The state of climate discourse is in the news frequently – with extreme weather and droughts in the US, and also with a notable former skeptic Richard Muller coming out to say that Climate Change is real, and it is definitely caused by humans. The comment below is basically a long-winded response to the questions presented in the original article, from my perspective. Climate change in the US is still not something that has national traction and engagement, and that isn’t likely to change until there are more grassroots lifestyle changes. International climate conferences and protesting of hydrocarbon infrastructures don’t answer the question of where is the energy demanded coming from. Until the underlying demand of energy that makes our current lifestyle possible changes, or until there are new ways to provide energy on the appropriate scale, nothing significant will change. Climate discourse is evolving, but solutions to Anthropogenic Climate Change are not – so the stalemate continues. [See also my Learnist Board - Energy in the United States]
Global mean surface temperature difference from the average for 1880–2009
OurEnergyPolicy “The State and Stakes of Climate Discourse” – The state of climate discourse in the US is still lacking, (see my comments here), but perhaps there is a general trend towards belief. The polls I’ve seen recently point towards a more general concern, and a more general acceptance that there is something that can be done about it – thus there is some belief in Anthropogenic Climate Change — that humans are impacting the climate. Wading through the greenwashing of “natural” food products and simplistic environmental ploys, I think people are starting to get it – especially with the summer we’re having in the US. But has any significant tipping point within the US been reached? No, I don’t think so. Not yet. If there is a significant stand against Keystone XL, or about hydraulic fracturing, or all of the badmouthing the EPA has gotten is rebuked, then I’d be more comfortable in saying there is some clout to the US’s concern about climate change — but I am not saying that all of those things are likely to, or ought to, actually happen.
What are the stakes? I personally think the stakes are huge, and there are huge losses at hand if we continue down our current path. I really don’t trust popular or mainstream conceptions of issues that climate change is contingent on – such as energy use, population growth, and resource depletion – so I’m more inclined to believe there are problems down the road. They are not problems simply because we’re putting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, they are problems because how humans have interacted with the earth on a planetary scale are problematic, and because the earth is a closed system (as far as I’m concerned), there are going to be consequences. To me, climate change is only partially about climate and weather and atmospheric conditions. Climate change, among other things, are results of the past 250 years of explicit decision making, which have roots much deeper in human history. But now we’re getting a bit too wide in scope, perhaps…
Is there a politically viable, effective path forward on this issue? (I wrote a very very long response here, which I will delete and replace with this)
No. [...]
[continued on OurEnergyPolicy.org]
Jesse Parent is a researcher, analyst, and editor focusing on energy & resources, technology, and global affairs. For more of Jesse’s thoughts throughout the week and to see what news he’s following, you are invited to join the conversation via Twitter and Facebook. Visit Jesse Parent [INFLUENCE] to view Case Studies, Commentary and more.
- – -
Related articles
- [See also my Learnist Board - Energy in the United States]
- Conspiracy Of Silence: The Irresponsible Politics Of Climate Change (thinkprogress.org)
- California prepares for harsh realities of changing climate (mercurynews.com)
- US presidential contenders can’t duck climate change. (sacbee.com)
- Appeal over climate change ruling (stuff.co.nz)
- Public strongly supports programs helping farmers adapt to climate change (seeddaily.com)
- Bill Nye Disappointed in Media Silence on Climate Change (ecorazzi.com)
- Alarmists Fake Grassroots Effort to Guarantee Carbon Taxes (newsworldwide.wordpress.com)
- 70%+ of Arctic Sea Ice Melting Caused by Human Activity (treehugger.com)
- Twenty Times More Likely (Not): The Science (chron.com)
Pingback: COMMENT: How Do We Get The Natural Boom Gas ‘Right’? | Jesse Parent [INFLUENCE]