Laudato Si’. Introductory Hors D'oeuvres

Picture credit: iustitiaetpax.va

The following was posted yesterday on the blog of the Newmarket Society of St Vincent de Paul.

Five years ago, on 25 May 2015, Pope Francis promulgated his famous encyclical letter, Laudato Si' - On Care for Our Common Home. Papal encyclicals are always named from the opening words in Latin, but this one is in Italian - from the opening words of the famous Canticle of the Sun and Moon by St. Francis of Assisi: "Praised be You my Lord with all Your creatures, especially Brother Sun, Who is the day through whom You give us light." Indeed, the encyclical devotes an entire section to this great saint of the poor who had such love both for the poor and for the goodness and beauty of the natural world around him.
(You can download the encyclical in PDF format here.)

The encyclical can appear quite daunting if for nothing other than its length - one hundred and eighty pages. The language, however, is not as heavily stilted or technically theological as the encyclicals of most of Pope Francis' predecessors. In great part, this is because the Pope is addressing this encyclical not just to Catholics, not even just to Christians, but to "the whole human family".

Question: How do you enjoy a huge dinner?
Answer: Savour one mouthful at a time.
The same principle applies to papal encyclicals.

For seven days starting Monday, 11 May, I will post a Laudato Si’ introductory Hors D'oeuvres for Vincentians, and others concerned with the plight of the poor and vulnerable, that just looks at a tiny part of the encyclical - Chapter 1, Section V - Global inequality. It is broken down into digestible extracts, one per day. For each day you are invited, firstly, to read what the pope wrote. Then read it again, finding and reflecting on a word, phrase or sentence that stands out the most to you. Thirdly, prayerfully and with a listening heart, tell the Lord how you feel about what you read and why: Frustration? Encouragement? Helplessness? Resolve? Whatever. Allow time for silence and the Holy Spirit. Then finish with one of the two prayers that the Pope gives us right at the end of his letter to the whole world. (I recommend the one for Christians if you are a Christian.) Actually, we will start right there, with the prayers, on Day 1 and Day 2.

You will be able to find the posts on our FaceBook page https://www.facebook.com/ssvp.sjcses/
and on our Vincentian Blog https://sjcses.blogspot.com/
If you register your email address at the bottom of the blog page then you can receive new blog posts in your email the following morning. If you have difficulty registering your email, contact Terry directly and I will try to assist you.

Don't forget, Monday, 11 May.

A View on the Climate Crisis

A friend who knows I'm a climate change nut challenged me, asking my thoughts on a rather scathing newspaper op-ed. My response follows.

We have a climate crisis of global warming that requires urgent attention. I say this with confidence because it is not merely my opinion, or anyone else's opinion, but a fact established with evidence from science and attested to by climate scientists worldwide. This according to NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the USA.  (See https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)

The economic impact of global warming is pretty-well incalculable, estimated in terms of a percentage of every country's GDP - certainly, therefore, in the billions of dollars - if not trillions. See https://www.britannica.com/science/global-warming/Global-warming-and-public-policy

Along with the global warming issue we have serious problems with air pollution that are having devastating effects upon vulnerable people whose lungs and breathing ability are already compromised, as well as people with cardio-vascular illnesses. We can only guess how much impact this is also having on childhood development, or life expectancy in the elderly. See, for instance: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/air-quality/health-effects-indoor-air-pollution.html

This too will have massive economic consequences. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), healthcare costs related to air pollution are expected to increase 8-fold in the fifty years from 2010 to 2060. See https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/the-economic-consequences-of-outdoor-air-pollution/executive-summary_9789264257474-3-en#page2

Thirdly, there is the contribution that environmental issues make to the "refugee crisis" that we hear so much about and feel the need to 'control' without thinking about controlling the causes of environmental degradation which is very much a root cause of migration for environmental refugees. According to Pope Francis: “Climate change is also contributing to the heart-rending refugee crisis. The world’s poor, though least responsible for climate change, are most vulnerable and already suffering its impact.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/pope-francis-climate-change-environment-refugee-crisis-destroy-sin-a7221476.html

What to do?

First of all, what NOT to do! I honestly do not think it is at all helpful when people look at their neighbours in countries that are oceans and continents away, or just a province or two away, or "on the reserve", and point out that, since THEY are contributing so significantly to the problem, what is the point of politicians trying to force ME to make sacrifices - as with a carbon 'tax'? As I see it, that line of reasoning lets us all off the hook of sacrifice. Not only can we just leave the problem, then, for our grandchildren to solve but we can feel free to continue exacerbating the problem by pushing out limitless pollutants seeing as our contribution is so small - relatively speaking.

