penguinsunited.com

Apr 18 2007

PENGUIN PLAN

Here’s the problem. Our home, sweet home, is slipping into the sea:

MELTING GLACIER

©Mlenny

Here’s Penguin 3 and Penguin 4 discussing our Penguin Plan:

©Mlenny

Unfortunately or fortunately depending on your point of view it’s hard to avoid Directv and Tivo even here in the Antarctic. And so just about every penguin knows the American expression: “What’s it to you?”

Well when it comes to global warming, it’s everything to you. To the you’s everywhere. And especially to us. We’ve been waiting for humans to come up with a plan that’s bold enough to save our world. Instead the American government delays and blames the Chinese for their new power plants. The Chinese blame the Americans for all the carbon dioxide they’ve thrown into the air for a hundred years. The rich nations want to stay rich and continue to increase their emissions. The poor nations desperately want to be richer. And they are convinced that only by using more power, building bigger buildings, driving more cars will they get to be rich.

Well we’re tired of waiting. Over the last year our Penguin Planners have been reading and studying and debating the ideas of some of the most forward-thinking of humans.

Here are some of the best ideas we’ve seen:

We are going to research plans and programs from around the world, taking those that are both bold and doable; ideas and projects from little to large. For example:
Al Gore’s proposal for an immediate “carbon freeze” that would cap U.S. CO2 emissions at current levels, followed by a program to generate 90% reductions by 2050.
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/21/10136/4144


George Monbiot’s plan that the world’s total carbon emissions must be reduced to 60 percent below current levels by 2030 - a target that would require the developed world to reduce emissions by 90 percent (to compensate for growth in China, India and other developing countries). Monbiot’s plan: each nation would be allocated a carbon limit based on urban population and each individual an annual carbon allowance.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17954879/site/newsweek/


Nicholas Stern, the former Senior VP of the World Bank, plan to invest 10 billion dollars annually to halve deforestation in the fight against global warming.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070323/sc_afp/climateenvironmentforestsindonesiastern


The Scottish Socialist Party’s proposal for universal free public transportation to be financed by a payroll tax on businesses with more than 10 employees. They argue that congestion already costs businesses about what the plan would costs, and points to the Belgian city of Hasselt which has seen a 1000% increase in public transportation since making it free.
http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.1284334.0.time_is_ripe_to_push_for_free_public_transport.php


Al Gore’s and Democratic Presidential candidate John Edwards’ proposed ban on any new coal-fired plants that don’t capture and sequester CO2.
http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/3/26/131321/888


The Carbon Tax Center’s plan to charge businesses and individuals a price to emit carbon dioxide. Instead of taxing employment, tax carbon.
http://www.carbontax.org/faq/


A new international framework - with stricter limits on greenhouse emissions than Kyoto.
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/21/10136/4144 and http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070319/wl_nm/globalwarming_dc_1


40% of the oil we use goes to our cars, SUVs and light trucks. Each gallon of gasoline burned pumps 28 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere. Raise fuel efficiency (CAFE standards) from 27.5 mpg for cars and from 20.7 mpg for trucks to 40 mpg now.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070329/sc_nm/globalwarming_buildings_dc


Homes and office buildings consume 30-40% of our energy. According to a Achim Steiner, head of UNEP, “A more aggressive energy efficiency policy might deliver over two billion tons or close to three times the amount scheduled to be reduced under the Kyoto Protocol.” Green buildings like the new federal building in San Francisco, the planned Bank of America building in New York, and the Pearl River Tower in Guangzhou, China use innovative ways to heat and cool and generate electricity.http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1604908,00.html

Gore’s proposal for an electricity grid that allows individuals and businesses to feed power back in at prevailing market rates.
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/21/10136/4144 and http://www.globalenvironmentfund.com/GEF white paper_Electric Power Grid.pdf

Sweden’s decision to offer citizens $1,400 cash bonus to purchase green cars.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17858992/

Baltimore’s use of solar-powered public trash can compacters, dramatically decreasing carbon-emitting trash trucks.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/858560/baltimores_trash_cans_go_hightech__at_3795/index.html

Join us. Read. Think. Debate.
If you’ve got some better ideas now is the time to speak up.
We’ll take the best you’ve and add some old-fashioned penguin wisdom. And soon we’ll offer you A PENGUIN PLAN.

We are at Penguins United know how many good and worthy causes there are. And legitimate requests for your charity.

But we at Penguins United are working hard to save the ice, and save the planet. Our planet and yours.

If this work is important to you, think about helping us. Penguin8 is our Treasurer and chief fundraiser, but between you and me, he has only been able to come up with a crate of sardines and a free pass to Disney World.

