Comments on: Antarctica’s Pine Island glacier and its implications for business strategy

By: sidd

sidd — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:41:26 +0000

Thanx for a thought provoking article. I disagree with you about the perspicacity of governments. They are bought and paid for by oligopolies, and will only take action for fear of populist anger, which is, in turn, controlled by media owned by oligopolies. Therefore, governmental action will occur only after enough of the apex level predators realize a) the reality of climate change cannot be bargained away and b) they have a plan to profit from it

ergo, Waxman-Markey

By: Antarctica’s Pine Island glacier and its implications for business strategy and the Great Disruption | Climate Vine

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:56:08 +0000

[...] (see here and NPR interview here). I asked him for a post, and he has offered up this recent post from his website (– a good follow up to Large Antarctic glacier thinning 4 times faster than it was 10 years [...]

By: Celebrity Paycut - Encouraging celebrities all over the world to save us from global warming by taking a paycut.

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:33:39 +0000

[...] (see here and NPR interview here). I asked him for a post, and he has offered up this recent post from his website (– a good follow up to Large Antarctic glacier thinning 4 [...]

By: Jean Brittingham

Jean Brittingham — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:13:28 +0000

Paul, good thoughts on strategy but this kind of thinking calls for a response rather than a reaction. While i see movement towards this in the US, there are still very large structures and institutions in place designed to limit response and keep government caught up in reaction.

Not in the case of Pine Island, but in other Arctic melting, oil conglomerates are pushing their respective governments to lay claim to the oil that is under the ice sheet and now more accessible to extraction. If we expect our governments to respond to something more than the true impending physical disasters we (as citizens) must call for the transparency in government that would include the dollars spent by business to stop unfavorable (but pro-active) government policy. And we must convince media that this is a story that must get front and center for public action.

Strategic government policy driving strategic business investment (in clean solutions) is what we need–it will take an active army of citizens to neutralize the billions of dollars being spent to maintain the status quo.

By: Jo McRae

Jo McRae — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:50:06 +0000

Poll results suggest more than 50% of the population are already expecting a better response to climate change than we are currently getting. How high does the percentage have to be, to get action? What has to happen in Australia to make it a crisis that will make politicians act? Why didn’t the Victorian bushfires provide that? Was it because the government was able to shelve the issue for months while waiting for the result of the inquiry? Hundreds dead, and they put decisions on hold in the hope that the issue will be defused by time.

This government does believe climate change is real, but they are still happy to sit back and relax, rather than take decisive action. Evidently the flak from industry is still the more significant factor in their reasoning – after all, the CEOs have direct contact with the politicians but the public can’t make a difference till the elections – and the alternative is no better.