Ten Ideas For How We Can Save the Planet

  • submit to reddit
Whitelee Windfarm on the outskirts of Glasgow (Photo: Danny Lawson/PA Wire)

Report after report tells us our planet is in trouble. Most recently, two teams of researchers concluded that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet’s gradual collapse due to global warming has become unstoppable; as a result, sea levels will rise by feet, not inches, in the centuries to come. This is just one of the many frightening effects of climate change.

Yet Americans remain unfazed. Only 40 percent of us are concerned, a Gallup poll recently found. Twenty-five percent remain global warming skeptics. Legislative attempts at climate action are inevitably derailed, and political hopefuls increasingly play the science denial card to win support.

So what can we do?

We reached out to a handful of scientists, policy experts, writers and activists to ask: “If you could require America to do just one thing — any one thing — to combat climate change this year, what would it be?” Here’s what they said:

Change How We Eat

Dr. Jane Goodall
I want Americans — and others — to eat less meat. As more and more people worldwide eat more and more meat, vast areas of forest are cleared to grow grain to feed livestock. Ever-growing herds of cattle and goats destroy more areas of forest. Destruction of forests releases CO2 from trees and forest soils — and leaves fewer forests worldwide to absorb atmospheric CO2. Large amounts of methane are released (especially by cows in the form of farts and belches). Gallons of fossil fuels are used to transport and prepare feed, to transport livestock from factory farms to slaughter and meat to the market.

Remember the Space Race

David Suzuki
Scientist and broadcaster
Faced with the magnitude and seriousness of global warming, and the tremendous opportunities in addressing it, we need the kind of leadership America is known for. We need an all-out effort as great as or greater than the determination to pull ahead of the Soviet Union in the Space Race. The America that set me on my path would never deny the reality of a scientifically proven problem, or claim nothing can be done about it or that meeting the challenge will destroy the economy. By committing to seek solutions, we will reap benefits — expected and unexpected. It’s time to revive the American know-how and gung-ho enthusiasm that has long characterized this great nation.

Do What You Uniquely Can Do

William D. Nordhaus
Sterling professor of economics, Cowles Foundation, Yale University
People ask, what can I do? My answer is that people should address the threat of climate change in ways that best fit their personal interests and capabilities. Students can learn, and teachers can teach. Citizens can inform themselves. Engineers can develop low-carbon technologies. Politicians can confront the realities and speak the truth. Media can avoid meaningless balancing of good and bad arguments. As an economist, I can explain why carbon pricing (such as through carbon taxes) is the most effective mechanism to reduce emissions. There is much to do, for everyone.

Take Action in Your Communities

Annie Leonard
Executive director, Greenpeace USA; creator, The Story of Stuff
If I could require Americans to do one thing, it is to get active! Already millions know and are concerned about climate change, now we need to move that passive concern into action. That action could take many forms depending on each person’s skills and interests: shut down coal-fired power plants, get your university to divest from fossil fuels and invest in a clean energy economy, encourage companies and state and local governments to switch to renewable energy, demand leadership from our elected officials. It doesn’t matter so much which thing we do, as long as we all do something.

Pass a Carbon Tax to Fund Next-Gen Research

Kerry Emanuel
Professor of atmospheric science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
If I could be a czar for a day (or a few days!) I would direct substantial federal resources toward research and development in a) next generation passively safe, modular nuclear fission reactors, and b) carbon capture and sequestration technology. I would implement a carbon tax to fund these ventures and otherwise encourage migration away from fossil fuels. At the same, I would force all industries to pay for their externalities; for example, the coal industry would be required pay for the health problems and premature mortality that arise from dumping waste into the atmosphere and waterways. I would provide strong incentives for producing more energy-efficient vehicles and buildings and for developing more efficient and effective renewable energy sources. Finally, I would start a movement to amend the Constitution to make it illegal to influence (whether by voting or through money) elections outside one’s own district.

Follow in the Footsteps of Martin Luther King Jr.

Kumi Naidoo
Executive director, Greenpeace International
Throughout history, when people have faced the greatest injustices, from apartheid to slavery, positive social change has happened as the result of peaceful civil disobedience. We are at the point in the struggle to save the climate where we must put our lives on the line. I would encourage Americans to follow in the footsteps of Martin Luther King Jr. and take peaceful action to stop the burning of fossil fuels and the collusion of our governments with industry interests, joining in the great worldwide tradition of civil disobedience. When we stand up together we can make the greatest change.

Bill McKibben
Author, founder of 350.org

Treat It Like It’s World War III

I’d put a serious price on carbon, and send the proceeds back to every American every month; and I’d push for renewable energy as if it was the start of World War II and we needed tanks and fighter jets. But these obvious steps won’t happen until we break the power of the fossil fuel industry, so what I’d really do is ask everyone to come join us in the streets of New York on September 20.

Vandana Shiva
Physicist, philosopher and environmental activist

Stop Letting Corporations Rule

This is the one thing I would ask of the USA: Stop promoting corporate rule and corporate greed. Stop giving corporations personhood.



Ban Fracking

Sandra Steingraber
Author, biologist, distinguished scholar in residence, Ithaca College
Thanks to the heat-trapping gases already stashed in our atmosphere from two centuries of fossil fuel dependency, we are rapidly approaching the last-straw-breaks-the-camel’s-back moment in the story of climate change. To stabilize the situation, we need to control methane. The best science shows us that methane is more than 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over the short term — the only timeframe now left to us. Thus, to sidestep disaster, my single act would be to declare a ban on fracking and redirect toward renewable energy projects all the capital investment now invested in blowing up our nation’s bedrock to extract the vaporous, inherently leaky, climate-killing fossil fuel called natural gas — which is the leading source of methane emissions in the United States. Cement well casings leak, crack, age, shrink and crumble over time. Each gas well is a methane chimney that can never be completely turned off. Stop drilling, baby.

Clean up Polluting Power Plants

Nikki Silvestri
Executive director, Green For All
Climate change is already taking a toll on human health and safety. And the most vulnerable among us — poor folks, people of color and kids — are hit first and worst. We have a chance right now to make a huge dent in the pollution that causes climate change. The Environmental Protection Agency is considering safeguards that would, for the first time, set limits on how much carbon power companies can spew into our shared air. Outdated, dirty power plants would be required to use technology to cut their pollution — or switch to cleaner, more modern forms of energy. Oil and coal companies have gotten away with poisoning our air and water for too long. They’ve been raking in billions in profit, leaving the rest of us to shoulder the costs — from asthma treatments and hospital visits to disaster response. It’s time for them to take responsibility for the harm they’re causing our communities. It’s a simple choice: We can protect polluter profits, or the health and safety of our kids and grandkids.

  • submit to reddit
  • thinkerman

    How to save the planet? Create a framework for global co-operation by founding a Union of the Democracies. All the big things we need that could make a real difference — carbon taxes, corporate regulation, deep demilitarization — get defeated on the grounds of needing to compete with other jurisdictions in one way or another. A Union of the Democracies could stop the race to the bottom, providing a common floor for policies needed in the common interest. NATO would be reformed as the security branch of the Union to protect all member democracies from outside attack, allowing all members to drawn down their arms spending, thereby freeing trillions of dollars for ecological renewal. Without such a global approach, nothing can happen that is large enough to make enough of a difference soon enough.

  • Marge Wood

    Thinkerman, what a wonderful idea! Let us know how your plans are coming along.

  • Anonymous

    “our planet is in trouble”
    Really? Our planet is in trouble? What kind of trouble?
    This planet of ours, formed from the results of the big band, supernovas, etc, and having survived collisions by massive asteroid, multiple ice ages, the massive movement of the continents, sea level rises of dozens of feet, etc, is in trouble?
    Trouble of what? A pesty species that is generating a little bit too much plant food? Really?
    This planet is fine. It can easily rid itself of the pesky humans any time with a single massive volcanic eruption, for example.
    I get a kick everytime I hear that the planet is in trouble. Humans may be in trouble due to lack of demand for labor at above value rates, lack of money to pay for promised pensions or national debts. The planet? Doing just fine. Still orbiting around the sun and the Milky Way as it has been doing way before humans appeared and will, likely, continue to do long after humans are extinct.

  • Jane Peters

    More solar panels on more homes.

  • JohnH

    Convert our power source to nuclear breeder reactors. It’s technology that’s ready. It works. The unit cost is cheap. And, yes, it’s safe.

  • mistywindow

    All of the above need to be done, but the single most important action is to make the bad guys pay: a tax on carbon and at the same time kill the billions of dollars given now in oil and coal subsidies. Fee and dividend is probably the way to go. Some of the tax revenue could go to blue sky alternative energy research, but most should be shared equally amongst all adults.

    That way you’re encouraging alternative energy, making the fossil industry pay for externalities, and providing an incentive for consumers to seek alternatives to goods and services with high carbon footprints.

    I’m not holding my breath. The US political system is in thrall to the bad guys and there’s no sign of imminent change.

  • mistywindow

    I suggest that the reduction in carbon emissions for the EU and the US is because of the exporting of jobs and manufacturing to China and other low-wage economies.

    We have a very sick system.

  • mistywindow

    They called in the League of Nations. Then we totally stuffed it up.


  • http://www.lightkeepersjournal.com/ Curtis

    I see no one checked with T. Boone Pickens. He seems like he would fit into the David Suzuki “opportunities and benefits” camp. Never let it be said that ol T. Boone ever missed a chance to cash a problem.

  • thinkerman

    You have strange enjoyments. But I think people generally understand the shorthand, Mr. Punctilious, that by the planet being in trouble we mean life on the planet, including notably us humans.

  • Anonymous

    Elect someone that would “Put a solar panel on every roof”

  • Anonymous

    It is humankind plus other animals and plants that are threatened by climate change not the planet. The planet will still be here long after we are gone.

