Forums > Social Discussion > What do we have to do to be 'green'
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
There's been a fair few posts on various aspects of environmentalism, usually along the lines of "we shouldn't do X and Y because it's destroying the planet".
So, I was thinking, with a bit of prompting from Triple J radio (not often Mif talks about anything meaningful); at what point do we move on from token efforts to being green?
If you use green shopping bags and low-energy lights does that make you green? Do you have to get rid of your car and forgo central heating and/or air con?
For example, I deliberately bought a house within walking distance of work so I very rarely drive, I bought a solar heating system, a rainwater tank and turn off all sockets when not in use, my air-con is an ultra-efficient inverter and I have no central heating. On the other hand, I have no altruistic motives for any of these; I do them because they save me money. Is this green or penny-pinching?
Are we willing to do things that may benefit the environment if its inconvenient for us or going to cost us money? At what point do we say "ah, screw it!"?
There's been a fair few posts on various aspects of environmentalism, usually along the lines of "we shouldn't do X and Y because it's destroying the planet".
So, I was thinking, with a bit of prompting from Triple J radio (not often Mif talks about anything meaningful); at what point do we move on from token efforts to being green?
If you use green shopping bags and low-energy lights does that make you green? Do you have to get rid of your car and forgo central heating and/or air con?
For example, I deliberately bought a house within walking distance of work so I very rarely drive, I bought a solar heating system, a rainwater tank and turn off all sockets when not in use, my air-con is an ultra-efficient inverter and I have no central heating. On the other hand, I have no altruistic motives for any of these; I do them because they save me money. Is this green or penny-pinching?
Are we willing to do things that may benefit the environment if its inconvenient for us or going to cost us money? At what point do we say "ah, screw it!"?
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
It's both- a win-win situation; which, in many ways, is the ideal.
There's always going to be a subtantial portion of the population who don't especially care about these issues- however, if each of them sees the ways in which certain 'green ways' actually benefit them in terms of saving money or increasing their enjoyment of life, then that's good, for them and the environement.
Written by: Eera
For example, I deliberately bought a house within walking distance of work so I very rarely drive, I bought a solar heating system, a rainwater tank and turn off all sockets when not in use, my air-con is an ultra-efficient inverter and I have no central heating. On the other hand, I have no altruistic motives for any of these; I do them because they save me money. Is this green or penny-pinching?
It's both- a win-win situation; which, in many ways, is the ideal.
There's always going to be a subtantial portion of the population who don't especially care about these issues- however, if each of them sees the ways in which certain 'green ways' actually benefit them in terms of saving money or increasing their enjoyment of life, then that's good, for them and the environement.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
Posted:
well, personally i am super green.
well, personally i am super green.
"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"
jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley
member
55 posts
Location: aucklamd
55 posts
Location: aucklamd
Posted:
EAT ROTTON OYSTERS????????????
EAT ROTTON OYSTERS????????????
Tehehe.....Fairy 'old me....
SILVER Member
Are you up for it??
349 posts
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Are you up for it??
349 posts
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted:
whewn bus services become reliable and can leave wher I am, when I want to, that's when I'll become "green" with regards transport
whewn bus services become reliable and can leave wher I am, when I want to, that's when I'll become "green" with regards transport
Are you up for it?
;)
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
Don't fly, especially internationaly.
If you cut out flying, you're basicaly green already.
Don't fly, especially internationaly.
If you cut out flying, you're basicaly green already.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
I have a "save the planet" bumper sticker on my SUV, a greenpeace badge on my luggage, and I constantly complain about other people not being green enough, that makes me super green.
As Eera already implied, the only way to live a green lifestyle, is to consume less of everything.
I have a "save the planet" bumper sticker on my SUV, a greenpeace badge on my luggage, and I constantly complain about other people not being green enough, that makes me super green.
As Eera already implied, the only way to live a green lifestyle, is to consume less of everything.
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
That's peanuts, in general. (although it can add up if done consistantly)
Seriously, giving up flying is the biggest difference you could make.
