners and others. These teams could evaluate the consequences of different policy choices, e.g., for dealing with rising sea level and changing agricultural conditions. Universities can expand their outreach efforts to inform the public of their findings. Universities, as institutions, should not participate in public discourse as policy advocates.

A few weeks ago I heard a program on NPR about a course given by Dan Schrag at Harvard in which the students are expected to map out, on a spreadsheet, strategies for reducing carbon emissions to set levels in the next few decades. According to the program, the students find that achieving significantly lower carbon emissions can be very difficult. This should surprise nobody.

I met Dan Schrag once. He gave a talk in my unit, and we had a pleasant conversation in my office. I remarked that serious reduction in carbon emissions would be very expensive. He said that we were going to spend the money anyway, and we should spend it wisely. I thought that was exactly the right answer. All the alternatives, from doing nothing and dealing with the consequences of climate change to making policy changes that would lead to fuel prices at $8 – $10/gallon at the pump, involve major economic dislocation. Our leaders are elected to make the hard decisions and take the heat for them. It’s their job — not the job of the universities — to decide among the available policy choices and implement the best ones. That’s why they get the big money.