Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
Member Run Boards >> Environment >> Real direct action
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1383108327

Message started by # on Oct 30th, 2013 at 2:45pm

Title: Real direct action
Post by # on Oct 30th, 2013 at 2:45pm
What Does Direct Action on Climate Change Really Look Like?

Posted on October 30, 2013      by christopherwrightau


Illustration: Daniel Pudles


As the disconnect between political obfuscation and climate science continues, how might individuals respond to climate change?

One theme that has emerged in my research is how people are beginning to reconsider their jobs and careers based upon a personal realisation of the urgency of the climate crisis. For instance, last week I received an email from a scientist in a US environmental agency, who related the increasingly tough choices she was having to make in her job. She was involved in overseeing fossil fuel developments in coal and gas, something she found increasingly problematic. After much thought she decided to no longer work for organisations facilitating the extraction and use of fossil fuels. As she explained:


Quote:
…many have pointed out that my position allowed me to protect the environment. But that never sat well with me, especially as it relates to fossil fuels with their broad and wide externalities. After much introspection, and a couple of tears, I realized that an opinion like that is a flat view and it ignores the fact I have enabled interests that are contrary to human existence. It’s the enabling that drives us nuts. To this end, I now flatly refuse any work that deals with fossil fuels interests. It makes life much simpler for me and I suspect it will for others.

In an earlier post I noted how sustainability managers and consultants often battle with the conflict between their jobs and personal environmental concerns. One example was a senior manager in a global resource company who had undergone a personal epiphany about climate change. His concerns about the urgency of climate change led him to resign from his job and pursue an alternative path of climate activism and personal sustainability.

Making such choices is tough, particularly given the endemic nature of fossil fuels in our economy and society, however it also reflects a changing social mood. As climate science has revealed the fundamental threat fossil fuels pose to our environment and future, so social attitudes are beginning to change. Oil, coal and gas will inevitably become the next ‘sin industries’ with potentially huge implications. This change in social attitudes is evident in the growing public campaign of groups like 350.org advocating for major institutions to divest from fossil fuel companies, and in examples like former coal executive Ian Dunlop campaigning for a seat on the board of BHP Billiton on the issue of climate change as an urgent business risk.

Of course this movement is being fought tooth and nail by the fossil fuel industry, politicians and the media. To imagine an alternative to our current fossil fuel addiction is heresy. However, as Paul Gilding has argued this changing realisation will inevitably occur as our environmental situation worsens. Will we shift in time? I have my doubts, however the resulting social conflicts will be profound.

Indeed, last week Crikey columnist Bernard Keane provided an insightful reflection on this coming shift in public attitudes. Entitled “Climate policy: when adults squib it, youth should take direct action“, Keane pointed out that the current political “debate” around climate change in Australia (as elsewhere) is a mirage. The fundamental reductions in greenhouse gas emissions required involve much more drastic changes than 5 per cent cuts and “market mechanisms”. Indeed, as Bill McKibben points out we need to leave the vast bulk of remaining fossil fuels in the ground. While our new conservative Federal Government likes to talk about “direct action”, as the climate crisis worsens and its impacts become more evident, so we should expect far more dramatic forms of social reactions and protest. As Bernard Keane puts it:


Quote:
Action to shut down the loaders and ports that export coal. Action to shut down coal-fired power plants. Actions to shut down the electricity-greedy industries we prop up, like aluminium smelting. Such action will be expensive, and damaging, and inequitable, and dangerous, but in the absence of real policies from political adults, it’s better than a status quo that will punish our youth as future taxpayers and citizens.

Welcome to the politics of the Anthropocene!

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Ajax on Oct 30th, 2013 at 5:15pm
Hey fossil fuel is cheap energy at the finger tips of the rich and poor alike.

Just because the high priests of Anthropogenic Global Warming (the club of rome) don't want the masses to have access to this cheap energy any longer.

It doesn't mean we have to abide by these would be saviours of the world.

Who appointed them to save us all from man himself..??

For those that have been foolish enough to get caught up in their propaganda of saving the world through the environmental movement.

Wake up to your selves FFS

The miniscule amount of CO2 man emits will not destroy our planet.

The only place you find this scenario is in the computer models of the IPCC.

The united nations wants to govern the world through policies of PIGS such as that of Jorgen Randers.

I say no thanks, I love my country and I don't need some nazi professor telling me how it should be in Australia.

So I guess he will die a very unhappy old man, despite spending 40 years of his life trying to pass a global carbon tax.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1382479215

The 5 commandments on how to save man from man. Jorgen Randers recommendations & the club of rome's agenda, lets give them all the arse before its too late


Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by # on Oct 31st, 2013 at 10:31am

Ajax wrote on Oct 30th, 2013 at 5:15pm:
... fossil fuel is cheap energy ...

I guess that depends on which costs one takes into account.

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Ajax on Oct 31st, 2013 at 2:17pm

# wrote on Oct 31st, 2013 at 10:31am:

Ajax wrote on Oct 30th, 2013 at 5:15pm:
... fossil fuel is cheap energy ...

I guess that depends on which costs one takes into account.


