Comments for Greener Thoughts

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by Ray

Ray — Sun, 21 Oct 2012 14:23:12 +0000

You left out the best part. Imhofe tried to get Mann into legal trouble by clinmaig he broke several US laws. But I think those same laws can be used against the people who actually did falsify evidence. Some who come to mind are big pharma, big oil, big war, and other big toxic industries who continue to pollute the planet with impunity.

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by Ravikumar

Ravikumar — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 22:05:20 +0000

Arthur JosephsonOctober 3, 2009I’ve just returned to Australia after seven years aabrod. It has been seven years largely ignorant of Australian media so I judge hesitantly. Many thanks for your article it helped me begin updating myself on the current state here. My first impression on returning is strong surprise at how little has been accomplished in the climate change agenda here. One would expect us to be strong pioneers, innovators and consensus builders; especially when one considers that we are such an extreme example in terms of drought, bushfire, top soil erosion, and that many countries in our immediate sphere are island nations who are already suffering under sea level changes. Perhaps climate change is Australia’s version of America’s healthcare problem? i.e. Change is in the direct and obvious future benefit for all our citizenry however their is so much money in lobbying from parties benefiting from the status quo (largely our fossil fuels sector and agriculture, but the short-term interests of diverse elements of industry and society) that debate can be sidelined and action undermined. From an external perspective on both countries situations it seems impossible that such resistance is effective, yet it still determines the very paradigm through which media, discourse and policy is shaped.Many thanks for your pieces, always a stimulating, concerning and enjoyable perspective.Arthur

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by Saipul

Saipul — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 17:21:25 +0000

I posted this in resspnoe to a comment on another blog and think it offers some answers to previous questions posted here:First, we should have clarified that we weren’t suggesting no groups focus on building more consensus around the need for climate change mitigation. We absolutely need that, and I didn’t anticipate people would draw this conclusion.What we were suggesting – and where we believe President Obama, Secretary Chu, and much of the administration are correct – is that we cannot win meaningful federal policy reform anytime for the foreseeable future with a climate-centric strategy, and we need an alternative approach with a greater chance of success.Some of you are saying that most or all climate activists don’t push climate-centrism, but I don’t think that’s accurate. Look carefully at the writing of Bill McKibben, David Roberts, Joe Romm, and several other climate thought leaders. Are they okay with talking about other benefits from clean energy, sure. But they’ve said numerous times that, most importantly, we need to make this about climate change.Cap and trade is sine qua non for comprehensive climate policy, and it turned out to be a political disaster that wasted (literally) hundreds of millions of dollars in advocacy resources and years of effort. Did US-CAP members discuss other benefits of clean energy, clearly. But cap and trade for climate change was the main event, and it collapsed. There’s little to no evidence that it would have succeeded if Obama talked more about climate, as some suggest.How we frame the challenge, and what we put at the front and center of our political and policy agenda, matters enormously. What we’ve argued for years is that an investment-centric approach, primarily justified for economic competitiveness and national security, puts us on much more solid ground to win. It can also be more effective at driving down the price of low-carbon energy technologies as rapidly as possible (which may be the single most important factor in determining whether the world gets anywhere close to meeting IPCC emission reduction targets).This doesn’t mean that Obama and others should never mention the word “climate” (characterizing what we wrote in this way is a straw man), and it doesn’t mean that parts of the movement shouldn’t be working to advance the climate consensus. I would be surprised if these efforts don’t eventually pay off, but we can’t keep making our federal policy success dependent on climate consensus.Will this new approach require an aggressive campaign and debate, absolutely. We can’t know if it will succeed, but we’ve never tried. Until now – hopefully – unless Obama backs out and/or climate-centrist advocates shoot it down. That would be a huge mistake, in my view, and I hope other climate thought leaders will step up to defend and advance this approach.

Comment on Ecological Overshoot by cgreener

cgreener — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 20:32:08 +0000

Thanks for your questions. There are several organizations that are supporting the idea of our Earth’s carrying capacity. If you do a search on the term, I think you will be able to find the answers to your well thought out questions. As for the supply chain, most experts and some economists are stating that we have already begun to feel the pinch, or too much demand with too little supply. I have heard numbers such as it now takes about 1.3-1.5 planets to support our current demand….there is an inherent problem with that equation.

Comment on Ecological Overshoot by Mohamed

Mohamed — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 20:16:22 +0000

I was hoping prehaps you could help me get some answers to these questions? Report on How long until earth’s resources can no longer supply the human race? When do we or have we already started to feel a pinch in the supply chain? Several fact must be studied and questions would have to be answered in order to answer this question.A list of a few questions and best answers gleaned from internet sources;1) How many earths does it take to supply (Humans) the USA? 2) How many Earths does it take to supply (Humans) the whole world currently? 3) Current Human population? 4) Human population growth curve? 5) Human population growth curve as it relates to how many Earths it takes to supply the earth now and it growth curve? (China and others want to be like the USA, yet the USA is the heaviest consumer on the planet these facts must be factored into this equation)6) Formula to figure out How long we have until we can no longer support current or future human population? 7) When do we or have we already started to feel a pinch in the supply chain? *** This is not the correct formula, need to develop one; Based on current human population + Plus # number of earths currently used to suply us now + growth rate of population (Demand) and Earth supply growth curve = equals time left.

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by sesli sohbet

sesli sohbet — Sat, 19 May 2012 20:07:31 +0000

I was studying some of your content on this site and I believe this web site is very informative ! Continue putting up.

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by sesli sohbet

sesli sohbet — Sat, 19 May 2012 14:16:42 +0000

Definitely believe that that you said. Your favourite justification seemed to be on the internet the easiest thing to understand of. I say to you, I definitely get irked while other folks consider worries that they plainly do not know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the highest and defined out the whole thing with no need side effect , people can take a signal. Will probably be again to get more. Thank you!

Comment on Growing Out of Climate Change by Valarie N. Springer

Valarie N. Springer — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:01:32 +0000

Hi just wanted to say that I like your article very much. Please keep up the good posts Thanks a ton! and Have a good day
http://www.businesstraveltours.com is my blog.

Comment on Its All About the Bag Credit by Roman

Roman — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 04:12:43 +0000

Really good insights! I have been previously hunting for something such as this for some time now. With thanks!