tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post5682052668301054806..comments2023-08-07T16:41:49.660+02:00Comments on Die Klimazwiebel: The Post-Environmental Dilemmaeduardohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-90569269847378442692011-10-04T12:45:53.552+02:002011-10-04T12:45:53.552+02:00@David #44
"In this specific case, how much l...@David #44<br />"In this specific case, how much local habitat and how many raptors are we willing to sacrifice to save a polar bear?" - that's too polemical, of course. <br />It's the legitimation, which makes decisions difficult and the cae interesting. Both climate (polar bear) or nature (Indian Summer) are pretty unreliable candidates. Of xourse, third solutions are fine. But once the case is already in full process, we need another approach to come to a decision. Negotiations, politics, deals.Werner Krausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15094636819952421339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-38826533952367655502011-10-04T12:41:55.377+02:002011-10-04T12:41:55.377+02:00@anonyMoose #6
very clever, very American answer. ...@anonyMoose #6<br />very clever, very American answer. In Germany, we (sometimes) rank the common good higher than private property.Werner Krausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15094636819952421339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-11568836296248338872011-10-01T23:30:44.855+02:002011-10-01T23:30:44.855+02:00"one of the largest tracts of private wild la..."one of the largest tracts of <b>private</b> wild land"<br /><br />It's private land. So it's none of the whiners' business. If they want to control what can be done to the land, make an offer to buy it.AnonyMoosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-83219626092315221112011-10-01T20:35:19.178+02:002011-10-01T20:35:19.178+02:00Werner@#3
So noted. Another way of stating the di...Werner@#3<br />So noted. Another way of stating the dilemma is: What (and how much of "what") are we willing to destroy to prevent a rise in global temperature and a decrease in ocean alkalinity which we assume (not necessarily correctly) will be harmful to what we value about the natural world? At some point, it becomes analogous to the infamous Viet Nam war justification for methods of pacifying the local population: "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." <br /><br />In this specific case, how much local habitat and how many raptors are we willing to sacrifice to save a polar bear? Difficult choices, but I think we can do better than ridge line wind turbines (and dessert solar farms) as solutions. These are the preferred solutions of the anti-nuclear folks, but they are no more natural nor less technological than fission reactors. <br /><br />Arguments can be made about relative risk to human populations, but these arguments, to be intellectually honest, must take into account that current reactors are 1950s technology. Personally, I would rather we invest in the research and engineering necessary to develop commercially viable advanced designs such as the liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR). Whatever we value about nature, we owe it to ourselves and our progeny to make the attempt.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11910918327702371741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-18680626917363052182011-10-01T14:54:44.355+02:002011-10-01T14:54:44.355+02:00Some problems have to be solved right now and some...Some problems have to be solved right now and some problems have to be solved in 10, 50, 100, 1000 years.<br /><br />Some problems affect us right now and some are only felt when it's to late to prevent them.<br /><br />The environmentalist movement and the green movement have become protest movements. Like Greenpeace you have to make as much noise as possible to be heard. You don't need to take decisions or responsibilities. <br /><br />From the very moment that you have to act as a good father for the society, you have to take responsibilities and everything becomes very tricky (cf. Joschka Fischer).<br /><br />Today many Greens etc., even very old ones, still act as if they were protesters. But we have a multiplicity of current problems to solve and not every counter-protest is evil.<br /><br />I think that many scientists drastically overestimate their ability to understand the global situation and generally their intelligence.<br /><br />Above all activist scientists tend to express their opinion loudely and arrogantly about every topic, even those that they ignore dramatically.<br /><br />Every criticism is fought in a very agressive and arrogant way and you can wait for an apology until the end of times. <br /><br />This is the dilemma imo. Stop this agressivity, stop this lack of responsibility, stop this arrogance and we can talk from intelligent human being to intelligent human being.<br /><br />As long as some of you feel (secretely) superior and act like the only wisdom is yours, as long as all these slogans from Greenpeace and Co have the same credibility than the Pope's we have this ridiculous situation.<br /><br /><br />Best regards<br /><br />YephAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-7360951844135135352011-09-30T23:29:34.043+02:002011-09-30T23:29:34.043+02:00@David44#2
Great example, David. But please note t...@David44#2<br />Great example, David. But please note that I did not argue for wind turbines; I just wanted to point to the problem of legitimization. It is possible to be proud of wind or coal cultures; it is also possible to reject it. Neither "nature", "the market", "progress" or "culture" (our identity) are final arguments. Instead, landscape and identity are indeed under permanent construction, under negotiation.Werner Krausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15094636819952421339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-52802132784237746642011-09-30T22:44:25.860+02:002011-09-30T22:44:25.860+02:00'Instead, Vermont, its landscapes and people&#...'Instead, Vermont, its landscapes and people's identity are permanently "under construction". Why shouldn't Vermont become proud of the wind turbines as it is proud of its colorful trees?'<br /><br />I agree that there is an environmental solutions dilemma; however, the above is like arguing that because there have been two centuries of coal mines in West Virginia, we should be proud of mountain top removal.David44noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-11038780281869484452011-09-30T21:05:56.660+02:002011-09-30T21:05:56.660+02:00I would add sth. very simple to this dilemma: It i...I would add sth. very simple to this dilemma: It is allways easy to be against sth...Freddy Schenkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05631385467667126610noreply@blogger.com