Utah is a red state fast going green.

David Long is a good example. A Brigham Young University professor of electrical engineering and self-described “middle-of-the-road conservative,” he embraced environmental protection when his work with radar imaging brought global warming into sharp focus. Now his family recycles and, when he isn’t riding his bicycle to work, he drives one of the family’s two hybrid cars.

“It’s not a political issue when the earth is warming,” he said.

“When God gave us the world to live on, he didn’t give it to us to ravish it and rape it.”

Utah might be as red as they get in its politics – but, like the rest of America, it is growing greener – fast. See Tribune’s special report on how green behaviors and attitudes are being integrated into everyday life of the Beehive State.

“There is no room now to argue that the earth is warming. Sadly policy makers have shied away from such findings and that is why there is no concensus on where to stabilise global temperatures or how,” he said. Even a minimal temperature change of 1C would put food security and water availability at risk.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5882341.ece

It fantastic to have your comments views insights and passion for the Environment, thanks for sharing them with us. Were a really pretty friendly group at MM and wouldn’t want to steer any one away from our site or make them afraid to leave a comment you included. As a general rule we try to keep Christ centred values and principles in how we converse , basically live the golden rule. Its been a site where we all have different views politically and spiritually and appreciate each others comments and ideas respectfully.

I hope you don’t mind me sharing some of your comments that I thought were a little harsh

1. What a load of crap.
2. Mormons in America aren’t “green”? Who cares.
3. Environmentalism is nothing more than cover for arrogant bossy tyrants
4. And how exactly do large houses hurt the environment anyways?
5. Please, man made global warming is an invention of a bunch of “scientists” who have prostituted their integrity for money.
6. But environmentalists are liars.
7. And I didn’t just swallow the conservative lines either.
8. And every single time- EVERY SINGLE TIME- the environmentalist was lying.
9. And so I get really pissed off at people like you who posture about how moral superior you are because you believe these liars and we don’t.
10. Which are all basically saying that we are the arrogant immoral people and we should let you “greens” rule over us.
11. My response includes a large amount of profanity.
12. You people forget that modern environmentalism started out here- and therefor we’ve gotten pretty good at figuring out environmentalists are BS-ing us, and when they’re not.
13. I love Mother Earth, but environmentalists are a bunch of liars.

Additionally, there are many many talks in GC, both recent and years past encouraging environmentalism (without calling it that or making it political). There is a real theme of frugality, utilitarianism, and self-reliance. These are the underlying themes of environmentalism that are clearly preached repeatedly.

Mormons in America aren’t “green”?

Who cares. Environmentalism is nothing more than cover for arrogant bossy tyrants who insist that they have the right to run other people’s lives and control other people’s property for some “greater good”.

And by the way, I think we do lots of “green” things in America that never get appreciated by others. Most Mormon homes that I know constantly reuse things. We use our plastic grocery sacks and garbage bags. We reuse empty margarine containers and jelly jars as tupperware. We sew quilts and make rags out of old worn out clothing instead of throwing them away. We grow our own food in a garden.

So we aren’t flashy, and don’t buy tiny cars that crumble in the slightest crash, well so what.

And so what if we have big houses. We have big families, and even after the kids have grown up and moved out the parents often serve as a gathering place for the holidays, not to mention when the cousins come over too, and we like being altogether instead of spread out.

And how exactly do large houses hurt the environment anyways? We build them out of wood which grows back. Lumber companies are required to replant what they harvest.

Carbon emissions? Please, man made global warming is an invention of a bunch of “scientists” who have prostituted their integrity for money. I’ve looked at their statistics and it’s nothing but crap. They have faulty incomplete models that make no attempt to correct for auto-correlation. But the media loves a good crisis story and the politicians love it, it allows them to posture as world saving do-gooders while bossing other people around.

Don’t get me wrong- I love the environment, and support it’s protection. But environmentalists are liars. I know because I have repeatedly, repeatedly, caught them lying- and then they excuse themselves that they were just “exaggerating” in order to get attention for an important cause.

And I didn’t just swallow the conservative lines either. When the environmentalist said one thing and the conservative said they were lying in such and such a way- I went and looked up the original sources. And every single time- EVERY SINGLE TIME- the environmentalist was lying.

