September 10, 2006

Fuel On, Baby!

By Sherry Harbert

The impact of global warming has been illustrated with diminishing glaciers, increasing strengths of hurricanes, an enlarging ozone and dying trees and animals. While profound, the most insightful illustration doesn’t come from scientific data. It comes from a movie.

Al Gore chose a concise, yet soft phrase to title his film, “An Inconvenient Truth.” While it explains much of the premise of the documentary, it does little to evoke heated debate outside of its targeted audience. And heated debate, as you will see, is what is most needed in addressing global warming. But that isn’t the movie that truly looked at the impact humans have on the planet. It came from the first in a series of Star Trek movies. When the higher intellect realized that carbon units (humans aboard the Starship Enterprise) were infesting the ship, the higher intellect attempted to eradicate the carbon units.

Fortunately for humans on earth, carbon removable seems much simply because it means only changing our attitudes and actions, not our existence.

Though scientists, advocates and concerned individuals have mounted their own dialogue to confront a fossil fuel frothing world, much of their warnings, evidence and pleadings have had little impact on the general public. Like carbon, attitudes stay around for a long time. Even when Time Magazine issued its dire warning months ago, the concept of global warming quickly evaporated into the public’s distaste for anything deeper than the thoughts of the latest “hot” celebrity in a nightclub.

But global warming warners need not be dismayed. Though their efforts to counter some of the effects of global warming may be truly daunting, there is hope on the public relations side. Getting their message into the mainstream will be much easier with a new set of terms ready for use in any situation. And they will fit easily into any conversation.

Welcome to the Global Warming Word Movement’s Glossary of Terms

Just think, next time you’re fuming behind that SUV, you can be “pumping mad.” It alleviates any concern with the FUC…FCK…no, FCC (Federal Communications Commission) to broadcast your message over any public or private airwave. Think of how it could have suited Bono in his expressive excitement over winning an award if only he had such a term. And, unlike the distinction first introduced by the FCC, he could have used it as an adjective or verb!

You see, “pumping” can be inserted in any conversation or situation. Think of the possibilities at the next board meeting or party. You could be “pumping” them full of information or rumors without ever worrying about the global implications. And all the while, you could be saving the planet from antiquated language. It’ll be pumping great!

And why use an unfriendly term like “carbon footprint” when you can use “carbon carnivore.” Use it with biting sarcasm the next time you attempt to explain the impact of energy use. You can truly sink your teeth into the term and still give Vegans a chance to finally have a callous phrase to throw out against the meat-eaters. After all, they have found it nearly impossible to get most people to pronounce their name with a hard “G.”

There has been a lot of press lately over vehicle emissions. A momentous agreement announced Aug. 30 by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to impose strict standards on what vehicles actually emit from burning fuel could have broad implications across the nation. How interesting that the “Term-inator” would actually be at the forefront of the Global Warming Word Movement. But to maintain its effect, there has to be a sense of what those emission controls mean. Of course, greenhouse gases could produce an array of sensory images that would have an immediate repugnant response. Filtering out such images is necessary to convey what is truly important—the weakening of tailpipe tendencies. But since any reduction of emission won’t begin until 2012, there is plenty of time to emit your own slant.

Alternate Fuels or Fueling the Alternatives

Biofuels offer an immediate solution to help lower greenhouse emissions, but they generate little excitement in the mainstream. What is needed is a reality check. Or, maybe a reality show. “American Biofuel” could fuel the next wave in reality TV. You would simply text message your vote for biodiesel as “bioD.” Ethanol would be “eth” and fossil fuel would be “*#^@%*!” Not only is it more difficult to key in, it also substitutes as a new crude word for environmentalists.

Why use a complex term like “sustainability” when “life” gets straight to the point. Or “climate change” when “bad weather” suggests an immediate consequence.

Hydrogen has also been pushed heavily by the Bush Administration as “the” alternative fuel source. Coming from people who made their fortunes on fossil fuels, it may sound like just a bunch of hot air. But, there is hope in the technology that can generate pollution-free electricity. It is a much better alternative than that of nuclear power, which seems to be regaining its power in places like Iran and North Korea. But, it does come with an old warning—its consequence means much more than mere global warming, it means global meltdown, then the cooling off phase with a nuclear winter.

But before building that bunker, there is one phrase that can be used now to encompass the entirety of the global warming movement.

The Ultimate Global Phrase

With the push to inject the new Global Speak into the language, a catch phrase is still needed to capture the movement’s attitude. That’s where “fuel on, baby” comes in. It is more flexible than a flex fuel vehicle and more hip than a hybrid. Plus, it already comes with alternate meanings. Use it as a greeting among friends or co-workers. Or, try shouting it as chant at a concert for one last song after the final set. The upside is that “fueling on” can be used to acknowledge the negative impact of SUVs and other low-mileage vehicles. Use it in a statement like, “They seem to be just fueling along in life” or “They are fueling our futures.”

The only downside to the phrase is no appropriate hand sign is available. Even if one could contort their fingers to form a rough version of an “F” most people would find it too strange to consider its impact. 

Of course it’s still fun to think of humans as carbon units. It eliminates any racial, ethnic or other barrier and points to where much of global warmings’ effects and solutions are to be found.

© 2006, Foreign Interest

Contact the author: sharbert@foreigninterest.com