Response to Ben's "Kyoto II"

Posting from my 2-room apt in DC! Whoo! : ) Lobbying is fun so far.

Ben, I really agree with you on most of your post. But I criticize you here:

-Don't just express a problem, express a solution too!
-I think your last three sentences are overgeneralizations. I'll address them each in one sentence. ONE: The American Revolution, implying all that came after it, was forced on the country by a minority (less than 30% of the pop.) who thought that all the others would appreciate it. TWO: Treaties are like laws: They require both enforcement And public support to work, but they are powerful when they do. THREE: See ONE, and remember that governments are composed of individuals, and especially unique individuals, IN government, are often the ones who make the biggest differences.

You're right, convincing people is more important. And ad campaigns aren't enough alone. If you tell people: "Either buy a green product or suffer a less beautiful world," that doesn't seem to have much of an effect. Activists have been trying to get Americans to be active about stopping genocide, with not much practical effect. It's one of the worst crimes you can commit. Why no action? Some of the biggest reasons include:
1- People don't care about what they can't see (don't often see rwanda/sudan on news, pop culture/local stuff takes priority)
2- People don't care about what doesn't affect them directly (Its somebody elses tragedy)

Back to environmentalism, Not everybody really cares about the beauty of nature(especially nature in some foreign country) enough to donate money. Off the top of my head one might guess that less than 5% do (more at colby b/c colby is known for its enviro studies progrums)

This is why you have to convince individuals that this will affect them directly.
Before Katrina, SUVs and other wasteful cars were used heavily, and criticized/satirized heavily as well. The criticism didn't affect the rising sales, tho. It was the Katrina oil scare that got people really into alt. energy. One can see hybrid cars around these days, where previously they were just amusements in "Tech" sections of news/magazines. People realize that oil prices can rise suddenly, that affects ppl directly and is right in their face. So there was at least a small rise in hybrid sales.

Thus, I argue that environmental product ads should be aimed at what really affects people every day in their own lives, like gas prices.


------------------------
4 Tangential Points:
I have seen people argue back and forth on whether oil is really running out or not. At least, it seems we will have to drill in more and mroe unsavoury places if we do drill.

I would argue that the 'war on terror' has made Americans less friendly to Saudia Arabia, probably one of Bush-tachi 's original goals (transfer oil source from SA to Iraq), but has also increased resentment slightly towards oil (not one of bush's goals).

Hopefully all these coal mine disasters will tell people that coal is not cool. Personally I support nuclear power: It's [EDIT: vastly safer than coal power], it produces less nuclear waste than coal power, and it is very efficient and has little negative effect on the environment.

Of course, solar power / wind power / hydrogen power are more ideal, as they pose no long term (long term meaning less than 6 billion years) problems, but they have not yet been researched/developed to an efficient/profitable level yet.