Before You Sink It, You Have to Drink It

George Kerr swimming in Burlington Bay, 1975

Today's post might seem a bit more convoluted than usual, but stick with me and let's see if I can make it make sense to you.

I've experienced several "convergences" lately: readings and meetings and thoughts and memories all intersecting, and I'm trying to focus in on that point of intersection ... is there a message waiting there for me?

First, I started reading Joseph Romm's Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga. It's a fascinating look at rhetoric, "the art of influencing both the hearts and the minds of listeners" and "the art of being pithy and profound." And besides being quite a readable book, it's also explaining the mysteries of American politics to me, a Canadian.

I've discovered that without knowing it, I often use rhetorical "figures of speech" in my writing. (Irony is one of them, and isn't it ironic that I use figures of speech in my writing?) 

But rhetoric, which was first honed by the ancient Greeks, and then studied intensively by the likes of Shakespeare and the King James translators of the Bible, was meant for listening audiences; widespread literacy is a fairly recent phenomenon. Indeed, there's this line on the title page of the 1611 edition of the King James Bible: "Appointed to be read in churches.") 

I sense that it's going to be rather fun and intriguing to use rhetoric more consciously and deliberately, and hence more effectively. (And that is another figure: foreshadowing.)

Second, we had a lovely visit with our youngest son yesterday. He's a thinker, that one! He reminded us that the only way enviros are going to win the day is to join in the economic fray. In other words, we haven't beat 'em, so we need to join 'em. 

Money makes the world go around, he reiterated. Young people with mortgages to pay and kids to feed will only pay attention if we can say, "Here's a secure job with good pay in the renewable energy field — and it happens to be much better for the environment." And older people whose investments are propping up the fossil fuel industries will only make the switch when we can say, "Here's a secure investment with good payback in the renewable energy field — and it happens to be much better for the environment." 

Yup, our son says, it's our job to make that transition to clean jobs and investments happen — and then to effectively communicate the opportunity.

Third, I've been horrified by the gigantuan (a mixture of gigantic and gargantuan ... doesn't get any bigger than that) backwards step we're taking with our move into fracking to satisfy our addiction to cheap energy. Punish them, Father, for they know what they do. 

I don't know who these people are (I guess I just don't hang out with frackers), though they're certainly being supported by governments at all levels who are salivatingly rubbing their hands together at the thought of LNG (liquefied natural gas) royalties bringing all sorts of wealth to their jurisdictions. ("Environmental assessment? We don't need no environmental assessment. Besides, didn't we lay those assessor guys off?") 

But I do know this: it is the height of stupidity, brainlessness (fossil fuel emissions are neurotoxins, after all) and immorality to allow fracking when we know its devastating consequences — to human and ecosystem health, to the climate, to the future. 

And finally, my horror at what fracking is doing to fresh water reserves* reminded me of something that happened in my hometown when I was growing up. We lived in Burlington, Ontario, next to the Pittsburgh of Canada: Hamilton, aka Steeltown. 

Burlington Bay was becoming terribly polluted and our provincial environment minister at the time, George Kerr, pledged in 1970 that the bay would be clean enough to swim in within five years. Well, Mr. Kerr took the plunge in 1975, bless him! He later admitted that the water wasn't clean enough to swim in, but he wanted to keep his promise (in a fishy sort of way). 

And so ... I've come up with a way to ensure that frackers don't get away with slow murder. If they want to make money from fracking, if they want to use the fresh water that belongs to all living things, and if they want to steal from the commons for their own profit, they should have to purify their fracking waste water — AND THEN DRINK IT. 

"Take a cup and drink it up" says an old nursery rhyme. Yup, if these folks want to put our health, our agricultural food security, and our future right to fresh water at risk, then they ought to take on some of the risk themselves. No? 

(One commenter on a blog post about the health risks of fracking goes one step further: "It would serve the fracking bastards right to have to live immersed in the crap they expect us to swallow while they reap the profits.")

So here's my dilemma. You've heard the Republican refrain Drill, Baby, Drill. How do we create a slogan just as short and pithy that will help the public "get" the dangers of fracking? I've been working on this for hours, and here's all I've come up with. 

Fracking water

What's that stink?

Fill your cup

And take a drink!

But it should be even shorter and pithier than that. 

Before you sink it,

You have to drink it.

No, that's not specific enough. Help!!! All you wordcrafters and rhetoricians, please sharpen your pencils and give me a hand. This ought to be one no-brainer fight we can win.

*from The Columbus [Ohio] Dispatch: "In the fracking process, millions of gallons of water, with some sand and a secret mix of chemicals mixed in, are blasted into shale formations deep underground to break up the rock and release the oil and gas trapped in it. About 15 to 25 percent of that tainted water comes back up. After oil and gas production begins, another liquid is produced. It is briny and often laced with metals, including radium, that occur naturally deep underground."

Compassionate Climate Messaging

Something a bit different this week. I invite you to visit Joseph Romm's Climate Progress blog, and particularly his 5 January 2011 post, Why science-based (dire) warnings are an essential part of good climate messaging.

I found it fascinating not just to read that my instincts have been right all along (or at least vindicated by the small sampling in question), but to see the breadth of responses in the comments section. (Most are from people who understand the science of climate change, and a few actually speak to doing the right thing for our children and future generations.)

