Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2007 - 02:31pm PT
|
I disagree with the view that driving to climbing, having kids, etc. is hypocritical if you are an environmentalist.
The Earth HAS the capacity to sustain x number of people consuming x amount of resources. We only recently passed a threshold where we are depleting certain resource faster than the Earth can deal with it. e.g. when we talk about reducing greenhouse gasses it isn't "let's eliminate all greenhouse gasses", it's "let's reduce levels to the level of 1990". We can easily reduce our impacts by 1/3 (recyle, drive a better mpg car, etc.) and the planet will be fine. Of course I'm greatly oversimplifying and we need zero population growth asap, but you don't have to choose between living your life and conserving the planet's resources.
Karl wrote "It's enough to make a guy suspicious when one of these new viruses starts moving around the world. It's getting easier and easier to design them these days. Not hard to fear that some neocon thinkers from somewhere might decide to ease this population problem with their own methods one day."
Except that it would neolibs! I was going to say that sounds like a great premise for a movie, but wasn't that already the premise of 12 monkeys? Good movie.
Yeah Marky, no additional benefits for children after 2, unless they are adopted.
|
|
Dropline
Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2007 - 04:05pm PT
|
But Fet, even if those of us driving and flying to climb reduce our consumption by a third, by world standards we will still be gorging ourselves on carbon. As a greater portion of the world's population modernizes their carbon consumption patterns will become more like ours and the problem remains.
There just isn't any way you can drive a car, any car, and post on the internet and still call yourself an environmentalist, without a degree of self deception and consequent hypocrisy.
No offense intended.... just earnestly making my point.
|
|
MikeL
climber
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 12:32pm PT
|
Maybe I'm just in a pissy mood today . . . .
Bitch, bitch, bitch. To hear people talk about it, the world is about to flame out. Problems, problems, problems. How depressing.
In the 60s a group of scientists called the Club of Rome predicted that by now we'd be up to our armpits in mulch and worldwide wars because population would outstrip food production. Nada.
As a futurist in the 80s, our best predictions only had a 25% probability of being right. I remember seeing only one; it was wrong.
Remember systems theory? You know, the theory that says that everything is connected to everything else? "Fix" one thing, and something else unconsidered changes in ways unforseen.
Look at the big picture.
One: Impermanence rules. Get used to it. There is nothing anyone can do about that.
Two: Resource allocations are always contentious. Someone is bound to get hurt. (See #1)
Three: The earth getting "hurt" or "damaged" are anthropomorphisms.
Four: Want to make a contribution? Work on yourself.
Five: Everything is relative. Go lightly.
|
|
Maysho
climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 03:50pm PT
|
Being an environmentalist to me is being a humanist. The earth is resilient and in the big picture will do fine. The question is, will our actions make life on earth for DMT's daughters kids, "life in hell"? Trying to understanding how nature works and working to redesign how we live in relation to it, is to work for better life quality for the future generations.
Peter
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 03:52pm PT
|
Hey Dropline, good points.
But we don't need to eliminate our impacts entirely, we just need to reduce them to the point that the planet can handle it.
I guess what we could do is figure out what the carrying capacity of the Earth should be approximately, e.g. 6 Billion People (actually it is probably much lower). Then figure out how much emissions each person could contribute without causing global warming. e.g. 200,000 pounds per year (actually probaby much higher). Then limit your emissions to that point. However that would be for some future point in time, when everyone around the world could contribute the same as Americans do today. At this point in time we just need to reduce our impacts to the point where we won't cause additional global warming. So I'm back to the thinking if Americans reduced our emissions to say 1990 levels we'd be ok for now. As other countries develop and start consuming like Americans, we'll hopefully have increase efficiencies (electric cars, etc.) and we can further reduce our impacts at that point.
