If Al Gore finally decides to not run, he will in so doing concede victory to processes by which Earth becomes, potentially, uninhabitable.
Yes. Uninhabitable. Say it again, slowly.
The. End. Of. Human. Life. On. Earth.
But there is a potential solution: a Sustainable New Deal....
(more on the flip)
Global warming is far worse than most of us realize - and none of the current Democratic "major candidates," even Edwards, has a plan sufficient to stop it.
I recommed anyone who cares about this subject read George Monbiot's brilliant analysis Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning (South End Press).
A few devastating tidbits from Monbiot's concise reporting on the subject:
• The emission reduction targets currently being floated by even the most aggressive European governments are far too small. And they're missing their too-low goals, quite badly at that.
• According to Monbiot, we must cut emissions in the U.S. 94% by 2030 or we face apocalypse.
• Doing "something" (as everyone, even President Bush, proposes) without doing "enough" (which almost no one proposes) is ultimately equivalent to doing nothing. Here's why:
• If we pass 2 degrees centigrade of warming over pre-industrial levels, a "positive feedback loop" begins...
- A
positive feedback loop (watch this video!) is when human caused-warming triggers a change in the environment which leads to more emissions and therefore more warming.
- Example:
If the Siberian permafrost fully melts, the amount of Methane that will be released will be
equivalent to 70 years' worth of human emissions at current levels.
- If the permafrost melts, we'll immediately jump from 2 degrees to 3 degrees, which will cause something else akin to the permafrost to melt, etc. - the "loop"
- Thus, 2 degrees is a line in the sand we musn't cross
- Any goal that falls short of 94% by 2030 will still involve crossing that line in the sand and lead to runaway global warming that we are powerless to stop.
# # #
Let me say it again, because this is Monbiot's crucial point: Doing "something" about global warming without doing "enough" is equivalent to doing "nothing." Doing something merely delays the onset of apocalypse; only doing "enough" has a chance to stop it.
Look at Edwards' plan. Edwards has consistently been the favorite of the DKos community - and his plan, clearly the least horrid of the three frontrunners, is to reduce emissions only 80% by 2050. (His comment about the "latest science" is several years out of date.)
Under President Edwards' plan, half of Florida will be underwater. Like all the other "major" candidates, he proposes we do something, but not enough. Under Edwards, Obama, or Clinton, we'll cross that 2 degree line and suffer the devastation of runaway global warming.
Of those who have a "realistic" chance of being elected, only Al Gore has the sufficient understanding of what's at stake and what the science demands to give us a chance - and at best, it's a chance, probably a "Hail Mary" in the closing minutes of the 4th quarter - to keep the worst effects of global warming at bay.
# # #
We cannot procrastinate any longer. The cuts must begin now. If we wait until 2012 - in other words, if we don't elect a President with the will to get this done now - it's over. Starting in January, 2009, we must begin an enormous transformation of our infrastructure and our way of life. A cut of 94% by 2030 demands enormous cuts in the next few years.
What we need is nothing less than a "Sustainable New Deal."
It cannot be left to the "free market," the uncontrollable profit-seeking machine that is largely responsible for this predicament in the first place. What we need is an enormous governmental intervention.
Affirmatively, the government must:
-
create tens of millions of Green Collar jobs in energy and efficiency: installing solar panels on every rooftop in America that can take one, enormous new wind farms, new tidal and wave energy, weatherizing every home in the country
- Build massive low or zero emission
public transit infrastructure
- Enforce mandatory
efficiency measures
- Reduce the size of cars; all cars must be purely
electric
- Shut down
polluting industries
- Replace nearly our entire airplane fleet with
Zeppelins (i.e. rigid air ships, dirigibles)
- Expand the Sustainable New Deal into a
Global Marshall Plan with an equitable, green pathway out of poverty for the whole planet - this strategy of generosity and leadership can help bring the rest of the world on board with the needed emission cuts
Monbiot's book explains how we can cut our emissions 90% in many different sectors of our economy - from ground transportation and home heating to energy generation, cement mixing, and air travel. The changes are doable, but not easy.
Are you willing to renounce jet aviation (as I have), and instead take a Zeppelin (rigid airship) for your next cross country trip - which will take three times as long? If not, kiss the planet goodbye.
It's that simple, we have a choice: jet aviation or life as we know it on Earth, pick one but not both.
Oh, and by the way: there's no such thing as a "green military." The military is perhaps the worst source of carbon emissions and we cannot maintain it in anything like its current manifestation if we want to achieve that 94% cut.
And to those who think Al Gore could push a Sustainable New Deal onto the American public from a minor cabinet position or as an unelected outsider: let's be realistic. Only a 110% determined POTUS can get it done.
We're talking about a transformation of most of the U.S. economy: from unsustainable to sustainable, from fossil fuels to renewables, from polluting to green, from destructive to constructive, from domination of the third world to partnership with everyone on the planet, from planning for the next 15 minutes to planning for the next seven hundred generations, from a bottom line of materialism to a bottom line of environmental sanity.
What is necessary is an all out effort by our political leadership to reshape the very culture of the U.S. and Western Civilization - a President who will demand environmental consciousness not only in public policy, but in every boardroom and classroom in this country.
Who other than Al Gore can be counted on to lead that effort?
# # #
I realize that what I've said sounds like a pipe dream. Shut down our airplane industry and replace it with Zeppelins? Permanently end the internal combustion engine, replace it with electric vehicles? Solar panels on every roof top? Massive new public transit?
But this may be our only hope if we want to salvage the Holocene fromcollapse.
If we want to do something about global warming, but not enough to actually make a difference and stop it, then we can be content with Hillary, Obama, or Edwards.
But if we actually want to stop global warming - hey, how about you, do you want to stop global warming? - it would seem that from a government-intervention prespective, Al Gore is our only hope. A faint hope, at that.
(Side note: I certainly hope that Gore will not endorse the insanity of nuclear if he jumps in. There are truly sustainable solutions for power.)
So what do you think? Is Al Gore the only one who can get it done? Do we need a Sustainable New Deal? Thanks for any feedback.