Silly green infighting*

From the inbox (Climate activists invade ...):

As the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change opened today in Poznan, Poland, grassroots climate activists took over the Washington DC office of Environmental Defense. The activists stated that they had targeted ED, one of the largest environmental organizations in the world, because of the organization’s key role in promoting the discredited approach of carbon trading as a solution to climate change.

Dr. Rachel Smolker of Global Justice Ecology Project and Global Forest Coalition read a statement, which said in part, “My father was one of the founders of this organization, which sadly I am now ashamed of. The Kyoto Protocol, the European Emissions Trading Scheme and virtually every other initiative for reducing emissions have adopted their market approaches. So far they have utterly failed, serving only to provide huge profits to the world’s most polluting industries. Instead of protecting the environment, ED now seems primarily concerned with protecting corporate bottom lines. I can hear my father rolling over in his grave.”

The activists rearranged furniture in the office, illustrating how marketing carbon is “like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.”  Others held signs reading “Keep the cap, ditch the trade” and “Carbon trading is an environmental offense.”

"Keep the cap, ditch the trade"? Guys, how about this alternative slogan:

"Lower the cap, keep the trade"

Repeat over and over until you understand what has gone wrong and how it can be fixed.

Next thing you know they'll be invading  my office (myoffice.JPG) and rearranging my 3 chairs!

*Note: if you ignore them they'll stop.

Comments

[tom]

How about these slogans:

"Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant."

"Carbon dioxide is necessary for all life on the planet."

"Why has the Earth been cooling and not warming over the last decade? Is it a corporate plot to discredit environmentalists?"

I noticed in your office picture that you are using either paper or Styrofoam cups.

[John Whitehead]

Anonymous,

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[joshua corning]

Instead of protecting the environment, ED now seems primarily concerned with protecting corporate bottom lines. I can hear my father rolling over in his grave.

So Kyoto has turned into a patsy for big business.

I want to say that there is no way we could have seen this coming....except that it happens every time government dips its hand into planning the economy.

[odograph]

I was going to say it was over the top with two monitors ... but with 4 cups of coffee maybe you need them.

[John Whitehead]

Odo,

I must maintain contact with the environmental economics blog at all times. Hence, I need at least 2 monitors.

[Dano]

I hope students aren't paying for a video card that makes the two monitors as one. Much better to pay for frosty beverages for John, I say.

Best,

D

[Michael Roberts]

How about ditch the cap, ditch the trade, and bring on the TAX!

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2008/09/pigou-club-manifesto-directors-cut.html

[John Whitehead]

Dano,

Somehow they wire both monitors (one is old) and you can mouse across both.

[Charles Sifers]

Same scam as CFCs, only the useful idiots never seem to get it. How much did Algore make on his Dupont stock with the switch? He's just waiting to cash in on carbon credits now.

Obama has proven that he is as much a liar as all other pols, so maybe if enough Greenie/Lefty heads explode, we can get back to rational discourse.

Its getting COLDER folks! How long do you think you can keep the scam going?

[Dano]

John,

at my last place, I needed a $1K video card to have two screens as one. Must be them there smart people at your place.

------

I enjoy the Sifers rant about getting COLDER. Comedy gold!

Best,

D

[Odograph]

iPod test post ...you might need three monitors

[Carlos Ferreira]

It's funny. If you think about it, modern environmentalism was born out of many works, but it came to the masses with "Silent Spring" and "Limits to Growth". Now, we seem to be on the verge of breaking up: the world used to be "the polluters" against "the nature lovers", now all want to do something about it - either for profit or for environmental protection - and none want to be confused with the other. I, for example, no longer go out for beers with the "Friends of the Animals Society", and they're disgusted at my "Biodiversity Offset" approach. It's the economics versus the morality.

As for tax versus cap-and-trade: we need both.