How to Reverse Global Warming

Posted December 4, 2007 | 08:47 PM (EST)



stumbleupon :How to Reverse Global Warming   digg: How to Reverse Global Warming   reddit: How to Reverse Global Warming   del.icio.us: How to Reverse Global Warming

Today, the Presidential Climate Action Project announces its recommendations to the next administration for a 100-day action plan to reverse global warming. This project, headquartered at the University of Colorado, is composed of 50 to 60 of the nation's leading environmentalists, climate scientists, and policy experts and we have worked for the past year to produce well over 100 key recommendations, including new laws, regulations, and executive orders, that will place the United States at the forefront of world action to save our planetary climate and environment.

We are calling on all candidates of both parties to pledge themselves to the kinds of actions we propose: upstream cap-and-auction; a zero carbon footprint for the U.S. government; elimination of carbon subsidies; dramatic steps in conservation and efficiency; and a host of other specific proposals. Our plan is based upon action in the first hundred days of 2009 because of the urgency of the threat, a threat to our national and international security. If we pass the tipping point at or about 450 parts per million of carbon dioxide emissions, which could come as early as 2012, many experts believe no amount of remediation will turn the tide back toward sanity and safety.

Climate change relates to oil, oil relates to petroleum imports, imports relate to military action, and military action encourages terrorism. Our climate is now a national security concern. We are trading young American lives for Persian Gulf oil so that we can drive energy-inefficient vehicles. This is our national policy and it happens to be massively immoral.

We are urging all Americans, regardless of party or ideology, to visit our website and join in our effort to encourage all presidential candidates to make an urgent, bold, and comprehensive commitment to reverse climate change.

Comments for this post are now closed

 
 

Comments
167
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)

Come on. Why are so many of you so narrow-minded. No wonder we can't get anything done. As with most major public policy and social behavior issues, this one deserves the positive thinking and action of as many of us as can possibly muster the ingenuity and energy to actually do something. This effort is a huge step in the right direction, along with many others. It should be applauded, not panned so extensively as it is here. I guess I'm surprised, especially since this is on the Huffington Post, not Human Events. Sen. Hart, in particular, deserves a lot of credit for his leadership on this and many other national security issues.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:52 AM on 12/07/2007

I agree with you to the importance of the climate threat. I think that Lester Brown is right (read B Plan) to state that the most urgent decision is to set in place a carbon tax. This tax could progressively raise to 1,5 $ per gasoline litter. The tax tool has an inconvenient ( a lot of people distrust taxes and the way the government uses them), but it brings a lot of advantages (easy to manage, raises the tag price discouraging the customer to use fossil fuel based products, brings money to invest for aid or new technology urgently needed).
We need a worldwide push for this carbon tax, focusing on airtravel, for a start (kerosine is now a NO tax fuel).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 AM on 12/06/2007

Joe Biden's plan for energy independance from Middle East Oil.

http://www.joebiden.com/assets/pdfs/energy_plan.pdf

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 AM on 12/06/2007

How to reverse the ozone hole?
Recall CFC's and the Antarctic Ozone hole? The fear was that radiation passing through the hole would cause damage to people and that the hole would spread. They passed a law restricting the way CFC's are used to decrease the size of the hole. Guess what? The hole grew after the legislation. I guess the problem was more complex than they thought.

The same is true here. They have this idea and they have built it into a political philosophy. IT was success with ozone that emboldens people to spread propaganda, they thinking the politicians are basically dense, and self-serving.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 PM on 12/05/2007

The Bush Administration, colluding with the oil industry, has worked deliberately to sink not only U.S., but global policy intended to avert the catastrophe of a rapidly changing climate.

They have has allowed global climate change to proceed, unimpeded " and even encouraged the melting of the polar icecaps, regardless of the devastation that coastal flooding, intensifying storm energy, changing disease vectors and migrating cvlimate patterns will wreak on the world"s human population. They have systematically suppressed scientific understanding; poisoned the well of public discourse; obfuscated the true nature and causes of the crisis; and used American power and influence to subvert global action.

These are crimes not only against human conscience (as in the case of genocide), but literally, against the very survival of our species.


