Us vs. Them: Why you hatin' on big oil?

Ellen brought up some very good points today after visiting the climate change rally here on campus. I am fully supportive of their cause and I think it's great that people are getting really active on this issue, but a few things gave me pause about the approach.

One of the speakers spoke very critically about the oil industries' lack of effort to combat climate change. He claimed that they don't really get it and are purposefully moving slowly on reducing fossil fuel use. However, I hesitate to think this is an issue the oil industries don't care about or aren't thinking about. Rather, solving climate change is an enormous challenge and in all likelihood the oil companies simply haven't managed to come up good solution that wont put them out of business. It seems silly to boil this down to a simple us vs. them, because in reality we are all in this together. Climate change affects everybody and instead of fighting each other and pointing fingers at "the enemy" we should be working together towards a solution. This is a common cause for humanity and there are no easy solutions and no clear culprits. After all, everyone depends on oil to a large extent and we shouldn't hasten to criticize its producers. Furthermore, I think it just makes big oil less willing to cooperate with environmentalists if they are constantly being blamed for inaction.

Some of the display booths had what I thought to be some very unhelpful information as well. One in particular showed different energy sources in two columns: GOOD and BAD. The good included: wind (a no-brainer), hydroelectric, and hybrid cars. The bad column included: SUVs, nuclear power, and coal (probably the worst culprit IMHO). This concerned me because I don't necessarily think of nuclear as being a "bad" energy technology. Surely it is no perfect solution and is held back by concerns over waste, proliferation, and fear of disaster. But in terms of climate change it is perhaps the best choice (zero CO2 emissions). Furthermore, wind and hydro have major drawbacks as well. Wind is scarce and intermittent and hydro is very environmentally hazardous for other reasons. In a broad sense I think it is mistaken to categorize any energy source as "good" or "bad" because in reality each has its benefits and drawbacks. We have to think harder about what solutions to use since there is simply no magic bullet or "good" technology that will fix all our problems. Undoubtedly any progress made will involve a variety of technolgies and approaches to cutting carbon emissions.

Regardless of all these issues, I think overall it is good to see people raising this issue and getting involved. Recent support from the business world, the supreme court decision, Al Gore's movie, and increased general awareness is really pulling climate change to the forefront of national politics as should have happened years ago.

On a hilarious note, I snagged a Gore 2008 button from one of the booths trying to get him to run for president. I can't imagine he would actually run. But would you vote for him if he did?