Hot Times in Tucson for Renewable Energy – La Cucaracha!
This afternoon I was reminded of an important fact: the promotional work that authors of renewable energy books do isn’t always relaxing, fun, and productive. I (foolishly?) had agreed to do an hour-long ultra-right-wing talk radio show in Tucson, AZ. The conversation with the host, Charles Heller, was completely civil, though we really didn’t agree on too much.
It got more interesting when we took calls from listeners, who, as one can only imagine, are apparently all climate change denier zealots, and trust me, they didn’t cotton to me. One guy was so angry with me I could almost see his clenched fists trembling; in fact, he was so enraged he could barely speak, but eventually made a statement that he finished up by calling me a “cockroach.”
Oh my.
I took a deep breath and calmly explained that I’m simply a guy who speaks with a great number of scientists, and trusts what they tell me. I believe in the theory of evolution, the big bang, quantum mechanics and so forth — not because I’ve independently verified them, but because I don’t believe there’s a better way to get at the truth on matters like these than to accept the findings of highly intelligent people who have studied them their entire lives. I know many of these people personally, and the idea that all these university professors and the like have formed a giant conspiracy to perpetrate the largest hoax in human history doesn’t hold water with me.
I concluded, “If that makes me a cockroach, I’m afraid I don’t know what to tell you.”
Charles, buddy, what’d’ya say? Perhaps we could take our next caller???
Oscar Wilde once said, “The only bad publicity is an obituary.” It’s hard to argue with that, but appearing on shows like this has no value for me – or anyone. Charles (who gentlemanly demanded that the caller retract his “cockroach” comment) wants me back on another show. But — sorry Charles — this is pointless.
Craig, I can completely comprehend your frustration. Climate deniers are a dangerous threat to a safe and livable future. However, the truth of climate change keeps popping out left right and centre, sooner or later, hopefully these deniers can see that they are simply being stubborn. But who really knows?
Americans will wait until it been raining 7 days before they ask Noah to get into the ark. They will tease and taunt and doubt while we build the ark. Just because it has never rained, doesn’t mean it wont rain. Stay strong Craig.
Craig,
Thanks for sharing your experience in Tuscon. For what it’s worth, I think you should accept the invitation to return. ‘Preaching to the choir’ is basically a waste of time and in Tuscon it would appear that you have a good opportunity to engage non-choir persons.
Just for fun . . think of being called a cockroach as a badge of honor. I say take Oscar’s words to heart and splash down into the Tuscon sands again.
Thanks as always for your work,
geopark
Thanks to you and the others for your support. And you bring up an excellent point. Again, I appreciate the feedback.
Yes, I agree with ‘geopark.’ If you feel comfortable, it would be great for you to further engage this audience. The Skeptical Science website ( http://www.skepticalscience.com ) is a great place to fortify yourself for any argument and even if you don’t change the mind of the caller, there are 100’s of other ‘fence-sitters’ who will be listening. And remember, cockroaches are the hardiest of species and will walk the earth long after our species has disappeared!
Craig, I can certainly sympathize with your experience. It is frustrating and sometimes infuriating to deal with deniers. I’m sure it felt like a waste of time for you. But who knows; you may have converted a listener or two out there in radio world. Changing minds is a necessary precursor to any meaningful climate progress. Thoughtful, intelligent people like you are the best weapons we have in this endeavor.
A group I work with held a symposium in Chelsea, MI on climate change yesterday and it was superb, but I’m afraid we were preaching to the converted. Your hour on right-wing radio may have done more good than our two-hour symposium. Everyone in our audience already understood the reality of climate change. You exposed deniers to an alternative (and correct) perspective. That’s valuable. Maybe a few more visits to Mr. Heller’s show will prove to be fruitful. Don’t let this one experience get you down.
