But it was a very interesting program, well worth watching, and from this side of the pond a revealing glimpse into American politics and the dominance of business interests. It was worth the time spent watching it.

There IS NO coherent strategy.

Best,

D

It is because of their different political system: when they elect a leader (PM, president) they get a whole new cabinet that matches, so if they elect a Democrat (equivalent)they can try out an entire Democratic renewables policy.

As a result, they get to try renewables policy for years at a time. Many times that has paid off, before getting submerged again in conservative swings backwards.

We don’t.

It is only sheer chance, due to ourextremely under-informed voters, that we ever get a Dem pres and true congress control. Last had it in 92-94.

And that program contributed to misinforming voters. It is not true that gas prices derailed L_W cap and trade, bipartisanly. Republicans derailed it, as they derailed rps and ptc repeatedly for decades. Same as they ever was.

They didn’t start derailing renewable policy this summer. They have done so for at least 30 years to my knowledge.

But much of the rest was weak. Maybe I have read too much ClimateProgress, but the program had very little to say about what we ought to be doing. Wind got some attention only via Pickens but there was no discussion of how big a player it could be and no rebuttal of the standard critiques of wind. There was only a passing mention of solar. No real discussion of efficiency. Instead we get a lot on CCS!

Topic after topic was developed, then dropped in midstream. When the program switched (abruptly) from Pickens to the next topic, my wife said, “Wait! What is happening with Pickens’ project?” His plans were presented but the viewer would be excused for not knowing how far along it is. It would have taken only a couple of summary sentences to provide closure. My impression is that the program was put together in a rush with little editorial oversight.

In short, the viewer will have come away with the idea that there is no coherent strategy for dealing with either GW or energy. Very little for the viewer who wants to write his/her congressman to ask, “Why aren’t you supporting (blank)?” In the end I was hoping that this was Part 1 of a multi-part series.

“There is, therefore, no escaping the need for politics, for a robust international agreement that, among other things, commits America to sharing the burden for helping China and India develop without burning their piles of coal…”

To be sure, Friedman is not, at all, suggesting we can escape the need for politics or government action. To the contrary, he is very clear that we, for instance, need government to completely redesign the (domestic) energy marketplace.

So far, so good.

But when it comes to extra-domestic policy, it seems (although this may be an unfair reading), Friedman falls back on the, what-to-call-it?, “aspirational” approach?

Writes Friedman:
“A truly green America would be more valuable than 50 Kyoto Protocols. Emulation is always more effective than compulsion.”

On McKibben’s reading, Friedman, while not opposed to international treaties, dismisses their value and the need for them.

It does seem odd of Freidman to pit international diplomacy against the influence of domestic government action. There’s no inherent conflict between the US leading internationally by domestic example, and ALSO leading, or at least sharing the lead, in international diplomacy, is there? We need “both of the above.”

There’s nothing quite like looking out the window of a runaway train going downhill and hearing someone say, “That there looks like a sharp curve!”

Despite positive ‘chatter’ amongst politicians and pundits about ‘change’ do you really believe that it will occur in the degree we need it? Look in your heart of hearts and ask.

Oh, we’ll get lip service up the ying yang. Promises galore spilling forth from pie holes everywhere. Everything will be green, green, green!!!

The truth is, the truth you know in your heart of hearts, is that behind the curtain of ‘green wash’ it will be, to quote Jim Hansen, BAU (business as usual).

The consequences are going to be staggering, the earth in a slow motion train wreck.

Dill Weed

Websites like Realclimate are good, but this is a video world. Scientists need to put out some DVD’s and put on cable and airwaves TV, on the science of global warming to be made available freely to evevybody. Volume 1 of the DVD’s would be on the science, Volume 2 would be on debunking the misguided and inaccurate ‘Global Warming isn’t caused by Man’ points that are wrong, but keep coming up.