And so I get really pissed off at people like you who posture about how moral superior you are because you believe these liars and we don’t. And you try to suggest that we do so not because we don’t believe the lies, no, it’s because:

# Many believe the second coming will be coming soon (God the creator of this earth will be able to clean up the planet in a second, our efforts are pointless.
# Gas guzzling cars – God created fossil fuels for our use. He created this earth and when we run out God will inspire man to come up with an alternative fuel – he always provides for us.
# God made fossil fuel for our use and we are fortunate to be Americans and live in a place where fuel is cheap and are blessed to be here.
# We have proven ourselves in the pre-existence and in this life and we deserve the just rewards for being faithful members
# An attitude of the more physical stuff I have cars, houses, boats shows were being blessed abundantly

Which are all basically saying that we are the arrogant immoral people and we should let you “greens” rule over us.

My response includes a large amount of profanity.

You want to know why Mormons in Utah don’t listen to environmentalism? It’s cause we are American Westerners who have been dealing with environmentalists far longer than the rest of the world- you people forget that modern environmentalism started out here- and therefor we’ve gotten pretty good at figuring out environmentalists are BS-ing us, and when they’re not.

It seems there is always a con to every pro for environment savings measures. Diesel engines are more expensive to run/dirtier, but could reduce depletion of fossil fuels with highly fuel efficient models. A friend of mine just raised the concern about the effects of used hybrid engine batteries damaging the environment, which I hadn’t thought about and don’t know how significant it is. Recycling materials uses water, which is scarce in some areas. Using soy instead of dairy may decrease the CO2 emission associated with cows, but if there are no cows to graze, then pastures will need to be cut with equipment that uses fossil fuels or they will lose their viability. The push for soybeans also incites slash and burn of the amazon by soy farmers looking to increase their profit and yield.

On Feb. 2, 2007, the United Nations scientific panel studying climate change declared that the evidence of a warming trend is “unequivocal,” and that human activity has “very likely” been the driving force in that change over the last 50 years. The last report by the group, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in 2001, had found that humanity had “likely” played a role.

The addition of that single word “very” did more than reflect mounting scientific evidence that the release of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from smokestacks, tailpipes and burning forests has played a central role in raising the average surface temperature of the earth by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900.

How Meat Contributes to Global Warming
Producing beef for the table has a surprising environmental cost: it releases prodigious amounts of heat-trapping greenhouse gases

By Nathan Fiala

* Pound for pound, beef production generates greenhouse gases that contribute more than 13 times as much to global warming as do the gases emitted from producing chicken. For potatoes, the multiplier is 57.
* Beef consumption is rising rapidly, both as population increases and as people eat more meat.
* Producing the annual beef diet of the average American emits as much greenhouse gas as a car driven more than 1,800 miles.

“Or do you mean that what you posted wasn’t your misperceptions, IOW, that some people believe those things but you don’t?”

Exactly. I tried to make that clear in the original comment, but it obviously didn’t translate from my brain to my fingers. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone talk about how climate claims are stupid because, “nobody knows what’s happening long-term. They used to say temps were cooling, then they said temps were rising, now they say temps are changing. DUH! That’s what temps do.”

I have heard that basic theme over and over and over again from those who discount “environmentalism” over years – with the last part (“climate change”) obviously coming to the front over the last couple of years, and the global cooling being mentioned for about 15 years before that. The focus on “cooling” and “warming” was a horrible way to frame the overall issue, as it diluted the overall focus on environmental impact in general.

I’m confused. I don’t think I understand the difference between a perceptual problem and a misperception. Or do you mean that what you posted wasn’t your misperceptions, IOW, that some people believe those things but you don’t?

Anyway, I don’t remember the “global cooling” scare being that big of a deal actually. There were a couple of scientists who pushed it, and some media reports about it, sure, but that’s about it. There weren’t any mass protests or political movements or global treaties as far as I can recall. Just a couple of documentaries and a few (admittedly “big” in some cases) articles. It appears to me that some people today (probably deliberately) exaggerate the theory’s importance in an attempt to discredit the genuine consensus on global warming (with some success, apparently).

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php

I didn’t post any misperception. What I described is exactly the perceptual PROBLEM many people have – as your comment showed.

