Forget Shorter Showers
orionmagazine.org
orionmagazine.org
Really? You're still convinced the Tsar was a serious tyrant? The Tsar was a little Debbie snack cake compared to his replacement. This is a good view of the deep memory hole into which the left throws every incompatible truth. In an article essentially advocating latter-day communism, he puts in a dig against Nicky, the nicest ruler Russia ever had.
[1] I realize that some businesses are several transactions away from serving consumers directly. Doesn't change the point that all business exists to produce stuff people want.
Unfortunately the solution suggested by the article is the destruction of "intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures". How unoriginal. I was waiting for some scheme of energy/resource taxes which, if harsh enough, would surely influence the behavior of the 78% evil scary corporations.
Suppose I contribute 22 tons of pollution by driving my car, and GM contributes 78 tons of pollution building the car. Therefore, if I don't buy the car, pollution only drops by 22 tons!
This analysis ignores the fact that if I won't buy a car, GM won't build it (reducing pollution by 100 tons).
> The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries (like electricity) to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world—none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.
I'm a poor guy in a poor country, and I _will_ hurt anybody who tries to destroy the civilization we live in. Reform by destruction is never a good idea.
This being said, I am much more optimistic about political measures. Simply taxing pollution or setting even voluntary (but open and controlled) standards can make the difference showers can't.
The thing is that global warming doesn't have an on/off switch. If we cut back emissions by 22%, then we're slowing down the global warming process significantly. As much as I'd like to see big business curb their carbon emissions, there's simply no way they will be cut back by 75% anytime soon.
Individuals do not have any significant influence, the industries need to cut back. The industries only exist to make stuff for people to buy. I am going to present the obvious, naive solution that everyone seems to be ignoring. Cut back your spending by 75%. Every dollar you spend eventually becomes oil and is burned by big business. In the words of Don Lancaster (1), "It is both a valid and useful concept to think of 'using dollars' as 'spending gasoline'".
Showers don't waste any water at all, it all gets reused.
It's little known that water that people use gets recycled many many time in its journey to the ocean.
Big city in the north pulls water from a river, uses it, down the sewer, and puts it right back into the river. Next city down the river does the same, and over and over for each city down the entire river's length.
The problems are cities like atlanta which have mostly septic systems. And watering lawns.
But using water in showers or washing machines doesn't waste it at all.
Next green movement: down with septic systems!
"Just wait it out and complain loudly" seems to be all he has to offer. Given he thinks the world is basically going to end if something isn't done I'd say that's a pretty stupid strategy
Deleted comment