As in fossil-fuels divestment.
This becomes yet another post on energy issues within the past few days, with the theme of Energiewende.
As much as I am in favor of consciously moving in the direction that is away from carbon, I get ticked off at the irresponsible and exaggerated claims from the uber-supporters and the uber-opponents of fossil fuels. Bobby Jindal, whose state is a big time carbon-energy producer, wants to increase oil and gas extraction and, get this, accuses the President of--you may want to hold on to your chair before you read on:
On Monday, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) told attendees at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor on Monday that the Obama administration was comprised of "science deniers" because of its energy policies -- even as he downplayed the role of energy production in the problem of global warming.Yes, an accusation coming from the same Jindal who wants schools to teach students creationism and intelligent design in science classes where evolution is taught! Seriously, this guy is a President wannabe? Oh well, if Reagan and Dubya could have been presidents, for two terms at that, then why not this moron!
Crap, this post is about divestment and I am digressing. And about the dogmatic stupidity of the uber-opponents of fossil fuels. Beating up on Jindal should not be interesting ;)
In the brainwashed college environment where critical thinking has long been dead, it is easy for faculty and students to get all high and mighty about doing good for the world without ever pausing to reflect on how many roads to hell have been paved with good intentions. One fine institution after another, in response to pressure from students and faculty, then makes a grand announcement about getting rid of coal stocks from its investment portfolio. Hey, whatever pleases the mob, right?
What the maniacal mob doesn't realize is this: universities divesting from coal won't make a damn difference to the goal of tackling climate change. It is wonderful feel good rhetoric, no doubt, even better than when beauty pageant contestants wish for world peace.
The president of Pomona College, who is a chemist by training, writes:
Feel-good measures that have no effect on actual greenhouse-gas production are a diversion from the critical actions we must take before it is too late.Exactly!
Symbolic actions have their place. But at colleges and universities, our first goal is to educate students to be skeptical about simple claims and to weigh competing values. Then we encourage them to build on their values to make a difference in the world. That will be done most effectively in the area of climate change not by headline-grabbing divestment decisions at individual institutions, but by helping to build a coalition and elect public officials for whom climate change is a compelling and urgent issue.Exactly!
While there are many efforts in higher education that seek to solve climate change, from trying to foster carbon neutrality to divesting from fossil-fuel companies, we must rethink how colleges are dealing with this issue because, frankly, we simply have not had much success in changing corporate policies, bending the stubborn will of politicians, or capturing the hearts and minds of most Americans.Exactly! Somebody give this man a big prize already.
Now is the time to move well beyond symbolism and ideologies and create a movement driven by young people. Decades from now, they will be able to look back with a sense of achievement (and relief) and see their results. Let’s get on with that important work.
But then it is easier for students and faculty to unthinkingly call for divestment in this age of lazy Facebook activism!
5 comments:
Can I join Pomona college ? (where on earth is it anyway ?)
I have little sympathy for the activists who make noise, are bone headed and offer no real solution other than to oppose everything. An activist who opposes fossil fuels and is also against nuclear plants, against dams , against windmills, and against the cost of solar power must explain where he thinks energy ought to be generated from or else shut up.
Were I a high school senior, I would have Pomona as my #1. A highly ranked liberal arts college that also comes with the casual attitude of Southern California. Expensive, as all private colleges are, but then ...
There are situations where to oppose at all costs makes sense. Like Gandhi's approach to kicking the Brits out. Or even in contemporary domestic public policies like war or abortion. But, on a global issue that climate change is ... oh well. Makes for blogging material ;)
Divestment may have no impact, but neither will the "world's largest climate rally" in NYC and other cities today. No politicians have the guts to do what they are told will make a difference, and no one wants to lose money. It's all talk and no effective action. Great - more hot air in the atmosphere.
Yes, and no.
I agree with you that the demonstrations alone won't trigger any kind of climate change policies.
The no is because we don't want to underestimate the power of public movements. If the messaging becomes well done, then a lot can happen. Or an image is all what is needed. Decades ago, the image of the Cuyahoga river on fire quickly led to the establishment of the EPA, the Clean Water Act, ... all under, gasp, Nixon! But, even prior to the image of the river on fire, there were protests and a great deal of noise about the environment. Without all that, the image alone might not have led to setting up the EPA.
But then, if we are responsible, we would not wait around for disastrous imagery, right? I suppose we humans rarely want to look quite a bit ahead :(
My point is that calling for divestment is ok. But, what ticks me off is the belief that divestment is some kind of a magic bullet, when it is far from that.
Andy Borowitz has a wonderful satire at the New Yorker:
"A climate-change march that organizers claim was the largest on record is nevertheless unlikely to change the minds of idiots, a survey of America’s idiots reveals.
Despite bringing attention to a position that is embraced by more than ninety per cent of the world’s scientists, the People’s Climate March, which took place on Sunday in New York City, left a broad majority of the nation’s idiots unconvinced."
The entire piece is here:
http://nyr.kr/1tQ8sl4
Post a Comment