Also, it's not popular, but nuclear power is safer and less environmentaly damaging that most forms of power production. (cue nukeular=bad a priori)
Written by: stout
As Eera already implied, the only way to live a green lifestyle, is to consume less of everything.
That's peanuts, in general. (although it can add up if done consistantly)
Seriously, giving up flying is the biggest difference you could make.
Also, it's not popular, but nuclear power is safer and less environmentaly damaging that most forms of power production. (cue nukeular=bad a priori)
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Peanuts? Well I did intend it as a generalization meant to include air travel, but I see where you're coming from jeff.
I don't see how we're going to meet our energy needs without nuculear.Wind, solar, tidal are all fine sources of green energy however I don't see them meeting our needs as a society. But if we were willing to reduce our demands......
Peanuts? Well I did intend it as a generalization meant to include air travel, but I see where you're coming from jeff.
I don't see how we're going to meet our energy needs without nuculear.Wind, solar, tidal are all fine sources of green energy however I don't see them meeting our needs as a society. But if we were willing to reduce our demands......
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Stout, I have an artical here from a non-nuclear related journal, which states that, due to the general inefficiencies and low returns with alternative fuels, if Australia was to build one alternative fuel energy station every month for the next five years, the total output would be around 20% of the consumption demand by the end of the century.
If 'green' is an attitude, I'm probably not it; my cars are 3.5l V6 and a 5.4l V8, I use normal plastic bags (which I then use as big bags), my trade is allied to both construction and coal mining, and I'm probably not willing to do envirnomentally concious things if I have to go out of my way to do them, and yet, according to the global impact footprint thing, I'm on the good side.
It makes my head hurt.
Stout, I have an artical here from a non-nuclear related journal, which states that, due to the general inefficiencies and low returns with alternative fuels, if Australia was to build one alternative fuel energy station every month for the next five years, the total output would be around 20% of the consumption demand by the end of the century.
If 'green' is an attitude, I'm probably not it; my cars are 3.5l V6 and a 5.4l V8, I use normal plastic bags (which I then use as big bags), my trade is allied to both construction and coal mining, and I'm probably not willing to do envirnomentally concious things if I have to go out of my way to do them, and yet, according to the global impact footprint thing, I'm on the good side.
It makes my head hurt.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
GOLD Member
grasshopper in training
124 posts
Location: Australia
grasshopper in training
124 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
I heard the radio show you refer to. I think the most interesting point (not that they made it very clear) is that if you do things like use the green bags and the lightbulbs and think you are green then your conscience is clear.
Then you don't listen as carefully to environmental warnings/messages because you are already doing your bit.
But the speakers (and other scientist) all agree that using green bags is Not going to save the world and the world is at the stage where it needs saving.
Just cause you use green bags doesn't mean you can stop writing letters to our fearless (and stuuupid) leader... campaining... telling your friends not to buy packaged foods... educating your co-workers about the environmnental impacts of non-organic foods... thinking about where your (especially cotten!) clothes come from.
Lots of stuff... just cause you use green bags doesn't mean you are green but i think the more important point was that just cause you think or call yourself green doesn't mean you are doing your bit (although good on you for doing thinking about it - and i am certainly not saying i am any better, i realise more and more each day how little i do)
Oh... and stop having babies
*runs for cover*
I heard the radio show you refer to. I think the most interesting point (not that they made it very clear) is that if you do things like use the green bags and the lightbulbs and think you are green then your conscience is clear.
Then you don't listen as carefully to environmental warnings/messages because you are already doing your bit.
But the speakers (and other scientist) all agree that using green bags is Not going to save the world and the world is at the stage where it needs saving.
Just cause you use green bags doesn't mean you can stop writing letters to our fearless (and stuuupid) leader... campaining... telling your friends not to buy packaged foods... educating your co-workers about the environmnental impacts of non-organic foods... thinking about where your (especially cotten!) clothes come from.
