Can you guess?
1. "In 1971, I participated in the second Earth Day and became the coordinator of an interdisciplinary Environmental Studies program at West Georgia College."
Find out here.
2. On the occasion of the first Earth Day: "[there is an] absolute necessity of waging all-out war against the debauching of the environment."
Find out here.
3. "Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing, head-on, the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."
Find out here.
4. "We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over."
Find out here.
Lesson: Stewardship is a value that should always transcend party politics.
Calling all radicals: Unite for Kerry-Boxer
Dispassion as the world ends: The absent heart of the great climate affair
Comments
View as Flat
David Roberts Posted 3:45 am
24 Apr 2007
www.grist.org
Permalink
Anna Fahey Posted 4:07 am
24 Apr 2007
Even if stewardship was a different ball game back when Earth Day started, it's intersting to see how "going green" -- or whatever it's been called over the years -- has been used here and there to gain some sort of political capital. At the same time environmentalists are accused of being extremists, radicals, long-haired tree-huggers -- take your pick -- savvy politicians know when it's a good idea to take a piece of the green pie for themselves. Just ask Frank Luntz!
Watch for signs of my increasing obsession with Newt Gingrich.
Permalink
Billhook Posted 7:55 am
24 Apr 2007
given first that all efforts to energy efficiency are prone
a/. to being offset by increasing sales of the item (aka Jevons Paradox) or
b/. to being offset by other people around the world being able to afford the fuel that you've avoided buying,
and, second, similarly that all efforts to produce and supply non-fossil fuels and energy,
help to keep the prices of fossil fuels and energy low enough for other people around the world to be able to afford them,
it seems clear to me that if politicians are not willing to discuss the framework of the required global treaty
to wholly preclude the above offsettings,
whereby nations around the world will agree a declining global carbon emissions budget,
and particularly the terms by which nations' allocation of emission-rights should be structured,
then those same politicians are simply not serious about halting Climate Destabilization
and are trying to fob you off with a bunch of Greenwash,
so be sure to carry a brolly when accosting them.
Regards,
Billhook
Permalink