This conversation is closed.

We've seen the global warming evidence, should we wait for policy makers and the corporate world to change the way in which they operate?

I find myself in a spot where the status quo of environmentalism is disheartening yet the large scale systemic change I long for seems so far off. How do you implement change, what are your strategies to engage the ones you love, your community and your city?

Cheers,

Nate

  • thumb
    Jun 22 2011: every change comes from the people. corporations and politicians only follow.
    • thumb
      Jun 22 2011: Agree! Leaders take their lead from the people.
    • thumb
      Jun 23 2011: Then what stops the people from leading??
      • thumb
        Jun 23 2011: people.
      • thumb
        Jun 23 2011: What stops them often times is/are the people in power who do not want the change.

        Are you familiar with that term "tipping point"? I think the people's movement for change across the middle east is a good example of people having reached a critical "tipping point" when change becomes inevitible.
        But I also think that a people's movement is greatly enhanced by it's leaders. For example, Martin Luther King and the people's civil right movement in the US.
        Without leaders to step up and clear a path for people, change becomes a much more difficult task. It can be a single, dynamic leader such as MLK or Nelson Mandela or Ghandi, or it can be a group of people who dedicate themselves to the change the people want.
  • Jul 1 2011: I think people are too involved in the process of everyday living to really give deep, dense thought to issues which will impact our future. Not that they are bad, heartless people but they are too busy trying to live and make a good live for themselves and their children to really worry about the greenhouse effects and Kyoto protocols.
    The future may matter to them but lack of education and lack of reliable sources mean a lot to them. A lot of us, intellectuals or not tend to think of issues like comfort , entertainment etc as trivial (and they probably are) but it helps the common man and woman get through their days better. And who are we to say otherwise. We owe responsibilty to the future, but also some to our present. Lets not judge. Lets educate.
    • thumb
      Jul 1 2011: So true Kanwar, this is solution 3 and 4 of our solution strategies. Why don't we have national and global information campaign. When I surf the web, why it's not visible, in TV shows, newspapers, in my work, on the street, everyhwhere, why? http://bit.ly/SolutionStrategies

      If we see the gathering threat of climate change in the sky like an alien force to wreck havoc on us then maybe it will put us all to action and save our people and our planet.
  • thumb
    Jun 24 2011: Isns't that what the Kyoto Protocol is doing?
    • Jun 24 2011: That is assuming all countries are diligently working towards their reduction goals which some countries (Canada) simply aren't.

      I suppose I am looking for of local level, or grass roots ideas.
      • thumb
        Jun 25 2011: Nate, for grassroots ideas look into 350.org.

        Cop16 was a relative success with 2 degrees certain to rise by 2020, others are more pessimistic 3-4 degrees but with the UN head optimistic. In all scenarios it seems that more people will suffer.

        Unless we attack the issue in all fronts and accelerate our transformation. This decade is our last chance. http://bit.ly/SolutionStrategies

        see also globalissues.org, weforum.org, http://www.globalchange.gov/
  • thumb
    Jun 23 2011: I don't think the tipping point has been reached yet insofar as global warming is concerned. I myself felt initially it was an urgent problem that if not addressed immediately and in a big wayu would speel big trouble for our planet. Now, I'm not as sure of that... I'm still trying to undersand.
    • Jun 23 2011: Call me a dreamer! What I am searching for ways to actively engage the people around me. I don't want a pearl harbor type event to change the peoples mentalities, to light the fire necessary under politicians rear ends... but I see much more apathy than I do cause for change. Whether the tipping point is here or not, most would agree it's on our horizon.

      I am steadily confused by peoples choices, or fear of actively changing our lifestyles, would it not be in all of our best interests to think more than 10 or 15 years down the road, I don't know about you guys but I am still planning on being around!

      If the doom and gloom predictions of global warming are bang on, when shit hits the fan, can you sincerely look into the eyes of the ones you love most and say “I did as much as I could?”
      • thumb
        Jun 23 2011: I think you are right on all counts.

        I do agree that the change we are looking for in terms of environmental issues/global warming are on the horizon - but what will "tip" things to change will be "high noon", not dawn. Walking the walk is the way it gets done and there's not much walking going on - but lots of talking/debate. Maybe that's where we are at in the whole process...
        Although I will say it to any one who wants to listen - Obama is walking the walk, maybe in a less confident way than some of us might have hoped, but he knows what he's doing and I trust him to make the right descisions at the opportune time.
  • thumb
    Jun 23 2011: Have you seen the "Plan B" broadcast on PBS? Google the plan and pbs and take a look. It relates (which you may already know) the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is already to the tipping point and could effect huge global changes in climate. One thing they point at is energy produced by burning coal. Huge emissions and still widely used. Very interesting stuff. Historically our planet went through several tipping points with carbon dioxide levels before our atmosphere developed the mix to keep in heat and sustain life. The volcanoes produced it then and as you know the rain forest (and all other plant life) have helped to sustain this correct mix (for lack of a better term). The scientists on the broadcast relate we are already at the tipping point and use evidence such as the rain forest shrinking to give proof of it. Scary stuff... If they issued pedal driven electricity generators to cut down on energy produced by coal.. My entire family would be peddaling...

    Peace,
    Neil
  • thumb
    Jun 23 2011: Actually, I am trying to get an insight into the IPCC scandals at the moment, specifically the allegations of corruption and fraud regarding Rajendra Kumar Pachauri. For example, there is this article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6999975.ece .

    "The chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has used bogus claims that Himalayan glaciers were melting to win grants worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. Rajendra Pachauri's Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), based in New Delhi, was awarded up to £310,000 by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the lion's share of a £2.5m EU grant funded by European taxpayers. [...] The IPCC had warned that climate change was likely to melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 - an idea considered ludicrous by most glaciologists."

    Obtaining money through blatantly obvious lies? Does that leave any other conclusion than that the leading figure of the IPCC - and the machinery behind him as a whole - is either corrupt or utterly incompetent? How come that the person behind that ridiculed claim gets his paycheck from the Institute of which Pachauri is the Director General? And how is it possible that the people who highlighted this "error" got insulted by Pachauri instead of being complimented? This behavior fits neatly to a debauched, fanatical, esoteric sect which shuns rational sceptics and qualified scientists as heretics. Is the IPCC as trustworthy as Scientology? And if this is the highest ranking climate panel already, then what does that tell us about the quality of all the research below it?

    The "evidence" for global warming seems to be even worse than that for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, at least judging from the scandals surrounding Pachauri. However, I am not an expert on this matter, and other supposed scandals like Climategate turned out to be pretty weak on closer examination. So I'm asking, was this depiction of Glaciergate wrong? And if so, where?