  • JonThomas

    True, and at times the distinction is very important, but for thousands of years humans have also been using terms like ‘all the Earth,’ or simply ‘the Earth’ to refer to the people living on the planet. It’s an accepted and an extremely long-standing traditional use of phrasing. :-)

  • Anonymous

    Referencing Earth instead of Humankind obfuscates the danger.

  • Anonymous

    A key factor typically ignored in discussions of climate change is the limited supply of fossil fuels. “Peak Oil” in general parlance. The best author on this subject – resource limits, climate change, and the culture that denies both – is John Michael Greer.

    Climate Change is likely, but the harder fact is that the oil will run out anyway, even if we don’t do anything about AGW. The denial of resource limits is much like climate change denial.

    Collapse now, and avoid the rush. it’s going to happen, one way or another. I can’t explain why economists keep telling us the economy can grow forever. Probably as simple as greed. It’s like a bad religion.

    Backyard (and front yard) gardens, bikes, simple living without lots of stuff… people won’t do it, but it is objectively the best path toward the inevitable less industrial future. However, it requires consensus; but the power available to those who want it simply overwhelms the wisdom of contentment.

    Nevertheless, it is a matter of great wonder how the lessons learned in the 70s about the inevitable Limits to Growth, and the efforts at sustainability that rose up in the time of Peak US domestic oil, disappeared for a variety of reasons and we bumbled on for a few more decades, in increasing decadence (a subject for another discussion).

    The lesson that came out of the 70s, I think, is simply that our desire to grow will not be impeded even by our understanding, whether of natural systems or of the limit of resources – or even more simply that for a thing to live it must also die. At this point in civilization’s life cycle, our culture is adept at denial: “They’ll think of something” – some new miracle technology – or The Aliens will come rescue us, or there’s no use doing anything anyway because the world will end in a fiery crash.

  • JonThomas

    True enough not to create divisions among people who otherwise agree. :-)

  • JonThomas

    Good comment.

    In this week’s episode, David Suzuki shared an experience that shone light upon, and offered insight into, the dilemma you posed of many economist’s world view. It doesn’t excuse or preclude their shortsightedness, but it does help us understand and react to their perspective.

  • Russell Scott Day

    When we raced to the Moon we didn’t know how much good it would do for us to know how to do it and see the Earth the way it gave us the picture. Now we just really need to keep on keeping on at doing what taught us what we could do. There really is the near earth and Mars and Venus for us to colonize. It is time to see the Vatican throw its resources towards protect Earth, and colonize Mars and Venus. The overpopulating of the Earth due to Vatican population policies internationally powerful have put us in a terrible fearful situation that only Transcendia the nation of airports and spaceports can systematically move us through towards security and happiness of a pragmatic nature.

  • Jim Guy

    You know how you walk into a room, and someone has turned the furnace WAY up, and it’s hot as heck, and even though you turn the temp down the furnace keeps running because it’s programmed that way? Yeah.

  • Laura Reynolds

    I’m starting to think we need to accept that governments and industries are not going to do these things, because industry won’t allow us to limit their profits. What can we do outside the “system”? I mean, I already recycle, work from home, limit my consumption of energy (I hardly drive), etc. These things are good, but they won’t do what, say, prohibiting fracking or closing down coal-based power plants would accomplish. How can we get these big things done if the government is ruled by people whose main interest is their own short-term profits and power?

  • Anonymous

    If I were king of the world, I would order everyone in my world-kingdom to become vegetarian now. And I would appoint Chancellor Angela Merkel to guide all countries in switching to renewable sources of energy ASAP. (Germany now is using 74% renewables — mostly solar and wind — under her leadership.)

  • Anonymous

    :) Thanks. Corrected.

  • Anonymous

    Cool – let me know when I can buy a nuclear breeder powered car. Sounds like it will be very fast. Though probably a bit heavy dragging all that continent building concrete around.

  • Anonymous

    Cool. A new Füher.

  • http://mdfrenchpilotcars.ca/ Deb French

    You may want to check the new coal plants being built in Germany since they closed their nuclear too quickly to provide enough power for the nation… plus they buy extra power (nuclear etc.) from France. I still admire they green effort… certainly more aggressive than most countries…

  • Anonymous

    before I saw the paycheck four $4212 , I accept that
    my neighbours mother woz like they say really receiving money in there spare
    time from their computer. . there brothers friend has done this 4 only about
    seventeen months and at present paid for the loans on their place and got a
    great Mazda MX-5 . navigate to this website F­i­s­c­a­l­p­o­s­t­.­C­O­M­

  • Anonymous

    Al Gore did this. Those who have a big footprint pay those who don’t. The overall didn’t change, Al just got rich.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds silly at first but this would help.

  • Anonymous

    Stop Smoking! (Get it?) Tax smokers till they stop killing us with their
    second-hand smoke. Create true, all-encompassing policy, not just
    “encourage alternative energy” or “jobs” or “carbon tax” both nationally
    and internationally.

    Reward electric-based commerce transport — GE,
    Siemens, Cummins: where are electric truck engines? Battery
    “stations”/exchanges? (mass public charging doesn’t work). Research
    & develop deep geothermal everywhere for regional electricity
    production, not just “enhanced drilling”. http://thnktnk.net/drill.html.

    If Norway can dig a 17km tunnel through solid granite for $100mm, why
    can’t we tunnel down 6 or 8 km to unlimited energy, forever …
    anywhere? Create an earth energy Apollo project!

  • pointofgrille

    Now the question is, where do we find a democracy?

  • Anonymous

    I say let the eco-nazis shiver in the cold.

  • Anonymous

    By the way… the planet stopped warming 17 years ago.

  • Gary Williams

    The latest desperate attempt to rekindle the fear is simply halarious.
    The Antarctic Ice will melt and drown all of our cities…
    Oh My God! Oh My God! Oh My God!… TAX me now!!!

    What they sort of glossed over is the time period.
    500 to 900 years if indeed it ever happens which is actually unlikely.
    When pushed to ring the alarm bell the Scientist responsible for this sillyness said in his OPINION it could even be in 200 years.

    LOL…. They are seeiing their grand scheme die bofore thier eyes and are panicking…

  • Orellian Tay

    To believe in catastrophic global warming, you do not need any global warming.

    The missing heat is in the arctic, in the oceans and under your bed. It will get us…oh yes it will.

  • Anonymous

    A carbon tax will do what? The United States has spent since 2006 $100 BILLION on global warming, climate change, climate disruption, whatever the name is now, and has gotten what?

  • Anonymous

    How do you explain Saudi Arabia pumping oil from the same hole for 50+ years. Peak Oil? Last November the USA produced more crude oil that the rest of the world. Peak oil? Oh and don’t forget the recent multi-billion barrel oil discovery in Austraila. Peak oil???

  • Anonymous

    Solar Freakin’ Roadways … Duh!

  • Anonymous

    Call, write, and repeat often the question to our elected officials. How can you risk the future of our children for your personal gain today?

  • Anonymous

    If you warmist trash weren’t aiding & abetting the liars and thieves proposing carbon markets and global wealth redistribution as ‘solutions’ to this imaginary climate change scam (neither of which would do anything about the climate even if the scam were true) – I might almost believe that you actually care about the environment and the future of our children and grandchildren. As it is however, you’re just criminals or idiots.

  • thinkerman

    Hipnosis, oh, but the way, you are mistaken on the facts. Heat is continuing to accumulate in the oceans. Read the science, not the propaganda.

  • JonThomas

    Among other benefits… including offsetting government subsidies given to the EXTREMELY profitable fossil fuel industry… a carbon tax (while not a panacea) would help to recover some of the hidden costs related to fossil fuel use.

    It is important to note that we, as a society, should not view a carbon tax as a substitute for sustainable choices and actions on an individual or grand scale. Nor should we view such a tax as an allowance to continue unsustainable practices.

  • John Wylie

    Check out fusionpowercorporation proposal. Your no. 2 has been done
    Yes, an Apollo program is necessary, but the basic science it seems was
    done in the 70’s and “certain” groups are playing serious games to keep it
    from being acted on.

  • John Wylie

    See well-reasearched and written study by National Geographic a few years back. You can argue whether peak is just past, now, or shortly in future, but that is waste of time. It is a finite comodity, and we need to work hard on alternatives. Cheap oil is already gone, and demand continues to climb in places like China, India, Japan, etc.

  • 2noame

    Add to this list an unconditional basic income.

    Providing everyone with the basics such that we no longer require jobs to live, will mean that entirely unnecessary jobs can be eliminated, and the work people do merely to provide income for their families despite its environmental consequences will become work people can begin to turn their backs on.

    The positive environmental repercussions of basic income need to be better understood and shared. Check out Alyssa Battistoni’s “Alive in the Sunshine” for a good start.

  • Anonymous

    Another good source for information is the following video:

    (ps, despite the title being “There is No Tomorrow”, it gives a realistic view of the forecast, and there is a tomorrow.)

    (pps would love to see the sources for the three contentions made above.)

  • Judy Cross

    “Global Warming” aka “Climate Change” is my litmus test. Those who pretend CO2, a beneficial trace gas present at only 4/100 of 1% is capable of changing climate are those whose opinion no one can count on for anything else because they are automatically Globalist Shills.

  • Mike435

    If we ban fracking we will just dig up more coal and import more oil. Fracking needs safety regulations and controls on methane leaking. But banning it would be a step backward. We need nuclear power, carbon sequestering and most of all a price on ghg emissions. Let’s cut income tax rates and tax ghg emissions instead. Rebates can be used to mitigate the regressive nature of consumption taxes. Putting a price on carbon needs to be goal number one.

  • Mike435

    I just finished reading Nordhaus’ book Climate Casino. I highly recommend it.

