December 8th was a Global Day of Action on Climate Change. Pete Seeger sung and stumped for planet earth.But it was a relatively mild day of raised awareness. All of that changed in the last 24 hours.Climate activists are turning more ominous, while oil and gas interests (aka the Bush administration) are digging in for a protracted fight in Bali.Perhaps the problems in Bali were unavoidable. There are deep disagreements regarding how to proceed.Cap and trade schemes were adopted by the EU after Kyoto, but have been criticized for their loopholes, costs, and lack of effectiveness.The Bush administration favors non-mandatory carbon targets and investments in new technology.Others prefer taxing carbon, mandating technological standards, or placing restraints on fossil fuel production. Meanwhile the climate crisis intensifies.Even the Pope has weighed in on climate change this week.
The most important article of the week is written by Ross Gelbspan who offers an alarming and controversial critique of both inaction and “the notion that we can solve the climate problem”.A former Boston Globe journalist, Gelbspan has consistently been on the cutting edge of climate pronouncements this decade. He now believes it is too late to avert planet-wide disasters. Gelpsan says we should recognize that “this historical era of nationalism has become a stubborn, increasingly toxic impediment to our collective future.”Gelbspan argues our energies must now focus on the local. Among his many points, his discussion of a 6’ sea-level rise has dire implications for coastal areas: beaches would be wiped out, and we need to begin anticipating billions of dollars in property damages, in county after county, this century. Another implication of his article is that we have to prepare for the worst on our own; expect a New Orlean’s style abdication of governmental assistance following disasters.
Gelspan’s basic thesis is that climate activists are fighting the wrong war; the carbon cancer plaguing planet earth has now metastasized. The Pope this week specifically criticized this kind of alarmism. We can expect Gelbspan’s argument to be repeated with more frequency in the U.S. – because of Gelbspan’s stature - but these claims will be harshly shut down by opponents for their alarmism. Put differently, the war of words is intensifying; we are entering a new era of climate rhetoric driven by contending fears for the future.Expect the politics – on the streets and in legislative halls – to turn more strident as well.
Also worth reviewing are Amy Goodman’s comments on Gore’s Nobel acceptance speech. Goodman reminds us that Ted Glick is now on his 99th day of liquid-only fasting.Glick has pledged to continue his fast through the end of the year to pressure Congress into passing climate legislation this session. Today, Ted Glick’s blog offers a quick review of Gelbspan’s essay.
There is also a well-written article in this week's Wall Street Journal by Gwyn Prins and Steve Rayner explaining why they believe cap and trade has (and will continue to be) a failure.They call for raising R&D and technology investments to “war-time levels” - an astonishing argument for the Wall Street Journal’s opinion page.Its editorials are typically blind to there being any climate problem at all!
Bottom line, as climate change intensifies is our ability to change course becoming more intractable? An interesting 24 hours.
I have been teaching Geography and Environmental Studies at Long Island University since 1993. I taught at LIU’s Southampton College and, more recently, the C.W. Post Campus. Most of my activities at LIU have related to sustainable development. In 2007 I initiated the Long Island Climate Solutions Network, http://www.licsn.org.
Fossil Fuel
ScottCarlin
December 8th was a 
The most important article of the week is written by 
Gelspan’s basic thesis is that climate activists are fighting the wrong war; the carbon cancer plaguing planet earth has now metastasized. 
