Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

Can Environmentalists Live Up to Their Own Standards?

By Janisse Ray, Orion Magazine. Posted September 10, 2007.


Environmentalists are chided for "preaching to the choir." But what happens when those of us in the "choir" aren't doing enough?
Advertisement

If I ever preached to the choir, this luncheon was it. The sixty people in the room were professed environmentalists, all of them on the advisory council of an earth center at a college that advertises itself, rightfully, as strongly committed to environmental responsibility. Seated to my right was a friendly but road-weary woman who had arrived minutes before from Chicago. She had rented a car at the airport and driven straight here.

"When will you return home?" I asked.

"I'll go back this afternoon," she said.

My white cloth napkin lay folded in my lap. Two silver forks waited to the left of my plate. In minutes I would rise to speak at a meal for which and only for which one woman had flown from Illinois to North Carolina. In fact, I was speaking about the climate crisis. Could anything I said be worth those 750 pounds of carbon dioxide blasted into the atmosphere? Fifty-nine other people had journeyed here by various conveyances. Surely I was in part responsible.

That afternoon, on a panel at the same college, I was asked to discuss "walking the talk." As invariably happens in the company in which I often find myself, someone referred to the audience as "the choir" and to us panelists as "ministers" -- "What can we do to quit just preaching to the choir?"

By "choir" I assume the person meant the already converted, the dedicated, the environmentalists, which implies that somewhere out in the big world there are people who have not yet seen the light, or have seen the light but have not accepted it as their savior, and that our job might more necessarily be to bring those people into the fold. Another person raised her hand and talked about how the uneducated firefighters at the station where she volunteers drive F-150s and employ chemicals to green their lawns. "Where are those people today?" she asked.

As missionaries, the choir member implied, we are failing.

I looked around the room, trying to find the so-called choir. I have been trying to find the choir for a long time, and even more importantly, have been trying to join the choir. From where I stand, even the choir seems to be failing. Or as my friend Dave Brown put it, the choir may be much smaller than we thought.

Many years ago a man I revere, a forest ecologist who has done more than anybody I know to promote his home ecosystem, revealed to me that he shoots hawks. He and his wife love the birds that flock to their butterfly gardens; they love to watch them through a floor-to-ceiling bird window. Yet my mentor loves the colorful songbirds more than he loves the raptors they attract, and in this conflict of interest the ecologist kills hawks.

This private confession of a forest ecologist caused a great turmoil in me. Whitman, of course, said, "Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself." But I'm a purist. I like black and white. I like hawks.

I fear what this choir -- the one I attempt to sing in and occasionally preach to -- actually looks like.

At risk of appearing a fraud, I want to admit my own culpability right up front. I live in a comfortable house in the small city of Brattleboro, Vermont. My husband and I cut trees to heat our home, and some of them are alive when we fell them. On the coldest days we turn to fossil fuels to keep the house above sixty degrees. We drive vehicles that consume fossil fuels, and we have raised a son who also now drives a gasoline-powered vehicle. We even own a motorboat. Our home uses electricity that, in part, is produced by the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. I fly regularly. Never having been to Europe, I'd like to take my family there someday, and chances are we'll fly.

Reprint Notice:
This article appears in the September/October 2007 issue of Orion magazine, 187 Main Street, Great Barrington, MA 01230, 888/909-6568, ($40/year for 6 issues). Subscriptions are available online: www.orionmagazine.org.

A portion of the food we buy is trucked or flown to us from a shocking distance. We have three dogs, demanding their own portions of the Earth's resources. Somehow my desk holder is always filled with disposable pens. I shave my legs, and I don't do it with a straight edge. I've purchased clothing at times that was surely made in sweatshops. So, perfect I am not. In fact, my part in the destruction of nature is both serious and shameful.

Yet many times a day, I move ever toward a more sustainable life, learning to weigh the implications of my actions. To measure sustainability, I often refer to Jim Merkel's definition, which is human consumption based on biospheric production or, using the Earth's resources at a rate slower than they regenerate. Step by step I creep toward a life that is easier on the planet, eating locally as much as possible, buying secondhand goods, using manual technology instead of electric. For over a year my husband and I saved to buy a hybrid car before purchasing a used one at list price from a friend. A state grant allowed us to exchange every incandescent bulb in our home for a compact florescent. Each spring our vegetable garden expands.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: climate change, global warming, environmentalism

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh.
Posted by: gellero on Sep 10, 2007 12:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Angst, the Angst........................

