PBS Frontline: Climate Of Doubt.

PBS Frontline’s “Climate of Doubt” is good but probably won’t change any minds. Skeptic leaders are bought and mostly professional contrarians who know how to push the right economic buttons and sprinkle in a little Al Gore to sway people to their skeptical view on climate change. [Having a British accent doesn’t hurt either.]

But by far the most chilling part of the Climate of Doubt episode occurs at the 50:35 mark during an exchange between interviewer John Hockenberry and climate skeptic Myron Ebell of CEI:

John H: “What if you’re wrong about climate change?”
Myron E: “[smirking] I’ll have to say I’m sorry.”

Why wait? Apology not accepted. [PBS]


Al Gore Compares Investments In Fossil Fuel Companies To Investments In Subprime Mortgages

Al Gore, Generation Investment Management LLP

“The value of the subprime mortgages was based on a false assumption…. in almost exactly the same way, the value of all of these carbon fuel reserves is based on a similarly absurd assumption.”
Al Gore, Co-Founder of Generation Investment Management LLP 2/14/2012

Mr. Gore makes a solid point and with his Generation Investment Management LLP (GIM) partner, David Blood, goes further by offering a five-point plan on “Sustainable Capitalism” that among other things, suggests that we should do away with quarterly reports. Quarterlies are forcing companies, especially in the renewable energy sector, to make short-term decisions in order to generate instant results for investors rather than allowing low-carbon businesses to grow slowly and succeed on a long-term plan.

Another selfless, pro-environment move by Al Gore and GIM or, could it be a calculated one to increase the value of their portfolio? Mr. Gore and GIM’s investments are knee deep and early into sustainably focused companies. Green or greenbacks: would it be wrong if it were for the both? [Bloomberg and Guardian]


Al Gore, Is It 24 Hours Of Climate Reality Or 24 Hours Of Wasted Breath?

49ers Fans Convincing Raiders Fans To The Reality Of Who Has A Better TeamIt’s great that Al Gore is doing this again and hopefully, it’ll reach some people on the fence about climate change. But here’s a tip – those people you want to reach most; the ones whose minds you want to change… they’re not watching this and you’re wasting your time trying to make them think otherwise.

As a political eunuch, I like to stare in from the outside and figure out who’s making the strongest and most convincing argument or even further, who is the most reasonable. Al, including the word “reality” in the name of your event is turning away the people you want to reach most and you have to re-think this whole thing. Maybe approach religious leaders that share your views and will share an “earth stewardship” message with their parishioners; it worked in a small Kansas town where your message didn’t. I’m sure you’re doing this but please don’t include the word reality in the name of your next event. It’s a repellent to your cause.
[youtube width=”425″ height=”239″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY-mboZkhD0[/youtube]

Related article: Enough Climate Denial! 24 Hours of Climate Reality Starts Tonight!

Related article: Scientists With Different Politics Speak With One Voice on Climate


Three Required Green Accessories: Peace Symbol, Politicized Hemp Shirt, And Bible?

Inspired by NYTimes.com article: “In Kansas, Climate Skeptics Embrace Cleaner Energy“.

Nixon vs Gore - Who is more Jubbling?When did politics become so infused into the issue of conservation? Yes, Richard Nixon’s Republican administration kick-started the Environmental Decade in the 1970’s and helped spawn the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments of 1970 and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). President Nixon was a tree-hugger but should we hold that against all Republicans?

There was a great article posted in the NYTimes.com about The Climate and Energy Project and how six towns in Kansas rallied around an effort to consume fewer resources and push for renewable energy. Their motivation was not political nor was it about melting polar ice caps or greenhouse gas emissions; according to the article, their motivation was born out of thrift, patriotism, spiritual conviction and economic prosperity. Lessen our dependence on foreign oil and respect God’s earth is basically it. So, what were the results? Over the life of the program which ended in the spring of 2010, the towns reduced energy consumption by 5% when a 1.5% reduction is considered significant.

Sorry Al Gore, Greenzo and Copenhagen – the answer to reducing consumption and finding renewable energy sources may not come from a “shock and awe” message but from efforts that are truly grassroots and definitely not politicized.

Now I do have one last question for the people in these participating Kansas towns – what about all those cool hemp based, peace-sign covered clothing that announces how environmentally aware you are; please tell me you are not giving that all up too. Everyone knows that it’s the best part of being truly green.

[Answer to Who’s More Jubbling – Nixon or Gore? Who Cares.]