Sometime after the release of An Inconvenient Truth in 2006, environmentalism crossed from political movement to cultural moment. Fortune 500 companies pledged to go carbon neutral. Seemingly every magazine in the country, including Sports Illustrated, released a special green issue. Paris dimmed the lights on the Eiffel Tower. Solar investments became hot, even for oil companies. Evangelical ministers preached the gospel of "creation care." Even archconservative Newt Gingrich published a book demanding action on global warming.
Green had moved beyond politics. Gestures that were once mundane--bringing your own grocery bags to the store, shopping for secondhand clothes, taking the subway--were suddenly infused with grand significance. Actions like screwing in light bulbs, inflating tires, and weatherizing windows gained fresh urgency. A new generation of urban hipsters, led by Colin Beavan, a charismatic writer in Manhattan who had branded himself "No Impact Man," proselytized the virtues of downscaling--dumpster-diving, thrift-store shopping, and trading in one's beater car for a beater bike--while suburban matrons proudly clutched copies of Michael Pollan's In Defense of Food and came to see the purchase of each $4 heirloom tomato at the farmer's market as an act of virtue.
For those caught up in the moment, the future seemed to promise both apocalypse and transcendence in roughly equal measure. The New York Times and San Francisco magazine ran long feature stories on the uptick of upper-middle- class professionals who worried to their therapists about polar bears or who dug through the trash cans of co-workers to recycle plastic bottles, as though suffering from a kind of eco-OCD. At the same time, folks like Pollan and Beavan provided a vision of green living that seemed to offer not just a smaller carbon footprint but a better life. Amid the fear was the hope that the ecological crisis would bring us together and make us happier.
And then, almost as quickly as it had inflated, the green bubble burst. Between January 2008 and January 2009, the percentage of Americans who told the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press that the environment was a "top priority" dropped from 56 percent to 41 percent. While surveys have long showed that enthusiasm for all things green is greatest among well-educated liberals, the new polling results were sobering. For the first time in a quarter century, more Americans told Gallup in March that they would prioritize economic growth "even if the environment suffers to some extent" than said they would prioritize environmental protection "even at the risk of curbing economic growth." Soon thereafter, Shell announced it would halt its investments in solar and wind power.
Policymakers took note. As gas prices continued their upward trajectory, climate legislation to cap carbon emissions garnered less support in the U.S. Senate last summer than it had in 2003 and 2005. Confronted by chants of "Drill, baby, drill," Senate and House Democrats, led by candidate Barack Obama, embraced offshore oil exploration, reversing nearly a quarter-century of opposition. When it came time to justify stimulus investments in energy efficiency and renewables, the president did so in the name of job creation, not polar bears. And, last month, after floating the idea of forcing cap-and- trade legislation through Congress as part of the budget, the White House quickly backed down in the face of opposition from Senate Democrats, especially those from the hard-hit Midwest.
Today, Beavan and others pitch green lifestyles as thrifty ways to make ends meet in a difficult economy. And, no doubt, many Americans are seeking out some form of (in)voluntary simplicity in response to the financial crisis. But making virtue of necessity is not the same as making necessity of virtue. Whatever romanticized vision of a simpler life that might have existed a year or two ago has largely been replaced by a fearful vision of a life of poverty or, at least, greater insecurity. Today, the Times and other newspapers run stories about how Americans are coping with their economic, not ecological, anxieties.
Of course, environmentalism itself has not disappeared. Earth Day was celebrated last week, magazines and marketers continue to use green to sell to upscale audiences, and legislation to cap carbon emissions, albeit heavily watered-down, could still pass Congress. But the cultural moment marked by the ubiquity of green self-help, apocalypse talk, and cheery utopianism has passed. It is tempting to reduce this retrenchment to economic pressures alone, with concrete short-term concerns trumping more abstract worries about the future. But a closer look at the causes of the green bubble reveals a more complicated story, not just about the nature of environmentalism but about modern American life itself.
Print
COMMENTS (76)
Michael and Ted,
Wow, please share your telepathic powers. Apparently you know what the 'greens'are about without bothering to listen to them.
You might want to look beyond your magical breakthrough dogma, you might realize that there is more to people than you see. Planting a garden might not stop the climate crisis, but it does provide a deeper connection to our consumption habits.
Jesse Jenkins talks about solutions and is respected by many of the 'greens' that you all vilify. The two of you, on the other hand, are increasingly irrelevant and boring.
Michael and Ted,
Wow, please share your telepathic powers. Apparently you know what the 'greens'are about without bothering to listen to them.
You might want to look beyond your magical breakthrough dogma, you might realize that there is more to people than you see. Planting a garden might not stop the climate crisis, but it does provide a deeper connection to our consumption habits.
Jesse Jenkins talks about solutions and is respected by many of the 'greens' that you all vilify. The two of you, on the other hand, are increasingly irrelevant and boring.
This is the most ridiculous and non-factual analysis I have ever seen of the U.S. environmental movement. This interpretation completely ignores the refereed literature on this topic. Why is the New Republic allowing this sort of drivel to appear? Don't you have any fact checkers?
Dr. Robert Brulle
Professor of Sociology and Environmental Science
Drexel University
This is the most ridiculous and non-factual analysis I have ever seen of the U.S. environmental movement. This interpretation completely ignores the refereed literature on this topic. Why is the New Republic allowing this sort of drivel to appear? Don't you have any fact checkers?
Dr. Robert Brulle
Professor of Sociology and Environmental Science
Drexel University
The Obama administration has embraced much of The Breakthrough Institute's agenda in response to the Great Recession, appointing Chu as Secretary of Energy, investing in basic energy research, development and deployment and budgeting for a national energy education act. If environmentalists are increasingly irrelevant, lets focus on what is relevant.
