Last week the American Council for an Energy Economy (http://www.aceee.org/conf/09becc) held a conference exploring the behavior and decision making of individuals and organizations and using that knowledge to accelerate our transition to an energy-efficient and low-carbon future.
Karen Ehrhardt-Martinez, the conference chair, remarked that personal choices have a huge collective impact on the climate crisis. Home energy use and the use of personal vehicles—that is, the way we live—accounts for about 38% of U.S. energy consumption.
” I just want to say that personal choices are probably the largest contributors to climate change and environmental degradation. I don’t know how one would conduct a study and come up with a percentage, but it would make sense that that percentage would be much higher than 38%".
Last Thursday at a Energy and Environment Study Institute briefing after this conference I asked the panelist about model programs. Karen responded the importance of grass roots organizing to foster green personal choices and I referenced one model leader I know named Annette Mills.
Ms. Mills’ transformed her community from a waste reduction rate of 39% in 1991 to a rate exceeding 65%. Because of her leadership, Falls Church had one of the best recovery rates in the country. For seventeen years, Annette lead the way in recycling and environment improvements in Virginia and the DC region. She enlisted the help of more than 130 citizen volunteers or “Recycling Block Captains.” Her grassroots approach to recycling and environmental education resulted in many successes. Annette’s showed that education through personal contact results in success.
She created a “tipping point” by empowering many to serve as their community’s conservation leaders. In her words, “People who are actively involved are far more motivating than media promotion of general environmental messages or ‘gloom and doom’ forecasts. The most effective models are those people who are actively working together to build relationship with each other and the natural environment”. Her approach is simple, work hard and lead by example, and people will follow! To quote one of the City’s council members, “…many of these programs have resulted in little extra cost and in many cases cost reductions.” Ms. Mills embodies frugality from another perspective. Her City’s solid waste management budget was reduced from 1.05 million in 1990 to $630,000 in 1997. The City saved more than $420,000 by implementing a curbside recycling program and providing a once a year.
Annette’s programs were effective because she both modeled the behavior and made it happen. Ms. Mills dedication was infectious. She inspired people in their personal and professional lives to whatever effort they undertook. One council member called the community volunteers “Annette’s Army” because she brings them out in full force for community programs related to environmental education and stewardship.
Annnette changed people's behavior because she made sustainability enjoyable. Ms. Mills integrated various environmental messages together showing how conserving is connected beyond just traditional recycling into all manners of showing reverence for our environment. Annette simply made saving resources attractive and easy whether it is planting a tree, or restoring wildlife habitats.
Revolutions happen because various individuals gather band together toward a common purpose. I challenge you to explore any major green innovation and the behavior change resulted due to the leadership of select group of individuals.
A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead
Monday, November 23, 2009
Green AT: Celebrating Green Acts That Better Our World
Back in April of 1979 I spent several weeks working full time at ACT 79. This was the first and largest national Appropriate Community Technology demonstration held next to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. Appropriate Technology (AT) celebrates positive green actions that conserve energy, preserve the environment, and better people’s lives. Highlighting such measures can and promoting what’s right inspiring others to the many ingenious, creative and artistic ways they can transform their home and community. Appropriate technology directly helps others and improves community by transforming local eco-friendly resources. AT is based in the traditional notion of thrift where there is sensible use of resources- human, fiscal and physical.
Alternative technologies are designed to make best use of local resources. Whether it is reducing, reusing, recycling and composting at home, walking/biking instead of driving, weatherization, greenhouses, solar, wind, bio-fuels, preventative health care and education, integrated best management, solar, wind and a wealth of other community actions.
AT uses people or "low tech" means rather than capital intensive or "high tech" measures. Also AT minimizes waste, cultivates renewable resources by “mending” instead of” ending” materials, people and sense of place. Appropriateness may be defined “is that which wastes least?”
Individuals, groups, and communities all over the world have developed appropriate techniques and technologies that profit from energy conservation and pollution prevention. Ingenious ways to provide better environmental management,and promote local community based decision making. These best management practices are founded on grass roots participation where people have the greatest effect on their life.
The term "appropriate technology" was born in 1970’s when E.F. Schumacher wrote, “Small is Beautiful,” Schumacher promoted practices and devices with special consideration to the environmental, ethical, cultural, social and economical aspects of the community it is intended for. AT uses fewer resources, is easier to maintain, and has a lower overall cost and less of an impact on the environment compared to other practices.
AT is not about utopian or futurist ideas yet practical and applicable ways we can become more self-sufficent. Developing community to be both interdependent and self-reliant interacting mutuality and treating people equally is.
AT works in such areas as;
• Land use
• Energy
• Transportation
• Health
• Food and Agriculture
• Recreation and Culture
• Community Economic Development
Today AT green action is the tenor of the time. AT or appropriate technology demonstrates that people, resources and community are all interconnected. AT is green action bettering our world for the enjoyment of all.
Alternative technologies are designed to make best use of local resources. Whether it is reducing, reusing, recycling and composting at home, walking/biking instead of driving, weatherization, greenhouses, solar, wind, bio-fuels, preventative health care and education, integrated best management, solar, wind and a wealth of other community actions.
AT uses people or "low tech" means rather than capital intensive or "high tech" measures. Also AT minimizes waste, cultivates renewable resources by “mending” instead of” ending” materials, people and sense of place. Appropriateness may be defined “is that which wastes least?”
Individuals, groups, and communities all over the world have developed appropriate techniques and technologies that profit from energy conservation and pollution prevention. Ingenious ways to provide better environmental management,and promote local community based decision making. These best management practices are founded on grass roots participation where people have the greatest effect on their life.
The term "appropriate technology" was born in 1970’s when E.F. Schumacher wrote, “Small is Beautiful,” Schumacher promoted practices and devices with special consideration to the environmental, ethical, cultural, social and economical aspects of the community it is intended for. AT uses fewer resources, is easier to maintain, and has a lower overall cost and less of an impact on the environment compared to other practices.
AT is not about utopian or futurist ideas yet practical and applicable ways we can become more self-sufficent. Developing community to be both interdependent and self-reliant interacting mutuality and treating people equally is.
AT works in such areas as;
• Land use
• Energy
• Transportation
• Health
• Food and Agriculture
• Recreation and Culture
• Community Economic Development
Today AT green action is the tenor of the time. AT or appropriate technology demonstrates that people, resources and community are all interconnected. AT is green action bettering our world for the enjoyment of all.
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Biochar- Black Earth Biotechnology
It can be described as a handful of charcoal, but Terra Preta (black earth), an ancient Amazonian agricultural practice, is gaining widespread attention. It is called “Biochar” or “Agrichar” these days, and it offers great potential for our planet. It may play a significant role in addressing issues of climate change, lessening erosion, improving crop yields and other environmental benefits.
Biochar is a process where carbon is drawn from the atmosphere. Biochar stores carbon in the ground for hundreds of years and its potential in reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs) is impressive. Biochar diminishes carbon release and reduces the impact from all farming and agricultural waste. Both the burning and natural decomposition of agricultural matter contributes to a vast amount of carbon released into our air. Biochar uses waste as feedstock—products typically mulched, composted or left to rot. Biochar stores carbon in the ground for long periods of time (estimates range from hundreds to thousands of years) and reduces atmospheric GHG levels, including nitrous oxide and methane in addition to CO2. Also there are research that Biochar it increases soil fertility, lessens erosion, increases agricultural productivity and improves water quality.
The third largest carbon pool on the Earth’s surface is the soil. There are various ways we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as minimizing tillage, diminishing or eliminating the use of nitrogen fertilizers, and preventing erosion. By enriching our soil with carbon we can store vast amounts of extra carbon when we bury it in the form of Biochar (biomass heated in a low-oxygen environment).
Roughly 30% of greenhouse gases result from land use practices and exceed the combined emissions of the industry and transportation sectors. Advancing agricultural carbon sequestration is critical to offset global fossil fuel used in food production. When natural ecosystems are converted to agricultural land use, most carbon in the soil is simply lost as greenhouse gas. So exploring how we can capture or sequester carbon due to farming, forestry and other land use practices is a pressing necessity. Sequestration of greenhouse gases so that they are not released into the atmosphere already happens naturally through photosynthesis—it is required to grow and sustain all plant life. Exploring how we can best sequester greenhouse gases in other ways so that they are not released into the atmosphere is critical in the reduction of our carbon footprint.
In addition to reducing CO2 released into the atmosphere, Biochar has been found to decrease methane and nitrous oxide emissions from soil, thus further reducing GHG emissions. Nitrous oxide is approximately 300 times stronger than CO2 in terms of global warming potential, and laboratory studies to date show that nitrous oxide emissions were reduced by 80-90% by land application of Biochar.
Biochar provides significant benefits in addition to carbon sequestration. Studies suggest that Biochar sequesters around 30-50% of the carbon available in the feedstock being used. It allows us to manage waste—agricultural, forest, municipal, wastewater, etc.—in a more sustainable manner. It assists the soil food web to build much more recalcitrant organic carbon (living biomass microbes & fungus) in addition to the carbon in the Biochar. It reduces nitrogen leaching and nitrous oxide emissions; it augments nutrient retention and moderates soil acidity; it increases water retention and productivity.
Biochar can retain up to 50% of the feedstock carbon in charcoal under best conditions. A fine-grained, porous charcoal substance is made when Biochar is produced. When this product is used as a soil amendment, it effectively removes carbon dioxide from the air. Biochar provides a habitat for soil organisms, yet is not itself consumed by them. Biochar holds and slowly releases water, minerals and nitrogen to plants. When Biochar is used as a soil amendment along with manure or fertilizer it greatly improves the soil, its productivity, nutrient retention and availability according to several studies.
