Month 8, Day 7: Nasty and Short (But Not Brutish)

The New York Times had a front-page article on how Russia is getting badly whacked by drought. Any mention of “climate change” in the piece? Hah.

As Russia’s food infrastructure crumbles under the pressure of a terrible drought, it’s tempting to think of it as a problem for “them,” not for “us.” But America isn’t immune to the devastating effects of global climate change. Russia’s crisis is part and parcel of the same complex set of phenomena that gave us Manhattan’s recent heat wave — and the freak snowstorms that brought Washington, DC to a standstill last winter. If we as a nation are to undertake meaningful action on behalf of the planetary systems that sustain us, the Jeffersonian ideal of a “well-informed citizenry” is more essential than ever: the fact that the phrase “climate change” does not appear at all in an article about the Russian drought is an unfortunate abdication of journalistic responsibility.

Warren Senders

Month 8, Day 5: Many Happy Returns!

Bill McKibben wrote this absolutely kick-ass piece, which went up in a bunch of places. I was inspired. Then I read Bob Cesca’s piece at Huffington Post and was further inspired. So I combined the two in a long letter to POTUS, who hasn’t heard from me for at least a week.

Dear President Obama,

The oil flowing from the site of the Deepwater Horizon disaster has finally been stopped, and for that we are all deeply grateful. But there is another spill which has not been capped — and if this one doesn’t get dealt with, all of us will be the losers.

I’m talking about the uncontrolled gusher of misrepresentations, evasions and equivocations that come from the mouths of BP spokesmen, from the PR outlets of Big Oil, from the offices of Senators and Representatives who have been taken over by petroleum interests…and, alas, from your own administration.

It is surely tempting to sugar-coat unpleasant facts; time and again we have learned that the political process is unkind to those who speak the truth bluntly and accurately. But there is a time for the actual truth, and now is that time.

The truth is — that BP spilled almost five million barrels of oil. If they’ve cleaned up three-quarters of it, that leaves about fifty-three million gallons, which is five times the size of the Exxon Valdez.

The truth is — that BP lied from the beginning about how much was flowing; far from cooperating in the cleanup process, they have done as much as they could to hide the details, restrict the flow of information, and make it impossible for accurate measurements to be taken.

The truth is — that the toxic dispersants they’ve used haven’t evaporated; they’ve dissolved into the seawater along with the oil. That doesn’t make the oil go away; it just hides it, and leaves the waters of the Gulf of Mexico a toxic chemical stew that will destroy ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.

The truth is — that BP was criminally careless in their handling of the Deepwater Horizon platform, and criminally careless in their handling of the disaster.

The truth is — that carelessness and mendacity are part and parcel of the strategic toolkit of Big Oil, day in and day out.

The truth is — that nobody in the United States should take anything an oil company representative utters at face value. To paraphrase Mary McCarthy, “Every word is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the.’ “

The truth is — that global climate change is a slow-motion disaster unfolding before our horrified eyes, and it has been made possible by the malfeasance of our energy sector.

The truth is — that Americans need to hear the truth, and they need to hear it from their elected representatives.

And the truth is, Mr. President — that means you.

We can’t afford happy talk right now. We need to know how bad it’s gotten if we’re going to find ways to stop it from getting worse.

Yours Sincerely,

Warren Senders

PS — Happy Birthday!

Month 7, Day 2: All The Specious Equivalence That’s Fit To Print

Newsweek has treated climatologist Michael Mann pretty shamefully. After Penn State’s Inquiry Panel completely exonerated Mann, Newsweek finally printed a pathetic excuse for a retraction, without acknowledging their own part in defaming his reputation.

It would be great to have actual journalism in this country, wouldn’t it?

It isn’t just the newspapers that have to retract their misleading reports about climatologist Michael Mann, whose work was unfairly maligned and misrepresented. Newsweek itself, which accused Mann and his colleagues of “massaging” their data, has some apologies to make and a retraction or two to print. Newsweek’s earlier articles on the “climategate” non-scandal were factually flawed, riddled with omissions and decontextualizations, and written carelessly and sloppily. So-called “journalism” of that standard is more appropriate for the celebrity beat; when reporting on science, it should be the first thought of a responsible news writer to make sure the truth is conveyed accurately. By hewing instead to a policy of spurious equivalence, where a fact from a scientist is “balanced” with a lie from an industry-funded spokesperson, Newsweek has helped damage the reputation of a man whose work on the science of climate change is (as PSU’s Investigatory Committee stated this week) beyond reproach. Michael Mann has been working to help all of us understand the facts of global warming, the greatest existential threat humans have ever faced. Newsweek has been obscuring the facts and aiding the forces of denial. We are all diminished by such irresponsibility.

Warren Senders

Month 5, Day 28: Looking The Other Way

FishOutOfWater has his usual mind-bendingly scary diary at Dkos. That motivated me to sit down, but what came out was a response to a New York Times article from a couple of days ago. It’s more in my “Oil and Coal Reward Evil, Stupidity and Irresponsibility” series. I will write something on the Arctic, perhaps tomorrow.