The Obama administration has embraced much of The Breakthrough Institute's agenda in response to the Great Recession, appointing Chu as Secretary of Energy, investing in basic energy research, development and deployment and budgeting for a national energy education act. If environmentalists are increasingly irrelevant, lets focus on what is relevant.
As someone who grows my own food, has the right lightbulbs, agonizes about consumer choices and reads Pollan and Beavan, I think that this critique is spot-on.
My own environmentalism is a lifestyle. It's meaningless in terms of the larger problem. Shellenberger and Nordhaus are doing important work. They are figuring out what lies beyond the dour Victorian choices (choices I can't seem to stop myself from making) that constitute modern environmentalism.
As someone who grows my own food, has the right lightbulbs, agonizes about consumer choices and reads Pollan and Beavan, I think that this critique is spot-on.
My own environmentalism is a lifestyle. It's meaningless in terms of the larger problem. Shellenberger and Nordhaus are doing important work. They are figuring out what lies beyond the dour Victorian choices (choices I can't seem to stop myself from making) that constitute modern environmentalism.
That this article will receive the typical harsh response from guilt-driven eco-friends only proves that it provides a well-reasoned assessment of the current environmental movement. Well done! Give credit to The New Republic for publishing a different viewpoint.
That this article will receive the typical harsh response from guilt-driven eco-friends only proves that it provides a well-reasoned assessment of the current environmental movement. Well done! Give credit to The New Republic for publishing a different viewpoint.
I think the article is an excellent bit of opinion and judging by the comments a bunch of sacred cows were very properly gored. Iparticularily enjoyed the highlighting of contradictions within self conscious environmental movements.
I think the article is an excellent bit of opinion and judging by the comments a bunch of sacred cows were very properly gored. Iparticularily enjoyed the highlighting of contradictions within self conscious environmental movements.
Bravo! Some sanity and truth-telling at last. CO2 and the "environment" are to the greens what sex was to the Victorians or what Western society is to the Islamists. Science, much less genuine human needs and desires, are irrelevant. Instead, "environmentalism" has become the provence of wealthy elites who aim to impose their sick sense of "virtue" on others. Until you "environmentalists" give up your mansions and private planes (yes, that includes the Goracle), and trash your cars in favor of public transit to get to the organic grocery store, and actually live the materially barren lifestyle you advocate for everyone else, you really should just STFU.
Bravo! Some sanity and truth-telling at last. CO2 and the "environment" are to the greens what sex was to the Victorians or what Western society is to the Islamists. Science, much less genuine human needs and desires, are irrelevant. Instead, "environmentalism" has become the provence of wealthy elites who aim to impose their sick sense of "virtue" on others. Until you "environmentalists" give up your mansions and private planes (yes, that includes the Goracle), and trash your cars in favor of public transit to get to the organic grocery store, and actually live the materially barren lifestyle you advocate for everyone else, you really should just STFU.
Thank you for a dead-on analysis. It's time we spoke truth to the often deeply irrational green movement. Conservation, pollution reduction, renewable resources, and efficiency are all logical premises that the vast majority of people can understand and do strive toward. Unfortunately the green philosophy has been co-opted by blowhards like Al Gore and wealthy urban liberals who think its the epitome of 'green' to drive their Prius an extra 20 miles out of their way to buy organic local produce.
Thank you for a dead-on analysis. It's time we spoke truth to the often deeply irrational green movement. Conservation, pollution reduction, renewable resources, and efficiency are all logical premises that the vast majority of people can understand and do strive toward. Unfortunately the green philosophy has been co-opted by blowhards like Al Gore and wealthy urban liberals who think its the epitome of 'green' to drive their Prius an extra 20 miles out of their way to buy organic local produce.
A tame if accurate summary of what is going on. The green movement will one day soon be seen as the product of the richer days of the late 20th Century and first years of the 21st. It will be demolished by technological development of the sort that will remove the need for the sort financially induced ruinous withcraft currently practised by the green movement. Among them will be revealing the looming proof that CO2 has no part in global warming but H2O does.
None of this is to say that we are pristine guardians of our environment, because we are not. But the alarmists are costing the rest of us an unnecessary fortune that would be much better deployed in improving our much more obvious fail ... view full comment
A tame if accurate summary of what is going on. The green movement will one day soon be seen as the product of the richer days of the late 20th Century and first years of the 21st. It will be demolished by technological development of the sort that will remove the need for the sort financially induced ruinous withcraft currently practised by the green movement. Among them will be revealing the looming proof that CO2 has no part in global warming but H2O does.
None of this is to say that we are pristine guardians of our environment, because we are not. But the alarmists are costing the rest of us an unnecessary fortune that would be much better deployed in improving our much more obvious failings of that guardianship the biggest priority among them being improving the lives of the poorest.
I love the "Planting a garden might not stop the climate crisis, but it does provide a deeper connection to our consumption habits." comment.
It sure does provide a deeper connection, a deeper connection to my grocery store. Who wants to spend hours upon hours weeding and maintaining a garden? I sure as hell don't, spent too many hours on it already and it sucks donkey dongles. It's nice that you feel I should be forced to do it though, fascist that you are.
I love the "Planting a garden might not stop the climate crisis, but it does provide a deeper connection to our consumption habits." comment.
It sure does provide a deeper connection, a deeper connection to my grocery store. Who wants to spend hours upon hours weeding and maintaining a garden? I sure as hell don't, spent too many hours on it already and it sucks donkey dongles. It's nice that you feel I should be forced to do it though, fascist that you are.
