Here’s an excellent write-up that describes the ways in which we are stealing from future generations to feed ourselves and the parallels between doing so and any other Ponzi scheme.

PONZICONOMY: Our global pyramid scheme

I’ve read Plan B 2.0, an excellent book, and notice that there is a link to a new version Plan B 4.0 by Lester Brown.

Don’t forget, the article doesn’t even mention the fact that not only is the oil at the pump a subsidized and limited resource, so is the oil we pour on our corn as fertilizer.

That’s right, industrial fertilizers are petroleum products. We’re eating oil!! That can’t be good for either our health or our long term prospects in terms of a very large population dependent on a fossil, non-renewable, resource.

Please read this article about Carter’s 1977 speech and tell me now that Carter was bad for the country and Reagan was good. Go ahead. Tell me now which of those two presidents had the right long term plan for this country. Tell me how much worse off we would have been had we continued with Carter’s energy plan. Tell me that this speech of Carter’s didn’t detail a large chunk of the events that have now come to pass as a result of not following his plan.

Do you think that we would have the need to take over Iraq as the United States National Petroleum Park?
Do you think we would have been chanting “Drill Baby Drill”?
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, a significantly reduced demand for oil would have left today’s oil-rich nations in an economic state where they would be less able to fund terrorism?
Do you think that perhaps they would have been less angry at the U.S. and less likely to commit the attrocity of 9/11?

The first two points seem obvious. The last two are, of course, highly speculative. However, had the U.S. taken the lead in renewable energy from 1977 forward, it seems obvious, at least to me, that the technology would be far beyond where it is today. The technology would be providing a major portion of the world’s energy. The U.S. would have had a strong economy based on selling renewable energy around the world instead of a weak one based on importing an ever increasing percentage of a limited resource. As a direct result of all the renewable energy that does not now but would have existed in this alternate universe, the price of oil would be very low indeed. There would just not be much demand for it.

Certainly we would not have the psychotic level of demand we have today, of which, 25% of the world’s demand is ours here in the U.S. When I say psychotic, I really mean it too. Our view of the world and of energy are a true split with the reality of the limited resource and of global climate.

So, as election day draws near, please consider whether we want to continue to “Drill Baby Drill” our way into the oblivion of extinction taking many beautiful species with us or whether we want to at least try something new. Perhaps, just perhaps, we should finally try some of this newfangled renewable energy. And, perhaps, just perhaps, we will stave off the worst effects of global warming, energy insecurity, and our economic crisis all at once.

See, not only would renewable energy give us a stable source of energy, which is a lot more important than energy independence, it would create a whole new industry here in the U.S. We could have a renewable energy boom similar to the internet boom of the 90s. This would stimulate our economy now and provide stable, clean energy for tomorrow, a tomorrow that may otherwise not be there at all for our species.

Vote for clean energy. Vote Obama.

(Don’t love Obama? He wasn’t my first choice either. He is by far the best choice available now. Drill Baby Drill is not the answer to any of our problems, short term or long term.)

Here’s yet another incredibly eloquent speech by Obama. I find it very refreshing that we have a candidate that can correctly pronounce place names and even the word nuclear. Further, some of the sentiments expressed in this speech are sentiments I’ve been hoping to hear expressed for a long time. Here is someone who can show real leadership, something we have been sorely lacking for 7 years.

I you prefer to read the text, rather than listen to a 36 minute video, the text is available on the Obama webiste.

Top U.S. Scientists and Economists Call For Swift, Deep Cuts In Global Warming Pollution
More than 1,700 Say Early Reductions Can Benefit Economy

I must admit that this is in the pattern ordinarily used by the climate change skeptics. They love to quote a large number of scientists that dispute that climate change is real or dispute that it is human caused.

However, it has been my experience that such claims are often made when the scientists listed largely fall into one of three categories, scientists in a field not related to climatology, names of people who may or may not be scientists but have no peer reviewed papers to their names, or known ExxonMobil employees.

