Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

USA: Wanted for Crimes Against the Planet

Center for American Progress. Posted November 16, 2006.


World leaders recognize that time is running out to halt global warming, but the next Congress needs understand just how high the stakes really are.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Who's Paying for the Recession Most of All? Young Workers
Lizzy Ratner

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
10 Suicides a Month at Ft. Hood -- War Stress Is Taking Soldiers to the Brink
Dahr Jamail

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

World temperatures are rising to levels not seen in at least 12,000 years. Greenland's ice mass is melting at "what what NASA calls a 'dramatic' rate of 41 cubic miles per year." And unless climate change is reined in, "extreme drought could eventually affect one-third of the planet." More than 5,000 activists, scientists, and diplomats understand these facts and have gathered in Nairobi, Kenya for the annual two-week U.N. Climate Change Conference, which is now in its final three days. As U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan wrote in a Washington Post op-ed, "The stakes are high. ... Yet too often climate change is seen as an environmental problem when it should be part of the broader development and economic agenda." The Bush administration and the 109th Congress haven't understood these stakes. Hopefully, the 110th Congress will. Incoming Senate Environment and Public Works chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) recently said, "Time is running out, and we need to move forward on this." The Bush administration's chief climate negotiator, however, promised conference participants that the White House would continue to do as little as possible.

Conference Against Climate Change

The Nairobi conference is the 12th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. It is second meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, a portion of which the Bush administration will not be attending. The United States and Australia are the only major industrialized countries to reject the Kyoto Protocol, which "requires 35 industrialized countries to reduce those emissions by 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012." Some of the main agenda items at the conference are securing commitments to reduce greenhouse gases under Kyoto for the period after 2012 and helping poor countries manage climate change. (At the 2006 Clinton Global Initiative, the Center for American Progress made a commitment to help poor countries enter the global carbon-trading system.) "We are all gathered...on behalf of mankind because we acknowledge that climate change is rapidly emerging as one of the most serious threats humanity will ever face," Kenyan Vice President Moody Awori told delegates in an opening speech. Delegates are also receiving "a closed-door preview of the latest scientific findings on a warming world, to be published next year in a comprehensive U.N. assessment by the world's leading climate scientists." This report -- which will offer "much stronger" evidence and "authoritative new data" on manmade global warming -- may provide "just the right impetus to get the negotiations going in a more purposeful way," according to the group's chief scientist.

Fuzzy Climate Math

President Bush and his administration have faced especially harsh criticism at the conference. Over the weekend, Kenyan children led a march through Nairobi and called on industrialized nations to do more to fight climate change. One man carried a poster of President Bush reading: "Wanted -- For Crimes Against the Planet." U.K. Environment Secretary David Miliband said, "It's absolutely vital that the United States is party to the global commitment that is necessary. I can think of no greater legacy for President Bush in his last two years of office than to lead a bi-partisan drive to put the United States at the heart of global emissions reductions." But no bipartisan drive is likely from Bush. On Monday, chief U.S. climate negotiator Harlan Watson defended the Bush administration's stand against compulsory caps on global-warming emissions: "I certainly got no indication that there's any change in our position, nor is there likely to be during this presidency." He added that the United States "is doing better at voluntarily restraining the growth of such gases than some countries that are committed to reductions under the Kyoto Protocol." Watson cited a U.N. report that showed "growth in U.S. emissions in 2000-04 was 1.3 percent, compared with 2.4 percent overall for 41 industrialized nations." But as Forbes notes, "When compared with Kyoto's 1990 benchmark, however, the picture is different. ... [E]missions of all industrialized countries declined by 3.3 percent between 1990 and 2004, while U.S. emissions grew by almost 16 percent. Among the Kyoto-obligated countries, Germany's emissions dropped 17 percent between 1990 and 2004, Britain's by 14 percent and France's by almost 1 percent."

A Lack of Investment

The United States is the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, responsible for 25 percent of global emissions. According to a new study released by Climate Action Network Europe at the Nairobi conference, the United States ranks 53rd in climate change performance of the 56 top carbon dioxide-emitting nations. Bush has contended that the Kyoto Protocol would be too expensive to implement and continues to shirk his campaign commitment to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. "If the USA, currently among the bottom five, were to exercise an international climate policy stance as progressive as the UK, it would move up more than 30 places," notes the Climate Action study, "but because of their adverse position in national and international climate policies the United States blows this chance." Annual federal spending for research energy and development has fallen from an inflation-adjusted peak of $7.7 billion in 1979 to just $3 billion in the current budget. Bush has "sought an increase to $4.2 billion for 2007, but that would still be a small fraction of what most climate and energy experts say would be needed." In contrast, funding for military research has increased 260 percent and is now at more than $75 billion a year.

