Bill Clinton on Green Jobs and the Economy

If you haven't called your senator's office yet about the Sanders amendment for Green jobs into the economic stimulus package, do it now! (see previous post)

Yesterday, Bill Clinton painted the picture that we're working for. Sure, we can get even better at messaging, but he definitely go the gist of it. (as an Obama supporter, I'm not convinced that Hilary's plan for green jobs is any better, but I'd love to hear other opinions on that)

"...The only way we can [save our planet and our grandchildren] is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work."

"And guess what? The only places in the world today in rich countries where you have rising wages and declining inequality are places that have generated more jobs than rich countries because they made a commitment we didn't. They got serious about a clean, efficient, green, independent energy future… If you want that in America, if you want the millions of jobs that will come from it, if you would like to see a new energy trust fund to finance solar energy and wind energy and biomass and responsible bio-fuels and electric hybrid plug-in vehicles that will soon get 100 miles a gallon, if you want every facility in this country to be made maximally energy efficient that will create millions and millions and millions of jobs, vote for her. She'll give it to you. She's got the right energy plan."

Focus The Nation Press

Williams College Focus The Nation gets its first local press coverage!

Below is the copy of our press release that was printed in iBerkshires earlier today.

Williams College Holds Focus The Nation

- January 29, 2008

Engaging everyone in working towards global warming solutions

On February 5th, the Williams Community can help build a climate positive world. Focus the Nation is a student-run event that promotes big picture policy changes as well as local innovation. Participants will hear from local voices, including the Williamstown Carbon Dioxide Lowering Committee and solar technology designer Craig Robertson. They will also hear perspectives from the frontiers of insurance, marketing, and global social, environmental and economic trends.

“It’s amazing how many people from all areas of the college and community are coming together to make Focus the Nation happen,” said Caroline Henry ’10, one of the day’s student organizers. “Global warming is so complex that it’s the ultimate problem for a liberal arts community to tackle.”

Participants will engage with global warming through class time, panel discussions, and ongoing action. Over 60 professors from all disciplines have pledged to focus class time on the issue, including Professor Zimmerberg of the psychology department, who will discuss the links between global warming, red tide, and Alzheimer’s disease.

The entire Williams college campus will transform into a forum, with speakers from the cutting edge of global warming solutions. On one panel, activists from West Virginia and the South Bronx will share stories from the dirty side of the fossil fuel economy. “Most people don’t realize the disastrous effect dirty energy has on the lives of the disadvantaged,” said Julia Sendor ’08, who is writing her senior thesis on grassroots opposition to Coal.

Another panel features youth activists Will Bates of the Step It Up organizing team and Morgan Goodwin ’08, founder of Mass Youth Climate Action. “Youth have been at the forefront of social transformation,” said Morgan. “The youth climate movement is winning campus victories, implementing state policies, and gaining a national voice”.

Students and community members can speak out to their elected officials in the Action Center, located in Paresky from 11 a.m.-2 p.m. Participants can learn more about local businesses, student groups, and community organizations.

In the late afternoon, attendees can discuss the college’s ongoing sustainability efforts with President Schapiro and senior staff. They will answer questions about the college’s carbon reduction goals and the impact of new building projects.

Focus the Nation will culminate in an address by Christopher Flavin (’77) entitled “The Climate of Hope: The Path to a Low Carbon Economy.” President of the Worldwatch Institute, Flavin will speak to the opportunities available when everyone engages in finding solutions to global warming.

“The greatest thing about Focus the Nation is that the events and speakers come from all parts of the community, which is exactly the way we need to approach solutions to global warming,” said Elizabeth Irvin ’10. "Large scale events such as these expand the boundaries of what is possible."

For more information and a full schedule of the day’s events, visit the Williams home page

Hope's Edge

"The first step is losing naive consciousness," Joao Pedro emphasized, "no longer accepting what you see as something that cannot be changed." (I'm amused by the irony that here in the U.S. it's the opposite. A person gets labeled naive who believes that things can change.) "The second," Joao Pedro continued, "is reaching the awareness that you won't get anywhere unless you work together.