The other thing NOT to do is give greater credibility to politicians and economists and their populist journalist followers (left, right and centre) than the credibility we afford climate scientists. It is inexcusable that government bureaucrats implement environmental policy changes without consulting scientists. More inexcusable is when governments then gag their own publicly funded scientists and not allow them to publish their peer-reviewed research.

I use gasoline to drive my car. I would love to be driven in a clean-energy taxi. I use liquid natural gas to warm my house. (As I write, the temperature today has warmed up to a high of +2C - the highest it has been in the last 5 days.) I would love to warm my house with power from the sun or wind, but our local government cancelled, at great expense in penalties, the renewable energy program initiated by the previous  local government. My point is that there are some initiatives that cannot be undertaken by individuals without incurring prohibitive personal expense. Such initiatives require changes to infrastructure that can only be achieved by local and national governments. But the will has to be there. As I see it, partisan political loyalties, fueled by the things NOT to do that I describe above, are the major obstacles to people even seeing the need, let alone developing the socio-political will.

Let's get off the darkness band-wagon and switch on an LED candle, and try to influence the people around us to do the same. "Lord, make me an instrument of your peace... "

Is climate change the most important life issue today?

"Until you start focusing on what needs to be done rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope. We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis." - Greta Thunberg

At election time, which issues should we focus on when marking an 'X' on our ballot? Eons ago Bill Clinton's presidential campaign famously said, "It's about the economy, Stupid." In 2016 Carl Anderson, Supreme Knight of the Catholic Knights of Columbus, said that abortion is not “just another political issue" but "is in reality a legal regime that has resulted in more than 40 million deaths. What political issue could possibly outweigh this human devastation?" As a result a large number of Roman Catholics voted for Donald Trump who had declared himself against abortion. Again, there are many people today who have voiced the opinion that immigration and migrants make up the issue of the day.

Daniel P. Horan, a Franciscan friar and assistant professor of systematic theology and spirituality at Catholic Theological Union in Chicago writes:

What good is it to prevent abortions or save the elderly from euthanasia or ensure the elimination of capital punishment if there is no air to breathe, water to drink, land to farm, plants or animals to eat, or habitats free from flooding, hurricanes, wildfires, tornados, earthquakes or some of the other devastating weather phenomena? I'm not suggesting that we ignore those discrete life issues; they demand prayer and action, too. However, there is a uniquely dire valence to what is happening to our planet and a very limited window to do anything to save the very possibility of life on this planet at all.

I highly recommend that you read the full piece here: Climate change is the most important life issue today

Call for an independent, public review of the costs of nuclear stations in Ontario

No nuclear project has delivered on time or on budget in Ontario’s history. Ontario still does not have a plan for storing radioactive nuclear waste, nor does it have an public emergency plan to deal with a Fukushima-scale nuclear accident. And taxpayers are on the hook for the costs of a nuclear disaster because no private company will fully insure high risk nuclear stations.

Darlington on Lake Ontario

Ontario’s residential electricity rates rose by 3.4% on November 1, 2015. According to an Ontario Energy Board report, 45% of the rise in Ontario’s electricity generation costs is due to subsidies for Ontario’s aging nuclear reactors. The 2012 restart of the Bruce A Units 1 and 2 reactors came in $2 billion over budget and over 2 years behind schedule. Rebuilding the Bruce B Nuclear Station will cost Ontario’s consumers between $60 and $111 billion over 30 years. Rebuilding the Darlington Nuclear Station will cost Ontarians between $8 and $32 billion.

Studies show that Ontario could reduce its debt by $12.9 billion, save ratepayers over $750 million per year ($15 billion over 20 years) and secure a higher return on equity for publicly owned Ontario Power Generation if Ontario replaces high cost electricity from Darlington with lower cost water power from Quebec.

Yet, Ontario has never conducted an independent public review of nuclear costs or alternatives.

It’s irresponsible for the Liberals to spend billions on rebuilding nuclear plants without conducting an independent public review of costs and alternatives.

I therefore join the call on the Government of Ontario to conduct an independent public review of the costs of and alternatives to rebuilding the Bruce B Nuclear Station and the Darlington Nuclear Station.

SIGN THE PETITION

(Picture credit http://www.powermag.com/opg-proposes-new-nuclear-construction-at-darlington/)