Against Copenhagen

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1

An interesting read:

"Who would listen to the suggestion that, without a transformative outcome, the best result would be a complete failure? "

part 1: http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2009/12/06/CopenhagenContradictions/

part 2: http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2009/12/08/ElephantsOfDoom/index.html

"This is Copenhagen's most basic contradiction. Growth may keep the economic world stable, but in the now 'full' world that we occupy (for the first time in human history), growth causes more problems than it solves. Growth has become self-defeating. As a recent British government report put it:

'[S]implistic assumptions that capitalism's propensity for efficiency will allow us to stabilize the climate and protect against resource scarcity are nothing short of delusional. Those who promote decoupling as an escape route for the dilemma of growth need to take a closer look at the historical evidence -- and at the basic arithmetic of growth.' "

Yes, hoping for complete failure so we can worry about real environmental concerns - e.g. deforestation, over fishing, air pollution etc etc.

CO2 is plantfood.

Nice (albeit 5% flawed) summary....

"CO2 is plantfood. "

Too bad there's fewer plants and more CO2.

Addressing the real impacts of climate change means addressing all the issues you've referenced. Attending to them in isolation just means more of the same when it comes to fixing the environmental problems we face, ie zero progress.