March sends climate change message? #tellusatoday
We asked our followers how effective they thought rallies such as the People's Climate March are in urging action on climate change. Comments from Twitter are edited for clarity and grammar:
Did Occupy New York change anything?
— @1flwpbmll
After the mess the marchers left in NYC, with garbage all over, it doesn't look like many care about the environment.
— @mairblakely
The activists are targeting the wrong sector. The focus of their effort is misguided.
— @SergeantMajor05
The march is very effective when people organize peacefully for a common cause. The news media cover it, and politicians are on notice.
— @JeffOstach
Letters to the editor:
The argument that 1.2 billion people without electricity can obtain it only with fossil fuels is like saying that developing nations can obtain modern communications only by installing dial telephones ("Don't constrain energy growth: Opposing view"). Solar energy, wind energy and other non-polluting renewable resources are fully capable of ending energy poverty around the world, and they are far less expensive than building big power plants and transmission lines.
Contrary to the arguments from fossil fuel energy advocates, the world does not have to sacrifice climate stability to obtain ample energy supplies.
William Becker, senior policy analyst, Center for the New Energy Economy; Golden, Colo.
More than one clever plan has been submitted in recent years to scrub carbon out of the atmosphere. What is the holdup? Do the activists against climate change who attended the People's Climate March on Sunday in New York understand that almost no one can afford to live in some latte-sipping upscale urban Bohemia with mass transit?
Do they understand that fusion nuclear plants and a cure for male pattern baldness will be realized before solar power becomes viable for the masses? And please stop the absurdly priced electric vehicles. They are nothing but status-symbol toys for the 1%, limousine liberal crowd.
Wesley Voyles; Raleigh, N.C.
If you're really concerned about emissions, use less energy. Turn off the lights and the television, replace light bulbs with light-emitting diode lamps, install smart thermostat, and stop speeding. A change in lifestyle is needed, not parades in New York City.
Sam Craig; Northumberland, Pa.
Comments from Facebook are edited for clarity and grammar:
Having a march to solve global warming is like trying to solve poverty with a concert. It's not going to work.
— Gerald Sarroca
It's great to hear that wealthy individuals and foundations are divesting from fossil fuels. I hope they are then re-investing that money in clean energy and energy-efficient companies. We have to have energy, and we have to develop sources of clean energy.
— Eleanor Hall
Climate change might be overstated, but the patterns are considered hard to deny. The major players speaking out against doing anything to address it are corporations and industries that don't want to deal with lower, short-term profit issues.
It's a choice between the rich getting a little less rich for a decade or so vs. the planet potentially getting healthier. The decision should be a pretty simple choice for the 98% of us who aren't rich.
— David Hoeltje
For more discussions, follow @USATOpinion or #tellusatoday on Twitter.