I have pondered the issue of the death of enviromentalism over the last few weeks, since I read the first article.  It is sad that we have come to a point where this is even being discussed.  The single largest problem I see is that there are so many groups with very special interests, we have ignored how we live here and now while we work towards change.  The collective money raised by all environmental groups is huge, but it is being used in an ineffective manner because it is so scattered.  The environmental movement has many new activists, economists, and researchers emerging now, use them to best advantage by helping them to create living examples of the combined result of all that has gone before.  If all the environmental groups put their efforts and resources into one organized, cohesive program that not only met the needs of all their groups, but also the needs of the planet and its people, they would have the political and economic power they need to accomplish what is needed:  MAKING THE PEOPLE OF THE PLANET (AND SPECIFICALLY, WASHINGTON, DC)SEE THAT WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER AND ONLY BY WORKING TOGETHER CAN WE SURVIVE.  

I have grandchildren that I want to know have clean air and water; can swim in the lakes and streams safely; who can eat food that does not poison their bodies or leave them sterile; and who can pass the beauty of this planet along to their children for generations to come.  As long as all the various environmental groups squabble over the same money, and divide their efforts into little specialty groups addressing only part of the problem, nothing of any consequence is being accomplished.  The businesses and governments which protect them have banded together to protect their interests.  Maybe it is time for the environmental groups to learn from their opponents, and band together as well.  Our future is in presenting a united front, with practical living examples for others to see and learn from in order to gain the public support necessary on a very large scale.  Until environmental groups do that, the public will not support their efforts.

The public is very fickle and goes with whoever offers them the quickest satisfaction of their wants and needs.  Environmental matters take time to change on a large scale, but on a neighborhood scale things can happen quickly.  Lobbying may be fine and good in D. C., but on my block, it means nothing.  The people in my neighborhood want to know how to put food on the table, get a job, and try to keep the medical bills down.  To them, the broader issues of environmentalism are of no interest.  Sadly, that is true of the majority of the world.  Environmentalism needs to become proactive in a way that is easy for people to identify with and in a way that will help the world take notice of what is really happening to our planet if we do not change our ways. An environmental congress bringing together all the groups to create one body whose sole purpose is to create a better, healthier, sustainable world, and to which all the groups pledge their financial support and resources would be a starting point.

The Earth is changing its weather patterns.  Soon there will be no going back, and we will need to learn a new way of living anyway.  Now is the time to unite and create a new living system that is easy to use for everyone, that incorporates all the lifeforms on this planet in a balanced way, and to demonstrate to everyone that it can be done in their neighborhoods.  We have some of the most intelligent people on the planet involved in the environmental movement, why not put them together to devise a plan of such a large scale that it cannot be ignored by the world, and make it work for everyone.  Once you prove it can be done, the use the combined financial resources of all the groups to make it happen at the ballot box, in congressional backhallways, and on city and country streets here in the USA, and then teach by example around the world.  Something to think about!  Environmentalism is not dead, it just needs to remake itself for the 21st century and start playing by the rules of the "good ol' boys", because the only way to win for everyone is to use those rules aginst the guys who wrote them.

Stephen Moret wrote: "Every day I interact with CEOs and other executives of large banks, manufacturing firms, law firms, entrepreneurial organizations, etc. To reach these groups will require a fairly succinct and fact-based description of the problem and potential solutions, including the likely cost and impact on their businesses."

I disagee - in approach. It is sort of like, "Ask the wrong question and get the wrong answer." To really reach these groups we must demonstrate the real benefits (not the cost) that impact their businesses. We must show factually that the overall impact on their businesses is positive. Be honest. "Yes there are these negative impacts BUT the bottom line is positive because ...." In most cases we don't need to back in the door like the humble supplicant.  Example: Show accurately how much asthma/lung diseases costs that specific company in incresed direct and indirect medical insurance costs and lost time.
 

I don't know who you are, but you are RIGHT ON THE MONEY! I've been thinking about these things for months, and you took the words right out of my mouth. Bravo, and Amen.

If anyone wants to take your comments seriously, I'm in.
I'm SICK of money being wasted on lobbying and letter circulating, signature drives, etc. Those tactics don't work in this climate. Look at how this administration pushes its agenda, knocking on every back door to gain entry, and forcing their way in if refused. And we're still squabbling over minor differences in approach to some of the most confounding issues mankind has ever been up against.

Let's put our money where our mouths are, damn it! It's the era of mergers, and if our causes can't find a way to come together, then we are fighting a losing battle, here and everafter. I wrote an email to the Grist editor earlier today. I'm going to post it here to prove my affinity. Let's roll!

That comment was for djnoll, by the way. Not that I don't love everyone else...