Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)

Friday, June 22, 2007
The following items are the continuation of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation Newsletter, June 21, 2007:

23. We all use solar energy
by Greg Rummo, New Jersey Sunday Herald, June 3, 2007 (PDF)

. . . Life on this planet as we know it would be impossible without our sun. Earth would be a frozen wasteland with a temperature only slightly above absolute zero. Its oceans and atmosphere would be solid. One day, the sun’s finite reserves of hydrogen will be used up and it will wink out — cosmically speaking. None of us will be around to witness the event. We are and always have been dependent on solar energy. But not just the energy that streams into our atmosphere and falls on our continents and oceans in real time.

This process has been going on for a few years. And over these millennia, the sun’s energy has been captured, utilized for some very complex biochemistry and the end products stored for a rainy day in the earth’s future.

Put in very simple terms: when a photon of sunlight falls on a molecule of chlorophyll in the cell wall of a green plant, biochemistry happens. The earth’s forests, prairies and algae-dotted oceans act like huge sponges soaking up atmospheric carbon dioxide. Inside the plant’s cell walls, the sun’s energy is harnessed to disassemble atmospheric carbon dioxide and combine it with water to produce sugar and molecular oxygen which plants release back into the atmosphere for you and me to breathe.

When you look at a forest, you are really seeing hundreds of years of solar energy, stored in wooden structures. You can cut down a tree and burn it or send it to a mill and cut it up into lumber for the housing industry. A tree is in reality, a sink of solar radiation that can be used either for the production of heat and light by burning (a process chemists call oxidation) or as a building material to insulate man from the elements—to keep him warm in other words.

But the story even gets better if we extrapolate further back in time.

Earth scientists tell us that long ago, the climate on our planet was mostly tropical. This rain forest-like climate covering our planet was very conducive to the growth of green plants. ExtremeScience.com explains that during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods a “profusion of plant and animal life left behind generous organic materials from their decay…(which) built up over millions of years undisturbed. They were eventually covered by younger, overlying sediment and compressed, giving us fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas.”

The reality is this: All of us are using solar energy, not just the techno-geeks with the flat panels on the roofs of their homes. Every time you flip a switch in your home or depress the accelerator in your car, you are using solar energy. Just because you weren’t there to witness the biochemistry and the geology behind its creation doesn’t negate the fact.

Continue reading "Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)"
Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)  at del.icio.us Digg Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.) Bloglines Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.) Technorati Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.) Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)  at Furl.net Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)  at reddit.com Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up (cont.)  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up

Friday, June 22, 2007
The following items appear in the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation Newsletter, June 21, 2007:

1. Southern Baptist resolution says humans not entirely to blame for global warming
Associated Press, June 14, 2007

San Antonio - Southern Baptists approved a resolution on global warming that questions the prevailing scientific belief that humans are largely to blame for the phenomenon and also warns that increased regulation of greenhouse gases will hurt the poor.The global warming debate has split evangelicals, with some not only pressing the issue but arguing humans bear most of the responsibility for the problem because of greenhouse gas emissions. Other evangelicals say talking about the issue at all diminishes their influence over more traditional culture war issues such as abortion, gay marriage and judicial appointments.

The SBC resolution, approved near the end of the denomination’s annual meeting Wednesday, acknowledges a rise in global temperatures. But it rejects government-mandated limits on carbon-dioxide and other emissions as “very dangerous” because they might not make much difference and could lead to “major economic hardships” worldwide.

Originally, the measure also backed more government-funded research into global warming’s causes and alternative energies to oil. But the resolution was amended to drop that language, in part over concerns that it would endorse strong government engagement in the issue.

The two-day annual meeting of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, which boasts 16.3 million members, ended Wednesday night. . . .

The global warming resolution acknowledges humans bear some responsibility for rising temperatures while urging caution, said Barrett Duke, vice president for public policy and research with the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.

“It does not deny there has been a recent warming trend in average global temperatures,” said Duke, who helped write the measure. “What it does do is call for more objective analysis in the data that would explain causes of the warming we’re experiencing.”

The resolution stands in contrast to a statement last year signed by 86 evangelical leaders that said human-induced climate change is real, and that the consequences of warming temperatures will cause millions of people to die, most of them “our poorest global neighbors.”

