My blog posts are rarely about sartorial splendor but it seems sadly appropriate to share with you what I am wearing today: the t-shirt to the right. If you have difficulty reading or seeing it:
- the graphic is of a heating planet with melting ice caps, the Keeling Curve behind the globe, a smiley face on the globe, and
- the title: "The White House Effect".
Almost old enough to merit the term "
vintage", this Union of Concerned Scientists shirt
dates from Earth Day, 1990 ... and, well, could well too sadly appropriate for
Earth Day 2012. The decision on today's clothing came late Friday while reading President Barack Obama's
Presidential Proclamation -- Earth Day 2012 (provided after the fold). The statement seeks to create a balance between praising efforts to date while calling for actions for tomorrow with a not light dose of praise for the Administration's efforts. Treading such a delicate line can lead to a fall too far to one side or another.
- Doom and gloom about tomorrow can undermine understanding and appreciation for what has been and can be achieved while weakening support for those (such as the Environment Protection Agency (EPA)) whose actions protect all of us and undermining energy for action. ('Why bother since the world is heading toward disaster no matter what we do?')
- Solely looking toward today's challenges as if nothing has been achieved since the first Earth Day 42 years ago can be disrespectful to those who have fought so hard to achieve real impact and, again, can weaken support for those (such as the Environment Protection Agency (EPA)) whose actions protect all of us and undermine energy for action. ('Why bother, since we can't have an impact in the face of polluter interests and a dysfunctional political systems?')
- Emphasizing improvements from the past situation while glossing over the seriousness of the situation we face, again, can weaken support for those (such as the Environment Protection Agency (EPA)) whose actions protect all of us and undermine energy for action. ('Why bother being up in arms since we're doing so much better and that progress is just going to continue no matter what I do?')
- Embellishing achievements and suggesting that marginal programs have great positive impact while ignoring other steps that are worsening the situation, again, can weaken support for those (such as the Environment Protection Agency (EPA)) whose actions protect all of us and can undermine energy for action. ('Why bother focusing on these issues, rather than other critical policy actions, because the Administration already has things well in hand?)
In seeking to tread this delicate line, the Administration seems to have almost certainly skewed far too much toward the second two while avoiding the first two to such an extent that an honest reader of the Presidential Proclamation might be hard pressed to realize that we
quite likely face an existential threat when it comes to climate change and the
myriad of other environmental challenges.
For understanding as to my choice of clothing, today, let us just take two examples and one minor omission from the Proclamation for illuminating the issues.
State of the Environment
Today, our air and water are cleaner, pollution has been greatly reduced, and Americans everywhere are living in a healthier environment.
Let us be clear.
It has been awhile since Americans have see a river burning, Acid Rain is reduced, lead poisoning is down, ... We have seen real progress in many arenas. We have seen real progress in the past 42 years even as there are very serious challenges and, in many ways, a worsening of the situation.
When it comes to pollution, for example, anyone want to suggest (contrary to every measurement out there) that CO2 pollution has been reduced from what it was 42 years ago? And, well, there are a myriad of other pollutants whose impact on Americans is far worse than when the first Earth Day occurred 42 years ago or when I first put on the shirt (front to the right about "The Green House Effect") 22 years (and just about 22 pounds) ago.
Taking from someone else reacting to this Proclamation,
"Philip Shabecoff was the chief environmental correspondent for The New York Times for fourteen of the thirty-two years he worked there as a reporter. Poisoned for Profit, based on more than five years of investigative research and reporting, reveals the cumulative scientific evidence connecting the massive increase in environmental poisons to the epidemic of disability, disease, and dysfunction among our nation´s children."
And how's that Gulf Oil Spill cleanup going two years on?
Oh, yeah, should we mention that The Proclamation doesn't discuss the measures the Obama Administration has taken to spark increased oil production, the areas (onshore and offshore) opened for exploration, the assistance to increased coal exports, ...
Greening America's School
As my second example, consider this paragraph:
As we work to leave our children a safe, sustainable future, we must also equip them with the tools they need to take on tomorrow's environmental challenges. Supporting environmental literacy and a strong foundation in science, technology, engineering, and math for every student will help ensure our youth have the skills and knowledge to advance our clean energy economy. Last year, we launched the Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools recognition award to encourage more schools to pursue sustainability, foster health and wellness, and integrate environmental literacy into the curriculum. In the days ahead, we look forward to awarding the first Green Ribbons and recognizing the accomplishments of green schools across our country.
Wow!
The Obama Administration set up -- in its third year -- a "recognition award" when it comes to "Green Ribbon Schools".
To be clear, this is not a bad thing.
Green School investments are the only means that I am aware of that offer a reliable (and traceable) school-focused path toward improving education, improving economic performance, improving economic performance, improving health while reducing environmental impacts and reducing educational costs. Green Schools merit focus and investment. If the Green Ribbon recognition program helps achieve that, great ...
However, the "Race to the Top" has been the signature Obama Administration effort when it comes to advancing (if it does so, put that debate aside) K-12 education. Greening schools has been notable absent from that and were certainly a late comer to the Secretary of Education's attention. As Secretary Duncan put it in a green schools speech less than two months ago.
I would be the first to admit that historically our department has paid too little attention to the green school movement and promoting environmental stewardship.
Yes, late is better than never ... And, a 'recognition program' is better than nothing. And ...
This is a recognition program which does provide greater visibility to green school but it is far from a major initiative driving a major, nation-wide investment in and focus on the myriad of value streams that schools, students, and society can derive from greening schools. What does dedicating more than 10 percent of a Presidential Proclamation to a "recognition program" suggest to you?
That 'oh by the way' issue
Consider, again, the shirt that I am wearing.
The 2012 Presidential Proclamation for Earth Day does not have the word "climate" (and, therefore, zero mention of "climate change" or "global warming").
While there is legitimate highlighting of the Administration's success in creating improved fuel economy standards, including that they will "cut greenhouse gas emissions" (actually, more accurately, lead to reduced emissions compared to what would be the case without them), there is nothing there about why 'cutting greenhouse gas emissions' would be something that anyone should be concerned about on Earth (or any other or, well, more accurately, every other) Day.
Yes. Okay. We all know about Global Warming. Don't we? And, 'if the President even mentions the word, those mean-old Anti-Science Syndrome suffering Haters Of a Livable Economic System will attack him and that won't be good for the re-election campaign.' Actually, the research shows that lack of significant leadership (e.g., people like the President of the United States) discussion of climate change issues undermines public understanding on the issue. And, actually tackling climate change in a serious discussion way could provide a very useful discriminator (along the lines of 1% vs 99%) between the Democratic and Republican parties in ways that could be not just truthful but also valuable in electoral concerns.
Just three examples ...
The full Proclamation is here. Judge for yourself whether the Administration is putting a smiley face on a melting globe.
Note: For an interesting contrast, see what the Obama Administration was doing around Earth Day 2010. And, here has the relevant section from the 2011 Earth Day Proclamation -- a very start contrast, indeed.