I didn’t have the same reaction as Lou, of The Cost of Energy blog, did upon reading this article by Bill McKibben. In fact, I got a bit annoyed by it. It’s not that I disagree with the immensity of the problem or even some of the suggestions for tackling it. It’s that McKibben comes off as a bit self-righteous to me.
I also don’t get some of his points. It is okay to buy an energy efficient washer, but not a “flat screen” TV, which, despite what he thinks, can use a lot less energy than an old fashioned CRT model. But, it’s not okay to buy a dryer, because “that’s the sun’s job.” These are very arbitrary and subjective choices.
And, what does he exactly mean by “community?” I constantly see “community” put up as some panacea to our GW and peak oil problems. But, here, it is not well defined. McKibben puts up public transit, farmer’s markets, and “co-housing” as examples of what this “community” will allow us to do. But, I already do all three within the confines of an “advanced consumer society” that apparently makes these things difficult. It is all so hand-wavy.
Real solutions require adapting current systems as best we can in an attempt to increase efficiency and mitigate against the unknown effects of GW and PO on the vital services provided by society such as food, shelter, water, sanitation, etc. For example, farmer’s markets are great, but they aren’t perfect. Some food can’t be grown locally and even if it could, it could still be more energy efficient to grow it elsewhere and ship it in. And, frankly, we’ll all starve if we are forced to just eat what can be grown locally. Why not work to increase farmer’s markets, but also adapt existing grocery stores to provide more local foods and work on reducing the energy requirements of their supply chains? And, your cause isn’t helped by implying that if you aren’t eating from farmer’s markets, then you somehow aren’t eating “real food” and don’t know what it tastes like. That’s just insulting and stupid. In the real world, people buy from both places and if done right, the food from a grocery store is just as real and tasty as stuff from a farmer’s market.
The near term mitigation strategy, as McKibben points out, is conservation of energy. But, the specific ways we accomplish conservation depend on specific circumstances. It just really irritates me when articles like this one obscure that point by making broad over generalizations and get hung up on moralizing about how we “should” or “must” change the way we live our lives. Yes, we must change, we are changing, and suggestions for how are welcome, but stop telling me what I must do. I’ll decide what is most appropriate for my situation and together we’ll decide what is best for our communities, towns, schools, businesses, etc. This dictatorship of environmental dogma that I sometimes see is counterproductive. There isn’t One True Way to tackle GW and Peak Oil, there many that are highly dependent on specific, local circumstances.
Ultimately, though, if you get beyond the annoying self-righteous tone and the unrealistic, perhaps naive, portrait of global activism saving the day, there are some good take-home points:
Conserve, conserve, conserve! However you can, wherever you can. Not only does this help in mitigating global warming and peak oil consequences, it can save you money. And, who doesn’t need to save money in a recession?
Think about the consequences of your actions, both large and small. Consume smartly when you have to consume at all. Buy the energy efficient devices when you need to replace what you have and after you have exhausted the possibility of acquiring used. Understand where your food comes from, where your electricity comes from, your gasoline, etc. How does your pattern of consumption fit into the overall big picture?
Be politically active. Change won’t happen without world governments getting on board and that probably won’t happen without a strong grassroots movement pushing for it.
Spread the word. Tackling this problem requires efforts by everyone and every entity in society, from individuals to governments. I still find today that far too many people who are otherwise educated don’t understand the severity of the issue, but will listen intently to someone who is willing to explain it to them without moralizing about it.
Post a Comment