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eat low on the chain to raise the bar
Posted by: gourdman on Sep 10, 2007 2:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, Janisse, here's an easy way to raise the bar more than by doing all those other little sustainable things you do around the house. Eat lower on the food chain: give up that Thanksgiving turkey and whatever other organically "produced" meat you still consume. It's amazing to me how so-called "environmentalists" let themselves off the hook by advertising how they partake of organic meat. It's still resource intensive, raising poultry and livestock organically still produces tons of methane and nitrogen-rich waste (which is flushed into streams), and -- need I go on? Hell, you'd probably reduce your footprint enough that you could take that trip to Europe without overweening guilt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: at low on the chain to raise the bar Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» VEGAN is the least impactful diet Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: VEGAN is the least impactful diet Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: VEGAN is the least impactful diet Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» Good point Posted by: ReallyBearish
The challenge is to move from observation to talk and from talk
Posted by: greentime on Sep 10, 2007 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to action. Your own personal change and the path you take is what WILL make the difference.

The greater challenge is to do this with the full knowledge that the corporatocracy now posing as our government has little interest in helping you get where you need to be. Some leaders do care and are taking action so we can support them.

Fortunately, there are so very many people making this difference: David Korten and his wonderful book THE GREAT TURNING for example and Bill McKibben of course and Elisabeth Lesser and Carla Goldstein at Omega Institute are just a few who come to mind immediately. There are thousands of people out there from writers to scientists to spritual leaders who are on a new road.

All you need to do is join them. No angst required.
The angst disappers as soon as you begin to act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHy a PLASTIC ad
Posted by: overseas on Sep 10, 2007 5:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I read this excellent article, between pages 2 and 3 there appeared an ADVERT on the right-hand border for a company called B PLASTIC who makes PLASTIC parts of all sizes and shapes (http://webshop.b-plastic.com/default.asp?PageNo=DEFAULT). WHY IN THE WORLD would ALTERNET allow a plastic company, with no statement on thier GREEN attributes, advertise on the margin of this article on how we should walk the talk by taking our own actions? What a mockery. When I went back to the same article this border ad is replaced by another..but still it appeared on and off as border ads do!!! What is that about????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Erm...to pay the bills? Posted by: ABetterFuture
A turkey's slaughter is not sustainable for the turkey!
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Sep 10, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want the author to stop contributing to the murdering of turkeys and go vegan!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Want to be an effective environmentalist?
Posted by: Constitutionalist75 on Sep 10, 2007 6:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pool your resources and buy a small parcel of land and farm it organically for your family and community and ignore the "Market". Birth no more than 2 children and support your local family planning clinic. Use no mechanical machinery except bicycles. If you need help plowing use horses. Study the Amish economy and learn how to live in balance with the land and each other - and gently spread the word among your friends and neighbors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Want to be an effective environmentalist? Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Amish economics Posted by: Constitutionalist75
easy to be green when you have green
Posted by: aislinnluv on Sep 10, 2007 7:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
so much easier to buy a hybrid vehicle, replace all your incandescent bulbs (a state that gives you money for doing that!? how nice for you!) when you have money to begin with. who can afford solar panels when your salary is less than $20k per annum? (and that's assuming your neighborhood would even allow you to have them!) nice to bicycle around if the trips you must make are within 5 miles of home and you have a safe roadway on which to ride. applaudable to use public transportation when there is such a critter where you live. for a lot of us trying to lower our "carbon footprint" (yet another stupid buzz-phrase), doing our best can be expensive. i've been replacing my incandescent bulbs and paid for every compact fluorescent out of pocket. i bet you, madame author, make more money than i, a single mom, do. all i can afford to drive is a 1991 mazda. at least it gets a semirespectable 27 mpg. my thermostat (in hellishly hot texas summers) is kept at 83F daytime, 80 at night. in winter i think it stays around 65. to be truthful, my main motive is to be able to pay the bills, but it helps to think i am using fewer resources. for some of us, being eco-warriors is not much of an option, as much as we believe in the cause. how about working harder to get some real action in washington? maybe that would help us in the lower income brackets join the ranks sooner.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rural living is not necessarily the most sustainable way of life
Posted by: sunhelen on Sep 10, 2007 7:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are too many people on the earth for all of us to live on our own farms. I think that people who are not farmers should live in apartment complexes with playgrounds and weekly farmers markets. All the buildings should have murals. There should be good bus service in town, and fast and frequent trains between towns.