The reason green is down is three fold.
First, people now have a vague idea of how costly the green lifestyle is. Cap and trade doubles their electricity bill. Not drilling drives up the cost of their gasoline. Bankrupting the coal industry will put them on the dole. Wind power means they will brownouts on hot summer days. And, they finally realize that living green means they have an hour a day less free time.
Second, greens have lost their credibility. The disasters that Algore and his priests promised haven't occurred. Fewer hurricanes, not more. Colder temperatures, not higher. James Hansen caught fudging his data. Solar astronomers talking abo ... view full comment
The reason green is down is three fold.
First, people now have a vague idea of how costly the green lifestyle is. Cap and trade doubles their electricity bill. Not drilling drives up the cost of their gasoline. Bankrupting the coal industry will put them on the dole. Wind power means they will brownouts on hot summer days. And, they finally realize that living green means they have an hour a day less free time.
Second, greens have lost their credibility. The disasters that Algore and his priests promised haven't occurred. Fewer hurricanes, not more. Colder temperatures, not higher. James Hansen caught fudging his data. Solar astronomers talking about a Mini Ice Age.
Third, people are beginning to understand that green guarantees the really poor in the world eternity poverty. If America goes green, Americans will drive Honda Fits instead of Honda Accords. If Africa or Asia goes green, Africans and Asians will eat less and get less medical care. More child deaths, shorter life expectancy.
Green is the modern Moloch, a religion that demands its believers sacrifice their present for unlikely benefits in the future.
Excellent article with one major omission. The writers fail to acknowledge the obvious role of elite secularization in the green movement's yearning for connectedness and meaningful living. Environmentalism is the new religion for a significant portion of these folks - complete with global warming apocolypse visions having become an article of faith.
Excellent article with one major omission. The writers fail to acknowledge the obvious role of elite secularization in the green movement's yearning for connectedness and meaningful living. Environmentalism is the new religion for a significant portion of these folks - complete with global warming apocolypse visions having become an article of faith.
It's an interesting piece, and thought provoking.
My thought is that this piece is all about marking the extremes of a swinging pendulum. What's more to the point is the underlying current outside of the extremes. We as a society are becoming more aware of our environment.
Media, well before Al Gore, were running lots of shows on the environment, animals etc. Our kids are getting this early and often. It's a cultural shift at different points of progress around the world.
In China, they care very much about how the world views them. The Olympics were an excellent example. They don't want to be able to see their air either.
So you might say a bubble burst, just as in our tech bubble, but technol ... view full comment
It's an interesting piece, and thought provoking.
My thought is that this piece is all about marking the extremes of a swinging pendulum. What's more to the point is the underlying current outside of the extremes. We as a society are becoming more aware of our environment.
Media, well before Al Gore, were running lots of shows on the environment, animals etc. Our kids are getting this early and often. It's a cultural shift at different points of progress around the world.
In China, they care very much about how the world views them. The Olympics were an excellent example. They don't want to be able to see their air either.
So you might say a bubble burst, just as in our tech bubble, but technology is alive and well and so is the green movement.
The article has captured the inherent inconsistencies in the environmental movement -- one that is dominated by an extreme that seems to beleive we would all be better off if we abandoned capitalism the accompanying economic development and all lived the simple life of subsistence farmers.
Of course, they ignore third world countries where people who really have to provide their own food locally tend to be the absolute worst stewards of the environment. When faced with the choice of clear cutting rainforest to grow crops or letting their family starve, they behave as all of us would in a similiar situation: start the chainsaws.
The article has captured the inherent inconsistencies in the environmental movement -- one that is dominated by an extreme that seems to beleive we would all be better off if we abandoned capitalism the accompanying economic development and all lived the simple life of subsistence farmers.
Of course, they ignore third world countries where people who really have to provide their own food locally tend to be the absolute worst stewards of the environment. When faced with the choice of clear cutting rainforest to grow crops or letting their family starve, they behave as all of us would in a similiar situation: start the chainsaws.
Gorebull warming is the greatest farce ever told
Gorebull warming is the greatest farce ever told
I've had a vegetable garden all my adult life, mostly because you simply can't get decent commercially grown tomatoes. I can say with a certain amount of assurance that the belief by so called environmentalists that home gardening (on a small scale) is good for the environment is almost surely wrong due to the environmental costs of the tools (rototillers used once a year to turn over a couple hundred square feet anyone), irrigation with treated city water, fencing to keep out the deer and rabbits, etc.
I've had a vegetable garden all my adult life, mostly because you simply can't get decent commercially grown tomatoes. I can say with a certain amount of assurance that the belief by so called environmentalists that home gardening (on a small scale) is good for the environment is almost surely wrong due to the environmental costs of the tools (rototillers used once a year to turn over a couple hundred square feet anyone), irrigation with treated city water, fencing to keep out the deer and rabbits, etc.
The most important comment has already been made, but I wish to reinforce it: environmentalism is the religion of many people who have no other faith. Facts do not matter much to them; they have faith.
The most important comment has already been made, but I wish to reinforce it: environmentalism is the religion of many people who have no other faith. Facts do not matter much to them; they have faith.
Two comments -- one minor, one more significant. The first is that Bush did not "sign a global warming treaty in Rio DeJaniero." Rather, he signed Agenda 21 (which while foreshadowing lots of environmental treaties) was not a global warming treaty. Gore did sign this but, as noted, the Clinton/Gore Administration did nothing to seek a ratification of that treaty.
