Marchers in S.F. push for end to fossil fuel use

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

(09-24) 20:53 PDT San Francisco -- With shouts demanding an end to fossil fuels, hundreds of people marched, biked and scooted down Market Street on Saturday as part of a global Moving Planet day.

Some were dressed as polar bears and fish, while others carried signs calling for better public transit, more solar and wind energy, and cleaner air. Many participants took the opportunity to blast plans for a pipeline that would carry crude oil from the tar sands of western Canada into the United States. But everyone was there to express concern at the growing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

San Leandro teacher Maureen Forney was dressed as a red-legged frog, a species once ubiquitous in the Bay Area but now threatened. And San Francisco resident Jennifer Harris donned a polar bear hat to march with her 2-year-old daughter, Harper.

Having a young child makes the issue that much more urgent, she said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/24/BA221L92LL.DTL

---

Unfortunately the most popular comments were personal attacks on Harris and a take on Michele Bachmann saying that carbon dioxide is natural: "Plants need CO2 to survive and thrive." One could imagine that the Koch Brothers were paying people to post on comment sections (and vote on comments if website has option). This beyondchron.org article "Internet “Comment” Sections Poison Public Debate" is a good takedown of the SFGate comment sections whenever they swing to the uneducated side on issues.

[GreenStormCloud]

1. Lets all wish for unicorns and fairies too.

They are making a impossible demand which will only get them laughed at. Much of modern civilization requires fossil fuel. You can't make large amounts of steel with alternate energy sources. They are demanding that humanity return to being hunter gathers, with an almost total population reduction.

By association they cause realistic demands to be laughed at too.

[patrick t. cakes]

2. fart

[cprise]

4. No, they're not demanding that.

Do they embarrass you?

[GreenStormCloud]

14. From the OP:

"With shouts demanding an end to fossil fuels,..."

If they are demanding something different then the OP should say so.

[defendandprotect]

24. We've known for more than 40 years that we have to stop burning fossil fuels ....

Only oil industry's buying of government -- See Koch Bros. for one --

has prevented that --

In fact, 1960 Platform which JFK ran on called for NATIONALIZING the oil industry!!

[EFerrari]

5. People will laugh and then what? We'll melt?

Btw, San Francisco exports comedy to Los Angeles, New York and Chicago. :)

[GreenStormCloud]

15. After the laughter dies, they will be ignored. N/T

[EFerrari]

17. It's a really bad idea to base your life on the reactions of others. n/t

[defendandprotect]

25. You couldn't be more wrong -- no one is laughing at Global Warming -- the lie is over -- !!

[backtomn]

12. I agree completely......and I have worked in the biofuels industry

It is billed as alternative....but NOT YET. Wind and Solar are still at 10x the cost of oil, natural gas, or coal. That is what needs to change.....more research, more data, more success. It will be the future, but we can't throw out fossil fuels yet....unless we are crazy.

[defendandprotect]

26. More nonsense ... As ENRON stole from the public in 4 months sufficient wind power was being built

for 176,000 homes -- !!

Everyone of our cars could be converted to electric -- solar battery --

All we need to do is wrest control of government from the oil and coal industries --

See Al Gore/Rolling Stone on that --

[NickB79]

19. Mother Nature doesn't give a damn if it's an impossible demand

We can either find ways to cut our CO2 emissions by 80% or more ourselves, or nature will simply kill most of us off as climate change destroys much of our ability to feed our population.

It's really quite simple. Fossil fuel consumption will be a small fraction of what it is today by the end of this century no matter what we wish. Even if we ignore the effects of climate change, we've already hit Peak Oil, and coal and natural gas production is poised to peak within a couple of decades at best. How we handle the decline is what matters at this point.

[defendandprotect]

23. ROFL when we become Fukushima -- !! Now's the time to shut down nuclear reactors ....

and time to move off the grid and to local/green energy --

Private interests who control our natural resources could care less if they kill

us all --

Global Warming is the most serious threat we've ever faced --

Glacier melting is causing increased earthquakes and more severe earthquakes --

Shutting down our nuclear reactors -- as officials in Fukushima wanted to do 5-6

years ago with their nuclear reactors -- could make the difference between

"a whimper or a bang" -- !!