Hope in a New Congress

Environmentalists likely won't miss the 109th Congress. Twice in three years, the Senate has rejected a bill from Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT) that would have limited greenhouse gas emissions. Other more aggressive bills by Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) in the Senate and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) in the House have not received a vote. Senate Environment and Public Works chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) has been one of America's most vocal climate skeptics, calling global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people" and the Kyoto Protocol "alot of economic pain for no climate gain." (He's wrong.) But when the 110th Congress takes office in January, the new chairwoman, Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has promised to begin "avery long process of extensive hearings" on global warming and hopes to put together a global warming bill that addresses all contributors to carbon dioxide emissions. "He [Inhofe] thinks global warming is a hoax and I think it is the challenge of our generation," Boxer said recently. "We have to move on it." In the House, Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), who is poised to take over as the Energy and Commerce Committee, is expected to hold a series of hearings on global warming. Incoming chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, Henry Waxman, will likely "conduct extensive oversight of federal agency efforts on environmental and energy matters, primarily climate change."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: global warming, climate change, kyoto

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
numbskulls
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 16, 2006 1:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies are such greedy numbskulls that the major step to save the world for people and other lifeforms is to impeach them. The USA needs to help lead the world to peace, prosperity and less emmissions instead of forcing war and environmental death on all of humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gotta go
Posted by: Intraspecto on Nov 16, 2006 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, I have to go drive my SUV pulling my trailer with my 67 mustang with 500HP under the hood to the racetrack

-Typical outlook of Americans

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Quality of Life Posted by: edith
» RE: Quality of Life Posted by: Intraspecto
It's been going that direction for 70 years thanks to Hemp Prohibition.
Posted by: NDnative on Nov 16, 2006 4:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another Big Government bullshit article with no solutions to the mess in sight. Neither the Right nor the Left have done anything to stop this mess. Sure, we can all talk about conservation and fuel efficiency but all that won't even cut corners. Some idiots would like to tell you that biofuels contribute to global warming compared to petroleum without offering proof thereby proving that they are nothing but spokespeople for Big Oil and Coal. Does it ever occur to these motherfuckers that digging for oil has already done enough damage to the planet compared to growing hemp and turning it into industrial use which does minimal depletion to the planet's atmosphere and even then the depletion can easily be recovered through crop rotation? Of course they don't. They would much rather settle for more oil digging followed by coal to gas, all of which will SEVERELY destroy the landscape just to fill up some gas guzzlers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Mushroom Clouds for Peace Posted by: edith
Time is running out.
Posted by: symcokid on Nov 16, 2006 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I take that back, at the rate the polar ice caps are disintegrating and the ozone hole continues to expand, it's already too late and is irreversible. Bush could care less as he thumbed his nose at KYOTO and seems 'hell bent' on raising havoc throughout the world! Either way the DOLT is going to do us all in!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time is running out. Posted by: Colin
» For What? Posted by: edith
» RE: For What? Posted by: symcokid
Global warming is not just an 'environmentalist' issue
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 16, 2006 7:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the land your house or business is located on is eroding away and being submerged, or if freak weather wrecks your crop, then you have a serious economic problem.

When entire populations are displaced from polar regions, spreading desert ones and low-lying islands and turned into bands of refugees, you have a serious human immigration crisis, which will include social and economic problems. This is starting to happen - in Tibet, Africa, Mexico and the Andes there are melting glaciers that have supplied water for thousands of years to locals. When they're gone, where will the water come from? Look at the Mideast war zone - now they're fighting over oil, but they're also fighting over water.

Responding to global warming means turning the established economic order on it's head. Solar and wind are just not as profitable. You sell someone a diesel generator, and you have a new market for diesel fuel. Sell someone a solar generator, and that's it - the thing lasts for at least 25 years. Meanwhile, the per capita energy use in the USA continues to grow every year, like clockwork. Reduced energy use is associated with economic downturn and depression (think Russia in the 90's).

