Global Warming Is A GLOBAL Problem

I want to talk to the denizens of Planet Stupid today, but I especially want to talk to the astonishingly dumb and parochial citizens of the United States of America. I am sure I have their attention

All the world over, politics runs human affairs, often intruding into issues which are not political in nature. Anthropogenic climate change, or global warming as it is more often called, is one such issue. As with so many things, the prevalence of politics in human affairs, even those which are not political, is doubly true in the United States.

Ever since "superstorm" Sandy pummelled New Jersey and New York City, our changing climate has been in the news, which means of course that the warming issue has been politicized. Despite the reluctance of Hopey-Changey and the Bane Capitalist to say anything about it, story after story has appeared in the mainstream media talking up the storm and the climate. The Los Angeles Times story Sandy a galvanizing moment for climate change? is typical.

One Sunday afternoon in 1969 the filthy, oil-coated Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught fire and quickly became a potent symbol of industrial pollution, helping galvanize public opinion and set the stage for passage of national environmental laws the following decade.

The combination of Hurricane Sandy and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's announcement that he was endorsing President Obama largely because of Obama's actions on global warming could do the same thing for climate change, say scientists and political observers.

Obama's actions on global warming?

"This may be that sort of Cuyahoga River moment for climate change," said Michael Mann, a leading climate scientist and Penn State University professor. "It has galvanized attention to this issue and the role that climate change may be playing with regard to the intensification of extreme weather."

More than half of Americans now believe that climate change caused by human activity is occurring, and 58% say they are "somewhat" or "very worried" about it, according to a September poll by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.

"After this crazy weather we've been having the last several years — Irene last year, Sandy this year, the drought, the fires, floods — it's getting more and more difficult for people to deny what everybody sees with their own eyes," said New York climate scientist Scott Mandia, coauthor of a book on the rising sea level. "I think people are starting to connect the dots."

Americans are starting to connect the dots. Can salvation be far behind?

Bloomberg's Thursday endorsement of Obama thrust to the political forefront a topic that has been largely ignored this election season, eclipsed by concerns about jobs and the economy.

"Our climate is changing," Bloomberg wrote in his endorsement posted online. "And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it might be — given this week's devastation — should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action."

Coming from a wealthy businessman and a political independent, Bloomberg's focus on climate change could influence the thinking of Americans on the fence about global warming, said Joshua Freed, head of the clean energy program at Third Way, a centrist Washington think tank.

"He's a capitalist, a different type of person talking about climate change than an environmentalist or yet another elected official," Freed said.

Now, I can't imagine why anybody who is not a politician could possibly give a damn what a majority of Americans think about anything, let alone a non-political issue like human-caused climate change. But I have written that before. I have other fish to fry today.

It is the parochial conceit of Americans that what they think about anything is the only thing that matters. After all, these dot-connecting idiots live in America, which still has the world's biggest economy, and a military which is twice the size of that of the rest of the world combined. Thus Americans simply assume as a matter of course, albeit unconsciously, that what they believe and decide goes for everybody else on Earth.

So I am here today to tell these exceedingly dumb, navel-gazing Americans that it is called GLOBAL warming because it is a GLOBAL problem. In 2011, the current estimate says that 34 billion tons of CO₂ was released into the atmosphere as a result of human activity on this planet. Of that total, 29 percent of the carbon emanated from busy smokestacks and other sources in the People's Republic of China. Only 16 per cent of the carbon was released here in the Greatest Country On Earth.

Are you listening, "Wild Bill" McKibben? How about you, Mayor Bloomberg? And Penn State climate researcher Michael Mann, who says Sandy has "galvanized attention" on the issue, are you listening? I assume all these people know where the People's Republic of China is, and (roughly) how many human beings live there.

So why don't the three of you, and another hundred Americans I could easily name, people like the New Yorker's Elizabeth Kolbert, get on a jumbo jet, fly over to The People's Republic of China—make sure you emit some carbon dioxide as you do so—and tell those Chinese miscreants that what a majority of Americans think is the only thing that really matters when it comes to GLOBAL warming?