It has been concluded by some soil experts that biochar keeps nutrients from running off or leaching out of soils allowing for increased plant growth. Since adding charcoal to soils appears to increase crop production. What’s more is reduces acidity and lessens nitrogen leaching while adding potassium. This reduces the amount of fertilizer required and increases water retention.
Innovations in agriculture provide the best opportunity to remove carbon from the atmosphere by changing the way we grow our food and use our land. Unfortunately, farming over the last 10,000 years has released roughly two-thirds of our excess greenhouse gases. Various agricultural practices have mined out soil carbon, converting it to carbon dioxide.
However, there are a few environmental groups who question the benefits of this biotechnology. They feel it is “dangerously premature”, that most of the claims made by Biochar advocates are unproven, and these critics argue that it has a high potential for causing harm.
Advancing Biochar technologies have significant implications. As this technology evolves so will Biochar best management practices. Apart of this process we will find how Biochar affects and effects our soil, water, air and climate. Researching and developing biochar offers numerous opportunities and challenges. More trials and tribulation will determine whether this black earth will result in greener rewards.
Biochar is a process where carbon is drawn from the atmosphere. Biochar stores carbon in the ground for hundreds of years and its potential in reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs) is impressive. Biochar diminishes carbon release and reduces the impact from all farming and agricultural waste. Both the burning and natural decomposition of agricultural matter contributes to a vast amount of carbon released into our air. Biochar uses waste as feedstock—products typically mulched, composted or left to rot. Biochar stores carbon in the ground for long periods of time (estimates range from hundreds to thousands of years) and reduces atmospheric GHG levels, including nitrous oxide and methane in addition to CO2. Also there are research that Biochar it increases soil fertility, lessens erosion, increases agricultural productivity and improves water quality.
The third largest carbon pool on the Earth’s surface is the soil. There are various ways we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as minimizing tillage, diminishing or eliminating the use of nitrogen fertilizers, and preventing erosion. By enriching our soil with carbon we can store vast amounts of extra carbon when we bury it in the form of Biochar (biomass heated in a low-oxygen environment).
Roughly 30% of greenhouse gases result from land use practices and exceed the combined emissions of the industry and transportation sectors. Advancing agricultural carbon sequestration is critical to offset global fossil fuel used in food production. When natural ecosystems are converted to agricultural land use, most carbon in the soil is simply lost as greenhouse gas. So exploring how we can capture or sequester carbon due to farming, forestry and other land use practices is a pressing necessity. Sequestration of greenhouse gases so that they are not released into the atmosphere already happens naturally through photosynthesis—it is required to grow and sustain all plant life. Exploring how we can best sequester greenhouse gases in other ways so that they are not released into the atmosphere is critical in the reduction of our carbon footprint.
In addition to reducing CO2 released into the atmosphere, Biochar has been found to decrease methane and nitrous oxide emissions from soil, thus further reducing GHG emissions. Nitrous oxide is approximately 300 times stronger than CO2 in terms of global warming potential, and laboratory studies to date show that nitrous oxide emissions were reduced by 80-90% by land application of Biochar.
Biochar provides significant benefits in addition to carbon sequestration. Studies suggest that Biochar sequesters around 30-50% of the carbon available in the feedstock being used. It allows us to manage waste—agricultural, forest, municipal, wastewater, etc.—in a more sustainable manner. It assists the soil food web to build much more recalcitrant organic carbon (living biomass microbes & fungus) in addition to the carbon in the Biochar. It reduces nitrogen leaching and nitrous oxide emissions; it augments nutrient retention and moderates soil acidity; it increases water retention and productivity.
Biochar can retain up to 50% of the feedstock carbon in charcoal under best conditions. A fine-grained, porous charcoal substance is made when Biochar is produced. When this product is used as a soil amendment, it effectively removes carbon dioxide from the air. Biochar provides a habitat for soil organisms, yet is not itself consumed by them. Biochar holds and slowly releases water, minerals and nitrogen to plants. When Biochar is used as a soil amendment along with manure or fertilizer it greatly improves the soil, its productivity, nutrient retention and availability according to several studies.
It has been concluded by some soil experts that biochar keeps nutrients from running off or leaching out of soils allowing for increased plant growth. Since adding charcoal to soils appears to increase crop production. What’s more is reduces acidity and lessens nitrogen leaching while adding potassium. This reduces the amount of fertilizer required and increases water retention.
Innovations in agriculture provide the best opportunity to remove carbon from the atmosphere by changing the way we grow our food and use our land. Unfortunately, farming over the last 10,000 years has released roughly two-thirds of our excess greenhouse gases. Various agricultural practices have mined out soil carbon, converting it to carbon dioxide.
However, there are a few environmental groups who question the benefits of this biotechnology. They feel it is “dangerously premature”, that most of the claims made by Biochar advocates are unproven, and these critics argue that it has a high potential for causing harm.
