I don’t pretend to fully understand the term “Evangelical,” and I doubt I fit whatever definition you may have of it. However, if it’s a euphemism for “Christian,” then apparently I’m on to something- I might be holding the keys to this whole environmental debacle called “climate change.” You might be a “key holder” too and if you are, then let us not waste this opportunity.
Here’s an opinion piece I wrote for the Pacific Coast Business Times:
Prop 23, commonly referred to as the “Dirty Energy Bill” by opponents, is bad for California and bad for business. California is known as the national leader for environmental quality and health standards, as well as innovative energy solutions. However, if passed, the impact of Prop 23 would result in disincentives for innovation in order to maintain a costly status quo. The November ballot initiative would suspend AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, until the unemployment rate drops to 5.5% for 4 consecutive quarters. What the supporters of Prop 23 aren’t telling voters is that the unemployment rate has only done that three times since 1984. We all know that times are tough, but this is not the solution. We’ve already invested too much into our future to continue to stay in the past.
AB 32 was created through exhaustive and informed committee work by the state legislature through more than a year of hearings, and eventually signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2006. The law requires that greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. The bill is progressive when compared to the rest of the United States, but it’s still behind the curve of the rest of the industrial world. The bill establishes a timetable to bring California into near compliance with the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol (UN protocol aimed at stabilizing global greenhouse gas emissions), which was signed by nearly all-first world (NOT including the U.S.), and even third-world, countries. AB 32 requires cleaner fuels, more efficient technology, a pay-to-pollute cap and trade system, as well as provisions that decrease greenhouse gas emissions, conserve fossil fuel, and foster green business. To think that the hard work behind AB 32 could be unraveled through the state of California initiative process is unfathomable.
The rationale for suspending implementation of AB 32 by Prop 23 supporters is that the state’s economy is too fragile to sustain the cost associated with compliance and that this would sacrifice jobs in an already depressed job market. However, not many organizations or businesses agree. In actuality, many business groups, large firms and trade associations are opposing Prop 23. Notably, these even include refiners such a Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and BP- possibly because they’ve already invested in cleaner fuel technology, and/or because they have transnational markets and expect to encounter similar regulations from the European Union. Also among those in opposition are environmental groups, health advocacy groups (e.g. the American Lung Association), local Chambers of Commerce throughout the state, a network of big names in innovative businesses ”from Apple to Yahoo,” the League of Women Voters, TechNet, AARP, and a multitude of green industry associations. Governor Schwarzenegger strongly opposes Prop 23, and with unusual unanimity, both gubernatorial candidates – Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman – do as well (The governor of California has the power to suspend provisions of AB 32 if he or she deems necessary).
Who then is for the measure? Prop 23 is largely funded (5.5 million) by three refineries – Valero Energy Corp, Tesoro Corp. and Koch Industries. These out-of-state corporations hope to avoid the expensive conversion required to meet California standards. Their real concern is their own bottom line not California jobs. In a misuse of our state’s initiative process, these outside interests aim to tie the hands of the legislature, governor, and Californians by nullifying the complex, lengthy process already undertaken to create AB 32.
Some might say that retooling to meet new requirements will not be cheap and some businesses may choose to migrate from California to a state with less healthful, and thus more harmful, standards. However the reality is that many large firms have already begun the investment. Waste Management, the trash giant, for example, planned a new methane gas collection system and began switching to alternative-fuel garbage trucks, costing about $85,000 per truck. It is unfair and unethical to penalize early adopters and then in turn create a financial advantage to the skeptics and those companies that dragged their feet.
With AB32, California is positioned to be a leader in an emerging global market for green technology. Already 500,000 green jobs exist here, and between 2005 and 2009, the field attracted $9 billion in venture capitalist funding – approximately 60% of the entire North American investment in green technologies. Green industry, supported by both private and public investment and underpinned by a technologically savvy workforce, has a powerful trajectory for future growth in high-wage high-value jobs. Its provisions should take effect as scheduled, modified only by the subsequent action of the governor or legislature as needed.
