http://www.nla.gov.au/webcasts/

http://www.nla.gov.au/webcasts/media/Kenneth-Myer-Lecture-15-07-2008.mp3

Nature can scale way better than any of our centralised governments and industry can.

Furthermore, even if it were possible, I can’t imagine what sort of environmental impact any of the listed initiatives would have. We need to think more outside the box. Tim Flannery has some good ideas:

“The response to climate change has focused largely on what we can do to reduce the production of emissions. But leading environmentalist Dr Tim Flannery reminds us that we should not lose sight of the tree fix. Farms and forests could become ‘enormous engines of planetary cleansing’.”

There are many, just as strong reasons, most in favor of developing a strategy and program of massive proportions for clean Domestically supplied Energy.

It would be a lot easier sell if Oil was priced back into the Stratosphere….. or perhaps taxed up to a level where folks were taking notice again.

If little or nothing is done, with estimates of the Worlds population doubling in 40 years (Which I personally believe will ultimately be a much larger problem than Global Warming) we will be in a position where life will not be sustainable on this planet…. or life will be very different than anything we all have experienced.

Doing token programs is not an option. We have to let our Politicians know that this problem is much larger than than ‘What can I do for me and my State.’

I do hope that Obama lives up to his billing and is able to get our Government to step out of it’s Comfort Zone in dealing with these issues…. The over abundance of former Clinton people he’s appointed hasn’t boosted my confidence that he’s ready to break Paradigms…. But I’ll give him some time to see what he’s all about.

And yes… Given the right direction, we are capable of achieving amazing things. Clean Energy Independence is something we can accomplish in ten years!

Yep. The ones you cite, and doubtless many others. But it’s the best way I’ve found so far to frame the opportunity amidst our challenges.

Exactly.

LOL!

Whoever asks that either hasn’t taken a good look at the demographics of “we” lately, or is in hot pursuit of winning the grand prize in a Greatest Rhetorical Question contest.

And then there’s the quandry of what can be done when the bulk of “we” are motivated mostly by that which creates the problem(s) in the first place. Ahem.

Yes. Fortunately it now has a face: The economic crisis. The proposed recipe is, long-term goals notwithstanding, the best possible way to bootstrap short-term prosperity.

Framed in those terms it’s less despairing and more a call to action: we can do what we choose to do. We are not powerless. These problems are not too large, because as large as the problems are, we are larger.

I think a lot of us understand this is the level of effort that is required, but this is the first place I have seen where anyone has tried to lay out the kinds of short term changes required to accomplish the goal.

Whether Obama or any other can rise to the challenge of how to motivate the world to act in this radical way is questionable, but one factor in making that happen will be a clear description of the project. This post is a step in that direction.

Now if we can get the Talking Heads to talk about this at least in passing while they carry on about Chicago Politics.

“Let’s Go Kill Hitler/Tojo!” is an easy slogan to get behind, especially when they’re slaughtering people who may well be your family. “It’s Getting Much Too Warm Here!” doesn’t really raise the same kind of fighting spirit.

1 – The “re-tooling” that occurred during WWII was not that big of difference to what they were doing at the time. They were all just sheet metal and people. Not robots and carbon composites.

2 – Do not forget that because we put so much energy into making weapons we ended up with the world’s largest supply of artificial nitrogen. Which was converted into fertilizer. And I think you can make a convincing argument that the number 1 environmental problem we face now (over-use of land for farming, over-fertilization and over-use of fresh water) is the result of the govt deciding to dictate how that nitrogen was used (e.g. for farming, instead of just letting it either be sold or buried).

3 – The govt should not be choosing the winners/losers in any markets. This is because it will ultimately choose not the best decision but who has the most influence. And sucks out all of the energy into alternatives.

For example – there is more energy to be found from conservation than from new power generation. This conversation isn’t just limited to “everyone put CF bulbs in their house” but a range of things. For example here in the south, we could start to adopt “cool paints” that reflect IR/UV rays that can reduce external temps of the house by 100 degrees. That dramatically reduces the amount of AC you need. And for less than $100, you can add a mister to your AC unit that improves efficiency by 30%.
And people can consider adding solar-tube lighting to homes/offices:
http://www.solatube.com/selector.php
This uses highly reflective tubing to allow sunlight to be used as your light – thus reducing the need for electricity during the day.

4 – Even if you think Obama has your best interests at heart – there will *always* be those who do not (just look at Obama’s former governor :)).

5 – Govt run industries give you old China and old India (billions of poor). While letting the market take over – gives you better conditions (India and China has seen the largest rise of people out of poverty in human history). Yes it has its ups and downs but it has higher ups and smaller downs than the alternatives.