We have some pretty big ideas for the future. Help make them happen!

If you’d like to contact us, you can easily send us an email message:

Your Name:

(required)

Your Email:

(required)

Subject:

(required)

Your Message:

 

3 Responses to “PENGUIN PLAN”

1. # . . . Ion 22 Jul 2007 at 2:50 am

   We are watching. And we are waiting.

   . . . I

2. # iyababaon 04 Oct 2007 at 11:59 pm

   Penguins, thank you for your efforts.

   I am very surprised and happy to learn how much of it is within our power to change. I had thought that luxury institutions like hotels use a lot of energy, and that manufacturing was also a major contributor. I’m also concerned with the effects of war on our climate. I heard that the manufacture and use of weapons, as well as the massive fires caused by bombing, are major polluters. Is this true?

   Thank you for identifying 70% of the problem, and if it really is coming from our homes, offices, and cars, we can make a difference!

3. # iyababaon 05 Oct 2007 at 12:41 am

   This is from my class. I just wanted to attach it in case it’s any use to you but since I can’t find attachment land, here it is:

   “Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term which describes the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with one’s beliefs.

   Because it is uncomfortable, your brain will seek out ways to resolve the contradictions.

   So if you think you’re a good and moral person, but you fudge a little on your taxes, you might justify this with an excuse like: “I’ve overpaid in previous years,” or “the government is using my money in an immoral way,” or “everyone else is doing it.”

   New research shows that this is not some individual character flaw, but a strong and consistent human impulse. Brain scans show that the brain floods with pleasure when conflicting ideas are resolved.

   I thought the segment went a long way toward explaining why skeptics on global warming still exist. When presented with conflicting views, such as “I am a good person” vs. “my lifestyle is destroying the planet,” the brain comes up with a way to resolve them, such as, “global warming is a conspiracy cooked up by celebrities and scientists.”

   This really highlights why we need to emphasize solutions. If we give people ways to address the problem, they won’t need to deny [the problem]” http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/7/214950/5506.

   So, how do we do this? First, we examine the aspects and scope of the problem(s).

   In this course we have been examining various social problems, and we are going to map their interconnections. If we can locate core factors that underlie and connect these problems, we can begin to locate sites for intervention. Then, we can consider far-reaching and/or multiple cumulative solutions.

   Do any solutions exist already, or do we have to invent them?

   The answer to that will depend on the core factors we identify. Are the core factors of problems inevitable, or are they social constructions? Since so many problems are quite new in the relative span of human life on earth, we already know there are other ways of living, but we’ve been taught to believe these ways of life are miserable, dangerous, or worse. We are taught to feel sorry for people, including ourselves, who don’t “have it all,” yet most of the world does not have what the US has, and as we saw, studies show what we have has not translated into happiness (Bill McKibben, Deep Economy). If the idea of what it takes to be happy was constructed then it can be deconstructed.

   Is it really that simple?

   No. First of all, as Lorraine Hansberry said in regard to race, one of the problematic constructions we’ve been discussing here, “It is pointless to pretend that it doesn’t exist — merely because it is a lie!” (Les Blancs). Though something may not be a natural reality, it may have become a social reality. For example, if Sut Jhally is right about how advertising determines our values and cultural norms, then if you show up with the wrong social markers for an interview, you won’t get the job (Advertising and the End of the World). While you may know you don’t need “all the toys” to be happy, if you don’t have an income you won’t eat and if you don’t eat you won’t be happy.

   So what do we do?

   We have to understand what is at stake for whom in dismantling social constructions. They were constructed for a reason and if we understand that we can strategize effective solutions. They may consist of pressure on those who benefit from and maintain destructive constructions. At the same time, if we want to bypass the cognitive dissonance that causes people to allow those constructions to continue, we have to offer solutions.

   For example, if the US is the major contributor to climate change, and if cognitive dissonance means guilt won’t do it, then we can demonstrate how and why living in “green equity” is attractive and rewarding. Imagine a reality show about people having fun being green together, or addressing a community problem together. But even if we have ideas of like this of how to bypass cognitive dissonance there will be resistance.

   If the current power structure benefits from inequity, how can we get media play to make solutions known?

   Maybe we can’t, but we can try. Shows like Live Earth in which celebrities who have benefited from consumerism turn around and give back can be helpful if they encourage people to do what they can rather than becoming just more entertainment to consume. And since the majority of us on this Earth are not celebrities, grass roots, local, and community-based projects add up to more than anything that can be done top down, as long as we know how to form alliances between issues.

   Imagine a reality in which people have fun being green together, or addressing a community problem together. Then try this at home.

Leave a Reply