Lots of stuff... just cause you use green bags doesn't mean you are green but i think the more important point was that just cause you think or call yourself green doesn't mean you are doing your bit (although good on you for doing thinking about it - and i am certainly not saying i am any better, i realise more and more each day how little i do)
Oh... and stop having babies
*runs for cover*
There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
The operative word being NEEDS (not wants). Most people are so wasteful with electricity it's gobsmacking. In Australia it should only cost under $150 a quarter per person for elecricity to live a decent life, but a lot of people spend 3 to 10 times as much as that on their bill. I've been into a lot of people's houses on the locum service and a scary number of them have TVs on that aren't being used or lights on in every room.
Written by: stout
Peanuts? I don't see how we're going to meet our energy needs without nuculear.Wind, solar, tidal are all fine sources of green energy however I don't see them meeting our needs as a society. But if we were willing to reduce our demands......
The operative word being NEEDS (not wants). Most people are so wasteful with electricity it's gobsmacking. In Australia it should only cost under $150 a quarter per person for elecricity to live a decent life, but a lot of people spend 3 to 10 times as much as that on their bill. I've been into a lot of people's houses on the locum service and a scary number of them have TVs on that aren't being used or lights on in every room.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
It's certainly NOT "green" to own a camper, dribbling oil and smoking exhaust, camuflaged with stickers: STOP NUCLEAR POWER!
It certainly is not "green" to have water and electricity running, without needing it.... I have met so called "Neo-Hippies" and artists living in a colony where neither heating, nor water and electricity cost a cent. The result was running light, water and heating, open windows 24/7 - even in winter. To be "green" or a "Hippie" is a little more than not taking a shower, not cleaning your room/ car/ camper and not cutting your hair...
The thing is nobody really needs to be "green". The planet will be destroyed, sooner or later. It's in the nature of things that they get born, have a certain life span and die (i.e. are transformed into something else, giving up their physical body)... NO matter what we try, this rock will at some time stop circulating this star - it will be gone.
We simply hold the power to either prolong or shorten the period in which mankind is able to inhabit this rock.
Personally I ceased to violently oppose the destruction of the environment. Why? Because I noticed that I am treating my very own body not much better. I am smoking, I am doing things I know I shouldn't, etc. When mistreating "my very own planet", how can I possibly criticise or judge others upon their actions? You may say that I simply destroy my own body and others destroy the foundation of life as we know it. But to me this is not much difference.
What all of us can do is to start right in front of our doorsteps and do all those simple things.
It's certainly NOT "green" to own a camper, dribbling oil and smoking exhaust, camuflaged with stickers: STOP NUCLEAR POWER!
It certainly is not "green" to have water and electricity running, without needing it.... I have met so called "Neo-Hippies" and artists living in a colony where neither heating, nor water and electricity cost a cent. The result was running light, water and heating, open windows 24/7 - even in winter. To be "green" or a "Hippie" is a little more than not taking a shower, not cleaning your room/ car/ camper and not cutting your hair... The thing is nobody really needs to be "green". The planet will be destroyed, sooner or later. It's in the nature of things that they get born, have a certain life span and die (i.e. are transformed into something else, giving up their physical body)... NO matter what we try, this rock will at some time stop circulating this star - it will be gone.
We simply hold the power to either prolong or shorten the period in which mankind is able to inhabit this rock.
Personally I ceased to violently oppose the destruction of the environment. Why? Because I noticed that I am treating my very own body not much better. I am smoking, I am doing things I know I shouldn't, etc. When mistreating "my very own planet", how can I possibly criticise or judge others upon their actions? You may say that I simply destroy my own body and others destroy the foundation of life as we know it. But to me this is not much difference.
What all of us can do is to start right in front of our doorsteps and do all those simple things.
Written by: ] For example, I deliberately bought a house within walking distance of work so I very rarely drive, I bought a solar heating system, a rainwater tank and turn off all sockets when not in use, my air-con is an ultra-efficient inverter and I have no central heating. On the other hand, I have no altruistic motives for any of these; I do them because they save me money. Is this green or penny-pinching? [/quote
Does it matter? In the end we all will find out that dealing with garbage and cleaning up the environment costs us heck more, than having implemented "green" technology in the first place.