Advancing Biochar technologies have significant implications. As this technology evolves so will Biochar best management practices. Apart of this process we will find how Biochar affects and effects our soil, water, air and climate. Researching and developing biochar offers numerous opportunities and challenges. More trials and tribulation will determine whether this black earth will result in greener rewards.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
A Bridge to Saving
Stephen Moore’s editorial in the WSJ on September 23, “Our $2 trillion Bridge to Nowhere,” addresses a recent Gallup Poll. While American believes that the Feds waste half of our tax dollars. He cites that the government spent nearly $4 trillion dollars this year. However when Mr. Moore compares another recent Gallup poll that American’s believe there is too much government regulation of business and industry as believe as too little (45% to 24%). He goes on to show that today public perception of government waste was lower 30 years ago when Americans thought 40 cents of every dollar was wasted. We Americans are the source and solution to government waste.
Many businesses externalize their waste passing if out to the taxpayer evident by our recent financial crisis. Privatization is another example where sometimes it costs the government more. Both sectors can foster innovation to fully optimize their transfer goods and services with less waste and improved performance. Increasing productivity must become a direct result. Our collective “output and inputs” must balance with increased environmental and social considerations on how the
We must become fully accountable through a new national policy of developing improved performance measurements. These measures must balance flexible environmental partnerships offer, integrated management system and ingenious paperwork processes. Preventing pollution, improving environmental management, and integrating approaches across media will become a new triple bottom line.
We need a middle path where neutral good third-party. Will our financial market not melt down like our environmental concern? American requires close examination of how we can efficiently save. America can champion waste reduction, and so profit from such minimization measures. Such renewal is tied to our nation’s health and safety and public welfare.
Many businesses externalize their waste passing if out to the taxpayer evident by our recent financial crisis. Privatization is another example where sometimes it costs the government more. Both sectors can foster innovation to fully optimize their transfer goods and services with less waste and improved performance. Increasing productivity must become a direct result. Our collective “output and inputs” must balance with increased environmental and social considerations on how the
We must become fully accountable through a new national policy of developing improved performance measurements. These measures must balance flexible environmental partnerships offer, integrated management system and ingenious paperwork processes. Preventing pollution, improving environmental management, and integrating approaches across media will become a new triple bottom line.
We need a middle path where neutral good third-party. Will our financial market not melt down like our environmental concern? American requires close examination of how we can efficiently save. America can champion waste reduction, and so profit from such minimization measures. Such renewal is tied to our nation’s health and safety and public welfare.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Larry Kelly: Silver Lining Specialist
I first met Larry Kelly back in 1989. November 11, the day the Berlin Wall fell, a truck carrying an international cross section of laundry workers from a Southampton New York laundry crossed the road, and hit me head on at 50 miles per hour. There seemed to be no insurance, and my physical therapist recommended an out of the box thinking trial attorney with a local reputation. Larry used Virginia and Maryland law to create new law in New York State, making a silk purse out of what appeared to everyone else as a sow's ear. The law is only a tool, he would say, a tool to find justice.
For many years, Larry would tackle the unpopular cases. He embraced the challenge. His work on behalf of civil rights plaintiffs against law enforcement so impressed law enforcement officers that they retained him to challenge what they saw as the unfair exclusion of cognitive grading on police entry and promotional exams. On 9/11, Larry volunteered to lead the High Income Lead cases for the Cantor Fitzgerald claims before Special Master Feinberg. His work for Trial Lawyers Care led to an initial $5.3 million award for one family, and the acceptance of the program by most of the Cantor families. After his nephew S/Sgt Ryan Kelly was seriously wounded in Iraq in 2003, he created TSGLI, a lump sum disability benefit which has now paid out over $200 million to seriously wounded service members. Larry is a transformer. He assesses a bad situation, and then moves on to finding what good he can bring out of it. Just before he left for Iraq, he introduced the concept of First Contact, a diversion program for military veterans coming into contact with the criminal justice system. After he consulted with their office, most of the New York area District Attorneys adopted the program.
Larry thought there was no reason his 23 year old nephew's work in Iraq should go unfinished while his 53 year old uncle had a chance to make a difference. Just six months ago, Larry visited me in Washington DC as he trained to volunteer to restore Iraq's legal system as part of a State Department Provincial Reconstruction Team. This kind of mid career opportunity to do national service in the international arena allows out of the box thinking to transform other regions.
When I last checked, he was introducing literacy programs, reopening libraries, introducing case processing systems to the courts, and improving prison conditions one day at a time. He also spent part of a day convincing the visiting Texas Governor Rick Perry that the Estate of one of the Sergeants in the Team's protective detail was entitled to Texas State Crime and Terror Benefits. Because even in Iraq, there's nothing Larry likes better than finding a way to fashion the law into doing justice.
