WHY HANSEN, WHY NOW?

Would James Hansen’s speech to the House last week have inspired national headlines (and a wave of blogs) if it hadn’t coincided with the twentieth anniversary of his first address to Congress? Probably not. If it weren’t for its dramatic timing, the maverick scientist’s return to Washington would have made barely a bleep on the national radar.

In the twenty years since his groundbreaking predictions met with almost total skepticism, Hansen has become known and respected for his work on climate change—but his symbolically charged House appearance became a magnet for media coverage. The press loves the dramatic hook of an anniversary, especially when it has apocalyptic imagery and the urgency of a ticking bomb.

That Hansen’s recent address occurred in an election year makes it all the more newsworthy. With the price of gas rising to stratospheric heights, and a general consensus about the need for energy conservation, the public is more than ever tuned into the environmental agendas of their local and national politicians. So when an eminent scientist like Hansen warns an assembly of politicians that we are on the brink of a “global cataclysm,” it makes for great copy.

And Hansen was more than forthright on environmental politics. Arguing for immediate and bold energy initiatives, he declared to the House that:

The next president and Congress must define a course next year in which the United States exerts leadership commensurate with our responsibility for the present dangerous situation…. I argue that a path yielding energy independence and a healthier environment is, barely, still possible. It requires a transformative change of direction in Washington in the next year.

With his impeccable science, fire and brimstone message and symbolic timing, it’s no wonder that Hansen’s House speech has captured the media’s attention and imagination.