People seem to enjoy taking polls. I know I do. It's not really DOING anything, but it feels like participating in solutions.
So here's a poll about what you, personally, would commit to do RIGHT THIS MINUTE (or maybe tomorrow, after you got your ducks in a row) to reduce your carbon footprint.
Head below the orange ornament for explanation and poll! Thanks -
"Fight climate change!" "Act on climate now!" "Let's unite to tackle climate change together!"
Thrilling words, to those of us who thrill to the sound of clarion calls to action. But what do those clarion cries mean? And how do they actually translate into action?
It's all well and good to go on and on about "fighting climate change," but at the end of the day, if you've got nothing to suggest, then... what?
I spend much of my Twitter Time nagging legislators. I know this is playing into the hands of those who insist that global warming is all a scam to grow the government, but in fact, I do believe we need large, decisive government action. We need regulations on emissions, on fracking, on drilling, on renewable energy, and even (dare I say it) on regulating personal consumption of commodities that use tremendous amounts of fossil fuels. I'm in favor of beefing up the EPA and requiring car manufacturers to vastly increase gas mileage (and heavily tax cars that get poor mileage). I'm in favor of government subsidies for solar panels and other green solutions. I support the concept of rationing, if that is what it takes. I realize this kind of makes me a socialist. I don't care.
But I also firmly believe that just asking government to "act on climate" for us isn't enough.
To begin with, it ain't happening with the current crop of... ummmm... let's just say "delightful people" in Congress. And it certainly isn't happening if Democrats and progressives of every stripe don't get out and VOTE in record numbers in 2016. We need a Democrat in the White House to have a hope in hell of ever passing any effective climate/emissions/energy legislation. If the GOP claws their way back in, expect the opposite of forward momentum on climate change, even if the winner is Lindsey Graham! (Remember, he thinks it's real, but is determined to be "business friendly.")
Even then, it won't be enough. Anyone who thinks so is deluding themselves, IMHO.
Which brings me to the question. What would you do? If you're reading this, you're probably already doing at least something. You probably walk if you're running an errand that's less than a mile from home. You certainly recycle. You likely make it a point to buy local products when possible, and limit your consumption in general. Otherwise, why would the EPA have been able to report that:
Greenhouse gas emissions in 2013 were 9 percent below 2005 levels.
That's pretty awesome, right?
On the other hand, per the EPA:
In 2013, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions totaled 6,673 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents.
U.S. emissions increased by 2.0 percent from 2012 to 2013. Recent trends can be attributed to multiple factors including increased emissions from electricity generation, an increase in miles traveled by on-road vehicles, an increase in industrial production and emissions in multiple sectors, and year-to-year changes in the prevailing weather.
There's plenty more interesting geekery of that sort in the
greenhouse gas inventory report.
Alas, the basic takeaway is that the reduction in emissions that will be required to meet current reduction targets - and keep global warming to under 2 degrees Celcius - is just not happening.
In 2013, a report in the Guardian warned:
The Emissions Gap Report 2013, which was compiled by 44 scientific groups in 17 countries, warns that if the greenhouse “gap” isn’t “closed or significantly narrowed” by 2020, the pathway to limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5C will be closed.
At UN talks in 2010, the international community agreed to limit the rise in average global temperatures to 2C by 2100, based on pre-industrial levels.
Scientists at the recent IPCC gathering warned that the world could emit enough carbon to surpass the 2C limit within 30 years, and this latest UN analysis heightens concerns that the world could be heading for a temperature rise of 4C or even 6C, triggering damaging sea level rises, extreme weather events and food insecurity.
The Emissions Gap Report, released ahead of climate talks in Warsaw next week, found that although the 2C target could be achieved with higher emissions by 2020, failure to significantly reduce CO2 levels will “exacerbate mitigation challenges” after this time.
“This will mean much higher rates of global emission reductions in the medium term; greater lock-in of carbon-intensive infrastructure; greater dependence on often unproven technologies in the medium term; greater costs of mitigation in the medium and long term; and greater risks of failing to meet the 2C target,” the UN Environment Program stated.
In order to avoid this scenario, the report recommends that emissions should reach a maximum of 44 gigatonnes of CO2 by 2020, falling to 40 gigatonnes by 2025 and further to 22 gigatonnes by 2050.
However, given that the 2C target was set based on the assumption that action would start in 2010, the report warns it will become “increasingly difficult” to meet this goal. Global greenhouse gas emissions for 2010, the latest year for which data is available, stood at 50.1 gigatonnes.
And we were on track to top 53 gigatons in 2013. That's bad news. Going up isn't in the plan.
As for the "action" in Washington, DC? Well, there's President Obama, who (full disclosure) I love and support, but whose "all of the above" approach strengthens the EPA with one hand while allowing the Arctic to be opened to oil exploration with the other. Not good enough.
Then there's Senator Inhofe, who leads the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee, Flying Spaghetti Monster help us!
There's our current Speaker of the House, who once said,
George, the idea that carbon dioxide is a carcinogen that is harmful to our environment is almost comical. Every time we exhale, we exhale carbon dioxide. Every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you've got more carbon dioxide.
While over in the Senate, Majority Leader McConnell once opined,
For everybody who thinks it's warming, I can find somebody who thinks it isn't.
People, I think it may be our turn to DO SOMETHING. These assha... I mean, delightful people... in Congress won't. The president is doing SOMETHING, but... see above!
So maybe we need to get up on our hind legs and take a little more personal action ourselves. I mean, it couldn't hurt, right?