Washington Post article generates sceptic deluge 20 September 04

Mark,

Well done, again, for putting yourself in the front-line.

My first reaction is that I am not at all surprised by the reaction you are getting. You are touching on issues which go pretty close to how people live their lives. It’s not a good feeling to believe that the way you are living your lives is responsible for the death and destruction you see on the news. People like to see themselves as caring citizens; that the Volvo car they drive will protect their children and so on; and you are dispelling that warm glow.

It is a very big project to change the way we live our lives to take account of Global Warming!! As you seem to imply, politicians, in particular, have a moral responsibility to take a lead with this – and I am glad that in the UK, all the major political parties seem to have signed up to doing something about Global Warming. In the US, I think we have to hope that the political parties are going to have the courage to take this issue on. Why don’t you have a chat with your friend, Al Gore? ;-)

On a personal level, you have helped generate a debate with my Canadian-born wife (partly because I have become rather boring about the problem of Global Warming). She does not find it particularly credible that North Americans are more polluting than Europeans since we have the same “developed-country” lifestyles. Indeed, she points out that our cities tend to be dirtier etc.

So, how is it that, as you claim, “With only 4 percent of the Earth’s population, the United States is responsible for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions.”?

Can you recommend a good site that could source this information and explain why this is so?

PS. Update of 21 September – Thanks, Lynn, for your response.

And keep on writing, Mark. I’m sure many more “silent Americans” would have heeded your message.

Some skeptics are so simply because they support Bush on other issues, and want to justify their vote without feeling guilty. Others, as Peter points out, PERCEIVE a threat to their lifestyle or the economy if they reduce GH gasses, or have an aversion to being the bad guys.

Re Europe’s less per capita GH emisions (I believe it is 1/2 of Americans), part of it is because of their good, affordable public transportation, and living closer to work/school & each other, smaller cars, and somewhat simpler life-style. See, Europeans, who have a lifestyle similar to Americans’, emit only 1/2 the GH gasses, and aren’t dead, unhappy, or unhealthy for it.

The point is we can have our cake and eat it too, at least an extent. If the “fear skeptics” would read NATURAL CAPITALISM by Paul Hawkens and Amory Lovins, they would see how we can reduce our GH emissions by 3/4, without lowering our living standard. I’m partly on the way there. There is, however an economic problem if we don’t lower our GH emission—EXTREME INEFFICIENCY, which is bad for the economy, even without environmental considerations.

I found the story at climateark.org myself. When I saw who’d written it, I printed out a copy at once! It’s nice of you to brave the lion’s den of American public opinion, especially since, deep down, you probably already knew the response you will get.

All I can say is, the leaders and general public of medieval times all chose to believe that the world was flat, and stubbornly resisted anyone or any evidence that said otherwise. But all the denial in the world didn’t change the fact that the world WASN’T flat! Same here, with GW/CC. They can deny it till the Great Die Off strikes them, but it won’t change the fact that GW/CC is REAL, and there are, and will continue to be, consequences to that.

Keep sounding the alarm, Mark. Maybe SOMEBODY is listening (I hope)!

Thanks to you all for your support – I sincerely hope that there are a lot of “silent Americans” out there who do agree with us all that global warming is a major problem. It’s true that I’m mostly moved to write to a newspaper when I disagree with something.

Here’s a very amusing one I got today:

“Mr Lynas, Your entire article should have consisted of the following line in your last paragraph: “With only 4 percent of the Earth’s population, the United States is responsible for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions.” This was a shameless swipe at the US for causing all the problems in the world. THAT was the true message of your article. There was no mention of the crap spewed into the atmosphere by Europe, Asia and Russia.

And another thing, how did you “journey across the world investigating its impacts for my book” ? Did you use one of those awful greenhouse gas pumping jets to make that trip? Do you drive? Until you guys move into caves and get rid of your own cars, leave the rest of us alone. Bottom line is this Mr. Lynas, you are an environmental hypocrite.”

And my reply (I know I shouldn’t wind them up, but…):

“I’m afraid that your email made me laugh – this defensive reaction is very common amongst American citizens who feel that their country is being unfairly disparaged. But I’m afraid that the issue with regard to greenhouse gas profligacy is a fact – you can find the stats in many different places. Per person US greenhouse gas emissions are double what they are in Europe, a hundred times what they are in Bangladesh and so on. There’s no point being in denial about it and trying to blame others. Deal with it. P.S. No, I don’t have a car.”

And an appropriate one for a U.S. paper. If you had written for Europeans, you might have compared their emissions to those of Indians. I compare my Indian relatives’ emissions to those of village India. And I tell village Indians about solar power and biogas. We all can reduce GH emissions, but some of us can reduce a lot more.

A response to that “no car” writer would be to attack the problem, not the person, or the problem will never be solved. There is not much wrong in GH emissions if they result ultimately in reducing GH emissions, as I am sure Mark’s trip will do—esp. compared to emissions from those who fly around the world to block the Kyoto Protocol.

If simply sharing info was enough to get people to reduce GW, Mark’s trip would not have been necessary – the sci reports would have been enough. But it is obvious we need human stories to motivate people. And-the hardest part-people need to grow up & get over their ego problems, so as to avert catastrophe for all. That is why I promote the Little Way of Environmental Healing. I try to get people to do small things, take a few baby steps, get small feel-good experiences, then take larger steps. Arrogant people only see big – big accusations against them, big expectations from them – and that immobilizes them, or makes them worse. I really don’t know what to do about all this arrogance that is the root cause of GW & of preventing solutions (which would save money & help the economy). Is there a psychologist or religous healer in the house???

Well, our debate continues. The SUV fanatic came back with a hilarious riposte this morning:

“Yep. I’ve heard that one before. Those selfish, rich Americans should give up their way of life so the rest of the world will be a better place. You’re not concerned about pollution or hurricanes, you’re more interested in eliminating the economic power of the US. I’m getting a clearer picture of your politics…it’s that old Socialism thing that’s been tried over and over again and always fails miserably. So who will buy all those great products the rest of the world dumps on us if we reduce our consumption by 80%? Certainly not that colonial power, Great “400 Years of Global Oppression” Britain! I guess your Utopia is a place where everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator.

Bye, bye Corvette?? You’ll have to pull it out of my cold dead hands. Excuse me, I have to go out now and fill it up with 20 gallons of high test.”

Cold dead hands? I love that. I’m beginning to think that this is a wind-up…