Prop 23 is an unnecessary and growth deterring measure. Only out-of-state special interests would be served by its passage, and California (And arguably the United States) would lag behind global competition in emerging clean-tech/green industries. The next global industrial revolution will be green and the State’s budding green economy is well positioned to benefit from the coming boom as long as Prop 23 is rejected.
Dr. Matthew Sleeth is succeeding where many have failed, and as a result, has become one of the most important voices in today’s environmental movement. I know that’s a pretty bold statement. Especially since there are hundreds of innovative environmental leaders around the world who are making a positive impact. However, Sleeth is going where few environmentalist are willing to go – the Christian Church.
Engaging the Christian Church with the message of climate change and environmental sustainability has been, to put it nicely, difficult. Western Christianity has only increased its political bias and scientific phobia over the last several decades for matters related to science, sustainable business, and stewardship. The Christian Church once birthed numerous forerunners in many areas of scientific discovery, observation, and theory (Newton, Galileo, Heisenberg), but has increasingly become a contributing force in the polarization of science and faith.
J. Matthew Sleeth, MD
Enter Dr. Matthew Sleeth. As a medical doctor and missions architect, Sleeth has treated thousands of people all over the world through the healing practice of modern medicine. He has seen, first hand, the correlation between environment and human health. Not only in foreign countries like China, which has seen a 31% increase in breast cancer rates over its last decade of industrialization, but also in his own community and hospital. It was while at work that Dr. Sleeth first became painfully aware of this correlation. In a single week’s time he admitted three women with breast cancer only to watch all three pass away. That same week he stopped dedicating his life to merely treating people with physical ailments, and instead pursue the root cause behind the great human health issues of our day. Sleeth put it this way, “I felt like I was straightening deck chairs on the Titanic, saving one patient at a time, while the whole ship (Earth) was going down.”
So what did he do? First, he put his money where his mouth is. Sleeth gave up his large “Chief of Medical Staff/Director of ER” bank roll, cushy lifestyle, and New England home for a more simple existence. He did what Colin and Michelle Beavan did as an experiment – reducing trash, electricity, fossil fuel – and made it a permanent way of life. The Sleeth family reduced their fossil fuel consumption by two thirds and their electricity use by nine tenths. No small feat. They have also been consistently reducing their consumption and waste disposal numbers. Last I heard, they were producing around four pounds of waste per week, while the average American household creates 40 pounds of waste per week. Once his lifestyle caught up with his values, he began writing and speaking a gospel that many Christians overlook – that God is “green” and has always been in the business of stewardship and sustainability.
Many Christians balk at that last statement, and I would assume that it’s primarily due to the political rhetoric that has been ingrained with much of Western Christian theology. If you actually engage and listen to what Dr. Sleeth preaches, then you’ll soon find yourself nodding to his reasoning and compassion. For example, where many Christians read “love your neighbor as you love yourself,” and agree it means being kind and compassionate toward all persons, Sleeth expands that “golden rule” into the realm of conservation and environmentalism. He believes that being a good neighbor and loving others entails protecting resources and stewarding what we’ve been given. The logic is quite simple. When we do large or even small things, like solar panels or recycling, we are protecting resources and creating less pollution. This, in turn, creates a healthier planet and people. When we steward resources and protect the gift that is planet Earth, we are essentially saying I care about my quality of life, as well as my neighbors (foreign and domestic) and the future generation’s to come. In his book “Serve God, Save the Planet” Sleeth says, “Being pro-stewardship is not a case of valuing forests more than people; rather, it means valuing human possessions less, and God’s world more. Surely we must value the loan of God’s earth at least as much as we value the loan of an automobile, for God’s earth is only on loan to each generation.” He goes on to say that “Environmental concerns are intimately tied to issues of poverty, health, and compassion.” The point he’s trying to make is that “it’s” all connected.
What is “it?” “It” is people, planet, and our relationship with God. If you don’t value people, then you’ll soon find yourself in disagreement with God. God values, and loves us. All of us. When we lose that perspective, we loose sight of who God is and who we were made to be. Also, if you don’t value the planet, then you don’t value people. Everyone is counting on the planet for sustenance and shelter. That’s why God gave it to us. By not valuing the planet, we devalue the gift, as well as the gift giver. We also devalue all those “neighbors” that are counting on the planet’s provision. Being a “good neighbor” requires us to steward all that we’ve been given, not just part of it. Try as we might to compartmentalized our lives, the truth is it’s all connected.