And while you're at it, since you've got an airplane at your disposal, you good folks can visit Japan, India, South Korea, Brazil, Russia, and sundry other places to give them the same lecture. I am sure you will be well received

Comments

[Ken Barrows]

It is a global problem. Vote Obama because world carbon emissions will only rise 2.8% per year if he wins. If it's Romney, it's 3.0%. (Yes, I am joking.)

[John D]

It's all connected. Everything we do to reduce coal use in the US allows for more coal exports from the US to Asia. We would never decide to leave the coal in the ground because that would kill 'jobs and growth'.

[Dave Cohen]

@John D --

Yes, I should have mentioned that. Decreased coal consumption in the U.S. has led to greater coal exports, especially to Europe. Maybe I will post on that.

-- Dave

[Dennis McCaffrey]

Thanks Dave for plenty of outrage and a few good laughs. They are extra appreciated on this dreary election day morning. I think we will hear some suggestions soon about building massive barriers on the outer banks, jersey shore, long island and other vulnerable places. Things will bog down quickly when we start to calculate the cost of this 'terraforming' and then realize there isn't enough wealth to pay for it unless we forego some things we value more. The notion of sacrificing some of 'America's way of life' will be most unwelcome.

You're absolutely right that the scale of our problems are truly global so agreement on what to do (and who will pay) is impossible. It looks like we're going to have to 'adapt'.

[john]

Once again, what the fuck are you ranting about? Do you think before you post?

[J. Drew]

Last year one of the assignments for a Human Geography course I was taking was that everybody wrote a very short essay on what we thought Canada should be doing about climate change both at home and internationally, and write a short response to 3 other classmates essays. I basically said that if we wanted to be serious about it, we would prepare for the inevitability of it and quit wasting our time trying to get countries like China, Russia, Etc to reduce their emmissions, and that when it came down to it, we shouldn't be expecting the government to do the preparing for us because of the economic consequences. I got a couple of (relatively) nasty responses, because according to the Progressive Hope Monkeys we just HAVE to do something globally about climate change, and you are totally not allowed to doubt the possibility of that happening and try to work within the limits of reality to make whatever small difference you can.

[ralph m]

I usually agree with Dave, but whatever the intentions, this rant sounds way too close to the bullshit rants I hear from global warming deniers....could we boil it down to 'I'm not going to trade in my Hummer unless China cuts back on carbon emissions too?

Fact is the Chinese Government is well aware that they killing themselves with the rapid, out of control industrialization program they have engaged in over the last 20 years. But when it comes to total carbon emissions, you'll hear Chinese and Indian leaders pull out the legacy card - adding up the historic greenhouse gas emissions since the Industrial Revolution began, which of course makes the U.S. and Europe by far the largest contributors of all of the extra CO2 in the atmosphere. So, whether it's rational or not, they act like it's all about matching and overtaking U.S. GDP.

But, there is an argument to be made that if the U.S. had continued to lead the way on reducing carbon emissions instead of walking away from the table 20 years ago, newly industrializing nations like China, would have lowered their guns as well. There's no way to prove it now, but having the U.S. walk away and go full speed ahead in their selfish exploitation of the environment, there was no incentive for less developed nations to change their ways either.

[Dave Cohen]

Re: Progressive Hope Monkeys

Thanks for that.

-- Dave

[Dave Cohen]

Re: this rant sounds way too close to the bullshit rants I hear from global warming deniers

For the life of me, I can not see how you came up with this interpretation of today's post.

I was ridiculing Americans for assuming they are Center of the Universe. For assuming that it's their world, and everybody else is just walking around in it.

-- Dave

[Phil]

Don't forget the 'embodied carbon emissions' in all those products the west imports from China.

[Oliver]

Re. a military which is twice the size of that of the rest of the world combined.

On the basis that Nature has a knack for self-correction - despite "our" best efforts to kill everything natural about our planet - it seems to me that this military force will blindly perform what the earth is crying out for, namely a rapid cleanse of us pesky aberrants. I am standing by for the pea-brained trigger-happy militants pulling the whomsoever-is-president's strings to provoke large scale conflict starting in the Middle East (whipping boy: Iran) that will escalate when the second and third largest military forces rush to protect their markets.

Just a likely scenario. Time will tell.