David Suzuki: U.S. president Barack Obama must show some climate leadership
The race to become leader of the world’s most powerful democracy often seemed disconnected from reality. During debates, the two main candidates stooped to insults, half-truths, and outright lies. The overall campaign included appallingly ignorant statements about women.
But the most bewildering disconnect was over the greatest threat the world faces: global warming. Republican candidate Mitt Romney only mentioned it mockingly, and President Barack Obama brought it up in passing toward the end of the campaign and in one line during his acceptance speech.
We should probably be happy that the candidate who at least acknowledged the seriousness of climate change won. Obama has had more to say since being elected to his second term. “I am a firm believer that climate change is real, that it is impacted by human behaviour and carbon emissions, and as a consequence I think we have an obligation to future generations to do something about it,” he told reporters at a post-election news conference.
He went on to list his accomplishments on climate during his first term: better fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, increased clean-energy production, and investment in “breakthrough technologies that could further remove carbon from our atmosphere.” But those were inadequate, given the scope of the problem.
He should have done more. As investment strategist Jeremy Grantham recently wrote in Nature, “President Barack Obama missed the chance of a lifetime to get a climate bill passed, and his great environmental and energy scientists John Holdren and Steven Chu went missing in action.”
Part of the problem is the increasingly dysfunctional nature of a polarized and paralyzed U.S. political system—including a Congress dominated by anti-environmental, anti-tax and often anti-government Republicans. Many of us—not just Americans—hope the president will show stronger leadership this time around. Unfortunately, his news conference statement sent mixed messages. Although he acknowledged that more should be done and promised to have “a wide-ranging conversation with scientists, engineers and elected officials” about reducing carbon, he also said “if the message somehow is that we’re going to ignore jobs and growth simply to address climate change, I don’t think anyone’s going to go for that. I won’t go for that.”
He went on to acknowledge the costs of climate-related natural disasters and mentioned the danger of climate change as “something we’re passing on to future generations that’s going to be very expensive and very painful to deal with.”
In trying to say the right thing without alienating the fossil fuel industry and other moneyed interests, he came across as confused. Even though it will be expensive and painful not to act, he’s not prepared to take the necessary steps if it will impede jobs and growth. But climate change is already costing the U.S., and the rest of the world—in money, human health and lives. The increasing frequency of extreme weather events, droughts, and floods is in line with what climate scientists have been predicting for decades—and evidence is mounting that what’s happening is more severe than predicted, and will get far worse still if we fail to act.
Because our leaders—in Canada and the U.S.—have too long listened to fossil fuel interests and their denier minions rather than scientists, it will be more difficult than it might have been to reduce carbon emissions to the extent necessary to prevent runaway global warming (if it’s not too late already), and it may require more sacrifice than it would have had we acted sooner. But there are many ways to protect the health of the planet and the future of humanity without destroying economies.
Conserving energy and thus saving money, reducing consumption of unnecessary products and packaging, and shifting to a clean-energy economy would likely hurt the bottom line of polluting industries, but would undoubtedly have positive effects for most of us. Many scientists and economists also say putting a price on carbon through carbon taxes and/or cap-and-trade is necessary. Rethinking the economy as a means and not an end in itself would also help.
If America wants to retain its position as a global power, its president must listen to the people and show strong leadership at this turning point in human history.
Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Communications Manager Ian Hanington. Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.






http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/11/world-bank-climate-change...
The President cannot unilaterally decide to implement any Law, Policy and / or agenda without the approval of Both Houses and within the Law as Checked & Balanced by the Judicial Branch.
It's known as the separation of powers so that no one President can become a Dictator like we have in Canada.
Contrast that with the warped version of the Westminster (English/UK) System in Canada whereby any party with even a 1 seat majority can DICTATE ANY Policy & Law.
In Canada today we have a Dictatorship until the next election (hopefully) with little effective separation of powers or adequate checks and balances.
So no the President can not do much without the consent of both the House of Reps & the Senate in Order to pass Bills into Law.
Climate change needs to be addressed by the People first and foremost holding Politicians & Industry to account.
*In all of the debates Obama hadn’t planned to mention climate change once.
*Obama has not mentioned the crisis in the last two State of the Unions addresses.
*Occupywallstreet does not even mention CO2 in its list of demands because of the bank-funded carbon trading stock markets run by corporations.
*Julian Assange is of course a climate change denier.
*Canada killed Y2Kyoto with a freely elected climate change denying prime minister and nobody cared, especially the millions of scientists warning us of unstoppable warming (a comet hit).
