We're Not in Kansas Anymore

Roderick Bremby is the newest ecological hero.  On October 18, he used his authority (as Secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment) to reject an air permit for another giant coal-fired power plant on the plains of southwestern Kansas.

The most remarkable aspect of Bremby's decision was that he based it solely on the carbon dioxide that the proposed coal burning would emit.

As reported in the New York Times and on the front page of the Washington Post, Bremby declared:

"I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing."

Were administrators like OSU President Ed Ray listening?

Based on his approval of the new natural gas power plant for the OSU campus, it seems that Ed Ray is no Roderick Bremby.  Even as the evidence piles up about the tragic impact of burning fossil fuels, and as the International Panel on Climate Change issues its most dire warning ever, construction continues on the white elephant known as the OSU Energy Center.

Go Beavers!

There's a large sign at the entrance to the construction site on 35th Avenue that lists the names of those responsible for the boondoggle.  I suggest we hold them accountable for their folly.

Back in Kansas, a spokesman for Sunflower Electric Power Company said that Governor Kathleen Sebelius had implied that those who burn fossil fuels are not moral stewards of the land.

An icon of the energy ethic at Oregon State University is a bank of giant blazing lights over an empty Reser Stadium.  Perhaps we can click our ruby shoes and bring moral stewardship back to campus.

A Question of Power

Oregon State University is the home of research on many aspects of the impact that humans have on nature — including climate change.  It would seem logical for the university to put the results of its own research into practice.

However, the university has begun to build a new power plant that will burn natural gas — a fossil fuel in limited supply that is a major contributor to global warming.  The administration even touts this "energy center" as an example of how it is leading the way toward a sustainable society — because it would emit 38 percent less carbon than the current power plant.

Is that really the best we can do here?

Eskimos are falling to their deaths through the Arctic ice, because the modern industrialized world is pouring at least ten times too much carbon into the atmosphere.  Furthermore, there is a delay between carbon emitted today and the ensuing increase in global temperatures for our children and grandchildren.  Armed with such findings from their very own professors and students, how is it that OSU administrators can tell us in good conscience that a mere 38 percent reduction — installed at a time when better alternatives exist — is such good news?

Like many problems of large scale, climate change is complex.  As scientists like Paul Ehrlich and Donella Meadows explained many years ago, the primary human variables that affect the environment are population, affluence and technology.  Therefore, it is the affluence and technology of the modern industrial world — particularly the flagrant consumption of fossil fuel that OSU continues to embrace — that is a major factor in the continuing erosion of the biosphere's ability to support diverse life.

There are also severe implications for human culture — especially for those with the least power to correct the problem.  Such cultures also tend to be among those with the lowest affluence.  So it seems fair to ask whether the vanishing Inuit village would draw any solace from the knowledge that those who indirectly destroy their way of life are working hard (with considerable fanfare) to stop such irresponsible behavior in a few decades.

What's wrong with this picture?