SAYATA

While much of the media paints Copenhagen as a total failure, in truth it was a success. The United States, China, and India prevented the EU from using the conference to put their laws in place to dictate to the world and to go back to dominating the world as they did under colonialism.

Cuba and Venezuela, who in no way abide with current international law and governance, oddly, were the first to proclaim the conference a failure. They were really pissed that they weren't allowed to dictate to the United States while they, themselves do not recognize the world has any right to dictate to them.

So how was Copenhagen a success? It created voluntary guides and pledges for nations to work toward but without any nation illegally giving away national sovereignty. It didn't end with a bunch of hyperbole from Obama, as wrote by Al Gore, that is not yet truly backed by hard science. Although Obama did not question the science, the unspoken words is that we are not going to destroy our economy but rather we are going to create more time to do things in better balance with known science.

Obama seems to have already backed away from trying to get the Cap & Trade foolishness through the Senate. Hopefully I am not wrong about that. Instead he is saying that things can be done through the EPA with current law. At first I was kind of resentful of things coming out of the EPA, and fearful that the EPA will try to overstep itself, which is a danger. But more likely, the EPA will behave in a more measured and sane manner and limit what they attempt to do in that they know Congress can abolish them in the long term and the Courts can limit and rule against them in the short term. It is in their interest not to fuck up with extremist positions.

Regardless of law, it is in the interest of the world to change transportation models to evolve back toward trains and boats and creating more pedestrian friendly cities. Local governments have got to be made to change zoning so that more people will begin living within walking distance to jobs and transportation centers.

CO2 emissions aside, people have got to stop building asphalt deserts. Green space does NOT mean manicured lawns. "Underground" cities, when feasible have got to become the future of city design so that governments begin to create "artificial real estate" that reduces sprawl. A program should begin in America to "roof" as much of America's roads beneath green space as possible. As someone who lives on a poorly maintained dirt road I know that is not likely to happen; it would be difficult to find the will or the resources to do it, but true environmentalist would be talking about it as a goal.

True environmentalism is not about some insane fear of global warming. It is about actually loving nature and wanting to preserve it to the degree that is economically possible and socially desirable.