Environmental Legislation vs. Personal Conservation

Today is Blog Action Day! Over fifteen thousand bloggers from around the world, with different voices, backgrounds and areas of interest, are joining together to blog about the environment.

I can’t think of a better issue to ask thousands of writers to address. Environmental destruction from causes such as a global warming is a threat to all people. It is not just a conservative issue, or a liberal issue, or a religious issue, or a parents’ issue, or a children’s issue, or an impoverished people’s issue, or an American issue, even as it is all those things and more.

Global warming is the most urgent threat to planet earth and to human life. The damage that will be caused by global warming if it is not reversed is to significant that many of us can barely stand to read the news about it.

Personal conservation is one productive way that we can respond to the global warming crisis. We can take such measures as reducing our fuel consumption, reducing our consumption of beef and pork, and changing to energy efficient lightbulbs. Each of us should consider where in our lives we can “cut back” on our personal consumption, taking into account factors such as the region of the country that we live in, our economic resources, our cultural context, etc.

I have implemented conservation measures in my own life, and I have led workshops for others in personal energy conservation. This gives me a sense of being closer to “walking the walk.” The daily measures are also a kind of spiritual practice that reminds me of the planet’s needs.

But there is a limit to the effectiveness of personal conservation. Elizabeth’s Little Blog had a great post, over a year ago now, sounding the alarm that we need a “radical change” to prevent environmental destruction.

The second way to reduce the impact of global warming is through environmental protection laws. This is critical. I have come to believe that global warming will not be reduced through personal conservation alone. It is harmful to ourselves and our planet to pretend otherwise.

Especially in religious settings, folks may be hesitant to discuss environmental legislation in depth, for fear of sounding “partisan.” But without information about what legislation is pending on the state and national level, people cannot advocate effectively for the change that is needed.

I believe the threat of global is so urgent and severe that it is nearly sinful NOT to raise awareness of the legislation that can reduce its impact.

The main global warming reduction legislation pending in the U.S. Congress now are the “energy bills.” One version has passed the House and another version has passed the Senate; they must be merged into a single bill, passed through the House and Senate again, and then sent to the White House for the president’s signature before they can become law.

The Climate Progress blog is a good resource for timely information about environmental legislation. Their post last Thursday, “The state of play of the Energy Bill” provides excerpts from the E&E News report on the energy bills:

The Senate measure would raise auto efficiency standards and greatly expand the national renewable transportation fuels mandate. The House-passed bill would create a national renewable electricity standard and advance a package of renewable energy and efficiency tax incentives funded through higher taxes on oil companies.

…The Senate-passed bill would boost corporate average fuel economy standards to 35 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks by 2020.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is taking the lead in pushing for this legislation. I am writing her a letter today to say thank-you and keep it up!