The bottom line to me is how do we reduce our impacts enough to keep the Earth's environment sustainable for our posterity. I don't think we need to eliminate all impacts for that to happen.
http://www.wikihow.com/Reduce-Your-Greenhouse-Gas-Emissions
en·vi·ron·men·tal·ism
2 : advocacy of the preservation or improvement of the natural environment; especially : the movement to control pollution
I guess it's in how you define preservation. But even a hunter gatherer isn't going to preserve the enviroment exactly how he found it. If you drive a prius 10 miles a year, can you still be an Environmentalist?
My personal philosophy is to do what I want to do (within reason) and make efforts to reduce my impacts as much as practicle. Because it all might not matter anyway. We could have a world war, an asteroid could wipe us out, who knows what the future holds. However I'm pretty sure that if everybody in the US and other developed nations put the same effort into reducing their impacts as I do we wouldn't have global warming (I say that because I see the idiots in big SUVs and trucks roar past me on their rush to the next stop light, my trash minus recycling is about 1/3 of my neighbors, I barely use HVAC in my house, etc.). Maybe in the future I'll have to reduce even more, but that's the future, can't worry about that too much.
|
|
hossjulia
Trad climber
Eastside
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 04:10pm PT
|
"Science is a thought process, the supernatural a belief system, let's be careful not to confuse the two."
You sure about that? Just what does "Super-natural" mean anyway?
I know plenty of people who have adopted science as their belief system, and others who use their thought processes to develop a personal belief system.
I'm a humanist. What is good for people, in the long term, is also good for the planet. What is good for people is not necessarily what they think is good for them either. Current society is a good case in point.
Most people would say they HAVE to have roof over their head and food on the table or they will die, or at the very least, get very sick and/or be socially unacceptable.
Not true, and why do they think this? Because that's the story we have been told. And why is that story told? To make money.
Capitalism is a dead end and is killing our planet.
But for those of you who think environmentalism will "save" the Earth, I say you are very cocky, the Earth has been around a lot longer then we have, and no doubt will be around long after Homo Sapiens has extinguished itself.
What we need to worry about saving is ourselves!
Edited to add: Maysho,I didn't read your post first, I think you said it better.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 04:13pm PT
|
"I don't know WHY we swallowed that fly Karl. But any 'solution' that excludes or overlooks the 7 plus billion Indian and Chinese is no solution at all. "
That's for sure. I think we should be spending every penny that being borrowed for the Iraq war on clean, renewable energy development from now until the coast is clear. Just like happened in Asia with cell phones, if better technology is available, the developing countries can jump into the new technology right away rather than build wasteful obsolete infrastruction.
The important thing I would note for those who dislike this kind of discussion is this. Don't get complacent and think it's all going to work out with we the people being seriously involved. In the course of history, most societies don't realize they are toast until it's far too late. This is particularly our fault in the US where we feel invincible and that we'll always be on top and that science will bail us out when we're in a pinch.
That's never been the case for any empire in history. This country is going down for sure unless we see change coming long enough in advance to do something about it.
As for your kids, even forgetting about Global Warming and Oil Depletion for a moment... Our government is living on totally borrowed money with no hope of ever balancing the budget in sight ever. We are producing less and less in this country with little change in that on the horizon. When does the bill come due? When will others stop loaning us money to finance our lifestyle when it's obvious that we're just printing oil sales backed money and we can never pay back our debt? There has to be end someday.
Seems to me that if we were in the "Clean energy manhatten project" business we would at least be having an economy at home that could take us somewhere. As it is, our economy totally depends on our making, exporting, and using weapon of death and destruction. I'm shamed by it. What makes us any better than gangsters?
What would happen to the US economy if peace broke out over the world. Would we try to prevent it?
We have to wake up. We're like teenagers that feel immortal and can't see where our actions are leading us
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 04:26pm PT
|
Fet, the carrying capacity of the earth if we didn't use fossil fuels is estimate to be between 2 and 3 billion folks. Sure we have fossil fuels (which also fuel global warming) which will still last us awhile but how long do we plan to be alive here (not only for your kids but when if there's reincarnation?)