For many years, Larry would tackle the unpopular cases. He embraced the challenge. His work on behalf of civil rights plaintiffs against law enforcement so impressed law enforcement officers that they retained him to challenge what they saw as the unfair exclusion of cognitive grading on police entry and promotional exams. On 9/11, Larry volunteered to lead the High Income Lead cases for the Cantor Fitzgerald claims before Special Master Feinberg. His work for Trial Lawyers Care led to an initial $5.3 million award for one family, and the acceptance of the program by most of the Cantor families. After his nephew S/Sgt Ryan Kelly was seriously wounded in Iraq in 2003, he created TSGLI, a lump sum disability benefit which has now paid out over $200 million to seriously wounded service members. Larry is a transformer. He assesses a bad situation, and then moves on to finding what good he can bring out of it. Just before he left for Iraq, he introduced the concept of First Contact, a diversion program for military veterans coming into contact with the criminal justice system. After he consulted with their office, most of the New York area District Attorneys adopted the program.
Larry thought there was no reason his 23 year old nephew's work in Iraq should go unfinished while his 53 year old uncle had a chance to make a difference. Just six months ago, Larry visited me in Washington DC as he trained to volunteer to restore Iraq's legal system as part of a State Department Provincial Reconstruction Team. This kind of mid career opportunity to do national service in the international arena allows out of the box thinking to transform other regions.
When I last checked, he was introducing literacy programs, reopening libraries, introducing case processing systems to the courts, and improving prison conditions one day at a time. He also spent part of a day convincing the visiting Texas Governor Rick Perry that the Estate of one of the Sergeants in the Team's protective detail was entitled to Texas State Crime and Terror Benefits. Because even in Iraq, there's nothing Larry likes better than finding a way to fashion the law into doing justice.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Manage Health Care/Promote Wellness
Manage health care becomes a contradiction in terms when we do not create preventative measures. This is true is so many areas of American culture. Look how me manage our environmental resources? We invested little in preventing pollution however, latter waste billions attempting to clean things up. America will prosper when we fully invest in wellness.
Certainly we do not manage our health care system. Health care premiums have shot up more than 90 percent from 2000-2007. Government involvement is important to regulate need from greed. In the last decade, profits from the largest 10 health care insurers has increased 428 percent.
Besides preventing the escalting costs and increasing competition to make such insurance affordable we must create incentives to conserve. Critical to the health care reform is providing choice. Choice is a key issue for Americans not whether it is private or public insurance. For example, in the early 90's our indemnity insurance vanished. We lost this choice. At the same time take overs, mergers and insuranace consolidations have taken many of our choices away - less competition, less options, higher insurance premium costs
Like many things today in our country we the taxpayers must pay for market failure when either capitalism fails or the government fails to best serve the public. Our Congress now has to walk the razors edge. Yes we must reform health care however do so without substantially change it. Each one us has to become more responsible and be rewarded for our efforts. Prevention will not happen until we stimulate ways that cure.
One idea is to give me greater incentives for maintaing my wellness. While today I get some reduce rates on my insurance these benefits are modest. If I do not drink, smoke and keep my weight down then lessen my premium.
One perfect example is medical cost of treating obsesity-related diseases may soar as high as $147 billion in 2008, according the Center for Disease Control. In 1998 these same cost were estimatd at $74 billion. Obesity rose 37% between 1998 and 2006
and medical cost rose about 9.1%. Obese people spend 42% more than people of normal weight, a difference of $1429. The Wall Street Journal on July 28th documents in the "Cost of Treating Obesity Soars," D3 by Betsy Mckay, that the average American is 23 pounds overweight.
Health care reform will not happen unless there are carrots and sticks. If we do not get people to eat right, exercise then our health cost will continue to bankrupt us. Government and private sector programs must connect the dots and promote wellness if we are serious about caring for our future.
Certainly we do not manage our health care system. Health care premiums have shot up more than 90 percent from 2000-2007. Government involvement is important to regulate need from greed. In the last decade, profits from the largest 10 health care insurers has increased 428 percent.
Besides preventing the escalting costs and increasing competition to make such insurance affordable we must create incentives to conserve. Critical to the health care reform is providing choice. Choice is a key issue for Americans not whether it is private or public insurance. For example, in the early 90's our indemnity insurance vanished. We lost this choice. At the same time take overs, mergers and insuranace consolidations have taken many of our choices away - less competition, less options, higher insurance premium costs
Like many things today in our country we the taxpayers must pay for market failure when either capitalism fails or the government fails to best serve the public. Our Congress now has to walk the razors edge. Yes we must reform health care however do so without substantially change it. Each one us has to become more responsible and be rewarded for our efforts. Prevention will not happen until we stimulate ways that cure.
One idea is to give me greater incentives for maintaing my wellness. While today I get some reduce rates on my insurance these benefits are modest. If I do not drink, smoke and keep my weight down then lessen my premium.
One perfect example is medical cost of treating obsesity-related diseases may soar as high as $147 billion in 2008, according the Center for Disease Control. In 1998 these same cost were estimatd at $74 billion. Obesity rose 37% between 1998 and 2006
and medical cost rose about 9.1%. Obese people spend 42% more than people of normal weight, a difference of $1429. The Wall Street Journal on July 28th documents in the "Cost of Treating Obesity Soars," D3 by Betsy Mckay, that the average American is 23 pounds overweight.
