Like a lot of people, I’ve been reading obsessively through election postmortems, fascinated by the inside stories on the national campaigns. And for some reason, this tidbit at Newsweek on Obama’s debate preparations stuck out at me:
When he was preparing for [the debates] during the Democratic primaries, Obama was recorded saying, “…I often find myself trapped by the questions and thinking to myself, ‘You know, this is a stupid question, but let me … answer it.’ So when Brian Williams is asking me about what’s a personal thing that you’ve done [that’s green], and I say, you know, ‘Well, I planted a bunch of trees.’ And he says, ‘I’m talking about personal.’ What I’m thinking in my head is, ‘Well, the truth is, Brian, we can’t solve global warming because I f—ing changed light bulbs in my house. It’s because of something collective’.”
Amen to that.
Of course, changing light bulbs is a great thing to do at the personal level. By some accounts, lighting accounts for a fifth of all electricity consumption in the US, and the simple step of screwing in a different kind of light bulb can help make a real dent in household consumption.
But to make the profound and fundamental progress we reallyneed, our political discourse has to stop treating energy and climate issues as simply matters of lifestyle choice and personal responsibility. Instead, it has to start treating them as systemic problems with systemic (and largely political) solutions. The boring details of energy efficiency standards, carbon pricing, investments in R&D and renewable power: these are the things that will make or break our energy future. Greening consumer behavior—however laudable—is of secondary importance.
According to this account, Obama clearly gets that—which is a very good thing.
Lightbulb Photo courtesy of Flickr user Not Quite a Photographer under a Creative Commons license.
Barry
I think most people have this dynamic backwards. Of course we won’t solve climate/energy crisis via voluntary actions alone. We have to have national and global laws. But that doesn’t mean that personal efforts are of “secondary importance”. I think personal efforts are of “primary importance” because they are the essential first step. I don’t think you can get politicians, however brave, to push through needed climate/energy laws until there is a big enough grassroots group of people already doing it.Just look at the BC carbon tax. It is tiny compared to what is eventually needed, yet it is under relentless attack by left and right as too great a cost to bear. Ditto for Dion’s “Green Shift”. See UK and coal or airport expansion.So i see the personal as leading the political. The personal efforts will never be sufficient by they are absolutely necessary. The biggest complaint I hear from folks against climate/energy laws is that it will force a lifestyle change on them that the people advocating the laws aren’t willing to take on themselves.Much as i like Obama and dance around just thinking about him as President instead of Bush, i think he is wrong to downplay the importance of his personal commitment to lifestyle changes. One thing we have seen clearly from his election is symbolism matters tremendously. He should be saying that our lifestyles have to change to solve the climate/energy crisis and he isn’t waiting for laws to force it through. He is preparing his family for the change. He is walking the talk and doing what needs to happen before asking others to join him.The message that “what i do isn’t really important” will never sell a potentially painful transition law to anyone. If it is a problem then act like it is in your own life first.
Sloan
It’s about f:ing time. It is a systemic problem with systemic solutions. Dick Cheney was wrong, it’s not a personal matter.
Darcy McGee
Slaon, I got your back man. You’re on Cheney’s list now fo’ sure.