The major coal and oil and associated companies have a current market value on the order of several trillion dollars. A large fraction of that needs to be replaced with renewable energy systems that are not nearly as profitable - resulting in massive economic upheaval.

The viewpoint of the fossil fuel & financial elements is short-sighted, and shows that economic idiocy develops when business leaders are allowed to set government policy for their own benefit. Call it 'tragedy of the commons'.

Under 'business as usual scenarios', global warming will devastate public health, economic activity, agricultural food production, wildlife on land and in the sea, and will exacerbate international tensions over water, food and energy supplies.

Bush and Paula Dobriansky and their Saudi, Kuwaiti and Australian allies are just continuing to carry out the denial policy that the Republican Fossil Fuel Caucus decided on in the 1980's. Paula Dobriansky is Bush's representative at the Nairobi climate talks and is also a founding member of the "Project for a New American Century" which called for US military control of the world's oilfields as the basis of US global power. She has a long record of opposing any formal government action on global warming.

Now, if the world didn't need those oilfields for energy; if they could meet all their energy needs with renewables- would that upset the PNAC plan for 'total global domination'? Is it any surprise that Bush is working overtime to prevent any action on global warming, or that renewable energy gets nothing more then lip service from this administration?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gaia,
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Nov 16, 2006 8:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or is ti Giai, should sue Bush and Howard for crimes against her and for intentional infliction of bodily harm. I think in California you can sue on behalf of another entity (in other words the claimant doesnt need to be personally injured/effected by the action). Can someone please file a lawsuit on Gaia's behalf?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gaia, Posted by: tlannin
» RE: Gaia, Posted by: tlannin
» RE: Gaia, Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Gaia, Posted by: tlannin
» RE: Gaia, Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Gaia, Posted by: Jordon
More than global warning....
Posted by: Smiggsy on Nov 16, 2006 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today it snowed in my region of australia where at the same time bushfires are still burning nearby due to a prolonged severe 1 in 100 year drought. Yesterday we were hit by a freak hurricane storm event that tore the roofs off houses in my street & hail damaged cars. Yesterday it was 33C (about 92F) and I went for a swim. At the moment it is 6C (42F) & things are freezing. It never snows here even in winter & our summer starts in 2 weeks?

I consider the weather situation is more than unusual. Not even the experts can explain what is going on. Statistics show that these freak weather incidents are 1 in 100 year events or worse.

We are now reaping what humans have been doing to the planet for 100 years. Now its the globe's turn & it is about to abuse us all in return.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More than global warning.... Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: More than global warning.... Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: More than global warning.... Posted by: polyquat50
bleh bleh bleh/yadda yadda yadda
Posted by: imors on Nov 16, 2006 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who can say what the future holds? however, one can be damn sure that global warming will become corporate sponsored big business.

no end in sight.

thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

China and Russia
Posted by: aonghus36 on Nov 16, 2006 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand China is also an ecological disaster, if this is so
why don't we hear more about it? Also, what about Russia? I am not trying to divert responsibilty, because we are responsible. But, is it just us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: China and Russia Posted by: jwg
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: jwg
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: polyquat50
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: edith
» RE: China and Russia Posted by: stressederic
The End Is Near
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Nov 16, 2006 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...thusly spake the Prophet Gore. We all must pray to Gaia to help save us and repent our ways of abuse/neglect to Mother Gaia lest she reap a whirlwind of destruction upon humanity for its abuse of herself. Oh brother and sisters! Repent now and beg forgiveness to Gaia! Change your wicked ways or the end is near. Thus ends the sermon.
ps: please buy my book, films, and tickets to my next lecture. Please also continue to watch the news for all the weather 'events' and dooms-day scenarios. We need the ad revenue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The End Is Near Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: The End Is Near Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: The End Is Near Posted by: jwg
» RE: The End Is Near Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Be passionate about the issue, but get the facts right and act intelligently
Posted by: tlannin on Nov 16, 2006 12:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reading this release makes me realize three things. 1). Make sure that your research and data are coming from reliable sources, 2.) Be very careful with how you interpret the “language of catastrophe”; it sells newspapers but doesn’t always reflect reality, and 3) The US is wasting lives and money in Iraq that should be spent developing alternative fuel and infrastructure globally with cooperative governments.

