Some facts

One of the problems with climate change is the Omnivore's Dilemma: there's so much info out there, so many different perspectives on the best response, and the facts of climate change so scary, that I'd rather put my head in the sand most of the time.

Here's some of what I know:

Natural Gas:

• Natural gas is not a sustainable solution to our CO2 problem.
• Natural gas, when burned, emits less CO2 than oil or coal, which is good.
• The human 'production' of natural gas, however, especially fracking, releases a lot of 'waste' methane into the atmosphere.
• Methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO2.
• Most methane in the US comes from natural gas and coal extraction, transport, and processing. Most is not from agriculture as is commonly expressed.
• Fracking, an industry growing too fast for regulatory agencies to catch up, is a dangerous, polluting process. Water is a much more important resource than fuel, and fracking threatens our water supply. 

Nuclear Power:

• Nuclear power is potentially a sustainable solution to our climate change problem.  
• Nuclear power plants emit no CO2 directly, but mining, shipping, and processing uranium emits some. 
• Nuclear waste remains dangerous to most life for a duration from a few days to a few million years after its creation.
• Nuclear power is very tempting as an interim solution, and I'd be willing to support this option as an absolute last resort. It's dirty, dangerous, and non-renewable, and it's not guaranteed to take us into the 22nd century due to limited uranium supply. 

Tar Sands:

• Extremely destructive to local and distant ecosystems. 
• This extraction method is so energy intensive and dirty that the mere desire to extract oil using this method is a red flag that extraction companies are getting desperate. 
• Again, the fuel obtained from this source is so not worth it that we're better off using no fuel at all than this stuff.
• Most tar sands oil, like most of our coal, would be exported to other countries. Destroying our land and many north americans' livelihood solely for financial gain. 

Geo-engineering:

• While many of us really do believe that a technological solution to climate change will be found before things get too bad, this is extremely not likely. 
• Bill Gates and Richard Branson, among others, have been pumping money into this for over a decade, and they've got nothing.
• However, if we don't mitigate climate change soon, the powers that be will talk most of us into believing that geo-engineering solutions are our best hope.
• The most widely supported geo-engineering solution is dimming the sun. Spraying sulfer into the stratosphere to block some of the sun's energy would keep some heat out of the atmosphere. In addition to turning our sky from blue to yellowish, this 'solution' doesn't help the acidification of the oceans due to CO2 absorption, and it will also lead to changing climate and weather patterns. I am truly disturbed and nauseated that there are smart people out there actually promoting this idea. Another short-sighted, short-term 'solution'.

Renewable Energy:

• A conversion to renewable energy sources would not be easy.
• Manufacturing renewable energy systems uses fossil fuel mining, transport, and production techniques.
• It would take A LOT of renewable sources to balance our current energy needs. 
• It has been calculated that the world could run on 100% renewables definitely by 2050 and perhaps as early as 2030 (Stanford study).
• Renewable energy power supplies would have to be distributed and not centralized. This lends itself to local energy self-sufficiency and small scale, local economies. 
• This is the best option for us and the future of the planet. We should all get behind this now, but it needs to be done right, with a commitment to minimal environmental and social impact.

Free Market Capitalism:

• Any system that puts the needs of the 'market' above those of people and other life is wrong.
• Moving to sustainable energy sources is not economical, and it therefore is not going to be supported by the development of so-called market solutions.
• Capitalism, on a local scale, isn't a problem. It's the dissociation of resources, producers, employers, and consumers at the heart of the global market dissonance.
• Capitalism, as we do it, has a serious flaw - it neglects to consider natural systems and life itself as capital to be valued as an end in itself. Instead, these are viewed as sources of income, cogs in the machines that churn out money, means to an end. 
• The idea that we need energy solutions healthy for human and non-human life that satisfy the needs of the market too is a faulty premise; the needs of human and non-human life should be valued above all. 
• An economic system that continues to jeopardize the well-being of human and non-human life is not an ethical or viable economic system.
• (Don't assume that criticism of capitalism means I promote socialism.)

Values:

• Our best hope is for us all to stop justifying polluting ourselves, our environment, and other life. Nothing is worth the damage we're doing.
• We need to develop courage to pull our heads out of the sand and face the facts.