[caseymoz]

3. Bachmann giving a science lesson?

Of course, anything natural in unnatural amounts is harmful. Have the CO2 level in Bachmann's bloodstream get too high and let's see if she could even say the word "natural." Hell, have her "natural" oxygen level and let's see if she could say it.

[defendandprotect]

6. We've know since the 1950's that we have GW and can no longer burn fossil fuels... but oil industry

didn't like that news and has defied it for more than 50 years --

spending BILLIONS on propagandizing the nation with lies and disinformation --

[backtomn]

13. That is complete CRAP.

Time and Newsweek printed cover articles on "Global COOLING" in the late 70's. That was where the science was at the time. I think that a bit more humility, particularly by people that don't know any of this, would be refreshing.

The fact is.....we DON'T currently have a replacement for oil.....even if we wish it is so. That is where are efforts need to be serious. Action....Facts....not rhetoric.

[NickB79]

20. That any scientific organizations predicted global cooling in the 1970's is a myth

One you are propagating, either intentionally or through ignorance:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm

"But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.

The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.

"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales.""


Now who's the one talking crap?

[defendandprotect]

22. ExxonMobil's billions bought a lot of scientists -- NY Times Op-Ed Page, as well ....

from which they catapulted their disinformation and lies over 40 plus years !!


And ExxonMobil's NY Times allies had an interesting out to protect Exxon from

rebuttal or criticism -- they prohibited the Op-Ed articles by ExxonMobil from

being addressed in Letters to the Editor ... because they were technically "AD's" -- !!

[defendandprotect]

21. Nonsense -- Check the records ... 1957 public was informed of Global Warming ... and obviously

scientists knew long before that --

In fact, they were aware of the damage being done to nature -- especially trees --

from the late 1880's and the Industrial Revolution --

Second greatest period of harm was the build up for WWII -- 1940's -- and that's when

the glacier melting began --

And baloney as well on no replacement for oil --

We have solar and wind -- solar batties ---

We need to shut down the nuclear reactors -- could make the difference between

"a whimper or a bang" -- !!


You might also check the Royal Academy of Science and their call out of ExxonMobil

and the billions they spent over 50 years of lying to the public re Global Warming!


:nuke:

[IamK]

7. then they all got in their cars and drove home.... n/t

[azul]

8. Probably not all, it is SF with excellent public transportation and many bikes.

But the point I think they are making is about choice. If the only available food you could buy was poisoned, would you chow down without protest, try to produce healthy food, or what?

The energy market has been manipulated for too long in favor of fossil fuels and people are sick and tired of it and want better choices.

[GreenStormCloud]

16. Those bikes were made of metal and rubber and other materials.

To have large quantities of steel requires coal smelters. You can't do it with electricity. Rubber for the tires has to be imported on steel ships, powered by oil. Wind power for modern ships has been experimented with and has failed. The harsh reality is that you can't have a modern civilization without fossil fuels at this time.

[defendandprotect]

27. Well let's just junk them, then? Today they SAVE energy which pollutes ....

And we probably have enough bikes to provide one for every human being on

the planet -

Let's also be clear that Global Warming is the most serious issue we face --

and even if it is too late, it is not to late to limit the damage that the

nuclear reactors -- and nuclear weapons -- could additionally create --

"a whimper or a bang" -- ???

[Yo_Mama]

18. Best reply ever!! n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. I love it when city folks demonstrate their ignorance

Even here I have seen LA residents say that the Owens Valley, Kern County etc should just give up their water and take Los Angeles trash with a smile.

Cities need to be self supporting in a way that does not trash the environment of their neighbors.

[raouldukelives]

10. The important thing to remember

is that it would be hard. Therefore we can't do it. Who really cares if a child of tomorrow can breathe? We need our luxury cars and plane trips to Las Vegas for the weekend. Trees are overrated.

[salib]

11. Why all the ridicule ?

It is a GOAL people!

have we become so jaded by disappointment and betrayal that we cannot tolerate some setting their sites on something big?

Remember, all the great progressive changes addressed the impossible and ridiculed.

[EFerrari]

28. It's San Francisco Envy. It's like penis envy but not reparable by surgery. n/t