Nov 17, 2009
Nearly two decades after writing a book that popularized the term "global warming," MoJo contributing writer Bill McKibben founded 350.org. He is chronicling his journey into organizing with a series of columns leading up to the global climate summit in Copenhagen this December. You can find the others here. And you can put yourself on the cover of MoJo's special issue on climate change here.
Two caveats. First, early in the primary season, when I was asked to
join Environmentalists for Obama, I signed on immediately. I knocked on
doors, made phone calls, gave money, and celebrated his victory-I think
he's the best president of my lifetime.
Second, Obama has done much that's right about climate, including
surround himself with a stellar staff of advisers. From auto mileage to
green stimulus spending, he's done more to deal with global warming than all of the presidents combined in the 20 years that it's been an issue.
But that's a pretty low bar. And the announcement yesterday from the APEC meeting in Singapore that next month's Copenhagen
climate talks will be nothing more than a glorified talking session
makes it clear that he has, at least for now, punted on the hard
questions around climate. The world won't be able to get started on
solving our climate problem, and the obstacle is-as it has been for the
last two decades-the United States.
And
in fact none of this should come as a surprise to anyone paying
attention. For a year now it's been clear that the president is not particularly focused
on applying the political pressure that would have been necessary to
reach any kind of pact, much less one that approaches what the science
demands. Despite the deadline of the Copenhagen conference, Obama
placed energy second on his priority list, guaranteeing that health
care would occupy most of the year. He talked very little about
climate, tending instead to talk about green jobs and energy security,
and in the process left the door open for climate deniers to have a
field day. And then-as with health care-he left it pretty much entirely
up to Congress to write the necessary legislation. That kept him from
having to bear the blame for a byzantine bill, but it also meant that
the Senate-the body from which he came, and whose culture he had to
know-could work in its usual style, without White House pressure. Which
at the moment means that Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham are
essentially rewriting the legislation, to what end no one really knows.
The real tip-off of Obama's unwillingness to lead, however, has been
the endless spinning of his climate negotiators. For 12 months they
have been fibbing about the science-reiterating over and over again
that their goal is the "scientific standard" of 450 parts per million
of CO2 in the atmosphere. That's no longer scientifically accurate-in
the last two years, since the rapid Arctic melt in the summer of 2007,
scientists have made it clear that a treaty that aimed at 450 ppm would
be a treaty that left the planet free of ice, a planet where many
current nations would disappear beneath the waves. We're at 390
now-we're already too high. The 450 number came from the various graphs
and tables of the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change-but Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, has said repeatedly
in the last year that that science is out of date. Recently, asked why
he'd endorsed a 350 target instead, he said, "As a human being, I just
couldn't keep quiet in the face of all this overwhelming evidence. I
know it's probably not right for me to take a position such as this,
but on the other hand, I think it would be totally immoral on my part
not to take a position, so I came out and said so."
By contrast, the Obama administration's position has been that a
tough treaty is politically unrealistic-that the Senate would never
pass it. That's certainly true, at least for the moment. But the White
House is starting to use the Senate in the same way that the Bush
administration used China-as a scapegoat for doing too little. You
don't get to blame the Senate if you haven't pushed the Senate as hard
as you possibly can. It would take a huge commitment of presidential
leadership, the sacrifice of large amounts of political capital, to
change political reality. It would also take a movement of
citizens-which we've tried hard to build. Three weeks ago we at 350.org
organized
what CNN called "the most widespread day of political action in the
planet's history." Many prime ministers, environmental ministers, and
foreign ministers participated-heck, the president of the Maldives
convened an underwater Cabinet meeting to make the point about how
desperate the situation was. We asked the White House if anyone-some
spare undersecretary of something-might come to one of the 2,000 demonstrations across the United States. They couldn't find a soul.
They'll have another chance. With groups around the world, 350.org
will help organize candlelight vigils across the planet on the weekend
of December 12. Many will take place at American embassies and
consulates. Not because anyone is anti-American. Because everyone
remains hopeful that America will finally help lead to solve the
problem that it, far more than any other nation, caused.