Health care reform will not happen unless there are carrots and sticks. If we do not get people to eat right, exercise then our health cost will continue to bankrupt us. Government and private sector programs must connect the dots and promote wellness if we are serious about caring for our future.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The Real Terror: Greenhouse Gases and Politics
There are two sources of dangerous air emissions threatening this planet: the first consists of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse contributory emissions; the second is the gas generated by politicians. Yes, we are truly in the danger zone when it comes to the first category, but even more alarming, is that public ignorance, apathy, and fear is failing to provoke action on the part of our elected officials.
Rarely has the scientific community been more in accord than on the imminence of global warming and our role in bringing it about, but at the same time, our political response has been dismal as evidenced by the tenor of public debate on these issues or by the lack of any debate at all. You would be forgiven for thinking that economic development, energy issues, climate change, national security and health care issues are inextricably interlinked, and you would be right in thinking that, but you would be in the minority. We are masters at failing to connect the dots. Right now as carbon dioxide is being pumped at ever-increasing rates into our air basin—some ten of thousands of times faster than nature can deal with it—the earth’s own refrigeration processes are dying. So are tens of thousands of living things on this fragile plant of ours.
Elizabeth Kolbert writes in her article “The Castrophist” in the June 29, 2009 issue of the New Yorker:
There's no precise term for the level of C02 that will assure a climate disaster, the best that scientists and policy makers have come up is the phrase "dangerous anthropogenic interference or D.A.I...In scientific circles, worries about D.A.I. are widespread. During the past few years, researchers around the world have noticed a disturbing trend: the planet is changing faster than had been anticipated. pg 42
James Hansen, NASA's leading climate expert disagrees with officials that the D.A.I. levels are around four hundred and fifty parts per million:
The bad news is that it's become clear that the dangerous amount of carbon dioxide is not more than three hundred and fifty parts per million.
Presently we are at three hundred and eighty five parts per million, and at current emissions we will reach four hundred fifty parts per million by 2035. Interestingly whatever the D.A.I. levels are, it is a problem, and the political and public response is skeptical and lacking. Just look at our largely failed efforts in the U.S. toward conservation--the most effective and efficient first step is evidence of our public neglect.
With today's economic woes “business-as-usual” is the norm. It seems people care about their future from the perspective of next week or next month-hardly in a few years from now.
Most scientists agree that coal is the most serious threat today, and some are advocating for "no new coal-fired plants," The current challenge is that 50 percent of our energy comes from coal! The recent "American Clean Energy and Security Act" passed by the House of Representatives allows for new coal-fired plants while its stated aim is to cut the country's carbon emissions by seventeen percent in 2020.
Interestingly, the article " The Castrophist," states (p.45):
Hansen argues that politicians willfully misunderstand climate science; it could be argue that Hansen just as willfully misunderstands politics. In order to stabilize carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, annual global emissions would have to be cut by something on the order of three-quarters. In order to draw them down, agriculture and forestry practices would have to change dramatically as well. So far, at least, there is no evidence that any nation is willing to taking anything approaching the necessary steps. On the contrary, almost all trend lines point in the opposite direction. Just because the world desperately needs a solution that satisfies both scientific and the political constraint doesn’t mean one necessarily exists...
(Hansen) As long as we let politicians and the people supporting them continue to set the rules, such that "business-as-usual' continues, or small tweets to ‘business-as-usual' then it is unrealistic. So we have to change the rules.
You would think if one of the leading climate expert is worried about our earth's future more of us should be also quite concerned.
Finally, Jerome Glenn, director of the Millennium Project, recently remarked how we can best deal with our climate crisis;
There are answers to our global challenges, but decisions are still not being made on the scale necessary to address them.
The times call for people of all walks to be the solution to our collective eco-problems. If we have any hope of addressing our ecological ills; politicians, scientists, business men and women, intellectuals, teachers, doctors and nurses, your neighborhood mechanic and that man walking his dog in your street--in short you, me and all of us--must become aware of the interdependence of all aspects of life and the true environmental costs of our human activities on our precious and threatened earth. By addressing what is head on, we can perhaps avert the worst case scenarios and begin to insure our future on this fragile planet.
Rarely has the scientific community been more in accord than on the imminence of global warming and our role in bringing it about, but at the same time, our political response has been dismal as evidenced by the tenor of public debate on these issues or by the lack of any debate at all. You would be forgiven for thinking that economic development, energy issues, climate change, national security and health care issues are inextricably interlinked, and you would be right in thinking that, but you would be in the minority. We are masters at failing to connect the dots. Right now as carbon dioxide is being pumped at ever-increasing rates into our air basin—some ten of thousands of times faster than nature can deal with it—the earth’s own refrigeration processes are dying. So are tens of thousands of living things on this fragile plant of ours.
