Gore's Nobel Prize

Champlain Islander · 12-10-2007, 07:45 AM

I just watched the tape of Al Gore's Nobel Prize acceptance speech. I know the issue of Global warming has been controversial in the public and private sectors as well as here on HNI. I have to say his speech did inspire me and brought about an increased awareness of issues that could affect life as we know it. I will offer this bit of wisdom from my thoughts on the subject. I find it strange that the two nations that pollute our environment the most are the two main nations that refuse to participate in agreements like the Kyoto Protocol. The two nations that could make a difference on a large scale don't want to do so. I can understand Communist China because they are a growing industrialized country that is focused on growth and developing as a superpower rather than to save the earth. Their main focus is jobs and feeding their population without regard to what is happening to the environment. They have some of the world's most polluted rivers and landscapes. We in the United States have the technology and public awareness to make a difference but for some strange reason are holding the line at following Europe, Australia and other highly developed nations on environmental issues. I see people everywhere picking up litter, buying energy saving lights, insulating homes etc. For some reason the voters are concerned with the environment but the government doesn't appear to act when given the chance. Denial of Global Warming appears the way to not participate and I wonder where that comes from.Are major industries like big oil, the automotive manufacturers and energy produces in control of our government? How much of a hold do they have on our administration to keep us apart from much of the rest of the world on this problem? The name "Inconvenient Truth" does ring true. Not in my backyard and I'll let somebody else worry about that appears to be a common thread in the way we treat something we don'tunderstand. I don't know what the answer is but can only offer my perspective on a solution. Make a difference wherever you can.Change starts with one and when you see something that could positively impact our environment..... engage.

burniegoeasily · 12-10-2007, 09:41 AM

The way i look at it, we could never meet the standards set by the Kyoto Protocol. Or at least at our standard of living. Besides, I wonder how well all the other nations are meeting the Kyoto agreement? For us to jump on the band wagon, would cause a huge uprising in this country. Can you imagine banning cars that have crap gas milage, or the strain put on industry, etc. etc..

vc1111 · 12-10-2007, 09:53 AM

Good post, CI.

I feel like what I may or may not do, would be far less than a drop in the bucket when I look around and see the widespread global waste of resources.

In this country for example, we use oil byproducts in staggering quantities with extremely limited usage. Plastic bags and utensils for example. What is wrong with paper or wood?

As to pollution, its the same hopeless situation. I don't litter, but Lake Erie is still used for the discharge of manufacturing waste and a dump for medical waste. So how can what I do ever make a difference?

Lastly, I think most people have a general, valid distrust of international "agreements." There are too many regional differences to find a workable collective agreement that won't unfairly hamper or punish one group or another.

Fieldmouse · 12-10-2007, 09:56 AM

Perhaps, most just pass it off as BS because we can go back and read over the last 100 years of alarmist reporting having to deal with climate change. Ice age is coming, no this decade it's warming, no it's ice age, how do we know this time is for real? My bet is that it will reverse before the decade is out. Perhaps it might be the fact we can put our CO2 emissions in perspective and know we're number 7th on the list as far as contributing to CO2 emissions and we also know that water vapor happens to make up the majority of Global Warming Gases at 95%.

So I guess CI, what you really want our Goverment to do is raise our taxes to the point we have to conserve energy to a level acceptable to you?

vc1111 · 12-10-2007, 10:00 AM

Quote:

So I guess CI, what you really want our Goverment to do is raise our taxes to the point we have to conserve energy to a level acceptable to you?

Bingo! That is how most change is "promoted," at least in this country. Then the proceeds are used to create ever larger and oppressive government on all levels.

burniegoeasily · 12-10-2007, 10:01 AM

Yep, we are way to comfortable in the way we live. Lets face it, we are pigs. America is fat dumb and happy. Too much big money making the calls. It will never fly in America. Does that make it right? No. For us to change, everyonoe will have to make big changes in their life, especially the ones like old Gore himself. And I do take issue in his hypocricy. He tries to sugar coat his wastes while putting a guilt trip on others. A much better spokes person would be Ed Bagely Jr.. People are more prone to listen to a message that is given by a person who walks the walk. Gore might have a good message, but taints it with his actions. Who cares if he buys carbon credits from himself. Carbon credits is a feel good solution for the rich with no real impact.

Lanse couche couche · 12-10-2007, 10:05 AM

I drive a Hyundai that gets 30+ miles per gallon and pretty much drive only for work or to visit family. I also own 19 acres of mature woods that probably offsets my carbon footprint tenfold. Iwonder if folks like me can get something along the lines of a taxrefund for all that[8D]

Fieldmouse · 12-10-2007, 10:08 AM

VC, your talking two totally different things. Global Warming is nothing more then a hoax. Polution is a real to do thing. Years past it was a major issue with regards to discharge, however, things have changed in a big way. We still do live with the linguring effects from years past. Some will disapaite on their own, while other's need to be addressed.

