Skip to main content

What should President Obama say about climate change in his State of the Union address? Actions speak louder than words, but some words will have more resonance and meaning than others.

So we asked scientist Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, to make his suggestion to the president in this extended preview clip from the next Moyers & Company.

In another excerpt, Leiserowitz explains that single-digit degree changes in our climate are comparable to single-digit degree changes in our body temperature when we get sick.

“I think there’s an analogy here — that little difference in global average temperature, just like that little difference in body temperature, can have huge implications as you keep going,” Leiserowitz tells Bill.



Use this tool to find Moyers & Company times and channels in your area.

Originally posted to Bill Moyers on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 09:53 AM PST.

Also republished by Climate Change SOS.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I sure hope he says something about it (6+ / 0-)

    It is probably the issue that the current crop of politicians will be judged on by history.  And he's got about a B on my report card so far.

    "Unrestricted immigration is a dangerous thing -- look at what happened to the Iroquois." Garrison Keillor

    by Spider Stumbled on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:17:25 AM PST

    •  Grading on a generous curve, are you? n/t (6+ / 0-)

      My other car is a pair of boots.

      by FutureNow on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 11:30:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Obama brags about approving "enuf pipelines to (6+ / 0-)

      circle the earth", saying he 'has opened up 70% MORE Federal lands for exploration', opened up the arctic for drilling (that's going real well, ask Shell /s), talks about 'clean coal" and numerous other things but he gets a 'B' on your report card?
      Damn, even Sen. James Inhofe has a chance of passing in your class.

      without the ants the rainforest dies

      by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 11:46:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wish that it weren't so (4+ / 0-)

        but there's some very damning work in Obama's record.

        He does however get extra credit for boosting fuel efficiency, creating CO2 requirements for power plants, and creating incentives for renewable energy (not least the wind production credit in the fiscal cliff deal).

        I haven't seen any analysis whether his pro-carbon boosterism will release more GHGs than his carbon reducing efforts will prevent.  I genuinely wonder whether he's got a net positive here.  (The difficulty is in assessing how much of the Powder River, tar sands, and arctic carbon to credit him with.  There is so much debate about the right baseline)

        Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

        by Mindful Nature on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 11:55:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  even tho I live in the northwest we are dealing (6+ / 0-)

          with his policies on coal mining in the Powder River Basin as we face the building of the biggest coal terminal in north America, right on the waterfront on top of a marine reserve and with 80 ACRES of coal piled 6 stories high.

          One study says the amount of freshwater (can't use salt water) that will be used to spray down these massive piles means a loss of 68 MILLION gallons of water each DAY just to evaporation, not to mention all they will capture, clean (or claim to) and reuse.
          All coming from the water supply of the nearby towns and so far we can get no answers as to how much water they'll use, nor what happens when the water is low in the summer and the issue is who gets the water, the people or the coal terminal.

          Add to that the impacts of over 800 trips per year by the largest bulk carrier ships in the world into an already crowded region, ships so large they take SIX MILES to stop and it's a matter of 'when' not 'if' we deal with an environmental disaster of epic proportions that can't be mitigated.

          That is just a fragment of the problems generated by his administration's policy on the Powder River basin (18 more mile and a half long coal trains a day with the public paying all necessary upgrades, etc.) and they will only grow.
          I listened to speakers that came from the PRB to the Seattle convention center for the last public hearing on what should be considered in the environmental review regarding granting a permit to Gateway Pacific Terminal and SSA Marine (unfortunately Sen. Murray's husband has a vested interest in SSA Marine) and it's destroying their way of life along with the next generation's chances for a livable environment.
          Check out some of the comments entered on the official site (anyone can enter 'scoping' comments') and you'll see (assuming you don't know this) more about impacts that are forseeable in this area alone (altho it will impact the world eventually) from Obama's policy on just the PRB.
          http://www.eisgatewaypacificwa.gov/...
          Oh yeah about that fuel efficiency, that kicks in on NEW cars in 2025 to get over 50 mpg and yet over 10 years ago I had a 1985 Datsun S-10 pickup that got around 40 mpg.

          without the ants the rainforest dies

          by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:20:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Coal dust will float all over the area (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mindful Nature, Lujane, Boppy, aliasalias

            just like it does at the coal terminal in Tsawwassen BC. That's another problem with giant coal terminals.

            ❧To thine ownself be true

            by Agathena on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:56:18 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Fugitive emissions from these facilities can be (0+ / 0-)

              controlled.    DTE Energy operates such a facility in Superior WI without the large fugitive emissions from facilities elsewhere.