With utility companies bringing lawsuits in several states to eliminate the
opportunity for homeowners to make a dollar by selling the excess power to
the utility at full retail we would do well to reconsider the solar energy
electrical usage scheme. I feel that a separate grouping of largest
electrical loads separate from the critical appliances and lighting could
be operating directly from solar whenever the sun is shining and any excess
should be diverted into a battery pack to continue to supply the largest
loads in darkness or if in a wind turbine system the battery backup is for
the times when wind is too light. this keeps the extra energy in the
house, and at full value. With a good “Feed-In-Tariff” the utility acts as
the “Load Leveler” but if it is not equitable and the utility pays
less for the power we “Feed-In” then the alternative, a battery bank
will pay for itself in only a few years, and half as long if it is
charging an EV also. The stationery pack can be much less expensive a battery chemistry
and much heavier as it is not going to be moving around on the street like
an EV battery pack. In fact a battery pack with a Mains operated charger to recharge during non peak times and feeding back to the utility during
peak times could make a profit without any solar panels or wind turbines if the “Feed In Tariffs” of the electric utility will permit it…
The likely smartest most talented person of the past 1000 years was Leonardo DaVinci. He once said: there are three kinds of people: those that “see”. Those that “see” when they are shown, and those that never “see”.
Some of The scientists and great inventors fall into the first category and that is a very small portion of the population. The majority fall into the second category, in this case, they look at the data from those scientists think it through for themselves and then believe it. However, there is unfortunately a substantial portion of the population who will never see the light even when it is like a spotlight shining right in their face. I suspect that caller falls smack into that last category
Craig, unfortunately there are many people that are not prepared to digest evolution theories and even with valid evidence and continuous research, they will still remain in denial until reality hit them in the face. Thank you for what you do and don’t let this frustrations get to you because each day more people are beginning to question the real truth of our existence.
Thanks for sharing
Jose Banks
Twitter: @JosBanks
CS – I enjoyed the laugh as per your new nom de plume – Sir Cockeroach. I agree with others that you should return to the radio show for all of the reasons stated….it is very important work that you are doing . There are significant examples of countries that have embraced the technology resources and partnering formats to the extent that what we are still engaged in discussion is now normal to others. One consolation for you -please note we in Bermuda follow the same Noahs Ark story stated by Ginje earlier!…keep up the great work.
Ha! You’re very kind. All the feedback really has changed my thinking.
Craig: What I see in that comment is simply this: When everything is against these people, their only response is to attack, like a child. Mahatma Ghandi said once: “first they deny, then they attack, and lastly you win”.
Considering the invitation, I wouldn’t repeat; you shouldn’t have to face the lion volutarily.
Be happy, you are on the right way, gaining ground with every step.
Renewable energy is still not globally accepted as the solution, but it is gaining ground every year.
Craig,
Thank you for taking the brunt of the opposition. I believe I have convinced about 1 person that excess CO2 is causing problems, all the rest simply turn away or continue to argue the same old denier concepts.
As for RE, I find it very hard for it to power a planetary civilization. So, i’m kinda leaning towards nuclear, however, I would much prefer the molten salt reactor because it is meltdown proof and inherently far safer than pressurized water, solid fuel and “spent” fuel. It is hard to fathom wind and solar being able to build itself (that would be hundreds of thousands of square miles of solar to power civilization without fossil fuels and without nuclear).
Most people either say “nuclear is too dangerous” or “there is no global warming” or, renewables “can do it all”. But one person got it right, He agreed that the global perspective might require (MSR) nuclear but he also said “there are actually communities on Earth already that are almost 100% powered by renewables alone (no nuclear)!
So, yes, I believe that it will take a mix of renewables, NG back up (hopefully to be followed up by utility scale storage, mass produced by machine automation)… and a safer nuclear as invented by Alvin Weinberg (it’s now called LFTR).
