Home | About | Donate

'The Climate Crisis Is Already Here': As US Mayors Convene, Rallies Demand Fossil Fuel-Free Cities


'The Climate Crisis Is Already Here': As US Mayors Convene, Rallies Demand Fossil Fuel-Free Cities

Jake Johnson, staff writer

As the 86th annual U.S. Mayors Conference kicked off in Boston, Massachusetts on Friday, environmentalists took to the streets—and the Boston Harbor—to demand that local leaders "walk the talk" on climate and commit to bold action as the Trump administration caters to the whims of the fossil fuel industry.


I always love how these articles never discuss the economic costs and ramifications of their plan to achieve 100% renewable energy cities. It’s as if the cost is nothing and the decision is entirely political. Sorry, guys. Socialism has consequences. Economic consequences.

We have previously seen an estimation for what it would take to receive 100% renewable energy globally and the total was conservatively estimated to be $100 trillion. Do you realize what that kind of cost would do to the global economy?


With people like you, we would be headed straight to hell. This has NOTHING to do with a political system and everything to do with science. You obviously don’t have the ability to see it. Why are you wasting our time?


Using oils and other materials via combustion and other means is one of the foundations of the anthropogenic dominance of our planet. The world economic and cultural grid is built on it.
There is no technological “clean energy” fix for that.
Nor is the focus on “climate change” a useful prioritization of the extinction and destruction problems our species is causing.
The simple fact is our species has trumped natural selection and other evolutionary restraints.
We have godlike powers but not enough ethics.
We torment, kill, and eat many other species. We rape the land, air, and water.
We breed like rats.
Only by a worldwide use of the following ethic can we hope to avoid total planetary ecocide:


My take on the “Cabinet” was immediate. Pruitt and DeVos represent the most destructive two members simply because their actions harm the most people, especially the young who will inherit the pea brained, gutter ethics emboldened by Reagan and now manifest. May both Pruitt and DeVos burn in hell, and I mean it. They stand to murder the young’s possibilities. The most severe sin that Reagan got away with. They will pay with their souls.


Decades ago, photovoltaic power cost 100 times as much per kilowatt-hour as oil-fired turbine power. The U.S. invested in driving that cost down. It worked.

Denmark invested in driving the cost of offshore wind power down. Denmark got wealthy!

Rhode Island invested in five offshore wind turbines just to show that it could be done. Now RI and MA want to put up 800 megawatts of turbines.


We have entered runaway global warming. We won’t be able to make a transition to a fossil fuel free energy civilization; but that is only one of our problems. As one of the above commentators stated we have destroyed and continue to destroy the biosphere. And we have poisoned the biosphere. And there are literally too many of use. We are heat engines whether it is putting CO2 into the atmosphere or generating heat by other means. When our civilization collapses, we will be unable to keep control of all the radioactive materials we have produced and which to neutralize require 100s of thousands of years to decay. We are On the Beach. We can try and should try. Ending all wars and ending production of all impliments of war is the fastest step we can take to reducing human component of global warming.



If renewables can’t keep up with population, you’re wasting time and resources. Renewable energy requires resources.

First step must be a discussion of people refusing to have more children.

Why would someone bring a child into the world today? What is your motivation? Do you not care about children?

Also, 410 ppm. The damage is done. Any child alive today faces a desperate future.


Gotta love how people like you never seem to get that a healthy economy depends on having a biosphere, or that a system built on perpetual economic growth in a world of finite resources is doomed to ecological meltdown. And where did you get the $100 trillion figure anyway? Pulled it out of your a**? Thought so.


The transition needed to avert disaster needed to start around the time of the first Earth Day, 1970. Since nothing has been done of any consequence all I see now coming is a collapse of industrial capitalism. Whether humans make it out the other side is now around 25%. I chose not to have children for this very reason. The 6th extinction is well underway. The coral reefs will be dead by 2050 or less. That’s equivalent to losing ALL the forests of North AND South America. Lately I’ve noticed that most predictions are woefully underestimated. The human world is in serious trouble and most won’t admit it or choose to ignore it. Too bad. Earth’s current crop of children are indeed spectacular, except maybe for the psychopathic humans running things with profit the primary motive. Really, too bad.