  • http://vernonhuffman.blogspot.com/ Vernon Huffman

    We’re learning to grow our own food, pedal our own bikes, and care for our neighbors. Through radical localization we’re building a resilient community that will be able to meet local needs through sustainable use of local resources. We’re asserting our community rights over those of corporations and demanding that elected leaders get behind the people.

  • Anonymous

    Ernest responded I am amazed that people able to profit $9067 in 4 weeks on the
    internet . try here F­i­s­c­a­l­p­o­s­t­.­C­O­M­

  • Guest

    We really CANNOT wait for a government intervention here. Too late now, anyway. I hope you’re grandchildren and great-grandchildren are ready for the coming days. YOU have left this for them. This is FACT – not some FUTURE that the ignorant, right-wing deniers might think is going on. I won’t live to see the end of the world as we know it – I sure hope the rest of you are OK with your grandchildren & great-grandchildren are OK with seeing it.

  • Scott DeBerg

    We really CANNOT wait for a government intervention here. Too late now, anyway. I hope your grandchildren and great-grandchildren are ready for the coming days. YOU have left this for them. This is FACT – not some FUTURE that the ignorant, right-wing deniers might think is going on. I won’t live to see the end of the world as we know it – I sure hope the rest of you are OK with your grandchildren & great-grandchildren are OK with seeing it.

  • Hawkroad

    Hear, Hear! Well spoken!

  • Anonymous

    It’s disturbing and sad that you don’t care about drowning our coastlines within a few hundred years, which is a blink of the eye in a geological timeframe. Think for a moment of all the infrastructure, property, great historical resources, and so on that line our coastlines. This antarctic ice melt is unstoppable. I look around America, and I see and enjoy so much that was bequeathed to us by our ancestors: public libraries, museums, institutions, national parks, and on and on. We’re leaving a legacy, too, of a toxic world sliding fast into an ecological nightmare. It really is tragic.

  • Kathy

    Those giant industrial turbines you feature are destroying intact ecosystems vital to our future…and causing humans and other creatures from their homes. Local distributed energy solutions keep communities whole. Radical simplicity is too “hard” for our soft populace to warm to but it will do the most. We need to face the music–less is more.

  • David Selwyn

    Hipnosis, I snapped my fingers! Wake from your trance! Now!

  • Anonymous

    I believe that there are those in rich places that seek to take advantage of anything they can, including global warming, but, if you have done any work involving chemistry, you would be aware that very small things can have very big effects. The potential of carbon dioxide to make the Earth warmer was discovered in the late 1800’s, long before any of this controversy, which would not even be controversial if it were not for oil companies to muck up the discourse with lies, just as the tobacco companies lied about smoking and cancer. Methane, the main component of natural gas, is much worse. My take on the matter is, even if there were not such effects, the use of fossil fuels for billions of humans makes the air difficult to breathe, destroys communities, ruins forests and mountains and water supplies, and there is no excuse not to try to find better ways of living. Also, if there is one thing owned by extremely rich and powerful people used to start wars or stop any action against fossil fuels, it is oil and the oil industry.

  • Anonymous

    These are one time costs that will eventually be provided by green energy, once the transition is made. The alternative is to do nothing, continue to burn fossil fuels, and eventually just roll up and die.

  • Dano2

    o CO2/GHGs such a small amount can’t matter (50 extra points if you ask if the person should increase their dosage by a similar amount and it gets them mad) [10 points]

    o Climate change, global warming, which is it? ( lol ) [15 points]

    o AGW believers want a world government/socialist/whatever [15 points]




  • Anonymous

    As long as corporations, especially the dirty energy ones are in charge of making energy policies for the nation, we will not have much change. We must diversify into wind, solar, hydrogen, geo-thermal, hydro, alcohol, while investing in Tesla model of energy. Civilization is impossible without energy. We need massive amounts for the future. In the future, it would be possible to harvest energy from outer space….The current needs point to moving from local sources of energy to planetary source of almost limitless energy. Tesla’s model of energy is the only viable alternative for harvesting planetary energy. Corporations need to find a way to profit from it. Then the shift is likely to be rapid.

  • Gary Williams

    Art… You miss the point. Antarctic ice mass is breaking records these days, Melting is normal and natural in an interglacial and NOTHING you do will ever have any effect on it. The area mentioned in this rant is 8% of Antarctica and will not change the normal rate of sea level rise which BTW has slowed in the last 20 years.
    You might feel better if you just stop listening to extremist activists and do a little research into the actual Facts>
    Did you know that it will take 169000 years to melt all of that ice?
    Did you know that if all the ARCTIC ice melted, it would not raise sea level?
    Are you at all aware that we are at the end of our current interglacial period and the climate is due to get bloody cold soon? As in before the ice at the poles could possibly melt…

    That is what I ridicule… blind acceptance of complete nonsense from the enviro Waco crowd.

  • Anonymous

    How about dumping toxic sludge, waste oil and any manner of other things onto their private property.

  • Anonymous

    Actual facts…hmm, care to share some links, places where you have done some of your extensive research?

  • Nj Anderson

    It is so clear. We have the sun, the moon and the wind. One person could save the entire world by inventing an insanely great battery. Invent the perfect medium and membrane, or even some thing entirely new and be king of the world.

  • Anonymous

    Gotta love Chaney and his secret energy conference 20 years ago.

  • Nathaniel Mulcahy

    a wonderful article, and while it is true that reducing emission by switching to renewables is a part of the solution, the reality is, even if all man made CO2 emissions were to stop we have already assured that CO2 levels will continue to rise for 100-1000 years. If we are to combat climate change the single most important thing to do is sequester CO2 from the atmosphere. CCS is costly and proven to not work, geo-engineering too risky, this leaves biochar and small scale agriculture as the only economic, and environmentally safe option.

  • thinkerman

    Yeah bio-char. Also massive reforestation, perhaps across desserts using desalinated water made by renewable power during periods of surplus. Much of the CO2 in the atmosphere is due to deforestation. Finally, the oceans cleanse carbon dioxide from the air, with corals and such sequestering it to the seafloor, if we haven’t already imperilled the cycle.

  • Judy Cross

    CO2 at 400 PPM or 4/100ths of ONE PERCENT would have tyo be magic to change climate. There is no mechanism for CO2 to store heat and re-radiate it as the climate crazies have suppoed.

    There is almost 1000x CO2 as there is methane…methane isn’t magical either.

    You’ve been lied to for fun and profit.

    The Banksters own the oil companies and the oil companies like Shell and British Petroleum are in on the scam. Both companies endowed the Climategate people.at the Climactic Research Unit.at the University of East Anglia who conveniently lost the original climate data.

    Wise up! It’s the biggest scam since the Banksters got to create money from nothing on which they charge us interest!

    Same people!

  • tljshare

    Indiegogo.com is a great if you have a great idea and timber to make see it through. There are some successes in funding with Indiegogo. All good for those seeking a way forward.

  • Mychele Hillary

    We may have slowed the increase in atmospheric CO2 by some small amt. thus pushing the tipping point back a year or two or a decade? Who knows? Are we simply not to try to change what we’re doing? and that $100 billion you cite includes spending on post-weather-related disasters that may have been influenced by climate imbalance i’m certain.

    What I DO know is that: The United States, indeed the world, has spent untold BILLIONS of dollars, pounds, Euro, drachmas, etc. on cancer research and has gotten what? Cancer still kills millions each year? Why bother trying to change this either by your logic.

  • Mike Thorne

    What we really have to do, if we wan’t the deniers, the right wing, center, left wing and ill informed (undecided) to all take this crises seriously, is to prove that this is a global issue. If we can not work together to develop some possible solutions, our world will no longer support humans.
    Think of the movie “4th of July”. or, better yet “Invasion From Mars”. All citizens of Earth were compelled to work together in order to find a solution.
    OK. that is also silly…
    Bottom line, I believe that our environment is very much worth improving. Last I heard, 65% of the US population backs me up on this.
    It’s very disturbing that big money directs the conversation!

  • Mike Thorne

    What we really have to do, if we wan’t the deniers, the right wing, center, left wing and ill informed (undecided) to all take this crises seriously, is to prove that this is a global issue. If we can not work together to develop some possible solutions, our world will no longer support humans.
    Think of the movie “4th of July”. or, better yet “Invasion From Mars”. All citizens of Earth were compelled to work together in order to find a solution.
    OK. that is also silly…
    Bottom line, I believe that our environment is very much worth improving. Last I heard, 65% of the US population backs me up on this.
    It’s very disturbing that big money directs the conversation!

  • Anonymous

    ugh….Judy. Science 101…the correlation between CO2 emissions and global temperatures in not controversial….at all. Climates do change all the time…slowly…over long periods of time…and it is correlated to CO2 concentrations as PPM not percentages. So my “litmus test” for climate deniers such as yourself is do they even have a basic understanding of science…you, ma’am…do not.

  • Anonymous

    oh…wow. Now I read this one…you really don’t understand “the greenhouse effect” at all…do you? Absent from the climate change discussion…you should at least start to understand the relationship between CO2 and temperature. You’re really limited in your basic handle on science…no, it’s not “magical”…it science.

  • http://aichiwithpetri.webs.com Petri

    I love this idea! And it will take large companies to implement it

  • Kevin Talmadge

    You’re cherry picking the statistics, and if you go back further than 17 years you see an unbroken and upward trend. climate deniers love to start at 1998, because we had an el nino which caused a temperature spike…

  • 4TimesAYear

    “We’re leaving a legacy, too, of a toxic world sliding fast into an ecological nightmare”
    Not here in the U.S. We cleaned up our air, etc. a long time ago. You obviously weren’t around in the 50’s and 60’s. No amount of regulation here is going to make one whit of difference overseas. 82% of pollution in our air we get 10 days later.