Meanwhile, the entire world of SCIENCE, lazy copy and paste news editors and obedient journalists, had condemned our kids to the greenhouse gas ovens of an exaggerated "crisis" and had allowed bank-funded and corporate-run “CARBON TRADING STOCK MARKETS” to trump 3rd world fresh water relief, starvation rescue and 3rd world education for just over 26 years of insane attempts at climate CONTROL.
Climate Change Belief is another speed bump on the road to knowledge.
Since the world of science has never say it "will" happen, only "could" happen and "might" happen, the consensus is that it won't happen.
When science says the worst crisis imaginable "WILL" happen, only then will the believers return.
Perhaps if the likes of Suzuki Foundation and the rest of the Deep Green cabal would also refrain from insults, half-truths and outright lies, a balanced, public analysis of the evidence supporting their shrill demands could be made.
Maybe they could demand that James Hansen or Kevin Trenberth be sequestered with someone like Richard Lindzen until agreement on what the evidence actually says can be found. If that agreement cannot be found amongst those deeply competent in the field, what does that actually say about the strength of the underlying science?
Suzuki will decidedly NOT advocate for that sort of thing, since it would tend to recognize the legitimacy of those who, rightly, remain unconvinced that the science is strong enough to justify monkeywrenching of the entire world's energy supply. People starve and humanitarian disaster happens from that too, Dave.
Are you one of those people who thinks that there's some sort of meaningful dialogue happening here? Like, you - and other environmentalists - are actually communicating with Obama through articles, and letters, and actions, and he's talking back to you in soundbytes through the media? Like, he's not just 100% having his entire approach crafted by handlers and advisors in response to terabytes of poll and research data?
Dave: he's not a leader.
What we really need is for temperatures to go up a few and knock off a couple million innocent people. That will firm up that sense of urgency in the public. Then those animatronic Chuck-E-Cheese bots we call politicians will dance their dance, or be replaced. As you can see by the whackjobs that emerge from the woodwork like so many pine beetles every time human-caused global warming comes up, a nice big die-off is where we're heading. The best thing to do is head for high ground and let 'em drown, starve, and burn. Some lessons come the hard way.
Hopefully Obama at least is smart enough to see that.
Have you taken into consideration the empirical evidence that you're a silly little goose that's lost its pretty little goslings?
That structure obviously didn't help them any because they now have a communist dictator in their White House who overthrows and rewrites any opposition to him that the USA public throws at him to freely defend themselves. He and the few he has trusted to administrative powers are systematically bankrupting and weakening every measurable strength of the USA for all of his communist benefactors and allies who dream to see the USA and the USA population long dead and forgotten.
If you don't think that that will even marginally affect Canada and our allies then you're dreaming a highest order of sociopolitical hallucination for which there may be no easy cure.
Except the USA has not signed a Trade Deal like Canada and it's Dictator giving Communist China the Legal right to any resource in Canada outside of ANY Canadian Laws that is Communist China can file suit against any Canadian Government in any Province and Territory to access any Canadian Resource in secret arbitration offshore outside of Canada.
Smells fishy, seems like a New-Con Party Funded Counter Hit from the same people that did Robo-Calls.
And are now selling Canada to Communist China.
Neo-Con Shills.
Seeing the truth has made me question David Suzuki's and Obama's true motivations, these men are smart so I cant think they aren't aware of these clear facts. I sincerely hope political ideology is not more important than a healthy Earth, don't let your political identity sway your common sense. We are being "played" by both sides here, identifying our common enemy and affirming our sovereignty is a matter of national security.
The only ones playing everyone are the communists attempting to overthrow the United States with historically extreme prejudice, which is still our most important trading partner.
What exactly are you confused about?
Are you aware that the Neo-Cons have sold Canada to Communist China via the Free Trade Deal ala NAFTA & Cash Envelope Neo-Con Mulroney.
Are you aware that the Neo-Cons put Corporate Welfare before Canadians well being?
The United States and Canada have the largest trade relationship in the world.[1] In 2011, US merchandise trade with Canada consisted of $315.3 billion in imports and $280.9 billion in exports.[2] The trade relationship between the two countries crosses all industries and is vital to both nations’ success. Each country is the largest trade partner of the other. The trade across Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, Michigan alone is equal to all the trade between the United States and Japan.
That means any Climate & Any Policy has a direct impact on every Canadian.
Are you informed or need to do some more reading?
Pages