The second point is that resource management 9sustainable development, if you will) is more a question of the institutional framework within which that resource - whether energy or groundwater - is administered. Prior to the Progressive Era (roughly 1880), the natural path was for new concerns to emerge and new institutions evolv ... view full comment
Two comments -- one minor, one more significant. The first is that Bush did not "sign a global warming treaty in Rio DeJaniero." Rather, he signed Agenda 21 (which while foreshadowing lots of environmental treaties) was not a global warming treaty. Gore did sign this but, as noted, the Clinton/Gore Administration did nothing to seek a ratification of that treaty.
The second point is that resource management 9sustainable development, if you will) is more a question of the institutional framework within which that resource - whether energy or groundwater - is administered. Prior to the Progressive Era (roughly 1880), the natural path was for new concerns to emerge and new institutions evolve to better address them. Thus, when energy grew in importance, property rights were extended to sub-surface oil and that resource was (and remains) a sustainable resource. it is well managed and reserves continually expand to meet expanded demand (save when blocked by eco-theocrats). The tragedy is that the Progressive with their belief in the superiority of political over private management blocked that evolutionary process. The result is that as slowly America grew wealthier and environmental concerns grew in importance, only political remedies were entertained. That led to the creation of national parks but the economic preference of most Americans for wealth (smokestacks if you will) blocked the evolution of expanding property rights that might have slowly made it possible for wildlife, clean water and air, and other environmental amenities to be handled in a private, decentralized fashion like values that were integrated into a voluntary, property rights framework. Thus, while environmentalisst have in many ways become eco-theocrats, the failures of modern environmentalism polciy have much deeper roots than Pollin and company. CEI's web site (www.cei.org) contains further comments on the topic of free market (better property rights based) environmentalism.
This will be a bit redundant, but I just cannot resist thanking Nordhaus and Shellenberger for showing me the light. Here I was, just a typical liberal environmentalist, thinking the desperately poor were happy while the rich were wicked. I guess I just haven't really been thinking very deeply or clearly all these years. But these authors have shown me to be a straw man, so easy to send up in flames.
This will be a bit redundant, but I just cannot resist thanking Nordhaus and Shellenberger for showing me the light. Here I was, just a typical liberal environmentalist, thinking the desperately poor were happy while the rich were wicked. I guess I just haven't really been thinking very deeply or clearly all these years. But these authors have shown me to be a straw man, so easy to send up in flames.
Oh brother, what a silly column. First, there have been tremendous successes in the environmental movement over the past several decades, and they continue today. Breathe the air in Beijing, and breathe it in New York City, and tell me that environmental regulations haven't made a difference.
Second, little or no mention is made of the tremendous public relations efforts by industry against environmental science. Consider global warming, which now is probably occurring at rates even faster than predicted in the IPCC. The public perception of global warming is dramatically different from the scientific literature, thanks to a well coordinated campaign by pro-carbon forces.
Third, the bigg ... view full comment
Oh brother, what a silly column. First, there have been tremendous successes in the environmental movement over the past several decades, and they continue today. Breathe the air in Beijing, and breathe it in New York City, and tell me that environmental regulations haven't made a difference.
Second, little or no mention is made of the tremendous public relations efforts by industry against environmental science. Consider global warming, which now is probably occurring at rates even faster than predicted in the IPCC. The public perception of global warming is dramatically different from the scientific literature, thanks to a well coordinated campaign by pro-carbon forces.
Third, the biggest changes in our energy consumption will occur with little or no change in quality of life, and may actually improve it. Electricity consumption has had no growth over the past decade in California despite a steady growth in the economy; there was an improvement in efficiency. That improvement in efficiency is where the future lies. You don't have to be green to own a refrigerator that uses one quarter the energy of an old appliance.
with the cold weather the last few years, i find myself firing up the suburban a little earlier than needed just to warm her up. then off to the donut shop drive through. then off to work in the top of the sawmill cutting up trees for algore's new home addition.
with the cold weather the last few years, i find myself firing up the suburban a little earlier than needed just to warm her up. then off to the donut shop drive through. then off to work in the top of the sawmill cutting up trees for algore's new home addition.
There is a direct connection between the loss of belief in God and the passion for the only other choice - spatial temporal Earth; there is no hereafter; no hope; no ressurection for the eco-worshippers. Wise use (conservation) has morphed into irrational fear and disuse (preservation) Those who understand the Parable of the 10 Talents and apply it here, know what's wrong. God help the pagan earth worshippers for they either have false gods or no faith.
There is a direct connection between the loss of belief in God and the passion for the only other choice - spatial temporal Earth; there is no hereafter; no hope; no ressurection for the eco-worshippers. Wise use (conservation) has morphed into irrational fear and disuse (preservation) Those who understand the Parable of the 10 Talents and apply it here, know what's wrong. God help the pagan earth worshippers for they either have false gods or no faith.
The modern environmental movement arose out of the wreckage of the New Left. They call themselves Green because they're too yellow to admit they're really Reds. Why do you think Lenin's birthday was chosen to be the date of Earth Day?
The modern environmental movement arose out of the wreckage of the New Left. They call themselves Green because they're too yellow to admit they're really Reds. Why do you think Lenin's birthday was chosen to be the date of Earth Day?
Great points, made in such a way as to intentionally piss off liberals. Sigh. I guess you've gotta sell magazines.
As an environmentalist and global warming freakoutist, I've always rather taken it for granted that the movement has some serious flaws, just like my precious democrats are also full of it, just like my precious Hemingway was probably kind of a jerk, etc. Is it really so surprising that the Green movement (which I believe is here to stay) has its fair share of morons? It doesn't make the movement invalid, nor does it qualify it as a "bubble."
Great points, made in such a way as to intentionally piss off liberals. Sigh. I guess you've gotta sell magazines.