Too many of the scientifically challenged have been prognosticating about the world ending from global warming. We need to be far less reactive and more measured with how we respond to a very real threat, otherwise we sound like people who can’t get their facts right. Remember those statistics about the Black Plague? Some sources say that two-thirds of Europe was wiped out over a 16-year period. Well, guess what? No one was capable of gathering real data about the peasants, 90% of the population, or about how many people died in the cities versus the country-side. Most accounts are broadly rounded, 50% here and 50% there. At any rate, we now have over six billion people on the planet, so the big issue is whether the leaders of most nations actually care about how much their people suffer or will they just continue to jabber about it.

One question we cannot accurately answer is, “What will happen to the earth in the next 50 years if global warming continues at its current rate?” The reason we cannot answer it right is that we don’t have crystal balls. No one can predict the future; we can only model it based on existing data and historical trends. Since our modeling methods vary and our data quality is often conflicting and inconsistent, we end up in a "debate" about global warming. If environmentalists can’t get their data straight they look like Chicken Littles clucking away about world chaos and collapse. For example, there’s a problem with how we gauge warming rates in the tropics. According to the US EPA, “models and theory predict greater warming higher in the atmosphere than at the surface. However, greater warming higher in the atmosphere is not evident in three of the five observational data sets used in the report. Whether this is a result of uncertainties in the observed data, flaws in climate models, or a combination of these is not yet known.” Note how the models predict greater warming, but the facts based on data input don’t. So what does that mean? It means that our scientists need to fix their data collection techniques so that we can know the facts, draw the right conclusions, and make informed decisions on the best actions to take.

Some predict, based on empirical evidence from field research and on predictive data, that the worst case result will be increased drought and famine, with hundreds of millions of displaced people seeking food and clean water, which in turn will create border, ethnic, and religious wars, which in turn will create innumerable other problems.

The best case scenario is that we will develop an actual plan for evacuating troops from Iraq, thereby stopping the ridiculous loss of lives as well as staunching the flow of dollars out of the US economy that should be spent on mitigating climate change from every angle possible. The majority of businesses, large and small, must finally figure out that sustainability is a money making proposition. Then they’ll influence political leaders to change economic policies accordingly, removing unfair trade and currency practices (as we have with China) and thereby using the natural capitalist system to help as many people as possible.

We’re not all going to die and need to stop thinking we will. We have the capabilities to reverse climate change and must act within our means to accomplish that reversal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CovertRage THe Poster
Posted by: etisoppa on Nov 16, 2006 1:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CovertRage

Please a reply to your post House Dems: Put Up or Shut Up on Congressional Black Caucus

By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, AlterNet. Posted November 9, 2006.

http://360.yahoo.com/etisoppa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

show trial
Posted by: edith on Nov 16, 2006 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
while it's dramatic to illustrate a personification of Uncle Sam in the dock cringing as witnesses like Concentration Camp survivors point bony fingers at the potbellied polluter, it might be more accurate to expand the list of defendants to include every industrial society in the world including India and China which do little or nothing to control carbon dioxide emissions.As for the pale hypocrites of the Apocalypse, i.e., the European Union, the maximum action that group of capitalist go getters too to reduce carbon dioxide in the real world was to sign Kyoto. The fact is that no one is doing anything to achieve Kyoto goals other than "trading" carbon credits, which is meaningless if in fact the atmosphere has warmed to dangerous levels, which of course no one can claim it has by a preponderance of RELIABLE evidence. And I said "atmosphere" folks. not random "surface" temperatures plugged into prearranged models to project higher temperatures than might otherwise be the case if satellite data were used.

Moreover, no one has the guts to publish an accurate picture of just what Western life will be like if magically Kyoto standards were in effect tomorrow. Perhaps the Kyoto standards should be in effect, but don't you think an accurate and reliable portrait of whose job vanishes and who is seriously disrupted would be a fair exchange? Really, is this going to be a rhetorical question. I hope not. Since many here are convinced despite evidence to the contrary that climate change will be drastic and harmful in the next decade, the working class, the slobs that make life comfortable for the intellectual elite that embraces kyoto, ought to know how many buses it will take to get to work or how many thousands of dollars of insulation will be needed for its house, or how many jobs will be lost. Don't tell me about all the jobs that will be created making solar cells; tell me first how many will be lost, and in what sector, and in what states. You must know this of course, being lovers of the working class and knowing what is best for the Ralph Kramdens of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hey Alice, er Edith Posted by: jwg
» RE: Hey Alice, er Edith Posted by: edith
» RE: show trial Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: show trial Posted by: AdamG
» Shed Some Light Posted by: edith
» RE: Shed Some Light Posted by: AdamG
Renewable Energy
Posted by: cbabe on Nov 16, 2006 7:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are so many solutions to current energy problems, and so much potential, but our leaders (and country as a whole) have been slouching around with their thumbs up their asses.