By the way, we have third world trains in this country. We need a system of regular trains running on double track. And those trains need to be cleaned regularly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the difficulty of modern life
Posted by: applepie on Sep 10, 2007 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes modern life is quite a dilemma. We become used to things, we want things we do not have, we make money for the sole task of spending it, and all about us life rushes on faster and faster in cyclonic patterns of dizzying change and inertia.

But how can we doubt ourselves that have worked to build peace and sustainability in our lives and our culture? Was there ever any hubristic hope that we would create an ecological paradise, a garden of Eden, on the planet in the 20th or 21st (or 19th etc) centuries? How adolescent...I think the forces arrayed against us, those of militarism, extreme wealth and greed, and mind bending religiousity are so, so, very strong.

But again those mere human constructs should not stop us. What is the reward you seek? Is it a 'sutainable heaven'? Is it a more just and fair economy? Is it a smaller human impact on the natural world? Or, all of the above?

I really believe that the act of forbearance in terms of environmental damage is important ~ maybe not to the planetary ecosystems but to our own damaged psyches. And recognition of the magic in nature is a strength. If you can agree with me on this than I think you have already found the garden. Once you are there, you should start inviting others in. But doubt, doubt is a prelude to the mindless survivalism of capitalist gobbling and belching and farting and wasting.

And another thing, to all the vegan saints out there, be careful of your preaching. Some of your human animal fellow travelers have a distinct counter-reaction to the holier than thou 'wisdom' that you have all the answers to planetary salvation. Read some Marina Tsvetayeva if you want to see the depths of human sacrifice and suffering.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Advertising is the problem
Posted by: metamind on Sep 10, 2007 8:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What difference does it make whether the ad is for plastics or produce? Very little. The idea is that money should rule our lives. Money is what is destroying the Earth, when you analyze it properly. Money always wants more ... more is better ... because the structure of money is to have some people ( the rich ) live off of the labor of others ( the rest of us. ) This creates conflict, injustice, poverty and war by its nature.

If you want to save the world you need to start talking about how to create a new economic system for the world. This one is at the root of the problem. Even Al Gore, in his movie "The Inconvenient Truth", only spent a few minutes giving you suggestions on what to do about it all. Missing from his list was "CREATE A NEW ECONOMIC SYSTEM."

Why not? Because it's all US. We are the problem. We are the solution. We need to support the right ideas and STOP supporting the wrong idea.

Recently I met a young man in Oregon who said "I hate politics." I asked him "Do you hate money?" He said "NO" and indicated his fondness for money. "Well," I told him, "Money is ENTIRELY political. If you love money, you love politics."

And so it goes ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Advertising is the problem Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: Advertising is the problem Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Personal is not enough.
Posted by: Urstrly on Sep 10, 2007 8:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a great admirer of Ray's work (especially Cracker Childhood) and of her commitment to the environment. However, I think we of the environmentally conscious mind-set, the choir in her essay, make a dangerous mistake when we assume this battle must be fought primarily on a personal level. Our society may be built on a cult of individuality and unbridled capitalism, but neither is ultimately going to save our planet. I'm for building political clout and intensifying regulation rather than depending on good intentions.

If plastic bags, balloons and picnic items threaten our ecological welfare, we ought to ban them wholesale rather than count on people to abstain from using them. Right now, I can get an infinite number of plastic bags from my grocer at no cost, and they love the advertising. Suppose I had to pay for the bags, or that they had to pay me for using them. If gas guzzlers are destroying the ozone layer and providing impetus for wars in the Middle East, don't count on people's good intentions when buying a new car; we could outlaw them, or allow them on the roads only at certain hours or with specified number of passengers. This would also make life safer for cyclists.

