No Time For Cynicism on Energy

One of the reasons why I wrote yesterday's post on the energy bill deal was in anticipation of articles like today's in the New York Times.

...despite the tougher 35 m.p.g. standard, a growing population of drivers would push up total fuel use, as well as greenhouse gas emissions — but not as rapidly as would occur without the legislation.

True enough, but what should that mean for us?

Does it mean that the energy bill is meaningless and not worth our time?

Absolutely not.

As Grist's David Roberts notes, the increase in fuel-efficiency still politically important as a momentum-building triumph over corporate forces of inacation. And there are several other provisions -- like the increase in renewable energy for electricity, and green-collar job training -- that offer more substantive progress towards a vibrant, clean energy economy.

But the NYT pieces does help put a fine point on how much is left to do. In terms of the climate crisis, the end goal is to seriously slash greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050 -- not merely slow their growth.

As I said yesterday, we don't have the time to do it piece by piece, fight by fight. But we do have to start somewhere.

This bill -- still threatened by conservative filibuster and presidential veto -- starts to turn the energy policy ship around, away from the fossil fuel icebergs, towards the open sea of renewable energy.

We could move it even farther with a strong bill to cap greenhouse gas emissions. (The key Senate environmental committee is working on a bill this week.)

The fact that the energy bill leaves much to do is not cause for cynicism and apathy. It's cause for momentum and motivation.