No that’s not what he’s saying. He’s saying the just because you call something “renewable” does not mean it comes from magical elves in the forests.

Those technologies require resources. And sometimes the resources are more poisonous or more rare.

People think they can vote in resources, then just go about their lives, having more kids, going shopping, keeping up with their careers.

Only with solar panels.


It’s too expensive? How stupid of a statement is that? How much is a livable biosphere worth? The bottom line is we have to get below 3 tons CO2 emissions per human per year as rapidly as possible. No matter how much it costs.


Basically a total realignment of ALL priorities may save the world. First would be to stop all military action. The curtail the reproduction. Live simply, etc. I don’t see that happening before the collapse.


It’s not just about temperatures. It’s not just about the amount of heat. There is ice covered with soot/dust. Did you ever do that experiment in science class where you compare the temperature of a black and a white object experiencing radiation? The heat absorbed by black things is HUGE.

I was preparing pictures to talk about different parts of the world for an ESL class a few years back. I was aghast at the black ones in Greenland. Oho, I thought. I talked about them a bit, passed them to friends. Then, they were, um, gone from the site.

You can see the pictures today if you search images with Greenland covered with soot. There are also many articles about it. And, of course, there is one sweetie out there saying ‘Greenland is NOT covered with soot.’ That must be our friendly MSM representative. Or perhaps the Greenland tourist bureau.

Anyway, I haven’t been there, but the culprit? I suggest that perhaps there are those who stand to benefit in all of these large land masses which are soon to be up for mining, real estate, look for a money trail. Let alone better shipping.


What good will money be if it’s too hot and poisoned to grow crops?


War, mining, plastic packaging, it is all fairly short-sighted , isn’t it?


He’s not saying what you’re saying he’s saying. What you are saying is correct if you’re implying the so-called ‘American Dream’ is and would be unsustainable under any scenario, because it is so highly consumptive it would require five or ten more planet earths. But that means we should critically evaluate said ‘dream’ and change society, evolve out of capitalism which is quite obviously the driving force causing the growing climate crisis, into an economic model not based on perpetual growth. No matter the cost, because the alternative is extinction.


The typical response from the “Free market will solve all our problems crowd”. This type always talks about the “costs to society” of a switch to more sustainable sources of energy while IGNORING the Free ride the Corporations have gotten off the environment for decades.

Do you know what the COSTS are of an ocean filled with Plastics? Do you know what the COSTS are of ecosystems that provide clean air and drinking water when those ecosystems destroyed to get at the tarsands underneath? Do you know what the COSTS were of all those Oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico with its every growing dead zone (Now the second largest on the plane and growing) ?

The reason people like yourself and the Corporations railing against costs of a switch to renewable and cleaner energy is because these COSTS are never factored in. They are “invisible” and those Corporations are getting a free ride as they destroy the very things that support LIFE.

Now I do not really like how current society seems only able to determine the “value” of something until it monetized and shoehorned into our economic model but just for some perspective on this. Just looking at honeybees it estimated they provide TRILLIONS of dollars worth of services “for free” when they pollinate our crops and plants. It does not seem very “cost effective” to me to destroy those same bees with pesticides to get out a crop worth a fraction of that.


And the costs of war. I stopped supporting military celebratory holidays when I was a child. They never celebrate the patriots they killed from the other countries.
The greatest environmental waste.


Yes, and the TYPES of pollutions left behind by the Militaries of the world are of the most dangerous kind and the type that will last thousands of years and more. Were human kind to vanish tomorrow Mother Nature would still be cleaning up this toxic mess 100000 years from now.

There no NEED for those Militaries , outside that “Free market” demanding they exist so as to “liberate” resources in other Countries to fuel “Economic Growth”.