None of this is easy. (I haven't even mentioned the obscenely low amounts of money
the administration and Congress are talking about appropriating for the
foreign aid that will be required to help developing countries adapt to
the global warming America has caused.) But all of it is easier than
trying to deal with the world that's coming at us faster every day we
don't act. Pressuring Senate Republicans (or coal-fired Democrats) is
hard; pressuring physics and chemistry is harder still. In fact, it's
impossible. That's why this is different than health care reform or
financial re-regulation. You have to actually meet the scientific
standard, not just do better than George Bush.
And of course, politically, Obama doesn't need to do it. He doesn't
need to worry about environmentalists abandoning him for someone
else-he'll always be the preferable choice, and I'll always be out
there knocking on doors for him. But his legacy won't depend on the
shiny medal the Norwegians hang around his neck next month; it will
depend, more than anything else, on whether or not he really tackles
the biggest problem the planet faces. There is still time for him to
make the crucial difference, but not if his administration continues in
fib-and-spin mode. At the same meeting in Singapore where he made it
clear that Copenhagen would not negotiate a new climate treaty, he
invited all the other APEC leaders to meet in 2011 in Hawaii, adding,
"I look forward to seeing you all decked out in flowered shirts and
grass skirts." Whatever-that sounds more like his giggly, sophomoric
predecessor than the leader we desperately need.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
© 2023 Mother Jones
Bill Mckibben
Bill McKibben is the Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College and co-founder of 350.org and ThirdAct.org. His most recent book is "Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out?." He also authored "The End of Nature," "Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet," and "Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future."
Nearly two decades after writing a book that popularized the term "global warming," MoJo contributing writer Bill McKibben founded 350.org. He is chronicling his journey into organizing with a series of columns leading up to the global climate summit in Copenhagen this December. You can find the others here. And you can put yourself on the cover of MoJo's special issue on climate change here.
Two caveats. First, early in the primary season, when I was asked to
join Environmentalists for Obama, I signed on immediately. I knocked on
doors, made phone calls, gave money, and celebrated his victory-I think
he's the best president of my lifetime.
Second, Obama has done much that's right about climate, including
surround himself with a stellar staff of advisers. From auto mileage to
green stimulus spending, he's done more to deal with global warming than all of the presidents combined in the 20 years that it's been an issue.
But that's a pretty low bar. And the announcement yesterday from the APEC meeting in Singapore that next month's Copenhagen
climate talks will be nothing more than a glorified talking session
makes it clear that he has, at least for now, punted on the hard
questions around climate. The world won't be able to get started on
solving our climate problem, and the obstacle is-as it has been for the
last two decades-the United States.
And
in fact none of this should come as a surprise to anyone paying
attention. For a year now it's been clear that the president is not particularly focused
on applying the political pressure that would have been necessary to
reach any kind of pact, much less one that approaches what the science
demands. Despite the deadline of the Copenhagen conference, Obama
placed energy second on his priority list, guaranteeing that health
care would occupy most of the year. He talked very little about
climate, tending instead to talk about green jobs and energy security,
and in the process left the door open for climate deniers to have a
field day. And then-as with health care-he left it pretty much entirely
up to Congress to write the necessary legislation. That kept him from
having to bear the blame for a byzantine bill, but it also meant that
the Senate-the body from which he came, and whose culture he had to
know-could work in its usual style, without White House pressure. Which
at the moment means that Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham are
essentially rewriting the legislation, to what end no one really knows.
The real tip-off of Obama's unwillingness to lead, however, has been
the endless spinning of his climate negotiators. For 12 months they
have been fibbing about the science-reiterating over and over again
that their goal is the "scientific standard" of 450 parts per million
of CO2 in the atmosphere. That's no longer scientifically accurate-in
the last two years, since the rapid Arctic melt in the summer of 2007,
scientists have made it clear that a treaty that aimed at 450 ppm would
be a treaty that left the planet free of ice, a planet where many
current nations would disappear beneath the waves. We're at 390
now-we're already too high. The 450 number came from the various graphs
and tables of the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change-but Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, has said repeatedly
in the last year that that science is out of date. Recently, asked why
he'd endorsed a 350 target instead, he said, "As a human being, I just
couldn't keep quiet in the face of all this overwhelming evidence. I
know it's probably not right for me to take a position such as this,
but on the other hand, I think it would be totally immoral on my part
not to take a position, so I came out and said so."
By contrast, the Obama administration's position has been that a
tough treaty is politically unrealistic-that the Senate would never
pass it. That's certainly true, at least for the moment. But the White
House is starting to use the Senate in the same way that the Bush
administration used China-as a scapegoat for doing too little. You
don't get to blame the Senate if you haven't pushed the Senate as hard
as you possibly can. It would take a huge commitment of presidential
leadership, the sacrifice of large amounts of political capital, to
change political reality. It would also take a movement of
citizens-which we've tried hard to build. Three weeks ago we at 350.org
organized
what CNN called "the most widespread day of political action in the
planet's history." Many prime ministers, environmental ministers, and
foreign ministers participated-heck, the president of the Maldives
convened an underwater Cabinet meeting to make the point about how
desperate the situation was. We asked the White House if anyone-some
spare undersecretary of something-might come to one of the 2,000 demonstrations across the United States. They couldn't find a soul.
They'll have another chance. With groups around the world, 350.org
will help organize candlelight vigils across the planet on the weekend
of December 12. Many will take place at American embassies and
consulates. Not because anyone is anti-American. Because everyone
remains hopeful that America will finally help lead to solve the
problem that it, far more than any other nation, caused.
None of this is easy. (I haven't even mentioned the obscenely low amounts of money
the administration and Congress are talking about appropriating for the
foreign aid that will be required to help developing countries adapt to
the global warming America has caused.) But all of it is easier than
trying to deal with the world that's coming at us faster every day we
don't act. Pressuring Senate Republicans (or coal-fired Democrats) is
hard; pressuring physics and chemistry is harder still. In fact, it's
impossible. That's why this is different than health care reform or
financial re-regulation. You have to actually meet the scientific
standard, not just do better than George Bush.
And of course, politically, Obama doesn't need to do it. He doesn't
need to worry about environmentalists abandoning him for someone
else-he'll always be the preferable choice, and I'll always be out
there knocking on doors for him. But his legacy won't depend on the
shiny medal the Norwegians hang around his neck next month; it will
depend, more than anything else, on whether or not he really tackles
the biggest problem the planet faces. There is still time for him to
make the crucial difference, but not if his administration continues in
fib-and-spin mode. At the same meeting in Singapore where he made it
clear that Copenhagen would not negotiate a new climate treaty, he
invited all the other APEC leaders to meet in 2011 in Hawaii, adding,
"I look forward to seeing you all decked out in flowered shirts and
grass skirts." Whatever-that sounds more like his giggly, sophomoric
predecessor than the leader we desperately need.
Bill Mckibben
Bill McKibben is the Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College and co-founder of 350.org and ThirdAct.org. His most recent book is "Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out?." He also authored "The End of Nature," "Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet," and "Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future."
Nearly two decades after writing a book that popularized the term "global warming," MoJo contributing writer Bill McKibben founded 350.org. He is chronicling his journey into organizing with a series of columns leading up to the global climate summit in Copenhagen this December. You can find the others here. And you can put yourself on the cover of MoJo's special issue on climate change here.
Two caveats. First, early in the primary season, when I was asked to
join Environmentalists for Obama, I signed on immediately. I knocked on
doors, made phone calls, gave money, and celebrated his victory-I think
he's the best president of my lifetime.
Second, Obama has done much that's right about climate, including
surround himself with a stellar staff of advisers. From auto mileage to
green stimulus spending, he's done more to deal with global warming than all of the presidents combined in the 20 years that it's been an issue.
But that's a pretty low bar. And the announcement yesterday from the APEC meeting in Singapore that next month's Copenhagen
climate talks will be nothing more than a glorified talking session
makes it clear that he has, at least for now, punted on the hard
questions around climate. The world won't be able to get started on
solving our climate problem, and the obstacle is-as it has been for the
last two decades-the United States.