Elizabeth Kolbert writes in her article “The Castrophist” in the June 29, 2009 issue of the New Yorker:
There's no precise term for the level of C02 that will assure a climate disaster, the best that scientists and policy makers have come up is the phrase "dangerous anthropogenic interference or D.A.I...In scientific circles, worries about D.A.I. are widespread. During the past few years, researchers around the world have noticed a disturbing trend: the planet is changing faster than had been anticipated. pg 42
James Hansen, NASA's leading climate expert disagrees with officials that the D.A.I. levels are around four hundred and fifty parts per million:
The bad news is that it's become clear that the dangerous amount of carbon dioxide is not more than three hundred and fifty parts per million.
Presently we are at three hundred and eighty five parts per million, and at current emissions we will reach four hundred fifty parts per million by 2035. Interestingly whatever the D.A.I. levels are, it is a problem, and the political and public response is skeptical and lacking. Just look at our largely failed efforts in the U.S. toward conservation--the most effective and efficient first step is evidence of our public neglect.
With today's economic woes “business-as-usual” is the norm. It seems people care about their future from the perspective of next week or next month-hardly in a few years from now.
Most scientists agree that coal is the most serious threat today, and some are advocating for "no new coal-fired plants," The current challenge is that 50 percent of our energy comes from coal! The recent "American Clean Energy and Security Act" passed by the House of Representatives allows for new coal-fired plants while its stated aim is to cut the country's carbon emissions by seventeen percent in 2020.
Interestingly, the article " The Castrophist," states (p.45):
Hansen argues that politicians willfully misunderstand climate science; it could be argue that Hansen just as willfully misunderstands politics. In order to stabilize carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, annual global emissions would have to be cut by something on the order of three-quarters. In order to draw them down, agriculture and forestry practices would have to change dramatically as well. So far, at least, there is no evidence that any nation is willing to taking anything approaching the necessary steps. On the contrary, almost all trend lines point in the opposite direction. Just because the world desperately needs a solution that satisfies both scientific and the political constraint doesn’t mean one necessarily exists...
(Hansen) As long as we let politicians and the people supporting them continue to set the rules, such that "business-as-usual' continues, or small tweets to ‘business-as-usual' then it is unrealistic. So we have to change the rules.
You would think if one of the leading climate expert is worried about our earth's future more of us should be also quite concerned.
Finally, Jerome Glenn, director of the Millennium Project, recently remarked how we can best deal with our climate crisis;
There are answers to our global challenges, but decisions are still not being made on the scale necessary to address them.
The times call for people of all walks to be the solution to our collective eco-problems. If we have any hope of addressing our ecological ills; politicians, scientists, business men and women, intellectuals, teachers, doctors and nurses, your neighborhood mechanic and that man walking his dog in your street--in short you, me and all of us--must become aware of the interdependence of all aspects of life and the true environmental costs of our human activities on our precious and threatened earth. By addressing what is head on, we can perhaps avert the worst case scenarios and begin to insure our future on this fragile planet.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Never Too Late
I recently read that some experts think that it is too late for us to alter climate change: we’ve done too little too late.
It is never too late. At least, it is never too late to change our thinking, to come to a realization of the fragility of the world around us. An abundance of knowledge coupled with limited wisdom and the propensity of our species for belly button gazing and escalating hopelessness simply feeds more despair. Our way of thinking can cripple us.
In the early days of the American Revolution, the odds against its success were overwhelming, and yet a new nation, one based on democratic principles, was born and has inspired positive change everywhere for the past 250 years despite all the obstacles.
We now number nearly seven billion on this small planet. We, as a species, differ from the other species we share this little dot in the universe with in that we have awareness of our mortality, and never have we been more aware of the possible extinction of our species as we are at this time. We have changed this earth beyond recognition and depleted its resources with alarming and ever-accelerating speed. This realization compels us to ask what we, as a species and as individuals, can do to sustain the delicate balance and reverse the devastating consequences of our own actions.
Only three years ago Al Gore’s seminal film, An Inconvenient Truth, brought international attention to the perils of climate change. As Congress debates today the form of legislation to address this problem, the situation is growing worse minute-by-minute. Rising sea levels, melting glaciers, increasing carbon emissions are the indisputable results of what we perceive to be minor changes in human lifestyle while population, and its inevitable needs and wants, continues to grow.
At the present time, we breathe more carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases than we have in the last four hundred thousand years. Fifty years from now, babies born today will have to subsist on air containing more greenhouse gases that at any time in the past three million years.
Global warming has altered the very chemistry of our oceans. The drop in ocean pH levels in the last fifty years may well exceed anything that has occurred during the previous 50 million years. Currently, nearly a third of the ocean’s corals and amphibian species, along with a quarter of all mammals, and an eighth of all bird species are threatened with extinction. And that is without counting the millions of species that are already extinct: it is impossible to quantify the disappearance of life forms already lost to collapsing ecosystems.