Here's the gist of a Berkeley study, as summarized by Joe Romm:

This study, if it proves anything, finds that the strongest possible s

cience-based messaging is effective. There is a vast sea of thorough scientific literature that makes the case that we risk multiple catastrophes if we don’t get off our current emissions path. Climate hawks should feel confident explaining to the public as clearly as possible the dire consequences if we fail to take action to reduce emissions together with the myriad cost-effective solutions available today that make averting catastrophe so damn cheap compared to the alternative.

[...] If people want to draw conclusions from the small sample of this study, then it would seem to be telling us:

1. The message that does work is we face Hell and High Water if we don’t act but fortunately much of the technology we need to solve this problem already exists.
2. The message that doesn’t work is that the problem is so hopeless science doesn’t even know where to start.

Anyway, if you're not a reader of climate change blogs, Romm's is a good one to start with. He chronicles both the catastrophic impacts we'll get (and that some parts of the world are already experiencing) and the solutions that already exist, just waiting for political will to change.

As I've been trying to get across to friends, family, colleagues, older students, neighbours and strangers for quite a while, making a (now urgent) transition from our fossil fuelled economy to a perpetual energy economy will create a world that is safer, cleaner, healthier, more equitable and more peaceful.

How's that for compassionate messaging? So far, I've never had anyone argue with me!

Now, go enjoy the straight up, unapologetic, wonderfully assertive writings of Joe Romm at Climate Progress.

170 Days - Compassionate Climate Change Solution #6 Get Ready for Alternative Transportation

Are you old enough to remember when flying was still special? I am. And I have a dear elderly friend who is old enough to remember when nobody took airline flights. They stayed home, walked, or took the wagon (or the sleigh in winter).

Getting to zero greenhouse gas emissions means changing how we do things, and one of the most interesting things we're going to change is how we get around. No more "I popped to Los Angeles for the weekend" or "I'm heading home to see my family in Australia for the holiday."

Nope, people are going to start living where they're born. And vacationing close to home. What a concept!

In the meantime, here are ways to get ready for the alternative forms of transportation that we should all be calling for:

• Get fit. Think about transportation for a moment. Have our legs (at least in the developed nations) truly become vestigial, like our appendixes? Have cars replaced our legs, like prosthetics? Let's start using our legs again, by walking and bicycling. If we start young, or get back in shape and then stay in shape, we'll be able to walk to our graves!
• Take a Hundred Mile/Kilometre Vacation. A change is as good as a rest, so you don't have to go far to go on vacation. Become a tourist in your hometown. Swap homes with a friend across town. Stay in a local fancy hotel or theme motel. Want to go further afield? Take a bus or train, a bicycle path or a subway to the end of the line. Get off. Explore.
• Join the Slow Movement. Just slow down. So what if dinner isn't eaten til 8 pm? Don't head out to insert-name-of-fast-food-joint here (on your prosthetic, fossil-fuelled wheels!) because you're tired after work or can't think of what to cook right away. Relax. Take your time. Say no to commitments that will make you rush through dinner. Or start out earlier and walk and talk and nibble.
• Learn to love staying home! Sleep on your balcony or in your guestroom or backyard. Make your home cozy. Get to know your neighbours. Plant a garden and enjoy watching it grow. Literally ... take a cup of tea into the garden every day and see what's changed. It's a delight! Take up a winter hobby that creates something (embroidery, woodworking, gourmet cooking) — spending more time at home does not mean spending more time watching TV. Volunteer at a local food bank, hospital or seniors centre (that you can walk, bicycle or bus to).

The point is that times are changing and we have to get ourselves weaned off fossil-fuel dependent forms of transportation. Why not start now while it's a fun challenge? Oh, you don't think this will be a fun challenge? Well, as my friend, visual essayist Franke James, says, "Do the hardest thing first!" (She got rid of her SUV altogether.)

171 Days - Compassionate Climate Change Solution #5 END DEFORESTATION

I've been forgetting that I started this blog to bring COMPASSION to the dialogue about solutions.

Deforesting the planet has caused innumerable problems: devastation of biodiversity (due to habitat destruction and loss) — think orangutans and weep; erosion and landslides (oftentimes leading to silt-up of streams, which leads to more loss of biodiversity); increased flooding; and the driving of indigenous peoples from their ancestral homelands (which leads to a loss of ancient, Earth-based wisdom and knowledge).

But the really bad news is that deforestation is a major factor driving global climate change. "Scientists say one day's deforestation is equivalent to the carbon footprint of eight million people flying from London to New York."

We know that trees sequester carbon (in the short carbon cycle) — we just don't understand all the connections within natural systems. This March 2009 article (Amazon Rainforest Carbon Sink Threatened By Drought) in ScienceDaily explains a few of those vital connections we sever with the unintended consequences of our wasteful lifestyles.

To learn more about the connection between deforestation of tropical rainforests and global warming, see The Prince's Rainforests Project. As Prince Charles explains, "If we lose the battle against tropical deforestation, we lose the battle against climate change."

What can we do without in order to safeguard our forests? What can we do about:

• clearcutting?
• wads of toilet paper from old growth forests when you're going to wash your hands anyway?
• newspapers, magazines and books you're not going to read?
• tropical wood patio furniture? (what's wrong with local wood, selectively logged?)
• hamburgers from rainforest beef cattle?
• palm oil? (lots of tropical forests are being cleared for palm plantations; palm oil is in many if not most of our packaged foods — let's eat real food and cook from scratch)