The only thing that matters is: How do you feel about it? IF it feels good to throw the filter of your cigarette, or any other garbage into the environment, go ahead. But write it down and keep it until you retire from work - because as a retired citizen, most likely you will walk around complaining about youngsters throwing their broken skateboards into the bushes...
Just don't be a hipocrate. Be aware! and inform yourself about the impact that you have on the environment every day. I reckon if we are aware of our actions and the possible consequences, it will all just be fine...
Great thread however
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Eera, if I'm reading your statement right, 60 alternative power plants in the next five years, coupled with estimated population growth by the end of the next century ( which by my math is about 93 years away ) doesn't seem like such a bad deal. How about if Australia built one a month for the next 93 years? What sort of percentage then?
Btw, I don't actually own an SUV, I was going to buy one, but decided on a Chev minivan with a 4.3l V6 which, for all intents and purposes is just as bad as an SUV but seems to fly right under "environmentalists" radar as being evil. I only put 4000 km on it last year, and when I compare that to the hippies in the volkswagen who I knew drove 20 000km, I COULD sit back with a smug feeling of self satisfaction that, in the grand scheme of things, I'm greener than they are. Go me.
I'm "green" for financial reasons too, and I do all the typical things like recycling, composting.minimizing power usage, but I refuse to carp on about my own goodness, simply because I KNOW I can do more,,,lots more, like getting rid of my van, and refusing to fly, however I don't want to, purely for selfish reasons.
The environment is one of those issues where I find the unwillingness to walk the talk, tedious.
Fire Tom, next time you're in Bangkok, toss a cigarette butt on the sidewalk, stamp it out, then pick it up. Note the reaction of the Thai people around you, they'll usually smile in approval, it's a great help in international relations
Eera, if I'm reading your statement right, 60 alternative power plants in the next five years, coupled with estimated population growth by the end of the next century ( which by my math is about 93 years away ) doesn't seem like such a bad deal. How about if Australia built one a month for the next 93 years? What sort of percentage then?
Btw, I don't actually own an SUV, I was going to buy one, but decided on a Chev minivan with a 4.3l V6 which, for all intents and purposes is just as bad as an SUV but seems to fly right under "environmentalists" radar as being evil. I only put 4000 km on it last year, and when I compare that to the hippies in the volkswagen who I knew drove 20 000km, I COULD sit back with a smug feeling of self satisfaction that, in the grand scheme of things, I'm greener than they are. Go me.
I'm "green" for financial reasons too, and I do all the typical things like recycling, composting.minimizing power usage, but I refuse to carp on about my own goodness, simply because I KNOW I can do more,,,lots more, like getting rid of my van, and refusing to fly, however I don't want to, purely for selfish reasons.
The environment is one of those issues where I find the unwillingness to walk the talk, tedious.
Fire Tom, next time you're in Bangkok, toss a cigarette butt on the sidewalk, stamp it out, then pick it up. Note the reaction of the Thai people around you, they'll usually smile in approval, it's a great help in international relations
veteran
1,328 posts
Location: Bendigo, Vic, Australia
1,328 posts
Location: Bendigo, Vic, Australia
Posted:
If you live in Australia and use normal electricity, you aren't as green as you think you are.
Australia are still running on coal for our electricity, research the amount of carbon emissions we produce.
Yes, Australia have signed the Kyoto Protocol, but whilst we are earning money from coal, we refuse to rectify it, which in short means we are refusing to cut down on our green house emissions.
Australia and USA are the only 2 countries out of 55 who signed the protocol who are yet to rectify it.
However, this is not the place to discuss this.
I'm not as green as I should be, but I have the knowledge to be, which is more than most people these days.
We have the problem though of more environmentally devices being more expensive than not so great stuff, so many people refuse to be environmentally friendly stuff
If you live in Australia and use normal electricity, you aren't as green as you think you are.
Australia are still running on coal for our electricity, research the amount of carbon emissions we produce.
Yes, Australia have signed the Kyoto Protocol, but whilst we are earning money from coal, we refuse to rectify it, which in short means we are refusing to cut down on our green house emissions.
Australia and USA are the only 2 countries out of 55 who signed the protocol who are yet to rectify it.
