Alright, I confess.  I’m a big, giant Olympics addict.  I love the intensity and the drama.  I could pass on the constant nationalism and medal count lists, and I’ll probably be considered un-American for saying this, but I’m really over Apolo Ohno.  Because of the Olympics, my TV has been on way more than it usually is and I feel like I’m still missing things.

But I didn’t miss something big that happened at last week’s TED Conference, where Bill Gates stood up and argued that climate change is the biggest issue we face today.  And, more importantly, that the only target which is acceptable for success is zero emissions by 2050.  That’s right.  ZERO.

Worldchanging’s Alex Steffen (who was at TED *envy*) argues that this was the most important climate change speech of the year. Steffen goes on to discuss the Gates Climate Equation – CO2 = P+S+E+C – what it means, and how he would modify it.  Worldchanging has since published a counterargument by Joe Romm (he runs ClimateProgress.org – we love them).  Both analyses are incredibly insightful, and I didn’t find them to be necessarily contradictory.  Romm argues that we need to focus on accelerating the deployment of existing clean energy technologies, not on research and development of new technologies.  Steffen argues that the merit of the speech is in the vision, but also criticizes Gates’ articulation of the equation and the way forward.

Not having seen or heard the TED speech, my biggest complaint is about the sound bite we’re hearing: Gates’ quote, “We need energy miracles.” What is either omitted from most articles or buried below the fold is that Gates went on to say that energy miracles would be a result of massive investment in alternative energy research and development.  In other words, we need miracles that can only be a result of tremendous effort.  That second part is what he was really calling for, not the miracles – the hard work.  (According to Gates, similar ‘miracles’ include the microprocessor and the internet.)

What needs to be reported much more broadly (in my opinion as the primary headline) is that Gates drew the connection between the work that his Foundation does now – fighting poverty and disease – and climate change.  Gates recognizes that if we don’t figure out climate change, the challenges presented by poverty and famine will be insurmountable.  He knows it, and he stood up and said it in front of everyone.

So yes, I do think that Bill Gates gets climate change.  And while I don’t agree with everything he said – such as his inclusion of nuclear energy in his proposed clean energy portfolio – I do love that he is now in the game.  Because whatever you may think of him, it’s hard to argue with the fact that he’s a game changer.  Gates has tremendous public and financial clout, and a very different and much wider audience than most of the people currently working to address climate change.  So when he stands up and declares that climate change is the key issue and redefines the metric for success in such a dramatic way, it is a really big deal.  It will be interesting to see who was listening.

Related posts:

1. Ten Climate Change Terms Everyone Should Know
2. Blog About Climate Change!
3. 19 Simple Ways to Start Thinking About Climate Change – Blog Action Day

In the interest of preserving my mental health, I usually try to ignore the news at least one day a week.  I find I need an occasional break from the constant influx of information and the glare and hum of my beloved laptop.  I often choose Sunday as my day off.  It tends to be a slow day anyways, since so many people are taking it off.  But yesterday was Climate Action Day, and I was really interested in seeing the follow-up coverage from the 350 events held around the world.

When I saw this article about Coal River Mountain, I was horrified.  This is a situation in which the right solution is so clear.  I’m not usually one to assign very strong value judgments to things.  The world operates in many shades of gray, and it can be hard to balance competing sides of complex issues.

But here… there is a right solution.  Massey Energy’s mining of the Coal River Mountain is just a bad decision.  It is bad for the environment.  It is bad for (and not wanted by) the local community;  it is bad for their health and it is bad for their economy.  And there is a thoroughly documented and much better option available.  This should be a no-brainer.

In spite of that, blasting has started on the Coal River Mountain.  I can’t help but worry that it is too late.  But because it is my anti-news day, and I am determined to be optimistic, I went to the Save Coal River site to see what could be done.  According to this site, the Obama Administration is not taking calls on the Coal River Mountain issue until 9:00 AM EST tomorrow.  In the meantime, they are accepting letters submitted via their contact site.