Perhaps you might say that these 1,700 fall into similar categories on the other side. However, in this case, according to the League of Conservation Scientists, among the names are:

The signatories, compiled by UCS, include six Nobel Prize winners in science or economics, 31 NAS members, and more than 100 IPCC authors and editors

The full PDF is available for download at this link

I scanned this list and found a very high percentage of relevant expertise. There are some names without full qualifications. However, most are listed with full degrees and job titles. Most are in fields that would be highly relevant to either climate change, economics, or fields such as agriculture and biology that would be relevant in assessing the expected damage from climate change and the amount to which we could mitigate the damage and what it would take. All of these are also relevant given the nature of this letter.

The most important point to take from all of this is that taking strong action on climate change will actually have a very high return on investment and not only makes ecological sense but good solid economic sense as well. This is important information to combat the claims of many in the right wing who claim that such action will destroy our economy.

Far from it. Strong action is required to save both the environment and the economy.

The economy cannot thrive without a healthy biosphere.

Here’s another incredibly persuasive, inspiring, and informative video from Al Gore. He’s such an excellent speaker and offers real analysis and solutions to the crisis of our time, climate change. This is the big one. There is no problem facing humanity today that approaches the seriousness and certainty of climate change left unchecked. Please watch this enlightening, empowering, and uplifting video. Watch for his analogy regarding tar sands and shale; it’s a classic.

TED: Al Gore: New thinking on the climate crisis — Note: I recommend downloading the mp4. I had problems trying to watch it on the web page. It’s under 100M. Your mileage may vary.

Remember, the extremely conservative estimate from the IPCC is for a billion climate refugees by 2050. Is there anyone out there that believes that the world economy can support such a disastrous occurrence? Is there anyone out there that thinks that this will not cause a serious and painful decline in human population? Is there anyone out there that thinks this would not cause global civilizational collapse?

We have the technology to solve this problem today. For the U.S. to do our part, we will experience a new economy based on sustainability. This will create whole new industries. This will create many new business opportunities. Already, Tesla Motors and Zap Car are preparing for the new economy, one in which they may displace the aging and dying U.S. auto manufacturers who whine to the government for aid rather than building cars that last and that people will want.

Already, vast solar arrays are beginning to be installed. New York City has a pilot project with working tidal turbines. People are installing pilot projects for wave power generators on the west coast. Wind is already cheaper than many existing power technologies and, though it faces objections from local politicians, is a technology whose cost of energy supply rivals that of our fossil fuel sources, even before the real costs of CO2 are calculated.

We must act quickly and decisively to fight climate change. For our survival, for our economy, for our way of life, and for our very lives, we must act now.

There is also a description of Earth the Sequel on EDF’s website. There’s a book signing in Manhattan. Details below pasted from an email I received from EDF.

Join Fred Krupp and Suzanne Vega for a book signing on March
10th!

***********************

Are you ready for the clean energy future that’s about to
explode? Don’t miss this energizing book talk and signing event
on Monday, March 10th at Barnes and Noble’s Union Square
location.

Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp will talk about
his exciting new book, Earth: The Sequel – The Race to Reinvent
Energy and Stop Global Warming. The event will also feature
Grammy Award-winning singer and songwriter Suzanne Vega.

Earth: The Sequel describes a high-stakes race that has already
begun. It involves the smartest minds in America, from venture
capitalists in Silicon Valley to scientists in the Alaskan
wilderness to inventors in garages. They are competing to
reinvent energy as we know it and solve the world’s global
warming crisis.

Come meet the author and get inspired by the clean energy
revolution about to explode.

Who: Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp and special
guest Suzanne Vega

What: Earth: The Sequel book talk and signing event

When: Monday, March 10th – 7:00pm

Where: Barnes & Noble, Union Square – 33 East 17th Street:
http://action.environmentaldefense.org/ct/81aE_Y610zQy/

For the West Coast crowd, there’s also a signing on Sunday 3/16 in Portland, OR. at Powel’s Books.

I’ll be at the Manhattan signing. Though, since I don’t look much like my avatar you probably won’t recognize me.