"This shift in consciousness, once you get it, is like riding a bike: no one can take it from you. So, you forget how to say 'yes sir' and learn to say 'I think that...' This is when the citizen is born.

"This change of consciousness is hard to measure statistically," Joao Pedro reminded us. "You can't count it the way you can the number of families we settle or the number of hectares the MST makes productive. But it is equally, if not more, important."

-Hope's Edge, Francis Moore Lappe and Anna Lappe

I think there's an important link between citizenship and empowerment, or the ability to think and act independently. This distinction is painfully obvious for the work that the MST does in moving landless workers onto private land, and then demanding the government fulfill its laws and grant the settlers rights in Brazil.

First, we can learn a lot from how people organize in environments like Brazil. There's a honed skill to creating lasting relationships, empowering people through teaching and collective growth, and building power in a decentralized system.

Second, is there an advantage to organizing and empowering people in a poor and disadvantaged area, over in a privelidged and satisfied upper-middle class setting? Its possible. We can start figuring out how to make change the norm, and the strength of working together appealing to our peers.

Obama Endorses Focus The Nation

Global Warming Solutions and Herding Cats

Holding a big event at Williams is like herding cats. In an institution run by independent and motivated professors and administrators, getting collaboration and consensus is very difficult. That is why I’m very proud to announce plans for Focus the Nation, an event which really will capture the attention of the entire school, at least for a day.

A little background on Focus the Nation: conceived of and promoted by Eban Goodstein ’80, this day-long symposium for global warming solutions will take place at over 1500 schools, churches and businesses across the country. Held on Jan. 31st nationally, the eve of super Tuesday, the goal is to engage 5 million citizens in active and intelligent conversations about global warming solutions.

The classic problem in any sort of activism is that when you throw an event, only the people who are interested come. In order to address this age old problem, we’re going to the students. Starting in September, we embarked on a campaign to speak to every single faculty member individually and ask for some or all of class time on February 5th to discuss climate change from the stance of their department. To speak to over 300 faculty is a big project, and I applaud Meredith Annex ’11 and Martin Sawyer ’08 who have coordinated those efforts.

Its paying off. Currently over 60 faculty will use between 5 minutes and all of their class time to talk about where their passion for a better world intersects with their discipline and subject matter. And more new commitments are coming in every day. We’ve actually been surprised at how many faculty are genuinely eager to participate in an event that addresses a big issue and uses their particular strengths. Maybe it’s not that surprising after all.


With so much faculty involvement, the next step is to hold big, flashy events to bring the campus together. The first will be a town-hall style forum to discuss the college’s commitments and challenges in becoming truly sustainable. President Schapiro and members of senior staff will have a conversation with students about light bulbs, solar panels, the new library and Paresky hours. Later in the evening, for our key note address, Christopher Flavin ’77 will discuss the climate of hope and the path to a low carbon economy.

In addition, throughout the day, several panel discussions will hit on issues such as environmental justice, the growing grassroots youth movement, marketing, insurance, Williamstown and college architecture.

In short, we’re throwing a huge event. We’re taking a big risk, and trying out methods of organizing ourselves and team building that are more ambitious than most groups ever attempt. After all, we’re students; we can take big risks because we don’t have that much to lose, but everything to gain. An event of this size requires coordination of a lot of administrators’ time, faculty time, and the resources of two departments (environmental studies and the Zilkha center) as well as lots of support from the president’s office.

Is it worth all this effort? Putting so much time into bringing people to talk together? Yes. Global warming is not a single problem and it will not be solved with a single solution. It will take collaboration and the sharing of resources among people with different strengths and interests, and it will provide opportunities for those who have visions of a better world to find each other, grow that vision and start building it.

For more information, see our current schedule here: (note: the williams.edu schedule is out of date, it should be fixed soon.)

Front Page in the Transcript

Thursday Night Group continues to charge ahead. Today we appeared on the front page of the transcript, featuring the MYCA effort to schedule appointments with congressmen in April for Massachusetts Power Shift.

The article, written by Bonnie Obramskie, features Elizabeth Irvin making phone calls and includes quotes from everyone in Wendy Penner's winter study class.