And we certainly could provide attractive, plentiful bus and train service across our land. A man told me that on a recent trip to India he discovered that a Korean company was offering comfortable, clean buses on routes for which the only prior transportation was a crowded, dangerous bus or an expensive plane trip. And the new bus ran on ethanol.

Getting steamed up about other people's wastefulness just encourages unattractive feelings of self-righteousness. I'm not self-disciplined enough to live a carbon-free life, but we're all in this together, and the solutions must be based on our sense of community and hopes for life's survival. The choir needs to embrace the congregation. If we keep it personal, we'll just exhaust ourselves without getting the job done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Personal is not enough. Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: Personal is not enough. Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Personal is not enough. Posted by: Urstrly
Wail and moan
Posted by: BlueTigress on Sep 10, 2007 9:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the author doesn't want the carbon guilt of travel, she could do speaking engagements by webcam. Any time she accepts a speaking engagement she could specify that if there is any sort of food or gathering, it could follow the guidelines she sets.

The story about the turkey was stupid. The farmer is BUSY; they don't have time to bring goods around to some suburban twit who doesn't want to burn the fuel to go get it.

It's like with a friend of ours; he is a huge fan of electric cars, but will not buy one until it can exactly replace his gasoline car.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The choir is an apt metaphor
Posted by: lamar on Sep 10, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just wish the choir was less preachy. I'm no environmentalist, but I have a few observations. (1) I use canvas bags at the grocery store. They are plain white. I cannot stand the ones that have some greener-than-thou slogan on them. Is it a bag, or a fashion statement? The trendier the green movement becomes, the more people will abandon it when it ceases to be trendy. Emphasize substance over style. (2) the image of greens matters. I constantly argue with righties who say that Al Gore's hypocrisy justifies their Hummer. They truly believe that hypocrisy negates the underlying thing, except when GOP senators get caught with their pants down. (3) stop trying to sell people like Susana Lein as the answer. It's too radical. Focus on what changes people can deal with. Living in a house made of junk is a non-starter in 99% of American households (and having a spring for water is actually impossible for most people). Instead of dumpster diving, we should ask ourselves how the next generation can be more reasonable than this generation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no answer...
Posted by: wildbill on Sep 10, 2007 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...welcome to hell!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gore and DiCaprio
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 10, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll believe them when Al Gore cuts his electricity bill from $30,000 /month to what I pay ($100/month).

I'll start to take it seriously when Leonardo dumps his Lexus's and starts flying non-private jets and the cattle-car planes that I fly in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gore and DiCaprio Posted by: lamar
» Global warming crock of shit Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Global warming crock of shit Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: Global warming crock of shit Posted by: AsteroidMiner
The problem as I see it.
Posted by: casa on Sep 10, 2007 10:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in regards to "And that's the conundrum we all should be facing. Every day we should be weighing even the minutest decision and asking ourselves, Which action causes the least harm? Should I travel these miles? Will my gains in knowledge and inspiration offset my damage to the planet?" is the fuzzy math. Often it's hard to know what the correct action is, thus "weighing even the minutest decision" becomes impossible at times. Sometimes it's easy such a s florescent light bulb. The choice between "paper or plastic" isn't even that obvious of a choice when all factors are weighed.

Until most of us can be educated to the point where decisions are a bit more clear cut, there are going to be countless mistakes made, strictly out of our ignorance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Save the earth, kill a celebrity
Posted by: vertical on Sep 10, 2007 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are all gulity, and you can only do so much. But the real pigs are our Athletes Celebrites, and CEOs (for short lets refer to them as ACC). These people use up exponetially more of the Earth's resources. For instance, I wonder how many households would need to convert from safe incondescent bulbs to mercury laden compact flourecscent ones just to compensate for one celebrity who flies cross country in their lear jet to get their hair done? They say that America has 5% of the world's population, but use 25% of its resources. I bet we could cut that down by at least half if we just got rid of our a listers. Save the Earth, kill a ACC!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Save the earth, kill a celebrity Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: not a nihilist Posted by: aislinnluv
» You're Missing Something Posted by: gellero
Which action causes the least harm?
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Sep 10, 2007 3:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every day we should be weighing even the minutest decision and asking ourselves, Which action causes the least harm?
Adoption vs procreation?