As an environmentalist and global warming freakoutist, I've always rather taken it for granted that the movement has some serious flaws, just like my precious democrats are also full of it, just like my precious Hemingway was probably kind of a jerk, etc. Is it really so surprising that the Green movement (which I believe is here to stay) has its fair share of morons? It doesn't make the movement invalid, nor does it qualify it as a "bubble."
The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991, p. 104) published by the "Club of Rome", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."
The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.
The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991, p. 104) published by the "Club of Rome", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."
The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.
Your statement that "greens note that climate change will have the greatest impact on the worlds poor, neglecting to mention that the poor have the most to gain from development fueled by fossil fuels" is very skewed.
Perhaps the poor do have an economic gain from allowing overseas manufacturing to take place on their soil. They may get jobs, and be forced to migrate to a smoggy city where they will be inhaling the toxic chemicals that go along with coal-fired power plants.
The deterioration in health, and rise of new healthcare problems in these poor areas are exactly what the world needs. More people who are chronically ill due to pollution.
The increase in coal-fired power ... view full comment
Your statement that "greens note that climate change will have the greatest impact on the worlds poor, neglecting to mention that the poor have the most to gain from development fueled by fossil fuels" is very skewed.
Perhaps the poor do have an economic gain from allowing overseas manufacturing to take place on their soil. They may get jobs, and be forced to migrate to a smoggy city where they will be inhaling the toxic chemicals that go along with coal-fired power plants.
The deterioration in health, and rise of new healthcare problems in these poor areas are exactly what the world needs. More people who are chronically ill due to pollution.
The increase in coal-fired power will also allow these newly "rich" people to watch their homes be destroyed in hurricanes and floods.
I'm not sure how the "greens" you speak of or anyone with a comfortable lifestyle have the most to lose when they are the ones living in an industrialized nation with relatively clean air.
It is ludacris to pretend that the poor in America as well as the world are not the ones being affected the most by climate change and pollution.
Offshore drilling was inevitable. But it's a stop gap measure at best. And, we aren't going to see oil for years. Everyone in Big Oil better cross their fingers, slaughter a goat, face the offices of National Review and pray 5 times a day, or whatever faith floats them. Cause just one little spill, and the Big Oil party will be over.
New CAFE standards are coming, today, and businesses are embracing them. Sad that it took 19 years, but better late than never.
Priuses definitely are a status symbol, but anyone with rudimentary math skills and a supposed understanding of economics can analyze hybrid car purchases and see that they make sense economically. Even if one is deluded into believing ga ... view full comment
Offshore drilling was inevitable. But it's a stop gap measure at best. And, we aren't going to see oil for years. Everyone in Big Oil better cross their fingers, slaughter a goat, face the offices of National Review and pray 5 times a day, or whatever faith floats them. Cause just one little spill, and the Big Oil party will be over.
New CAFE standards are coming, today, and businesses are embracing them. Sad that it took 19 years, but better late than never.
Priuses definitely are a status symbol, but anyone with rudimentary math skills and a supposed understanding of economics can analyze hybrid car purchases and see that they make sense economically. Even if one is deluded into believing gas prices will remain low forever, many of them (except for most of GM's mild hybrids) still make financial sense.
As plugin hybrids and EVs start appearing in dealer showrooms next year, sit back and watch the line form outside. Some might have paper in pencil in hand, but most have already done the math.
Even with a down economy and cheap gas, car sales overall are down but hybrid sales are up. Ford is the only one of the Big Three that's making it, their hybrids completely smash GM's and Chrysler's hybrids, and in the case of the Fusion hybrid it beats it's competition the Camry hybrid. 40% of Fusion sales thus far have been hybrids. So duh, it seems that the Hummerization of America wasn't a sustainable course.
There is plenty of greenwashing out there, but CFLs are another economic no brainer. Anyone who uses them, and I have for 9-10 years, knows how much of a payoff they provide. Analyses I've read show ridiculously inflated pricing ($10-$14 a bulb) that isn't close to reality ($2-$3 a bulb). At times, I've paid as little as 50 cents a bulb for CFLs. I have CFLs that are older than my 8 year old.
My wife harped on me to grow our own tomatoes. Decades ago, she learned what her grandparents knew that home grown tomatoes beat store bought junk. No questions asked. I just wished I could figure out the secret of growing 'em consistently here in the Great North Wet.
What moronity, as the first two posters noted. Michael and Ted's not-so-excellent stereotyping of environmentalists perpetuates half-truths, lumping all enviros in one basket and more, all while ignoring that the current downturn in the importance of environmental issues to the average person, like previous such downturns, IS largely driven by the economy.
That said, it's no shock that a mag like TNR, which thrives on "contrarianism for stupidity's sake," would run something like this.
What moronity, as the first two posters noted. Michael and Ted's not-so-excellent stereotyping of environmentalists perpetuates half-truths, lumping all enviros in one basket and more, all while ignoring that the current downturn in the importance of environmental issues to the average person, like previous such downturns, IS largely driven by the economy.
That said, it's no shock that a mag like TNR, which thrives on "contrarianism for stupidity's sake," would run something like this.
The green movement has hurt itself with its own gross exaggerations. They created alarm by overreacting during paticularly hot spells. Now that there was a particularly cold and long winter, they lost credibility. They also created alarm by stating that we only had ten years to reverse carbon emissions substantially or face disastrous consequences and nobody really believes them, not even the very politicians who are trying to push Cap and Trade down our throats.
The green movement has hurt itself with its own gross exaggerations. They created alarm by overreacting during paticularly hot spells. Now that there was a particularly cold and long winter, they lost credibility. They also created alarm by stating that we only had ten years to reverse carbon emissions substantially or face disastrous consequences and nobody really believes them, not even the very politicians who are trying to push Cap and Trade down our throats.
