The Island of Doubt

The fundamental question facing climate crisis activists is how to go about convincing the world to change its energy production and consumption habits. I still haven't found good answer to that. But Joe Romm has produced a magnificent primer on the challenges involved in changing those habits over at Climate Progress. There we learn why nuclear power won't be a serious player in whatever "clean" energy mix we come up with, why the Pacala and Socolow "wedge" strategy supplies only a conceptual tool instead of a useful guide to the required transformation, and why we have to start down that path yesterday.

I fear that the only way to grab the attention of the population at large, and the politicians they elect, will involve wall-to-wall coverage of at least two major climate-related disasters one ont he heels onf another, several thousand dead, and the loss of something iconic. In other words, a disaster scenario makes 9/11 look like a nosebleed.

But even if we're than (un)lucky, we're still going to need solid, scientific analysis of our existing technological options available to forestall further climate catastrophes. And it's to that end that Romm is working. Thanks, Joe.

Please read the whole thing if you have a few minutes. Here's a money quote for the rest of you:

We probably need more than 14 wedges starting in 2010 to stay below 450 ppm, and we currently don't have the political will to do more than 2 or 3. In particular, the policies needed to achieve most of the wedges are currently anathema to most conservatives, even the relatively few who actually believe the climate problem warrants strong government action.

This may depress you, but I'd rather it would motivate you.

After all, the economic cost of doing all those wedges is not high, especially compared to the incalculable cost of not stabilizing below 450 ppm. As I say in my talks, "It's just money."