Friday, January 25
WILLIAMSTOWN — From a "call center" on the Williams College campus, several students spent Thursday morning on the phone with state representatives to show their support for a bill that would call on the commonwealth to become more environmentally friendly.

About 160 legislators listened as the young activists asked for appointments to talk about supporting the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2007, which is a bill sponsored by Senator Marc R. Pacheco (D-Taunton).

Read more.

Culture of We Can

In How do we end the Planetary End Game, Terry Glavin calls for an all-out war on global warming; a massive mobilization of people and resources to fight to eradicate this threat from our lives and the entire world. He's right in what he's saying, but his messaging is not quite there.

We can declare war on global warming. We can mobilize the way we did for world war two, as a nation utilizing every resource. Everyone did their part. We had victory gardens and Rosie the riveter, as well as brave men in uniform. We saw a massive government expansion which was handled very well with almost no corruption. And we invented some really cool technologies and vastly improved a lot of existing ones. Sound like a good start to global warming solutions? You bet it does, sign me up.

However, a 'war' is an ugly thing that we neither have nor want. Excluding (or not) other poorly framed 'wars' like the war on drugs and the war on poverty, a war is a violent and disruptive process, and also one that requires massive centralizations of power. Who are the people that cause global warming? We are, and while we cannot be considered guilty, we can start to hold ourselves responsible, and then the war turns against us. I have many deep struggles to figure out myself, but I don't think framing those as battles, with the world against me is going to make it any easier or more pleasant.

Here's another way of looking at our current transformation that is much less combative, not to mention even more far reaching. The economic transformation that has occurred all over the world since the rise of modern capitalism has re-shaped the entire face of the earth and empowered billions of people to pursue lifestyles that they wanted. Was there a negative aspect to all that? Yes, there was. Can we choose to take the best parts of that revolution in human thinking and move on? Yes, we can.

This is why I was heartened by Lester Brown's essay, Cutting Carbon Emissions, on how many opportunities we have to switch to an entirely renewable energy sector. He gives us lots of examples of deep and far-reaching gains that can be made in the switch to an efficient and clean economy. He also says that we can cut carbon emissions in half by 2015. That sounds pretty good to me. I'm ready to start working on building a better world. Vince Lombardi said, “those who say it can't be done, should get out of the way of those who are going to do it.”

Affirmative World View

An affirmative world view

An affirmative world view is a certain way of envisioning the world that causes it to become like the vision. If a critical mass of people share a certain set of assumptions and goals for a person's role in the world, then they will live as if such a world exists. Living as if something exists can be a force, pro actively developing its own reality.

In the abstract, this is a pretty far-fetched idea. A bit of metaphysical nonsense which might be true and might not, but we have more important and relevant things to think about. I want to propose a case study; a set of assumptions and commonly held beliefs which started out only being held by a few but ended up driving the change and creating the conditions for this world view to become predominant. What began as a few people holding a vague belief, but still acting as if it were real, affirmed that such a world was eventually possible.

The case study is, of course, modern capitalism. What started as a vague notion in the seventeenth century that division of labor, economies of scale, investment of capital and of course, individuals making economic decisions in their own self-interest was a rational way to run the world, became the norm. What did those early capitalists think about? Was it how to someday run a multi-national corporation? No, they thought about how to grow from an individual into a factory, into a company into larger manifestations of this new kind of system all stemming from the agent and the idea.

Today we live in a world that has been actively re-envisioned by millions of capitalists to the point that it is established almost everywhere. We are so far into it that we forget it rests on some very fragile assumptions. We forget money is really just trust in institutions which are really just made up of people. We forget that our consumer purchases contribute to the wellbeing of millions of people all over the world, (as well as the inequality and ecological difficulties they experience.) We also forget that money is an end in itself for many people, (although it doesn't have to be.) These assumptions are held widely enough to create and perpetuate capitalism.

Many ideas are dismissed because 'people don't think that way' or 'the world doesn't work that way'. For most of them this is true, they won't work and this isn't a rallying cry for every 3am genius on the internet. But an idea that works, a set of assumptions that makes a lot of sense, a world view that encompasses enough hope and opportunity and meaning and foundation will reshape the world as soon as we start living in affirmation of that vague notion.

