First some good news. Here in the U.S.A., November started with a bang as voters overwhelmingly rejected Donald Trump’s Republican party. Democrats now control a comfortable majority in both houses of congress, and Trump will be the lamest of lame-duck presidents, especially as we all know the reason Republicans lost so badly was Trump himself. Many are celebrating, including myself, and that’s good but we are well to remember that this is just the start; now the tedious and difficult work begins.

Now some bad news. The good people at the Copernicus Climate Service regularly update their global surface temperature record (and make it public through the excellent website Climate Pulse), and this year is on track to exceed 1.5°C above “pre-industrial temperature.” That threshold, which the world’s nations agreed (in the Paris Accord) was to be avoided, is now inevitable. Furthermore, because we’re now in the throes of a very powerful el Niño, everyone expects next year to be even hotter, breaking the record (set in 2024) for “hottest year ever.” Climate change is getting worse and we’re not making progress.

I know some like to rejoice in the rapid expansion of renewable energy, and well they should; it is a necessary prerequisite to stabilizing the climate. But it is not sufficient. The goal of renewables is to replace fossil fuels, which requires more renewables and less fossil fuel use. It’s that second part which is sorely lacking. And because of that, we have failed to stabilize (let alone reduce) the greenhouse-gas load in the air. Instead, CO₂ rises at an ever-faster rate, as do methane and nitrous oxide.

As a necessary strategy for securing a liveable future, at this point in time we need to use less energy. The obvious way to do that, efficiency, is popular everywhere, but the unpopular way, obvious but usually unspoken, is to make some sacrifices. We should especially curtail the AI explosion and its greed for energy; we cannot afford to squander resources on this morbidly obese industry with its paltry return on investment. But in a “free market” economy, especially the unregulated nightmare capitalism that conservatives worship, the AI industry will never limit itself voluntarily. Whether it’s an untapped gold mine or a bubble waiting to burst, it beckons to the greedy nature of billionaires, and conservatives in our government would rather die than put any restraints on them. Or perhaps I should say, they would rather we die than put any restraints on them.

I have come to two conclusions. First, I agree with those who are calling for new leadership in the Democratic party. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have got to go, but I will not villify them, rather I will remind readers that despite their flaws, for years they have been on the front line defending the country against the evil cult leader Trump. Still, I want new leaders with more progressive ideas and a greater awareness of the need to address climate change. A lot of folks want Bernie Sanders to be majority leader in the senate, but I disagree — although I admire his policies and the best leaders are finally catching up with Bernie, he’s too damn old, we need someone younger.

Second, we need to revive the issue of climate change. I know it never died, and advocates have remained steadfast, but the general public has abandoned the issue in favor of more pressing needs: inflation, an endless and stupid war against Iran, the Israeli genocide against Gaza, tariffs which hurt American consumers, the Epstein files, alienating our allies while assisting Putin, and a gestapo called ICE murdering people in the street in broad daylight. Now, if Democrats in congress can act swiftly and forecefully, we get to do something about those issues. I want to make sure that Climate Change makes the list of high priorities.

You can help this blog! Feel free to
donate at my wee dragon