[Ok-sus] Inhofe Premises NO. 2

Joel Olson joel.olson at cox.net
Sat Mar 16 09:05:32 UTC 2013


Vicke -
There have been many polls on climate change and global warming, with results 
differing
from 2/3 to 3/4 of the populace believing there is a serious problem. The Sierra 
Club did
a poll, not long ago, which indicated nearly 80% of Oklahomans were concerned:
http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=249085.0

Yes, there is still obfuscation going on, on many topics, but there is also 
hope. And I see
fighting that obfuscation as now a rear-guard action, while the way forward is 
opening.

- Joel


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vicke Adams" <vicke at vickeadams.com>
To: <ok-sus at lists.oksustainability.org>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Ok-sus] Inhofe Premises NO. 2


> Here's the problem with thinking that the argument is over, almost half the 
> people in this country still don't believe global warming is happening. It is 
> probably more than that in Oklahoma. We are a long ways from being through 
> educating people. And there are many related problems that are in exactly the 
> same boat. We still have people that don't believe oil is endless and people 
> still think it is fine to use umpteen gallons of potable water to flush the 
> toilet even when they just pee. Communities still mix their sewer and runoff 
> water contaminating many gallons more than necessary. Many people are not 
> taking seriously the problem with GMO crops or even think twice about the 
> process by which their food is raised. People in this country have been 
> conditioned to think that we have endless resources. We have a huge uphill 
> battle to educate people and the educational process is thwarted by people 
> like Senator Inhofe who mislead their constituents for the benefit of their 
> corporate funders. That is the part I was fuming about to begin with. In my 
> mind it is terribly wrong to use your position to manipulate and mislead.
>
> Vicke
>
> PS - While I'm not an expert on this issue, I think that use of the term moron 
> is frowned upon these days :-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ok-sus [mailto:ok-sus-bounces at lists.oksustainability.org] On Behalf Of 
> Joel Olson
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 12:41 PM
> To: ok-sus at lists.oksustainability.org
> Subject: Re: [Ok-sus] Inhofe Premises NO. 2
>
>
> Well, John, in answer to
> "What could be more sustainable than that.":
>
> We could recognize that the argument is over, and stop falling for the "Let's 
> argue the case again" gambit promulgated repeatedly by the minions of the 
> Heartland Foundation, the Koch Brothers and the big fossil fuel corporations. 
> It's exactly like the moron who lost $20 betting on the play, and another $20 
> on the replay.
>
> And get on with doing something about the problems. It is very clear that we 
> need to stop using fossil fuels, for electricity and for transportation.
>
> The battle over limiting carbon will continue and it looks a lot like the 
> trench warfare of WWI - little movement on either side. And its likely to stay 
> that way for the next four years, while the natural calamities continue.
> Floods and hurricanes along the coasts, heat waves in the midwest, water 
> shortages in the southwest. The cap & trade, or fee & dividend arguments will 
> all be quickly turned into squabbles as to who gets the tax money, and the 
> measures will be stalled.
>
> Cutting back on CO2 will be costly, and much of that cost will trickle down to 
> everyday people. A sudden stop would be more dramatic that the recent'
> 'fiscal cliff'. But gradual reduction, combined with replacement with 
> renewable energy will soften the drop. And renewables are, by definition, 
> sustainable.
>
> The way that other states have made progress in renewable energy is by 
> enacting a mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard. These require the major 
> utility companies to obtain a percentage of the state's energy use from 
> renewable sources by a certain date. It puts pressure on them to eliminate 
> their coal plants, and to encourage the development of renewable industry, 
> jobs, factories and investors in-state. It is a proven way to develop 
> renewables quickly, and expand the state's economy at the same time.
>
> People will never go for a straight elimination of fossil energy. We HAVE to 
> replace that with energy from clean sources.
>
>
> Joel Olson
> meteorologist, NWS, retired
> Moore, OK
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Miggins" <jmiggins at cox.net>
> To: <ok-sus at lists.oksustainability.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ok-sus] Inhofe Premises NO. 2
>
>
> Perhaps we can stage a great debate in the state of Oklahoma on this topic 
> once
> and for all in lieu of a sustainability conference it would seem with the
> experts we have on both sides I would Pay to see Hentges and Inhofe debate
> global warming, perhaps have it in Norman at the Weather Center.
>
>
> What could be more sustainable than that.
>
>
> John Miggins
> Principal
> Harvest Energy Solutions
> "renewable solutions to everyday needs"
> 918-743-2299
> 1571 East 22 place, Tulsa OK 74114
> jmiggins at cox.net
> www.harvestsolar.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ok-sus mailing list
> Ok-sus at lists.oksustainability.org
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/ok-sus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ok-sus mailing list
> Ok-sus at lists.oksustainability.org
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/ok-sus
>





More information about the Ok-sus mailing list