However, this is not the place to discuss this.
I'm not as green as I should be, but I have the knowledge to be, which is more than most people these days.
We have the problem though of more environmentally devices being more expensive than not so great stuff, so many people refuse to be environmentally friendly stuff
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
Sure, all things are born and then die, but would you kill a new born puppy? There's a difference.
Written by: FireTom
Personally I ceased to violently oppose the destruction of the environment. Why? Because I noticed that I am treating my very own body not much better. I am smoking, I am doing things I know I shouldn't, etc. When mistreating "my very own planet", how can I possibly criticise or judge others upon their actions? You may say that I simply destroy my own body and others destroy the foundation of life as we know it. But to me this is not much difference.
Sure, all things are born and then die, but would you kill a new born puppy? There's a difference.
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
I also really honestly don't think that going from driving a 'fuel guzzling' 5.4L V8 to a 2L rag-runner is going to do stuff all, when, less than 100km from my house is a mine, where they run somewhere in the region of 40-60 mammoth diesel engines. nigh on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. I'm talking huge, dirty, smoky monstrous machines. Agreed, diesel is, by nature, more economic than petrol, but me cutting out 50 kilo's of pollution per year isn't going to do jack when there's lots of stuff running and pumping out my yearly pollution in a week.
Also, something i recently thought about, is this: Could use of wind farms and, to a lesser extent, solar panels, mess up the environment? I'm not talking the production side of things, but for electricity to be made out of moving air, that moving air has to lose as much energy as is being put into the power lines. Could excessive wind farm use bugger up the wind?
I also really honestly don't think that going from driving a 'fuel guzzling' 5.4L V8 to a 2L rag-runner is going to do stuff all, when, less than 100km from my house is a mine, where they run somewhere in the region of 40-60 mammoth diesel engines. nigh on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. I'm talking huge, dirty, smoky monstrous machines. Agreed, diesel is, by nature, more economic than petrol, but me cutting out 50 kilo's of pollution per year isn't going to do jack when there's lots of stuff running and pumping out my yearly pollution in a week.
Also, something i recently thought about, is this: Could use of wind farms and, to a lesser extent, solar panels, mess up the environment? I'm not talking the production side of things, but for electricity to be made out of moving air, that moving air has to lose as much energy as is being put into the power lines. Could excessive wind farm use bugger up the wind?
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
50 kilos? You mean 1 or 2 tonnes...
Interesting idea... of course you'd need millions of them to have any effect, but the effect would be there. Even if the wind did get stuffed up, would this cause catastrophic climate change? Any meteorologists around?
Written by: MiG
me cutting out 50 kilo's of pollution per year isn't going to do jack when there's lots of stuff running and pumping out my yearly pollution in a week.
50 kilos? You mean 1 or 2 tonnes...
Written by: MiG
Also, something i recently thought about, is this: Could use of wind farms and, to a lesser extent, solar panels, mess up the environment? I'm not talking the production side of things, but for electricity to be made out of moving air, that moving air has to lose as much energy as is being put into the power lines. Could excessive wind farm use bugger up the wind?
Interesting idea... of course you'd need millions of them to have any effect, but the effect would be there. Even if the wind did get stuffed up, would this cause catastrophic climate change? Any meteorologists around?
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Sigh. It's not easy, being green.
Sigh. It's not easy, being green.
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
Pooh-Bah
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
Posted:
aha! oh but it will make a difference - this is where you get to the 'if everyone in the world...' bit. nope it won't make much difference on its own, but if you make your little difference & back it up by having a good attitude & encouraging others to follow you then you might make more of a difference than you think.
old point i know, but i thought it was worth repeating!
Written by: MiG
but me cutting out 50 kilo's of pollution per year isn't going to do jack when there's lots of stuff running and pumping out my yearly pollution in a week.
aha! oh but it will make a difference - this is where you get to the 'if everyone in the world...' bit. nope it won't make much difference on its own, but if you make your little difference & back it up by having a good attitude & encouraging others to follow you then you might make more of a difference than you think.
old point i know, but i thought it was worth repeating!
