Checks and Balances

Checks and balances. Have you ever thought about how amazing those two words are? In the simplest sense, writing checks and figuring out how much money you have left after you've written them. In the larger sense, if something is depleted or out of whack, something comes along to reestablish order.

Which brings me to ANWR....

"On the northern edge of our continent, stretching from the peaks of the Brooks Range across a vast expanse of tundra to the Beaufort Sea, lies Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. An American Serengeti, the Arctic Refuge continues to pulse with million-year-old ecological rhythms. It is the greatest living reminder that conserving nature in its wild state is a core American value." --National Resources Defense Council

In the '60s, some forward-thinking environmentalists designated a protected zone in and off the coast of Alaska where the land and sea is thriving. And our erstwhile President George W. Bush, (who doesn't believe in checks and balances) is trying to convince us that it's time to mine the protected zone of the Alaska Wildlife Refuge for oil (that may reach the market fifteen years from now) with no thought, as usual, to the balance of the world or that the real solution is alternative sources of energy. And it seems like the Congress and CNN think that we're in favor of this. We're not. No forward thinking educated person is in favor of this. And I, for one, will be really unhappy if the representatives that we've supported pander for one second to a misguided, dangerous, skewed irresponsible administration and media outlet (that seems to also have no checks and balances...)

Which brings me, coincidentally, to poison ivy and dandelions. As global warming increases and the amount of CO2 in the air increases, it turns out, poison ivy and dandelions will thrive. (And coincidentally brilliantly convert CO2 to oxygen as they do.)
Checks and balances. When something's out of whack, something comes along to recreate a balance.

Dandelions -- those funny little flowers that blow in the wind and plant themselves everywhere. Poison ivy, which for its preservation (and perhaps ours), zaps you if you come anywhere near it. And maybe, just maybe, we should stop using herbicides on dandelions and poison ivy and let them do their job? Maybe we should designate protected poison ivy and dandelion fields (and stay the hell out of them) so that they can, by propagating, reestablish through their photosynthetic genius, a balance in the air. (Which, by the way, might help the bee problem because it would give them a protected area, away from pesticides and human pathogens, in which to propagate and recolonize.)

Bees, it turns out, love dandelions.

But sometimes, in order to have checks and balances, you have to have a responsible person writing the checks. And it seems to me, it may be time for an audit.

Comments

[mayzebra]

THAT"S THE SOLUTION!!! We need to genetically engineer poison ivy and dandelions to find some semi-effective, fast-spreading, non-toxic, carbon-eater that's eye candy and get everyone to plant it in their gardens, so we can continue down the oil burning road. Meanwhile it continues to mutate and spread, wiping out the human population... or maybe we could make it edible while we're at it and solve the hunger problem too!

[tiggrrl]

And the VP's office censored our six pages of data showing the health risks of global warming: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/557816900?z00m=15900053

[kingofscotts]

Mrs. Ephron,

Perhaps it is statements such as these that dimish your credibility.

"We're not. No forward thinking educated person is in favor of this."

I for one am educated (M.S. Environmental Science), and forward thinking.
However I partially disagree with you. While the idea of keeping ANWR pristine and free of drilling is a great though and possibly the right answer, you (along with so many others) ignore the facts of our problem. Clearly the answer to the larger issue is to develop alternative fuels. The problem is that we don't have them yet and even if we had the magic fuel today it would not solve our energy problems. Just think how many vehicles are owned and being bought everyday that require traditional fuels to operate. How long will these vehicles be in service? The answer is clearly a long time. Nobody could possibly suggest that even if a fantastic new fuel (and the vehicles that run on it) were available right now that we would legislate that all people send their cars to the scrap yard and cough up the 40k to buy the vehicle.

Therefore we must have a balanced approach. One that recognizes the long term need to end our use of traditional fuels for transportation but also recognizes that for a few decades at least a tremendous amount of traditional fuel will be needed.

[Cathexis]

You make good points, kos, but ... where in Ms Ephron's post does she state anything to the contrary? It seems to me that you are arguing points she did not make.

Now, if you are going to assume that the only way we can achieve the points you make is by drilling in ANWR, then yes ... you have a point of disagreement. But it is not about end results, it is about "how to implement."

[GuyRC]

I'm not sure that Dandelions sequester carbon that well. Trees do because they live a long time and develop wooden trunks. At the present we are cutting down trees and burning them faster than they are growing, and we are drilling into fossil fuel deposits faster than we are burying trees and other vegetation to sequester carbon. I think the problem is simply human population, humans burn stuff, and there are increasing numbers of us. It would be smart to burn less per capita to balance the increase in population, but that would be a sacrifice to many that they simply won't believe is justified. On the other hand supply and demand will eventually take over. Prices will go up, people will change against their will. I hope we can save a few natural ecosystems despite the demand, but i doubt that will be possible.