Below is the letter I submitted.  Please feel free to copy it, use it, distribute it — whatever you want.

Dear Mr. President:

I am writing to you to express my horror at the destruction by Massey Energy of Coal River Mountain in West Virginia.

6,000 acres of land is due to be mined for coal in a mountaintop removal project, in spite of the fact that this land would be far more valuable as a renewable energy project.  This land is rated Class 7 for wind energy potential, the highest rating on the scale.

Local residents have already filed lawsuits against nine coal companies for contaminating their well water with coal waste.  Construction of a wind farm project in this area would create more jobs than would the mining of Coal River Mountain, jobs that would last longer than those created by the relatively short-term mountaintop removal plans.  Coal River is the last remaining intact mountaintop in the area.

Coal River Mountain represents a unique opportunity for rational minds to prevail.  Human, economic, and environmental interests are all at stake, and the solution is clear.  The mountaintop removal of Coal River Mountain must be stopped, and it must be stopped immediately.  This situation requires urgent attention, as reports indicate that blasting has already begun.

Please use your influence to help the residents of Coal River Valley to preserve their own health, the environmental health of the region, and their future economic security.  The destruction of Coal River Mountain is not something any of us can afford.

Many thanks for your attention and swift action,

On that note, I’m going to shut off my computer and go enjoy the little bit of time left of this Sunday evening.  I hope everyone had a great weekend.

No related posts.

I have been waiting impatiently for the release of Julie & Julia. I confess to having a bit of a crush on Amy Adams, and more than a bit of a crush on food. Not to mention that, as a blogger, this little (BIG) blogging success story was just what I needed to stave of depression in the wake of my husband’s deployment.

I loved Julie & Julia. That statement is possibly the only positive thing you’ll read on the internet about this movie. I will say further that I loved not just the half of it that everyone else loved, but the whole of it. But this is not going to be a movie review. Just go see it.

Are you back? Ok. Now that you’ve seen the movie…

I have to admit that I, like Julie Powell, was surprised and a bit heartbroken when I learned that Julia Child was highly critical of the Julie/Julia Project. I assumed this struggle for personal meaning was something that she would intrinsically “get.” I was further surprised to read quite a few reviews that criticized not the movie (although some of those as well), but rather Julie Powell both for starting the Julie/Julia Project and as a person. I have to say, I don’t get it.

Julia Child’s legitimacy came from achieving a level of culinary professionalism unknown to women at that time. She was successful in large part because she was an expert, and because she was able to translate her expertise to others.

Julie Powell is illegitimate. Or, at least as illegitimate as any person who decides to start a blog and document their personal journey, be it a journey towards financial stability, weight loss, or living a greener life. She was not an expert, but she cooked her way through Mastering the Art of French Cooking in a year, which is more than most of us can say for the projects in our lives.

Child learned to cook because she loved food. Powell started the Julie/Julia Project in a moment of desperation and personal crisis. But I bet she learned a lot about cooking while she was at it.

Which brings me to my point. Does intent matter?

Listening to NPR the other day, I heard a report about a business owner who installed solar panels on the roof of his building. He doesn’t believe in climate change, but he stands to make $18,000 per year selling energy back to the grid. He will produce enough electricity to power over 30 homes.

There is tons of money built into the climate change bill for residential efficiency improvements (new windows, insulation, etc.). Most people who take advantage of this policy and retrofit their homes will likely do it because it will save them money on utilities and increase their property values on the government’s dime. For many, the environment is an added bonus or a political talking point.

Eating organic is healthy. Eating organic is trendy. Eating organic decreases the excess nitrogen runoff from farms that is destroying the biodiversity of our rivers and coastlines. Wait a second… were you thinking about reducing nitrogen runoff when you headed for those organic strawberries? No? Because you just spent your money like you did.

I think both Julia Child and Julie Powell are very impressive women. And I am glad that, more and more, there are other reasons to make environmentally sustainable choices. Because sometimes, it’s not about why you’re there. Sometimes, it’s just about showing up.

No related posts.