My notion is a belief in people. I believe in people's minds, I believe in people's motivations and I believe in people's ability to realize their dreams. I believe in people's ability to make responsible choices about their future and the world if only they are given an opportunity to make that choice. I believe in our need to connect spiritually with each other once we know that is possible and wonderful. I believe in our pride and self-confidence if that can be also open and humble and free from attack or fear. I believe in people's ability to organize themselves if they have a sense of their own power. I believe we will direct our life energy towards the greater good if we do not constantly see the meaningless allure of endless consumption and status symbols. I believe self-interest is the same thing as community interest if we believe it to be so.

When Smith described the division of labor as the driver of economic development, industry had barely scratched the surface of how specialized and productive labor could be. Once industry knew that this was the key to unlocking the productive power of their factories, it became obsessed with analyzing every detail of how tasks were divided. Entire realms of profit were discovered in the tiniest corrections of understanding a movement or a piece. Some early capitalists were like explorers on epic journeys towards greater efficiency. They believed the key to unlocking productive power lay in the details of the actions of production and they were right, and they affirmed that the world worked in such a way, that the world would become organized around such principles.

In order to believe in people, we must recognize that the value is only the beginning. The much greater question that we will explore and struggle with and reshape and develop is how to believe in people. We too must embark on epic journey's towards new and exotic looking ways of believing in ourselves, our friends and our networks. These journey's are so exciting because they are often venturing into the unknown, and we might encounter very real and threatening dangers along the way. And yet we will keep exploring because we will also start bring back wildly effective and exciting things. We will also keep exploring because we have affirmed that the driving force, the energy of the world we want to live in is here, waiting for us to find it.

A Question for the Spirit

Nordhaus and Shellenger, the authors of Death of Environmentalism and Breakthrough, awaken controversy when they speak of the high church of environmentalism. People don't like to think of environmental leaders as priests and environmental writers as prophets. I feel like that cuts particularly deep because we don't have a very positive image of a traditional church dynamic in our minds, and because we somehow believe in the modernist philosophy that people are becoming less religious and therefore less in need of churches or spiritual guidance.

Parts of all that are true, and we can recognize how environmentalists don't like the image of themselves as part of a flock. But we can also phrase that relationship between a shepherd and his flock as something very beautiful and very human. We all have certain skills we bring to bear on the situation, and an ability to create a space where the spirit can roam free is a contribution to a group the same way a teacher, a chef or a manager can do their jobs. All of these jobs can be done well or poorly, to be sure, and all these jobs are necessary.

Most of us do not react very strongly to observations of the similarity between the belief system of environmentalism and other belief systems. I think a lot of us know that there's enough of a connection there that it's not worth getting down into the details. I'm more curious about the people who do react very strongly against the notion that environmentalism does fill a spiritual need in many of our lives. What is it about the similarity is so disturbing? What would be bad about embracing that connection?

We are very aware of the somewhat delicate frame of reference upon which our identity as environmentalists rests. In the cultural back and forth of framing and re-framing that the intellectual leaders of our partisan social sphere engage in as if it were warfare, certain ways of looking at things begin to look dangerously like 'the enemy'. If certain words like religion and priest have the power to put us on edge, then we are not on a very stable keel. We are not going to right ourselves by moving further to one side of the cultural ship. We've probably already rocked it about as far as it can go. Lets start to come back, to find our balance and accept that we have spiritual needs which can be met in many ways.

I hope I haven't lost anyone on that little ramble. Typing is a lot harder than conversation, and I can't exactly check in to see if you're with me. However, if you are with me, then thank you.

Climate Positive

We can be climate positive. As carbon based lifeforms, we can breath, eat and sleep without contributing to the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. As people who can think, we can improve on that.

There are lots of amazing marvels of the human-created world, from production facilities to micro-chips to the cell phone, and all of these pale in comparison to the complexity and resilience and efficiency of natural systems. Should we feel bad about this? No! We can be excited about the possibilities contained in this revelation.

Factories pouring out smoke from manufacturing processes? Lets improve them to the point that they produce more, using less energy, and use the savings from those improvements to install wind, solar, geo-thermal, bio-mass and hydro. Homes leaking heat and sapping electricity? Save home-owners money by working together to retrofit homes, save money and re-invest in their own future.

I'm excited. I see a world of opportunities for growth and amazingness and pride in the ingenuity of people everywhere. We are only beginning.

Affirmative World View

The affirmative world view

The affirmative world view is a certain way of envisioning the world that causes it to become like the vision. If a critical mass of people share a certain set of assumptions and goals for a person's role in the world, then they will live as if such a world exists. Living as if something exists can be a force, pro actively developing its own reality.

In the abstract, this is a pretty far-fetched idea. A bit of metaphysical nonsense which might be true and might not, but we have more important and relevant things to think about. I want to propose a case study; a set of assumptions and commonly held beliefs which started out only being held by a few but ended up driving the change and creating the conditions for this world view to become predominant. What began as a few people holding a vague belief, but still acting as if it were real, affirmed that such a world was eventually possible.

The case study is, of course, modern capitalism. What started as a vague notion in the seventeenth century that division of labor, economies of scale, investment of capital and of course, individuals making economic decisions in their own self-interest was a rational way to run the world, became the norm. What did those early capitalists think about? Was it how to someday run a multi-national corporation? No, they thought about how to grow from an individual into a factory, into a company into larger manifestations of this new kind of system all stemming from the agent and the idea.

Today we live in a world that has been actively re-envisioned by millions of capitalists to the point that it is established almost everywhere. We are so far into it that we forget it rests on some very fragile assumptions. We forget money is really just trust in institutions which are really just made up of people. We forget that our consumer purchases contribute to the wellbeing of millions of people all over the world, (as well as the inequality and ecological difficulties they experience.) We also forget that money is an end in itself for many people, (although it doesn't have to be.) These assumptions are held widely enough to create and perpetuate capitalism.

Many ideas are dismissed because 'people don't think that way' or 'the world doesn't work that way'. For most of them this is true, they won't work and this isn't a rallying cry for every 3am genius on the internet. But an idea that works, a set of assumptions that makes a lot of sense, a world view that encompasses enough hope and opportunity and meaning and foundation will reshape the world as soon as we start living in affirmation of that vague notion.

My notion is a belief in people. I believe in people's minds, I believe in people's motivations and I believe in people's ability to realize their dreams. I believe in people's ability to make responsible choices about their future and the world if only they are given an opportunity to make that choice. I believe in our need to connect spiritually with each other once we know that is necessary and wonderful. I believe in our pride and self-confidence if that can be also open and humble and free from attack or fear. I believe in people's ability to organize themselves if they have a sense of their own power. I believe we will direct our life energy towards the greater good if we do not constantly see the meaningless allure of endless consumption and status symbols. I believe self-interest is the same thing as community interest if we believe it to be so.

When Smith described the division of labor as the driver of economic development, industry had barely scratched the surface of how specialized and productive labor could be. Once industry knew that this was the key to unlocking the productive power of their factories, it became obsessed with analyzing every detail of how tasks were divided. Entire realms of profit were discovered in the tiniest corrections of understanding a movement or a piece. Some early capitalists were like explorers on epic journeys towards greater efficiency. They believed the key to unlocking productive power lay in the details of the actions of production and they were right, and they affirmed that the world worked in such a way, that the world would become organized around such principles.

In order to believe in people, we must recognize that the value is only the name on the door. The much greater question that we will explore and struggle with and reshape and develop is how to believe in people. We too must embark on epic journey's towards new and exotic looking ways of believing in ourselves, our friends and our networks. These journey's are so exciting because they are often venturing into the unknown, and we might encounter very real and threatening dangers along the way. And yet we will keep exploring because we will also start bring back wildly effective and exciting things. We will also keep exploring because we have affirmed that the driving force, the energy of the world we want to live in is here, waiting for us to find it.

Think Big

If you take a group of a couple dozen motivated, forward thinking and skilled people, and trace the connections that are within 2 degrees of separation, there are thousands of amazing people. My friend Zo Tobi refers to this as the tribe. I don't have a name for it, but its clear that I can have an instant bond with any number of these thousands of people.