We all know the moguls of the environmental movement those wonderful "masters of the universe" that you so religiously serve are trying to make fossil fuel energy VERY expensive for us plebs.

But at this stage fossil fuels are still cheaper than green energy.

BTW i'm not against renewable energy, i'm just against world domination by a hand full of elite moguls through the environmental movement on a global scale.

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by # on Nov 1st, 2013 at 6:58am

Ajax wrote on Oct 31st, 2013 at 2:17pm:

# wrote on Oct 31st, 2013 at 10:31am:

Ajax wrote on Oct 30th, 2013 at 5:15pm:
... fossil fuel is cheap energy ...

I guess that depends on which costs one takes into account.


We all know the moguls of the environmental movement those wonderful "masters of the universe" ...
Yes, Ajax; it's a conspiracy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ko2yFSNfQE

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Ajax on Nov 1st, 2013 at 5:07pm

# wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 6:58am:
Yes, Ajax; it's a conspiracy.


Hey Hash

Explain to me why Maurice Strong and Al Gore are investing in carbon credits........?????????


Quote:

Gore Pocketed ~$18 Million from Now-Defunct Chicago Climate Exchange

Although the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) collapsed and shut down this week, Al Gore's Generation Investment Management LLP pocketed approximately $17.8 million on it's 2.98% share of the exchange when it was sold to the publicly traded Intercontinental Exchange a mere 6 months ago.

According to news reports, the brainchild of the exchange, academic Richard Sandor, founded the exchange with a foundation gift of $1.1 million, and pocketed $98.5 million for his 16.5% share of the CCX.

This would place the value of Gore's firm's stake at almost $18 million. Note Gore is the founder, chairman, and largest shareholder in Generation Investment Management LLP.

Barack Obama was on the Joyce Foundation Board when it provided the funding to establish the CCX. Maurice Strong, founding head of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), precursor to the IPCC, was a CCX board member.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/gore-pocketed-18-million-from-now.html

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Deathridesahorse on Nov 1st, 2013 at 5:46pm

Ajax wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 5:07pm:

# wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 6:58am:
Yes, Ajax; it's a conspiracy.


Hey Hash

Explain to me why Maurice Strong and Al Gore are investing in carbon credits........?????????


Quote:

Gore Pocketed ~$18 Million from Now-Defunct Chicago Climate Exchange

Although the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) collapsed and shut down this week, Al Gore's Generation Investment Management LLP pocketed approximately $17.8 million on it's 2.98% share of the exchange when it was sold to the publicly traded Intercontinental Exchange a mere 6 months ago.

According to news reports, the brainchild of the exchange, academic Richard Sandor, founded the exchange with a foundation gift of $1.1 million, and pocketed $98.5 million for his 16.5% share of the CCX.

This would place the value of Gore's firm's stake at almost $18 million. Note Gore is the founder, chairman, and largest shareholder in Generation Investment Management LLP.

Barack Obama was on the Joyce Foundation Board when it provided the funding to establish the CCX. Maurice Strong, founding head of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), precursor to the IPCC, was a CCX board member.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/gore-pocketed-18-million-from-now.html

YOU SHOULD WATCH DAVID LETTERMAN MORE OFTEN

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by # on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:09pm

Ajax wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 5:07pm:

# wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 6:58am:
Yes, Ajax; it's a conspiracy.


Hey Hash

Explain to me ...
I think it was Lewandowsky who pointed out that conspiracy ideation tends to be "self-sealing". It doesn't matter how often a conspiracy is disproven, the disproof just becomes part of the conspiracy. The conspiracy then continues on, even bigger than before.

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by gizmo_2655 on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm

# wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:09pm:

Ajax wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 5:07pm:

# wrote on Nov 1st, 2013 at 6:58am:
Yes, Ajax; it's a conspiracy.


Hey Hash

Explain to me ...
I think it was Lewandowsky who pointed out that conspiracy ideation tends to be "self-sealing". It doesn't matter how often a conspiracy is disproven, the disproof just becomes part of the conspiracy. The conspiracy then continues on, even bigger than before.


You mean like how all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Innocent bystander on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 2:31pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm:
You mean like how all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????



Have you got this months cheque yet?, mine came yesterday  ;)

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by Vuk11 on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 2:35pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 2:31pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm:
You mean like how all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????



Have you got this months cheque yet?, mine came yesterday  ;)


Mine was higher than last months for those hundreds of votes I did on the Yahoo internet polls  ;D

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by # on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 3:07pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm:
... all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????

Really? Good heavens! Who told you that?  ::)

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by gizmo_2655 on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 3:19pm

# wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 3:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm:
... all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????

Really? Good heavens! Who told you that?  ::)


Some of the Greenies on here say it fairly often..( Possibly you have as well, for that matter)

Title: Re: Real direct action
Post by # on Nov 3rd, 2013 at 10:54am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 3:19pm:

# wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 3:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2013 at 1:51pm:
... all people who are sceptical of AGW theory are being paid by the 'fossil fuel industry'????

Really? Good heavens! Who told you that?  ::)


Some of the Greenies on here say it fairly often..( Possibly you have as well, for that matter)
Do they? Show me where.

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.