Three Andrews here.

Andrew Bolt looks more and more like those preachers in Hyde Park. Frantically denying climate change with the pathos of someone’s whose income depends on it. Those guys may be greenhouse denialists, but they’ve lost relevance to the argument. And their boosters have lost power.

Andrew Bartlett’s piece in Crikey this week mentions an ANU report, and points out another Andrew - Andrew Norton - who has refashioned the term “the real greenhouse denialists” to characterise people who accept climate change, but won’t change their own lifestyles to cut emissions.

It’s something planner Michael Dudley picks up at Urban Planetizen.

I promote smart growth - alternative transportation choices, reduced greenhouse gases, increased housing densities. It’s my business to help Canadians understand and adapt to a future that is different from the past. I am a 21st-century city planner.

Along with fellow futurists, I advocate less vehicle travel, more cycling and transit use, smaller cars and sensible energy consumption. The terms ‘eco-density,’ ‘high-occupancy vehicles’ and ‘environmental footprint’ are common currency. By day I’m committed to radical societal change.

But my lifestyle is suspect because I really like to drive. Mostly by myself. Pedal to the metal. Wide-open spaces. No boundaries. Zoom, zoom, zoom.

I understand the disconnect between the extravagant past and our frugal future. My lifestyle is unsustainable and I need to change my patterns. But I subtly resist the shift. Perhaps it’s the curse of the baby boomers. For our generation, driving has been a lifelong love affair, one that isn’t easily surrendered.

Is this - as Bartlett puts it - the “biggest barrier to addressing the climate change threat”? Or is it just a step in the process. Denial… resigned acceptance… action?