They were blunt and to the point:
There is no longer any credible scientific debate about the basic facts:
our world continues to warm, with the last decade the hottest in modern
records, and the deep ocean warming faster than the earth’s atmosphere.
Sea level is rising. Arctic Sea ice is melting years faster than
projected.
The costs of inaction are undeniable. The lines of scientific evidence
grow only stronger and more numerous. And the window of time remaining
to act is growing smaller: delay could mean that warming becomes “locked
in.”
And then they stood up for the Democrat currently in the White House and his climate action plan:
A market-based approach, like a carbon tax, would be the best path to
reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, but that is unachievable in the
current political gridlock in Washington. Dealing with this political
reality, President Obama’s June climate action plan
lays out achievable actions that would deliver real progress. He will
use his executive powers to require reductions in the amount of carbon
dioxide emitted by the nation’s power plants and spur increased
investment in clean energy technology, which is inarguably the path we
must follow to ensure a strong economy along with a livable climate.
...As administrators of the E.P.A under Presidents Richard M. Nixon, Ronald
Reagan, George Bush and George W. Bush, we held fast to common-sense
conservative principles — protecting the health of the American people,
working with the best technology available and trusting in the
innovation of American business and in the market to find the best
solutions for the least cost.
Climate change puts all our progress and our successes at risk. If we
could articulate one framework for successful governance, perhaps it
should be this: When confronted by a problem, deal with it. Look at the
facts, cut through the extraneous, devise a workable solution and get it
done.
We can have both a strong economy and a livable climate. All parties
know that we need both. The rest of the discussion is either detail,
which we can resolve, or purposeful delay, which we should not tolerate.
Mr. Obama’s plan is just a start. More will be required. But we must
continue efforts to reduce the climate-altering pollutants that threaten
our planet. The only uncertainty about our warming world is how bad the
changes will get, and how soon. What is most clear is that there is no
time to waste.
Hmm, I wonder, do Trudeau and Mulcair read the New York Times?
3 comments:
This is indeed a powerful indictment of the short-sighted goals pursued by our current crop of politicians, Mound. The op-ed should also serve as an indication of the possibilities when partisanship is put aside, but I fear that it will be largely ignored by those currently holding power and those jockeying for positions of preeminence through pandering to the basest impulses of the electorate.
Good point, Mound. What *do* Mulcair and Trudeau have to say about climate change? Have all the politicians in this country been bought by big oil?
@ Anon - a lot of Canadians don't realize how thoroughly our nation has been transformed into a petro-state.
Post a Comment