Champlain Islander · 12-10-2007, 10:37 AM

Quote:

As to pollution, its the same hopeless situation. I don't litter, but Lake Erie is still used for the discharge of manufacturing waste and a dump for medical waste. So how can what I do ever make a difference?

A good point that only emphasizes what I am saying. VC you don't litter and that is starting with one. So how can what I do ever make a difference? That is the main problem as I see it.The issue is so encompassing people think their singular work will never make a difference. True enough ....when you look at the math and the vast scope of the problem. What Gore, Bagley and other environmentalists or alarmists as you will, are pointing out is the problem. I am not as concerned about what size Gore"™s carbon imprint is as much as mine. I can't control his but can do something about mine. What I do find useful about Gore is that he has the courage to at least try to do something about an issue he is passionate about. The message he sends to all of us is far more important than how he personally lives. He is part of the media and his main goal should be to educate. I don't hold all the dire predictions that are flowing out there to be the total truth. I feel that the answer is probably somewhere in between all the theories. I hope so at least for the betterment of our planet. I am not advocatingdramatic lifestyle changes that take place right now and will cost us money. That would be ludicrous in view of the fact that science hasn't proven the need for drastic action at this point. We have found out over time that some things we took for granted were wrong. The Love Canal disaster comes to mind. At one point in time we thought that disposing of industrial wastes and heavy metals in a vacant lot shouldn't hurt anyone. The brain trust making that decision never considered that those toxins could seep into the ground water and make people die. They never considered that dust from that site could be spread by the rain and wind to impact people far away from that site. I am sure all people involved with that flawed way of thinking wish they could turn back the clock and take a different course of action. I see the Global Warming problem much the same way. My feeling is that we need to be cautious going forward but not let ourselves be blinded to the canary in a coal mine. I listened to Gore and feel it at least opened my eyes a little wider regarding the issue. I wonder why Lake Eire is still being used to dump waste. Millions of people live in close proximity to it and use that water for basic needs. How can an intelligent society condone polluting it for the sake of a corporation"™s bottom line? I suppose that falls along the same line of thinking that the amount of pollution would be diluted by the vast amount of water that the lake has. Same thinking as my vote doesn't really count I guess. It all starts with one.

Alsatian · 12-10-2007, 01:53 PM

1st: my global warming position: The climate may be warming on a global scale but not be caused materially by human behavior. The climate may be warming on a global scale and be materially caused by human behavior, but questions remain as to how significant the warming will be or the gravity of the effects. The predictions are all over the map. I am not convinced the science is mature on this, for which I call to witness the inability to explain through climate models major historical climate transients of the past such as the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warming Epoch. I don't buy the argument -- "it could happen, it doesn't hurt to change." Nope, it DOES hurt to change, and it isn't prudent to change without solid and reliable science on the subject. So much for where I stand on this. Furthermore, I have been wrong in the past and I may be wrong on this.

2nd: Many nations have made a big issue that they signed on to Kyoto and the United States has not signed on to Kyoto. I wonder if those nations that have signed on to Kyoto are in any position to deliver on the promises that treaty obliged them to satisfy? It is one thing to promise to reduce your emissions X% by 2012, it is quite another to deliver on the promise. I don't think any developed nation has done anything to reduce their total greenhouse gas emissions. They may have reduced the rate of increase, but I doubt that anyone can claim to emitting less CO2 in year X + 1 than they emitted in year X. So, it would appear to me that all the bruit about Kyoto is just a bunch of public posturing. I am ready to be corrected on this opinion by others who are better informed. I'm not sure all the above is correct.

3rd: I have installed compact flourescent lights in my house not because I am trying to reduce my carbon footprint but because I am trying to reduce my electricity bill. When I drive my Toyota Corolla to work rather than my Suburban it is because I'm trying to reduce my gasoline bill rather than my carbon footprint.

4th: The global warming hysteria put out by the media just doesn't stack up, it doesn't smell right. The shrill and insistent programmatic droning on about this issue sounds like a concocted agenda, not dispassionate, careful, deliberate, peer reviewed science. Too many people with insufficient backgrounds are throwing their opinions into the ring. It looks like people chasing a buck to me, chasing research grants. There are too many "inconvenient anomalies" that the global warming Cassandras neglect, such as why we can't explain the Little Ice Age, but we are for sure that our CO2 emissions are going to raise the global climate temperature and raise ocean levels Y-feet by 2050. Poppy-cock. Stuff 'n nonsense.