Comments on: No Coal by 2020: Sign It! http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/ Dispatches from the Youth Climate Movement Sat, 22 Nov 2008 09:19:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: R Margolis http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58602 R Margolis Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:56:27 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58602 Yes there have been assessments and reports. Still, the policymakers face the prospect of phasing out 80% of the current energy supply and replacing it with something else. I think even Abraham Lincoln would have been perplexed how to do that. [At least he might have recognized earlier that it needed to be done ;-)] Windmills are protested, LNG is protested, even transmission lines are protested. The policymakers do not see a consensus in how to transition from fossil fuels. Yes there have been assessments and reports. Still, the policymakers face the prospect of phasing out 80% of the current energy supply and replacing it with something else. I think even Abraham Lincoln would have been perplexed how to do that. [At least he might have recognized earlier that it needed to be done ;-)]

Windmills are protested, LNG is protested, even transmission lines are protested. The policymakers do not see a consensus in how to transition from fossil fuels.

]]> By: Carlos Rymer http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58583 Carlos Rymer Sun, 16 Dec 2007 23:26:10 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58583 Sorry, but this is the 4th assessment report. The scientists have screamed, and the policymakers have heard it in DC over and over from citizens. The problem is that they've got lobbyists giving them $ to not vote for the right thing. Didn't the Department of Defense say that climate change was the biggest threat we face? They said that in a report. So why are these policymakers not up to date? Climate criminals is pretty accurate. As for coal, we don't want sequestration. Period. We just don't want any of the fossil fuels. We have what we need to power the world, save the policymakers who have to shift subsidies from fossil fuels to renewables. Coal is not the future. It shouldn't be used under any scenario. Sorry, but this is the 4th assessment report. The scientists have screamed, and the policymakers have heard it in DC over and over from citizens. The problem is that they’ve got lobbyists giving them $ to not vote for the right thing. Didn’t the Department of Defense say that climate change was the biggest threat we face? They said that in a report. So why are these policymakers not up to date? Climate criminals is pretty accurate.

As for coal, we don’t want sequestration. Period. We just don’t want any of the fossil fuels. We have what we need to power the world, save the policymakers who have to shift subsidies from fossil fuels to renewables. Coal is not the future. It shouldn’t be used under any scenario.

]]> By: Jonathan Maslow http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58496 Jonathan Maslow Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:41:59 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58496 Carlos: Good post, great idea on coal petition. Can you cross post this on TEI? We want to support the petition and actions any way we can. tell me. jm Carlos: Good post, great idea on coal petition. Can you cross post this on TEI? We want to support the petition and actions any way we can. tell me. jm

]]> By: R Margolis http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58491 R Margolis Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:18:28 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58491 I'm not sure I would call them criminals. Most of these policy types probably do not have science or engineering backgrounds, so the climate science may not have the same impact on them as others. Also, it sounds like the movement cannot decide where carbon sequestration fits in (or not). With so much disagreement over the different alternate technologies, the policymakers do not have a clear path to eliminate coal. I’m not sure I would call them criminals. Most of these policy types probably do not have science or engineering backgrounds, so the climate science may not have the same impact on them as others.

Also, it sounds like the movement cannot decide where carbon sequestration fits in (or not). With so much disagreement over the different alternate technologies, the policymakers do not have a clear path to eliminate coal.

]]> By: Carlos Rymer http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58481 Carlos Rymer Sat, 15 Dec 2007 19:46:46 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58481 I would agree. It's absolutely absurd that they spent 2 weeks to just agree to another conference. It's a shame! I would agree. It’s absolutely absurd that they spent 2 weeks to just agree to another conference. It’s a shame!

]]> By: david hill http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58444 david hill Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:18:00 +0000 http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/12/15/no-coal-by-2020-sign-it/#comment-58444 Other than the fact that the Bali Summit provided nothing other than to agree to agree to further climate talks (and that’s all that it was), it provided absolutely no change in stopping the constantly increasing global pollution and the life-threatening build up of carbon dioxide. Climate change added to the world’s emerging and dire problems (population explosion and its sustainability, famine and food shortage, energy resource depletion and increased energy demands, cyclic pandemics, global pollution and carbon dioxide saturation, dwindling water shortages for life etc, etc, etc), put together are immense. Indeed together, they are a recipe of nightmarish proportions that has never been seen before by humankind. But the greatest threat to human stability is the fact that people in high places do not realize that the time-span for solving these huge global problems has a finite period of time also. The writing is now on the wall I would say for all to see if they will only look and where humanity has to react without delay, but where, reaction to global problems takes decades to solve. Therefore the lead-time that we have now is the only thing that we have in our favour. Leave it for another 20-years and we shall not have the necessary lead-time to do anything about the really 'big' problems. This is what we really have to get over to our leaders, politicians and multinational industrialists, for it will affect them as much as it will affect you and me. Indeed, if they do not change quickly there self-preservation and vested interest thinking, we shall all end up with problems that are just unsolvable due to the time-served requirement to solve them and where time will literally run out on us all. For only by people in high places realizing our dilemmas quickly now will be able to confront them and have enough time to solve them. It is no use therefore in pussy footing around until it is too late. For hesitancy and delay today is the greatest threat to the survival of humankind and where if we do not come to our senses quickly, in fifty-years time, the world will have become very similar to most probably how we can picture in our minds, a world very much like hell itself. Dr David Hill World Innovation Foundation Bern. Switzerland Other than the fact that the Bali Summit provided nothing other than to agree to agree to further climate talks (and that’s all that it was), it provided absolutely no change in stopping the constantly increasing global pollution and the life-threatening build up of carbon dioxide. Climate change added to the world’s emerging and dire problems (population explosion and its sustainability, famine and food shortage, energy resource depletion and increased energy demands, cyclic pandemics, global pollution and carbon dioxide saturation, dwindling water shortages for life etc, etc, etc), put together are immense. Indeed together, they are a recipe of nightmarish proportions that has never been seen before by humankind. But the greatest threat to human stability is the fact that people in high places do not realize that the time-span for solving these huge global problems has a finite period of time also. The writing is now on the wall I would say for all to see if they will only look and where humanity has to react without delay, but where, reaction to global problems takes decades to solve. Therefore the lead-time that we have now is the only thing that we have in our favour. Leave it for another 20-years and we shall not have the necessary lead-time to do anything about the really ‘big’ problems. This is what we really have to get over to our leaders, politicians and multinational industrialists, for it will affect them as much as it will affect you and me. Indeed, if they do not change quickly there self-preservation and vested interest thinking, we shall all end up with problems that are just unsolvable due to the time-served requirement to solve them and where time will literally run out on us all.
For only by people in high places realizing our dilemmas quickly now will be able to confront them and have enough time to solve them. It is no use therefore in pussy footing around until it is too late. For hesitancy and delay today is the greatest threat to the survival of humankind and where if we do not come to our senses quickly, in fifty-years time, the world will have become very similar to most probably how we can picture in our minds, a world very much like hell itself.

Dr David Hill
World Innovation Foundation
Bern. Switzerland

]]>