What happened?

The April, 2001 issue of Time magazine focussed on global warming (see front cover below).  The coverage was uncompromising: 

• "the trend toward a warmer world has unquestionably begun"


• "scientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening, and almost nobody questions the fact that humans are at least partly responsible"


• "the increase in temperatures is happening at a pace that outstrips anything the earth has seen in the past 100 million years."

Time's 2001 report points out that:

• "the 1990s were the hottest decade on record",


• "glaciers . . . are disappearing"


• "coral reefs are dying off"


• "the Arctic permafrost is starting to melt"


• "migration patterns. . . are being disrupted"


• "drought is the norm in parts of Asia and Africa"

Now after 10 years of all these trends intensifying, and even hotter weather, more extreme storms, and many disasters, you would think that the press would be howling for change.  But no.  Floods, hurricanes, droughts, wild fires, Snowmageddon last winter, and record heatwaves this summer are all just part of the "crazy weather" we've been having lately.

What happened??!!

IMHO, Time had not really thought through the consequences of their coverage.  If fossil fuels are causing all this destruction, the solution has to be to virtually eliminate fossil fuels.  Perhaps Time  thought that a modest reduction, such as proposed at Kyoto, would be enough to stave off global warming.  But that's not the case.  We need to reduce CO2 from 20 tons per person per year in the U.S. to 1 ton per person to really stop global warming.  And that's a problem.  The oil, gas, and coal companies are the most powerful companies in the world.  And in a society where dollars buy votes, and also where dollars buy advertising in media, it is no surprise that elected officials and media depending on advertising are not willing to call for the elimination of the companies that feed them.  So what was obvious in 2001, and is even more obvious today--namely that global warming is real, and is a terrible threat to humanity--is just not a proper subject for the media to dwell on or for Congress to take action on.

Now I may be a bit too harsh.  California's Democratic controlled legislature found the courage to pass some pretty good laws.  And many cities around the country are taking actions to build a sustainable future.  But the U.S. government is completely stymied by Koch Industries funded deniers, and the media is still pretending that there is an honest debate about global warming being real and being caused by CO2.

The good news is that the cost of wind and solar and batteries for electric cars have all plumeted in the past decade, so the alternatives to fossil fuels are much more affordable than they were in 2001.  Of course, it would have been nice if government had really promoted these technologies during that time instead of continuing subsidies to fossil fuels, but the time we have lost only makes our present efforts all the more urgent.