The actions of all the players in the global warming game are making things difficult. Winning is often more important than solving, one camp says “yes” just because the other says “no”...and no one wants to give up their car.
Environmentalists must realize that they are part of the problem. Stridency, arrogance, and lack of effective focus are powerful factors helping those who deny the reality of climate change.
Environmentalists have been screaming about doomsday scenarios for decades. I remember reading a bestselling book in 1968 which predicted the death of the oceans by 1979. There never has been a silent spring either. Cry wolf too many times and people stop listening.
Most environmentalists are no better at the actual science than the deniers, but they are usually better educated (except for the dreaded statistics, of course). I own a pair of Birkenstocks, too, but I try not to feel superior to those who don’t.
Environmentalists cannot seem to focus..Get rid of cars (not Subaru’s of course), recycle (bottles [PET], but not caps [styrene]!), fix the water, wilderness trails, public lands, bicycles, drain the dams, fish, birds, bears, prairie dogs, water logs, spills, permafrost. The list is infinitely extensible. Each foray away from climate change vitiates the message.
Don’t lose focus. Keep the eye on the ball. Hammer one nail at a time.
Environmentalists must focus on:
Environmentalists attack people who could help. A coal fired power plant can be made totally non’polluting in any of a number of ways (cf., http://www.calera.com/beneficial-reuse-of-co2/process.html). It may be that coal fired plants can be better than solar or wind power with proper improvements..
The environmentalist’s attack on Nuclear waste is specious. While it is true that some waste lasts a long time, the longer the waste lasts, the less of a problem it presents. The half life is long because the materials are not very radioactive. The really dangerous waste is the part with the shortest half life--the part that remains radioactive for the least amount of time. Instead of millions of years, a safe storage plan for a hundred years is quite feasible. Environmentalists should examine these facts before opposing everything in true NIMBY fashion.
The coal industry is managed by people used to a defensive posture. My great grandfather was driven out of Oak Creek because he was a union organizer. There are examples of heavy equipment in the world with bullet holes in the glass. Mines have been shut down in spiteful attempts to destroy unions.
If Coal industry managers were to (gasp!) accept the science, they could go far toward eliminating the threat of climate change, becoming heroes in the process. It would require moving from a reactive mindset to a proactive one, of course--something they often talk about but seldom do.
The technology is (or can be) available. They just need a different mindset to become environmental heros.
Even if the technology didn’t work, the public relations benefit (from working with the scientific consensus instead of engaging in the usual fight) would be astounding.
The oil producers need to realize that it really is in their best long term interest to slow the consumption of oil. There will probably always be a need for some gas, diesel, and oil. We should make an effort to preserve these for the important uses for future generations. Airplanes and ocean-going ships may always require fossil fuels. One would think some oilmen could be farsighted enough to want their grandchildren to take over the business.
Natural gas, the current environmental darling, is likely a worse offender than coal. Methane leaks are endemic to the industry. Methane is a horrendous greenhouse gas. The leaks must be stopped before natural gas can be helpful in reducing warming.
There are, of course, many other concerns and points to be made on this complex subject, but hopefully this is enough to push buttons on both sides of the issue.