Personally I totally like the idea of we need
something bigger to happen in terms of going green from Professor Maniates'
perspective. It's difficult or even impossible for us to simply 'reuse scrap
paper before recycling' or 'take showers' to be green or environmental
friendly. These actions are environmental friendly ones but they will not bring
out of the current situation of global climate change. Its time for something
larger to happen: the ones will have fundamental effects globally. EPA as well
as other organizations provided us different kinds of lists that can guide us
to choose green actions. The best result that could happen is that we are
"slowing the growth of environmental damage". If we want to avoid the
worst outcomes of global climate change to happen, in next 30 years, 80% of
carbon emission in the States needs to cut off completely. Keep recycling
paper, installing energy efficient light bulbs and taking shorter shower will
not help us cut 80% of the carbon emission. These individual and consumer-centered
actions are the just a tag used by politicians to tell the public that 'we care
about our environment so that you need to this, this and this'. But the fact is
that what is going to work to help the society being green, is much more
expensive but will have huge impacts. Politicians and government organizations
barely talk about these because they know that they do not have that money and
human resource to do that.
In order to achieve the goal of cutting
carbon emission by 80%, far more difficult technologies are needed instead of
tweaking on the margins of what we already have. We need fundamental changes of
our energy use, the way of transportation and agriculture system we have now.
All of these aspects requires tremendous amount of money. I like the idea that
we are grown ups and we know the importance and necessity of making difficult
choices and working hard to make changes. Taking the energy change fro example,
all the infrastructures we have now have to switch for new ones. This will cost
billions of money worldwide. How can politicians raise such huge amounts of
money to make the society going green in each president’s term of service?
Going green has become a tool for the candidates for advertising themselves for
making more job opportunities. It’s a time consuming and costly thing to go
green for politicians; they want things that will have immediate outcomes. The essence
of going green has been narrow down to personal levels. Environmental elites
and our leaders treated us like children. This article really wakes me up
regarding of acting green and going green. While I was trying so hard to go for
green, what our nation is doing?
Still consuming tons of energy to maintain an
American lifestyle for the entire society. While the global north blaming the
global south for deforestations, we are living in a luxury lifestyle that needs
five or more earth to support all population if we live in American lifestyle. Personal
actions can help us starts from grassroots to make changes and brainwashing more
people of the idea “going green”, the individual actions will help the progress
of going green but without bigger actions from the entire society. It’s
impossible to make changes for achieving the goal.
What do you think is the way forward for making the idea of changing infrastructure and "going green" more inviting for politicians? That seems like a significant hurdle especially for the American political system to overcome.
ReplyDelete