I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
SILVER Member
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand
Posted:
It has to go both ways... Until a hella lot more people accept how serious the ecological crisis is and start taking resonsibilty for their own actions there isn't going to be any political pressure for the institutional action which is desperately needed.
While it may be economical for me to not drive a gas guzzling SUV, or fly to China - thus making it sensible both economically and ecologically the same doesn't hold true for institutional activities. The diggers at the mine up your road will be loads more economically efficient that a man with a spade - who would be ecologically prefferable. It does make economic sense for a corporation's cheif executive to go and visit his factories in order to maximise efficiency there...
Externalising environmental damge in search of short term financial gain is basically what a CEO HAS to do... His job is to maximise shareholder profit - not ensure his shareholders grandchildren have a sustainable ecology. This externalisation of social and environmental damage in pursuit of short term capital gain is not anything new... In the 1840's it was described by Marx and Engels as one of the internal contradictions of capitalism - which they predicted would eventually lead to its replacement. (Sorry... I think I may have started ranting here... anyways)
My point is that if we - as people posting on a hippy-ish internet message board, connoting that we are likely to have both, liberal/emancipatory social and environmental ideals and a sufficient level of technicity to access a great deal of credible evidence pointing towards a looming ecological catastrophe unless we personally and collectively engage in immenent radical environmental and social reforms - can't make personal decisions like not flying/owning SUV's because they're inconvenient to us personally... Then what hope do you see of our society collectively making decisions which will most likely be detrimental in the short term to people's standards of living (certainly in the industrialized world - dealing with the extreme global material equalities created by integrated world capitalism, and the potential for global collusion between rich and poor nations in collectivist ecological action is another threads worth of ranting)?
I suppose I might liken being 'green' to being a political activist... It's about doing things that you would rather not (or not doing the things you'd like to more often in this case), for what you see as a long term collectivist benefit. If there are commonsense things which make sense both economically and ecologically then great... But it has to go further than that if we're to avoid a whole lot of future suffering for most of the people and other organisms on the planet.
Written by: MiG
but me cutting out 50 kilo's of pollution per year isn't going to do jack when there's lots of stuff running and pumping out my yearly pollution in a week.
It has to go both ways... Until a hella lot more people accept how serious the ecological crisis is and start taking resonsibilty for their own actions there isn't going to be any political pressure for the institutional action which is desperately needed.
While it may be economical for me to not drive a gas guzzling SUV, or fly to China - thus making it sensible both economically and ecologically the same doesn't hold true for institutional activities. The diggers at the mine up your road will be loads more economically efficient that a man with a spade - who would be ecologically prefferable. It does make economic sense for a corporation's cheif executive to go and visit his factories in order to maximise efficiency there...
Externalising environmental damge in search of short term financial gain is basically what a CEO HAS to do... His job is to maximise shareholder profit - not ensure his shareholders grandchildren have a sustainable ecology. This externalisation of social and environmental damage in pursuit of short term capital gain is not anything new... In the 1840's it was described by Marx and Engels as one of the internal contradictions of capitalism - which they predicted would eventually lead to its replacement. (Sorry... I think I may have started ranting here... anyways)
My point is that if we - as people posting on a hippy-ish internet message board, connoting that we are likely to have both, liberal/emancipatory social and environmental ideals and a sufficient level of technicity to access a great deal of credible evidence pointing towards a looming ecological catastrophe unless we personally and collectively engage in immenent radical environmental and social reforms - can't make personal decisions like not flying/owning SUV's because they're inconvenient to us personally... Then what hope do you see of our society collectively making decisions which will most likely be detrimental in the short term to people's standards of living (certainly in the industrialized world - dealing with the extreme global material equalities created by integrated world capitalism, and the potential for global collusion between rich and poor nations in collectivist ecological action is another threads worth of ranting)?
I suppose I might liken being 'green' to being a political activist... It's about doing things that you would rather not (or not doing the things you'd like to more often in this case), for what you see as a long term collectivist benefit. If there are commonsense things which make sense both economically and ecologically then great... But it has to go further than that if we're to avoid a whole lot of future suffering for most of the people and other organisms on the planet.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Nietzsche
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Well said!!!
