It's Getting Hot in Herre (05 Apr)

As I noted previously, I'm trying to make coverage of climate change news new regular feature, but I'd certainly hoped to be a bit more regular than I have so far (it's been a busy week already). I've also been trying to wrap my head around what I want to do with these posts, when I came across this article from Salon about how positivity is needed in discussing climate change--not just a constant drumbeat of depressing news about melting glaciers and warming ocean waters and feedback loops (though that's all important to understand what's at stake). Here's the crux of the article:

Lance Armstrong has said many times that getting cancer was the best thing that ever happened to him. The course of his recovery -- the changes he made in his lifestyle and training, the immediacy with which he approached decisions and tasks -- is what enabled him to win the Tour de France seven times. It made him a better cyclist and, he suggests, a better man.

That's what we're dealing with here. Climate change can kill us or it can save us. As we deliver the diagnosis -- as Gore, Kolbert and Flannery do so effectively -- we share news that is every bit as devastating, as immediate, as powerful as the word cancer. But many cancer survivors will tell us, as Lance has told us, that the disease itself changed their lives in positive ways. It helped them find greater levels of commitment, of satisfaction, of spirituality. Their recovery helped them achieve great things.

This illness -- climate change -- may do the same thing for America. It will test us, threaten us and scare us, but it may also transform us. If we deal with it seriously, we will be a stronger and better country.

I don't mean to paint a rosy picture of cancer. I've lost dear friends to it, and it is horrible. But I do mean to point out that most people who receive a diagnosis with that key word -- the C word -- live through it. And their lives are often better because of it.

So when we give the diagnosis of climate change, we must pair it with a look-me-in-the-eye style of communication that says, yes, we can do this if we work on it together. Before the diagnosis, we frame it with the prospect of hope. After the diagnosis, we shift back to hopeful messages, as a means of inspiring quick action.

I agree with that assessment and I'll try to remember to bring a balance of evidence (which can seem daunting) and positive steps that can be taken right now.

The passage above noted "Gore, Kolbert and Flannery," which refers to three important works already released or coming out soon that will hopefully bring the force of what's at stake with climate change to a larger, more mainstream audience. Already out are books by New Yorker writer Elizabeth Kolbert (Field Notes from a Catastrophe, which I'm hoping to get to soon) and Australian writer Tim Flannery (The Weather Makers, which is next in my book stack). Then there's Al Gore and his upcoming film on his climate change slideshow, An Inconvenient Truth, (which sounds like a wonky Spalding Gray monologue/slideshow film, but one that's been getting rave reviews from the Sundance festival--check out this Treehugger post).

Staying on the positive tip, I'll finish this out with some positivity by way of Barack Obama, who recently introduced legislation designed to further promote the use of biofuels and alternative fuel technologies with Republican Senator Richard Lugar (IN). Check out the coverage over at GreenCarCongress, but here are a few highlights from the bill's provisions:

An Alternative Diesel Standard that requires 2 billion gallons of alternatives diesels be mixed into the 40 billion gallon annual national diesel pool by 2015—a 5% alternative diesel standard.

A $0.35 per gallon tax credit for E85 fuel through 2008. The credit drops to $0.20 per gallon in 2009 and 2010, and further to $0.10 in 2011.

Also, here are some highlights from a speech earlier this week by Senator Obama on energy independence, found in full at ThinkProgress:

Now, after the President’s last State of the Union, when he told us that America was addicted to oil, there was a brief moment of hope that he’d finally do something on energy.

I was among the hopeful. But then I saw the plan.

His funding for renewable fuels is at the same level it was the day he took office. He refuses to call for even a modest increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars. And his latest budget funds less then half of the energy bill he himself signed into law - leaving hundreds of millions of dollars in under-funded energy proposals.

This is not a serious effort. Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program. It’s not enough to identify the challenge – we have to meet it.

[...]

The President’s energy proposal would reduce our oil imports by 4.5 million barrels per day by 2025. Not only can we do better than that, we must do better than that if we hope to make a real dent in our oil dependency. With technology we have on the shelves right now and fuels we can grow right here in America, by 2025 we can reduce our oil imports by over 7.5. million barrels per day - an amount greater than all the oil we are expected to import from the entire Middle East.

For years, we’ve hesitated to raise fuel economy standards as a nation in part because of a very legitimate concern - the impact it would have on Detroit. The auto industry is right when they argue that transitioning to more hybrid and fuel-efficient cars would require massive investment at a time when they’re struggling under the weight of rising health care costs, sagging profits, and stiff competition.

But it’s precisely because of that competition that they don’t have a choice. China now has a higher fuel economy standard than we do, and Japan’s Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this year.

There is now no doubt that fuel-efficient cars represent the future of the auto industry. If American car companies hope to be a part of that future - if they hope to survive - they must start building more of these cars. This isn’t just about energy – this is about the ability to create millions of new jobs and save an entire American industry.

[See previous Hot in Herre post.]