Welcome to a discussion about the upcoming 5th Revolution in the US, which I’ve titled the “Revenge Revolution.” For more about the Revenge Revolution and the author, click “About the Author” tab.  Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether a revolution in the US is possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US Entry #476 was the most recent “sense check.”

BEGIN ENTRY #496: For about the last four (4) years, I have been part of a group of fellow MIT alumni working on practical solutions to climate change.  The criteria for solutions are: (i) technology must be currently available or likely to be commercially available in the next say 10 years, preferably less.  This requirement would eliminate fusion and other technologies with long development times and problematic outcomes; (ii) technology must have a meaningful impact on reducing global warming – e.g., direct carbon capture is a tech at the margin; (iii) likely adoption of the technology must be at a rate to positively reduce global warming. 

Interestingly, assessing and selecting the technologies has been relatively easy.  There is a reasonably long list of technology available today that could help significantly reduce global warming worldwide. 

The most difficult problem is getting people to adopt technology.  Convincing people to even consider adopting is often a problem.  An example is getting people in the US to consider cooking on an electric stove rather than using natural gas.  Why the change?  Natural gas, which is primarily methane, leaks at all stages from the wellhead to transmission in the pipeline to even a bit at the stove. 

“Unburned” methane is 50+ times worse for global warming than methane when burned, or CO₂.  Switching to all-electric burners on a stove would have a major positive impact on reducing global warming.  If you want an immediate and intense reaction, try discussing the idea of switching with a committed cook.  

There are numerous other examples of difficulty getting people to consider even a slight change in behavior.  People seem to understand global warming in the abstract but do not relate to daily behavior. 

One of the early projects of the MIT group was drafting a “roadmap” of practical solutions.  Because of my background, I was the lead author for transitioning transportation out of fossil fuels.  During the drafting I tried to think of every option possible to help accelerate the adoption of zero-carbon transportation. 

At the end of the 18 months, I came up with a single answer.  Since publishing the roadmap, I’ve continued to rack my brain about how to get people to understand the need to take meaningful action to address causes of global warming. 

At the Federal/state level, the only viable option appears to be widespread mandates.  Such actions are not unprecedented — rationing during WWII, e.g.   However, before mandates can be implemented there needs to be an event that solidifies support for potential action.  

Without such an event — Pearl Harbor, e.g., in WWII — the likelihood of persuading legislators, Federal or state, seems remote.  Stating the obvious, the House of Representatives, in fact the entire Republican Party, seems to be unable to commit to governing.  I thought that might change after Trump was defeated in 2020 but the lack of will to govern seems to have intensified.  

In addition, a number of companies seem to be quietly backing away from their public commitments to address global warming.  Among the largest companies are ExxonMobil, Chevron, Delta Airlines and everyone’s least favorite utility, Duke Energy.  

All that said, I am reminded of a quote from Evert Dircksen, former senator from Illinois and Majority Leader. “The mind is no match for the heart in persuasion.”  

With Dirksen in mind, who like LBJ was great at persuading people, maybe efforts to persuade the public to adopt changes that reduce global warming should first focus on the “heart,” then focus on the “science.”

People under age 30 will be most affected by climate change.  Maybe those involved with efforts to reduce global warming need to encourage tactics used in other eras to persuade the public and politicians.  While each situation is a bit different, tugging on the heart strings has been effective over time.  An oft-cited example is the series of protests outside the White House during the Vietnam War, “Hey, hey LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?”  

In a way, the stimulus to protest for action on climate change and against war in Vietnam is the same — early death.  Ironically, “early death” was an underlying theme of the support for WWII.  Not an early death on the battlefield but an early death of freedom in the US if Germany or Japan won the war.  While the theme of “early death” from no action on climate change might be and a bit controversial, it just might wake up the public and especially the under-30 group to start demanding change.

What does denying climate change have to do with the 5th US Revolution?  Look back in history and view actions of people who were faced with a grim situation over which they had little or no control.  Many of these groups rebelled against the ruling class, even though those in charge had more resources and many of those rebelling faced certain death. 

In other entries, I’ve referenced lyrics from the song made famous by Janis Joplin, “Me and Bobby McGee.”  The lyrics that seem appropriate here are, “Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose…” 

If the Federal government does not take meaningful action to address causes of global warming, both in the US and worldwide, then those who will be the most negatively affected by climate change could begin to revolt and implement actions on their own.  The under-30 group has nothing to lose by rebelling and overthrowing the Federal government.  Doing nothing means a shortened lifespan.  Rebelling means a chance of surviving.  What would you do? More thoughts on this in future entries.  END ENTRY #496

Other Topics. Interested in more info about climate change, what’s required to electrify a fleet of cars/trucks, what it was like to work day-to-day with Lee Iacocca and an array of other topics? Visit another page of this website, https://usrevolution5.com/jrd-thought-comments/