The lost history of what Americans knew about climate change in the 1960s
The lost history of what Americans knew about climate change in the 1960s
grist.org
The lost history of what Americans knew about climate change in the 1960s
16 comments
-
-
This is a pretty interesting article on the Right's recent strategy to undercut environmental protection, by claims that the original congressional mandate was focused on the immediate health risks and not long term concerns for the climate.
Recent papers highlighting original studies are helping the current generation of lawyers locate the less immediate/imminent/was-all-over-the-news reasons behind the adoption of the EPA. There was quite a bit of focus on climate damage, but what sold all the public arguments was smog and one of the Great lakes bursting into flames.
All the more reason that originalism is dumb, but I guess it's the way the court wants to be right now and you've got to work with what you've got.
It's easy to forget how much good the EPA has done.
-
Fuck Reagan and conservatives. The 1980 elections should have been overturned and Carter should have been kept as President.
16 comments
I guess "lost history" means things Gen Z didn't grow up with? I'm sure the vast majority of Americans have been well aware of global warming and the ozone for the past 30+ years. Oh... yeah. I just looked at the author's photo and she appears to be in her mid-early twenties.
What actually happened was the shift of manufacturing towards countries with worse environmental standards than the US put into place in the 1970s. The standards implemented by the Clean Air Act simply made it more expensive for producers to do things in this country than in others. And as technology has progressed, and the human population exploded, our need to mine and transport and process raw and refined materials has increased - despite the efforts of "first world" countries to reduce their carbon foot print.
Nothing was forgotten. Congress and corporations just kicked the can into someone else's yard.
This is a good article but the premise is misleading.
The title says "1960s", that's closer to 60 years than to 30.
Thank you for the math lesson. Let me introduce you to context.
This sentence is saying that the vast majority of Americans have been well aware of global warming and the ozone for at least the past thirty years. It's suggested here that for at least thirty years, if not longer - if not for sixty years, most Americans have been well aware of climate change. I have the confidence to say that being that I'm in my mid-forties and have been well aware of climate change since I was in elementary school. Being that the generations born before and after me make up the vast majority of the population, I feel that it's safe to say that for at least thirty years, the vast majority of Americans have been well aware of climate change. Meanwhile, a portion of the country has been aware even longer (nearly sixty years) and perhaps an even smaller portion of the country has been area for less than thirty years.
I mean there was environmentalism in the 60's, 70's, 80's but you had to be somewhat plugged in to be aware of global warming at the start of the 90's although you would have to be somewhat clueless to not know by the end of the 90's. One thing about global warming that is scary is if we 100% reversed it I don't think folks understand all the other environmental damage is still heading us off the cliff.
That’s the longest sentence I have ever encountered.
I was taught all about global warming in the 80s and 90s in elementary and middle school. It was all over cartoons and magazine and newspapers. Definitely not forgotten. It was nearly top of mind.