In the present model, capitalism and climate change don’t mix. Put simply, the reliance of capitalism on limitless growth and fueling that limitless growth with fossil fuels have combined to put us in the unenviable position now of having to fix a lot of broken things around the world. Put economically, we won’t grow in the next 50 years the way we did in the last 50. Put dramatically, we will not leave the Earth discernibly better for our children than our parents left it for us- if that was ever true.

The reality right now is that everyone- individuals, businesses, and governments from local to federal- is trying to figure out how to balance environmentally responsible living with economic concerns (foreclosure/ unemployment/ no credit). There are sustainability programs at universities around the country, but one that is right in my neighborhood is called the Presidio School of Management. Rather than trying to fit sustainability concepts into the existing “bottom-line” system they are starting from further back and approaching the entire problem from the vantage point of the triple bottom line (people/ planet/ profit). Meaning, something needs to be good for all three in order for it to move forward.

There is a forward-thinking collective of Western U.S. states  called the Western Climate Initiative that has been working together on ways for them to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer decided this week, and declared by executive order, that Arizona will no longer participate.

Er? And why not? Because she will not endorse anything that will raise costs for consumers and businesses and that state officials have concerns that it will slow the state’s economic recovery.

Now, this is pretty run of the mill. Fighting climate change will cost money and may slow what has long been seen as the only factor in measuring economic success: What we need is a new system for measuring economic success. It can’t just be on the profit- there needs to be some kind of tangible reward for taking care of the Earth in business and as a government. The problem there is that our governing bodies are not set up to care for and manage anything but people. We have never done a very good job of taking care of any of our natural resources, let alone the Earth as a whole, unless you mean taking care of it like making quick use of it.

Arizona is bailing on aggressively cutting emissions because it will cost too much and leave them behind other states or economies that don’t cut emissions. This is the same problem that Copenhagen has. Nobody wants to be left behind economically.

There’s Daddy Warbucks:

"Arizona needs a green-and-grow approach rather than a cap-and-trade approach. We can make environmental and economic progress, and we can do it by staying engaged and creating green-job opportunities," said ADEQ Director Benjamin Grumbles.

"It's very important for the state to stay engaged, to be at the table, but it's also important to convey clearly our position on how to make progress. Right now, given the economic downturn, given the complexity of the cap-and-trade scheme being developed, we're not going to be supportive of it."

And the Lorax:

"I think it's embarrassing for the state of Arizona," said Sandy Bahr of the Sierra Club in Phoenix. "It demonstrates a real lack of understanding of how significant of a threat climate change is to the state. We ought to be standing at the front of the line to look at solutions."

California may well be singing the same tune soon.

Photo Credit: lynac (via Flickr under CCL)