Hey guys..next month let's ummm figure out climate change.

Michelle's profileA Distorted Reality is N...PhotosBlogLists

< Previous Next >

August 06

Hey guys..next month let's ummm figure out climate change.

I thought it was bizarre that none of the major news sources in the US carried prominent news stories about President Bush's call for a two day meeting on climate change with international representatives in the US. I caught the story on the BBC where it was the headline of the website. I am a Minnesotan, and I especially appreciate the attention that was given to one of our major highways literally falling from the sky. However, this was several days later and the bridge story wasn't really developing, so why did it take precedence over Bush finally sitting down to talk climate change? I'll touch on what I think at the end of this blog.

Bush plans to address the conference. What will the leader of the largest polluter contributing to climate change say? China and India have been invited. China poised to surpass the US in greenhouse gas emissions. India close on their tail. Why is Condoleeza Rice the facilitator? What role will the International Panel on Climate Change play? What about Dick Cheney and his fossil fuel lobby?

As for why the bridge instead of the meeting....

1. The bridge was a tragedy with vivid imagery and connections/implications nationally regarding the safety/reliability of our aging infrastructure.

2. A call for a meeting is not a meeting is not an announcement of action.

3. Understanding of risk and magnitude is difficult to understand on climate change. The risk is high and the magnitude is astronomical. Aging infrastructure carries risks, but I would not consider them as high and the magnitude of impact not as great. However, it's much easier to get your mind around "what if a major bridge in NYC fell tomorrow" than "what if the temperature continues to increase at this rate."

That's my two cents. You can read the NYT's blurb on the meeting here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/04/washington/04brfs-DETAILSOFMEE_BRF.html

1:38 PM | Blog it

Comments (2)

To add a comment, sign in with your Windows Live ID (if you use Hotmail, Messenger, or Xbox LIVE, you have a Windows Live ID). Sign in

Don't have a Windows Live ID? Sign up

No namewrote:

oh, by the way, it's erin s. above. I hate microsoft.

Aug. 6

No namewrote:

Yeah. I can't believe that the NYT coverage was literally a paragraph--was there a longer article accompanying it? It didn't really say anything.

I have to say, though, I'm a bit surprised by how almost protective I feel, seeing a horrible local tragedy being eaten up as the "breaking" and "developing" news on CNN, and being tossed around like a political football nationally. I'm glad we're talking about decaying infrastructure--about time. But it feels weird to be so, almost exposed, in some ways, to keep using the images of the bridge accident as the backdrop. Maybe my Minnesotan is showing ; )

I have a newfound empathy for folks in other cities whose tragedies become part of the national political landscape.

So, hmmmm, if terrible tragedies are what it takes for both sides to come together and address the issues, what would it take for serious global warming policy in the US? One can't pin global warming on a particular weather event, obviously... but what if Katrina happened in a largely white state like Minnesota?

I hope I'm being cynical...

Aug. 6

Trackbacks

The trackback URL for this entry is:

http://mrosier.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!6007DAD8F2B4F53A!873.trak

Weblogs that reference this entry

None