When the VOLT first came out,two years ago, Rush Limbaugh and David Letterman both said one would only be able to drive 20 miles before he had to think about going back. Today many people still don’t know how hybrids or EVs operate. Jay Leno only used 4.6 galons of gas while driving 11,000 miles his first year. He averaged 2391 MPG. That is not too shabby. Many people who have short commutes also show high averages daily and can still drive across the couuntry on gasoline only if they wish.
I wonder how many climate deniers are also doomsday preppers. It might be worth pointing out to an ultra-conservative how renewables could be valuable if and when the power goes out.
Well, some of them are Doomsday preppers with a capital D. A guy who used to coach kids’ soccer with me doesn’t care about climate change because he eagerly anticipates the events foretold in the Book of Revelations.
I will recommend not to go to that program again. Resistant minds will not accept new thot. An addict, (as one addicted to foolish ways for convenience), will not change without first being introduced vividly to the error of their ways, so that change is wanted. Then, learning is absorbed readily. Facts or arithmetic are ignored. Predictions of the future are viewed with fear and doubt. By teaching to resistors, you may prove to be right, but you will loose the game.
The people of the USA have lost their spiritual identity. They have succumed to being lied to and cheated by their own government in many ways. We are largely in conflict and competition with our own government because of it. Even those who claim to want to cut the size of government (a lie at best) only plan to corporatize civil services at far greater cost and less control to the public. Religions offer flip-flop fundamentalist ideologies. Take your pick of which illusion you would prefer. They are mostly foolish.
Only a mind at peace will see reason. And understanding peace is not on the docket at any federal or state meeting these days.
Even diplomatic parlance employs war and bombing as the gateway to peace. The inevitable guilt that ensues makes repeated circles of defend and attack into a national death mantra. From Nixon and Regan on, the release of governmental oversight has let the corporate monsters of the worst kind leech our country of public gains. The sad thing is that they seem to be favored. Certainly they are not visible to most.
But for one to willingly stand before the firing squad I cannot see as Gods will.
Hi Craig,
I realize that it probably really sucked to go on that show, But like it or not these are the people that need to be educated. By (bravely) going on the show you reached an audience that has been brainwashed for just one view. The majority of the listeners will probalby not think at all and just regurgitate talking points by people that are more interested in making money with the status quot then what is best for everyone. Some items you may want to mention next time are that even the CEO of Exxon admits that global warming is man made.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jun/28/exxonmobil-climate-change-rex-tillerson
I know that now in California unless all of your electric bill is in the first tier it is now financially profitable to get solar. This was not the case two years ago. You can mention to the audience regardless of global warming, if they use more than $80 of electricity per month (this is for California, check what it is for Arizona) they can now save money by getting solar.
I hope that you go on again despite the taunting you will receive.
Your deep breath and your brilliantly measured and honorable response assured your position in the minds of thinking listeners. I’m also encouraged that the host did not allow the name-calling to pass uncontested.
One of the oldest retreats of an incompetent debater (and most revealing of their incompetence) is to attack the messenger instead of the message.
It’s also useful to remember that ad hominem arguments go further than that – they appeal to emotion rather than reason by turning the focus away from the facts to some small or even illusory risk. You will hear people argue for reducing inheritance taxes by talking about a small farmer struggling to maintain his property, when the reality is that only the estates of the wealthiest 0.14 percent of Americans will owe any estate tax whatsoever because of the current $5.25 million exemption.
People driven by the truth will always be viciously opposed for it, because powerful individuals profit from lies, which they propagate and reinforce constantly.
Socrates advise that, “The secret of change is to focus all your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.” It seems to me that a significant part of building the new here is to enlighten ignorance and appeal to reason, so as to gently build and reinforce among the population the cold realization of our stark collective position. Radio is certainly a useful tool for that endeavor, if it can be accessed.
you don’t have to be a scientist to see the mess that is being made here,we all still have to do all we caN
Dennis Willoughby
I subscribe to Hydrocarbon Processing, World Oil and Power magazine for the direct purpose of understandig the Conventional Energy Industry. Matter is niether created nor destroyed int meerly changes form, from a solid to a gas from potential to kinetic etc… Combunstion is after all, an electro -chemical reaction and is the basis of our evolution from huter gather’s, to farmers, to city dwelling and suburban Americans. The reality of cutting your own firewood and draging it out of the forest yourself, limits the amount of energy one woman/ man can harvest in one day. We have made these substituions of Oil and Coal for Wood, Natural Gas for those and refined Petrol products as of late… We are a young civilization very young… We are now producing power digitally from Solar Panels mechanically/ digitaly from the run of the river and the spin of the modern wind turbine. Hydrogen will replace Natural Gas and we will evolve beyond combustion through electro- chemical reactions in a fuel cell. Those that claim that “everything is fine and we should not change a thing” are dillusional. As a human community we must be patient with those among us that have yet to evolve. Hopefully this brings a fresh perspective, as humans were barely crawling, not yet standing on our own two feet. It will take “Seven Generations before we learn to live on the land”… As my kids say on the way to Oma’s and Opa’s; “are we there yet” ? “No, not yet, we are still on the way” – Brian Reagan One Sun Vermont-
Dear Craig
As a PhD ecologist and member of the AAAS, I read the original science and followed the travails of Jim Hansen of NOAA when the politicians tried to belittle his expertise and shut him up. In order to know that global warming is real and that human activity is causing it, one must know physics, astronomy, atmospheric science, the carbon cycle (a finding of the science of ecology itself) and mathematical statistics. Since I have studied all of these, I know with a high degree of certainty that the increase in average earth surface temperature since 1750 is both anomalous and undeniable and correlated only with the combustion of coal over the same time period. The only scientific questions remaining about global warming are how fast will it get warmer, by how much, and what will that do to the weather and sea level. The inertia in the system due to its great mass means that we would continue to warm at some rate for decades even if no more CO2 were added to the atmosphere. While none of the recent weather anomalies “proves” global warming, all these events are consistent with global warming and constitute likely consequences thereof. Astronomy comes in because of the natural ice age cycle driven by orbital apogee and perigee and precession of the angle of the earth’s axis of rotation. These effects are supposed to be now cooling the earth at a rate of a degree per century, but the temperature itself is increasing instead. Analyses that do not include the astronomy, the solar physics, the albedo effects, and the infrared resonance of CO2 are inadequate to explain what is actually measurably taking place – but analyses that do account for all of these do explain the events!
Charles Heller is not a nobody here in Tucson. He has been on the radio for a decade that I know of and has a significant following. He is a political conservative and a Second Amendment supporter, the latter being a real issue here in Tucson and one with considerable local advocacy. I, although a Democrat, am also a Second Amendment supporter, as are many other Tucson Democrats. The conflation of Second Amendment support and Republican conservative ideology is a serious political problem, as is the conflation of “pro-life” beliefs with Republican conservative ideology. Republican conservatives are “against” global warming mostly because Al Gore is “for” it, and Gore is identified as a liberal Democrat, which is equated with evil on The Right. The substitution of prejudgment for judgment based on determinable facts is the real obstacle here – the Right does not want to believe anything the Left accepts!
The essential logical principle of Occam’s Razor states that whatever hypothesis that accounts for all the known facts and is simplest is probably correct. Appeal to divine intervention is not admissible in logical argument, since that is a matter of belief, not of determinable fact. Anyone who assumes the Holy Scriptures are literally true understands neither the history nor the text of the scriptures themselves. What are you going to believe, a bronze age narrative about the world or the evidence of the world itself? When experience contradicts the text, it is not the events that are wrong, it is the text that is wrong. Believers must assume that the world itself is God’s Creation, so if the world contradicts the story it is our human fault that the story is wrong, no reflection on God.
There is none so blind as those who refuse to see.
You would think that Christians would be the MOST to care (not)!
Thanks very much, Dr. Vernon. That was very interesting — and completely correct by my wits.