It hardly matter what small acts we do personally (except for our own karma) when the world as a whole refuses to see and act on the future but insists on squandering our resources and money on war and killing. We should be fighting to save our future by using our remaining fossil fuels cleanly and in a way that invests in a long future. (ie Windmills, Solar Panels and tide farms use a lot of fossil fuels to develop)
Marky I'm in total disagreement with you. Tell me what could replace oil in our world and how it could be brought up to scale. Don't forget that we're not just talking about gas for cars. We eat oil.
My understanding is that copper is now at an all time high. Care to document that it's cheaper than decades ago?
Peace
Karl
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 05:29pm PT
|
"carrying capacity of the earth if we didn't use fossil fuels is estimate to be between 2 and 3 billion folks"
Time to start developing that virus... A nice virus that only makes stupid people sterile.
"It hardly matter what small acts we do personally (except for our own karma) when the world as a whole refuses to see"
That's true but we can start to make a difference. Look at how much change Al Gore has helped bring about.
For me it's like trash in natural areas. I would never dream of leaving trash behind. When I'm out hiking and I see garbage I'm always tempted to clean it up, but it's often not practicle. So I make sure to clean up after myself, and if I have room in my pack I'll pack out some other people's trash too. But I can't worry about all the trash, or I'd spend my life picking up after other people.
|
|
atchafalaya
climber
California
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 06:53pm PT
|
"We stand for what we stand on." B. Abzug
|
|
hossjulia
Trad climber
Eastside
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 08:20pm PT
|
great quote. If you can name the book, then you qualify.
|
|
MikeL
climber
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 08:59pm PT
|
"It hardly matter what small acts we do personally (except for our own karma) . . . ."
Karl, my friend, I can't believe you actually said that!
It's all karma, and it's all personal. I'm sorry to grandly disagree, but there's nothing else, nothing else at all. I know you and others sometimes see a roiling sea of puppets with a few string-pullers in the background, but it's all up to you, the others reading this, and me. Be that person you want everyone else to be. It's a handful and a lifetime's project.
In Tibetan Buddhism, we do a lot of imagination in meditation under the belief that if we were to completely imagine ourselves to be a Buddha, we would be so, period. Everything is your mind.
Peace back at ya.
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 09:02pm PT
|
Karl wrote in quoting me, "I do disagree wh"The only way everyone can be happy is if we all share a reasonable standard of living," if you mean a standard of living considerably higher than much of the world has. I know that's not true because I've seen many, many people just as happy with much less."
Karl, I am not saying this in a mean way, so please do not take it as such, but you saw the people you are talking about while you were jet setting around the world recreating, correct? People who live in primitive conditions everywhere want better. Remember the cargo cults in the South Pacific? My dad saw those guys first hand in WWII. Maybe their wants are pretty simple, but the more they know about the world usually the more they want. Maybe all they want are a few steel tools. What I was saying is I have a clear realization of the huge infrastructure behind that simple steel implement. You try to make me out to be a hypocrite for saying I want to have a nice bicycle and acknowledging the infrastructure that requires. I'll answer that with this declaration, imagine how much better off our country and planet would be if we could pry everbody out of their auto's and get em on a bicycle. I personally challenge everyone reading to do this, if you can do something without driving, do so. Driving is the worst thing we all do to our environment. I have a vehicle and I drive it when necessary. For me, that is usually once a week, sometimes less, sometimes more. Last year I drove less than 5000 miles. Admittedly I did not drive to the mountains as much as I might have to climb or ski, but I was happy with what I did. Maybe you can't be happy without a lifestyle that requires driving hundreds of miles a week, if that is so, probably you should not be passing judgement on people who live without electricity, refrigeration, phone service, etc... Think about that while you type away on your computer and think about the infrastructure that it took to put that computer in your house and connect it to the whole world. Denying others what you take for granted is very shortsighted. Are any here willing to give up nylon climbing ropes or aluminum/titanium/steel climbing hardware? Probably not. Think about the industry required to put those implements in your hands. In the long run a sustainable population size supported by high tech industry should be our goal. We must run our industries as cleanly as we can with as little impact as possible. In turn, we as individuals must do our part to minimize our impacts. I have chosen to drive less, and yes, it is a sacrifice. But no matter how much we are willing to sacrifice as individuals in the long run it will not matter if we cannot limit the world population. Personally I prefer taxation as the method, but no matter how go at it if we do not succeed in the long run nothing else we do will matter.