If we all quit eating meat — or at least used it “sparingly” as we’re supposed to, that would put a huge dent in our CO2 output as Mormons. When I quit eating meat and told some friends at church about it, I was surprised by their reaction. A couple of them were very critical, which I found interesting and yet disappointing. I thought that fellow Mormons would, of all people, find the vegetarian lifestyle admirable and something to aspire to. And yet some seem downright hostile to the idea of cutting out meat. I remember a Sunday School teacher even going so far as to call vegetarianism a “sin” because “God gave us animals and we’re supposed to use them.” Another Mormon recently told me, “Livestock were put on this earth to be eaten.”

The way I look at it, don’t we believe that when the Lord comes again, we’ll all be vegetarians? Even the lion will lay next to the lamb and eat grass? Is it so bad, then, to get a head start before the Lord comes again and makes you go veg?

Sounds like you have read STATE OF FEAR – CRICHTON – I think Senator Hatch and George W Bush prescribe to it as well.

There is indeed a perceptual problem, as demonstrated by the misperceptions you’ve posted.

The “global cooling” scare was nothing more than a few scientists with an interesting idea. As Hawkgrrl quite correctly pointed out, it was a mass media phenomenon. It was not a widely-held scientific consensus. I fail to understand why past media hysteria should discredit current science. Why, IOW, some media (in the 1970s) and most climate scientists (in the 2000s) should be considered “the same voices” as you put it.

My understanding is that the reason for the change in preferred nomenclature from “global warming” to “climate change” is because “global warming” falsely implies a uniform process, i.e., every place on Earth will get warmer at the same time and at the same speed. Since this is not the case, “climate change” is more accurate. It is also not the case, BTW, that this change in terminology occurred a couple of years ago or was some sort of dishonest reaction to inconvenient data. “Climate change” has been the preferred term among scientists and environmentalists since the early 1990s.

Global temperature in 2007 was cooler than in 1998, but that’s because 1998 was a very hot year and 2007 experienced a temporary cooling trend due to climate variability (El Niño). Climate change models do not imply that each year must be hotter than the last. They do imply that each year should be hotter than previous averages, and this has been the case. Although 2007 was not as hot as 1998, it was a hot year.

As to Mormon environmental messages – what could be a more green message than having a garden and eating your own food you have raised? Composting is also common for those with gardens.

Quote from I Believe, Ensign Magazine, August 1992, Gordon B. Hinckley:

“I speak of that service which is given without expectation of monetary reward. Most of the troubles of the world come because of human greed. What a therapeutic and wonderful thing it is for a man or woman to set aside all consideration of personal gain and reach out with strength and energy and purpose to help the unfortunate, to improve the community, to clean up the environment and beautify our surroundings. How much greater would be the suffering of the homeless and the hungry in our own communities without the service of hundreds of volunteers who give of their time and substance to assist them.”

Quote from A Wonderful Flood of Light, p. 103, Neal A. Maxwell:

“This restored work not only involves the things of eternity but is also drenched in daily significance. True disciples, for instance, would be consistent environmentalists-caring both about maintaining the spiritual health of a marriage and preserving a rain forest; caring about preserving the nurturing capacity of a family as well as providing a healthy supply of air and water; caring for both the prevention and the treatment of the miseries caused by the diseases of transgression.”

There you have it. A future prophet telling us to clean up the environment, and an apostle writing that true disciples would be environmentalists.

Double-paned windows have been the standard in the U.S. for decades (our house was build in the late ’60s and had double-paned windows, which were recently replaced with new and more efficient double-paned windows.) Abundant insulation is also the norm, both in new construction and in home improvement. Even the electric utilities have been pushing the use of CFL bulbs (compact flourescents). Regarding diesels in the U.S.: there are only four makers (with a total of 9 models) that sell diesel-engined passenger cars (I’m not counting full-sized trucks in this) in the U.S.: Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagen, and Jeep. The reason? Most diesel engines are too dirty to pass U.S. vehicle emisions tests! The models that do pass have complicated (and very expensive!) emissions systems. With the high cost of diesel fuel in the U.S. and the $5000 to $12000 added cost of the emissions systems, diesel passenger cars actually tend to be more expensive to operate than similar gasoline-engined models.