My thoughts on being carbon neutral:
1) The very way we are setup to live emits carbon. For the sake of purists, I am excluding breathing as an exception, LOL! Something as trivial as switching on a fan! Our electricity is fossil fuel based. Our automobiles are fossil fuel based. Even if you use public transport, you should take a share of the pie. You can cycle to work - the long term usage fo a bicycle will offset the carbon emitted from a production perspective.
2) In general, the planet has protection mechanisms to offset increased carbon. We are working on a multi pronged approach to disable that! On one side is the steady rise of emissions. On the other side, is the steady destruction of forests (*1).
3) One human being carbon neutral has near nil effect on the atmosphere. But seven billion? But it is not practically feasible. This is not a pessimistic statement of any sort, but the way we are setup in terms of day to day operations makes it infeasible. Can I cycle 30 or 60 kms daily to my office?
4) However, industries can be carbon neutral. Corporations can be carbon neutral. No, I am not trying to shift responsiblity. It is like, giants causing destruction and ants trying to reverse it. People who are directly responsible for a situation can do best to first stop and then reverse damages. For example, if all paper companies decide to use hemp(*2) instead of wood pulp, trees will no longer be cut in the same scale. Today, we are trying to plant trees at an individual level which are being cut at the size of states (see *1 below). And is it practically possible? Why not? See Iceland as an example. (*3)
5) I was originally assuming that all these alarms would either be acted upon, at minimum be acknowledged. But a really cunning strategy being followed is denial. "Yes, we hear you, but you're wrong! These evidences are coincidences or they do not directly produce an inference to the root cause." Very good excuses, but at a point in the future, the undo button will be disabled!
6) We really need to change! Change at a fundamental level. I wrote my thoughts earlier. Just for argument's sake, let us assume that global warming is a myth. In any case, doesn't switching to renewable make sense? Can we agree that, at the current rate, there will be no more trees by 2020 or 2030? Do we have an ingenious plan to produce cheap oxygen cylinders for the entire global community? They day we hear something like that, we can give kudos for royally screwing up something that is in the palm of our hands today - literally!
7) What am I trying to say eventually? Do your best at reducing your carbon foot print. In the end, whatever effect you achieve will only be trivial. Still do it! It will make a statement. But eventually, it is the large scale changes that will save the planet!
(*1) I have written this citation multiple times, from Thom Hartmann's "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight" - the total forest cover in the world is equivalent to the area of USA today. We are removing a chunk equivalent to the size of Florida every year. You do the math.
(*2) Hemp
(*3) Iceland's energy consumption is from 100% renewable sources. No kidding. 27% Geothermal and 73% Hydro power. Please don't start an argument stating Iceland is small.
0 comments:
Post a Comment