1. What percentage of climate scientists have concluded that anthropogenic climate change is real?
2. What is the Heartland Institute devoted to?
3. What was Upton Sinclair's famous observation?
4. What is "green fascism"?
5. Who did Al Gore proclaim to have "the best green energy program" in North America?
6. What three "policy pillars" are incompatible with bringing emissions to safe levels?
7. What accounting system has created a distorted picture of the drivers of global emissions?
8. What logic, "even more entrenched than free trade," must be confronted if we're to have a chance of achieving lower emissions in time?
DQ:
- Is it possible to reason with, and persuade, ideologists who are convinced that "climate change is a plot to steal American freedom"? 32 What's the best way to persuade those who've not made up their minds?
- If it's "always easier to deny reality than to allow our worldview to be shattered," 37 how do we change that and raise a generation of reality-based humans?
- Are you more chastened or heartened by the phenomenon of rapid shifts in public opinion (as, for instance, about the reality of climate change)?
- If climate deniers and climate progressives are both intransigently committed to their positions, are we doomed? Or, "may the best side win"?
- Is "free trade" a good idea in principle, but not in our world of corporate globalism? What kind of globalism would be good in practice?
- Should climate progressives consider themselves at war with the fossil fuel industry? Do you support Klein's "heavy-duty interventions"? 39
- Does the climate crisis "demand collective action on an unprecedented scale, and a dramatic reining in of market forces"? 41
- Is Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged irrelevant? 44
- Is white male privilege one of the root causes of the climate crisis? 46
- Are economic geologists deluded? 46
- How do we overcome the "empathy-exterminating mind-set"? 48
- How do we create a public-spirited insurance industry? 50
- Why shouldn't we expect more altruism and generosity on a much warmer planet? 53
- How can we avoid "green fascism"? 54
- Is nuclear technology inherently objectionable because it reinforces our sense of mastery over nature? 57
- Would it work, in the short term, to "pitch climate action as a way to protect America's high-consumerist way of life"? 58
- Are we "not worth saving"? 62
- Is it wrong to say "climate is not about left and right but "right and wrong"? 63
- How do we get local governments to defend their emission-reducing activities and not "cave in early, not wanting to to appear anti-free trade"? 71 How do we get the WTO to apply and enforce trade agreements in a way not harmful to local green initiatives?
- How do weholdcountries responsible for the pollution they create beyond their own borders? 79
- Is there anything good to be said about "reflexive political centrism"? 83
- Al Gore: hero or villain? 85
- COMMENT: "Many degrowth and economic justice thinkers also call for the introduction of a basic income, as a recognition that the system cannot provide jobs for everyone and that it is counterproductive to force people to work in jobs that simply fuel consumption... 'While making people work shitty jobs to 'earn' a living has always been spiteful, it's now starting to seem suicidal.'" 94
- Please post yours (especially from ch2)
 | Andy Revkin (@Revkin) |
|
In a changing climate, what does the second century of our National Park system look like? reports.climatecentral.org/
| |
A terrifyingly clear visualization shows how Earth is fast approaching a red hot mess rawstory.com/2016/08/a-terr…
A glimmer of hope for lower emissions may be twinkling in Texas. A front page article in 8/29 WSJ is headlined "Texas' Latest Gusher: Wind and Sun" reports that "Texas has added more wind-based generating capacity than any other state, with wind turbines accounting for 16% of electrical generating capacity as of April (2016)"
ReplyDeleteIt is true that Texas is still committed to fossil fuel electricity generating capacity, but this indicates that there are investors who can make money with wind - and more and more solar, too. While this activity does not overtly challenge the prevailing attitudes of "drill, baby drill" that reigns in the U.S. capitol of oil and gas country, it illustrates that there is room for renewables.
DQ: "Is it wrong to say "climate is not about left and right but 'right and wrong'?"
ReplyDeleteIt really depends upon your audience. I think that would come off as pretty hostile from the perspective of a conservative (right) audience.
Climate issues obviously have more support from the left, and the measures required to remedy the damage we've already done seem absolutely contrary to most right-leaning perspectives (an example would be the fear of Green Fascism).
Saying "right and wrong" just explicitly shoots down the opposition instead of respectfully addressing it; you're not going to convince anyone of anything if you insult them.
And if you're not trying to convince them of something, why even debate it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteComment on your thoughts; I guess this really made me think and question a lot of my own personal beliefs.
ReplyDelete"One day (in 2035) you will wake up in subsidized government housing, eating government subsidized food, your kids will be whisked off by government buses to indoctrination training centers while you are working at your government assigned jobs on the bottom floor of your urban transit center village because you have no car and who knows where our aging parents will be but then it will be too late!" pg. 38
DQ: "Is it possible to reason with, and persuade, ideologists who are convinced that "climate change is a plot to steal American freedom"? 32 What's the best way to persuade those who've not made up their minds?"
ReplyDeleteAccording to Klein's portrayal of the panelists, I think the only way to convince those who are so set in their ideals is to present the facts using more confrontational approaches such as fear tactics in order to convince them that American freedom is endangered by the threat of climate change in the sense of physical environmental issues rather than political issues. If they are unyielding in their convention, then at that point I would say they are beyond persuading. It would be best to address those who are indifferent or on the fence about the matter because then they would more open to the evidence and not trapped in their traditional ideals. As the old saying goes "you cannot fill a cup that is already full."
I think that less altruism can be expected in a warmer climate because there will be less resources to go around. When there is less people are more likely to say what can I do to help myself instead of what can I do to help others. And if people still help others they will likely expect something I return.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-30/the-8-trillion-fight-over-how-to-rid-america-of-fossil-fuel
ReplyDeleteThis article on Bloomberg News website provides insight into a scientific calculation and criticisim of the methodology and conclusion of the this study. It is a minimum of an $8 trillion "fix".
It is an attempt to estimate the cost to reduce emissions and whether you believe it is correct, it shows the basic absence of a challenge to the unlimited growth paradigm and focuses on emissions reduction.