I grappling with the role of sustainability post-Copenhagen. It just strikes me as so much fiddling while Rome literally burns. While Obama put a happy face on agreements reached there, I can't imagine how people can see it as anything but a dismal failure. A recent editorial does a good job of capturing some key issues, though it paints a picture that's a bit too rosy for my taste. The IPCC is a key scientific group established to provide decision-makers with accurate scientific information. By the way, you won't find any information here from climate change skeptics. That's a waste of time and crucial energy that you can go and research yourself if you so choose. China and the U.S. haggle over crumbs that take on a 'he said she said' quality which is utterly short-term. While the U.S. has its hands bloody in this argument, China again once again rings the sovereignty bell arguing that climate change limitations mess with their sover...
Not exactly. Let me explain. Our lack of even the most basic understanding of how the elecricity system operates (explained below) allows us to mistakenly imagine we are taking actions that will shut down CO2 emitting generators. A number of headlines read something like "California Poised To Require All Its Electricity To Come From Renewables." SB100 appears to be a bit more complicated, however. Plus, electricity complies to the laws of physics, not the laws we mere mortals devise. Hoefully, this post will identify several important implications of these distinctions. Recognize that electrons (what electricity consists of) going over the wires thorughout California flow from all generators located everywhere within what’s called the Western Interconnect (WECC). Electrons are already present throughout all the electric wires in every building in every community at every moment in time. When you flip a light switch on, more electricity gets generated ...
To some extent, this term suffers from the same problems as does the term - natural, or, better yet, "Green." What is natural versus what isn't natural? It's not defined in law, and as a result, to a large extent, what it means is in the eye of the beholder. Here are some takes on it's meaning. The project in Sustainable Management of the Presidio Graduate School starts by stating the obvious "There are many ways to measure or define sustainability." One particularly inciteful definition is "the property of being sustainable." The AFSC defines it thus: "Sustainability: Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Scripps Colleg e for Women takes a similar approach - "Sustainability: Sustainability seeks to provide the best outcomes for the human and natural environments both now and into the indefinite future." The NADA also takes this approach...
Comments
Post a Comment