|
I think more emphasis should be placed on the "reduce, reuse" aspect of personal involvement in environmental efforts. As has been stated before, the actual effectiveness of recycling on waste reduction is a complicated issue, and isn't necessarily one that can be settle with across the board endorsements or condemnations.
Reducing and reusing will always help. Don't drink bottled water. Get a reusable bag for your groceries. Get a travel mug for your coffee. Ride a bike, fatass. Take the bus. Don't live 20 miles away from where you work if you live in an urban area. Shut your lights off. Don't waste energy inadvertently heating or cooling the outside of your house.
It isn't that difficult to conceive of ways to be more efficient. