September 23, 2016
Many folks who vote — in the last presidential election, only 54% of the U.S. population did so— understand, this may be the most important presidential election in our lifetimes. Not only is the future direction of the supreme court directly impacted by who’s elected, whether we continue to address the threats posed by climate change or reverse course entirely will also be determined by the outcome.
Anyone who chooses to vote for a third-party candidate or not vote at all, is simply choosing to play Russian roulette with the future.
The BBC is not generally known for offering supportive articles about climate change but this one does offer such a perspective: Global warming and the race for the White House.
At the core of the climate change debate is not the science itself but the politics. And on the losing side is coal if climate change action continues to be taken. That’s the battle: the economic forces that stand to lose vs society as a whole and the economic interests that will benefit from strong action toward transitioning to renewable energy.
What’s also interesting to note, the cost of solar energy continues to fall to the point where it now makes economic sense to convert to commercial use in many different applications.
I’m reminded of the optimism that Al Gore expressed back in 2000 when he was running for president. The idea that we could build a green economy with high paying jobs and break the yoke that binds us to the old fossil fuel technologies that wreak havoc on the environment and upon public health.
Solar and other renewable energy sources offer a win-win future and an economic means to fight the serious threats posed by global warming.
It’s time to heed what the scientists are clearly telling us and convert their warnings into effective public policy.
Especially in this election cycle, let’s stay focused on the real issues and leave the circus stunts to the carnival barkers at the fair.