Well said!!!
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
'Twas well said, even if I did have to read it three times to understand it
There's something I wish activists would come to terms with, We need more than their words to inspire us to change, we need their examples.
'Twas well said, even if I did have to read it three times to understand it
There's something I wish activists would come to terms with, We need more than their words to inspire us to change, we need their examples.
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Stout, most activist I know *are* living their examples... But you would have to spend time with them, and interact within their communities in order to see that. They show what they can in their protests, awareness campaigns etc, but the real inspiration is, for me, just the practical stuff, seeing how people actual live their words, and that is demonstrated in their day to day lives.
PS -PM me with your phone number 'kay? I lost it, and there is some fun workshop stuff coming up!!
~A
Stout, most activist I know *are* living their examples... But you would have to spend time with them, and interact within their communities in order to see that. They show what they can in their protests, awareness campaigns etc, but the real inspiration is, for me, just the practical stuff, seeing how people actual live their words, and that is demonstrated in their day to day lives.
PS -PM me with your phone number 'kay? I lost it, and there is some fun workshop stuff coming up!!
~A
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
enthusiast
242 posts
Location: L.O.N.D.O.N.
242 posts
Location: L.O.N.D.O.N.
Posted:
"You must be the change you want to see in the world."
Mahatma Gandhi
(As etched on the heart of every activist I know)
To be green you must not just talk the talk, but walk the walk and more (as Dream so eloquently explained). This is why many criticised Al Gore on his international promotion of An Inconvenient Truth, and of David Cameron when he flew to the North Pole to say how green he was. Others say that the benefits of increased awareness out weigh the direct affects.
Its not a simple debate and there is no easy answer. One way would be to look into to a person's heart, to see if they really cared. Perhaps possible with a close one, but with a politican or business type?
Of course caring isn't enough; one can care but, for one reason of another, not act. Today lethergy and disempowerment are rife, others are scared to act. Some even act without caring; does David Cameron really care or is it merely an electoral ploy?
Therefore someone is 'green' if they care and they act. However the second is easier to determine than the first.
"You must be the change you want to see in the world."
Mahatma Gandhi
(As etched on the heart of every activist I know)
To be green you must not just talk the talk, but walk the walk and more (as Dream so eloquently explained). This is why many criticised Al Gore on his international promotion of An Inconvenient Truth, and of David Cameron when he flew to the North Pole to say how green he was. Others say that the benefits of increased awareness out weigh the direct affects.
Its not a simple debate and there is no easy answer. One way would be to look into to a person's heart, to see if they really cared. Perhaps possible with a close one, but with a politican or business type?
Of course caring isn't enough; one can care but, for one reason of another, not act. Today lethergy and disempowerment are rife, others are scared to act. Some even act without caring; does David Cameron really care or is it merely an electoral ploy?
Therefore someone is 'green' if they care and they act. However the second is easier to determine than the first.
BRONZE Member
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Still wiggling
5,967 posts
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)
Posted:
Dream... you do indeed rock, very nicely said.
Dream... you do indeed rock, very nicely said.
Getting to the other side 
veteran
1,328 posts
Location: Bendigo, Vic, Australia
1,328 posts
Location: Bendigo, Vic, Australia
Posted:
Whilst we are quoting here, this is one of my favourites. It is on the wall of our outdoor & enviro studies room, and is ALWAYS being used in class 'discussions' (aka arguments)
"Never doubt that a small group of people can change the world- it's the only thing that ever has"
-Margaret Mead
Anthropologist
Whilst we are quoting here, this is one of my favourites. It is on the wall of our outdoor & enviro studies room, and is ALWAYS being used in class 'discussions' (aka arguments)
"Never doubt that a small group of people can change the world- it's the only thing that ever has"
-Margaret Mead
Anthropologist
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Unfortunately I am not that certain anymore, that it's only and exclusively the industrialized western powers, who damage and destroy the planet. I am not certain, who causes more damage: the fuel guzzling SUV's in the US or the millions of "unclean" TukTuks, Trucks, Rickshaws or Motorcycles in India, China, Indonesia and many more developing countries on the planet.
