Forget the views of the conservative environmentalist who tells us that all we have to do is change a few light bulbs and buy a more economical car and all will be well; to turn the climate around we are looking at a fundamental change in what we consider to be normal and acceptable levels of consumption.

If a billion people currently sit comfortably above the "poverty line" in the western world - a poverty line based on the acquisition of consumer goods - try imagining a further 2 billion people obtaining that level in the next 50 years. If climate change is a problem now, stacking this upon the ever increasing profligacy of the west is, by any reasonable calculation, going to lead to annihilation of one sort or another; catastrophic weather events causing mass deaths, global ecological shifts tipping the natural balance of life into a state that can no longer support us, positive feedback cycles pushing the climate into ever tighter loops of change or just the complete lack of oil, a substance that is so fundamental to our way of life that even this potentially positive outcome would cause hundreds of millions of deaths.

Any one of these will force an unsustainable change in human activity at far a more rapid rate than the admittedly fast, but controlled and planned change that we currently need, but which governments and especially the vested interests of commercial economic growth are refusing to look in the eye. Denial is the only response, denial and a wink to the acceptable conservative environmentalism which is just a way of making us feel better about ourselves whilst letting the problem slip like so much hot sand between our fingers.

each of us needs a healthy dose of guilt and responsibility for the harm we are causing to not only our own mental and physical well-being but also to all the other beings who call this planet home

I Am an American who sees the errors in our ways of mass consumtion and indifferance. I just want to say that whenever I see a forum such as this it gives me hope. THANK YOU AND GOD BLESS :)

Thanks Josh - nice to be appreciated.

every one who has a minimum of sensibility is touched and wants to react after the view of such a tragedy: our planet gave us the most precious thing we posses , that is our life, and in return we juste ignore that dett of respect we ow to her and destroy her. React, yes, but how? Shure, you can still go in the streat and stand there carring a board calling for the oil companies to stop doing their activities. Yes, but what can we do at our human level, to try help change the hole society? Saying that the only hope for our planet is the change of the human modern way of life, abandonning profit to save the polar bears isn't very convinient and dosn't give that much hope, I think.What's the solution? try thinking wile still time...

We need to encourage everyone we know to see this movie. As desperate the message is - educating ourselves will be the first step. This is not a party problem -it is for ALL to help solve.

Hi Lisa

I guess you mean "An Inconvenient Truth". It is a fine movie, but by no means the only thing that can educate people - the main job is to make people want to solve the problem and then feel that there are things they can do; real things that are sufficient to make a big difference. Watching is not enough.

Keith

I am a member of the OAR Alliance.
Though it sounds extreme and because it is a heavy idea, The Alliance is willing to offe the sum of $5000 to be forfeited if the Alliance is proven, not to be in possession of a means of eliminating global warming within 10 years.
This involves efficiently lifted mobile weight, hoisted to [an arbitrary] 300feet by a winch burning a few gallons of fuel. There, the weight which is divided into [an arbitrary] 5 ton balls, could be made to lean or be dropped on the end of blades attached as levers to great axles 15 feet in diameter, with the turning force a function of the multiplying effects of leverage.
The claim, is a system able to exert a constant 450 tons of turning force, while burning between 20 and 40 gallons of fuel.
The 450 tons [of turning force] would set in motion a great axle and attached flywheels weighing hundreds of tons to even a thousand tons.
This in many ways uses the same tools as hydroelectric power, just without the need for a dam.

Hi Richard

The amount of energy in 30 litres of fuel is 1 billion joules (http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/2907.asp). So in 20 gallons, it is 2.5 billion joules. The amount of energy needed to lift the weight is 4.9 million joules (mass x gravity x height), so you could actually lift a 1250 tonne weight with your setup at only 50% efficiency.

You will never lose the money. Sorry.

But maybe you do have an idea - if you could send me the detailed mechanics then I would be happy to look at it.

Keith (keith@theearthblog.org)

I'm only 13,and I live in Canada.I believe that everybody can help resolve the issue of global warming. We're KILLING our environment, the one that supports us. (a really good website is www.greendaynrdc.com - my fav band, Green Day, and Nrdc are teaming up to save the environment)

Great site Lenore, thanks for the tip. I have put the link up on the Get Active section. It's really nice to see young people caring so much, and the people they follow using their influence in a good way.

Keith

i hope you find my website interesting.

happy new year to you:-?

My head hurts now ;-) But I see what you are getting at - love the term "Chemtrails". Much more descriptive than Contrails! k.

I like your information

Kudos for tackling this hot potato! James also has a really good post on the carrying capacity of the planet and human population growth, with great comments. http://jimbodouglass.blogspot.com/2008/02/overpopulation-killed-by-k.html

Good article, population needs to keep being made a primary issue.

You might like to read my take on this, written a while ago:

http://earth-blog.bravejournal.com/entry/17204

Cheers, Keith.