Let me start with my motivations. When it comes to climate change, I know two types of people. One group does not believe in global warming. The other cannot believe that there are actually human beings who do not believe in it. The vast majority fall into the second category.
I'm in a group all by myself. I believe in global warming and that we humans are probably the biggest aggravating factors. On the other hand, I can see why people might be skeptical. It's really hard to trust in our media and politicians, and the stolen emails are easily misread to indicate a cover-up of one big lie. In this case, I do think we have access to some pretty clear data, but some aren't so sure.
So, maybe instead of focusing on things we can't yet agree upon, we should look at undeniable facts.
Fossil fuels are limited. Whether we engage in offshore drilling or exploit other reserves, they will run out. Is it acceptable to leave our children and grandchildren to figure out the energy problem when we know the problem is out there?
The most accessible deposits of these fuels are under the control of other countries. Do we go to war to gain access to the fuel? Some may answer that we do not. The almost 10 million barrels of crude oil imported to the US each day equal dependency. In that case, is it healthy for our country's economy for us to be so dependent on this import? (source: US Energy Information Administration)
If the damage to the Earth's o-zone is not clear to all, can we agree that the pollution from auto transportation pollutes the air at our level? Is the correlation between this and increasing rates of allergies and asthma too far a leap?
Consumerism in other areas is also damaging to the Earth. The production of cotton clothes items uses an abundance of pesticides, which contaminate water supplies and major bodies of water and use extreme amounts of energy and water to process. According to the EPA Office of Solid Waste, Americans throw away more than 68 pounds of clothing and textiles per person per year. Is this acceptable? Is it moral to create things we think of as being so disposable that we cast them off at such a rate? Why are we buying things we don't want or need in the first place?
The Society of St. Andrew reports that forty to fifty percent of all food ready for harvest in the US never gets eaten. Again, why is this okay? Why do we allow this to happen?
So, yes, I am trying to decrease my impact because I believe it will help in the fight against global warming. But I also think it's my responsibility to do my part because I cannot tell my little sister or my future children that it's up to them to solve the energy problem without the help of the generations who helped create it. It's my job because I take responsibility for my own health and would like to be able to breathe clean air. I want to decrease my impact because I do care about my water supply (as well as others'). And finally, I want to decrease my impact because it is senseless to pay to waste resources.
World leaders have been meeting in Copenhagen to hammer out agreements regarding how we will address the need to reduce our environmental impact. I hope that they are able to come to an effective agreement, but everything about it is complicated. It will not happen overnight. Economic factors aren't just about greed. They are also about keeping people from starving. I do have hope that some little bit of progress will come from Copenhagen.
No one has all the answers, but I absolutely have answers about what I can do. That is, I can consume less, I can reuse what I can no longer use in its present form. I can compost. I can reduce my impact by eating less meat. I can turn off the lights when I leave the room. I can watch less TV. I can drive less. I can ask my local government for more usable public transportation. And I know that my own changes are small, but I hope others will choose a change to make this week. And another one next week. And another one the next.
Image Credit:
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment