By Jon Queally, EcoWatch
We're under attack, said author and climate campaigner Bill McKibben,
and the only way to defeat the enemy is to declare a global war against
the destructive practices that threaten the world's imperiled
ecosystems and human civilization as we know it.
In a new piece published Monday in The New Republic, the co-founder of the global climate action group 350.org
said there is simply no more time to waste and that a full-scale
mobilization, like the one orchestrated by the U.S. government during
World War II, is now necessary if the adversary—human-caused global
warming and the climate change that results—is to be vanquished.
"World War III is well and truly underway," McKibben wrote. "And we are losing."
Showing posts with label war economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war economy. Show all posts
17 August 2016
22 May 2014
The real budgetary emergency and the myth of "burnable carbon"
by David Spratt
How fast and how profoundly we act to stop climate change caused by human actions, and work to return to a safe climate, is perhaps the greatest challenge our species has ever faced, but are we facing up to what really needs to be done?
No Carbon Budget Left - David Spratt from Breakthrough on Vimeo.
For the last two decades, climate policy-making has focused on 2°C of global warming impacts as being manageable, and a target achievable by binding international treaties and incremental, non-disruptive, adjustments to economic incentives and regulations (1).
How fast and how profoundly we act to stop climate change caused by human actions, and work to return to a safe climate, is perhaps the greatest challenge our species has ever faced, but are we facing up to what really needs to be done?
LISTENWe have to come to terms with two key facts: practically speaking, there is no longer a "carbon budget" for burning fossil fuels while still achieving a two-degree Celsius (2°C) future; and the 2°C cap is now known to be dangerously too high.
Listen to David's carbon budget interview on Radio EcoShock
RELATED POST
Carbon budgets, climate sensitivity and the myth of "burnable carbon"
WATCH PRESENTATION
No carbon left to burn (audio + slides, 17 minutes)
No Carbon Budget Left - David Spratt from Breakthrough on Vimeo.
For the last two decades, climate policy-making has focused on 2°C of global warming impacts as being manageable, and a target achievable by binding international treaties and incremental, non-disruptive, adjustments to economic incentives and regulations (1).
12 December 2013
Naomi Klein: Radical GHG emissions policies need radical social movements to back them
by Gabriel Levy, People and Nature
Policies to counter global warming effectively “will only advance
if accompanied by radical social movements”, socialist writer and
activist Naomi Klein has told the Radical [greenhouse gas] Emissions Reduction conference in London. “Transformative policies… must be backed by transformative politics.”
Advocates of radical action have to face the fact that pro-market ideology is dominant in mainstream political fora and that “we are the marginal ones”, Klein said yesterday, on a web link from Toronto, Canada.
“It’s not that our ideas [about cutting greenhouse gas emissions] are not popular. But they are not powerful, not dominant. They are not winning.” The movement needs to “turn the popular into the powerful” by creating a “radical, enabling environment in which these policies can flourish”, she said.
![]() |
| Naomi Klein |
Advocates of radical action have to face the fact that pro-market ideology is dominant in mainstream political fora and that “we are the marginal ones”, Klein said yesterday, on a web link from Toronto, Canada.
“It’s not that our ideas [about cutting greenhouse gas emissions] are not popular. But they are not powerful, not dominant. They are not winning.” The movement needs to “turn the popular into the powerful” by creating a “radical, enabling environment in which these policies can flourish”, she said.
12 January 2013
If we need a war footing to rebuild the physical economy, why can't we talk about it?
by Philip Sutton, Manager, RSTI
At the end of last year a very useful discussion was opened up by a number of climate scientists in different parts of the world calling for climate change action to be put onto a war footing.
John Connor, CEO of the Climate Institute, questioned the desirability of pursuing this approach. But how valid was John's critique? And is there a better response to the call from the climate scientists to go onto a war footing?
This is what John said in the Climate Institute's 13 December 2012 newsletter (emphasis added):
![]() |
| A 2009 WWF report says "a 'war footing' may be the only option" to re-industrialising at the necessary speed |
John Connor, CEO of the Climate Institute, questioned the desirability of pursuing this approach. But how valid was John's critique? And is there a better response to the call from the climate scientists to go onto a war footing?
This is what John said in the Climate Institute's 13 December 2012 newsletter (emphasis added):
If you are not scared or getting scared, you are not paying attention. Yet another rollercoaster year for climate policy and investment is ending as a remarkable chorus of conservative voices from the World Bank, the World Meteorological Organisation, the International Energy Agency and others state that climate change is happening and on track to get much worse in terms of danger and expense. These are realities, not just risks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