Things I find interesting:
The population of the earth is estimated to have been 200 million when Christ was born.
The population of the earth is estimated to have been 310 million when Charlemagne was crowned in the year 1000.
The population of the earth didnt pass 1 billion until after the year 1800.
The population of the earth when I was a kid in 1950 was 2.5 billion.
The population of the earch reached 6.1 billion in 2000.
The population of the earth reached 6.454 billion in 2005.
Total population has more than doubled in my lifetime. There are now more than 2 people walking around for every person I saw when I was 10. They all need food, shelter, educa ... view full comment
Things I find interesting:
The population of the earth is estimated to have been 200 million when Christ was born.
The population of the earth is estimated to have been 310 million when Charlemagne was crowned in the year 1000.
The population of the earth didnt pass 1 billion until after the year 1800.
The population of the earth when I was a kid in 1950 was 2.5 billion.
The population of the earch reached 6.1 billion in 2000.
The population of the earth reached 6.454 billion in 2005.
Total population has more than doubled in my lifetime. There are now more than 2 people walking around for every person I saw when I was 10. They all need food, shelter, education, transportation, jobs etc.
In the last five years we have added more population to the total than the entire population of earth in the year 1,000.
The idea that we can continue to grow in numbers as we have been and all aspire to an ever higher standard of living is suspect on its face. You don't need to be a scientist or an economist to figure it out.
The idea that for the last 250 years we have pumped ever increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere through industrialization and the automobile and that we can continue to do so without any consequences is suspect on its face. The idea that ever more people on this planet can do so is truly suspect on its face.
What me worry? I'm old enough that the planet wont get too hot nor will the oil run out for the remainder of my life span.
Many good points have been made. I have a comment for Bob Ennis. Does one cold winter really disprove global warming? I've always understood global warming to mean climate shifts over long periods of time. It can amount to a two steps forward, one step back pattern can it not? I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion that the movement may have hurt itself with exaggerations. I'm merely saying that instances of cooling ought not be enough to discount an overall trend of warming.
Many good points have been made. I have a comment for Bob Ennis. Does one cold winter really disprove global warming? I've always understood global warming to mean climate shifts over long periods of time. It can amount to a two steps forward, one step back pattern can it not? I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion that the movement may have hurt itself with exaggerations. I'm merely saying that instances of cooling ought not be enough to discount an overall trend of warming.
The only thing shocking about this article is that it has to be said in the first place. Of course environmentalism is an individualistic form of conspicuous consumption with little impact on the (actual) environment. What's rather striking is that millions of semi-intelligent people are able to persuade themselves that their grocery bags MATTER. This is fetishism of the highest order.
The only thing shocking about this article is that it has to be said in the first place. Of course environmentalism is an individualistic form of conspicuous consumption with little impact on the (actual) environment. What's rather striking is that millions of semi-intelligent people are able to persuade themselves that their grocery bags MATTER. This is fetishism of the highest order.
An argument about nothing. Yes, concern for "the environment" (I hate that term....it should be "our life support system") waxes and wanes with "the economy" (I hate that term as well). But over time we manage to solve a particular problem: rivers that catch fire, acid rain, wetland loss, deforestation, etc., and then move on. CO2 and global warming represent a big problem that is taking us some time to come to grips with. But its not a made up problem. Its a set of verified facts, and sooner or later we will make our adjustments, change our energy use pattern and move on. Holding "the poor" up as an excuse for further inaction is ridiculous, because the people now whining about the poor, i. ... view full comment
An argument about nothing. Yes, concern for "the environment" (I hate that term....it should be "our life support system") waxes and wanes with "the economy" (I hate that term as well). But over time we manage to solve a particular problem: rivers that catch fire, acid rain, wetland loss, deforestation, etc., and then move on. CO2 and global warming represent a big problem that is taking us some time to come to grips with. But its not a made up problem. Its a set of verified facts, and sooner or later we will make our adjustments, change our energy use pattern and move on. Holding "the poor" up as an excuse for further inaction is ridiculous, because the people now whining about the poor, i.e. Republicans, are the same ones who have done nothing to alleviate poverty all these years.
The fact that nuclear power is not even considered as part of a solution to "Global Warming", displays the lack of seriouness to "solving the enerergy crisis"
The fact that nuclear power is not even considered as part of a solution to "Global Warming", displays the lack of seriouness to "solving the enerergy crisis"
This article raises many very interesting points about the green movement, but fails to even hint at one very important point -- that is, the green movement may well be fueled in large part by the 'other green' -- good old money. There are many who have made lucrative careers of being green, and many (who are no more green than the man in the moon) who see exploiting the green movement as a money making opportunity. Most are hypocritical at best.
Most importantly, the authors do not address the reality of humankind. We are still -- in the grand scheme of things -- a new species who are still in the early stages of our evolution -- which in our case is social instead of biological. For many ... view full comment
This article raises many very interesting points about the green movement, but fails to even hint at one very important point -- that is, the green movement may well be fueled in large part by the 'other green' -- good old money. There are many who have made lucrative careers of being green, and many (who are no more green than the man in the moon) who see exploiting the green movement as a money making opportunity. Most are hypocritical at best.
Most importantly, the authors do not address the reality of humankind. We are still -- in the grand scheme of things -- a new species who are still in the early stages of our evolution -- which in our case is social instead of biological. For many, many generations we will still experience the harsh realities of (social) natural selection -- fierce competition for resources, vast inequalities and yes, a dying out of those who are less "fit". Our social engineering has attempted to fool mother nature, but in the end, nature will take it course -- with or without us. It could be hypothesized that what the eco-aware elite truly need is psychotherapy to deal with their misplaced guilt.