We learn once again that there were warning signs of the impending disaster on the Deepwater Horizon, but that they were ignored. This should surprise no one; the oil and coal industries have had a lot of experience ignoring the signs of impending disasters. The siren call of quick profit drowns out the voices of caution, care and conscience, leaving our nation’s energy economy under the control of forces motivated entirely by profit, unhindered by any sense of responsibility to the greater good. British Petroleum’s behavior has been shameful, yes — but the entire fossil energy sector has a history of rewarding shameful, callous and irresponsible behavior. If ecocidal oil spills, coal mine explosions, and terrifying increases in world temperature levels can’t persuade us to kick our fossil fuel addiction, then we too are ignoring the signs of a planetary emergency that will make the Gulf spill seem small.

Warren Senders

Year 1, Month 1, Day 4: A Fax to the White House

Dear President Obama,

The urgency of the climate crisis is without a doubt increasing by the day. Yet our national media persists in fostering the misconception that there is doubt about the causes, effects and possible remedies for anthropogenic global warming. And (tragically) they appear to be succeeding.

If meaningful climate-change treaties are to be ratified, if meaningful legislation is to be passed, it will be because
you fought for it in the arena of public opinion. Please, sir — use the presidential “bully pulpit” to make the case for America’s full participation in global efforts to combat catastrophic climate change. We must lead; if we cannot lead, at least let us lend a hand, rather than hinder the efforts of others.

Thank you,

Warren Senders

This was handwritten on the back of a previously used piece of paper and faxed at around 10 am this morning. I’ll email it in a couple of minutes.

The White House FAX number is: 202-456-2461

The White House web page is:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

Go tell them something. Keep the pressure on.

The Corporatocracy cannot save itself or us.

It really looks as if the only way we can save a recognizable planet is to create an unrecognizable economy:

…the problem of climate change legislation is economic as well as being political. We will discover a world order governed by an ideology called neoliberalism, in which a great surplus of capital, evident in the 1970s but having grown each decade since then, makes government into neoliberal government, government as a conduit for investor profits.

Neoliberal government, government under the conditions of dollar hegemony, global governance, the WTO, and so on, as have been increasingly applicable since the 1970s, is responsible mainly to the global neoliberal economy. If they hope to attract any business in their countries, governments around the world must provide an “appropriate business climate,” which in practical terms means they must cater to the profits system, the system which has produced 793 billionaires for our globe amidst a bottom half of humanity which lives off of less than $2.50/day. Thus the dramatic privatizations which have taken place over the last three decades around the world.

(snip)

If we are to grant the human race the freedom to think about devoting lifetimes to stewardship of Earth’s ecosystems, we will have to grant the human race a prior freedom FROM economic need. This means a rededication to the problems of food, clothing, and shelter, the problems of FUNDAMENTAL economic need (you know, nobody really needs a Mercedes) in light of the great initial retrenchment in resources which will go along with an international agreement to phase out the production of fossil fuels.

If we can’t agree upon an economy which provides everyone with the fundamentals, an economy of basic human rights, then what we’re likely to get are a bunch of last-minute, slapdash measures, committed in the expected panic of massive weather disruption and failing annual crops, which will hurt an awful lot of people. Imagine a carbon tax so onerous as to make air conditioning unaffordable in 110 degree (Fahrenheit) heat, or water restrictions which make it unaffordable for people to grow their own food under conditions of skyrocketing food prices. (Remember, most of the continental American west will be altered by the melting of the icepack atop the Sierras and Rockies, with the consequent drying up of water resources for Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and so on.)

There’s not much “on the other hand” that anyone can point to. But I think that an economy which reflected economic justice to the peoples of this world would probably rely a whole lot more on barter, and would be profoundly local. Right now, those of us who “own” our houses probably send those mortgage payments to corporate offices in some other state; our bills are paid by and to banks in Delaware or South Dakota or some other damn place; our salad greens come from California, our tasty Clementines from Spain.

If survival of the species depends on reinventing our economic systems, creating a way to live that’s better than what we’ve already tried…can we do it?

4 Oct 2009, 11:25pm
environment:
by

1 comment

  • Meta

  • SiteMeter

  • Brighter Planet

    Brighter Planet's 350 Challenge
  • What music will become extinct?

    Every day, more bad news on climate change.

    Fortunately, we’ve recently begun to initiate the process of agreeing on a framework for the development of a concept that will allow us to frame the discussion which will impact the structuring of a procedure for developing a methodology that makes it possible to begin to finally PAY SOME ATTENTION TO A GLOBAL CRISIS!

    I am not a climate scientist. I’m a scientifically literate musician. Climate change scares me for dozens of reasons. And it makes me deeply and terribly sad.

    With rising sea levels, many island nations will lose much of their land, or even cease to exist. Which brings me to tonight’s question:

    What music will become extinct?

    more »