Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.
Soapbox

It's Bout Time

Humanity faces the fight of a lifetime against heavyweight climate change

By Auden Schendler
24 Oct 2006
Read more about: climate
Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
Suppose you'd been invited to go into the ring with Muhammad Ali at his prime, for a 15-round bout. You'd almost certainly have said, "No thanks."

Two boxers.
Climate change: down for the count.
Photo: iStockphoto
But what if you had no choice? Say someone had a gun to your head, and you'd be killed if you didn't comply? What would you do? One option would be to cower in the ring, letting Ali pound you senseless. But another approach might be to go for it: bob and weave, dance and waggle -- give it your best shot, maybe even have a little fun. And hope this guy's talk of "hospitalizing a brick" is all bluster. After all, you have no choice.

This is the situation we find ourselves in with climate change. We have a nasty battle in front of us, and we have no choice but to fight it. The only question is what attitude we take into the ring.

By now most Americans know that climate change is what's for dinner for the foreseeable future. They also know what will be on the plate -- a heaping serving of doom and gloom. NASA's James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, has said that if we don't take radical action to reduce global greenhouse-gas emissions in the next decade, our children will be living on a planet unrecognizable to us.

Elizabeth Kolbert of The New Yorker concludes her book Field Notes From a Catastrophe with this chilling comment: "It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself, but that is what we are now in the process of doing."

As Hansen, Kolbert, and many other leading thinkers are striving to make clear, climate change seems to be the most pressing issue ever to face humanity. But the problem is that humans, and Americans in particular, can't be galvanized into action by "the sky is falling" scenarios, even if they're true. We tend not to believe them, partly because we have such a history of overcoming predictions of doom with technology or luck (population, Y2K, and ozone-layer destruction, for example), and partly because we can't imagine the scope of a challenge like this. The Black Death killed off a third of Europe, but that was in 1348; we don't have the experience, or social memory, of real catastrophe.

To solve this problem, we need to entirely reengineer our energy infrastructure -- which is to say our societies -- in order to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 90 percent by century's end. It will be the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. But there's another way to look at climate change. It is an opportunity on the scale of the Enlightenment or the Renaissance, a rare chance to radically change the face of society forever. Such wholesale societal change is within our ability: we have done it before.

When Europe emerged from the Dark Ages, it moved from a period of irrational superstition -- when mythology, not reason, ruled people's lives, and fear, not optimism, was the operating principle of the day -- into an age of reason and rationality. The movement was traumatic, but ultimately it improved every aspect of people's lives, from medicine to law, science to government.

Like the Enlightenment, tackling climate change will require a century-long revolutionary mobilization of society's intellect, finances, mores, vision, government, and technology. And the payoff, the promise of overcoming this challenge, is not just a safe, stable, and livable world. It is a planet from which the barriers to utopia are substantially removed.

In a highly efficient planet running on clean energy (which is a world that has solved the climate problem), most existing pollution will be gone, and many of the obstacles to solving other problems -- poverty, starvation, access to clean or any water, disease -- will be significantly reduced. Wars will be less likely without the need to fight over scarce resources like oil or water. The health risks associated with contemporary energy generation and usage -- mercury in our blood, acid destroying our lakes and forests, diesel fumes in our lungs, and toxic smog in our cities -- will decrease significantly, if not vanish altogether. And the environment -- on which much of our wealth is based -- will be able to rebound and flourish when the stresses of mining, drilling, and clearcutting are replaced with cleaner, renewable options.

My favorite sport is white-water kayaking. When faced with an especially difficult section of river, I will scout the run, examining all the obstacles from the bank, planning a safe route through the rocks, holes, and churning waves. At some point, though, most kayakers get tired of scouting. Anxious to tackle the challenge, we want to get in our boats and go.

As Americans, we have scouted this climate problem to death. Yes, we are frightened by the immensity of the problem. But this is the opportunity of a lifetime, maybe of a species.

Like the leaders of the Enlightenment, who viewed themselves as courageous, able, and hopeful, Americans are ready to engage climate change frontally, right now. Because we have no choice on the matter, we might as well relish -- even enjoy -- the fight.

Read more about: climate
Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
Auden Schendler is director of environmental affairs at Aspen Skiing Company.
< Previous | Next >
Comments: (5 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

Just who is our opponent?

Climate change is the natural response of the Earth's systems to the many forms of abuse heaped upon them. Among these are burning fossil fuels, the destruction of rainforests and the depletion of organic matter from soils. All these release carbon into the atmosphere.