            •  yeah as a brakeman for CPR in my last 2 years (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AshesAllFallDown, Agathena

              I worked out of there a LOT, what a pit and that was 1981.
              Short story, on one call I was to be on the caboose that trip and when the conductor and I got taxied to the caboose he looked around when we got there and said "no way".
              He said we weren't going to wade thru ankle deep black muck (dammed up by piles of coal, big and small) to get to the 'cab', and I agreed so the Terminal was contacted to tell them to resolve this or the train doesn't move.

              The terminal didn't have an extra body to do anything about it so they called the Union hall downtown and it was two hours later before any help got there. A taxi pulled up, a guy gets out with a shovel, knocks down a pile of coal on one side and we all watched as the muck drained away...right over the side into the bay.

              That was 1980 or '81 and the place was ran by very few people, a good example being that our entire train of loads of coal would get emptied by ONE guy in a booth punching buttons, and they hadn't even had one extra warm body that one day to wield a shovel.

              Side note, being on the caboose was THE  way to go, a LOT quieter ,the ride was much better and you had a stove to boil water for tea or coffee, or to cook.
               In fact unless someone had engineer training the brakeman with the most seniority got the caboose,while the other guy got the noisy engines with their uncomfortable little stools to sit on.
               But out of Roberts Bank you didn't want the caboose, and if you had seniority over the other brakeman you didn't have to ride on the caboose, so I got put there by senior brakeman several times.

              without the ants the rainforest dies

              by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 04:35:36 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  by 2025 (5+ / 0-)

            we need to not be selling gasoline cars anymore.

            Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

            by Mindful Nature on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:59:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  check THIS out (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Meteor Blades, FutureNow

              http://www.thedailybeast.com/...
              Read the whole thing but this part is agood start.

              Approximately 43 percent of the coal produced in the U.S. comes from public lands managed by the government and owned by all Americans. Public lands are home to some of the richest coal deposits in the nation, mostly located in Wyoming and Montana’s Powder River Basin.

              However, as the use of coal for electricity continues to decrease, coal companies have been eying fast-growing Asian markets as a potential destination for U.S. coal.  In 2011, U.S. coal exports were the highest they have been since 1991, and companies like Arch Coal have predicted that they could be even higher over the next few years.

              Shorting royalties isn’t the only way that taxpayers may be losing out.
              Some have called out the government for carrying out policies on public lands that keep coal cheap, and therefore shortchange American taxpayers.

              For example, a report published by financial analyst Tom Sanzillo in July found that the Interior Department has offered coal leases non-competitively in the Powder River Basin rather than putting them up for auction, thus costing taxpayers  as much as $29 billion over the last three decades.

              Coal companies can also get leases on public lands extremely cheaply. The highest bid ever received on a federal coal lease in the Powder River Basin was $1.10 per short ton, despite the fact that the coal can be sold for approximately $10 per short ton.

              In a separate piece on coal exports, Reuters noted that these government policies raise “questions about whether taxpayers are essentially helping Asian economies save on energy costs.

              without the ants the rainforest dies

              by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 09:51:50 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for that condensed version of ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mimi

            ...an issue we need to be dealing with broadly: stopping coal exports. Coal is slowly getting phased out in the U.S. (too slowly, to be sure, but it is happening). But we're still mining more coal as exports grow. As we all know, when the carbon in that coal is burned, it's no longer exported because the CO2 is in our already over-burdened atmosphere which, of course, doesn't just affect global warming in China where the carbon gets burned in ever greater quantities.

            We can't control what China does, but we can at least stop being the enablers of that coal-burning. The thousands of jobs in coal mining can be replaced, even if we have buy out every miner and railroader dependent on coal traffic over 30 years old and train the others for different, decent-paying work. We can't buy out Mother Nature and I'm more than a little suspicious of geoengineering tricks to retrain her.

            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

            by Meteor Blades on Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 12:57:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Let us ask these questions (0+ / 0-)

              what coal in destination countries would get burned if they did not burn U.S. PRB low sulfur coal?

              [ i.e. is it better to burn PRB coal in Europe than to burn high sulfur, very low BTU coal from central and eastern Europe?]

              does use of U.S. PRB coal reflect a higher or lower rate of CO2 [and SO2 as well] emissions than the fuel to be used overseas if the PRB coal was not available?

              If coal is actually mined, what difference does it make from a greenhouse gas control aspect whether it is burned in the U.S. versus burned elsewhere?

              For each of the major coal shipping routes, what is the total energy consumed per ton for moving the coal from mine to foreign combustion site?  how much via water and how much via land transportation?

              can the environmental community understand that energy facility and electric generation stewardship is about more than just controlling CO2 emissions?

              •  I understand your points... (0+ / 0-)

                ...and there are, of course, differences in the carbon footprint from mining, transporting and burning PRB coal and Europe's brown coal.

                But we have to get past these details and get to the crux of the matter: Burning coal of whatever type is bad news wherever it's burned and burning it is what generates, by far, the most CO2 in the overall process.

                Expanding exports will, of course, expand domestic mining, which means habitat and water impacts, costs for rail and port upgrades, and the impacts on the communities where these things take place. But while the local and regional impacts can be unpleasant for those communities (even though they proved good-paying jobs), the most important issue is the release of CO2.

                Lower-ranked coal (with its heavier pollution releases) imported from other places may, in fact, mean Chinese burners will be releasing more CO2 than if they were burning PRB coal, it's true. But what's the difference in CO2 emissions from burning European brown coal and PRB coal? About 2.5% less per for PRB coal.

                In a world not faced with an eminent cross over to 2° C temperature increase, that 2.5% might make a difference. But we are now, imo, beyond fiddling with these marginal factors.

                Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

                by Meteor Blades on Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 12:31:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Energy stewardship? (0+ / 0-)

                  When you say this:

                  But we have to get past these details and get to the crux of the matter: Burning coal of whatever type is bad news wherever it's burned and burning it is what generates, by far, the most CO2 in the overall process.
                  That tells me that you may not be interested in what energy stewardship means since you're trying to take the position that coal burning, both in the USA and worldwide, is somehow now scheduled to be phased out within 15 years and so somehow what coal utilization takes place in that interval is not relevant ---  but that is only if you are not responsible for generating electricity in currently implemented electric utility system.

                  First of all, even if that did happen, what coal gets burned where for what specific detailed reasons is a pretty crucial matter to operational energy stewardship in that interval.

                  Details matter, such as whether a particular coal from europe has a high sulfur content, whether the coal burning unit has a percentage reduction for sulfur dioxide emissions and the amount of carbon dioxide emissions per million BTU heat input.   [What is the source of your 2.5% difference between PRB coal and European brown coal CO2 emission rate per unit heat input basis?]

                  In the case of that European brown coal, the sulfur content matter 'detail' is quite important and you cannot portray the required environmental management decision solely in the context of CO2 emission limitation....especially when there is nothing in place to get such limitations on existing sources.

      •  He also considers natural gas as a clean source of (5+ / 0-)

        energy. It's a fossil fuel and it's extraction is releasing tons of methane into the atmosphere.

        ❧To thine ownself be true

        by Agathena on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:43:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  that was how he lost my vote (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias, snoopydawg, FutureNow

        when he started competing with Romney for which of them was more supportive of fossil fuel industries, leading to the ineffable Romney statement that Obama was not "Mr. Oil or Mr. Coal."

        Did Romney make anybody else feel like they were heading to Romper Room?

        if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 05:03:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Y'er doin a heckuva job Barry! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snoopydawg, FutureNow

      In terms of alternative energy development, the President needs to do more. His grade so far is an I for incomplete. In terms of education legislation, the President gets an F.

      Educational experience based on non-consensual behaviorism is authoritarian mind control.

      by semioticjim on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 12:24:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The analogy I like (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      too many people

      is that with respect to global climate disruption, we are behind by three touchdowns in the fourth quarter, its fourth down and 20 to go and Obama runs a quarterback sneak.  He will probably move a little bit in the right direction, but not enough to avoid disaster.

      I'm truly sorry Man's dominion Has broken Nature's social union--Robert Burns

      by Eric Blair on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:28:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Furthermore (24+ / 0-)

    I think he can echo Neil deGrasse Tyson and say this or something to its effect

    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
    I do like how Leiserowitz uses the word "CRAZY"in the  above vid , because ignoring the fact that we are destroying the planet's ability to support us is just that.

    And remember: if we fail on climate change, nothing else matters. - WarrenS

    by LaughingPlanet on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:18:02 AM PST

    •  We could use some words supporting science too (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Agathena, Lujane, too many people

      After all, Obama has overruled the scientists and engineers on a number of big decisions so far.

      Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

      by Mindful Nature on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 11:55:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Because he is a lawyer (2+ / 0-)

        And lawyers have this view that multiple sets of facts exist and you choose the ones that make your case.  

        However, China is run by a bunch of engineers with technical educations and they aren't any better.  In fact, they are worse since they are concerned with keeping their economy humming with fossil fuel inputs.

        Merkel gets it, but she is a PhD scientist.  Germany has decided to phase out nuclear, even at the same time as they phase out fossil fuels, which makes both efforts doubly hard.

        The fact that they arrest James Hansen and let James Inhofe address the Senate, instead of the other way around indicates we are never going to do anything about climate change.

        Better get used to that 4-6 degree hotter world.  I figure I can move to Greenland and start a farm.  If I live long enough, maybe I can even grow some bananas.

        •  4-11 (0+ / 0-)

          degrees, you mean.  

          Plant some avocado in that orchard of yours and I'm totally there. :-)  But in the meantime, wouldn't it be great if everyone who commented in these threads would also drop Obama a note asking him to pay attention to the science?

          Don't Just Sit There - Do Something! --- a humorous take on climate news, climate science, with easy things everyone can do to make a difference.

          by Dont Just Sit There DO SOMETHING on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:00:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "...we are never going to do... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          navajo

          ...anything about climate change."

          Maybe. But I don't believe in despair. We keep plugging away until enough people with clout get the message and do something (meaning they'll have to take on the folks who make money off this stuff and buy many politicians with it) or we add our own species to the tally for the growing global mass extinction period we're now verging on.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 01:26:15 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Despair? or reality? (0+ / 0-)

            I'm in the small faction of scientists who look at the evidence, see that current trends are changing faster than the ensemble average of the models, and act accordingly.  The fact that this faction is being shushed for pointing out that the reality is even worse that what is being discussed is what should cause despair.   Maybe when the North Pole loses its ice cover this summer (a prediction I give a 50-50 shot at happening), it will get a few more people to wake up.  

            While it would be nice if all greenhouse gas emissions were phased out in the next 5 years, there are still several decades of CO2 increases already built in, which makes for several decades of global warming.  There is a whole lot to do to adapt to this changing world: build water catchments, better irrigation schemes, move coastal infrastructure, etc., yet the politicians are frozen on what should be a first-step given -- cut carbon emissions.

    •  When did the rich go crazy? (0+ / 0-)

      Why do they want to do this?

      Do they have a super-special secret Star Trek ship to take them to a viable Earth-like "Class M" planet somewhere? Have they figured out FTL drive or suspended animation or something?

      if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 05:05:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If the fiscal cliff "conversation" is any guide (12+ / 0-)

    the State of the Union affirm the evidence that government will not provide a vehicle to address Climate Change on a time scale that matters.

    As Anthony Leisorowitz states, we are course to hurtle past a 2 degree Celsius increase in temperature, which is somewhat analogous to hurtling past a 2 degree increase in body temperature. Considering that an extinction level event is not all that far beyond, the lack of symmetric government and public response--even among kossacks--is horrifying.

    The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

    by Words In Action on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:20:29 AM PST

    •  Let's use F ... (22+ / 0-)

      e.g., for most Americans 3.6 F sounds like a hell of lot more than 2 degrees C even though they are the same. We need to use language that people use.

      E.g., a 102.4 fever is a hell of a lot scarier than 100.6 (which is what 9x% of Americans think of when they hear "two degrees c" in terms of impact on body temperature).

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:33:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  We Can't Assure Our Own Social Security (5+ / 0-)

      which is orders of magnitude less imposition on the economy than climate change response would be.

      I don't see that our system of government could ever address it appropriately. The issue needs to be taken face to face to top global owners. They're the only ones who can empower government. I doubt they'll act either, but we should know right away.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:40:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  EPA Chief Lisa Jackson agrees with you (2+ / 0-)
        Jackson Confirms EPA Chart Showing No Effect on Climate Without China, India

        July 7, 2009

        Contact: Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov  (202)224-9797

        Jackson Confirms EPA Chart Showing No Effect on Climate Without China, India

        http://epw.senate.gov/...

        "I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels," Administrator Jackson said.  

        Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

        by PatriciaVa on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:59:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good point (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          asym, jfromga, Cassandra Waites

          But -and this is a big but- getting China and India fully on board without the U.S. participating?  Highly unlikely.

          The world has been begging us to lead on this for at least the last decade.  