Not only has our population more than doubled in the last fifty years, but also our global economy has doubled every 10 years for the past few years. Between 2003 and 2007, average income worldwide grew at a faster rate than ever recorded in history. Our global economy has grown from $31 trillion in 1999 to $62 trillion in 2008. All you have to do is look at our run-away use of coal and oil—natural resources that required millions of years to form—supplies in the last century to get an idea of the rapidity with which we are killing our planet.
We are barely recovering from a worldwide financial meltdown caused by unbridled human greed. This economic disaster is distracting us from the ominous ecological disaster before us. The shallowness and lack of public debate and dialogue with regard to cap and trade vs. carbon emissions taxation clearly illustrates the general disregard for these fundamental, and infinitely more critical, issues.
In addition to the current economic worries, Americans are faced with a broken healthcare system. This too is an issue of enormous societal implications that diverts our attention from any debate or actions concerning climate change even though, ironically, our health is directly related to our environment.
Yes we live in very complex, stressful and desperate times. Nevertheless, each of us does have a choice as to how we deal with these challenges. A feeble ray of hope perhaps: people of all walks of life everywhere around the world are awakening to our interconnectivity to one another and to every aspect of life on this planet—a fine thread to which our very survival is attached.
It seems at times that our species should be called “bozo sapiens” to reflect our monumental egocentricity and ability to delude ourselves. We are truly on the edge of a precipice. Can we make the right choices? Can we act responsibly and with respect for all? Can we ensure a world for future generations? Or will we doggedly continue to self-destruct? This is our greatest challenge, and each of us must unblinkingly face it with purpose as well as with humility.
It is never too late. At least, it is never too late to change our thinking, to come to a realization of the fragility of the world around us. An abundance of knowledge coupled with limited wisdom and the propensity of our species for belly button gazing and escalating hopelessness simply feeds more despair. Our way of thinking can cripple us.
In the early days of the American Revolution, the odds against its success were overwhelming, and yet a new nation, one based on democratic principles, was born and has inspired positive change everywhere for the past 250 years despite all the obstacles.
We now number nearly seven billion on this small planet. We, as a species, differ from the other species we share this little dot in the universe with in that we have awareness of our mortality, and never have we been more aware of the possible extinction of our species as we are at this time. We have changed this earth beyond recognition and depleted its resources with alarming and ever-accelerating speed. This realization compels us to ask what we, as a species and as individuals, can do to sustain the delicate balance and reverse the devastating consequences of our own actions.
Only three years ago Al Gore’s seminal film, An Inconvenient Truth, brought international attention to the perils of climate change. As Congress debates today the form of legislation to address this problem, the situation is growing worse minute-by-minute. Rising sea levels, melting glaciers, increasing carbon emissions are the indisputable results of what we perceive to be minor changes in human lifestyle while population, and its inevitable needs and wants, continues to grow.
At the present time, we breathe more carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases than we have in the last four hundred thousand years. Fifty years from now, babies born today will have to subsist on air containing more greenhouse gases that at any time in the past three million years.
Global warming has altered the very chemistry of our oceans. The drop in ocean pH levels in the last fifty years may well exceed anything that has occurred during the previous 50 million years. Currently, nearly a third of the ocean’s corals and amphibian species, along with a quarter of all mammals, and an eighth of all bird species are threatened with extinction. And that is without counting the millions of species that are already extinct: it is impossible to quantify the disappearance of life forms already lost to collapsing ecosystems.
Not only has our population more than doubled in the last fifty years, but also our global economy has doubled every 10 years for the past few years. Between 2003 and 2007, average income worldwide grew at a faster rate than ever recorded in history. Our global economy has grown from $31 trillion in 1999 to $62 trillion in 2008. All you have to do is look at our run-away use of coal and oil—natural resources that required millions of years to form—supplies in the last century to get an idea of the rapidity with which we are killing our planet.
We are barely recovering from a worldwide financial meltdown caused by unbridled human greed. This economic disaster is distracting us from the ominous ecological disaster before us. The shallowness and lack of public debate and dialogue with regard to cap and trade vs. carbon emissions taxation clearly illustrates the general disregard for these fundamental, and infinitely more critical, issues.
In addition to the current economic worries, Americans are faced with a broken healthcare system. This too is an issue of enormous societal implications that diverts our attention from any debate or actions concerning climate change even though, ironically, our health is directly related to our environment.
Yes we live in very complex, stressful and desperate times. Nevertheless, each of us does have a choice as to how we deal with these challenges. A feeble ray of hope perhaps: people of all walks of life everywhere around the world are awakening to our interconnectivity to one another and to every aspect of life on this planet—a fine thread to which our very survival is attached.
It seems at times that our species should be called “bozo sapiens” to reflect our monumental egocentricity and ability to delude ourselves. We are truly on the edge of a precipice. Can we make the right choices? Can we act responsibly and with respect for all? Can we ensure a world for future generations? Or will we doggedly continue to self-destruct? This is our greatest challenge, and each of us must unblinkingly face it with purpose as well as with humility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
