Thursday, June 05, 2014
Obama's EPA Plan vs. Climate Catastrophe: Fighting a Wildfire with a Garden Hose
Obama's Power Plant Rules Too Little Too Late: Too Ineffective
A Top Obama Aide Says History Won't Applaud President's Climate Policy
Friends Of The Earth Statement
An inconvenient truth: US proposed emission cuts too little too late
'The Cause Is Us': World on Verge of Sixth Extinction/Species loss soaring at 'pace not seen in tens of millions of years'
America Will Fail On Climate Change-Ezra Klein
"The world is failing to do nearly enough on climate change nearly fast enough. That isn't to take away from the incredible work of the activists trying to push politicians further and faster, or to deny the possibility that a once-in-a-generation storm will upend the politics or a tremendous technological breakthrough will render the problem moot. Pessimism shouldn't be considered fatalism. And impossible fights have been won before. Perhaps more to the point, climate change isn't binary. There's not a single state of success and a single state of failure. Warming the world by 2.5 degrees Celsius is a whole lot better than warming it by three degrees Celsius. Warming the world by three degrees Celsius is vastly less catastrophic than warming it by four degrees Celsius. There are manageable failures and there are unmanageable failures. We're currently on track for an unmanageable failure. I think it's possible that we can slowly, painfully pull ourselves towards a manageable failure, but I'm not willing to call that optimism. On climate change, the truth has gone from inconvenient to awful. Right now we're failing our future. And we will be judged harshly for it."
Below 2°C or 1.5°C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and non-Annex I countries
Key word here, rapid. Again, expecting a scientifc/moral response from a political lackey is an exercise in futility. Those stating to be part of the "climate movement" who continue to support this mediocrity when we need bold vision are only pushing us faster into the climate abyss.
EPA Rules Ignore Methane
Yes, CO2 is the greatest radiative forcing now, but the effect of methane cannot be ignored. The preoccupation with CO2 ALONE by governments and certain groups suggests an alternate agenda. If you wish to address climate destruction you must address CO2 emissions as well as methane, nitrous oxide, black carbon, etc.
Anyone who follows the entries on this blog or who has followed the events occurring globally knows well that humans are changing the face of this planet as we have never seen it before during the time of our existence. We have seen countless reports from scientists stating that our rapacious consumption of fossil fuels combined with other factors has now led us to a point in civilization where the habitability of our planet is at stake. We have been warned that to continue on this road of burning fossil fuels will see a bleak future for humanity. We now see the culmination of our effect on this planet more frequently and more severely and this then dictates to us a harsh reality that should appeal to our moral compasses. However, our unwillingness on the whole to deal with our addiction adequately in the face of that reality has now also led us to making excuses for it. The current rule proposed by the US EPA is no exception.
Since I am not one who speaks based on political or economic allegiance I can at least speak truth. In plain language, this rule simply is not enough at a time when we need to see truly bold initiatives to tackle the abrupt climate change that is now upon us! Instead of boldness we see capitulation and placation. We see using excuses and our desire to maintain our status quo as a means to relegating our children and grandchildren to the brunt of the effects of our folly. We see greed, fear, selfishness, hubris and all the baser instincts of our nature taking over when we should be overcoming them to put the higher ideals first. I cannot tell you how angry this all makes me, because many people are falling for this deception. This rule was trotted out stating that there would be a 30% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030... 17% by 2020 which is embarrassing and the other 13% in the next ten years. Seriously? We sit on the precipice of the tipping point of no return and this is the best we can do?
We are already seeing feedbacks in our climate system that have locked us into a 4 degree C or higher rise in global temperature by the end of this century. Using 2005 as a baseline year for this rule is practically useless at the juncture we now see CO2 emissions rising along with methane and other greenhouse gases including nitrous oxide (note as well that the industrial agriculture sector was totally spared by this rule.) Once again, we leave the solutions to politicians beholding to their own interests and the fossil fuel cartel that owns us and see nothing come from it.
However, don't get me wrong, any rule that helps to clean our air or water is a given that it is needed. However, this was touted originally as a climate plan. This is no climate plan. This isn't even close to a climate plan. You cannot have a climate plan that is adequate from any administration that supports an "All Of The Above" energy strategy! Those still wearing their partisan rose colored blinders need to wake up.
We need to see an 80% reduction in emissions by 2030 based on 1990 in order to delay the most catastrophic effects of climate destruction. It is a betrayal to all of us to have those in government and those supporting them for their own reasons not tell the truth and to continue to support a "low carbon" policy. This is not the time for using the usual excuses about Republican bullies. There are more of us on this planet who care about it than those who sit in some body playing games with their money. STAND UP TO THEM once and for all! There is also a year for commenting on this rule timed so strategically between elections this year and the US presidential "election" (election is a word I use very loosely in regards to this corporate bought dysfunctional system) coming in 2016. Do we really need to be subjected now to more of the same political back and forth on this with nothing coming from it as that year produces another year's worth of emissions and more amplification of this crisis?
However, that will not happen because you see the current administration and those who run it are also minions of the fossil fuel industry. Obama supports fracking and the administration is now pushing for much more of it in the wake of this "rule" and also to export it to Europe and other markets as well as CCS ("Clean Coal" as well as nuclear which is absolutely not feasible in a world of drought nor a world where we don't wish to slowly die from radiation poisoning.) The EPA administrator has also hinted repeatedly that she will allow states latitude in how they reach the targets which is essentially a gift. Also, three days before this rule was proposed Obama rewarded Exxon with offshore leases to drill in the Gulf of Mexico. Remember the Gulf of Mexico? The body of water totally toxified by BP's ecocide. (BTW, BP has also been given the OK from the EPA to drill again.) So again, please explain to me how these people can sit in front of us and tell us that addressing climate change is a moral obligation while doing this behind our backs? I will tell you how- because they like their counterparts are all using this as a way to gain political advantage. It has nothing to do with really caring about this planet or our present/future.
The Arctic is now 9-36 F degrees above normal as ocean temperatures particularly in the Pacific see record temperatures. There has been NO plan put forth to truly prepare us and our infrastructure for what is to come. "Leave it in the ground" is the phrase being used by scientists in regards to what we now must do in order to not see the planet we love, the only planet we call home to be made uninhabitable. It is also why geologists name this current epoch the Anthropocene. Yet, all we get is placation and betrayal with a willingness to support it.
Biodiversity loss, water scarcity, land scarcity, monoculture, abrupt climate shifts all in a world with a growing population cannot survive a 17% by 2020 rule. It cannot survive the continued stalling and political rhetoric of governing bodies like the UN that continue to talk without walking. Your "investments" and your posturing and your egotistical "legacies" will not shield us from the abrupt changes we have now precipitated. They will not now stave off the mega droughts and stronger storms. Only a mass moral awakening more than likely now due to greater catastrophe that ends our insane addiction will shake our souls enough to save us. I will not look back upon these days and state that it was an All Of The Above energy policy by those bent on destroying this planet for their own false delusional choices that saved us.
Algeria has stranded 13,000 migrants in the Sahara forcing them to walk across it in response to EU directive to North Africa to lessen mi...
The state of water in our world currently is endangered. Pollution, privatization, waste, climate change effects and lack of attention to...
Clean Water Baby Wants To Swim My father learned how to swim in the Hudson River when he was a boy. That was over 70 years ago when the w...
New Climate Records Transforming Arctic The latest report on the Arctic by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fin...