Disasters make for sexy headlines, but the real stories are in the clean up. Also, often times politicians use disasters to push through tough land-use regulations (such as no-rebuild zones or requiring homes on stilts) after a big storm. These regulations would get little-to-no support without a big storm or disaster.
Pesky facts.
Vile.
But why did I post this?
There’s an interesting section in this article, one that environmentalists can readily relate to, and that’s the “jobs defense.”
The Jobs Defense is a common response by businesses that fear new regulation. For those that know a bit of environmental and economic history, this defense been used effectively for centuries to tamp down protest, influence politicians, and garner public support.
The Jobs Defense was used to defend from regulating slavery, child labor, the right to vote, organize unions, pass environmental regulations, and myriad other policies that benefit you today.
In this case, a public meeting was called to democratically discuss how to prevent slaughtering children (dramatic, but that’s the language we’re using up here in New England regarding the Newtown, Ct mass shooting). True, the headline is about some brainless bullies who heckled a dad who lost his 6 year old boy.
But to me, the interesting aspect of this is that the journalist sort of dances around the examining the Jobs Defense.
A gun manufacturer is quoted in the article that his company, “(Pumps) tens of millions of dollars each year into the Connecticut economy.” The journalist does mention that gun manufacturers offered no solutions at the meeting. But the Jobs Defense went unchallenged.
There was no discussion or questioning that his product causes deaths.* There’s no discussion of why “tens of millions of dollars” is a reasonable response to the death of Americans. Isn’t that curious? That we all accept that the Jobs Defense is a so legitimate that it gets a free pass?
Barack Obama uses the Jobs Defense, too. In fact, it’s a primary driver of getting the Keystone XL Pipeline approved - jobs. Indeed, there are thousands of articles discussing jobs in relation to building the oil pipeline, have a look.
None of them, that I found, examined the benefits of environmental protection over the few jobs that the line will create. It’s true that some have examined the claim that the line will create a certain number of jobs. No one can say clearly if the line will create 500 jobs or 20,000.
But this still doesn’t examine the facile and rather weak argument that jobs should be a primary motivation versus incredibly beneficial, American alternatives. From my point of view, the Jobs Defense must be examined. Should jobs be held in reverence over human health? If so, why?
“…hundreds of federal scientists in charge of environmental monitoring are being laid off as part of the 1,500 government professionals affected by Conservative budget cuts.
“Doctors, biologists, chemists are being shown the door. These scientists monitor environmental changes that can threaten the health of Canadians,” said MP Hélène LeBlanc…
“Prime Minister Harper has dropped any pretence that he cares about Canada’s natural environment, reducing the federal government’s oversight role to miniscule proportions,” said May, who represents British Columbia’s Saanich-Gulf Islands in Parliament.”
Via ENS
GOP lawmakers in North Carolina attempt to outlaw sea-level rise. Not. Kidding.
Gah! Yet another flubbery enviro-PSA. It’s 2012. We KNOW the problems. People need to know the solutions! At 4 minutes and 20 seconds long, it dedicates 10 seconds(!) to a weak and wispy appeal to the public to “do something.” Well, like what? Their answer (like most enviro-PSAs) is that, “Citizens have responsibility of encouraging and supporting their politicians to make (policy) decisions.”
COME ON! People need a roadmap. Environmental organizations are getting crushed partly, imo, due to too much focus on the lazy activist approach (Sign my petition!).
In my opinion, environmental groups need exacting methods to embolden the public to actually influence policy. More focus on things such as,
Perhaps my crits are invalid. But, I know from working with city governments that policy makers do not want too many people involved in shaping policies and regulations. They prefer the “sweet spot” to show they’ve met their democratic obligations - not too little involved public, not too many public, but half-a-room of quiet folks is just about right.
I need evidence that campaigns such as the above are much more effective then showing people how to land a seat at decision making tables. Perhaps such evidence exists, but I’ve yet to see it.
Overfishing visually explained
As part of their mission to reform destructive fishing practices, Ocean2012 explains the risk of catching too much fish, in motion graphics. I like the pixelated aesthetic.
They’ll probably win their request. They also ask the Canadian government to ban prayers and children’s plays at public hearings. The mining company states that permit review should only include “objective facts.” They have a point.
A new federal environmental review panel “does not have any right to attribute significance to the spirituality of a place per se,” wrote Taseko Mines Ltd. president Russell Hallbauer in a letter obtained under the Access to Information Act and provided to The Vancouver Sun by B.C. independent provincial representative Bob Simpson.
Last year, the mining company was denied a mining permit. The company went to court to force the government to reconsider the permit, but lost. But, all is not lost for the poor mining company! In addition to weakening the permit review standards, which take native Indian rights into consideration, they’re lobbying the Canadian government to change federal environmental laws all together. After the lawsuit was lost, and the company lobbied some more, the Canadian government will now allow review of a revised permit application.
Stephen Harper’s government is acceptingly being sodomized by oil, gas, and mining companies, which means that the Canadian government is not just gutting environmental laws, it’s obliterating them. The mining company will eventually win their permit to mine for gold and copper - they’ll just have to plant some trees and hire a few natives.
To my mind, this mess reveals major weaknesses of Canada’s progressive voters, environmental activists, and environmental lobbyists. As a result of this disorganization, environmental laws in Canada are bought and sold on the free market right under everyone’s noses.
Three Short Minutes: Naomi Oreskes deconstructs Nick Minchin’s climate denial
In this video Naomi Oreskes meets Nick Minchin and clearly explains with the driving force behind climate denial:
aversion to the political and economic implications of climate change leading to a rejection of the science.
Oreskes is the co-author of the book, ‘Merchants of Doubt’. Minchin is a retired Australian politician and a climate change skeptic. The clip is unused footage from the documentary, ‘I Can Change Your Mind about… Climate’.
(Source: Skeptical Science via YouTube)
Her book Merchants of Doubt is required reading for which she won the 2011 Climate Communicators Award.
“It’s totally maddening,” Mr. Sanfilippo said. “They’re just doing it to make all the green people happy.”
Whole Foods says that, in fact, it is doing its part to address the very real problem of overfishing and help badly depleted fish stocks recover. It is using ratings set by the Blue Ocean Institute, a conservation group, and the Monterey Bay Aquarium in California. They are based on factors including how abundant a species is, how quickly it reproduces and whether the catch method damages its habitat.
How dare us green people.
Wrong answer, Susty Sam. Enviros will not make inroads by alienating people who just lost their jobs. Hostility to opposing points of view, spouting egotistical responses, or publicly blathering about the poor environment are failed strategies. Such responses negatively impact the domain of viable solutions to ongoing environmental problems. They certainly do not foster public support nor does it build trust.
Public trust is a valuable and rare commodity among environmentalists. And trust is needed in order for environmentalists to get a seat at the table.
The NYTimes article shows that environmental wins sometimes cost good people’s jobs. When jobs are lost due to a new restriction - especially blue collar jobs - the impacts negatively affect public opinion. It’s not cool to spit in the faces of someone who lost their job to environmental successes. In this context, job losses become stained by environmental regulation.
Environmental success should exemplify excellence. They should not chip away at any potential support from the public for new or altered environmental regulations.
When the next round of regulations are proposed, imagine the opposition pointing to sarcastic responses, such as Susty Sams. This stuff infuriates the public, who are needed to vote for restrictive measures.
Enviros need to increase their influence by being respectful, acknowledge social impacts from increased regulations, and attempt to offer sets of alternatives once changes occur such as the above.
“Americans’ concerns about environmental problems have dropped in recent years, coincident with their drop in support for various environmental policies and the higher priority they assign to economic growth than to environmental protection.
There are two likely explanations for the declining concern. First, Americans are a bit more positive now than they have been in the past about the quality of the environment. Second, the economic downturn has forced Americans to focus more on bread-and-butter economic issues than quality-of-life issues. It may be no coincidence that environmental concern was highest in 2000, when the U.S. was enjoying one of the strongest economies in recent memory, and that environmental concern has reached new lows recently, after the worst financial downturn in the last 25 years.”
Source: Gallup
More wonderful results of not participating in your government. Factory farm lobbying to change laws to criminalize the public from reporting abuses.
Carry on.