  • CB

    The US does have much cleaner air and water than it did in the 50’s and 60’s, partially because of regulation and partially because we’ve offshored our manufacturing to China.

    The atmospheric carbon imbalance is fundamentally different from local pollution, and far more dangerous.

    You may stop pretending you don’t understand that now.

  • 4TimesAYear

    Let. me. repeat. CO2. is. not. pollution.

  • GreenCPA

    Require everyone to read “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn.


    “There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with people. Given a story to enact that puts them in accord with the world, they will live in accord with the world. But given a story to enact that puts them at odds with the world, as yours does, they will live at odds with the world. Given a story to enact in which they are the lords of the world, they will ACT like lords of the world. And, given a story to enact in which the world is a foe to be conquered, they will conquer it like a foe, and one day, inevitably, their foe will lie bleeding to death at their feet, as the world is now.”

    ~ “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn

  • James Arnn

    Reducing human population in a measured and sane manner is probably the most effective long term solution to our problems. Yet it is not even mentioned in passing in the “10 ideas”. And very rarely mentioned in the comments. All the other “solutions” will just make it possible to add more people and keep us in the same sinking ship.

  • Dano2

    Again, it must be said: we will damage the planet, we won’t kill it. And we could very well wipe out most humans, but not all. There will be pockets left as we are too clever.

    Maintaining these population levels for much longer? No.



  • Anonymous

    These are as effective as sound bites – they get your attention. But at the ground level – in the field with conservation scientists (and poachers) – these are worth a hill of beans. They do not reach to the ground, where it’s all happening.
    My own town is building massive amouns of new condos, hotels, restaurants on a floodplain. The tidal gauge is rising at a 35* angle. FEMA is demanding stringent requirements that will only matter to the new owners, who will have to pay for the consequences of the next big storm – not the developers or the city.
    How do you stop the force for short-sighted greed of both city and developers – even in the face of federal and international data that prove it simply stupid?

  • Verla Gardner


  • ChazNCenTex

    So you get there the day before so you can get settled, know where to go etc. If you live nearby then sure the 21st may be fine. But if you’re in Texas…

  • gmocs8

    We are already reducing populations due to the Islamic fanatics and their wars. We are having massive flooding and bad weather that wipes out everything too. Michigan has those wind towers and half the time they are never used. Waste of money.

  • http://www.coroflot.com/maceye Vamboroolz

    Another is to address the ridiculous amount of waste that goes into the packaging of consumer goods, from (for starters) non-recyclable plastic clamshell containers to individual throw-away teabag packets. We are burying ourselves under an avalanche of garbage, and it seems the vast majority of people would rather look the other way than face up to the enormous problem we have created for ourselves.

  • MDWilson

    If we made it a national goal, akin to JFK’s call to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade, we could within 10 years blanket every roof in the U.S. with solar panels (of ever decreasing cost and increasing efficiency) and build wind farms everywhere that is appropriate, thus reducing our reliance on fossil fuels by over 80%, thereby creating complete energy independence for the U.S., with the free bonus of dramatically reducing our contribution to global climate change.

    With energy independence we could then re-deploy all of our troops out of the Middle East, saving hundreds of billions every year, and send them where they will do the most good for our country. I’m sure we could keep everyone working for the next 50 years just repairing our crumbling infrastructure.

  • Douglas McFarland

    If we went nuclear it would go along way. France is doing it and with new technologies and designs we could do it here in the U.S. even better. France went entirely nuclear for power in ten years and now they have the lowest carbon footprint out of any industrialized european nation.

  • dragontech64

    Nuclear just kicks the can down the road, because there are already TONS of spent nuclear fuel rods, waste water and other contaminated materials that will remain dangerously radioactive LONG after the human race is gone, that needs to be dealt with, and is currently being ignored as NIMBY.
    We cannot create more nuclear waste till we have a plan on what to do with it. We are already past a critical point in storing these materials.

  • dragontech64

    And that you seem to be OK with the deaths of BILLIONS of humans, tens of billions of other creatures, soil destruction and the unalterable destruction of most of the arable land just to maintain the current rate of capitalist greed is sickening.

  • dragontech64

    Wrong. The worlds population growth rate is faster than it ever has been. The so-called Islamic fanatics and “their” wars (mostly started by US greed for oil) are barely putting a dent in the growth rate.

  • dragontech64

    The vast majority of the “giant industrial turbines” are miles from homes, either out in farm pasture or grain fields or in stable off-shore plains. These are NOT fragile ecosystems that cannot take the presence of the turbines, nor are the large ones that near residential areas to drive humans from their homes. It would be better to have smaller turbines close to use points, and roof-top solar also near the place it’ll be used. But for now we do need these larger remote turbines too, until we can get people over their NIMBY fears.

  • dragontech64

    Are you happy with the world YOU left your kids, grandkids, great-grandkids? It isn’t just us and ours, you know. YOU had a hand in it too, Skippy.

  • Douglas McFarland

    Light water reactors create the waste. I am not advocating building light water reactors. Breeder reactors like the IVR reactor (shutdown) built in Idaho could actually reduce nuclear waste over the course of their operation because we could use the existing “waste” as fuel. These reactors produce a tiny fraction of the waste that light water reactors produce. If we built breeder reactors (which isn’t what I am advocating either) we could use the existing “waste” for fuel. The result of operating these reactors would be a reduction in U.S. nuclear “waste” over the life of their operation.

    There are even better designs that would produce even less waste on the drawing boards. Bill Gates company Terra Power is developing such technology which is just one example. Thorium reactors are another although these won’t reduce the amount of “waste” we already have.

    While there are legitimate serious concerns with nuclear power so far the amount of premature death associated with fossil fuel power plants dwarfs that which has been caused by nuclear.

  • dragontech64

    There is too much development needed right now for nuclear to CURRENTLY be a viable alternative. Unless we can do something about the THOUSANDS of tons of waste ALREADY existing, we cannot even afford the research for it.

  • Douglas McFarland

    There is already the IVR reactor design. No development would be needed to build these reactors. The reactor in Idaho was tested for complete power failure to all systems and the reactor shutdown automatically. Then they shut down the water pumps and (a catastrophe that mimics pretty much exactly the Fukushima disaster) the reactors shut down without incident.

    If we built these reactors then we could do something with the thousands of tons of “waste” that already exist. This reactor or ones like it are the only way that I have ever heard suggested that would actually make large quantities of nuclear “waste” go away. All the nuclear waste produced in america if put in a solid block would fit on the playable area of a football field about 9 feet high. It is a viable alternative. France doesn’t have a nuclear waste problem like the U.S..

    Liquid Thorium Fluoride Reactors have been developed and built in Norway and are being built in other countries so although this wouldn’t address the U.S. nuclear waste disposal problem no development would be necessary to develop these practically waste free power plants.

  • Douglas McFarland

    Yeah dragon is right. The population is growing not shrinking. The level of violence in the world has decreased overall as have the percentage of populations killed by violence. The only thing that has ever been correlated with flat or declining population growth besides disease are large percentages of educated affluent people in countries. The only way to stop population growth is to help poor countries become educated with stable growing economies.

  • Theresa Smith

    So, the other day, I went looking
    to see what I could do, just me, myself, and I, and a not too amazing budget,
    to help slow down the effects of the climate change disasters so many of us are
    already seeing evidence of. I found the usual stuff, switch to CFL or LED
    bulbs, drive less, eat local, don’t water your lawn, etc. That’s all well and good, BUT um what next?
    Part of the issue is that many of us, far more than you’d think, have already
    done most of that stuff. Yay US! That’s
    great, but it does nothing to help ME or my household deal with higher summer
    temperatures, intermittent flooding, power outages, water shortages, colder
    winter temps or wild wind storms. Just
    so we’re clear I’m not talking about the ever famous apocalypse scenario. I’m
    talking about 2 inches of rain in one day in July which just happened a week
    ago where I live! I’m also not talking about brownish lawns; my lawn gets a tan
    every year. I’m talking about a town in Texas where the local park’s kid’s toys
    MELTED in the heat, and it didn’t rain for 9 months. I’m talking about the kind
    of “something I should do” because scientists think that the Colorado River’s
    aquifers may just be giant dry voids at this point, and it would take about
    four decades for them to refill, even with no one using any of the water.

    So, whether you think climate
    change is human related, not human related, or because cows are farting too
    much, is really pretty immaterial when it comes to practical actions that we as
    individuals, families, and maybe even communities can take to mitigate the
    problems the freaky weather is causing. And apparently there is not a lot of
    material written about this, anywhere.. So here goes! I’m going to put out this
    article with a few practical, some tested and some not tested ideas that don’t
    cost an arm and a leg, can be accomplished fairly easily, and will make an
    appreciable difference in how the freaky weather is affecting you, your family,
    and your house.

    Paint your roof white, especially
    the south face of it. Sea ice reflects light into space. Sea ice is melting and
    there is less of it now, so less heat is reflected back into space and more of
    it stays here. And it gets hotter. The hotter it gets the more ice will melt
    and the cycle continues. BTW the extra heat in places where it’s not usually
    that hot is one of the things pushing the odd weather patterns. Also, we all
    know that wearing a black shirt is hotter than wearing a white shirt in direct
    sunlight. Your roof gets a lot of direct sunlight. Paint it white and it will
    absorb less of that heat and reflect more of it back out of your house. In an
    awesome ideal world, we could paint most of the roofs white and replace the sea
    ice etc. I did this, and it lowers the summer temp in my house by about 5
    degrees, easy. I don’t live in a particularly hot place so this should work
    even better for people in places like Arizona, Mississippi, and Florida where
    it’s really hot. I live in the northern hemisphere so if you live in the
    southern hemisphere prioritize the North face of your roof rather than the
    south etc. Ok, here’s how. Buy good quality white exterior grade, acrylic paint
    and then thin it down by ½ with water making it really liquid. It adheres to
    the textured roof tiles better, and dries faster when it’s thinned down, and it
    also covers nearly twice as much area for the same expenditure. Did I mention
    that my budget is a bit, um..limited? Use a paint sprayer and just spray it on
    your regular roof tiles on a hot windless day. The windless part matters if
    there’s another house close to you. Don’t EVEN park the car near the house or
    hang your laundry that day. The thin paint adheres well to the roof tiles,
    dries nearly instantly on a hot day, and lasts for years. Needless to say, if
    you’re re-roofing anyway, just get the lightest possible tiles (they come in
    arctic white).