And
in fact none of this should come as a surprise to anyone paying
attention. For a year now it's been clear that the president is not particularly focused
on applying the political pressure that would have been necessary to
reach any kind of pact, much less one that approaches what the science
demands. Despite the deadline of the Copenhagen conference, Obama
placed energy second on his priority list, guaranteeing that health
care would occupy most of the year. He talked very little about
climate, tending instead to talk about green jobs and energy security,
and in the process left the door open for climate deniers to have a
field day. And then-as with health care-he left it pretty much entirely
up to Congress to write the necessary legislation. That kept him from
having to bear the blame for a byzantine bill, but it also meant that
the Senate-the body from which he came, and whose culture he had to
know-could work in its usual style, without White House pressure. Which
at the moment means that Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham are
essentially rewriting the legislation, to what end no one really knows.
The real tip-off of Obama's unwillingness to lead, however, has been
the endless spinning of his climate negotiators. For 12 months they
have been fibbing about the science-reiterating over and over again
that their goal is the "scientific standard" of 450 parts per million
of CO2 in the atmosphere. That's no longer scientifically accurate-in
the last two years, since the rapid Arctic melt in the summer of 2007,
scientists have made it clear that a treaty that aimed at 450 ppm would
be a treaty that left the planet free of ice, a planet where many
current nations would disappear beneath the waves. We're at 390
now-we're already too high. The 450 number came from the various graphs
and tables of the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change-but Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, has said repeatedly
in the last year that that science is out of date. Recently, asked why
he'd endorsed a 350 target instead, he said, "As a human being, I just
couldn't keep quiet in the face of all this overwhelming evidence. I
know it's probably not right for me to take a position such as this,
but on the other hand, I think it would be totally immoral on my part
not to take a position, so I came out and said so."
By contrast, the Obama administration's position has been that a
tough treaty is politically unrealistic-that the Senate would never
pass it. That's certainly true, at least for the moment. But the White
House is starting to use the Senate in the same way that the Bush
administration used China-as a scapegoat for doing too little. You
don't get to blame the Senate if you haven't pushed the Senate as hard
as you possibly can. It would take a huge commitment of presidential
leadership, the sacrifice of large amounts of political capital, to
change political reality. It would also take a movement of
citizens-which we've tried hard to build. Three weeks ago we at 350.org
organized
what CNN called "the most widespread day of political action in the
planet's history." Many prime ministers, environmental ministers, and
foreign ministers participated-heck, the president of the Maldives
convened an underwater Cabinet meeting to make the point about how
desperate the situation was. We asked the White House if anyone-some
spare undersecretary of something-might come to one of the 2,000 demonstrations across the United States. They couldn't find a soul.
They'll have another chance. With groups around the world, 350.org
will help organize candlelight vigils across the planet on the weekend
of December 12. Many will take place at American embassies and
consulates. Not because anyone is anti-American. Because everyone
remains hopeful that America will finally help lead to solve the
problem that it, far more than any other nation, caused.
None of this is easy. (I haven't even mentioned the obscenely low amounts of money
the administration and Congress are talking about appropriating for the
foreign aid that will be required to help developing countries adapt to
the global warming America has caused.) But all of it is easier than
trying to deal with the world that's coming at us faster every day we
don't act. Pressuring Senate Republicans (or coal-fired Democrats) is
hard; pressuring physics and chemistry is harder still. In fact, it's
impossible. That's why this is different than health care reform or
financial re-regulation. You have to actually meet the scientific
standard, not just do better than George Bush.
And of course, politically, Obama doesn't need to do it. He doesn't
need to worry about environmentalists abandoning him for someone
else-he'll always be the preferable choice, and I'll always be out
there knocking on doors for him. But his legacy won't depend on the
shiny medal the Norwegians hang around his neck next month; it will
depend, more than anything else, on whether or not he really tackles
the biggest problem the planet faces. There is still time for him to
make the crucial difference, but not if his administration continues in
fib-and-spin mode. At the same meeting in Singapore where he made it
clear that Copenhagen would not negotiate a new climate treaty, he
invited all the other APEC leaders to meet in 2011 in Hawaii, adding,
"I look forward to seeing you all decked out in flowered shirts and
grass skirts." Whatever-that sounds more like his giggly, sophomoric
predecessor than the leader we desperately need.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.