We need to view the Earth as our sustaining lifeblood. This article comes close to portraying nature as a tough opponent - entirely the wrong metaphor.

People are abusing the planet. People with names and addresses. They are what/who we are fighting, not climate change.

It's Bout Time

"Auden Schendler is director of environmental affairs at Aspen Skiing Company."

How can someone associated with a fossil-fuel-based-energy-intensive recreational activity be lecturing the rest of us on saving the planet?

His customers use fossil-fuel-based energy for transport to Aspen, for heat, food and transport while there, for getting up the slopes, and in the manufacturing and transport of the equipment used by the customers.  All of this for a completely unnecessary activity.  Additionally, the slopes have been clear-cut in order to make the them safe for his customers.  Some of the customers will also take advantage of heli-sking in which large quantities of fossil fuel wil be burned to transport them to isolated places to ski.  And all this occurs in and around a city that very likely has one of the highest densities of houses of enormous size on the planet.  Many of which are not the primary housing for the owners, and all of which use much-higher-than-average amounts of energy for operation and use.

Thank you for any responses to these issues.

It's a reductionist argument

The most obvious action Aspen Skiing Company could take to address Dan Hughes' concern, above, would be to shut down. Then, of course, we'd also have to examine every business--actually, every aspect of our lives--and run them through the Dan Hughes eco-viability test, and see if they measure up to his standard. It's not clear to me any sector of business, or any act like driving to get groceries, buying the groceries, or using refrigeration for the groceries, would measure up. In short, this is a reductionist argument that suggests the solution to the cliamte challenge is to shut down the global economy. Of course, this won't happen. Commerce is the oldest human endeavor, and it is reponsible for much of the good in the world, as well as the bad. The solution to the climate challenge is to find ways to operate our economy in vastly less damaging ways. One way to start that process might be to patronize businesses, like Aspen Skiing Company, that are aggressively tackling the climate problem. Their economic success will drive further action on that issue. And the dirty guys will go out of business. The solution is not to shut our doors, go to the basement, and shoot ourselves in the head.
Finally, we have to understand that economic viability is often tied to environmental improvements. From old pictures, know what Aspen was like 100 years ago when the economy was limited, not vibrant, and based on mining. We had no trees, the rivers were polluted with heavy metals, there were no tax dollars to fix these problem, no public money for open space preservation, no nonprofit funding, etc. The idea that business is bad and must be eliminated is something from the unexamined start of the environmental movement 30+ years ago. It's not a viable path. Nor is seizing the higher moral ground or using the easiest attack possible--calling someone a hypocrite. Give me a snapshot of anyone, or any business's life, and I'll destroy them as a hypocrite in short order. But to what end?

It's not a reductionist argument

Hello Auden,

I said; "All of this for a completely unnecessary activity."  I did not say anything at all about shuting down all commerce.

It is a true fact that your company caters to the way-above-average-income fraction of the population.  Aspen is to the point now that billionaires have driven out the millionaires and the previous local people can no longer afford to live anywhere nearby.  Way-above-average-income people will always consume more energy, and much of that will be for activities that are not essential for life.

The recently completed multi-lane road from Glenwood Springs up to Aspen, complete with bus service, was made just so 'the service people' needed in Aspen, and most likely originally lived in Aspen, can get to work.

Isn't it also true that ski companies are buying up carbon credits to offset the high energy costs of operating such businesses?

Downhill sking is an unnecessary high-energy-impact activity.  Its contributions to 'the climate problem' will likely contribute to unnecessary burdens falling on people who cannot afford even the basic energy for necessary life-giving activities.


sliding scale

Dan:
The problem is in defining what is unnecessary in the world of commerce. Using Peter Singer's logic, the computer you're writing on is an unnecessary expense. After all, the dollars you paid for that computer could literally save people's lives in Africa. Through Singer's lens, you could argue that the tech industry is unnecesary, really. So my point is: where do you drawn the line? CAN you draw the line? I submit we need to fix the whole enchilada, not take moral positions on what aspects of our economy are necessary or unnecessary.

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?


Also in Grist

The Week's Most Popular
From the Archives
Xi'an Marks the Spot, by Dongli Zhang, Nathan Wyeth. The state of China's student activist movement.
Hugs and Disses, by Mark Peters. The history of tree-hugging, and the future of name-calling.
Count Him In, by Mike Taylor. One of two individuals in DOE's voluntary emissions program reports back.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Jobs Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcasts
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra® | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks