Art Basel, Copenhagen, Nuclear Power and The Miami Herald ... by gimleteye

I'm relieved by the passing of Art Basel in Miami. Don't get me wrong: I hope that the planeloads of art experts, professionals, artists and collectors have made their reservations back for next year. The arrival of so much art from around the world, and the crowds and the energy, brings a measure of reality to shallow claims of culture in Miami, otherwise. But in the experience of so much art reflecting conflict, ambivalence, consumption and dissonance with higher values, I had an queasy feeling as though I was observing like those well-fed citizens of Washington DC who took horse and buggy and picnics in 1861 to watch the unfolding battle of Bull Run; a scene they never imagined would engulf their own lives.

This is much the case with global warming and rubbernecking the melting glaciers and rising tides.

The low-lying streets of Miami Beach regularly flood, now, on the high phase of the moon cycle. Recent tides, Eyeonmiami noted, have been extraordinarily high in some of those same places where fair-go'ers freely enjoyed their entertainments. It is good news, then, that The Miami Herald "joins the historic push by editorial boards" to speak with one voice on the issue of combating climate change. The Herald recognizes that it lacks the resources, the research, and the expertise to write with the energy, consistency, and thoroughness that the topic deserves. Good for the Herald joining the unique campaign by the London Guardian "in an effort to get the world leaders' attention at the conference that begins Monday in Copenhagen."

The Herald also gives space to the leading skeptic commentator: conservative columnist George Will. Will is part of the status quo that is pressing for incremental change at a time when the free markets he espouses have catastrophically imploded. He mistrusts government, although it is not clear who would pick up the pieces after such a grand failure as we have collectively experienced in serial asset bubbles of internet stocks and real estate, if not government.

The question then becomes the ordering of priorities, with respect to combating climate change. Left to the automobile industry, for example, the need to adapt was resisted tooth and nail. Some good it did, them and us. Now we face the crisis of rapidly modifying our energy sources. Who is to say that nuclear power is not a central piece of the puzzle? But the environmental order of priority should be to first solve the regulatory barriers to energy efficiency on a massive scale. That's not the priority of big energy producers like Florida Power and Light that wants to build new nuclear reactors in Turkey Point, surrounded by the lowest lying land in South Florida.

Who will make the choices and order the priorities, when the spectators on the hill are in full retreat while the battle rages on the plains below?