    Create a “water garden” in the portion
    of your lawn that gets the most water and has the worst drainage. Information
    on how to plant a water garden is available on the internet and your county
    extension or gardening organization should also be able to help. I’m not going
    to go into too many specifics since plants and annual rainfall, and city
    ordinances vary so much from area to area. The purpose of a water garden is to
    catch excessive runoff from major storms and filter it slowly through plants
    that need the water rather than having it flow into a storm drain. This helps
    reduce street pollution in runoff, and helps prevent urban flooding from sudden
    drenching storms. It also filter more water into your lawn without you paying
    for the water. These can be sited either where a local street or sidewalk dumps
    water into your lawn, or near buildings whose roofs catch and drain vast
    amounts of water during a storm.

    Get a water barrel, or make one for
    yourself. They have some very pretty ones for sale on the internet and probably
    at your local garden outlet or farm store, but they are so easy to make that I
    can’t see why. Silicone epoxy and the
    appropriate hole saw bit are the secret to making them quickly and easily. It
    does generally take either two people or some way to steady the barrel. Again,
    free water.

    Plant a tree! Shade that hot side
    of your house with a deciduous tree. In the summer when the sun is hot the
    leaves keep the sun off the house, and in the winter the leaves fall off and
    allow the lower angled winter sun to warm the walls of your dwelling. It’s the
    best of both worlds. Not to mention that trees generally clean a ton of dirt
    and pollution from the air and produce oxygen, this is always good.
    Alternately, and I’ve seen this work pretty well, put up trellis on posts and
    grow a climbing vine (honeysuckle is wonderful) about 4 feet away from the wall
    you’d like to shade. It looks pretty, smells great, and shades the house in
    summer while breaking the worst of the wind in winter.

    Get really good window coverings. A
    thick insulated pair of curtains will do almost as much for your heating and
    cooling bills as new windows (which I also recommend) will. Keep the shades or
    curtains drawn on the east side of your house until noon, and then switch and
    close the ones on the west side in the afternoon. Keeping all that heat from
    getting into your house in the first place is one of the best ways to ensure it
    stays temperate without the AC running nonstop, and closing those heavy
    curtains at night in the winter will really make a difference in how cold it
    gets overnight. You can make insulated curtains yourself from any heavy curtain
    fabric backed by cheap flannel sheets that have been washed and dried on hot.
    Or if your inner seamstress is anything like mine, you can also buy curtains
    with excellent insulating materials already included.

    Get a water filtration system. I’m
    not talking about one of those super spendy in ground systems, although those
    are certainly nice! I mean something as simple as a large fridge water pitcher
    with the filter. Now keep it filled up every day. I have a 3 gallon standalone system I was
    given as a gift, and it’s come in handy more than once if a city main breaks
    and there is a boil order for the water due to possible contamination. Also house
    plants love the filtered water. It makes
    much better tea and coffee too.

    Get heavy area rugs. They are
    easier to keep clean than wall to wall carpet and are much less expensive to
    replace if something does happen to them. They can be rolled up and put away in
    the summer so you can enjoy the nice cool floors, and put down as extra
    insulation and comfy warmth in the winter. Incidentally, this creates one less
    season of vacuuming!

    Keep chanting, “Heat the person,
    not the room!” Invest in a gorgeous heavy weight sweater or polar fleece to
    wear in the winter, and suddenly keeping the heat a bit lower doesn’t suck so
    much. But sometimes even with the heat blasting in our houses it seems hard to
    get warm. Smartwool socks and heavy sweaters will make for a happier winter.
    Buy winter shoes ½ size bigger to accommodate heavy boot socks, you’ll be glad
    you did. This is the time to bake and make soup, it’ll help warm the house and
    keep you warmed up inside too.

    In the summer afternoons, if you
    can, spray water, not a lot but some, on the roof of your house. Evaporative
    cooling will help cool the house down a bit, but will especially keep it from “heat
    gain” in the evening. And yes, you’re using water, but it need not be
    drinkable, and it does actually evaporate and get returned directly to the
    earth’s hydro-cycle so it’s not really “wasted” anyway. Use the same theory to
    help yourself stay cool too by placing a shallow pan of cool water in front of fans
    in the summer, or even just wetting your hair, or shirt, or placing your feet
    in cool water. “Cool the person, not the house!” makes just as much sense. Also
    eat cold foods like salad, and jello, or ice cream, or iced tea etc. rather
    than cooking dinner and eating hot food.

    This is a little more expensive, or
    crafty depending on your skill set, but it makes such a huge difference that I’m
    going to include it anyway. Put awnings over your windows. It saves the window
    frames from water damage and storm damage from things flying in the wind. An
    awning shades the windows from the higher angle summer sun but allows the lower
    angled winter sun to come in which is perfect. Also, it generally ups the value
    or at least the “curb appeal” of your home. Plus it makes it really easy to
    decorate for various holidays!

    Again, this is a “buy it” solution,
    but I have found it to be of practical value. Buy a few solar charged LED
    lights. Not the “stick in your lawn” kind, but ones that are meant for indoor
    use. They just sit in a window sill until a power outage, or backyard party
    requires their presence.

    These are a few of the practical
    DIY ideas I’ve come up with. I hope you’ll share those you can think of too! I
    just try to put the emphasis on DIY, not too expensive, low tech or no tech,
    set it and forget it type of things which address a specific problem and do no
    harm anyway even if it doesn’t work as well as hoped for.

  • Dano2

    And that you seem to be OK with the deaths of BILLIONS of humans, tens of billions of other creatures…

    Only someone being mendacious or dishonest would say that. Or Titanically ignorant. Either way.



  • Anonymous

    I do everything I can but I don’t think people as a whole are capable of mitigating catastrophes before they happen even when it is clear they will happen. No civilization thus far has. Humans have always found new sources of energy or increased efficiency, but there aren’t any big discoveries out there that can change things like fossil fuels did.

  • Anonymous

    There is also a limited amount of fissile uranium suitable for fuel that we can get to.

  • Wendy Hellerstedt

    Not a single one suggested that individuals limit their family size. 7 billion people use a lot of resources.

  • Anonymous

    Family size decreases with better infant survival rates. Women need to have control over the number of children they have. Families in the US do not have the number of children they had a generation ago. Look at the craziness currently with the birth control debate. Many people are making the effort.

  • Anonymous

    I was in a program to become a math teacher. The program was for math and science teachers so we had classes together. I had an adjunct prof who was a denier and I wrote a blog for an assignment on finding good science resources. She failed me in her class. The dept head backed her up. I suspect I came across some Fox News watchers or young earth creationists. It was a Catholic college. I had to withdraw from the program at 2/3 of the way through. I have had to hire a lawyer and now have a huge debt. These people are the educators of the educators. Climate change is standard high school science in my area. My opinion of colleges, higher ed and teachers has dropped significantly. I was a career changer (52) not a 20 yr old. I have put some thought into this whole problem and Jane Goodall’s suggestion has a very large impact. There was a study released recently that reduction in meat consumption can make one of the largest differences. It is not one person doing a lot. It is many people doing something.

  • michelle rogers

    The climate debate is taking place in political, academic and activist circles.
    It has not hit our culture and because it is not in our culture – it remains distanced from regular people. If you want people to care then you have to enter the cultural realm, you need writers, artists, designers, tv shows, music, computer games, comedians etc to start making work about the environment and until you do that,,,this conversation remains limited to academics.

  • Jason

    What’s the one thing linking all these ideas? Money. Change money from a debt based instrument to one where we democratize money… This creates the space to do all these things otherwise the demands of debt will always come first

  • FriendofThom

    I would add: End obscene excess! Limit personal spending!

  • http://clifi.mobi/ Jim Osborne

    How about giving all children education and opportunity. With an educated planet all things are possible.

  • Anonymous

    re: “I want Americans — and others — to eat less meat. As more and more people worldwide eat more and more meat, vast areas of forest are cleared to grow grain to feed livestock.”
    Not only is clearing forests being done to produce agrifuels but also indigenous farmers in poor countries have been killed or driven from the land that provides food for local people in order to expand agrifuel crops, yet not a peep of protest from green ideologues. So my plan to save the planet is to avoid agrifuels that are worse for the planet and devastating farmers in poor countries.

  • Anonymous

    @ “What’s the one thing linking all these ideas?”
    I thought the common link was that all of these people who want us to dial back our lifestyles are huge hypocrites who have been some of the planets largest emitters of GHGs and have done little to nothing to dial back their own lifestyles in order to save the planet.

  • dragontech64

    Then go back and reread your comment, where you seem perfectly fine with the destruction we are already leveling on this planet will destroy “most humans” (while ignoring that this will entail destroying most OTHER forms of life in those areas too)
    Your comment reads exactly as that you are fine with this. Want to call me “Titanically ignorant” for your own blithe ignorance of facts? Fine, feel that way. I don’t care about what you think. But when you post online something that comes across as callous as you posted, expect people to call you on it.

