Skip to main content

View Diary: Al Gore chides President Obama to do more to address Climate Change & an urgent message from Doha (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  why don't we talk about (14+ / 0-)

    the economic devastation that climate change will cause and already is causing? read the stern review. why don't we talk about the economic opportunities that will be there if we do address climate change? why don't we stop with the right wing talking points, as if economic and climate responsibility are in conflict rather than intricately connected.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 08:04:27 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Don't talk to me about RightWing talking Points.. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Steve Canella, Larsstephens, qofdisks

      I'm one of the few people in this community who have proposed a tax on wealth, starting at 1% for households with net worth of at least 50M, to 8% annually for the likes of Buffet and Ellison.  I advanced this over 18 months ago, and over the past month references to a wealth tax have begun to appear in the NYT and WSJ.

      You want to accuse someone of RightWing Talking Points?

      Then accuse fellow Kossacks who have embraced a Carbon Tax or Cap and Trade, both which originated in RightWing Think Tanks, like the one that Senator DeMint today announced he was going to lead.

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project.

      by PatriciaVa on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 08:11:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  wealth taxes are irrelevant on this issue (7+ / 0-)

        they are a distraction from this issue.

        carbon taxes and cap and trade once were considered a good first step. they no longer are.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 08:13:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  LL - that's good because we don't even have (5+ / 0-)

          the political will to implement cap and trade or a carbon tax.

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:22:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  This is the sticking point. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lefty Coaster

          What are the solutions?

          Wean the combined economies of the entire
          world off of carbon based fuel and energy sources,
          starting with the most profligate and egregious sources.

          How can this be achieved?

          Cap n Trade? Carbon taxes? Buy in tariffs for alternatives?
          Smart grids? Fusion? Greater efficiency? Conservation?
          A global Apollo/Manhattan sized initiative of academy,
          government, and business, including their disparate
          and often competing economic interests and factions?

          Increased funding for research and implementation of it all?

          Add to this the emerging evidence that amelioration
          of actual environmental impacts that will effect millions and
          cause severe global economic and sociopolitical stress must
          now be factored into this endless and exponential equation.

          Is there a triage? A path forward? A coherent tactic or strategy?
          A unified vision with any remote semblance of hope?

          I may be mistaken, but I believe I have heard not just
          our recently re elected president, but other international
          leaders discuss many of these issues at various times.
          Perhaps not enough, but at least they are discussing it.

          Barring immediate severe economic and sociopolitical
          pain and dislocation, how may the tipping point of elite
          global consensus be reached that action is in the utmost
          self interest of everyone involved? Who can best sell this?

          This is a perfect storm of environmental, economic, and
          political conditions. When enough of the 1% is displaced
          or affected, we shall see some movement on this issue
          politically, and legislatively. Then it may already be too late.

          It does not surprise me that the evidence based activists
          have come to the conclusion that we are nigh well doomed.

          Thanks for all of your efforts.

      •  There's also a few people on D.U. who've...... (0+ / 0-)

        made the claim that significant reductions of emissions would bring the world economy to a screeching halt; which, btw, is a claim that's been pretty popular with some skeptics, like Chris Booker, as here: "The fact is that there is no one in the world who can explain how we could cut our emissions by four fifths without shutting down virtually all our existing economy. What carries this even further into the higher realms of lunacy is that such a Quixotic gesture would do nothing to halt the world’s fast-rising CO2 emissions, already up 40 per cent since 1990. There is no way for us to prevent the world’s CO2 emissions from doubling by 2100"

        Ironically enough, every single one of the guilty culprits, to a "T", was actually a climate "doomer".....

        •  Ignorance is hardly factual (10+ / 0-)
          The fact is that there is no one in the world who can explain how we could cut our emissions by four fifths without shutting down virtually all our existing economy.
           -- that is Tea Party level ignorance!

          What would shut down the world economy would be business as usual, leading to immense droughts and many Sandy's and Katrinas, inundating coastal cities.

          Many people have explained how to ramp down greenhouse emissions over the next few decades.  Amory Lovins of RMI outlined of a solution starting in the 1970s.

          Profs  Socolow and Pacala have explained a Stabilization Wedges strategy championed by Joe Romm at Climate Progress, for example here:

          The crucial climate strategy is aggressive deployment of every last bit of available low-carbon technology starting ASAP.  Anyone who isn’t in favor of that strategy understands neither climate science nor the current state of clean energy.  Sadly, that covers most of the traditional media and so-called intelligentsia.

          Even the traditionally staid and conservative the International Energy Agency explained two years ago that “The world will have to spend an extra $500 billion to cut carbon emissions for each year it delays implementing a major assault on global warming.”

          Princeton Professors Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala became leading champions of the “deploy now” strategy with their 2004 in Science paper, “Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies.”....

          There's no such thing as a free market!

          by Albanius on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:36:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I often referred to that P & S paper....... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Albanius, Larsstephens, elwior

            when I was a somewhat frequent commenter on DU's Environment & Energy board.

            And yes, I've pointed out some to the people whom I call the "wannabe Cassandras", that is, the people who believe that the worst case scenarios, (or worse), human extinction, etc. are inevitable, that they've been duped into buying into a few of the "skeptic" talking points. Unfortunately, the reaction I received was, sadly, less than positive from these folks.

            What's really strange about this is that I was eventually labelled a "denier" by some of these very same people, simply because I didn't subscribe to their mantras; even though I do realize that climate change is a real and serious threat!

            I'm thinking about writing a diary on this, and ACC in general at some point; there will be a portion of it that'll cover my experience at Democratic Underground in regards to pointing out the facts......stay tuned, if you're interested.

        •  interesting (5+ / 0-)

          that you quote a climate change denier. interesting that you call such a dishonest hack a "skeptic."

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:55:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  how would you regulate carbon, Patricia? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ORDem, joanneleon, Lefty Coaster

        without a fee on it, how to get people to use less fossil fuel?

        And do you not think climate change impacts the economy?

        An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

        by mightymouse on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 09:21:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Carbon Tax originated in right wing think tanks? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        You have a link for that, because I am pretty sure that's total BS.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site