In states across the country, legislation has been passed to keep factory farming practices away from public view, as well as the toxic chemicals used for fracking, and corporate tax disclosure off the books. So what’s behind these laws that let corporations, keep their secrets? Talk radio host David Sirota discusses.
Oil extraction method widely used in California with little oversight: Regulators and lawmakers know very little about how and where oil companies employ hydraulic fracturing in the state.
Is Brown selling out California?
Hoping to boost the state’s sluggish economy, the Brown administration has eased rules for oil drilling in California, firing two top regulators last year over permitting delays. Though regulators said they monitor drilling operations “quite thoroughly” under existing law,they acknowledged the need for more disclosure of what chemicals are used in oil production.
Brown has the protection of the Obama administration and the EPA, which are doing virtually nothing to regulate fracking. Also, follow the LA Times.
Hmmm…
“America’s dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year since President Obama took office. In 2010, we imported less than 50 percent of the oil our nation consumed—the first time that’s happened in 13 years—and the trend continued in 2011.”
OneNOAA Science Seminars: February 2012 (click on seminar title to access full presentation details; subject to change)
Note: Every seminar includes a link to add the presentation to your personal google calendar. You can view also all of the seminars in google calendar format.
Feb 27: The NOAA Habitat Blueprint: A Framework to Improve Habitat for Fisheries, Marine Life, and Coastal Communities; Speaker(s): Brian Pawlak (Acting Director, NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation); Location: NOAA SSMC-2 (1325 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910); 2nd Floor, Room 2356. Add this seminar to your google calendar
Feb 28: Optimal Metric and Control Variables for Improved Forecast Associated with the Tropical Cyclones; Speaker(s): Kosuke Ito (The National Taiwan University); Location: World Weather Building (5200 Auth Road, Camp Springs, MD 20746); Room 707. Add this seminar to your google calendar
Feb 28: Intrinsic Variability and Predictability of Numerically Simulated Tropical Cyclones; Speaker(s): Greg Hakim (Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington); Location: National Weather Center (120 David L. Boren Blvd, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK), NWC Room 1350. Add this seminar to your google calendar
Feb 29: The Validation of Climate Models: The Development of Essential Practice; Speaker(s): Richard Rood (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor); Location: NOAA ESRL Chemical Sciences Division seminar Room 2A305, David Skaggs Research Center (NOAA Building), 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO. Add this seminar to your google calendar
OneNOAA Science Seminars: March 2012 (click on seminar title to access full presentation details; subject to change)
Note: Every seminar includes a link to add the presentation to your personal google calendar. You can view also all of the seminars in google calendar format.
Mar 01: You Still Can’t Have Your Hake and Eat It Too: Growth and Movement of a Species of Concern; Speaker(s): Dr. Paul Chittaro (Northwest Fisheries Science Center); Location: NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NWFSC (2725 Montlake Blvd. E, Seattle, WA). Add this seminar to your google calendar
Mar 01: Comparison of Subantarctic Mode Water and Antarctic Intermediate Water Formation Rates in the South Pacific between NCAR-CCSM4 and Hydrographic Observations; Speaker(s): Corinne Hartin (University of Miami, RSMAS); Location: NOAA SSMC-3 4th Floor, Room 4517 (1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910); Add this seminar to your google calendar
Mar 01: Fukushima Daiichi - How Much Radioactivity Was Really Released?; Speaker(s): Roland Draxler (NOAA Air Resources Laboratory); Location: NOAA SSMC-3 ARL Large Conference Room 3404 (1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910); Add this seminar to your google calendar
I want to punch climate change in the face.
A blog about the interactions between the built environment, people, and nature.
I'm a Washington, DC-based climate adaptation specialist. I help governments and stakeholders around the world increase their capacity to deal with climate impacts.
In addition to traveling and hiking, I research, publish, and lecture on how cities can adapt to climate change.
"Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt." - John Updike
Professional inquiries, please
email.
about.me
FAQs
Follow!
Ask!
Donations (supports my book - thank you!)
-----------
My Book Recommendations (New!)
Book Store
NASA's Climate Indicators
------------
G+
LinkedIn
@climatecote
RSS
Archive