I cannot tell you the horrible feeling that envelops me”
(Over plastic cups), but didn’t we just read AlterNet’s The Great Plastic Bag Plague where paper too has its own disadvantages when its recycled?

We also have to keep applying pressure to government, and holding our elected officials accountable.
How accountable are elected officials when many want to get re-elected so they don’t speak up about overpopulation? And aren’t these the same officials that would find it difficult to get elected in the first place if they didn’t believe in a christian god? Isn’t this the same god that wants us to “go forth and multiply” but also said the same thing to the creatures of the sea, land and sky? Wasn’t god the first environmentalist? How can we multiply when it’s at the expense of every other living species on the planet? And somebody please show me how any, or more, kids creates a positive impact on the environmental or implies an environmental credit or write off, like the deceptive practice of carbon credits, which appear to be only for those who can afford them?

Living a lie destroys the spirit. It is a kind of mental illness, a schizophrenia. It also undermines our credibility.
Well put.

By using porcelain plates and cloth napkins, the group met its goal of zero waste.
Somebody’s going to wash those dishes and napkins, right? No landfill waste, but waste of another kind. Substituting one waste for another is part of the same problem I described earlier, where we think we’re doing right by the planet by executing some form of tradeoff.

I like the article and I think it’s good to face the reality of how we’re being manipulated by those in the business of going green. A few years ago, some conservative said liberals who were jumping on the environmental bandwagon were just in it for the money. I disagreed, but now I’m finding there is money to be made by positioning one’s self in that market, like Al Gore, and feeding into the feeling we are destroying ourselves, like other prophets of doom throughout history. I think though in this case, we really are doomed, at least heading in that direction.

Funny thing is, with all the talk and articles and movements, they pale in comparison to having another kid being born in America. How come no one is doing the math on those resources? Don’t get me wrong, I believe you should have a right to give birth, but someday governments will be forced to crack down and impose some form of restriction on overpopulation…unless they can figure out a way to make money off of pregnancies, like the current trend of capitalism and democracy through military intervention.

All interesting concepts nonetheless.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ah Yes, the hypocrisy...
Posted by: ldasteelworker on Sep 10, 2007 3:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah Yes, the hypocrisy...

Well I don't buy it! We all are hypocrites because we don't have any easy and readily available alternative choices and human nature is what it is... Fact is -- it's dam hard to "walk the talk" and have what is considered by most in society as a normal life!

However, I do not believe that we need to even make that choice. We don have to "get by with less." I know that we can have our environmental cake and eat it to. No changes in quality of lifestyle are necessary but we do desperately need to rapidly change the techniques and technologies we currently utilize to live, commute, and work.

The answers are largely already out there... One of the best examples can be found at the Rocky Mountain Institute ( www.rmi.org ) because other than population, it all comes down to resource and energy issues. "RMI brings a unique perspective to resource issues, guided by the following core principles: Advanced Resource Productivity; Systems Thinking; Positive Action; Market-Oriented Solutions; End-Use/Least-Cost Approach; Biological Insight; Corporate Transformation; The Pursuit of Interconnections; Natural Capitalism."

The real question should be what is keeping rapid change from happening? Is the human race intelligent enough to stop acting like a culture of bacteria and change its course? Can the political, religious, social, economic, and corporate obstacles be overcome in time?

We can all do the best we can (insert your own list here) but will it not be enough in face of the choices society as a whole is currently given... That is the bar that needs to be raised!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hypocrisy at RMI Posted by: veggiegrrrl
Seriousness leading to satire
Posted by: anothername on Sep 10, 2007 7:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trying to promote women-owned businesses and women in politics, I talk with several people each week. A person I met said that she and other women wanted to fly an east coast person that was featured in the New York Times to the Midwest to talk about how women can write op-ed pieces. The woman charges $5,000 for her services but possibly would do it for the cost of expenses. I looked at the person who told me of this idea and told her it was idiotic. There are many women in the city where we live that could make a similar presentation without the cost. Moreover, those women needed the publicity and if any women had money to fly in somebody from New York, I know plenty of women-owned local businesses that really could use that cash infusion.