  • Anonymous

    I like Kerry Emanuel’s suggestion but I disagree on how to fund it. I don’t think we need a new tax and that we already have the funds that we need and it is only a matter of shifting those existing funds into solutions research. I would argue that there is little if anything we don’t know about the theory of Earth’s gravity that would require billions of dollars to be spent on further research of Earth’s gravity. Well climate change science has rightly been compared to the science of gravity and is accepted by a 99% consensus of scientists so why do we need to be spending money on further research on known knowns. When we already know that WAIS is collapsing isn’t money better spent on solutions to deal with the collapse? Why should we spend more money on studying it. Do we need to still fund climate models that have already provide a verdict on Earth’s future? What purpose do they serve now and again wouldn’t money be better spent on science that provides ways to avoid cataclysm?
    The answer is that like the Moon Exploration Program these programs are no longer needed and that the money should be reallocated into funding the solutions application side of global warming going forward. I’m sure Kerry Emanuel will be the first too support a shift in climate change research funding towards projects that will lead to practical and applicable solutions for CO2 removal rather than supporting funding that has been shown in other countries via economic studies, to increase energy costs that only cause harm to poor people like we see in countries like the UK and Germany where growing numbers of humans have to choose between heating their homes and putting food on the table for their family.

  • Dano2

    If you need to make sh– up for whatever reason to get through the day, hey whatevs.



  • Ruben Chandler

    Americans, educate themselves…………oh, really? LOL.

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    The csrbon tax needs to be joined with the wall street trading tax, big time! Those who have been looting our economy without taxation include mostly the one percenters and more wealthy. The poorerand middle class Republican voters (there are many of them) need to get wise or get surprise! Vote Green Party candidates. What could we possibly loose?

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    Also, to remind you, the title of this piece begins; “Ten Things” not “everything”. Good to see many additional ideas. Vote “Green Party” so we can get ’em done!

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    Dragontec64; we are awaiting your solutions! Population limits is only one!

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    And going there may be good for NYC businesses and their police dept., but not necessary! We can do the most good at home. Not by needless travel for a political spectical! One way, “Vote Green Party”, and kick the bums out!

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    A great and cheap battery is an insulated water tank! US citizens use about half their energy for heating purposes, and the popular commercial push is for heat pumps. How wasteful, when a small pump and computer can direct and store solar energy cheaply!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/RPManke.solar RevPhil Manke

    I support Tesla!– But Washington DC and corporate USA does use lots of ‘alcohol’…….. Just sayin…

  • dragontech64

    Yes, that WOULD be an idea that could be considered, if we were China, where such legal limits are failing.
    We DO need to stop stressing capitalism and material success as being the only measure of the worth of a person, so we can all start to understand we can live with less, EASIER than we can live with “more”.
    America has degenerated to the point where money is more important than life. How much further are we going to follow the course of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? How much more of the “bread and circuses” are we going to swallow thinking that bigger TV’s “luxury” SUV’s and iPhones are going to make our lives mean anything?

  • Delster

    These are the ethical rules we must all adopt into our lives. As one of the worlds offenders I must begin today with myself. I would encourage the institutions and governments as well as my fellow participants to help me in my transformation as I must help and encourage others.

  • Rebecca Jones

    Here is the solution I see: take our commitment to democracy seriously, assure government of by and for the people, and then embrace the link between pursuit of happiness and pursuit of healthiness. If we commit the 3 trillion dollars we spend right now on health care, to health for all, and create policy and infrastructure that makes our worlds healthier, we will at the same time be reducing/eliminating carbon. Bike paths, side walks, busses, trains, village downtowns, community building, local agriculture, reduction in carbon and toxin pollution benefit our health and our future.

  • Anonymous

    The US has a huge military budget. That money could be much better spent on research, healthcare and education. The climate change research is a drop in the bucket. If you want real money eliminate the expenditures which have the only purpose of killing people.

  • Anonymous

    Where are indigenous farmers being driven from their land for agrifuels?

  • Claro

    Volunteer with Citizen’s Climate Lobby! We are a non-partisan group working to get a revenue-neutral carbon ‘tax’ passed. This is a proven solution that even Republicans like. We need your help! Learn more at http://citizensclimatelobby.org/

  • Kathy

    It seems you know little about such things. The Mojave Desert is important to us all – who knew deserts were terrific carbon sinks! Desert ecosystems are being destroyed, 50 yr old desert tortoises eliminated, to build turbine plants that have no contracts (or transmission lines) for their energy. These plants are being built in migratory flyways – now THERE’S a good idea, huh?

    As far as turbines close to homes– would you be willing to have a bucolic-sounding “wind farm” close to you? Would you not mind having to move your bed to your basement when you just can’t take it any more? Enjoy having the equivalent of a jet aircraft hovering in your yard, sometimes for days? Would you be willing to have your property de-valued? Would you be willing to sacrifice your well-being so that international developers can make scads of profit? You clearly know little about what is real for a lot of people around the globe. As little as four turbines are making life hell for one little community here in Vermont. Others here (14 and 21 turbines) are making people prisoners in their own loved homes–as they cannot sell them and cannot afford to buy elsewhere. Read up before you spout, please. Children are living with headaches and stress, compounded by the fact that their parents are being functionally disabled by these things.

    The monumental lack of creativity in this type of “solution” as well as denial by people that their lifestyles are causing these problems is keeping us from making real, non-damaging improvements. We need to change our economy and our lifestyles – growth is not the answer. We need local, distributed energy. I cut my electrical use in half with a measley 12 standard solar panels. Germany requires solar on every new roof constructed. Think Home Depot, think parking garages. Think clotheslines. Vermonters that came before me knew how to solve problems, and I doubt they’d destroy intact ridgeline ecosystems so that they could live large.

  • dragontech64

    You accuse me of not knowing my subject matter, then repeat that DEBUNKED crap about the noise of wind turbines? I’ve been around them, and didn’t hear any annoying sounds. And who brought the Mojave into the discussion? I said the turbines could go in land already used as farm fields and pastures. The farm usage has already supplanted the natural ecosystem, and the marginal loss of space for crops is compensated for the farmer by the rental fees for the space for the towers.
    As for your claim about the turbines having no contracts or transmission lines, site verifiable proof of that happening, since your comment is the first I’ve ever heard that people would spend THOUSANDS putting up turbines, and be stupid enough not to have a way to get the electricity to market.
    Turbine sounding like a jet hovering? BS. Have you ever even heard an AV-8 Harrier hover? I GUARANTEE that it is hundreds of times louder than a wind turbine. I’ve heard BOTH and can make that assertion with 100% confidence. Your arguments against wind farms are based on pure lies.
    We DO need both, because there are areas (like Seattle) that get marginal sunshine AT BEST for weeks at a time. Or are you going to suggest that people move out of sun-deprived areas to go pure solar?
    NO single energy source can sustain all of America’s CURRENT needs, needs that are expanding daily. While there is a great deal of room for expansion of solar, with the solar road material being developed, clear solar that can go over office windows, flexible solar for curved surfaces, solar alone WILL NOT meet the energy needs. This is why wind HAS to be developed too, where it can be.
    So, try proving your claims about the “evils” of wind turbines (which SEVERAL studies have already debunked) or just STFU with the lies. I am SO sick of people brining these lies to an argument because they, for whatever reason, don’t want the turbines near them. I’d GLADLY have turbines if I had the land to put them up on. They are NOT noisy as you claim (certainly not “hovering jet” range!) They kill less birds (migratory or otherwise) than coal, oil, natural gas, or house cats (which outweigh ALL these combined)

  • 4TimesAYear

    “Revenue neutral carbon ‘tax'” What an oxymoron.

  • 4TimesAYear

    You think really think businesses are going to eat that tax? They pass it on to the consumer.

  • nynetguy

    Yeah, sorry but we don’t live in some socialist craphole like Cuba or Venezuela. Go take a look at how well nationalization has worked for those countries and if you like it so much let me know. I’ll gladly buy you a one way ticket.

  • nynetguy

    Oh lord. The stupid is contagious. Please kill yourself now.

  • Anonymous

    Most people use an assortment of buildings powered by fossil fuels, drive around among theses buildings in a motor vehicle powered by fossil fuels, have a job which requires fossil fuel inputs, eat food produced with fossil fuels for tillage, agricultural chemicals, processing, and shipping. On their time off they may take a jet propelled vacation which uses fossil fuels.
    This is a daunting challenge.

  • Mike Hanauer

    Where is reducing our OVERPopulation ??? It overwhelms all else we do — including those 10 ideas. Why is having 2 kids or fewer not mentioned?

    This is much BIGGER than only climate change, which is one of many difficult environmental and social problems we now have. I have come to believe that getting to authentic sustainability, as the real environmental issue, is the required overarching goal if we wish to save our planet, our nation, and our communities.

    If we only try to mitigate symptoms like climate change, we still NEVER attain authentic sustainability. That means the oceans still die, the fish are all eaten, the planet’s diversity of life disappears with all its habitat, the traffic, sprawl, heaps of trash, and economic inequality still only get worse, clean water becomes ever scarcer, and we still need franken foods to feed the growing population. In fact, only mitigating carbon emissions may well allow us to further escape sustainability and worsen all the symptoms. Our continuing population and economic growth overwhelms all else, including carbon emissions and our need for energy. I believe we must get to a steady state economy

    Our culture of looking to (eternal) growth is the SOURCE of most of our problems, NOT the solution. The USA doubles its GDP every 40 years and doubles its population every 60 years. Growth overwhelms all else we try to do to help the environment and our society.

    You say we don’t have time to act on the overarching issue of growth? We have said that for 50 years, yet always find some other symptom to fight. It is time! Individuals and, especially, organizations must rise to this reality if they value their mission or a quality honest future.

    Consider even the local financial, water and open space challenges in your own community. Without always pressure for more growth, we could concentrate on our quality of life rather than in always somehow accommodating more.

    Population is the great multiplier!

