On the COP15 website, en.cop15.dk, there is information about the conference itself, committees, events that are leading up to the conference, and new information about the state of our environment, as it is found. Several articles on this site caught my attention.
Firstly, there was a list of ten myths about energy, by Michael Von Bulow. Most of these items were, surprisingly, good news. Such as the fact that solar energy is not really as expensive and out of reach as people think. Also, wind energy is a lot more accessible and practical than many admit. Also, marine energy has been successful off the coast of Northern Ireland, and, although the physics still remain difficult, some solutions have been found. Overall, the revealing of these truths is uplifting, and hopefully a nice foreshadowing to the tone that will shape the success of COP15.
Another article stated that the severe effects of Global Warming that were once predicted to hit in approximately 100 years, are now predicted to be present within the next 50 years, by 2060. One of the most fascinating aspects of this issue for me, is the fast approach of “water politics”. Who will it affect? When we start talking about the “right” to water, how will it work? This is going to be not only an interesting dynamic between first and third world countries, but the entire worldwide politics on this issue could be devastating. Will fingers point? Are the countries who have emitted the most greenhouse gases going to be held responsible for the lack of resources available to other countries?
Monday, September 28, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
Interest Groups in the policy process
In Kraft's chapter 3, "Making Environmental Policy," there are statements about agenda setting, which are critical to understanding how environmental policy comes to life. On page 57 in the introduction paragraph, Kraft states that "the striking difference between environmental policy decisions of the Clinton administration in the 1990's and the Bush administration in the 2000s makes clear that the views of a president and his top advisers matter a great deal." Where the person in charge and his advisers can make a great deal is in agenda setting.
It is so critical how the president and surrounding officers set priorities in the White House. The American people think about what they are being told to think about, often, and if something does not seem like an issue, they can easily forget about it. Clinton and Gore talked about the environment, and so their voters thought about it. Bush talked about the energy crisis, and the need for energy, so people worried about gas prices, and their personal spending.
What this brings to mind for me is the critical importance of (and I suppose my own belief in) Interest Groups. For most people, simply because you are a part of some organization or group that talks about an issue, your knowledge and passion on this issue can grow, regardless of what is most popular in the media. These groups of people will be the ones to, in a sense battle the masses when their issue is forgotten.
In other words, when the president (in this case George W.) is "setting the agenda" for the uninformed masses, it is critical to have groups who are passionate about something (in this case the effects of energy use on the environment) to bring up alternative options, or ways of thinking about it. As the book says on page 59, Bush talks about "insufficient reply that required more oil and gas drilling rather than conservation to reduce demand." Interest Groups can provide the balance; they can bring to the attention of the American people other needs, solutions, and standpoints.
It is so critical how the president and surrounding officers set priorities in the White House. The American people think about what they are being told to think about, often, and if something does not seem like an issue, they can easily forget about it. Clinton and Gore talked about the environment, and so their voters thought about it. Bush talked about the energy crisis, and the need for energy, so people worried about gas prices, and their personal spending.
What this brings to mind for me is the critical importance of (and I suppose my own belief in) Interest Groups. For most people, simply because you are a part of some organization or group that talks about an issue, your knowledge and passion on this issue can grow, regardless of what is most popular in the media. These groups of people will be the ones to, in a sense battle the masses when their issue is forgotten.
In other words, when the president (in this case George W.) is "setting the agenda" for the uninformed masses, it is critical to have groups who are passionate about something (in this case the effects of energy use on the environment) to bring up alternative options, or ways of thinking about it. As the book says on page 59, Bush talks about "insufficient reply that required more oil and gas drilling rather than conservation to reduce demand." Interest Groups can provide the balance; they can bring to the attention of the American people other needs, solutions, and standpoints.
Monday, September 7, 2009
9/7/09
Response to Speth-My first experience reading about environmental concerns in 2009.
Throughout various biology classes in high school, English classes, and general life, I have had some exposure to talking about environmental issues, but it's always something that I process quickly, and disregard. I am ashamed to say this, as much as I am aware of it. It's a hard topic to stomach, and many spend a lifetime avoiding information.
This semeser, my goal is not only to dive into this material and information about the state of our world, but to digest it, and figure out what can be done by someone in my position (socially, physically, financially, etc).
Speth, as a first reading was certainly a challenge. It is scary. A common response to fear is to run away, but when there is something that we clearly cannot outrun the only solution becomes to face it, head on.
Speth outlines some of the issues that we are now dealing with some 20 years fter the discovery of some of the most presssing environmental issues. The solutions that we found many years ago are not doing enough. The fight to restrain ourselves from overusing resources, energies and damaging fuels is a difficult one.
In the article, Speth outlines some of the most otable sentences from the IPCC's report in 2007. The collective evidence that global warming is happening, and at a rate that we never would have predicted, is enormous. For example, that 11 out of the past 12 years have been record breaking in global surface temperature. To have these consecutive years directly correspond to years that we have had the most output of greenhouse gases, seems to me to be undeniable evidence. Although most governmental bodies have acknowledged this, they, like me, are still in the first steps of starting to make real changes that can help sustain our environment and (eek!) prolong our existence.
Throughout various biology classes in high school, English classes, and general life, I have had some exposure to talking about environmental issues, but it's always something that I process quickly, and disregard. I am ashamed to say this, as much as I am aware of it. It's a hard topic to stomach, and many spend a lifetime avoiding information.
This semeser, my goal is not only to dive into this material and information about the state of our world, but to digest it, and figure out what can be done by someone in my position (socially, physically, financially, etc).
Speth, as a first reading was certainly a challenge. It is scary. A common response to fear is to run away, but when there is something that we clearly cannot outrun the only solution becomes to face it, head on.
Speth outlines some of the issues that we are now dealing with some 20 years fter the discovery of some of the most presssing environmental issues. The solutions that we found many years ago are not doing enough. The fight to restrain ourselves from overusing resources, energies and damaging fuels is a difficult one.
In the article, Speth outlines some of the most otable sentences from the IPCC's report in 2007. The collective evidence that global warming is happening, and at a rate that we never would have predicted, is enormous. For example, that 11 out of the past 12 years have been record breaking in global surface temperature. To have these consecutive years directly correspond to years that we have had the most output of greenhouse gases, seems to me to be undeniable evidence. Although most governmental bodies have acknowledged this, they, like me, are still in the first steps of starting to make real changes that can help sustain our environment and (eek!) prolong our existence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)