One thing I'm amused (not in a good way) by, is that there's so much FUD and marketing around the use of Coal etc. for energy and alternatives (Nuclear, wind, solar) ... I'm not necessarily knowledge enough to favor some over others. But I always felt, "because pollution," should be enough reason alone to look at alternatives, and considering the impact of building/supplying/disposing of the materials in the alternat…
How should climate change or air pollution or any of it be partisan? When Republican voters are polled, many say they love the environment and the outdoors too. The truth is fossil fuel has bought and sold most R politicians and many D politicians too. Until we get money out of politics or make the energy companies go bankrupt, they will continue to pay politicians to prevent the cleaning of our environment and energ…
The question is 'who should give something up to deal with [X]'. It is likely that the situation will become unresolvably partisan in any democracy.
If the conversation were about clean air and making energy efficient decisions then it would not be a partisan issue. However, I've had conversations with people who seriously proposing 'solutions' like deindustrialising civilisation. I don't want that sort of people to be in charge of anything.
It is a partisan issue because the choices presented are 'take actions that do not impact our standard of living' and 'take actions that reduce our standard of living'.