Benjamin's Posterous

The Gulf Oil Spill - We the People are to Blame

As clean-up efforts continue in response to the Gulf oil spill, we are now recognizing it as the largest oil spill of its kind and possibly the most devastating man-made environmental disaster in U.S. history.  Images from the coast reveal animals in peril and water and beaches mired in sludge.  Certainly the effects on local ecology, wildlife and human populations will be felt for some time.  Now, in the aftermath of such an event, our natural tendency is to find a place to rest the blame.  Some blame the oil empire of BP.  Some blame President Obama.  But the truth is, we the people are to blame. 

We demand cheap oil, and plenty of it.  We scoff at smaller efficient cars and alternative modes of transportation.  We design cities to cater mostly to automobile traffic.  We barely acknowledge that oil is not an infinite resource thereby borrowing energy ahead from future generations to satisfy our unsustainable planning.

Political posturing by elected officials and grandiose financial promises from corporations only temporarily address the immediate problem.  We continue to design our way of life around oil even though oil is getting increasingly more difficult to mine, causing a dangerous combination: increased demand and increased environmental risk.  As long as we are purchasing oil at this rate, companies will strive to provide it.

The human efforts being organized to remedy this tragedy are remarkable and demonstrate that we as a human community can respond quickly, and with efficiency.  However, if this does not change our attitude to the continued heavy reliance on diminishing fossil fuels, then we are only addressing the short-term issue.  We are acting defensively, not offensively.  

We must begin to plan for the future.  A future in which fossil fuels are used sparingly and only at a rate at which the earth produces them.  It will require our moderation in the use of natural resources, reserving some for the next thousand generations of humans.

Another climate change article igniting comments

In the USA Today article "3 climate change reports: Set prices on carbon emissions" by Dan Vergano, a summary is given of the recent report by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences that suggests the United States government should impose a "price" on carbon emissions in an effort to curtail the rate of release of carbon into the atmosphere by industry.  While the article itself is short and lacking much analysis, what really stands out are the comments.  As in most areas of politics there are usually two sides.  In the world of Climate Change there are those that accept it and those that deny it.  A brief survey of the comments show the following*:

*48 comments included in graph, did not include troll-like comments

Evaluating comments on Internet convos can be inexact but it can help indicate a trend.  It certainly seems in vogue to be quick to reject entire branches of science to embrace ignorance and stand against change.  But what is more disturbing, is that extremely deep areas of scientific study and discourse are immediately dismissed in favor of conspiracy theory and pseudo-intellectualism.  A quick review of some of the more virulent "deniers" exhibits this quite clearly:

commonsenz: "What is really driving this is its another way for the government to collect more taxes."

c007: "To think that man can control the earths' temperature is flat out insane. "

brody: "It is he height of arrogance to suggest that we stop a natural planetary process. "

dhwj: "This so-called science is no more than bottled BS."

daveNaustin: "I'm to the point where I don't give a rat's @ss. This rock will be around, no matter what man does to it. Whether or not it's habitable is irrelevant (yes, fuqqing irrelevant). Just let me live out my remaining days in peace & quiet, and stay out of my fuqqing business."

Beyond many of the commenters appeals to subjectivity ("... bottled BS") and irrationality ("...what is really driving this is...") there seems to be a strong undercurrent of selfishness ("...I don't give a rat's @ss").  Is this really the time to only consider ourselves? Thousands of generations of humans before us overcame tremendous hardship to survive.

The climate crisis (i.e. global warming, climate change) is more than just the study of the gradual increase in global temperate.  It is an effort to sustain humanity in the face of exponential population growth and finite natural resources.  It is the recognition of our impact on our surroundings and a call to action to preserve our species and this planet for millennia.  It requires the ability to consider not just our own immediate quality of life, but also the quality of life for the generations to follow.  

As for the report itself, even though the science is generally accepted and based on sound experiment, the science community should not mire itself in the pit of political policy recommendation, but rather stick to giving unbiased detailed analysis of observations and evidence.

Source Article:
3 climate change reports: Set prices on carbon emissions  
By Dan Vergano   , USA TODAY