<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
This was my blog day post and it got picked up by 350.org.<br>
__<br>
I have really begun to think that Obama has made a colossal blunder in
the way that he has chosen to handle climate change. It would seem to
me that his presidency will be evaluated by history on the manner in
which he has reacted to this crisis. It won't be Iraq, Bush's war, nor
even Afghanistan… now known as Obama's War. It won't be health care.
But those are the issues on which he has chosen to spend his time and
his political capital. <br>
<br>
It could be argued that he did not <i>choose</i> Iraq and Afghanistan.
True about Iraq but he certainly has, from the days of the campaign,
chosen to play in Afghanistan. <br>
<br>
It is the focus on health care that concerns me and makes me question
his judgment. It has the ring of a young man trying to prove that he
could get done what Clinton could not, taking Obama forever out of
Clinton's shadow.<br>
<br>
But this is not issue number one. It won't determine the fact of our
economy, or of our comfortable lifestyle. Climate Change will. Failure
to address the biggest elephant in the room is a way to be trampled and
I don't want my children to suffer for Obama's failure to take his
biggest challenge head on. <br>
<br>
In the mean time, opposition to Obama has had the opportunity to hone
their economic arguments about big government and the costs to the tax
payers. If the opposition to the economic bailouts has this ring, and
the opposition to health insurance reform has this ring, what do you
think will be the key element of the Republican opposition to doing
anything about climate change? I can just hear Boehner and McConnel
droning on now while Glen Beck stirs up the troops by labeling them
"Commies". <br>
<br>
There is only a very short time between now and the next meeting of the
United Nations Climate Change Conference - Copenhagen. The best Obama
can bring to the meeting is a flawed bill from the House of
Representatives, a draft of a bill from the US Senate and a history of
having climate change treaties not being ratified in the Senate. The
prospects are bleak. <br>
<br>
At this point, Obama has yet to expend any political capital to try and
get a climate change bill passed in the Senate. Most of the heavy
lifting about the economics of this issue has been carried by Joseph
Romm at the Climate Progress blog. Even today, <a
href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/10/15/entergy-ceo-leonard-global-warming/">Romm
cited Entergy CEO J. Wayne Leonard</a> on Climate Change.
<blockquote>We
are virtually certain that climate change is occurring, and occurring
because of man’s activities. We’re virtually certain the probability
distribution curve is all bad. There’s no good things that’s going to
come of this. But what’s uncertain is exactly which one of those things
are going to occur and in what time frame. In the probability
distribution curve is about a 50% probability that about half of all
species will become extinct or be subject to extinction over this
period of time. What we will never know on an ex ante basis is whether
or not man be one of those casualties or not.<br>
<br>
We condemn Wall Street for taking risks with our economy — risks
that all of you are trying very hard to reverse — but at the same time
we’re taking exactly the same kind of risks, with no upside whatsoever,
with regard to our climate, failing to practice even the basic risk
management techniques in terms of climate change reduction.</blockquote>
In
the same post, he quotes Carol Browner as saying it would be a “big
mistake” if Congress passed a clean energy bill without a cap on
emissions. <br>
<br>
I agree with her assessment. I just don't think that this Congress has
the courage to do that. There are too many who are too willing to
compromise too much for the sake of another vote. So, we will invest in
oxymoronic clean coal technologies until we figure out that it is too
late. We will shift to burning wood at our power plants because it will
be called a "renewable" and the CO2 will fill the skies as before. <br>
<br>
This the the issue where science and politics are on a collision
course. We must not let the politicians win. How I wish that there were
Green willing to stand up and challenge Barbara Boxer in the Senatorial
Race this year. Her Republican Opposition seems to be demonstrating
their ineptitude at every turn, though Fiorina could bankroll whatever
she wants for as long as she wants. DeVore might have the so many manic
Republican votes locked up that she will drop out rather than throw
good money after bad and we know that DeVore's solution to everything
is to go nuclear. <br>
<br>
The challenge from a Green would be all about doing the right thing,
about standing for ones values and not the value of a contribution. If
done right, it would be about correcting Obama's big blunder and saving
humanity
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="80">--
"Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this Earth" Roberto Clemente
Wes Rolley
17211 Quail Court, Morgan Hill, CA 95037
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.refpub.com/">http://www.refpub.com/</a> -- Tel: 408.778.3024</pre>
</body>
</html>