I would say "Seasons Greetings" but perhaps "A farewell to Seasons" is a more fitting greeting given the after (lack of) math of our shared Copenhangover. Curious creatures with great potential were it not for a few fatal flaws. The history of humanity emulates the structure of a Shakespearean play long before it had Shakespeare to so poignantly identify it repeatedly with such eleoquence in his work. We just cannot seem to see the forest for the trees. Resistance to change seems forever preferred over rising above and being proactive. I hope its not human nature and that we are as protean on this one as we are on some other issues (such as mobilizing for war) but there sure is a lot of evidence that our own survival as a species is quite beyond our ability to secure against the biggest threat of all (the one we always address last if ever): ourselves.
Saturday 19 December 2009
What if...
I would say "Seasons Greetings" but perhaps "A farewell to Seasons" is a more fitting greeting given the after (lack of) math of our shared Copenhangover. Curious creatures with great potential were it not for a few fatal flaws. The history of humanity emulates the structure of a Shakespearean play long before it had Shakespeare to so poignantly identify it repeatedly with such eleoquence in his work. We just cannot seem to see the forest for the trees. Resistance to change seems forever preferred over rising above and being proactive. I hope its not human nature and that we are as protean on this one as we are on some other issues (such as mobilizing for war) but there sure is a lot of evidence that our own survival as a species is quite beyond our ability to secure against the biggest threat of all (the one we always address last if ever): ourselves.
Tuesday 21 April 2009
Happy 40th Earth Day Everyone!
Lordy, lordy look whose 40! (Well, okay 4.5 billion.) The thing about paying 1/365th of your attention to something is that you get predictable results. In 1970 Earth Day was a big day. Lots of gatherings, protests and positive vibes. These days it is more of a institutionalized mild nod overshadowed by economic and consumeristic diversions. Whatever we do about it, Earth is and will continue to be the Living planet. The only role we have to play is to decide if we want to continue to be part of it. Earth, the cosmic miracle... Ours to recover...
Friday 27 February 2009
Social Ingenuity - Inventions Technological Cleverness
It continues to happen. Even though we (must?) know there are cheaper, easier, more effective and more sustainable solutions by now. Barack's plan for energy transformation is innovative and brave. But I cannot help but put it in perspective.
We keep betting our current and future assets on finding ways to continue consuming energy in the quantities we do. Yet the real ingenuity is not technological.
Its right here and its right now and its the lowest hanging fruit of all. Its not using it up in the first place. Its negawatts v megawatts. Its legs, bicycles and public transit v. cars.
Its things money and technology cannot buy: A walk in the woods. A stroll by the lake. A chair on the porch. A cool drink of water. A lazy summer breeze. A cup of tea with a friend. Its things we hear, taste, smell, touch, do, make, write, speak, ourselves. Its game with the kids. Its philosophic conversations. All of these things are right here, right now, right in front of us. Its worthwhile not lifestyle.
This is not to say that industrial society does not need financial investment and technological innovation to achieve very desirable and needed efficiencies to reduce material and energy use and "throughput" to a more sustainable level. It only says, we need to question the rate of usage we currently take for granted. It says we need to question the assumed rate at which we consume that is currently the invisible foundation on which we think we need to surge forward with sophisticated and expensive technological innovation. It also says that questioning our assumptions ("the unexamined life is not worth living" remember?) about the amount of material it takes to be happy will create more "space" in which to transform our societies. We can lament the difficulties of getting political decision makers to create and implement public policies that are sustainable. And we should. But, in the mean time, we can see the possibilities right in front of us that are liberating in that they do not require any major political movement to implement on the personal, family or even community level.
In the the end, most of our engineering feats in modern society will lie rusted and idol as the primary fuel on which they were build will be spent and unacceptable to the assimilative capacity of nature.
Very little of what really matters requires big financial investment, scientific ingenuity, material or energy consumption. Its just you me and our skills and time that will secure a future.
We keep betting our current and future assets on finding ways to continue consuming energy in the quantities we do. Yet the real ingenuity is not technological.
Its right here and its right now and its the lowest hanging fruit of all. Its not using it up in the first place. Its negawatts v megawatts. Its legs, bicycles and public transit v. cars.
Its things money and technology cannot buy: A walk in the woods. A stroll by the lake. A chair on the porch. A cool drink of water. A lazy summer breeze. A cup of tea with a friend. Its things we hear, taste, smell, touch, do, make, write, speak, ourselves. Its game with the kids. Its philosophic conversations. All of these things are right here, right now, right in front of us. Its worthwhile not lifestyle.
This is not to say that industrial society does not need financial investment and technological innovation to achieve very desirable and needed efficiencies to reduce material and energy use and "throughput" to a more sustainable level. It only says, we need to question the rate of usage we currently take for granted. It says we need to question the assumed rate at which we consume that is currently the invisible foundation on which we think we need to surge forward with sophisticated and expensive technological innovation. It also says that questioning our assumptions ("the unexamined life is not worth living" remember?) about the amount of material it takes to be happy will create more "space" in which to transform our societies. We can lament the difficulties of getting political decision makers to create and implement public policies that are sustainable. And we should. But, in the mean time, we can see the possibilities right in front of us that are liberating in that they do not require any major political movement to implement on the personal, family or even community level.
In the the end, most of our engineering feats in modern society will lie rusted and idol as the primary fuel on which they were build will be spent and unacceptable to the assimilative capacity of nature.
Very little of what really matters requires big financial investment, scientific ingenuity, material or energy consumption. Its just you me and our skills and time that will secure a future.
Monday 9 February 2009
The Economic Quantitative & The Ecologic Qualitative
The fundamental problem with environmental economics as a framework for analysis and advocacy for sustainability is that it is restricted to using quantitative methods to achieve an essentially qualitative goal. Sustainability lies on multi dimensional gradient and cannot be fully conceptualized, understood let alone actualized on a two dimensional plane.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