Dr. Brulle,
Professor of Sociology & Environmental Science? I think that nonsensical combination sums it up nicely.
Dr. Brulle,
Professor of Sociology & Environmental Science? I think that nonsensical combination sums it up nicely.
A lot of people, including myself, are skeptical about global warming predictions. There are way too many variables and I haven't seen any scientific predictions that have come true or computer models based on past data that accurately predict the future or parts of the past.
But the heart of the matter is this. You have a Stuff While People Like condition: Knowing What's Best for Poor People.
A lot of people, including myself, are skeptical about global warming predictions. There are way too many variables and I haven't seen any scientific predictions that have come true or computer models based on past data that accurately predict the future or parts of the past.
But the heart of the matter is this. You have a Stuff While People Like condition: Knowing What's Best for Poor People.
What is the purpose of this article?
The environmental movement has had an enormous amount of success on BIG issues (acid rain, endangered species, the ozone hole). The Clean Air Act is an incredible success story.
What's changed, I think, is that many issues that used to be part of the environmental agenda, and discarded as such, are now accepted by society as a whole. It was nothing a decade ago for a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE to dismiss Al Gore as "Ozone Al" who's "way out there." That would never happen today, as it would offend too many and such a person would run the risk of being labeled anti-scientific. Even the most environmentally uninformed recycles, buys the right light bulbs, a ... view full comment
What is the purpose of this article?
The environmental movement has had an enormous amount of success on BIG issues (acid rain, endangered species, the ozone hole). The Clean Air Act is an incredible success story.
What's changed, I think, is that many issues that used to be part of the environmental agenda, and discarded as such, are now accepted by society as a whole. It was nothing a decade ago for a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE to dismiss Al Gore as "Ozone Al" who's "way out there." That would never happen today, as it would offend too many and such a person would run the risk of being labeled anti-scientific. Even the most environmentally uninformed recycles, buys the right light bulbs, at least considers fuel economy of vehicles, pays attention to the amountof their waste, etc. The environmental movement has already won in many regards, because they've moved the mainstream far closer to the green side.
I don't think the "Green" movement has anything to fear from a temporary decline in popular sentiment. The worldwide recession is the best thing to ever happen to the environment. People cannot afford to buy things and therefore consumption of everything is way down. When the economy picks up and people have more money the poll numbers will improve for green iniatives. Now if only all the money was wasted on treating people in their last 10 years of life could be redirected to the benefit of the collective we would be getting somewhere. I know when I am old and useless (a net drain cost wise)I will look for an environmentally sensitive way to die. The best thing about national health c ... view full comment
I don't think the "Green" movement has anything to fear from a temporary decline in popular sentiment. The worldwide recession is the best thing to ever happen to the environment. People cannot afford to buy things and therefore consumption of everything is way down. When the economy picks up and people have more money the poll numbers will improve for green iniatives. Now if only all the money was wasted on treating people in their last 10 years of life could be redirected to the benefit of the collective we would be getting somewhere. I know when I am old and useless (a net drain cost wise)I will look for an environmentally sensitive way to die. The best thing about national health care is it will force these choices based on finite resources.
I don't think the "Green" movement has anything to fear from a temporary decline in popular sentiment. The worldwide recession is the best thing to ever happen to the environment. People cannot afford to buy things and therefore consumption of everything is way down. When the economy picks up and people have more money the poll numbers will improve for green iniatives. Now if only all the money that was wasted on treating people in their last 10 years of life could be redirected to the benefit of the collective we would be getting somewhere. I know when I am old and useless (a net drain cost wise)I will look for an environmentally sensitive way to die. The best thing about national hea ... view full comment
I don't think the "Green" movement has anything to fear from a temporary decline in popular sentiment. The worldwide recession is the best thing to ever happen to the environment. People cannot afford to buy things and therefore consumption of everything is way down. When the economy picks up and people have more money the poll numbers will improve for green iniatives. Now if only all the money that was wasted on treating people in their last 10 years of life could be redirected to the benefit of the collective we would be getting somewhere. I know when I am old and useless (a net drain cost wise)I will look for an environmentally sensitive way to die. The best thing about national health care is it will force these choices based on finite resources.
I'm not exactly clear what the picture of the Whole Foods store at the top of the article has to do with any of this. At our nearest store in North Carolina, business has been booming, and defies all cultural and socioeconomic stereotypes, least of all, Chicken-Littles showing off their Priuses.
I'm not exactly clear what the picture of the Whole Foods store at the top of the article has to do with any of this. At our nearest store in North Carolina, business has been booming, and defies all cultural and socioeconomic stereotypes, least of all, Chicken-Littles showing off their Priuses.
Professor Brulle,
Those referring the journals you refer to are the exact sorts of people the authors of this piece are talking about. The provincialism of academia blinds you to this fact.
Professor Brulle,
Those referring the journals you refer to are the exact sorts of people the authors of this piece are talking about. The provincialism of academia blinds you to this fact.
To Chris Laybourn. I did not mean to imply that one coled winter negates concern. My point was that if that is so, then one hot summer does not prove that we have a crisis. There is general agreement that there is a long term warming trend. The disagreement is about how much is attributable to anthropogenic CO2 emissions and what can be done about it.
To Chris Laybourn. I did not mean to imply that one coled winter negates concern. My point was that if that is so, then one hot summer does not prove that we have a crisis. There is general agreement that there is a long term warming trend. The disagreement is about how much is attributable to anthropogenic CO2 emissions and what can be done about it.