We have the internet to thank, and we have the amazing work of the Sierra Student Coalition and the rest of the climate movement, and we have our college networks. We have the connections to translate an amazing idea into action in a matter of months. In the book Fight Global Warming Now, the crew points out that sometimes organizing an action in a few weeks is better than a few months because it just flows and happens. And with the internet, we don't have to. (I don't just mean the internet, but rather the innovative tools that we're constantly developing and the skills to use them.) Ideas spread fast, the people who can contribute the most have nothing holding them back to contributing, and the people who wouldn't have heard about it hear about it.

Step it Up was organized in 10 weeks last spring. The marchs to Re-Enegize NH and IA were done in a summer. Power Shift came together in a few months, and over 75% of the students signed up in the last 2 weeks. We're learning how to use the internet better, and we haven't even scratched the surface.

What does that mean? WE NEED TO THINK BIGGER. We are no longer held back by the scale of action that's possible. Instead, we are only held back by the scope of our imaginations. I'm challenging us to think bigger than we've ever thought before, bigger than we're comfortable doing.

From dawn till dusk

To say that yesterday was a full day of discussing climate change is an understatement. We started over coffee and bagels in the morning and finished on the bus, riding home from the bar at 1:00 in the morning.

Its healthy to connect with people over our cause, to share our energy and feel it reflected back at us. I think back to times that I've felt like the lone wolf, valiantly struggling against overwhelming odds, and that just doesn't seem as healthy. Instead, groups like this, gatherings of like minds in the growing movement are showing us that we are not alone in this struggle. Indeed, the team we're trying to create for change is so vast that we might never be alone.

[posts are scattered because of the busy day, but I'm trying to add little updates of the exciting things going on]

Slots vs. networks

There's an issue that we face in building a coalition of students for change: do you give people a defined role or do you encourage them to come up with their own ideas and how to implement them? In other words, is it more important to create open space or find slots to put people?

Here at the January Institute in MN this thought came up this morning. Clearly, some people really thrive on thinking of crazy, big ideas and then figuring out independently how to make it work. Often thought of as leaders, these people abhor top-down structure and thrive on open environments of possibility. Then there are those people who really want to help out but have no idea what to do. They might be new to the climate movement, and they might be new to taking positive, proactive action of any kind. They usually want to be told what to do, at first. They are looking for slots to fit themselves into.

Recognize this dichotomy? If so, if you're like me and struggle with the best model of involving people of all temperments and skill levels, then you think about this a lot. Here's a different way to think about it: we're all in a group or space or community, but some people have a lot more connections than other people. If you have lots of connections, then you have a good sense of your place and role, and therefore usually a good sense of what type of action you can take that will be effective. On the other hand, if you're new to a group than you will have very few connections and be looking to see how you fit in. That often ends up being to seek a role, but really we should think about it as seeking connections.

Connections are shared passions, recognition of skills, shared insights or maybe just a buddy. Either way, the group defines the niche of the individual as the individual explores the group socially. Its not up to the leader to assign roles or slots, but rather up to the group to reach out and form connections with its members. This makes the group deeper, it makes the group stronger, and if people are connected and welcomed, they will come back, which makes the group bigger.

As we try to build the coalition that will create a just, sustainable and healthy society, we need to remember it means developing connections constantly.

Environmentalism: what does it all mean?

Some of you know that I'm currently travelling to Minnesota for the January Climate Institute, a small conference of student leaders designed to push the bounds of how we see ourselves and the climate movement.

Of all the big, hanging issues out there, the one at the top of the list might be the term 'environmentalism' itself, and all the identities and connotations that tag along. I'm not fan of the term and rarely consider myself an environmentalist, but my reasons for doing so are often inarticulate or boring. Still, I feel it more and more strongly, the need to break free from the values and identity that is ascribed to us so that we can focus on the possibilities the future holds.

Here's a piece of recommended reading: The Failure of Environmentalism: Hurricane Katrina It seems to lack an ending, but other than that it really cuts to the root of why environmentalism is simply an inadequate term and philosophy.