Michael
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 10:55pm PT
|
Michael, I didn't call you a hypocrite or make any negative remark except to say that people can be happy with a more primitive lifestyle. If they (and we) are forced to, we'll be more OK than we think. That's all. Happiness is within
which brings me to MikeL
I agree with you 100%. We are just speaking from different levels. On the macro- world level, I'm saying we need to do big things to solve these problems but perhaps our everyday life is what sets the example and energy into action.
I don't want to see folks just ride their bikes and recycle and say "I don't need to think about politics and our war machine, i've done my bit by cutting back" It's better than nothing but the hour is getting late and the world is painting itself in a corner. Not a corner than will get us older guys, but I fear for the grandkids for sure, and that's bad enough. I don't think the kids will get a picnic either.
Peace
Karl
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2007 - 11:45pm PT
|
Karl, nowhere have I said I don't think about politics or the war machine. I apologize if I read a slight into your comments, but I think your remark about people "riding their bikes" gets right to the heart of the matter. Don't want to feed the war machine, big oil, etc...? My answer is get out of your car. You can't make a more powerful statement without taking up arms against the government. Of course, if its just a few of us making that statement the big guys can easily ignore us, write us off as a few left wing nuts. If you truely believe you can be happy with less, make that less driving and you will be taking an incredibly positive step. I am active politically and I am as anti-war as anyone I know, but the biggest vote you make from day to day is with your dollars. Don't give them to big oil! It is a big sacrifice to make in your personal lifestyle, but I say put your money where your mouth is. I do it as much as I can within my reality. That reality includes climbing, skiing, seeing some wild places. That means I have to drive at least some amount. but every time I buy gas I am very conscious of who is getting that money and how much they are f*#king up the world with it. I have organized my life so I don't have to drive very much, imagine how different the world could be if all of us were willing to make that sacrifice. If you are going to talk the talk, walk the walk (literally)!
Michael
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Michael
I certainly agree with you in spirit but I don't think it necessarily works the way you want it to. If you conserve, and a bunch of us conserve, the price of gas goes down and the incentive for industry to build gas guzzlers goes up. That's one of the things that happened when Carter forced us to conserve. If oil is cheap, China and India also just burn more too.
So its great if you reduce driving for your own reasons and maybe it helps but maybe it doesn't.
Read about Jevon's paradox as it relates to petroleum use here
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/SecondPage.html
Peace
Karl
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Now wait a minute.
Simple living and high thinking is knott primitive, but real advancement.
This modern iron age of cars and computers is primitive.
In the old days one had good brain and didn't need a computer which is and extension of brain. Such weak brain we now have that we need to make an extension.
Just see how the illusionary energy works it's wondrous ways to entrap us deeper and deeper into materialism.
|
|
Hootervillian
climber
the Hooterville World-Guardian
|
|
"Science is a thought process, the supernatural a belief system, let's be careful not to confuse the two."
You sure about that? Just what does "Super-natural" mean anyway?
the only thing i'm sure of is that i'm not sure of anything. science has no answers, it's just that, a process, and not a very comforting one if you're searching for individual contextual relevance.
I know plenty of people who have adopted science as their belief system, and others who use their thought processes to develop a personal belief system.
i'm sure you do.
What is good for people, in the long term, is also good for the planet.
this one's going to take a little time just to define what good means. however, this seems the appropriate thread.
|
|
hossjulia
Trad climber
Eastside
|
|
I agree with Werner, I think.
"Good" can be so subjective.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!