If you would like to find out more about what Dr. Sleeth is doing, then check out his website below:
http://www.matthewsleethmd.com
The United States is one of the greatest countries to live in. I really believe that. I know it’s not perfect, but it offers people an amazing amount of rights and securities that are not otherwise afforded in many places throughout the world (My recent article “Fair Trader” goes into more detail regarding these rights). We have the Bill of Rights and the Constitution as a moral compass for Human Rights development in our country, and even if you don’t agree with the development that occurs (or lack thereof), you can speak out in protest or even build a case in a court of law. That’s not bad… but there is better.
I recently ran across the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights and was stunned. The amount of detail it provides in comparison to any piece of legislation we have on the issue is amazing. Check it out: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
I know it’s a bit long, but just try reading a couple articles and see how it compares to your own thinking. Do you agree with their statements? Do you automatically default into “what it would cost” with regard to money? Do any statements make you uncomfortable? If so, why? What do you think the world would look like if these were actual rights for all people?
It’s a great document. Now, if only the UN had the authority to uphold it.
The U.S. continues to buzz over Obama’s proposed health care plan. It dominates the news headlines and will continue to do so for many more weeks to come. Depending on the source, you’ll find some eloquent, and some not so eloquent, discussion on why Americans should agree or disagree with the proposal, and although opinions change from article to article and source to source, reactions seem fairly consistent regardless of what side of the political spectrum you fall on – rumors persist, misunderstandings abound, anger grows, and fear spills over the hearts of the public.
There is no doubt that health care is a sensitive subject. I mean, any topic that brings out gun toting protesters and grocery store “soapboxes” (That’s when people setup informational booths outside local supermarkets) is a serious one in my book, or at least one that should be taken as such. It was just the other night that I was getting off a boat from backpacking Santa Cruz Island when I entered a grocery store and was confronted with a large sign displaying the words “Not over our Dead Bodies.” The individual displaying the banner was building opposition for the President’s proposal, but the sign acted more as a sharp jolt back into our controversial and complicated world for me.
After a couple days of being disconnected from both the media and society, I had forgotten all about the controversy that loomed. It was quite nice not having a cell phone, internet, depressing statistics, terrible headlines, or heated debate to deal with. Nature had “chilled me out” with her panoramic views, calming breeze, and peaceful landscapes, so coming home to the heated health care battle was like a cold shower on a cold day.
Now don’t get me wrong. I understand why there is controversy and debate. I get why a well-managedand and dependable health care system is extremely important for us. However, for me, it’s much more than a program provided by a public or private agency. I believe it’s first and foremost about lifestyle, which is entirely regulated by us as individuals. What do I mean? Well, lets take a step back from the political sound bites for a moment and think about what we are currently doing to maintain a healthy life. For instance, are we eating right? Exercising? Engaging in positive and meaningful relationships? Learning? Growing (Relationaly and Spiritually)?
One of my favorite things about the natural environment is the health benefit
it provides. It’s a great place to exercise whether I’m hiking, surfing or going on a walk. It’s also the perfect venue for clearing my head and/or hashing things out. Nature surrounds my daily distractions (i.e. iPhone, Computer, TV) with her cloak of dirt, sand and trees to the point where I can actually think straight. Some of my most enjoyable moments in life are simply walking the beach’s promenade with my wife. I get to enjoy the ocean, uninterrupted quality time with a loved one, meaningful conversation, and some exercise all in a single moment. It’s one of the most important components to my personal health care plan.
If you haven’t already, then I suggest creating your own reformed personal health care plan. Try a simple walk in a park, on the beach, or forest trail. Grab a friend or loved one to provide some company. The point is to get away from what ever distracts you, get into nature, and connect with yourself and/or someone else. You’ll be amazed at how easy and fun it is. Plus, it might even make you a nicer person… who knew?
