Think Globally, Act Locally on Climate Change
“Future historians, looking back from a much hotter and less hospitable world, are likely to play special attention to the first few weeks of 2005,” began a story that appeared Sunday in the London-based newspaper The Independent. “As they puzzle over how a whole generation could have sleepwalked into disaster – destroying the climate that has allowed human civilisation to flourish over the past 11,000 years – they may well identify the past weeks as the time when the last alarms sounded.”
The story details the latest tocsins: First, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) told a United Nations conference that carbon dioxide, a pollutant that causes global warming, has reached dangerous levels. Then Oxford University researchers who led the biggest study of climate change in history reported that the problem could be twice as catastrophic as the IPCC’s worst predictions.
That was followed with an announcement from an international task force that the world could reach “the point of no return” in a decade. Then the head of Shell Oil’s U.K. division warned that unless governments take urgent action on climate change there “will be a disaster.” And last week, 200 of the world’s leading climate scientists meeting in Britain advised that significant impact from global warming is inevitable and that catastrophe likely.
But the scientists also offered hope: They said that avoiding the worst was technically simple and economically cheap – if governments can be persuaded to take immediate action.
Here in Raleigh, the N.C. Conservation Network is working to persuade the state government to take action, and it needs your help. The group has issued a public alert asking concerned citizens to urge North Carolina’s leaders to address global warming. The alert comes as a coalition of environmental groups is lobbying state lawmakers to address climate change in the legislative session that opened last month.
“Ultimately, addressing global warming will require national and international action – but there are free or inexpensive steps that North Carolina can take now to begin to address the threat: namely promoting non-fossil fuel sources of energy; supporting energy efficiency in industry and government; and planning ahead to position North Carolina to cut our carbon dioxide emissions without damaging our economy,” the alert states.
To send a message to Gov. Mike Easley, House Speaker Jim Black and Senate President Marc Basnight on the need to address climate change, click here. Let’s not sleepwalk into disaster.
posted by Sue Sturgis @ 12:35 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
have you seen recent news re: the Bush budget not funding TTA's effort toward bringing commuter rail to the Triangle?
http://www.wral.com/news/4176297/detail.html
The simplest "local act", and the act most appropriate for minors is, as G. Easly has proclaimed "To Participate in making the roadsides clean of litter." Citizens of NC should be concerned that those who gather litter - or merely encourage others to gather litter could be arrested if any of the litter they collect includes advertisements or notices - which every manufactored good includes.
A Law written in 1885 by a legislature which sent female voters to the insane asylum commitee and lynched minorities passed a law which forbids the collection of "advertisements" or "notices" in any form.
Litter collectors should be aware that beer bottles and cigarette cartons contain both notices and advertisements and the collection of same is a violation of our state's anachronistic environmental laws.
By contrast, the city of Jacksonville florida clearly states that adverisments on the roadside are "abandoned property" and subjecct to removal by any person. That is the sound of a clean environment. Threats of jail time for litter collectors is garenteeing and endless accumulation of intentionally visual petroleum pollution where it can cause the most accidents, deface the most scenic beauty, best deprive the people the value of a clean eco-tourism experience, and relegate the environment to a "non-economic" concern by discouraging eco-tourism. Jacksonville, on the other hand, has embraced the environment as a substantial economic contributer, and is therefore able to calculate a net finacial gain from protecting this asset, while NC is driving away environmental tourism with crass "forclosure" ads nailed to its beautiful dogwood trees. - Protecting criminal litterbugs while harassing those who encourage others to "think globally - act locally".
Benjamin
On Carbon Emissions,
NC is one of few states with substantial renewable resources. The Wind in the high country is adequate (Class 5-6) to support utility-class Wind energy, but the land is federally protected forests, which raises a conundrum: do we develop virgin protected forests in order to protect the environment?
