Climate Change Redux/Recap
A huge dialogue is happening on climate change as we speak in Copenhagen regarding what we do about climate change.
This is going to be sort of long, but will be informative.
Side note: I looked up the pronunciation of Copenhagen in Danish and I finally understand what that O with the slash in it is. It is actually a very distinctive Nordic language sound that gives Minnesotan and Canadian English their flair (they tend to round more of their vowels). It is a rounded 'e' (ay in traditional English phonetics). Neat. See for yourself, linguistics nerds.
I have been working for the last 9 months almost full time on carbon management solutions. We're working to be measurement and verification contractors on the GHG angle now, in parallel with our measurement and verification work in the electricity sector. I will start my first measurement job of GHG emissions on a distillery in the near future. While that is exciting, in a way, much like with all the other energy efficiency work I'm doing, I feel like I'm a cog, but a cog in the wheel of something awesome.
So, here goes some intensive information.
This is a major problem. But it isn't a localised problem, and that's the main issue. Those of us in Northern lattitudes don't have the ocean lapping at our homes or moving our community centres. Those of us in the north have longer growing seasons (at least for now). We don't see the consequences of our actions except by news, media, or internet. But to so many, this is potentially threatening entire cultures. It's not fair to ask everyone in the Maldives to leave their home and eradicate their entire culture so that we can burn coal and save some money.
So, good luck in Copenhagen, nations. And I hope to see positive, long-lasting, peace- and job-producing results.
This is going to be sort of long, but will be informative.
Side note: I looked up the pronunciation of Copenhagen in Danish and I finally understand what that O with the slash in it is. It is actually a very distinctive Nordic language sound that gives Minnesotan and Canadian English their flair (they tend to round more of their vowels). It is a rounded 'e' (ay in traditional English phonetics). Neat. See for yourself, linguistics nerds.
I have been working for the last 9 months almost full time on carbon management solutions. We're working to be measurement and verification contractors on the GHG angle now, in parallel with our measurement and verification work in the electricity sector. I will start my first measurement job of GHG emissions on a distillery in the near future. While that is exciting, in a way, much like with all the other energy efficiency work I'm doing, I feel like I'm a cog, but a cog in the wheel of something awesome.
So, here goes some intensive information.
- The New York Times has a front-page (on the web) special on this. Here is a rundown of all the interests at play.
- Also a NYT article, there is news of the EPA's regulation on reporting that will facilitate cap-and-trade. I've attended two webinars in the last two weeks on this very subject. I'll attend another on Wednesday. It seems that steam is building.
- As a note to everyone: do not be fearful. Cap-and-trade will yes, raise energy prices. But since it is market based, I really see those as being short term. Those of us who have invested or plan to invest in energy efficiency will be more handsomely rewarded with higher energy costs. Those of you who haven't will have that much more market-based incentive to do so, which means for the conservatives, less government interference in markets. Renewables will be more competitive with traditional technologies.
- There are some great graphics that NYT creates with this. Here's a good source to see a few. The one on the front page is awesome; I can't seem to link to it, though, so for a limited time, check it out.
- Need I remind people that logic can at times help to guide us. Whether you 'believe' in global climate change or not, logically, the best solution is to act, even if it is a hoax. Watch this to understand why.
- And, I suppose to divulge more of my political leanings, which I try not to do on this particular blog: I would much rather spend money on potentially helping the poor across the world through avoidance of catastrophe that is already happening in Bangladesh and the Maldives (PBS interview link) than on war and so-called defence of resources that continue to create problems, such as oil. Oil is a destabilising resource, and due to peak oil, we've already gotten oil out of the places that are politically safe to do so; now, we're on the back side of the oil supply curve, and there will be nothing but unrest and conflict in getting the last half of the world's supply out of the ground. What we can get will be expensive, and will continue to pollute. Additionally, green energy and energy efficiency provides high-paying jobs that give working-class people access to money, to energy efficiency, to food, and to security in jobs and family. That reduces urban blight, crime, drug addiction, and a slew of other problems. Wars in the Middle East do not have that same spillover effect.
This is a major problem. But it isn't a localised problem, and that's the main issue. Those of us in Northern lattitudes don't have the ocean lapping at our homes or moving our community centres. Those of us in the north have longer growing seasons (at least for now). We don't see the consequences of our actions except by news, media, or internet. But to so many, this is potentially threatening entire cultures. It's not fair to ask everyone in the Maldives to leave their home and eradicate their entire culture so that we can burn coal and save some money.
So, good luck in Copenhagen, nations. And I hope to see positive, long-lasting, peace- and job-producing results.