Climate proposals are set to begin at the G-8 conference in Germany next month but surprise, surprise, the US has already rejected all of the proposals. WTF?
The Bush Administration has repeatedly ignored scientific studies and even censored or changed others to bring them in line with their policy objectives. Overall, nothing has been done regarding this issue. If the purpose of all of this nonsense is to keep the status quo happy (i.e. Big Oil, Corporate Donors) then this approach is short-sided and ignorant at best. What would it take for this Administration to wake up- picking sunflowers on Christmas Day instead of making snow angels?
This is not simply a black and white issue. There are many factors at work here. Let's take a look at some of them:
1. Peak Oil- Former President Clinton, in a speech before the Aspen Ideal Festival in July, 2006 states that " This is very important. I have never had a security briefing which said what some of these very serious, but conservative petroleum geologists say, which they think that, either now or before the end of the decade, we'll reach peak oil production globally, and with the rise of China and India and others coming alone, unless we can dramatically reduce our oil usage, we will run out of recoverable oil within 35 to 50 years. And that would mean that ...in addition to climate change, we have a very short time in the life of the planet to turn this around. We may not have as much oil as we think. So we need to get in gear."
Former President Bill Clinton, Aspen Ideas Festival, July, 2006
The United Sates is a fossil-fueled throw-away economy and this model is simply unsustainable. We must act as a nation to change this which will require a major change in how we all live and do business.
2. Energy Prices- As the prospects for oil decreases, the prices increase. That's the law of supply and demand, right? It is imperative that the United States restructure its' energy infrastructure or millions of us could find ourselves unable to afford the most basic of needs- food, for example. To costs do this is, of course, enormous but when we spend untold billions on war and the expansion of military power (i.e. bases), the argument that there are no resources for this are hollow.
3. Jobs- Think of all of the new jobs that could be created with investment in alternative energy sources. High tech jobs- not just service jobs that are created in today's economy. Think of how competitive the Big 3 automobile manufacturers could become as it develops the 'next big thing' in alternative energy running vehicles. Bye Bye gas hogging SUV! Also, the money consumers could save by reducing they amount they pay today for ancient sources of energy could help stimulate the economy which is good for everyone.
4. Decreased dependence on foreign sources for our energy needs- Do I really need to add anything here?
Overall, it's a winning proposal and something that, whether you like it or not, will have to be done at some point in time (hopefully, sooner rather than later). The longer we wait, the more difficult the choices become and the less time we have to develop these changes. Who can realistically argue (besides Sen. Inhoffe, who does try!) that it's better to be chasing down some dwindling source of energy in a foreign land (usually hostile) when we could be developing alternative energy sources here at home that creates actual jobs? Where's that American spirit of innovation and hope that we can and will create a brighter future? If we refuse to change, Iraq could just be the beginning of future 'oil and resource' wars. For the government not to act and the people not to demand it would truly be the ultimate tragedy for not only ourselves but the future of humankind.
No comments:
Post a Comment