Climate Change Mitigation Is Going Forward—With or Without the U.S.
Here’s an important, if fairly general, article in Science Magazine written by (or for) U.S. President Barack Obama that offers good news: climate change mitigation is gaining strength and is, at this point, irreversible.
The author makes the point that I’ve stated on numerous occasions: The U.S. stands to lose a great deal if it backs out of the Paris Accord. If the new administration keeps its promise on this topic, it will, ironically, cede leadership in this arena to China, a communist country, both the world’s largest polluter and the world’s most aggressive investor in renewable energy.
It’s really up to the American people to make a stand here. Are we comfortable being led around by the nose via the wealth and power of the fossil fuel industry, or do we want to lead the way to clean, 21st Century energy solutions?
From the headline of the article:
“If the new administration keeps its promise on this topic, it will, ironically, cede leadership in this arena to China, a communist country, both the world’s largest polluter and the world’s most aggressive investor in renewable energy.”
China is a world leader in nuclear energy. See this article in the MIT Technology Review:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602051/fail-safe-nuclear-power/
Let us hope that under the new administration, the U.S. will not “cede leadership in this arena to China, a communist country….”
@Craig
‘Cede’ is a poor choice of word.
Arguably the Unites States greatest ever track and field athlete, Jesse Owens single-handedly delivered an important lesson in 1936 to all athletes and citizens of the world, that the only connection between a sprinter and the track is the timing clock. Everything else is irrelevant.
He taught us that a superior performance by a sprinter from anywhere on earth is not influenced at all by national boundaries, language, colour or creed – those factors are irrelevant, and only the timing clock will expose a superior performance above all others, on the day.
There is a useful metaphor here for the global greenhouse gas emissions technocrats. Firstly, there is no such concept as national custodianship or technological superiority when it comes to climate change mitigation generation science moving forward. It will come from the world’s best and brightest physicists, scientists and engineers.
All global citizens have a vested interest in the unfolding ‘climate change technological sprint race’.
The starter’s gun has gone off and the race is underway. We the spectators are watching the race unfold and understandably barracking for our national competitors from the bleachers.
No nation has anything to “cede’ to another in this regard though because they are not the custodian of (yet to be realised) technological appropriate solutions.
The winner of course will ultimately be the one who outperforms the competition, and this will be exposed through normal market forces.
I understand what Craig is attempting to express. I am always supportive of national pride and nation building technological projects; in fact I was the only contributor last year on 2greenenergy to devote a posting entirely to this very subject.
But Craig has done quite poorly in expressing himself in this way in his post. His view is not expansive and rear view mirror stuff; not likely to elicit any likes beyond US borders I would estimate.
I am a little bit surprised by Frank Eggers jumping into line so quickly with Craig on this point of ‘ceding’ also? It implies that the US has something others don’t have or are incapable of having unless ‘ceded’ to them from the US, which of course is absolute piffle, and normally Frank avoids polarising commentary.
Lawrence Coomber