by Dr. Michael Smith

Created on: December 22, 2008

With increasing frequency, evidence of global warming and climate change are making headlines around the world. Politicians, while giving lip service to the dangers that lie ahead for the planet, lack a fundamental understanding of either the dangers or the solution to the problem. They all promise a technological solution, but fail to grasp the social context which makes the problem difficult to solve. The urgency and complicated nature of a solution puts humanity at a distinct disadvantage and many scientists involved in the study of our planet concur that if we acted now, we would only be able to make a difference in what is happening by the end of the century. The problem is that the situation is growing more desperate and yet those in power are not. Why are these issues so difficult to address?

During the recent US Presidential election, politicians promoted new technologies as the solution to climate change and to decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, which is the largest contributor to pollutants damaging to our planet. What they failed to say was that technology alone cannot fix this problem because it has a social context attached. Any technical solution must also address the human element. Several historical examples highlight this basic truth.

During the oil embargo of the 1970s, oil supplies dropped, prices escalated, and President Jimmy Carter promised the nation we would break the back of foreign oil, and end our dependence. Subsidies were put in place to develop alternatives to hydrocarbons, but as soon as the crisis ended the oil companies influenced Congress to end the promotion of other forms of energy.

The current economic crisis began with oil prices once again soaring to unprecedented levels. The United States consumes almost 25% of the world's oil (20.6 million barrels per day or roughly 456 gallons per American per year). Our nation spends almost as much per year on oil as the current bail out of financial institutions.

Think about that figure. We send about $700 billion dollars per year just to can drive our vehicles. Simple measures to reduce our oil consumption by 10% could have a dramatic effect. The problem in the US with a solution is that is must address the social context. Americans love big, gas guzzling automobiles and they equate the right to drive any vehicle they choose with their personal freedom. Without coercion or incentive from the government it is unlike the trends towards reducing oil usage will change. Unless the

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>