Instead of working to reduce carbon emissions, it appears they worked to increase carbon emissions, perhaps to ensure that, before the Oil President gave up the reins in 2009, another decade of inaction had made global warming irreversible. So that even a new president, taking office in 2009, would be able to do little to reverse the trend toward catastrophic warming, species extinction, spreading disease vectors, and rising sea levels that could inundate America"s (and the world"s) coastal cities within a hundred years. And, of course, easier drilling beneath the poles without all that pesky ice.

The IPCC now says that we have only two or three years in which we " meaning the entire human race " must begin to take drastic, global action to reverse climate change.

Most observers sense that only the United States can truly lead such a crucial global campaign. But the United States, with Bush at the helm, is the leading agent working against that campaign.

So, for the next fourteen months, the United States will remain in retrograde motion, while the world anxiously awaits the end of the disastrous Bush Presidency. The American Congress and the American people remain unwilling to remove Bush from office before January 20, 2009.

That makes us complicit.


http://scorpionbowl.blogspot.com/2007/12/climate-crimes-against-humanity.html




    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:20 PM on 12/05/2007


Thanks for the great and informative post. I have always thought of you as an original and deep-thinker.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 PM on 12/05/2007


1. Gary Hart is among the smartest people in the WORLD. If he says it, I believe it.
2. Doesn't it make you wonder why the nay-sayers are republicans and the doers are Dems? This isn't a political issue! It effects the whole world.
3. It's obvious most of these negative bloggers didn't read (or understand) what he was saying. Criticizing what you don't understand is stupid.
4. We have to start somewhere. Even if it all turned out to be a false concern (!) changing our habits and cutting down our oil usage would be a good thing. We have to run out eventually. Anyone with children should be concerned since it probably won't effect you selfish people anyway.
5. Why do Democrats always have to have some evil ulterior motive, but Republicans' motives are always the moral ones? What a joke.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 12/05/2007

I've read these comments and I have a question. What is in it for the scientists who believe that global warming exists? How is this so called conspiricy going to benefit them? I can see how somebody in business might make up something to make more money, but I don't think the scientist are really in it for the money.

Also, if the conspiricy is to put the big oil companies out of business by suggesting we use alternate forms of energy, I don't buy it. The energy companies will adapt to what the consumers want. If the majority of consumers demand solar or wind energy, the energy companies will provide that and make a profit on it. Same with the car manufacturers. Can you imagine how well off the auto industry would be in America if they produced the best mpg cars in the world?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:03 PM on 12/05/2007


Maybe this will help:

Have Mr. Gore quit flying around in private jets. One flight for him from LA to NY burns more fuel and carbon emmision than roughly 50 SUV's driven daily for more than a year. (also, look at the caravan of suv's for his Nobel prize party.) Have him shut down a huge portion of his house. He expends the energy of more than 20 families in one home alone.

Tell Ms. Streisand to shut up 5 of her six homes to save energy, they are all heated or maintained so she can just go to them any time they want.

Quit making movies, there is a ton of wasted energy there. I just watched the making of Pirates three and they joked about using enough lighting to light a small city. The hydraulics used over 1000 gallons of oil a minute.

All these ultra rich that have everything, want all the working class to do everything, but do very little if nothing themselves. They couldn't play on their yachts, go on cruises, fly their private jets, etc.

Bali climate summit....everyone is flying in in their own private jet which they will have to fly to another airport because they don't have room for them all. TAKE ONE JET with everyone on it.

Good grief, if all these people raising a rucos about global warming would just practice what they preach would be a good start and actually be showing LEADERSHIP.

Oh by the way, buying carbon offsets is a joke. If for the fun of it you say everyone can have 1000 carbs a day and you want to use 1,800 a day buying the ones I don't use (say 800) doesn't solve anything, you are still used up 2000 carbs. True conservation would be that we both use less, my 200 & you 600 for a total of 800 and not 2000. True conservation and a goal worth working for.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:54 PM on 12/05/2007

When will liberals stop opposing wind farms off the Cape and in the mountains of Northwest Maine?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 12/05/2007
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Gary Hart›
 

 Site  Web ask.com