dagblog - Comments for "Conserve or I'll Kill You"

Perhaps so, but I still

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 14:45:00 +0000

In reply to As DF alludes to, however,

Perhaps so, but I still maintain that the environmental movement's balance is way off.

As DF alludes to, however,

Atheist — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:34:08 +0000

In reply to The conflict is in available

As DF alludes to, however, it's not necessarily a zero-sum game. I agree there are those who waste goodwill in how they attempt to persuade people to take environmental issues seriously, but asking them for small sacrifices can actually help them to accept the bigger sacrifices. Long ago I used to be a dance instructor, and one thing we learned was that if we gave away our introductory package (consisting of, among other things four half-hour lessons that would normally cost about $200 total), new students would often give up after the first half-hour lesson. However, if you charged them $10 (again, for a package worth more than $200, and that cost the studio more than $100), they were much more likely to stay for all of the lessons, and you'd be more likely to convince them after that to start paying real money for future lessons.

I'm not convinced that small

Donal — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:26:40 +0000

In reply to Conserve or I'll Kill You

I'm not convinced that small efficiencies are necessarily ineffectual. When the price of gasoline began to skyrocket a few years ago, a lot of people began driving less, and more slowly. It made a big difference in the amount of gasoline sold, and the Saudis took notice. Then people got used to the higher costs. Some started buying hybrids and everyone started driving faster again. The longterm mindset just wasn't there.

The recession has forced even more demand destruction. Some people are undergoing forced conservation curtailment, like moving out of their houses into small apts, or in extreme cases, into their cars. The well-to-do are still driving like gangbusters, still using A/C, etc., but their numbers are shrinking - which is why there's a Tea Party.

I think you're probably right

Orlando — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 07:09:55 +0000

In reply to The conflict is in available

I think you're probably right about that. And DF is right that we should do both. But there's the conundrum. Your way wouldn't be as successful without my way but we've been trying my way for a long time--it's met with limited success and we may be running out of time. Basically, we're screwed.

The conflict is in available

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 03:38:48 +0000

In reply to I think you both have valid

The conflict is in available resources. You can focus your energy on persuading people to conserve in small but ineffectual ways, or you can focus your energy on persuading people that we need to global change. The environmental movement, in my opinion, has for too long wasted too much energy on the former to the neglect of the latter. It was not until Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth that global warming became a central part of the popular dialogue on environmentalism.

I think you both have valid

DF — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:57:04 +0000

In reply to I disagree but somehow my

I think you both have valid points that aren't necessarily in conflict. In the long run, minor conservation measures just don't match up to the problems we face, especially since consumption grows exponentially, but in the short run a shift in consciousness is probably necessary in order to begin making big changes. To the extent that getting people involved in thinking about it raises consciousness about the full extent of these issues, I believe that it can have the effect you describe so long as those marginal measures are not seen as a substitute for doing what's really necessary to solve the problem.

I disagree but somehow my

Orlando — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:34:49 +0000

In reply to Useless energy efforts bug

I disagree but somehow my comment about it got misplaced above. Micro-conservation matters because it changes the mindset of the population. Without that, trying to move big changes through is difficult.

I think the biggest

Orlando — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:33:11 +0000

In reply to The point Lee thought he was

I think the biggest difference that small contributions can make is that they change the overall mindset of individuals. In a country like the United States, where getting any new initiatives through the government is about as easy as pulling a watermelon through a straw, public opinion matters. If the public is conserving on an individual level, they will be much more likely to support big conservation and climate efforts on a macro level.

Useless energy efforts bug

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 20:38:29 +0000

In reply to Conserve or I'll Kill You

Useless energy efforts bug the hell out of me. Call me a sucker for intellectual honesty.

But the real problem is not the empty conservation itself but the waste of resources used in trying to convince people to engage in empty conservation. I wish that environmentalists would stop spending time and money to persuade people to build urban gardens, buy local tomatoes, or set up kitchen composts. Instead, they could be focusing their voices and energy on promoting global warming education and pushing for solutions with the only hope of real impact, e.g. fossil fuel taxes and green technology investment. The rest are just kindergarden exercises.

There is nothing wrong with

Austin Train — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 19:03:12 +0000

In reply to Conserve or I'll Kill You

There is nothing wrong with small, incremental efficiencies, though I doubt they will make anything more than incremental differences.

What is needed is national-policy-level transformation, from the energy infrastructure on up, and the resistance to that from both the general population, who likely won't want to give up driving three blocks to pick up something they can carry home in one hand, and from the corporate community, who do stand to lose big and will fight such changes with all the means ($$$) at their hand, will be both widespread and energetic.

It's about overcoming inertia.

Make the small, incremental changes if you like, I've made some, to be sure, just don't mistake them for the substantive changes we need.