Bill McKibben pulls it all together today in his Washington Post essay explaining what's at stake if President Obama sticks to his decision to let the coming climate meeting in Cophenhagen fail.
Try to re-imagine World War II in this context. Just before the invasion of Normandy, General Eisenhower decides not to send the Allied forces into Normandy. It's too windy, too choppy, the risk of failure too great. Instead he says, "I will work with Allied leaders toward a more modest interim invasion and I assure you that we will have a really big invasion next year." That is exactly where we are on global warming when it comes to US leadership. The fossil fuel industry sets the agenda, the agenda is to delay action, and politicians from both parties dutifully follow.
I remain audaciously hopeful that my president could pull this off if he chooses to. The question is, will he?
Follow John Passacantando on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JPassacantando
Helena Christensen: Meltdown: Images of What We Lose When the Glaciers Disappear
As with many poorer countries, Peru is bearing the brunt of a problem it has done little to cause. Its emissions account for only 0.1% of greenhouse gasses, but climate change has affected all aspects of life there.