          -Joylette

          Don't Just Sit There - Do Something! --- a humorous take on climate news, climate science, with easy things everyone can do to make a difference.

          by Dont Just Sit There DO SOMETHING on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 12:16:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  What China, India, or anyone else does or doesn't (4+ / 0-)

          do shouldn't be part of our concerns when it comes to acting on this real crisis and unfortunately (for everyone) the petroleum industry's supporters have successfully used the 'them first' arguments to stall any real action on Climate Change. (I'm not putting Lisa Jackson in that category)
          The following is from an excellent article with a LOT of great maps, charts, articles etc., dated some (Kyoto) but the reality of climate change has only gotten worse since it was issued.
          http://mindprod.com/...

          What About China?
          "Very few people could have foreseen the explosive growth of the Chinese and Indian economies in the last decade. When China and India ratified the treaty in 1993, the intention was the developed world would develop the technology for these countries to adopt later. In the meantime, China and India would not do much damage compared with the developed countries. However, that all changed. China opens a new dirty coal-fired electric generation plant every week. China is now about equal to the USA is terms of contribution to the total yearly carbon emissions. It is time to pressure China to go carbon neutral. It has plenty of money, so it has no excuse. The problem is being dirty gives a country an economic advantage. Industry in clean countries relocates to dirty countries where costs are lower. So countries are extremely reluctant to clean up. If our species is to weather this, we must insist every country clean up to some degree, so there is a level economic playing field. At that point, industry will climb on-board the cleanup, since they can make money from it.

          Ideally we should institute a global value added carbon tax. It could be revenue neutral. Basically it would punish carbon emitters and reward those who reduce carbon emissions. If the VAT (Value Added Tax) were global, there would be no incentive for an individual country to go dirty to attract industry. It could start with individual countries instituting the tax based on the total carbon footprint of a product including mining, manufacturing and shipping. This would discourage dirty production in foreign countries too.

          What I find odious is the USA refusing to clean up, using as its excuse that China is dirty too. Imagine two dirty little boys refusing to take a bath, each floating the excuse the other is dirty, and staying dirty will encourage the other to bathe. What nonsense! If one boy climbs into the tub, the other is far more likely to conform too. You lead by example. You can’t very well demand behaviour from others you are unwilling to do yourself.
          The following map distorts the size of countries relative to how bad their greenhouse gas emissions are. The figures used to generate the map are current as of 2002. Since then China has got much worse..." (China is # 61 and the USA is # 8)
          (all emphasis mine)

          without the ants the rainforest dies

          by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 12:18:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  US companies relocating (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AllisonInSeattle, cai, aliasalias

            to China so they can be dirty and pocket greater profits are a large part of the explosive growth in China.   Blaming the Chinese is pretty feckless.

            •  like the article said... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jfromga, cai
              What I find odious is the USA refusing to clean up, using as its excuse that China is dirty too. Imagine two dirty little boys refusing to take a bath, each floating the excuse the other is dirty, and staying dirty will encourage the other to bathe. What nonsense! If one boy climbs into the tub, the other is far more likely to conform too. You lead by example. You can’t very well demand behaviour from others you are unwilling to do yourself.

              without the ants the rainforest dies

              by aliasalias on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:23:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Echoing George Monbiot, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cai

          at the time when in all of human history we most need governments to take concerted actions to avoid climate catastrophe, we are saddled with self-loathing governments for whom such actions are an anathema, who believe that less government is good and that governments should not ever restrict the sacred free market or annoy their corporate overlords.

          I'm truly sorry Man's dominion Has broken Nature's social union--Robert Burns

          by Eric Blair on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 01:35:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Sure, fine, but that's constantly used (0+ / 0-)

          as an excuse for the U.S doing nothing. Then China and India say they won't do anything till the U.S. does. Then the U.S. says it won't do anything till China and India do. And on and on it goes.

          Listening to those negotiations also makes me feel like I'm back in Romper Room.  You go first! No, you go first! No, you're a meanie, you go first!

          if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 05:07:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Snore...Yawn...WAKE UP FOLKS! (9+ / 0-)

    I hope the President says something to wake people up to the fact that we are ALREADY experiencing huge costs due to Climate Change.  Our government is asleep at the wheel and no one is steering this bus.  Good bye coastal cities.  Good bye island nations.  Flood insurance anyone?

    •  Actually, one step might be to have one (0+ / 0-)

      strike and you're out flood insurance for vulnerable coastal areas; the government will pay off your flood insurance claim once, but will not reinsure you if you rebuild in the same place (or without appropriate safeguards, or whatnot).

