Monday, June 9, 2008

Global climate change and the coming environmental clash

Previously posted (by me) at Myspace:

The "Environmental Movement", if you could call it that, will cease to be relevant in its current state in the near future. It's all gotta change. Well, ok, maybe not everything.
The looming crisis is not because environmentalism has been a failure, but because much of the actions that we have demanded (and I strongly include myself in the "we") in pursuit of its goals contained false assumptions. The primary false assumption is that there is no negative environmnetal impact to pursuing positive environmental goals. Global climate change turns that idea on its head. Expending energy has a cost in increased global warming and accelerating global climate change no matter what the goal. I've coined the term "carbon benefit analysis" to get people thinking about this concretely. The energy costs of implimenting environmental cleanup actions, including the energy costs and lost energy efficiency of reducing pollution, such as emissions controls, have to be measured and balanced to determine the net effect of the action. What is the trade-off (carbon benefit) between 1 part per billion and 10 parts per billion in environmental impact vs. global warming? What is the carbon benefit of deisel over gas? Of 50mpg (half the CO2) and 15% greater hydrogen sulfide output and 25mpg (twice the CO2) and 15% less HS? These are real questions which can't be ignored any longer by serious environmentalists.
The concept is already integrated into the slogan "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle", but I doubt that the originators of the phrase realized it could (and should) also could include environmental cleanup and mitigation. The key word in that statement is "REDUCE".
There is some hope of course and not everything is a trade-off. Global climate change is a very nasty actor in a myriad of ways, so many key aims of environmentalists look even more attractive by their added positive climatic effects. These include leaving pristine areas pristine, allowing native lands such as shorelines, etc. to return to native, and generally getting people to reduce their impact through conservation of resources and energy (i.e. turn off your damn tv! Buy locally!).
Having said that, environmentalists (like myself) need to make some very difficult decisions moving forward. We need to do intense soul searching to develop an integral concept of "What's the Point", and develop priorities on what trade-offs are worth making. The landscape is changing.
Not my last post on this topic, just getting the ball rolling....

No comments: