I really don’t understand the conflict between the factions of climate change when the major contentious point of debate is the veracity of whether or not carbon-based energy is creating conditions that will ultimately be the demise of the human race. This debate is not dichotomous; it has more than two arguments.
Why, exactly, is this debate so divisive to a point that many are emotionally affected by its outcome? Why do many of us feel it necessary to choose only one of the proffered solutions? How is the general public affected and to what degree? Why do we get so emotionally involved in details that are irrelevant? It’s not like there are no alternatives to the problem. Energy is not exclusively generated through processes that use carbon-based resources, so why are some proponents of carbon-based energy so ardent, especially when they are not directly rewarded and when the coveted energy is easily available from other sources that more effectively and efficiently provide the same energy?
Energy is an important social concern that nearly everyone should consider, yet most Americans don’t work for fossil-fuel corporations, and they are not compensated by them, so why such loyalty? Energy is provided by many methodologies that are renewable (carbon-based energy is finite); energy created from wind and solar technology do not add deleterious miasma into the atmosphere; even if the level of pollution spilled into the atmosphere from burning carbon is within acceptable levels of human tolerance, it is still pollution—why support the possibility of damaging effects when it is so unnecessary? The answer lies within the heart.
Emotion seems to be, terrestrially speaking, a human quality. (We, as a species, might anthropomorphize (accent on the fourth syllable) some other animals, but that is kindling for another fireside chat to be conflagrated at another time.) Emotions are ambivalent; they are neither right nor wrong; they simply exist within the human condition. How we react to our emotions is what we perceive as either malevolent or beneficent. Conflict quickens when we falsely interpret these feelings into factual proof of veracity for debating. For whatever reason, we grasp onto the notion that we are right when being right or wrong is not the objective. The only desirous outcome in this particular debate is having abundant, inexpensive energy so that we may maximize our abilities to work and to recreate. Carbon-based energy is not the only resource that will accomplish these objectives; in fact, carbon-based energy is not a very good resolution when cheaper, more efficient technologies exist, technologies that, if researched with necessary enthusiasm—the same alacrity exploited by the status quo—would make the planet smile like a pharmaceutically enhanced Cheshire Cat supplemented with industrial strength catnip.
The answer to many of the questions asked at the beginning of this essay is very easy… and most children instinctively understand, especially if they have ever sullied their hands with a greasy piece of coal: The people who are making irrational, monarchical amounts of money through carbon manipulation do not want to negatively affect their ludicrous incomes because, as you know, it is very difficult to maintain a staff of servants who are manageable—servants who have adequate enough skills to perform their duties with the deference due to one’s employer. Very few of our nation’s populace—only one percent of one percent—really understand the cost of the resources exploited to maintain a palatial house with a fleet of luxurious automobiles; to possess more than one estate—because living in one locale throughout a calendar year is so mundane; to maintain a yacht and crew to cruise the Caribbean or Mediterranean seas; to even plan a major party that effectively displays Sardanapalian luxury, which, obviously, denotes directing the help with an acceptable hubris and feigned concern about their particularly pedestrian lives. When one is wealthy and has the accompanying responsibilities, the health of the planet is a really low priority concerning daily modus operandi.
Peace Through Music