Irrelevant, myopic and sotto voce dramatic, with a tone of weary condescention that attempts to dress this boring mess in the robes of a sobering truth. The popularity of "green" has slipped? Who cares - please, bust the Bubble. We have work to do. Climate change is a fact, not a cultural artifact. Next?
Irrelevant, myopic and sotto voce dramatic, with a tone of weary condescention that attempts to dress this boring mess in the robes of a sobering truth. The popularity of "green" has slipped? Who cares - please, bust the Bubble. We have work to do. Climate change is a fact, not a cultural artifact. Next?
Co2 is not a poison or a pollutant. Nor is it a relevance in larger quantities than at present in the atmosphere and if we stop NOW all CO2 production there will still be 97% wafting around courtesy of Mother Nature. All the Green hysteria about 'tipping points' is utter fantasy. A fantasy that the USA will pay for in huge tax rises. Congratulations on allowing President Obama to appoint the most politico/scientific posts to retards. Please don't quote the IPCC doomsayings as being accurate. Also garbage in/out computer modeling is never going to convince anyone except Al Gore, who is on another planet anyway and has another agenda which is to rob both rich and poor alike using carbon t ... view full comment
Co2 is not a poison or a pollutant. Nor is it a relevance in larger quantities than at present in the atmosphere and if we stop NOW all CO2 production there will still be 97% wafting around courtesy of Mother Nature. All the Green hysteria about 'tipping points' is utter fantasy. A fantasy that the USA will pay for in huge tax rises. Congratulations on allowing President Obama to appoint the most politico/scientific posts to retards. Please don't quote the IPCC doomsayings as being accurate. Also garbage in/out computer modeling is never going to convince anyone except Al Gore, who is on another planet anyway and has another agenda which is to rob both rich and poor alike using carbon trading lies as truth.
To James Boley:
Since when has climate ever not changed? Its like claiming that tidal erosion is a fact not a cultural artifact.
To James Boley:
Since when has climate ever not changed? Its like claiming that tidal erosion is a fact not a cultural artifact.
This was a very insightful article for me. I now have a better understanding of why so many of the folks in Hollywood go around telling us how green they are. They have the greatest need to validate themselves after taking so much money for their artistic gifts.
This gives me an idea for a new Cap and Trade scam. If I were the Governator I would pass a law that every greenie in Hollywood after a cap of $1M per year, must trade their guilt by living in a hut in a developing country for 1 week for every excess million, and pay that excess to the poor. That should shut them up about being green and caring for the poor.
This was a very insightful article for me. I now have a better understanding of why so many of the folks in Hollywood go around telling us how green they are. They have the greatest need to validate themselves after taking so much money for their artistic gifts.
This gives me an idea for a new Cap and Trade scam. If I were the Governator I would pass a law that every greenie in Hollywood after a cap of $1M per year, must trade their guilt by living in a hut in a developing country for 1 week for every excess million, and pay that excess to the poor. That should shut them up about being green and caring for the poor.
Head of nail squarely hit. Environmentalism jumped the tracks from a focus on improving known, measurable threats to human health and the environment in the 60's - 80's to a religious ideology that blames humans, human activities, and the human quest for comfort and security from 90's to current, the movement loses credibility with intelligent people who understand something about risk, cost/benefit analysis, and recognize fear mongering and hyperbole when they see it.
Head of nail squarely hit. Environmentalism jumped the tracks from a focus on improving known, measurable threats to human health and the environment in the 60's - 80's to a religious ideology that blames humans, human activities, and the human quest for comfort and security from 90's to current, the movement loses credibility with intelligent people who understand something about risk, cost/benefit analysis, and recognize fear mongering and hyperbole when they see it.
Hopefully the fever has finally broken. Wouldn't it be encouraging if we could finally get folks to stop their fascination with the extreme and get some things fixed in this country. I consider myself a social centrist, slightly left of center, and an economic moderate, slightly right of center. I wish there was a viable center in this country. We must first address the economic vitality and sustainability of this country, without which we will not be able to solve all of the other problems we face. This article was encouraging.
Hopefully the fever has finally broken. Wouldn't it be encouraging if we could finally get folks to stop their fascination with the extreme and get some things fixed in this country. I consider myself a social centrist, slightly left of center, and an economic moderate, slightly right of center. I wish there was a viable center in this country. We must first address the economic vitality and sustainability of this country, without which we will not be able to solve all of the other problems we face. This article was encouraging.
There is not much I can add except my "having been there and done that". I grew up on a farm in Germany in the 50's. Close to the land? Oh yes, including eating dust behind a team of horses plowing fields. It convinced me to study hard and to join the elite in the city.
Whenever I felt sorry for myself for working insane hours to get ahead in this world I thought about my grandparents on that farm. And I felt better right away. My grandparents would believe that I lost my mind if I were to advocate returning to those good old days.
And a word to Jack Polis: to "not waste money on people in their last 10 years and to redirect it to the benefit of the collective" is something you are ... view full comment
There is not much I can add except my "having been there and done that". I grew up on a farm in Germany in the 50's. Close to the land? Oh yes, including eating dust behind a team of horses plowing fields. It convinced me to study hard and to join the elite in the city.
Whenever I felt sorry for myself for working insane hours to get ahead in this world I thought about my grandparents on that farm. And I felt better right away. My grandparents would believe that I lost my mind if I were to advocate returning to those good old days.
And a word to Jack Polis: to "not waste money on people in their last 10 years and to redirect it to the benefit of the collective" is something you are free to apply to yourself. But beyond that it is merely a recycling of policies of Nazi Germany . It is indeed a slippery slope to tyranny.