If we’re going to save the world—from the ravages of climate change?We have to save our cities; we have to make them sustainable, in every meaning of that word—starting, I would argue, with . . . Waste & Energy & Transport—an interwoven and interlocking tapestry of issues, a matter of “Getting Right with WET.” That sounds like Hysterical Greenie Preaching? Well . . . stop reading right now; it only gets “worse.”Many countries may be somewhat indifferent to, or paralyzed in the face of, climate change, perhaps because they feel (and they may be right) that they “can’t afford to spend time and money” on the issue. I don’t think there’s any country other than the US where a sizable portion of the population and a sufficient-to-block-action percentage of (pretty much exclusively Republican) politicians are sticking their fingers in their ears and chanting “Nah, nah, nah, nah-nah! Can’t hear you!” as . . . the waters rise—among other catastrophes. What will or will not happen? In the next century? The next year? Tomorrow? I’m not a climatologist; I don’t know. But the accruing “facts on the ground” are something between disturbing and terrifying. When Texas has three straight years of 500-year climate “events”? That ought to not just garner attention but spark action. And here we wait. The role of Texas, however, is something of a double-edged sword. Think Texas: Think Oil. But then—surprise!—Texas is also the greatest producer of wind energy in the US, by far. Second place goes to Iowa and—Go Big or Go Home!—Texas produces more than twice the wind energy that Iowa does. We have the technology.The technology is cost-competitive—particularly if you drop federal subsidies for the hydrocarbon industries; a great deal of the work that needs to be done would be a phenomenal (naturally occurring and market-based) jobs program for many of the people who need it most. We need the will.And . . . we’re running out of time.