Climate Consciousness Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal

By FRANK LINGO

Normally, we can count on the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Guardian for insightful reporting on the environment. Normally, I would trust the Wall Street Journal as far as I could throw a bundle of their papers — maybe 10 feet. After all, when the be-all of your corporate mission is making money, protecting the environment is nowhere near your priority.

So it was a pleasant surprise on Feb. 12 when the bible of bankers gave us a full section entitled “The Future Of Everything.”

OK, it¹s a grandiose header but they seemed to make a good-faith effort. Despite blowing two of the 10 pages on a skiing spread, the WSJ actually addressed pertinent issues including offshore wind turbines, open source technology for monitoring endangered species, and a speculative tease about green hydrogen, which might or might not help the world to lower its carbon output.

It was annoying for the WSJ to do a decent section because it took the wind out of my turbine for hating the rag. Just recently they had run a huge opinion piece entitled “How The Left Hijacked Civil Rights,” written by Black writers. I found it hilarious that the Right¹s patron paper should make a case against the Left for handling civil rights after the Journal supported a white supremacist president the last four years.

Unsurprisingly, the Journal’s outlook in the section was decidedly corporate, especially in a piece called “Nuclear Power, Miniaturized.” The supposition that the smaller nukes are safer calls for a giant leap of faith among anyone who remembers the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. There are several nuclear reactors in the US that are similar to Japan’s Fukushima, which suffered a massive meltdown a decade ago after an earthquake and tsunami.

The article glossed over the downsides of smaller reactors, such as the need for a constant supply of cool water, which is then released back into the environment as hot water — a bad thing for fish and other aquatic life. And let¹s not forget that after 70 years of trying, there has never been a safe disposal method for radioactive waste that lasts thousands of years.

On the happier side, the special section included a piece headlined “From Trash Heap To Tank.” The article explained that the process known as waste gasification can turn non-recyclables into solids for road materials, and gases into biofuels. Some environmental groups criticize the process as an excuse for the oil companies to continue making plastic. However, plastic could still be banned and replaced with biodegradable substitutes, while our mountains of landfills could be ³harvested¹ for solid and biofuel re-purpose.

Another positive piece highlighted how a Philadelphia architecture firm is working to build fuel-efficient and inexpensive apartment houses. Three brothers and a friend started the firm Onion Flats with the vision of designing buildings that add no carbon to the environment. They built their first government-subsidized ultra-energy-efficient townhouse for low-income residents in 2012. Fifteen states are reportedly following Pennsylvania¹s lead in producing efficient low-income housing.

Onion Flat architect Tim McDonald said, “Being green, being sustainable, being carbon-neutral, should just be what it means to be a good architect.”

Yeah! And hey, Wall Street Journal: Being green and sustainable should just be what it means to be a good newspaper.

Frank Lingo, based in Lawrence, Kansas, is a former columnist for the Kansas City Star and author of the novel “Earth Vote”. See his new website Greenbeat.world. Email: lingofrank@gmail.com.

From The Progressive Populist, March 15, 2021

Populist.com