Motivating the public for an energy shift

Global warming probably won't do the job.

Posted by David Roberts at 11:16 AM on 19 May 2005

Roger Pielke, Jr. makes a good point over on Prometheus today about the way the debate over energy policy is being framed. He says:

The energy policy debate over climate change has largely been framed as an issue of managing the global climate for long-term benefits with the extra benefits of reducing dependence on foreign oil, increased efficiency and decreased particulate pollution.

He suggests that advocates of a sane energy policy would be well advised to reverse this order, to sell their ideas "in terms of a primary need to reduce dependence on foreign oil, increased efficiency and decreased particulate pollution," with "the resulting side benefit of reducing the impacts of humans on the climate system."

I too have my doubts that global warming will ever serve as an effective driver for public action. Even if the faux debate went away and everybody acknowledged the reality, it's just too abstract and far away, the benefits too intangible. Yes, the ice caps are melting (etc.), but we're talking about making a major shift in the way we live in order to ... what? ... slow but not stop the rise in greenhouse gases so as to avoid the worst impacts of climate change in 100 years? It's just not something that's going to get people in the streets. In a perfect world, maybe, but ours is not that.

What will get people fired up? Security and money. Money and security.

For story: Motivating the public for an energy shift
6 Comments | Post a Comment

Yep economic recovery and winning the oil wars.

Something that green energy will provide that nuclear and fossil energy cannot.

Soaring fuel and energy prices, recession, job outsourcing, eternal oil wars, waste and pollution... are the future, with this present fossil fuel and nuclear energy policy.

Actual globing warming may seem far away, but the climate volatility wreaking havoc through storms, drought, crop failure are immediate problems causing 100s of billions in losses every year.

When will a major storm flood Manhattan? Only a matter of time with rising water levels and ever larger storm surge. What will that cost the US economy?

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

by amazingdrx at 12:08 PM on 19 May 2005

Energy shift - ANWR

Speaking of energy shift - I'm trying to find out what companies are lined up to drill in ANWR so I can boycott. Yes, I know, using the term "energy shift" here loosely...anyway, anyone know? Dave? Amazing? Anyone, anyone, anyone at all?

by doriannegray at 2:00 PM on 19 May 2005

Wrong way to go

The problem, of course, is that reducing our dependence on foriegn oil will do nothing to slow global warming.

While we think it means increasing renewables-

For the right it means drilling in the arctic (sound familiar), off our coasts, removing regulations on coal mining, etc.

by setb at 2:18 PM on 19 May 2005

Government Action the Only Solution

The reason global warming is a problem that's difficult to get people into the streets about is because the streets are filled with cars being driven by the very same people! That's why we have to demand that the Government take action, because like it or not, the future quality of life for everyone on the planet is being threatened by global warming, and the cause of it is our incessant burning of fossil fuels in much of what we do.

The most critical climate change impacts will not, of course, just suddenly appear in year 2099. Global warming's impacts will get progressively worse as the century unfolds. This has already begun as a previous commenter notes.

Worse still, because of a latency of effect between rising greenhouse gas accumulations in the atmosphere and the warming of the planet, future actions we take to mitigate global warming will be hampered by temperature increases associated with past emissions. That's why it's so important we begin to act now and in major ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today, not wait for tomorrow.

A "Preserve Our Climate" coalition has been formed in Wisconsin and has initiated a petition drive which asks Wisconsin's legislators to create climate change enabling legislation that will authorize programs designed to provide positive financial incentives to residents who use less energy than average in transportation and in their homes. To view the petition, visit the following web site:
http://www.onlinepetition.com/climate

Other states might want to consider following a similar approach.

PRESERVE OUR CLIMATE COMMUNITY PAGE:
http://www.madison.com/communities/preserveourclimate

CONSERVE, NOW! to reduce GHG emissions
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ClimateArchive/message/229

by mtneuman at 10:15 AM on 20 May 2005

Petition for Climate Change Legislation

Sorry.

Here should be the correct URL for the Wisconsin Climate Change Legislation petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/climate

by mtneuman at 11:47 AM on 20 May 2005

Prepare for killer heat and high energy prices

Acting sooner rather than later will reduce the suffering. Who else besides the government can take action for the public?

by patneuman2000 at 6:21 AM on 21 May 2005

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.