Comments 1 to 8:

1. Tom Curtis at 09:32 AM on 5 May, 2014

   I am very much looking forward to the skewering George "people have a right to be bigots" Brandis by Ellerton.  His recent comments complaining about the infringement of the right to free speech of climate change deniers (who from 2% of the scientific literature receive 50% of the press coverage, and nearly 100% of the commentary in The Australian) is patently absurd, and yet more evidence that Australia has a government of climate change deniers - determined to place posterity in hock for the short term benefit of investors.

   0 0
2. Trevor_S at 10:44 AM on 5 May, 2014

   "People who campaign against slavery don't own slaves. People who campaign against smoking don't smoke. People who campaign against violence against women do not commit violence against women. And so it goes for almost all causes - except for climate change. Then, somehow, it becomes not only acceptable but almost obligatory for people who campaign against fossil fuels to burn more than their fair share of them."

   "You have people who support a cause in the abstract, general sense, while acting against the cause in their personal life. The typical rationalisation is to view one's personal contribution to a problem as being an insignificant part of the whole problem. But this ignores the fact that the problem results from vast numbers of people making similarly insignificant contributions. It will be just as hard for any of them to stop and they can all make the same excuse that their bit doesn't matter"

   -The Guardian Comments section

   We have to stop emitting first.  My parter and I are working hard to get our emisisons as close to zero as we can.   How can we convince others to recue thier emisisons if we won't ?

   0 0
3. Michael Whittemore at 15:32 PM on 5 May, 2014

   Trevor, I don't think a person needs to have zero emissions before they have the right to support the science and ask the government to do something about it. If everyone asked the power companies to supply them with green electricity (like i do) it would be a start, but that does not mean factors and businesses will do the same. Big and small business needs to be taxed to give them an incentive to reduce their carbon foot print. This is the same for everyday people, you reduce your carbon foot print because you care, but that is not good enough, skeptics need to be forced to care with a tax. If skeptics have a problem with the science they can do their own science or reference science that proves their point, until then a tax needs to be introduced.

   0 0
4. wili at 23:14 PM on 5 May, 2014

   The legislator who authored the bill outlawing indoor smoking in my state was himself a smoker. He recognized it as an addiction, and he recognized that he and other smokers did not have the right to polute other people's lungs.

   We are indeed in the position of having to be 'slave holders advocating for emancipation.' Of course, it's good to try to free as many of your own 'carbon slaves' as you can, but that alone is not going to end the 'peculiar institution' we find ourselves inevitably participating in.

   But yes, by all means, join me and others in not flying or taking any (motorized) long-distance trips unless it is absolutely necessary (and how often is that). Minimize or eliminate meat and dairy and car trips. Consume little and consume local.  Encourage others to do the same, individuals and institutions.

   But also demand changes in legislation and demand divestment from ff...

   We have to be able to "chew gum and whistle at the same time." The merchants of death are certainly multi-tasking and are very well organized in their very successful campaign to make the planet essentially unlivable for our kids and for most other species.

   0 0
5. localis at 04:27 AM on 6 May, 2014

   Until enough of us are dramatically and obviously reducing our carbon emissions others won't feel any compulsion to do likewise. It will only be when the worlds' more conspicuous fossil fuel consumers start to feel some guilt and embarrassment about their life-style that there may be some hope of a better future. Those of us who are making a determined effort to reduce our emissions are but a tiny fraction of the population for the majority will always blame the government for their own lack of action at an individual level. Until the media and governments make a forthright condemnation of the denialist agenda I fear little will change.

   0 0
6. Michael Whittemore at 13:38 PM on 6 May, 2014

   localis, I pay a little more for my electricity so that I am supplied with carbon free (green) electricity. When I fly I pay extra to offset my carbon emissions, I also drive a small car.. But its a choice.. because I research climate change, I know.. But we can't expect everyone or even more than 5% of the population of the world to know anything about climate change or about a carbon foot print. My point is even if this 5% of people reduced their emissions, no one would even notice because governments are not passing laws that force people to reduce their emissions. At the end we all need energy to live, we cant be expected to sit around doing nothing in the hope to reduce our carbon foot print. Electricity companies need to go green so as everyone can live normally. Carbon tax that gives the revenue back to the poor is spot on.

   0 0
7. John Hartz at 01:17 AM on 7 May, 2014

   White House Hangout: Commitment to #ActOnClimate

   Phil Larson
   May 06, 2014
   10:58 AM EDT

   Today, the White House is hosting an event highlighting the release of the Third U.S. National Climate Assessment – a major scientific report on the impacts of climate change on all regions of the United States and key sectors of the national economy. The report was called for in the President’s Climate Action Plan, launched last June, to cut carbon pollution in America, prepare communities for the impacts of climate change, and lead international efforts to fight this global challenge.

   The event will include remarks by senior Obama Administration officials and experts who contributed to the development of the new National Climate Assessment. Tune in to WhiteHouse.gov/live at 2 p.m. ET.

   And on Thursday, we’re co-hosting a conversation with the Weather Channel about the current state of climate science and impacts and what work we are doing to make a difference. Use the hashtag #ActOnClimate to ask questions and join the conversation with these participants via Google+ Hangout on Thursday, May 8 at 2 p.m. ET:

   • Sam Champion, host, The Weather Channel
   • Carl Parker, Meteorologist, Hurricane Specialist, The Weather Channel
   • Kathy Sullivan, Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
   • Dan Utech, White House Domestic Policy Council
   • Mike Boots, White House Council on Environmental Quality
   • Laura Petes, White House Office of Science & Technology Policy

   Find out more about the National Climate Assessment, and check out some of the graphics and videos about the findings by visiting the website here.

   Watch today’s event at 2 p.m. ET, and then join and ask your questions for Thursday’s White House hangout on the National Climate Assessment at 2 p.m. ET right here, or on the White House Google+ page.

   Phil Larson is Senior Advisor for Space and Innovation at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
   
   

   0 0
8. John Hartz at 01:41 AM on 7 May, 2014

   Climate change: what are the worst impacts facing America?

   A government report has found the US is already experiencing the effects of climate change. Karl Mathiesen, with your help, investigates where it will cut deepest.

   Join the debate. Post your views in the comments below, email karl.mathiesen.freelance@guardian.co.uk or tweet @karlmathiesen

   This EcoAudit post is now live.

   0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.