Next, the NC Coast, as the Wright Brothers determined, has an excellent fetch - the stretch of undisrupted wind which builds waves. But the Department of Renewable Energy has a moratorium on new Wave Technology.
Wave Energy Converters do not sacrifice federal forests, or ocean horizons for small reductions in carbon emissions. The Resource is more constant and predictable, which means that it can power baseloads without the need for "dirty spinning reserves".
Because NC is an environmental leader when it comes to making noise, NC should follow this up with what Pope John Paul II calls "Concrete actions", for example, by including Wave Energy research in one of its Universities.
Another fact those concerned about Carbon Dioxide should consider is that dirty coal costs 4-5 cents per KWHour, Nuclear Cost 8-12 cents per KWHour, and Wind is somewhere in the middle at 6-9 cents per KWHour. The challenge of renewable energy is in part, an irrational preferance for "civil" nuclear technology which is responsible for the current crisis in N. Korea (remember they purchased nuclear equipment under the argument of power plants), Iran, and Iraq.
We are spending 300 Billion to address a one-time event with 2,500 tragic deaths - while we are short-changing the environment which accounts for some 400,000 deaths annually. As reasonable people, we need to correct our priorities so that they are aligned proportional to actual risks.
NC should claim a leadership role in the manufactire of Wind and Wave energy equipment, but this will require a commitment to consume natively produced renwable equipment, to commit long-term to a carbon reduction tax credit - and this is very important, because reneable energy schemes are capital intensive, investors need more than a single-administration policy which places a value of carbon reduction. Investors need to know what carbon tax credits can be relied upon in the context of a 20 year proforma. If the legislature would pass a tax credit of - say 3 cents per KWHour for clean energy as a Constitutional Ammendment so that it could not be easily rescinded, this would be concrete action to secure carbon reduction.
Additionally, NC should offer a tax credit to businesses who plan ahead for sprawl control - by selecting a suburban township for future commute mitigation, which starts with a corporate carpool to encourage employee housing concentration, and is followed up with a satellite office as growth permits. By simply encouraging medium sized companies to adopt a future suburb early, the state can realize commute reduction over time with zero infrastructure improvements.
A more aggressive solution to sprawl would be to define a future transit corridor, and provide adoption incentives based on the proximity of the suburb to the corridor. This insures that light rail will be a viable option as the corridor developes. The property in the corridor will increase in value, and the increase can pay for the incentives.
(Adoption means a corporate funded carpool at least one day a week and 15% annual increase in ridership)
Benjamin Gatti
Is it any Surprise that Sue Myrick - who dumped hundreds and probably thousands of petrolium products on the side of the road for competative advantage - coincidantally voted 1. Against increased vehicl effeciency (cafe), 2. For drilling in ANWR, and 3. Against cooperating with other nations to clean up the environment (Kyoto).
I would suggest it is not a coincidence, and we ought to care how small violations of the environment for political advantage - result in the selection of representatives who will engage in whole-scale destruction of the earth as described in Revelations 11:17-18
Benjamin Gatti
Nuclear Power is Dirty?
Myth of Clean Nuclear Energy Details the use of the dirtiest coal-burning plants to process uranium for use in Nuclear Plants.
Further evidence that the rich are polluting the environment of the poor for their own benefit by using the least sophisticated regions of the country as a sump for toxins while the more-educated, wealthier regions enjoy "Clean" energy - which is only clean because of the pollution generated in poorer states.
Wind Advocate Wins
Speaking of action, NC should adopt a similar statute to Wisconsin which requires clean alternatives to be considered prior to building a power plant.
Bob Owens, Wind Advocate Stops a Coal Burning Power Plant Because the planners failed to consider a renewable alternative.
While the risk of endless litigation is not inspiring to most, some sensible commitment on the part of new energy builders should be directed to clean alternatives - say 3% of the engineering cost of the plant. This would ensure that clean energy is reviewed as an option at the point of decision.
Benjamin Gatti
Post a Comment
<< Home