Links Random

Links for 2006-12-17

3 replies on “Links for 2006-12-17”

I read this in the Guardian yesterday, or was it Friday.
And although I’m all for a more skeptical approach to offsetting carbon emmisions, I’m also skeptical about a report that comes from Stanford Univeristy; a recipient of much funding from Exxon.
There was also in the last coupla days a BP type ad from Exxon in the newspaper, but I can’t find it now, boasting about it’s funding of American Universities to help solve the world’s fuel problems. Or something.
I can’t seem to find it anywhere now though. Nor online.

This is a political answer to the first link. I’m a locally active, independent member of the Green Party of Sweden. And a christian. And transsexual. And lots of other, even more irrelevant things, cause I’m really just me anyway. So.
I don’t mind people exploring the details of climate change. However. There’s no need for complicating the debate of what needs to be done. Since there are only two things that really needs to be done to slow down to climate change signinficantly. Basically:
1. The westernized world need to stop pumping carbon dioxide out into the atmosphere. Released through motor vehicles, electricity production mostly for base industries such as paper and steel but also direct heating, livestock, and direct heating with fossil fuels.
2. While the rest of the world need to stop chopping down forests faster than they regrow. Mostly for production of food, but also for building material.
This is a very easy thing to do technically. Downright banal. And the issues are also almost totally a result of globalized trading and westernized consumption lifestyle – that is, excessive consumption of unnecessary luxery products, and excessive consumption of “seemingly life-vital” products. So it’s there the change has got to be made if one wants change.
We can let the earth boil too if we just accept the consequences. I mean, we’ve found it acceptable to let people die from poverty and starvation in hundreds of years. We just gotta make up our mind, really. And act accordingly. (Don’t give me no bullshit that people actually care about Africa, anyone. What we accept is not in our pretty words that sound good to our mates – it’s in our actions.)
So. Recap. What I’ve basically said so far is that “western” trade and consumption patterns make up the root of all problem. So. The reasonable thing to do – if one seriously wants to make a change – is to change these patterns.
Now. I’m telling you. As a politically active person in a westernized country. This will not happen on a political scale. Why is that? Because politicians are mugwumps holding on to your votes. The only way to change this is through:
1. Personally seeing that one’s own day-to-day lifestyle make up these problems.
2. Changing these behaviours so that oneself, at least, do not contribute to the issues.
3. Through the ultimate power of social networking showing how you’ve gone from bad behaviour to better behaviour, and by doing this, also have improved your life quality. Be it, by having more money over to more giving consumption or feeling better about your own interaction with the world.
So. You are trouble too? Don’t hesitate to change. Just frickin’ do it!
Sigh. That was kind of off-topic, and not the right forum, or?

Related quotes! 🙂
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.”
“Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.”
“He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.”
“People who fight may lose. People who do not fight have already lost.”
“To isolate mathematics from the practical demands of the sciences is to invite the sterility of a cow shut away from the bulls.”

The planting trees study was interesting, but I think missed out on a few items:
1) One of the reasons that so much wood is cut down in tropical areas is that we don’t have enough mature trees in temperate areas. If we were to grow forests here, then there would be less economic incentive to chop down forests there.
2) The warming effect of the forest is a one-off cost, whereas the CO2 absorption is every single year. So at some point in the more distant future, forests even in a temperate climate have a net cooling benefit.
3) The benefits of forests is not just a matter of temperature. It is a home for native wildlife and a delight for people.
So, I vote for the forests.

Comments are closed.