Do you read anything about "killing newborn puppies" in my post? I am not patient enough to ponder what the heck you could be talking about...
And what is the crap bout "if you are not flying international, you're basically safe"??
Unfortunately I am not that certain anymore, that it's only and exclusively the industrialized western powers, who damage and destroy the planet. I am not certain, who causes more damage: the fuel guzzling SUV's in the US or the millions of "unclean" TukTuks, Trucks, Rickshaws or Motorcycles in India, China, Indonesia and many more developing countries on the planet.
Written by: psyrush
Written by: FireTom
Personally I ceased to violently oppose the destruction of the environment. Why? Because I noticed that I am treating my very own body not much better. I am smoking, I am doing things I know I shouldn't, etc. When mistreating "my very own planet", how can I possibly criticise or judge others upon their actions? You may say that I simply destroy my own body and others destroy the foundation of life as we know it. But to me this is not much difference.
Sure, all things are born and then die, but would you kill a new born puppy? There's a difference.
Do you read anything about "killing newborn puppies" in my post? I am not patient enough to ponder what the heck you could be talking about...
And what is the crap bout "if you are not flying international, you're basically safe"??
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Speaking of trying to be green, has anybody seen this ? At least it's a step in the right direction.
Speaking of trying to be green, has anybody seen this ? At least it's a step in the right direction.
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
If you take an international flight you will emit more carbon than you could save over a year. Cutting them out, by taking a local holiday for example, will cut your carbon emmissions drasticaly. Any other changes you make are trivial in comparason (but by no means useless).
Written by: FireTom
And what is the crap bout "if you are not flying international, you're basically safe"??
If you take an international flight you will emit more carbon than you could save over a year. Cutting them out, by taking a local holiday for example, will cut your carbon emmissions drasticaly. Any other changes you make are trivial in comparason (but by no means useless).
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Here is a green suggestion from Jeanette Winterson, one of my favorite authors. She has also set up super efficient geothermal heating system at her place, and is very conscious and activist in other concrete ways too. She has a great website on all that she does, green and otherwise...
Quoted from this months column on the site:
"I have installed my Rain Water Harvesting tank. Can anyone tell me why it attracts VAT at 17.5%? Why there aren’t any grants available for people who have the space to do it, but perhaps not the means?...
No wonder I went to the Tory party conference – not because I am a Tory, but because our planet is worth more than anyone’s politics.
One good thing – if you live in the UK, why not switch your electricity supply to ECOTRICITY. Call 08000 326 100 or visit www.ecotricity.com. All their power comes from wind turbines sensibly erected (not on peat-bogs!) and with the support of the local communities where they are found. The more of us sign up to renewable energy suppliers, the more the government will have to take it seriously. "
Just thought I would mention it to the Brits, don't know if it is common knowledge or not! Sounded like a good idea though. Anyone out there researched or tried this at all?
~A
Here is a green suggestion from Jeanette Winterson, one of my favorite authors. She has also set up super efficient geothermal heating system at her place, and is very conscious and activist in other concrete ways too. She has a great website on all that she does, green and otherwise...
Quoted from this months column on the site:
"I have installed my Rain Water Harvesting tank. Can anyone tell me why it attracts VAT at 17.5%? Why there aren’t any grants available for people who have the space to do it, but perhaps not the means?...
No wonder I went to the Tory party conference – not because I am a Tory, but because our planet is worth more than anyone’s politics.
One good thing – if you live in the UK, why not switch your electricity supply to ECOTRICITY. Call 08000 326 100 or visit www.ecotricity.com. All their power comes from wind turbines sensibly erected (not on peat-bogs!) and with the support of the local communities where they are found. The more of us sign up to renewable energy suppliers, the more the government will have to take it seriously. "
Just thought I would mention it to the Brits, don't know if it is common knowledge or not! Sounded like a good idea though. Anyone out there researched or tried this at all?
~A
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com