However, I don't agree with the idea that legislation is not part of the answer. When I worked in the environmental area, specifically in hazardous waste management and clean-up of contaminated sites, it was clear that federal legislation in both areas was essential in bringing about responsible disposal of hazardous waste and clean-up of sites where hazardous waste had been dumped in the past. It's hard to imagine how innovation alone could address a Love Canal-type site or a cluster of childhood leukemia in an area where dumping of hazardous waste decades before had contaminated water supply wells in Woburn, Massachusetts.

In addition, legislation often motivates behavior change by imposing hefty financial penalties. The federal Superfund Act requires owners of contaminated property to clean it up. If they fail to do so, the governemtn can perform the clean-up and go after the property owner for treble damages. That approach tends to get a lot of compliance which benefits all of us.

Whether global warming is true or not, how we live is still unsustainable. There are still more advantages to going green than to not. Lets just be careful to not become a force for politics rather than a force for good. Put thought and reason behind your decisions and examine evidence presented by your opponents.

Don't panic – but please don't minimize the facts. If you have any links to credible articles that site real sources and show that Greenland melting is not accelerating or that the oceans are cooling and not warming and that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas after all and that we are not pumping giga-tons of CO2 and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, please post it here so I can feel skeptical about climate change again.

I think this is HUGE. We spend so much time arguing over this policy and that policy and will it do more harm than good and does climate change even matter … and we get nowhere. You're exactly right, Sky – the changes we can and should make (being efficient, cutting waste, developing cleaner technologies) don't need climate change as a justification. They're beneficial in and of themselves.

But fear-based rhetoric on both sides does nothing to move us forward. In that, I completely agree with you, Stormbringer.

@Illham – Nicely put. It really is a lifestyle change – meaning something you have to commit to over a long period of time. Part of that is changing your mindset.

So it is obvious that changes must be made. I agree with earlier comments that the people have the power and small changes can make a difference. Many of us have already taken the steps we can. But others will not without more incentive. A cultural shift is a great thing, and certainly needed, but EXTREMELY slow without major crises.

The financial incentive is already there for many measures, such as weatherization, because it pays for itself in a short time. Yet even with that incentive many still are unwilling or unable to take those small steps. For that reason we do need legislation to level the playing field, show true costs of the various options, and provide added incentives. I know getting good legislation is extremely challenging, but it can dramatically speed up the necessary changes.

And many of the changes being suggested to slow down climate change (waste reduction, efficient resource use, cleaner energy) have many positives and just make good sense, even if climate change isn't happening. If it is, I just don't want my kids or grandkids to witness the results of dramatic climate change (collapse of natural and cultural systems, mass human migration and starvation) and have them know we had very clear signals and selfishly did not respond.