Though what I’m about to write is not a direct response to any of your statements, I do wish to point out that I believe what little action we are taking to prevent climate change is very superficial - perhaps a good word for what I’m describing is “fashionable,” or “hip.” For example, (and this example is one of many), rather than just limiting our use of fossil fuels through merely driving less, we’re finding ways around the problem in hybrid vehicles and diesel. One may argue that hybrids are a step in the right direction, but it is my belief that they are merely a cool, new, expensive toy for someone to spend a lot of money on. Take this how you will, but I think we all need to seriously reevaluate our conservation efforts.

1. But it seems to me that the hardest part of enacting positive change is that there are no easy answers (for we-the-people anyway, I’d say Kyoto is a pretty good example of an easy answer to the “what can be done?” question, but that leads into all the economic and political hurdles and lack of incentives…). There are no easy answers, no big shining proximate cause of global warming, on a smaller scale, only “smaller” non-point-source issues dealing with resource use, energy efficiency, pollution, which are wrapped up in our standards of living (see poetry below). So I agree there is a trade-off here (with the biggest changes so far only seeming to follow fashion trends), but if it’s the little things that make a difference - positive or negative - I prefer to see hybrid cars as positive.

2. If it’s true that it’s those “little” things that are to blame, can’t the economic and political advantages of energy/resource efficiency be used to circumvent the whole prescriptive argument?

3. ‘The American Way of Life is Not Negotiable’ - Selected Poems, G.W. Bush

I find it very difficult to discuss this point without specifics, and feel usually woefully without good information to do so. But I notice that on an individual basis doing one specific thing leads to more, and an accrual of moments can result in a larger action (butterfly hurricane metaphor here). But I also absolutely understand the vantage point that individual efforts are one small small part of whats needed. We actually need global, political economic changes. So somehow there is a need for both efforts.

It’s so much easier to pretend nothing is happening. I feel I never have a conversation about climate change with anyone without running into wilful doublethinking stupidity.
Things like carbon offsetting and hybrid cars only help people burying their heads in the sand, keeping planes in the sky, car factories in production and root causes unaddressed.

At the risk of sounding somewhat cynical - I think that the sense of belonging that comes with the mainstream is too much to resist for most. The climate activist is often seen as the latest in a long line of leftist loonies. Even when presented with evidence the well integrated human balks and withdraws to the womb of the dominant culture. We’re in this for a long haul. When the radical becomes the mainstream we will get effective action. This, of course takes time we do not have. Contraction and Convergence offers a realistic approach to both the personal and the private.