No Talk and No Action

Why the Montreal summit was too painful to watch

Posted by Bricolage at 11:53 AM on 12 Dec 2005

Bill McKibben is no stranger to climate-change negotiations -- he's attended and reported on them all over the world. But when this year's came to his backyard, he couldn't muster the energy to hop in his hybrid and go. Why? Because he knew it would be too painful. The veteran writer explains his glum outlook and lashes out at a few key figures along the way. (Hey, we're not naming names, but one of them rhymes with tush.)

new in Soapbox: No Talk and No Action

For story: No Talk and No Action
5 Comments | Post a Comment

No Talk and No Action

I knew it would be only a matter of time before the great moral stars of our day would begin to fall.

Anti global warming stalwart Bill McKibben appears to be taking 1960's writer Timothy Leary's famous quote seriously:

"If you take the game of life seriously, if you take your nervous system seriously, if you take your sense organs seriously, if you take the energy process seriously, you must turn on, tune in, and drop out".

Please get up, Bill. We need you now more than ever.

by mtneuman at 2:50 PM on 12 Dec 2005

No Talk & No Action

Of course I'm dismayed that my nation is once again thumbing its nose at efforts to fight climate change. But when I start to get mad at Bush, I remind myself that we-the-people sure don't ACT like we give a damn about reducing our OWN CO2 emissions. Highways and parking lots are still overflowing with vehicles. Airports throb with planes landing and taking off. Snowmobilers and four-wheelers are hitting the trails now that it is too cold for power boating and water skiing. Everyone continues to drive to church and the grocery store. Business remains brisk at ski slopes and casinos and amusement parks - thanks to customers who fly and drive thousands of miles. Bulldozers and paving crews prepare new suburban and exurban homes for auto-addicted buyers. It's business as usual, and the usual business is steadily increasing energy consumption.

There is only one way we can convince our political leaders that we are serious, and it ain't street protests or petitions or bumper stickers or elections. Washington pays attention to money, and right now oil companies are the high bidders. And these companies are flush with cash because you and I and our families and friends and neighbors have willingly enriched them.

What to do about it? Stay away from the gas pumps and slash our fuel consumption. (Hello!). That means walking, biking, using public transit, living closer together, and living frugally. We are utterly free to do all these things right now; we are utterly free to enroll others in the effort; we don't need any laws or new technology or government programs to get our butts in gear. The thing we DO need is to believe our own actions matter. Then we must commit ourselves to transforming our fellow countrymen.

Is it going to hurt the economy when we stop building single-family suburban homes and buying snowmobiles and flying to Colorado and Disney World for amusement? Unfortunately the answer is "Yes". After a fossil-fuel binge that lasted a century, our addiction is severe. Overcoming this unhealthy, profoundly endemic dependence may be one of the greatest challenges our nation has every faced.

Addicts always begin with denial and shifting blame. Can we take the next step? God have mercy on our heirs if we cannot.

by Hans Noeldner at 8:15 AM on 14 Dec 2005

No Government Action = No Action

Relying on the good will of the people to cut back on driving, flying and wasting energy in their home and everyday living isn't working now nor is it likely to. That's the George W. Bush plan, and it's failing miserably.

Government needs to develop new programs that will encourage people to conserve energy. Financial incentives (rebates) to encourage less driving, flying and home energy use - funded by increases in fuel taxes. The incentives have to be high enough to make it worthwhile for people to change to a less energy intensive way of living.

How you get government officials to implement the changes is the hard part.

by mtneuman at 1:48 PM on 14 Dec 2005

No Talk & No Action

Dear mtneuman - you made my point for me!

Government WILL NOT ACT until a critical mass of citizens walk the talk. Elected leaders will never clamp down on fossil fuel use when over 50% of the voting public continues to increase consumption. We vote for national leaders every four years on average. Most of us vote at least once per week at gasoline stations. It is obvious which votes prevail.

And remember "It's the economy, stupid!"? Economic downturns are the number one reason why incumbents loose. Economic growth has NEVER occured in our nation without increased energy consumption. Politicians know that advocating reduced consumption is suicide right now.

President Bush is a perfect reflection of we-the-people -- including his lies about why we just happen to have clustered our armed forces around the world's greatest remaining oil reserves. If we don't like the reflection, we'd better transform the source instead of blaming the mirror.

Is it hopeless to change the behavior and lifestyles of a hundred million Americans? Probably. But to what more worthy fight could we devote our lives?

by Hans Noeldner at 9:41 AM on 16 Dec 2005
[ Parent ]

No talk, no action

You pointed out by inference that the Clinton Administration, prior to the Bush 43 Administration, saw no good reason for the United States to participate in the Kyoto protocol.

The Wall Street Journal ran an interesting story on Jnuary 19, 2006 addressing this issue in some detail entitled "Kyoto's Big Con." I commend it to you.

by ben1364 at 7:29 AM on 02 Feb 2006

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.