Addressing global climate change
Today’s New York Times has an opinion piece that compares two approaches to addressing global warming: personal lifestyle changes versus government regulation (cap-and-trade or higher energy taxes).
It’s no surprise which approach wins, in the opinion of the author, Gernot Wagner. Read the interesting analysis here: “Going Green but Getting Nowhere.”
My own opinion differs from Wagner’s — I’m a firm believer in the importance of personal actions that are consistent with our goals — but I agree that without governmental action, we face a grim future indeed.
(I also disagree with the author’s belief that living off the grid is a form of purgatory: “An entire life voluntarily lived off the grid? No thanks.” Really, Gernot, it’s not so bad.)
GBA Detail Library
A collection of one thousand construction details organized by climate and house part
Replies
IMO....
One sided thoughts.... Wagner's right? If too many humans is the basic problem, China's beyond socialistic government is addressing it best with their one child policy right? Right. Europe being more socialist than the USA releases half the CO2 of us and has instituted cap and trade. Wagner states this in his own article. Not sure how he came up with the conclusion at the end that we need to end socialism then??
One thing I think we all know. If something starts biting us, we work hard to stop it. So when and if CO2 levels really start to cause some real pain then we most likely will work hard to stop it (the pain at least.)
Personnally I agree with some who logically state that the benefits of higher CO2 are left out of most discussions. Economy is doing. Rebuilding homes on higher land is economy, a job creator. I love playing in surf but also love driving a nail.
My conclusion. Climate change is a job creator. Work is great way to live. And working to lower CO2 is too!
Win win as I see it. Lunch over, going to drive some nails.
AJ,
You predict that "when and if CO2 levels really start to cause some real pain then we most likely will work hard to stop it."
Unfortunately, climate scientists tell us that if we wait until then, it will be too late to avoid catastrophic changes to the planet's climate.
I think the fundamental problem is this: people in "first world" countries feel that if you are affluent enough to afford occasional or frequent air travel, driving all the time, and meat with every meal, then you are off the hook for minding your carbon footprint because only a communist could expect you to give these things up just to avoid screwing up the planet. The only acceptable steps have to look and feel like what people are used to (e.g. choosing a slightly more fuel efficient gas powered vehicle) rather than making any significant changes.
Thomas,
When I was a child, air travel was expensive and rare. People still went on vacation, but they were more likely to travel by train or boat than they are these days.
If air tickets included a tax that was commensurate with the climate damage caused by air travel, most of us couldn't afford to fly as often -- a result that would be beneficial for the planet.
Anyone who thinks Climate Change is "going" to start causing real pain just hasn't been reading the news lately. The folks in PA, VT and TX might beg to differ right now.
So, Jesse -- is it already too late?
This reminds me of Monbiot's Small is Useless article, which enraged and confused many.
On one hand, I think both Wagner and Monbiot are correct. Personal-scale action in our current situation is, holistically speaking, worthless. On the other hand, this does not excuse inaction. We are each responsible for our own actions, and impacts, regardless of what direction our government goes. Being part of a murderous regime does not absolve us of our own murderous actions.
Martin, it was too late a very long time ago. Our economic and social systems are too fragile to handle even one environmental disaster at a time. AJ makes the argument that when humans feel enough pain, they'll respond. Unfortunately, the 'pain' we're feeling right now is the whine of a minigun spinning up. Once the real damage starts, there will be no chance at an effective response.
It's never too late, people always seem to be capable of amazing things once they start actually working towards a goal collectively.
I like Jason McLennan from Living Building Challenge's quote, very roughly paraphrased: "All we need to do is completely rebuild and transform the entire US economy within a decade. And for all the doubters, we've already done it multiple times. Railroads and electrification did it once, the WPA did it again, and the superhighway and suburban build-out completely transformed the country yet again after WWII. Let's just get on with the next one..."
It would be nice to get started, however.
Climate scientists?????? The last people that should be quoted as to how we individually and worldwide... will respond to various pains caused by climate changes.
Look people... Where I live, no ocean is going to be lapping at my door soon. If it is at your door, guess what, once, you rebuild, ten times, ya move or you drowned prior to moving because you are a Darwin Award winning individual.
That is life on this neat ever changing planet. All that nature has to kick at us... just creates opportunities, economy..... motion... a reason to get off the damn couch and do.
Too late? Give me a break.
just sayin
PS... None of you like to surf? I do... and others do. When the hurricanes come whipping up the waves... we surf. If you want to die of old age slowly in a hospital bed... good for you. Not all of us do.
AJ, Paul,
Geez... You guys are hard asses! :()
I'll mirror Jesse's comments and add my own:
Every day is a new day. Change your personal habits because it's a good thing to do. Do it for yourself because your choice does matter to yourself and the others around you. Your not living in a vacuum. I struggle with my own prescription, and am gradually, yet methodically reducing my consumption.
I agree with all of you that these are public problems and that the solution is in public policy. We need to fight for that.
To me, the fight for changing the attitudes regarding energy and resource consumption is often as exciting and as much fun as surfing in a hurricane. Ok... Well... Not that exciting, but pretty exciting.
And yes I completely agree, cleaning up the mess is economic activity.
Martin, missing my point. My point deals directly with our given reality. We are not going to pull back CO2 at the pace that the Gore types are asking for. It isn't happening period. Taking that reality in, what next, start wringing our hands? No. What will happen is most will adjust to whatever is thrown at them. Some won't. Some will be effected. Some will die. In due time we all will die, no biggie. My heaven or hell or cloud has a hang glider waiting for me and three virgins, two hookers, and a IPA beerarator.