  • Scientist Warrior

    While Native Nations are far from
    being monolithic, there is one thing that forced assimilation cannot
    take from us, as Natives; our coevolved connection to nature. We all
    know that there is a settler colonialist darkness hovering like a
    vulture, set out to divide us for one purpose; to take. From creating
    blood quantum rules and silencing strong Indian voices to intellectual
    property theft, the chipping away of our identity and everything that
    makes us who we are is, by design, to take our lands and resources. Here
    is why I believe Climate Change can be one catalyst in uniting Tribal
    Nations of Turtle Island.

    In order to understand how Native Americans recognize climate change,
    where so many non-Natives cannot, we have to acknowledge that
    coevolution and sacred place matters. Native Americans are genetically
    connected to their ecosystems within their sacred space and that space
    is Turtle Island. That is the largest difference between Indigenous
    people and those who are new arrivals; thousands of years of belonging
    here. It takes thousands of years to become genetically connected to
    ecosystems and their services. Our women are even closer to nature
    within that sacred temporal and spatial realm. The givers of life,
    Indigenous women and our Earth Mother are even more aware to the minute
    changes within our ecosystems. Through this connection our women brought
    these changes to the attention of our communities and Tribal Nations.
    The Tribal Nations have been trying to bring climate change to the
    attention of the occupying colonizers, decades before Al Gore made his
    movie An Inconvenient Truth.

    Everything is connected and in a compartmentalized non-Native world,
    those connections are difficult to see. Dr. Don Grinde has written about
    disconnection from nature in his book, “Ecocide”. Disconnection from a
    nature, where one has not coevolved, contributes to that
    compartmentalized world view. Warped value agendas come out of that
    disconnection. For Native Americans, everything within our ecosystems
    have value, because everything is connected to those ecosystem services
    in some way, even the most insignificant or inconvenient. Gregory Cajete
    writes about Native Science and traditional ecological knowledge which
    includes reciprocity where great care is taken in knowing and
    understanding nature’s connections and how one can mitigate and give
    back for what is taken for the needs of the Tribal Nations, or commons.
    The commons are lands or resources belonging to or affecting the whole
    of a community. In a compartmentalized disconnected worldview the goal
    is the exploitation of nature in ways that generate the least cost.
    Giving back or mitigating exploitation is costly where exponential
    profit is the goal. It then becomes more profitable the more
    disconnected from nature a non-Native society becomes. The value of the
    commons becomes diminished which is what Garrett Hardin warned in his
    essay, “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Fikret Berkes makes it clear that
    the “Tragedy of the Commons” does not normally apply to Indigenous
    commons, in his book “Sacred Ecology”; which is why the World Wildlife
    Fund says that the last remaining sustainable lands are Indigenous
    lands. Charles Menzies attributes healthier and sustainable Indigenous
    territories and their natural resources to traditional ecological
    knowledge in his book “Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Natural
    Resource management”.

    Therefore we must ask what all of this means for climate change and
    why are Indigenous people more aware of it and how it is affecting their
    commons? Why do so many non-Native Americans choose not to acknowledge
    climate change? Native Americans notice when their ecosystem commons are
    changing and search to recognize what the causation is. This is beyond
    spirituality or Native American fetishes this is about being one with
    the universe which includes climate, sea levels, plant and animal
    movements and their seasonal reproduction or lifecycles and all of their
    connections. Let’s say dandelions are blooming earlier, and for some
    Tribes, this was an indicator of when the sturgeon run, most Native
    Americans will notice changes in those connections. Climate change is
    important to Native Americans because those changes will affect the
    human and non-human relationships within their territories. Much has
    been written about Native peoples diagnosing these changes from noticing
    tree displacement, bird migration shifts, invasive species encroachment
    changes, fish die offs, sea star and coral die offs, Mycorrhizal
    abnormalities to weather changes bringing abnormal rain and flooding or
    the warming temperatures melting permafrost and glaciers. Indigenous
    Peoples of Turtle Island noticed long before western scientists and
    there was no denial that Climate change is real because all of nature
    has value, not just that which can be commoditized. Now that western
    science has caught up with Indigenous awareness, many decades later,
    western scientists are being confronted by the same corporate denialist
    rhetoric that have silenced Native peoples for generations.

    Western science is stuck with the corporate political stalemates, but
    Indigenous peoples have an edge. We can decolonize. We know what we
    need to do to adapt and change. We know what we need to fight. Because
    the same climate change creators are the same environmental polluters
    and are the same land and resource thieves as well as the same food and
    medicine intellectual property rights violators. We can reject them from
    our territories much easier than our non-Native climate denier
    neighbors. This is our unifying moment. We can only be sovereign if that
    sovereignty includes decolonizing from that which our ancestors fought.
    In peace and beauty we can choose technology that helps our people but
    does not hurt our ecosystems or our water, or our food or the ozone or
    that which contributes to climate change. We can do this in solidarity.

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    Their are many things citizens can do to reduce our carbon foot print.

    Plastic shopping bags are so convenient but oh so destructive to the environment. We don’t need this kind of convenience, their are several towns in my state that have banned these plastic bags but not enough to make a difference yet. If we do not uses these kinds of products the corporations will not produce them.

    Why do we need big cars with gas guzzling engines in them to haul around one person (the driver) instead of an economic economy car that will do the same thing? EGO trips is what it’s all about.

    America is in the stone age with public transportation and needs to start recognizing the need for mass transit to get people too and from work.

    I like the idea Bill McKibben put up for a carbon tax that hands the money back to the citizens because it’s the public that always gets stuck with cleaning up the corporate mess.

    We have had a chance to join good peaceful protests but always leave to the next guy/gal and it is what the corporations thrive on.
    Just look at the Occupy Wall Street protest and how the same people that whine about low pay and work conditions laughed at them as the cops ran wild roughshod over them for the corporations that pay them off.

    Most citizens don’t realism that the constitution under article 3 says “the government will support and research scientific discovery.” But today’s politicians especially the gop claim science is a hoax.

    The most important tool we have is our vote and their is no reason why we should keep supporting corporate politicians that are destroying the environment for personal gain.

    Together we could create a future environment our children of the future would be happy to live a healthy and disease free world in.

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    Their are countries that are over populated but America is not one of them and producing poison frankenfoods is not the way.
    Water us by individuals is not the problem the use of our water supplies by corporations is what drive the over use of potable water.
    China uses a to child birth control method but the country continues to become bigger and bigger population wise.
    We can grow more and safer foods by not supporting GMO poison foods and fertilizer that is one of the main issues with the destruction of water supplies through runoff.
    African people did not starve by the millions before Western colonization took place.

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    So you would rather go with the let it all hang out instead of being part of the cure.

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    The government can tax in a way they can’t pass it on to the consumer.

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    Your idea is very good! I like and use the NASA climate research sites for reliable info on climate change.

    NASA Announces Media Briefing on Arctic Climate Change Campaigns

  • http://none.com Jack Everett

    West Africa and this clearing of forests is whats causing the Ebola outbreaks as more and more farmers are exposed to wild animals.

  • Mike Hanauer

    Jack, we have been called the “most overpopulated nation” by the Sierra Club. We are at least double a sustainable pop. See http://npg.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/OverpopulationandOverconsumption-revised2013.pdf

  • Anonymous

    If every politician in every country in the world believed that climate change was real, then we could actually save the world!

  • http://www.goodgoalgroup.com/ Ferdinand Swart

    Most important steps missing:
    1) target poverty first: pay the (rural) poor for climate services rendered
    2) plant 1trillion trees by 2050 (mainly by the rural poor)
    3) return 10% of yearly litter fall as biochar into the soil
    4) no top-down methods, but support private initiatives and the 1.5 Bn family farmers
    5) use the internet and volunteers to increase efficiency
    6) gamify the whole operation to make it attractive and quantifiable

  • http://www.goodgoalgroup.com/ Ferdinand Swart

    Sorry I forgot most urgent:
    7) stop overpopulation by empowering (educating) women and especially girls

  • Anonymous

    Well said! Big thumbs up!

  • http://www.google.com/profiles/nawabdera NAWAB IKRAMULLAH KHAN

    INSHA ALLAH I appreciate deeply .chiefly because of poors

  • Anonymous

    What a bunch of twaddle. The Earth is in no danger from plant food. Government does need to stop subsidizing flood insurance for people who choose to reside in flood plains. There is plenty of undeveloped land in this country that is more than 300 feet above sea level. Make it uneconomic for the swamp people to build in the flood plain and 99% of the ACTUAL issue with global warming (something we could all use tonight) would go away. I’ve done my part by building my house 1080 feet above sea level.

  • SilenceIsConsent

    I live in the Tehachapi Pass where there are thousand of industrial wind turbines littering what used to be virgin desert providing protection for hundreds of species of animals, pushed out of former habitats caused by Los Angeles sprawl. The cement plant that provides the 24 x 7 dry cement to fill turbine pads with tons of concrete is the 2nd highest emitter of kiln mercury from their coal fired manufacturing. It doesn’t just poison the people and AG crops, it pollutes all of California. We find baby animals dead in roads, running away from the industrial equipment, Mojave Desert tortoises are unceremoniously removed from their dens while hibernating to eventually die is some remote area, eaten by coyotes and ravens. There used to be bats, bald and golden eagles, and California condors plus songbirds. They’ve all been slaughtered by the 200 mph 186 foot long turbine blades that the designers didn’t bother to cover with grills. Instead of “sacrificing” animals and destroying stable, vibrant deserts and mountains, it’s time and now to subsidize solar at it’s source in every state in the U.S. and advance it to where we break loose from utility companies digging in our pocket to heat and cool us. Thousands of miles of transmission lines is reckless. Industrial solar plants are no better, scraping the floor of the desert.

