Perpetual Innovation

Category: UN

  • Why the World Bank Is Taking On Climate Change – NationalJournal.com

    Why the World Bank Is Taking On Climate Change – NationalJournal.com: “w­w­w.K­E­P­2.c­o­m”

    Caral Davenport of the National Journal spoke with Rachel Kyte, the World Bank’s vice president of sustainable development, about the economic impact of climate change.

     The world bank is taking some rather aggressive action. 
    (Also watch the debate on global warming that follows. Hmmm?.)

     Some of us would argue, that if you don’t want governments to take more active roles in sustainability, then we all should start to be more sustainable ourselves. We have to eventually, right? 

     Why not start now, and start with the “low lying fruit”: energy efficiency, telecommuting, etc.  Those initiatives not only pay for themselves, but can be implemented immediately.

     Or we can continue to debate if there really is global warming, is it primarily man-made, etc. 

     For the latest info on the science and the concepts of sustainability visit: www.TinyURL.com/SharedStuffZ/
    The intro document there provides the outline of the WikiBook with hyperlinks to the live pages in Wikipedia. If you think that Wikipedia is wrong, please offer corrections and provide sources and links to the proof. But, before you offer corrections, read some of the section, especially read the nexus of energy, water, and food.

     Even if there were no global warming, we all should start to take aggressive action now, today, ahora. The global warming issue simply adds a level of urgency to our steps.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Bonian Golmohammadi: Why We Need a Global Environmental Organization

    Bonian Golmohammadi: Why We Need a Global Environmental Organization:

    This article seems to do a good job of organizing the current research. It builds a good case for global action.

    The global organization is needed, yes. But that is part of the problem. The dysfunction of individual governments is amplified many, many times when it comes to global organizations such as the UN. I think that a big part of the denier ideology is the fear of the following logic train:
    1) Global warming (yes)
    2) Human caused (debate mainly over how much)
    If yes to 1 & 2, then we have a moral and fiduciary responsibility to:
    3) start taking action, at least prudent action.
    4) Global coordination and cooperation are required.
    5) The UN is the logical place to start…
    Sooo, what if the global and UN involvement is an unacceptable alternative?
    It’s hard for those of us who have thought about the outcomes and the possible ramification of climate change to get our heads around the likely results. The ideas of taking huge sums of money, giving it to an organ of the UN, and having them giving it to climate refugees is ugly in all the ways you look at it.
    To the extent that we all can have non-government solutions, the better all around. It will certainly help get people on board as they try to work themselves past #1 and #2 above.
    So, I’ll come back and check the article and its links to see how well they did.
    Thanks. EH