Global Warming

Both global and local.

Global Warming

Postby Michael » Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:40 am

After the fiasco at Copenhagen, I thought I'd share a couple of Johann Hari's articles. I agree with him, and it is pretty clear, that governments are not representing citizens and our interests, but instead are puppets of the oil companies. As such, it's time for us to get more involved - to become activists instead of couch potatoes - and push for the changes we need to solve this problem.

The truths Copenhagen ignored

After Copenhagen, it's all down to us
User avatar
Michael
Site Admin
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Global Warming

Postby KathyO » Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:48 am

I can't understand why people fight against any reduction in reliance on fossil fuels. I'd like to ask them: Even if you don't accept AGW, no one can deny that we will someday run out of fossil fuels. Whether you think that will happen in your life time or in your grandchildren's, it *will* happen! The obvious course of action is to move away from reliance on fossil fuels now, while we still have options.

Unfortunately, reasonable people are not in charge of this issue. Personally, I think only science can solve this problem. When there's a way to get to the mall without using coal or gas, people will use it. But until then, people will still go to the mall.
KathyO
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:38 am

Re: Global Warming

Postby Michael » Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:26 am

If the prices were set right, people would reduce their fossil fuel use and transition to alternate sources of energy. The biggest culprit I understand is the oil and gas lobby, which influences / controls government policy. We subsidize the fossil fuel industry with our taxes, but what we should be doing is taxing fossil fuels at source. We should subsidise alternative energy with our taxes, so that it is price competitive and give people incentives to switch. We have the money for this, but we are using that money to engage in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan (and Yemen next) for the purpose of securing access to oil and gas resources. It's insane, but the US economy is a military economy. We need to transition to a peace economy. That would end the "terrorism" threat, which is all blowback from US foreign policy. :)
User avatar
Michael
Site Admin
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Global Warming

Postby KathyO » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:12 pm

There's no telling how much could be accomplished if the same money that is currently spent on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were funneled into domestic problems.

For one thing, there is technology available today for using renewable energy sources, building electric cars, creating the necessary infrastructure, etc. We still need improvements in battery capacity, solar energy capture and storage, and definitely in exploiting sources such as geothermal energy. But we could overcome all these obstacles. It would just take some funding and some will.

On the other hand, who am I kidding? The US can't even switch over to the metric system.
KathyO
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:38 am

Re: Global Warming

Postby Michael » Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:36 am

A big challenge the US faces is reining in the military-industrial-congressional complex. It seems Obama isn't interested in doing anything about it. According to this article, we won't see major shifts in policy unless the progressive movement gets stronger and more organised: Without a movement, progressives can't aid Obama's agenda.
User avatar
Michael
Site Admin
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Global Warming

Postby Cathy » Sat Jan 09, 2010 5:01 pm

I get to feeling despairing sometimes, because it doesn't seem possible to ever move society even a smidgen (as Kathy said, the U.S. can't even adopt the metric system, something that was being promoted as imminent 40 or so years ago).

However, if we actually dip into materials from the 50s, 60s, and 70s, we can see that as a whole society has moved quite a bit. Sexism, racism, homophobia--none of these have been eradicated, worse luck. But mighty big strides have been taken! As to the environment, I was one of those teens with a green armband and the "ecology e" buttons, picking up litter, starting recycling centers, and so forth a looooooooong time ago. I remember a bit how negative some people were to the simplest, most obvious statements made by the environmental types. There is a lot more general interest in the environment as well as a lot greater general consensus that we ought to clean up water, prevent air pollution, reuse and recycle, and so forth. As far as global warming is concerned, it all may be too little, too late for our survival.

But survival is overrated.

Wait! Umm.... :problem:
Cathy
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:08 am
Location: Chino, CA


Return to Policy and Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron