Home | About | Donate

Emerging From the Pandemic With a Climate Plan

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/05/18/emerging-pandemic-climate-plan

1 Like

As the vast majority of people on the earth want things to get back to where they were before this pandemic; …what chance then would there be in the world’s governments to voluntarily install measures that would curtail the use of fossil fuels as this pandemic has done? The answer unfortunately is that there would be no chance of this.

So far the pandemic is providing a dream shock doctrine opportunity for the 1% to dismantle the few financial and environmental regulations they had not already dismantled. Not sure how to reverse that trend ?

2 Likes

First I’m going to define “we”. “We” isn’t one billionaire who understands the industry that made him (rarely her) rich but has only a dabbling interest in this climate thing, or worse, has massive financial bets on one particular technology. “We” more probably must include you and me.

“We” need to make good engineering and financial decisions for the world, or else some billionaire certainly will horn in on the decision making.

We’re going to need a “we” of stakeholders. Everybody needs one or more engineer friends of a friend who has good integrity. Most people aren’t engineers or reasonable civilian tinkerers but these people can be found. The same goes with financial people.

We have to make the innovation decisions. “Clean coal” money? Throw rotten eggs. $25 billion dollars for a nuclear power plant? Where’s the barf bag?

A real climate plan must have teeth. Let’s see them. Smile!

Less travel and commuting will be great for reducing the need for other measures that will eliminate GHGs. Things like clean safe renewable energy-powered mass transit, private EVs when necessary, etc.

We also have to break up big corporations and reconfigure the concept of corporation to prioritize the good of society over profit, because whatever actions big corporations-as-they-are take to greenwash their impact will be shallow and deceptive.

The article wasn’t about strategy or wider implications; only about 1 tiny aspect of transportation policy. That’s fine, but it makes the headline misleading.