Whether too scientific, too technical or too policy focused, leading environmental thinkers are discovering the fact that global climate change, as an issue, is simply too large for the environmental movement alone. Each of these papers advocated for different coalitions to be formed. Shellenberger and Nordhaus advocated for an alliance with labor, like the Apollo Alliance, and subsuming the goals of environmentalism into the larger progressive movement. Professor Dan Esty, from the Yale School of Forestry, in a debate, argued that environmentalism should stop attacking drivers of SUVs, as they are motivated to protect their children’s wellbeing, and instead focus on the parent’s concerns over their children’s future and the consequences of global warming.[xii] Bill Moyers, in an address to environmental journalists, argued that conservative Christians should be swayed to respond to the issue.

When we look at Katrina,

All of these concerns [about what went wrong with Katrina] are valid, but there is a definite disconnect between all the identified problems and those categorized as “environmental.” One major factor that Katrina reveals is how many constituencies and issues are tied up in the response to the climate crisis. Scientists have warned that storms will get more intense, sea levels will rise, and effects as far-ranging as drought to regional cooling might occur. How to protect humanity and the rest of the ecosystem from these impacts is a question that involves the effectiveness of government, the robustness of infrastructure, the level of education of the public, land-use planning, environmental policy, and social justice.

You really need to read the whole thing (its only about 2 pages).

For me, this is yet another way of rephrasing the question that seems to be constantly on my mind: why is it more important to fight climate change than address any number of other human problems? I guarantee you, whatever answer you have to that question is not going to hold up as well as you want it to.

Activist Project

For the winter study class on climate change activism with Wendy Penner, we need to do a weekly activism project. This week, I published a letter to the editor in the North Adams Transcript

Monday, January 7
To the editor:

I applaud Savoy for approving the wind energy project. This is an important step toward fixing climate change and becoming cleanly energy independent.

Thank you, Bonnie Obremski, for keeping us so well informed on these developments. I am also very glad that Tom Decker, who lives near the Searsburg (Vt.) wind farm, wrote a favorable letter for the Savoy project. Sometimes it takes people who have actually lived near them to reassure us they aren't really that bad.

I spoke with a woman whose front porch looks out at the Jiminy Peak turbine. Her first word in describing it was "pretty." Indeed, the fascination and excitement that has greeted the Zephyr at Jiminy is evident all over the mountain.

As we develop more wind in Massachusetts, hopefully we can convince those opposed to it that it isn't so bad. Cape Wind should be approved soon; there's no excuse. On the local front, Williams College has the financial resources and institutional commitment to build its own wind power on the Taconics. We should work to make such a project happen, now that we know the support for wind is growing in our beautiful, green Berkshires.

Morgan Goodwin

Even better than getting it published, my friend Sam who is the chief custodian for Paresky commended me today on the piece. He called out to me and said that he had enjoyed reading it. Not bad for 5 minutes of work and reading the Transcript now and then.

On a different note, I genuinely meant the praise for Bonnie Obramskie. Her reporting has consistently sought out stories on climate change issues in the purple valley. Thank you Bonnie.

The Fierce Urgency of Now

Record voter turnouts in Iowa and New Hampshire. The candidates, republican and democrat alike are speaking the clean energy language. I'm excited. We've never seen a politics like this in our lifetimes, but clearly something is ready to change.

I support Obama. He has a lot to do with the surge of citizenship that we're seeing and I have incredible respect for a well-run campaign that believes in people, that energizes America and responds to what the people want - clean energy legislation. But I'm not going to go work for Obama. I'm not going to get caught up in the excitement too much because the bottom line is that he isn't going to become Al Gore.

Obama is no climate champion, but he is creating the conditions for the success of the movement. The people who work on the Obama campaign are getting a sense of their own power, and they're getting a sense of how to run an organization. The people who volunteer are getting drawn into politics. The buzz means that we can talk politics with people who never would have before. Lets take advantage of our good fortune and press the fight home. We need bad senators out of office and good ones in. We need ambitious state policies. We need to expand our base at the grassroots. We need more people to become excited about the possibilities for change.

Al Gore says that political will is a renewable resource, and that it is non-linear. We're seeing a non-linear progression right now. Things are changing fast. Big organizations and campaigns can't keep up, but little ones can zip right up to the front.