I also wonder at the people who drive to a park to walk five miles to raise money for some cause, and to take away a screen-printed t-shirt, bottled water, 4-color glossy printed material, and some cheap plastic souvenir.

Then there are the presidential candidates who tell use we need to wean ourselves from foreign oil, but not to worry because we can still drive SUVs and run our computers all day. We just need to give venture capitalists massive tax breaks and replace our light bulbs.

I’m so depressed now that I must go use the remote controls to start the DVD of Al Gore’s global warming documentary. While it’s playing, I’ll keep the computer on so I can read up on Leonardo Dicaprio (or whatever his name is) and find out what lessons he can teach me about saving fuel, probably by making sure the engine in my ATV is tuned regularly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We Are 5% of the Planet
Posted by: gellero on Sep 10, 2007 7:32 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People should do what they can afford. Let the Third World carpool and ride bicycles. They'll come around in a Century or two. We are not the ones ruining the planet. Our efforts mean nothing in the scheme of things. Our efforts and energy use provide them with the advanced goods they need to keep up with modern society. They provide our sneakers. Fair trade until they can do better. Unless you believe we should be Colonial rulers and tell them what to do. Probably would be the best thing, but not very politically correct.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We Are 5% of the Planet Posted by: screamingdissent
Just a Little Bit Ridiculous
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Sep 10, 2007 7:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author implies that right now each individual can make minute choices throughout the day that will result in less resources used up than the planet can regenerate.

With the exception of some obvious choices there is no way of knowing how much less polluting those choices are than the ungreen choices.

We can not achieve substantive change without our government's support.

The author advocates riding bicycles for transportation. How about we think bigger and less polluting?

Maglev transportation would revolutionize transportation throughout the world if the political will was behind it. Imagine a computer controlled highway system where cargo vehicles, multi-passenger vehicles, and single passenger vehicles all move upwards of 300 mph to their destinations, all computer controlled to eliminate accidents from vehicles merging onto the highways and traffic jams.

The vehicles could be all electric and the batteries could be recharged by the maglev track while they travel on them.

Power the system with offshore wind turbines that have ocean tidal turbines on the underwater portion of the poles and you get a 2 for 1 benefit generating power from 2 sources on the same structure AND it is all renewable energy.

The answer to our pollution and resource problems isn't to go backwards, but to go forwards, and it requires imagination, courage and leadership.

It requires visionaries who can see past the next quarter's profit margins and the winning the next election.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The elephant Janisse Ray doesn't see
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 11, 2007 1:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Janisse Ray worries about the trivia and doesn't notice the
elephant in the living room. The elephant is the extinction of
Homo Sapiens in 200 years because global warming causes a
poison gas to come from the oceans. To prevent our own
extinction, we have to cut CO2 production NOW. The only
feasible way to do it is to convert coal fired power plants to
nuclear.

Important information on this is found at:

http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-
34/text/coalmain.html

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00037A5D
-A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000&sc=I100322

http://astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name
=News&file=article&sid=2429&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation
from
http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2000_1.html

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12346
-renewable-energy-could-rape-nature.html

Please read all of these web sites before replying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We abandon our allies
Posted by: Sum Won on Sep 11, 2007 1:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author suggests we need to "recognize that the most unlikely people are going to be allies in the quest for sustainability." While living in Central America my campesino neighbors taught me how to simplify my life. This facilitated acceptance into a community which depended on sharing and co-operation to remain sustainable. Even if they had a car they used the bus as much as possible. Some said it was the opportunity for interaction. Others to save gas. Some suggested if everyone started using their cars that the bus would no longer be viable. The service would be discontinued, the driver would lose his job and those that couldn't afford it would be required to somehow get a car. Once everyone had a car the road would need to be widened and on it would go.

In the five years I lived there I observed the gradual breakdown of their community. An aggressive plan was implemented which supported the building of resorts, vacation homes, golf courses, malls and other amenities to service the rapidly expanding tourism industry. Young workers gravitated to the English language night schools so they could compete for tourism jobs in areas far from their homes. There they would become wise to the ways of the modern world. With jobs and disposable income they started to acquire the consumer goods needed to mimic their guests. They had learned quickly how the ostentatious display of wealth raised your status. When they visited home, they would do so as a success. Those behind who previously had only experienced such lifestyles through the fantasy of television were now confronted with it in their midst. They were envious and quick to accept the new paradigm which dictated they also compete and start putting their self interests first.

