Mobile Version: mobile.adirondackdailyenterprise.com
RSS:
Saranac Lake Weather Forecast, NY
»BREAKING NEWS» Oil sheen spreading from Gulf platform explosion
Member Login: Email: Password:
Search: Local News Classified Web
Local News  Local Sports  Best of the Mountains 2010  Summer Vacation Guide 2010  Embark: Get Up, Get Out  Adirondack Living Real Estate  North Country Dining Guide  Community Resource Guide 2010  An APA reform plan  Local Classifieds  Jobs  CU Photo Galleries
  • Follow us on twitter
  • Find us on Facebook
  • Opinions
  • Columns
  • Sports
  • People
  • Special sections and series
  • Olympic blogs
  • Local Links
»ACTION ALERT» Your Comment has been successfully added.
Guest Commentary

Earth: too big to fail?

Guest Commentary By Glenn Scherer and David Lillard Blue Ridge Press
POSTED: November 20, 2009

When our economy tanked last year, politicians told us that our nation's financial institutions were "too big to fail." Now, as world leaders prepare for a critically important climate summit in Copenhagen, we need to ask: Is Earth too big to fail?

You know the backstory: Scientific studies pile up monthly, warning of a potential collapse of our planet's human life-support systems. Most recently, researchers calculated that the Arctic icecap - one of Earth's largest geographic features - could disappear in 10 summers. That meltdown might unleash global weather changes that destabilize agriculture in a world where a billion people already go hungry, thereby threatening food riots and fanning the fires of global terror.

Meanwhile, UCLA scientists have looked back 20 million years to find atmospheric carbon dioxide levels as high as today. Global temperatures then were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher. Sea levels were 75 to 120 feet deeper. And Antarctica was nearly ice-free. Clearly, we are reshaping our "planet into something we have never seen in all of human history," says climatologist Jonathan Foley.

Still, a Senate climate bill remains stalled, and its cap-and-trade mechanisms are seen by many as inadequate to deal with global warming. What's needed immediately are fresh ideas that will break the logjam before Copenhagen. What is needed is a great and radical compromise that deals decisively and honestly with the climate change threat but also allows the fossil fuel industry, and the rest of the U.S. and world economy, to thrive. Such a compromise is possible, though its provisions will likely cause environmentalists and fiscal conservatives to fall out of their chairs.

Here are four bold measures for breaking the climate deadlock:

Put tens of billions into clean coal. Coal largely powers our nation. That is current reality. And clean coal is still a fantasy, but not long ago so was a trip to the moon. Money is the answer. It is already technologically possible to remove 90 percent of the carbon from coal emissions. However, according to a July 2009 Harvard study, this thorough carbon-cleansing nearly doubles the cost of making electricity. So why not offer federal loans to energy producers to cover the difference? A carbon tax would pay back that loan. It can be done: Norway is already sequestering carbon beneath the North Sea, and sequestration sites are being identified across America. This is no permanent solution, but triage. It's a stopgap measure to buy us some time: At a cost roughly equal to current U.S. corn subsidies, sequestering coal carbon emissions underground would give us a few decades to transition into a renewable-energy world and give coal companies time to transform into 21st-century energy companies.

Repurpose petroleum. Oil isn't renewable. Every barrel we burn for energy is wasted. It's like burning money. Rather, let's transition from using oil as fuel and turn it into high-quality plastics and other durable goods. Let's fund research into next-generation plastics and other petrochemically based materials designed for reuse in an endless loop - rather than being discarded. Already, scientists at the University of Washington are using petroleum-based plastics to make solar cells; other researchers are using them in high-quality building materials. Following the "cradle to cradle" ideas of architect William McDonough, manufacturers are inventing ways to design shoes, cars - even factories - to be dismantled and reused. Such change could take decades, but an infusion of investment will quicken it.

Institute a global Marshall Plan. Current economic and climate realities dictate that we bail out the developing world. Unless we bring the poor out of poverty through clean energy, all of the developed world's carbon-emission-reduction efforts will go for naught. Exporting sustainable-energy technologies to the developing world will help end poverty and dramatically boost our economy. When the U.S. rebuilt Europe and Japan after World War II, skeptics called it economic suicide. Today the U.S.-European-Japanese trading partnership is the strongest, freest economic engine the world has known. Likewise, investment in Africa today will create thriving free markets there tomorrow.

Adapt now. No matter how successfully we implement the first three steps, too much greenhouse gas is already aloft. We must prepare for some climate-caused upheaval. Intensive cooperative public-private planning is needed to anticipate the extreme weather, sea rise, wildfire, insect, disease and other damage done by climate change.

These proposals will likely anger many. But sticking with the current crop of platitudes is getting us no closer to a solution. And we've run out of time. Hear this recent warning from U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon: "Our foot is stuck on the accelerator and we are heading towards an abyss." We are speeding headlong into climate chaos.

A change in approach must come now - before Copenhagen. Impossible? Not in the America we know.

Glenn Scherer, of Montpelier, Vt., and David Lillard, of West Virginia, are the editors of Blue Ridge Press, a syndicated commentary service about the environment.

 
Share:
Facebook  MySpace  Digg  Stumble    Mixx  Fark  del.icio.us   LiveSpaces
 
Member Comments
View Comments: | 1-5 | Post a comment
AdirondackCitizen
12-05-09 2:35 PM
This letter makes a couple of good points, especially re-purposing petroleum but there is no such thing as clean coal. However, clean coal burning technology to reduce emissions can be achieved. Nevertheless, the emphasis on carbon reduction is ridiculous. Science has not shown that carbon is a 'greenhouse gas' and in fact carbon dioxide is such a small percentage of our atmosphere that working to reduce it is a truly worthless endeavor. What needs to be scrubbed from coal burning emissions is the sulfur, nitrogen and mercury emissions that are killing our brook trout, red spruce and common loons. It's too bad the Wild Center, Paul Smith's College, Adirondack Council and other Adirondack environmental advocates have bought into consensus instead of science. How about doing something that will actually benefit our dying ecosystems?

designer5
12-04-09 8:16 PM
Gore cancelled his lecture in Copenhagen, now that the truth about the manipulation of data is being exposed. 3000 people will get their money back instead of listening to his fantasy.

PNorthElba
11-21-09 12:18 PM
Crude northcountrynell, but a good one.

northcountrynell
11-21-09 6:43 AM
jackkk.....sounds like your wife's honymoon banter.

concerned
11-20-09 8:07 PM
platitudes, nice word.i think my wife puts it on my cereal

You must first login before you can comment.
Existing Member Login
Not a Member?
Create a Member Account  
*Your email address:
*Password:
    Forgot Password?
  Remember my email address.
 
Local News  Local Sports  Best of the Mountains 2010  Summer Vacation Guide 2010  Embark: Get Up, Get Out  Adirondack Living Real Estate  North Country Dining Guide  Community Resource Guide 2010  An APA reform plan  Local Classifieds  Jobs  CU Photo Galleries