Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
10. We will not make the choice to undergo that degree of sacrifice.
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 03:05 PM
Jan 2013

The sacrifice entails cutting all fossil fuel use within a couple of decades, and reducing our energy supply to perhaps a tenth of what it now is. That reduction would entrain the premature deaths of billions before the end of the century. Who will make that choice? Who would elect a leader who promised it? What autocratic leader would bother with it?

I don't think either a middle road of gradualism or a "World War IV" level of effort to build renewable energy would help. Both would encounter significant political, economic and social roadblocks, and would take far too long. Not to mention that as long as we keep burning any significant amount of carbon the climate will end up where it's headed.

It's too late, and has been since at least 1945. We have made the Procrustean bed of civilization, and now we have to sleep in it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thanks OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #1
That sucking sound you hear GliderGuider Jan 2013 #2
I forwarded the Nature article off to Governor Cuomo OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #5
Good! The more ammunition they have against fracking, the better. nt GliderGuider Jan 2013 #8
I hope we have another Sandy ... (sort of) Vox Moi Jan 2013 #3
Looks like the gas-lovers who badmouthed the Cornell study NickB79 Jan 2013 #4
Well, to be generous… OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #7
That was the first thing I thought of, too. joshcryer Jan 2013 #18
Here's why I think we face a choiceless choice GliderGuider Jan 2013 #6
It's not a “choiceless choice” OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #9
We will not make the choice to undergo that degree of sacrifice. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #10
I don’t see where that necessarily follows… OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #15
You have to start somewhere? GliderGuider Jan 2013 #16
EU makes up 15% of global electrical consumption. joshcryer Jan 2013 #25
You'll pry the new smartphone I buy every 18 months from my cold, dead hands NoOneMan Jan 2013 #11
It's OK, I can wait... nt GliderGuider Jan 2013 #12
Sounds like a personal problem to me OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #13
Me neither NoOneMan Jan 2013 #14
Even as inhospitable as the results from IPCC RCP8.5 and the A1FI scenarios, CRH Jan 2013 #19
Yeah, I expect things to unravel a lot sooner than 2100 myself. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #20
Can't be said better than that. n/t CRH Jan 2013 #21
Funny you should mention Kevin Anderson, ... CRH Jan 2013 #28
Spot on - "a choiceless choice" due to the nature of our belief in exceptionalism Nihil Jan 2013 #23
This was being denied here just a few weeks back. joshcryer Jan 2013 #17
In that case the denial was probably the indirect defence of the wind industry ... Nihil Jan 2013 #22
That would be my assessment, too. joshcryer Jan 2013 #24
Oh, hey, the next line of defense will be that methane is a natural substance. djean111 Jan 2013 #26
seaQuest DSV. joshcryer Jan 2013 #27
Does anyone know if the leakage, ... CRH Jan 2013 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»NOAA Confirms High Methan...»Reply #10