This country is supported by environmental movements for creating national parks to protect endangered species. Unfortunately one of the most valuable species is being extinguished with little protection or support from the environmental choir. Its unfortunate as it turns out they have (or had) beautiful voices. If we can't save their culture from the ravages of ours will there be any hope? We're ignoring the potential to create an alternative and sustainable model of growth for mass markets with people that already have the natural skills and talents needed to do so. While we navel gaze on the fringe and create our alternative communities we ignore the swollen masses who have no alternative but to join consumerism and abandon theirs. What can we do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only significant environmental decision anyone needs
Posted by: leafsong1 on Sep 11, 2007 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to make is whether or not to PROCREATE. Factories don't make pollution, logging doesn't destroy habitat, cars don't cause global warming, PEOPLE DO. The entire environmental movement outside of population control is a charade, a feel-good movie with an impossibly happy ending. Nothing you can possibly do in your lifetime to conserve or preserve could possibly outweigh the damage you do when you BREED. All efforts to preserve ecosystems or habitats or climates ARE DOOMED TO FAILURE without effective means of STOPPING AND REVERSING POPULATION GROWTH. The essence of hypocrisy is an environmentalist with seven biological children, regardless of lifestyle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's An Environmentalist To Do?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Sep 11, 2007 4:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I worked as a campaigner with Earth First! for three years, I spent 10-20 hours per week doing free work AFTER GETTING HOME FROM MY LOW-PAYING RECYCLING JOB. Sometimes I drove somewhere to camp out because I needed a break. Anyone who's a real environmentalist probably has a reasonable lifestyle, but aside from really harmful acts (having more than two children, driving long distances regularly, living in an overly large home, etc.) they might occasionally do something they shouldn't (though shooting hawks is actually pretty egregious and shows that this guy doesn't really get environmentalism, despite whatever other good acts he does). Cut us some slack, we're not the ones causing the problems!

If you want a good picture of what the choir should look like, look to TRADITIONAL Native Americans (there are very few left, so you'll have to look hard). The cultures that were here before Europeans clearly lived in environmentally friendly ways, with the exceptions of the larger nations like the Aztecs, Incas, and Mayans (bigger is almost always worse). It would have been inconceivable to a traditional native to, for example, kill one species because it naturally preyed on one that (s)he enjoyed seeing. That's the mindset the author is looking for.

The problem, as identified in some of the comments, is that we live in a society that has no regard for the natural world, despite whatever spin or platitudes are mouthed. In the latest polls, Americans placed the environment at the bottom of their priorities, and public policy always places money and business at the top. Until this changes radically, it really won't matter significantly what the tiny minority of us who place the environment at the top of our priorities do or don't do. That's no excuse for not taking proper actions or refraining from taking improper ones, but we need societal change as much as we need personal change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Raise your hand if your community doesn't recycle
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 13, 2007 10:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What bothers me most about these commentaries is not that they don't have a good point. It's that they are so negative, so depreciating. For Chrissakes, environmentalists have been fighting for their causes for decades and only now are some on the other side seeing the light. So what do we do? Do we pat ourselves on the back and say 'Good job'? or 'Congratulations, keep up the good work'? No, we tear each other and ourselves to shreds because we're not good enough yet. Republicans are having a field day as pretend environmentalists and our response is to ignore them and make cannon fodder of ourselves for them to use politically. WTF?!?!

Human consciousness is slow to change. We should congratulate ourselves on every victory, no matter how small, and vow to change ourselves as best as we can at the pace that we can. By all means reconsider your lifestyle. But don't shoot yourself in the head and don't load this political gun with bullets to give to the right wing just because it's not perfect yet. Newsflash: We're none of us perfect.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vegetarian and childfree by choice
Posted by: Janet4784 on Sep 17, 2007 6:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These two choices make all other personal environmental actions pale in comparison. It's that simple, like it or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]