[Comment: Notice how the media frequently refer to the Evangelical Climate Initiative as signed by 86 evangelical leaders but ignore the facts that its signers lacked relevant expertise and that the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance’s (now Cornwall Alliance’s) “Call to Truth” (PDF) was signed by far more leaders (PDF), including scores with relevant expertise in science and economics? This is how the media spin the news.--ECB]

The SBC statement frames the global warming debate as a moral issue with profound implications for the poor - but does so through a different lens.

“Our concern is for the vulnerable communities as well,” Duke said. “But we think if the data is being misinterpreted, and policies are being implemented to reduce the human contributions, those policies are bound to drive up the costs of goods and services for poor and underdeveloped parts of the world.”

Related item:



2. Southern Baptists doubt human cause, government solution to global warming
by Marv Knox, Associated Baptist Press News, June 15, 2007

SAN ANTONIO (ABP) -- The Southern Baptist Convention rejected scientific claims that humans are to blame for global warming and dismissed the governmental efforts to reverse it. . . .

Messengers did not object to the basic claims contained in the global-warming resolution: that global temperatures have risen for decades as Earth emerges from the Little Ice Age, “scientific evidence does not support computer models of catastrophic human-induced global warming,” and major steps to reduce greenhouse gass would unfairly impact the world’s poorest people. . . .

Read the whole article here.

Related item:

Al Mohler interviews Cornwall Alliance advisory board member Dr. Russell Moore on global warming after Moore testifies to Senate Environment and Public Works committee.

Continue reading "Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up"
Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up  at del.icio.us Digg Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up Bloglines Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up Technorati Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up  at Furl.net Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up  at reddit.com Bookmark Environmental Stewardship News Round-Up  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Immigration and Xenophobia

Friday, June 22, 2007
I’m reading David Schmidtz’s Elements of Justice, which is very ably reviewed (although not by me) in the forthcoming issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality (10.1). I just read a striking passage, which discusses the merits of a principle of property rights that respects first possession rather than equal shares.
An overlooked virtue of first possession: It lets us live together without having to view newcomers as a threat. If we were to regard newcomers as having a claim to an equal share of our holdings, the arrival of newcomers would be inherently threatening. Imagine a town with one hundred people. Each has a one hundred foot wide lot. If someone new shows up, we redraw property lines. Each lot shrinks by one foot, to make room for the new person’s equal share (and so on as more people arrive). Question: How friendly will that town be? Even now, in our world, people who see the world in zero-sum terms tend to despise immigrants. They see immigrants as taking jobs rather than as making products, as bidding up rents rather than as stimulating new construction, and so on. The point is not that xenophobia has moral weight, but that xenophobia is real, a variable we want to minimize if we can. Rules of first possession help. What would not help is telling people that newly arriving immigrants have a right to an equal share (155).

It seems that the latter is exactly what many political liberals in America are doing by guaranteeing various kinds of entitlements to immigrants, whether legal or illegal. In that sense, a statist ideology that emphasizes government provision of various social entitlements seems to promote and foment rather than minimize xenophobia. And so ironically, the liberals who champion a freer and more lenient immigration policy are effectively undermining their own efforts.

This also shows just how dominant a statist (or zero-sum) mentality is in today’s United States when political conservatives are the ones who are most vociferiusly depicting immigrants as economic and social drains rather than positive producers.

The reality is that immigration generally tends to be a net economic benefit. While there are some localized pockets of negative economic effects, the national economic trend is positive. This has been articulated in one of Acton’s policy publications, “The Stranger who Sojourns with You: Toward a Moral Immigration Policy,” and was recently underscored by a White House report.

These realities bear serious reflection. Last Wednesday was World Refugee Day. We should be asking whether our society’s decisions about the government provision of social welfare entitlements has concurrently made our nation more attractive as a destination as well as more unfriendly to newcomers.

Could an elimination or reduction of entitlements make our country even more attractive while at the same time removing some of the economic incentives for xenophobia? Perhaps so.
Bookmark Immigration and Xenophobia  at del.icio.us Digg Immigration and Xenophobia Bloglines Immigration and Xenophobia Technorati Immigration and Xenophobia Bookmark Immigration and Xenophobia  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Immigration and Xenophobia  at Furl.net Bookmark Immigration and Xenophobia  at reddit.com Bookmark Immigration and Xenophobia  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!