You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
This morning, I awoke to the voice of Steven Chu on NPR. I'll want to go back and listen to the piece again this evening -- any pronouncement to the media (national media, particularly) by any member of any Cabinet is always an exercise in political spin, and my de-spinning capacity before I've had coffee is extremely limited.
The fact that the Secretary of Energy was talking to the nation about renewables, nuclear and clean coal while the rest of Washington is wrapped around health care and Afghanistan, however, is significant. Regardless of what words he used, regardless of whether or not (you or) I agree with his message. And part of that message, I was able to tell even in my uncaffeinated state, was "clean energy isn't scary". Not scary in terms of availability, not scary in terms of cost. Really. Not to worry.
From a political perspective, then, it seems that the best government money can buy is getting proactive about defusing the sort of fear tactics that have been in such wide distribution this summer. The climate debate won't be improved by talk of death panels, socialism in our schools or freezing goldfish (bowl included, no extra cost!). Framing the issue in rational terms, early in the discussion, is a major lesson this administration may be learning.
I think it's a lesson for those of us who have to preach/lobby/prosyletize for climate-related action on campus, as well. Not just in our dealings with organizational decision-makers, but also as we interact with students and the public in general.
One of the (electronic) newsletters I receive regularly is Environmental Leader. Today's issue has an item which caught my eye largely because it started with a reference to the Piazza della Signioria in Florence. On further reading, it turned out to have almost nothing to do with Italy and almost everything to do with the public's awareness of and attitudes to environmental/climatalogical responsibility. A colorful chart (I'm attracted to shiny objects, particularly if that caffeine is still kicking in) featured to demonstrate that "there is no common definition of sustainability" grabbed my attention. Once I enlarged the image enough to (1) read it and (2) read the even smaller citation of its source, I found it came from a WBCSD report titled "Sustainable Consumption Facts and Trends".
What I've found in dealing with at least a portion of the organizational decision-makers at Greenback is that I have to treat them like businesspeople (which, of course, they are). Perhaps it makes sense to start dealing with students and the general public by treating them as consumers (which, increasingly, they are as well). In fact, being able to explain what the consumers want to the higher-ups on campus might be a useful tactic.
At the very least, reading what the WBCSD has to say will be a welcome break from editing and re-editing Greenback's Climate Action Report (arriving tomorrow at a website near you!).
