Warm words won't save us
I am interested, and hence would value any others' views, on the relative merits of what gets hyped, talked about... and actually addressed, for anything other than political, activist or ratings-driven agendas.
For instance, the other day I stumbled across what seemed to me an extraordinary discrepancy in positive climate word vs. deed, or effort vs. result, in the form of the launch of Cool Earth
Now, I stand ready to be persuaded otherwise, but if a years' worth of deforestation is responsible for a greater CO2 consequence (in terms of absorption) than the entire pollution (a mate of mine has pointed out that word seems to have been dropped in favour of 'emissions', with consequentially rosier allusions) created by the USA, then surely this warrants a serious mention at least? Or at least decent debate?
Or are we going to keep on with all this faffing about, arguing about who says what, with the big stuff locked in inertia and eco-chancers making capital out of sideshows?
I truly wish for clear leadership, and non-agenda-skewed information, based on genuine enviROIs, such that I can make decisions and act to improve my kids' future chances.
BBC - How Gr8 is G8?
No comments:
Post a Comment