      The problem with the U.S. flood insurance program is that it subsidizes people to build where we should not build, and build back bigger and more expensive each time.  Because of government backing, their beachfront property keeps getting more valuable -- hell, it keeps being salable.  

      Federal government flood insurance has become a de facto subsidy to rich people and people living where people cannot sustainably live.  (And while I am 100% on board with the idea that climate change will impact our coastal areas, and may be already, when you look at insurance claims on flood disasters in past events, the biggest factor in the increasing losses has been what and where people build.)

      © cai Visit 350.org to join the fight against global warming.

      by cai on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 06:52:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  "I'm Re-nominating Dr. Marilyn Brown to TVA Board" (12+ / 0-)

    That's what Obama should say. TN Senators Corker and Alexander blocked  Dr. Brown's second term. She's a Nobel Lareate on climate change and an expert in energy efficiency. She is EXACTLY who we should have leading TVA.

    The Chattanooga Times Free Press has called them out.

  •  This is THE opoortunity (6+ / 0-)

    if not now, when? I did hear him mention climate change as one of his 5 top priorities in his second term, so I'm pretty optimistic, he'll come through for us and everyone else.

  •  As for science ... (23+ / 0-)

    A rather simple table that the WH could release as a press release:

    Table 1: Professional Societies and Major Relevant Research Institutions on whether humanity is driving climate change

    Humanity driving climate change Uncertain about extent of  human role

    American Association of Petroleum Geologists

    Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

    by A Siegel on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:40:44 AM PST

  •  What he "should" say: (9+ / 0-)
    My fellow Americans, we must devote all our energy and resources into saving our planet and life as we know it. We cannot emit any more C02 into our atmosphere. We must stop now.

    I will devote my entire Presidency to shifting our economy entirely off fossil fuels beginning today. We must lead the world to a safe, sustainable way of life. We will institute a Carbon tax, we will eliminate all fossil fuel subsidies and institute a 100% tax on profits generated from fossil fuel extraction and production. These moneys will be used to shift our economy to sustainable, renewable energy sources.

    This is the greatest threat to life on earth as we know it that we have ever faced. It will require sacrifice and hard work from each one of you. We must focus our attention as we did in WWII to defend the world from destruction. We must devote all of our government energy and resources to saving our planet and ensuring a livable future for our children.

    And I want a pony.

    muddy water can best be cleared by leaving it alone

    by veritas curat on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 11:14:47 AM PST

  •  This geologist is worried (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, cai

    Discussion and action must not be allowed to fall by the wayside.

  •  Heyyy, I remember the Yale Project from the (5+ / 0-)

    Climate Change SOS series back in August.  

    (I also remember thinking that we hit every one of the 5 points they recommend you make when making the climate case in our fifth video, Climate Skeptics' Top Five Myths.  Heh.)

    It's been more than a little exasperating that Obama doesn't seem to understand the urgency of tackling climate change.  Agree with an earlier comment that this is the issue that the current crop of politicians will be judged on.  (Whereas, no one will remember the fiscal cliff in 50 years.)

    -Joylette

    Don't Just Sit There - Do Something! --- a humorous take on climate news, climate science, with easy things everyone can do to make a difference.

    by Dont Just Sit There DO SOMETHING on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 12:26:15 PM PST

  •  or just wait a year until Tampa is 4 feet under (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Arlys, Boppy
  •  great point about body temperature (0+ / 0-)

    I guess that's why he's the director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.

    Keep it up, Mr Leiserowitz!

    All things in the sky are pure to those who have no telescopes. – Charles Fort

    by subtropolis on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 04:41:37 PM PST

  •  Oh, the Yale people are great on climate (0+ / 0-)

    and the environment. Was just up there last summer at a Religion and Climate Symposium. One of the best developments I've seen in the climate debate lately is the upsurge of religious activism on this issue. Seeing as how, if you believe in a God, you likely believe He/She/It created this ball of wax, it makes sense for religious folks to take a stand against destroying it.

    if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 05:02:36 PM PST

  •  Ooh, nice analogy. (0+ / 0-)

    I hadn't heard that one before.  And it makes immediate, visceral sense: you don't have to be a doctor to know that running a slight temperature makes you oogy, running a couple degrees flattens you, and anything more than three or four (for grownups) is "get your butt to the hospital" time.

    © cai Visit 350.org to join the fight against global warming.

    by cai on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 06:47:26 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site