    Want to reduce greenhouse emissions? Recycle, remake and reuse all the trash we generate and treat as disposable today. Developing recycling to a goal of 90% will put a major cap on drilling, mining and deforestation. Jobs galore will be our future, inventing, r&d, developing manufacturing that doesn’t emit pollutants, capture, transport, separate, remake and put on the market as new. Check your trash to see the opportunities of tomorrow. Peace all and to a better tomorrow.

  • SilenceIsConsent

    How about educating boys and men. All they’re good for is making more babies, TV, drinking beer and passing gas.

  • David Lake

    Very well written description and great ideas. However, we will not realistically stop industrial production, and industrial wind farms are part of our renewables solution. We will probably find better transmission methods and less ecologically sensitive areas to place them. I would suggest that areas in the great plains that have already been destroyed to grow grain for animal feed be slowly transitioned to their native tall grass and buffalo (grass fed buffalo can gradually replace corn fed antibiotic laden beef but as a luxury item) and wind farms across the Midwest, which is not really well suited to human habitation anyway. We could also place them near the poles where damage to wildlife is less intensive.
    Of course the economic answer is to price externalities. That is, if the economic opportunity produces $1M in profit and $300K in damage, our traditional capitalist model socializes the damage and privatizes the profit. This MUST change and those realizing the profit must also pay for the damage instead of foisting it onto the taxpayers or all those who breathe or drink from the watershed. This would require eliminating the practice of having financial entities control our legislative body, which we have mostly admitted cannot happen under our current political system.

  • David Lake

    Why do we need bottled water, SUVs, leaf blowers? Why can’t we have a 300% tax imposed on frivolous luxuries that produce immense waste streams (bottled water alone produces many fleets of diesel trucks and plasticizers in our watersheds for the coming decades) with proceeds used to mitigate the damage?

  • David Lake

    Controlling population from the top down doesn’t work. Economic prosperity is what ultimately controls population growth. We just have to do this in a sustainable manner that does not rely on endlessly increasing production, but increasing benefits to a shrinking population and the planet we are not toying with.

  • SilenceIsConsent

    Part of the deal when General Electric bought Enron’s assets was that they had an open door to exploit wind energy across the U.S. My problem is that these machine are killing off our wildlife – yours and mine to the level that they are lobbying for 30 year takes of our national bird the Bald eagle. I realize that most people don’t give a rip and think that treating our planet as a never ending source of natural resources, but here in California with us in a 4th year of drought at some point reality will set in. I see Tehachapi Mtn and also the recently closed GE plant from my property. There isn’t a bit of snow on the mountain which means local aquifers won’t be replenished. I also acknowledge that it will take people dying to wake up our country but if people like me don’t throw ideas out nothing will change.

    G.E. to Buy Enron Wind-Turbine Assets
    April 12, 2002
    General Electric has won a bankruptcy auction for the Enron Wind Corporation’s wind-turbine manufacturing assets, with a bid of about $358 million.
    General Electric won the court-supervised auction after increasing its offer by $100 million.
    The GE Power Systems unit will pay $325 million in cash and assume about $33 million in debt.

  • Sonia Collins

    People fought for equal access to drinking fountains. But, alas, in most public places, including public schools here in NYC, the fountains are now absent or non-functional. Insuring free, clean drinking water will be good for everyone’s health, cut down on obesity (in rich countries), disease (in poorer countries) and make bottled water avoidable. Fix those fountains.

  • Robert McDealer

    I was actually expecting 10 ideas on what the average person could do… so here are my ten….

    1. Choose one day as a non-driving day… try walking or biking instead.
    2. Consolidate errands… grocery shopping, dry cleaners, gas, etc should all be in one stop or on the way… no side trips.
    3. inflate your tires for better gas milage.
    4. Your next car is a Hybrid
    5. …..

    1. Install solar panels.
    2. Plant a tree or two.
    3. Add more insulation.
    4. Unplug your appliances when not using them… if it has a red light… it is using electricity when your not using it… like your coffee pot and computer… just unplug them.
    5. take out the light bulb in you ref rig.
    6. take navy showers.

    And in General… stop buying stuff… most of it you don’t need.

  • PU

    No, america is not over populated, but that’s not the problem. It’s about resources and Americans consume more resources than any other people on the planet. So, if the size of the american family could decrease, the worlds resources could be distributed more equitably.

  • PU

    Whoa! Really? Where did you read that?

  • Canuck Cruiser

    Every recommendation below is a band aid solution. No one wants to touch on the real & most serious cause of all, overpopulation! I’ve been screaming about this for over 40 years, but nobody is listening. When I was going to school, the world population was 2 1/2 billion. It’s now over 7 billion, & growing exponentially! That’s over a 300% increase in my short lifetime. Not only is this directly related to global warming, it’s also the main cause of almost all of the other major problems on the planet: mass clear cutting of forests, over fishing in all of the oceans of the world, mass pollution of our oceans, huge shortages and contamination of our drinking water, no where left to dump our garbage, mass extinctions of our wild life, lots more wars, and the list goes on & on & on. Yes, all of the above recommendations should be acted upon, but that should all be secondary to mass & global educational programs on the extreme urgency to practice birth control & common sense family planning. We do not want to slow the growth of population, we must reverse it, or in another 50 to 100 years there will be no hope what-so-ever of reversing all the damage our overpopulation is doing to the earth.

  • Timothy Mundorff

    Embrace safe nuclear power.

  • Anonymous

    I spent over 15 years in the natural gas industry as a consultant searching for and measuring gas leaks. They are everywhere. Natural gas burns clean and even and it has never greased a duck or slicked over any rivers like oil. It is my favorite choice. HOWEVER, when it leaks, the main component of methane becomes a horrible greenhouse gas. It traps heat with great efficiency and the industry does little to prevent thousands of small leaks without repair. FRACKING exposes us all to enormous leaks that are really worrisome to me and more needs to be done to educate the public. My attempts at delivering neighborhood awareness programs to the public cost me my job. I was fired and blacklisted within the industry for little more than messages just like this one.

  • Charles F. Easter

    Fracking has NOTHING to do with Leaks, the leaks are above ground…Correct? The pipes don’t know whether the gas came from a Fracked well or a non-fracked well.

  • Turtuga Blanku

    Who is paying you to write this? There is no such thing as safe nuclear power. Have you taken a good look at Japan lately? (Say, in the last 4 years?)

  • Turtuga Blanku

    Vandana Shiva’s recommendation ‘Stop Letting Corporations Rule’ is a lot more than a band aid solution. Corporations are at the base of our current problems and thus taking care of them means putting a stop to a lot of our current problems.

    Overpopulation is a real problem too, but if sustainable societies can be realized globally, I think we can both handle a lot of the problems currently coming with overpopulation and decrease the over population..

  • Anonymous

    Eating less or no meat is not a bandaid. It would be huge. The waste and pollution associated with meat accounts for an enormous chunk of greenhouse gas production.

  • Anonymous

    and choose carefully what you eat. Start having some meat and dairy free days

  • Robert McDealer

    That is a really good one…

    also… try going to second hand stores for home stuff you might need.

  • Guest

    I was a petroleum engineer who designed frac jobs back in the early 1980’s (yes hydraulic fracturing has been around since the 1950’s or before), in the Antelope and Monterey Shales in California. One principle of fracture design is that usually you frack a porous layer with the hydrocarbons, and hope that the vertical growth of the fracture is “confined” by certain other types of over and underlying layers. Shales are usually thought of as one of the best kinds of confining layers. When one fractures the type of rock, shale, that is usually thought of as a confining layer, then I believe all bets are off on how that fracture is confined and contained. Since with large volume frac jobs, the fractures can extend for 1000’s of feet, the idea that thousands of feet of depth are protection in themselves doesn’t really fly with me. All the deep natural gas needs to eventually escape to the atmosphere is to get into the shallower, softer, and much more permeable near surface formations. They are doing a lot of fracing in the Four Corners Area of Northwestern New Mexico, the San Juan Basin, and the methane cloud, from both surface pipe leaks and probably from seeping up from the ground, can be seen from space.

  • chuckgoecke

    I was a petroleum engineer who designed frac jobs back in the early 1980’s (yes hydraulic fracturing has been around since the 1950’s or before), in the Antelope and Monterey Shales in California. One principle of fracture design is that usually you frack a porous layer with the hydrocarbons, and hope that the vertical growth of the fracture is “confined” by certain other types of over and underlying layers. Shales are usually thought of as one of the best kinds of confining layers. When one fractures the type of rock, shale, that is usually thought of as a confining layer, then I believe all bets are off on how that fracture is confined and contained. Since with large volume frac jobs, the fractures can extend for 1000’s of feet, the idea that thousands of feet of depth are protection in themselves doesn’t really fly with me. All the deep natural gas needs to eventually escape to the atmosphere is to get into the shallower, softer, and much more permeable near surface formations. They are doing a lot of fracing in the Four Corners Area of Northwestern New Mexico, the San Juan Basin, and the methane cloud, from both surface pipe leaks and probably from seeping up from the ground, can be seen from space.

  • Eleanor H.

    Buy shares in mutual funds focusing on alternative energy and energy efficiency stocks. Of course, only a small amount — don’t bet the farm. Because of low oil prices, there is currently less incentive to turn to renewable energy. But in the long run, such funds should give an adequate return.

  • Mark Meyers

    Lots of great ideas. And Allan Savory on reverse desertification has produced fantastic results that would also increase the arable land of this world.

    Allan Savory: How to green the world’s deserts and reverse climate change

    Reversing Desertification with Livestock

  • tomtomtom

    All problems and solutions are caused by overpopulation. Revolutionary farming methods have allowed us to feed many times the nmber of people than was ever thought possible in the 19th century. Will someone come along who will save the planet or at least the people on it with another farming revolution or a method to get to another planet? I don’t know, but the more people we have available the more likely that super genius will be born. The savior of us could be that 3rd child you chose not to have.