Heat

** Director: **Martin Smith ** Release Year: ** 2008 ** What is the central argument or narrative of the film? **   After more than a century of using fossil fuel base energy forms to expand the world economy the environment is beginning to show signs of changing due to the high levels of carbon dioxide. The film shows the many ways the world has already changed due to higher temperatures. Also is speculates and uses models to predict what it will look like in the not so distant future. There is a great sense of urgency that there needs to be some major changes in the world to correct this destructive practice. ** Who are the key social actors and stakeholders in the film? **  The problem of rising carbon dioxide levels is something that affects everyone on the earth. The film shows a few specific examples of peoples and areas that will be drastically changed with a hotter climate. They show the glaciers of the Himalayas, how they have shrunk dramatically over the past several decades. The issue with this is that these glaciers store water for the dry season for hundreds of millions of people in Asia and India. Further reduction of the glaciers could dry up some rivers during the dry season causing a savers lack of water for many people. This problem of melting glaciers is not only isolated to the Himalayas, ice is melting all over the world. All this new water will raise sea levels all around the world. This will displace billions who live on the coast. The raising temperature of the climate is truly a global problem that will change the life of every person on the planet. ** What does the film convey about the matrix of factors that contribute to our dependence on oil? **  For more than a century energy has been readily available and inexpensive. This has been in the form of coal and in the past several decades’ oil, then in the future the potential of natural gas depending on future legislation and development. People have taken advantage of this cheap energy to support extreme economic growth. This is something people are unwilling to give up. Now people are continuing to look to old methods to solve the energy needs of the future. This is perpetuated by the strength of the oil and coal companies. This power extends to influence politicians, there is a coal plant right in Washington to supply power to government buildings. Also they have significant influence on new policies. One example was California trying to raise fuel standards on cars in the state, and the government blocked the move because of oil influence. There is a perception that moving away from an oil economy would be expensive and disruptive to growth in this country. This is perpetuated by the oil industry to satisfy its own interests. Also politicians do not fight this idea, they are looking for the next fix to appear to their voters that they are working for inexpensive energy. This is what will get the politicians reelected. People still believe there will be little to not economic growth in an economy based on something other than oil. They only see the costs of new infrastructure. ** What does the film convey about the matrix of problems caused by our dependence on oil? **  As shown by the title, Heat, the film discuses increased temperatures in great detail. There are many other issues with using oil, the toxicity and destructive practices involved in drilling that are not looked at in this film. Global warming is the biggest challenge faced by people around the world today. It is something that will change everyone’s life. This will come in the form of raising sea levels that will destroy most of the coastal communities around the world. Also the rising temperature will change the climate patterns. Severe storms will increase around the world. Increased air temperatures will increase the temperature of the oceans. This has already begun killing coral reefs and causing algae blooms that create dead zones for fish and other marine life. People are still unable to see how these problems will devastate the world economy. There is little understanding of the value of the services that nature preforms for humans. This includes abundant fish in the ocean, constant water supply, steady sea levels, and moderate storms. If these things were to change, it would cost a great deal to compensate for these lost services. This will almost defiantly be greater than any investment in renewable energy sources to fix the problem before it gets out of control. ** What parts of the film convey about the matrix of affects that would be mobilized by a shift away from oil? **  Any large move away from a fossil fuel based economy would take a large push in the government, however this will only happen with public support. In some areas of the country states area taking it upon themselves to make such changes. California has demanded cars with better fuel economy, this has received attention from the federal government and the major auto makers. People are beginning to understand the consequences of waiting for the perfect solution. The federal government is also beginning to understand the problem and make action. Both presidential candidates in them most recent election called for new policies in the government to combat climate changed, there has been less than expected done on such issues because of the economic recession however. For further government change there needs to be continued public support. This starts with an educated public, people need to know the consequences of doing nothing and the alternatives. With knowledge the true scope of the problem becomes apparent and the solutions are not as daunting. ** What part of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? **  It was amazing to see the U.S. representative at the Bali climate change summit reject the proposal after a majority of the other nations accepted it. Then the U.S. came back and accepted the proposal to not appear to be the one who did not care. The willingness of the government to continue business as usual and harm the environment was astonishing. The oil and coal companies have disproportionate influence on policy in this country. This is something that needs to change in government, not only with regard to oil. Politicians should made decisions based on what is best for the people who they represent not for the companies who pay them the most. Since the 1950’s people have understood that increase carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would change the global temperature. This has been studied and evidence has been brought forth for years are people are still reluctant to believe and take action. There are still over 600 coal fired power plants in this country. China’s recent economic growth has been power by coal plants. They are build almost one new coal pant each week. Now that people understand this problem there needs to be some action towards a solution. ** What part of the film did you not find compelling or convincing? **  The film gives the example of clean coal as a potential solution to the carbon problem. This involves capturing all the carbon dioxide from a coal plant, compressing it and storing it underground permanently. It is amazing that people would believe that is that this is a valid solution. The method they are proposing to store the carbon dioxide underground sounds very similar to hydro fracking, and there is no mention to the problems caused by that. This is still a dream for coal companies, there is still no viable working carbon sequestration plant. This feels like another distant solution that people are using to cover the real problem for a few more years. This film was made before the past presidential election, it show President Obama making campaign speeches. He talks about the changes he plans to make to the energy policy of this country. He may have made changes while president, however they are nothing to what he was promising. This is partial because he was faced with a severe economic recession. He still needs to make hard decision that will actually change the energy policy of this nation. ** What kind of corrective action are suggested by the film, if the film itself does not suggest a corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective? **  Japan and Europe are used as good examples of successful energy polices. The film suggests that this country moves toward something similar to their policies. These countries have has many years of higher energy prices, causing people to buy smaller cars and live in more efficient home. Their standard of living in no lower than this country but they are able to accomplish this on much less energy. The film also suggests renewable energy. Germany is given as an example, they have a higher percentage of their energy from wind and solar than this country when there renewable resources are significantly lower. This has all been accomplished by higher taxes to encourage people toward renewables and conservation. Also people are more educated and understand the consequences of their actions with regard to climate change. ** What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out, provide two examples of what you learned? **  I looked up the U.S. Climate Action Partnership and read some on their site. I found it interesting that there were several companies who make a business off of burning fossil fuel. Most notably Alstom, they build coal and natural gas plants all over the world. Also there was Duke Energy, a major electricity provider in this country. This lead me to suspect the motives of this organization, I feel it would be difficult for energy companies who base their existence off of fossil fuels to be profitable in an economy that regulates carbon heavily. Some companies on the list may have good intentions, however there may be those who have no interest in carbon regulation but only good publicity. []
 * Title: ** Heat