Friday, May 10, 2013

Friday Five: May 10, 2013

In a week where we had much public discourse on climate change and the political solutions, I had the luck to talk to a crowd that asked me if I had any doubt about climate change and the human role in it. I responded unequivocally that I did. Where we go from here comes down to two choices: decarbonize our energy economy or do nothing, and two possible outcomes: either the climate science is wrong (which we have already seen it is not) or it is right. If it is right and we do nothing, we will not recover as a species. If it is wrong and we deal with it, we get cleaner air, cleaner water, better health, and a more resilient economy. The choice is not really that difficult to make...just difficult to implement in the current economy and political environment.
The most controversial chart in history explained
"When he shows that graph to audiences, says Mann, 'I often hear an audible gasp.' In this sense, the hockey stick does indeed matter — for it dramatizes just how much human irresponsibility, in a relatively short period of time, can devastate the only home we have."

For those who may not get swayed by data, charts and graphs, perhaps real images of how we have changed our world will put the issue in perspective.
How humans are changing the planet - in 7 dramatic GIFs
"'Much like the iconic image of Earth from the Apollo 17 mission--which had a profound effect on many of us--this time-lapse map is not only fascinating to explore,' Google Earth's Rebecca Moore writes, 'but we also hope it can inform the global community's thinking about how we live on our planet and the policies that will guide us in the future.'"

Recent revelations about possible bipartisan acknowledgement of climate change and our role in it gives hope for a political solution. The market and voluntary efforts can only go so far, but we as a nation need a way to cover the costs to each one of us brought upon by the fossil fuel industry. If a carbon tax that offsets income tax can move forward, it is not an ideal solution, but it puts the cost of fuel on those who use it, which is the way that a market is supposed to work.
The coming GOP civil war over climate change
"And a quiet, but growing, number of other Republicans fear the same thing. Already, deep fissures are emerging between, on one side, a base of ideological voters and lawmakers with strong ties to powerful tea-party groups and super PACs funded by the fossil-fuel industry who see climate change as a false threat concocted by liberals to justify greater government control; and on the other side, a quiet group of moderates, younger voters, and leading conservative intellectuals who fear that if Republicans continue to dismiss or deny climate change, the party will become irrelevant."

Whatever the solution, as our lives become more and more dependent on man-made technologies and business, we have to have some way of making sure that we protect our health and our families' health. Time and time again, we see that if left to their own devices, business will do what is in the interest of profit and not in the interest of individual people. As the article points out, we pay for it one way or another...one way allows us to not pay for it with the lives of our fellow citizens.
The price of safety: Why cheap regulation creates expensive crises
"Either way, we have to pay for it. But as a taxpayer or as a consumer, I would be happy to pay more if it means that the airplane I'm getting on was reviewed and tested by someone qualified who wasn't being paid by its manufacturer."

To cap off the week, an interesting discussion on how complex the interactions of an extractive economy are. Our efforts to recycle are admirable, but we need to focus even more on reducing the amount of waste we produce, and then build an economy around packaging and materials that have natural foundations so that we can return them to the growing cycle directly. When one of your top exports is garbage and scrap, that should wake a society up that something needs to change.
China doesn't even want to buy our garbage anymore
"Especially U.S. recycling programs. Those trash exports to China became indispensable for municipal recycling. In 2011, the United States recycled some 52.8 million tons of paper and paperboard — and about 15.8 million of those tons were sent to China. Likewise, China imports nearly half of America’s recycled plastics, including bottles and containers of all sorts, around $500 million worth. But now that cozy arrangement is in danger. Over at Quartz, Gwynn Guilford reports that China has recently launched 'Operation Green Fence' — a policy to prohibit the import of unwashed post-consumer plastics and other 'contaminated' waste shipments."

Happy Friday!

No comments:

Post a Comment