Flagstaff City Council, mayor, answers questions about Flagstaff and green house gas emisisons
Wednesday, November 26th, 2008It’s pretty cool to live in a town where this even comes up in a city council meeting. We might not agree with the perspectives shared, but at least they’re sitting down to talk about it. It should be built into the moral underpinnings of any City Council to talk about its impact on the natural world; at the very least they can talk about it. I have friend who always says, no, the very least they can do is nothing. Well most cities are not doing anything. Cheers Flagstaff.
Somewhere along the way, we turned well-known facts into a belief system. It’s easy not to “believe” in global warming. I first heard about this stuff when I was a kid, and as a Phoenix kid from the suburbs, it scared the shit out of me. But then, like so many other topics thrust upon children in school, we moved on. For the majority of us, it didn’t stick, because it was taught as science instead of ethics.
With no changes, greenhouse gas emissions produced from residents, tourists and businesses across the city are forecast to increase by 52 percent from 1990 to 2020. Most climate scientists believe these emissions are a key component in global warmng.
I really wish people would stop calling it global warming. Warming here causes freezing there, and droughts over there. It’s climate change. It’s a much more accurate description. It’s a lot easier to make fun of global warming than it is to climate change.
Anyway, there are two members of city council that are still in the dark.
Two councilmen, Joe Haughey and Scott Overton, voted against the proposal to limit greenhouse gases at the city level in 2006 and say it is not the city’s top priority or role to combat global warming.
Because of the way we live on the planet, it is just crucial to include global environmental ethics as well as the local. It’s especially imperative for small towns that can experiment with a lot of different ideas and initiatives that, if successful, could perhaps be applied on a large scale in some cities.
Still these condescending city council members continue.
Haughey, who makes air quotes with his hands when speaking of the “global warming-climate change thing,” said global warming “could be, maybe not” a problem, and that the science is not entirely conclusive.
Overton’s response was parallel.
“It is not definitively known,” he said. “It’s still being questioned.”
Climate change is unbearably palpable in northern Arizona. The climate is changing and our civilization is causing it. We’re in the midst of a mass die-out of species at the level of the dinosaurs and our civilization is causing it. While residents of Flagstaff refer to last winter as a “big winter,” those residents who lived here 20 years ago shrug their shoulders and laugh. Take a look at some of the older houses in Flagstaff that have a back door off of the second floor, this is the kind of winters that Flagstaff used to have. I’ve seen a picture of my mother posing next to her bike in the 70’s and the snow is up to the handlebars. Today is November 26th and it’s raining.
Local ski resorts must be “saved” by producing fake snow with poisoned water. This is the extent to which we are willing to stay in denial. If the city were united in confronting reality, we would have no choice but to dismantle those systems that are not and can never be made sustainable. Keeping this a debatable issue only functions to justify an immoral and, frankly, insane lifestyle. We think we need cars, we need dams, we need cell phones, and we need cheap consumables and clothes made by slaves in other countries. So, anything that points toward the fact that this lifestyle is killing everything around us is “not entirely conclusive.” It must be called into question.
So we’re faced with the choice of driving, for example, and having a living planet that will sustain future generations. That logic is easy, but it results in giving up something we feel we need. So the parameters are changed and we pretend that the world is infinite, self-healing, and invulnerable to such mass destruction. It’s delusional. It’s selfish. It’s narcissistic. Anybody who refers to climate change as a belief or maintains skepticism, especially in Northern Arizona where the evidence is in our face all the time, is simply not paying attention. We don’t need people like that in positions of power in our city.
We need to live sustainably or we won’t be living at all. Even if Haughey and Overton don’t “believe” in climate change, measures that address climate change are also steps that will move us in a sustainable direction. Their condescending skepticism is dead weight.