The true fact is some areas will see climate improvement.
Climate is ever changing. Smart tribes deal with it. And don't think I am for fossil fuel use or technology. I use it and take advantage of it but also liked what Ted had to say in his manifesto.
So back to reality today, am Nj bound, installing custom pantry this week in an energy hog of a kitchen, best friends place...
Just saying gents.... adjust and prosper..... When the waves come your way surf or move to high ground.
Albert - I think I make it pretty clear that almost certain failure does not absolve us from the sin of inaction. I agree 100% with right action. But I'm getting tired of the misguided optimism from the environmental community. Climate scientists across the board are basically screaming that things are moving faster than anyone could have anticipated, and that the feedback mechanisms are moving into place. Our society responds by ignoring them. Something has to give.
AJ - I appreciate your life ethic, but you're thinking like an American. Most of the people in the world do not have the mobility, wealth and information necessary to adapt to climate change. Look to Bangladesh for an idea of how climate change impacts whole nations; when the storms come, these people aren't looking to hang ten - they're figuring out how to keep their children alive on $150 a month.
My earlier comments may not be crystal clear for some readers, and I'd like to take another stab at this. If you are driving to work every day, shopping at big box stores and eating feedlot beef, then it's absurd to say you wish the government would take some action on climate change. The damage is being done by large numbers of people (in affluent countries) living the same way their friends live. Maybe you want the President to take a leadership position on this? You're talking about someone who travels in an entourage with twelve Suburbans. The President's carbon footprint is HUGE. There's no leadership possible from those at the top, when it comes to doing less damage to the planet. Making progress on climate change depends on what you don't do. If you know it's bad, then figure out how to stop doing it, or at least cut back. That's a challenge, and it requires making changes in how you live.
Thomas,
I started this thread, so I should take the blame (even though the culprit is Gernot Wagner, not me) for introducing a false dichotomy between personal action and national policy. Thomas, you are falling prey to this false dichotomy when you write, "There's no leadership possible from those at the top, when it comes to doing less damage to the planet."
We need both personal action and national policy, so it's silly to argue about which one we need. I know that leadership is possible on several fronts -- for example, national policies on coal burning and the use of renewable energy to generate electricity -- because some leaders (for example, those in Germany and Denmark) are doing a much better job than other leaders (for example, those in the U.S. and Australia).
“For most of the history of this country our motto, implied or spoken, has been Think Big. I have come to believe that a better motto, and an essential one now, is Think Little....While the government is ‘studying’ and funding and organizing its Big Thought, nothing is being done. But the citizen who is willing to Think Little, and, accepting the discipline of that, to go ahead on his own, is already solving the problem.”
-Wendell Berry, from his essay “Think Little” in A Continuous Harmony: Essays Cultural and Agricultural (1971)
At the same time, I'm reasonably certain that Berry doesn't absolve the government for its inaction, nor individuals and organizations for not petitioning the government with more urgency (Berry was part of a protest march on a coal-fired power plant in D.C. in 2009 that shut the plant down for a day or so http://www.shatziephotos.com/gallery.html?gallery=Tim%20DeChristopher&folio=Stories). But if/when all else fails or is ineffective, we are left with our personal actions.
I'm most confused by Wagner's statement, "But, sadly, individual action does not work. It distracts us from the need for collective action, and it doesn’t add up to enough." The idea that, for instance, giving my daughter a ride to school this morning on my bicycle instead of in the car (individual action), somehow distracts me from promoting collective action is nonsense.
Wagner is correct, no doubt, that economic policy is the only hope the tide will turn in this country. The multi-trillion dollar question - will we choose the economic policy, or will it be chosen for us at a later date by Mother Nature?
Paul,
Yes... You were clear. I was trying to state my position. I wasn't try to second guess yours at all.
My "every day is a new day" attitude was not me trying to convey optimism... More along the lines of waking in the morning, noticing I'm not dead yet, and then moving forward and (hopefully) not being ruled by my failures that I made the day before... Kind of it's a new day... What the heck... I'll spend some time pushing for more responsible building practices. As you can guess, after a few days of that, it can be a tad bit discouraging at times...
Also... My hard ass comment was not a slam. To me, both you and AJ have some pretty strong positions. I enjoy them. It's great to see those put up there as a "take it or leave it". I only seem to take a "strong position" if someone insults wood as a building material...
Lastly, to all: You kind of have to agree that it's a bit ironic to question or negate the value of individual action in favor of public policy. After all, the public policy (ideally) would enforce the same individual actions to begin with. It seems a bIt circular.
So... Doesn't increasing individual action in a certain direction like this make it easier for the policy to be made and accepted by the larger community?
In the 1980s the Iron curtain fell due to the combined actions of many individuals. Recently, the Arab Spring changed several governments.
In Canada and the U.S., we elect our leaders at all levels of government. Policy change begins with each of us. Eventually, our leaders will listen - if each of us demands action and change.
If each of us changes our habits and takes steps to reduce our individual impact on the environment, we can slow down the effects of climate change.
A flood begins with a single raindrop.
Albert - I get where you're coming from, and probably agree more than is obvious by my previous comments. My views have polarized over the last twenty years since I went to school for environmental studies. As our understanding of the world becomes more sophisticated, there's no corresponding change in behavior. Like you said, it gets a little discouraging sometimes.
But, I think of $4 a gallon gas, and the blank stare people gave Prius drivers ten years ago. Now that gas prices have almost tripled, I imagine the sense of doubling or tripling your driving efficiency is apparent. People and their attitudes do change. Just nowhere near the speed we need.