Now for some sensible talk | The Australian Janet Albrechtsen Blog
Now for some sensible talk | The Australian Janet Albrechtsen Blog:
Yes Janet, maybe history can teach us.
For starters, I have no problem with Rock Stars (and Al Gore et al) flying around the globe to spread the message. It's a standard line the deniers: "if they are anti Co2, why do they fly?". It's so tired and lame that I guess I can only address it by saying this:
Its the same as those who sent troops to Iraq to fight for peace. See, you create more of the problem (war/Co2) to prevent/reduce the problem (war/Co2).
The difference is that you can't really fight for peace in a country like Iraq. The more you fight, the more you encourage fringe thinkers into becoming outright fighters against you.
In contrast, people can get on board with reducing their carbon foot print. They don't have to kill anyone to do it. They can save money into the bargain. win/win.
Still, as a national columnist it's difficult to give any real thinking to this. You just have to job out something controversial and topical every three or so days, so skipping on the thinking part is de rigeur.
And before I get shouted down for being a motoring journalist talking about carbon footprints etc, I'd like to point out the following:
"PHEW, Live Earth is over. The seven concerts on seven continents featuring a bunch of jet fuel-addicted rock stars summed up the problem with much of the talk about climate change. Hypocrisy aside, the climate change rockers and other zealots would have us believe there is no problem more uniquely modern than climate change. When it comes to mapping out solutions to this most 21st century of problems, history can teach us nothing. We are on our own. Right? Well, actually, no. Wrong. Dead wrong."
Yes Janet, maybe history can teach us.
For starters, I have no problem with Rock Stars (and Al Gore et al) flying around the globe to spread the message. It's a standard line the deniers: "if they are anti Co2, why do they fly?". It's so tired and lame that I guess I can only address it by saying this:
Its the same as those who sent troops to Iraq to fight for peace. See, you create more of the problem (war/Co2) to prevent/reduce the problem (war/Co2).
The difference is that you can't really fight for peace in a country like Iraq. The more you fight, the more you encourage fringe thinkers into becoming outright fighters against you.
In contrast, people can get on board with reducing their carbon foot print. They don't have to kill anyone to do it. They can save money into the bargain. win/win.
Still, as a national columnist it's difficult to give any real thinking to this. You just have to job out something controversial and topical every three or so days, so skipping on the thinking part is de rigeur.
And before I get shouted down for being a motoring journalist talking about carbon footprints etc, I'd like to point out the following:
- Despite all my talking/writing/blogging about cars, I don't actually own one.
- I catch public transport a lot- I have a 10 trip ticket in my wallet at all times.
- When I do need to make a vehicular trip, I ride my low carbon output motorcycle, or ride my bicycle or, heaven forbid, I walk.
- I am about to start offsetting my car tests.
- I have been pushing via my on air appearances hybrid cars (special on the 18th July, already did a feature on the Volt electric car in December of 2006, and called for F1 to be a hybrid category in the coming years)
Labels: in the garage, motoring, politics
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home