I think we need to show how interested we are in having a healthy environment that can last for generations to come--and take responsibility on ourselves to conserve and live sustainably--before our government will do anything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In case it hasn't been said yet here
Posted by: fifthworld on Nov 17, 2006 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is virtually nada to do about global meltdown, as the damage has already been done over decades of pollution, nuclear testing, etc. etc. The only issue to concern ourselves with is, of course, stopping our crazy ways and hoping that might halt any more damage. I.e. damage control. And more than that, strategizing broadly, and locally, on how to manage the great collapses, ecological and economic.

Personally I'd prefer if it were largely the USA that reaped what it's sowed. Unfortunately all life is at stake and it will be a long, slow suffering.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the personal is political
Posted by: CyberBrook on Nov 17, 2006 2:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While we're struggling (and waiting) to change our governments, corporations, and other orgs to be better about global warming etc., we can personally be more eco-responsible.

One simple but major way to do that is to eat a plant-based diet.

Another Inconvenient Truth
http://www.eatkind.net/inconvenient.htm

EarthSave: A New Global Warming Strategy
http://www.earthsave.org/globalwarming.htm

Another Inconvenient Truth: Meat is a Global Warming Issue
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3312

Another Inconvenient Truth: In the modern world, it is impossible to reconcile a carnivorous diet with environmental responsibility
www.aquarianonline.com/Eco/anotherinconvenienttruth.htm

Warming Up to a New Diet
http://simplevegan.blogspot.com

Diet, Energy and Global Warming
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~gidon/papers/nutri/nutri.html

ABC News: Meat-Eaters Aiding Global Warming?
abcnews.go.com/Technology/TenWays/story?id=2119267&page=1

Greenpeace: On Your Plate
www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/green-living-guide/on-your-plate

Fight Global Warming by Going Vegetarian
http://goveg.com/environment-globalwarming.asp

Vegan diets healthier for planet, people than meat diets
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/06/060413.diet.shtml

The SUV in the Pantry
http://www.organicconsumers.org/btc/gasfood112105.cfm

Cut Global Warming by Becoming Vegetarian
http://www.physorg.com/news4998.html

Five Food Choices for a Healthy Planet
http://www.veg.ca/issues/enviro-5reasons.html

and

Eco-Eating: Eating as if the Earth Matters
http://www.brook.com/veg

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I call bullshit veganazi Posted by: AdamG
» RE: the personal is political Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Oh, BTW, it's not just warming either
Posted by: nickptar on Nov 17, 2006 4:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look up ocean acidification. Basically: increased CO2 dissolves in water, makes the ocean more acidic, makes life a lot harder for coral, molluscs, and other animals with hard parts made of calcium carbonate, knocks the bottom out of the marine food chain, and we're twice as screwed.

So even if the global warming deniers are right, we need to cut back on carbon emissions. Good luck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Horses and mules? Whaa? Posted by: nickptar
» RE: Horses and mules? Whaa? Posted by: nickptar
Homo sapiens - highly overated
Posted by: Knowmad on Nov 17, 2006 9:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always suspected we were a short lived species, though I admit I didn't think it would come to pass quite so quickly. It's a simple consequence of our knack to create outpacing our ability to forsee, understand and counter the consequences of our creating. Even now all we can seem to do is try to create ways to clean up the messes of our other creations, often still without a thought to the possible implications of the clean-up creations themselves.

Regardless, it's all fodder for experience, and perhaps even the development of a little knowledge and maturity, which could possibly become wisdom if carefully nurtured. And if that's true, then maybe we'll be better off for all this negativity next time around.

So, it seems there is a silver lining . . . or is it just mercury vapor in the atmosphere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Homo sapiens - highly overated Posted by: stressederic
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement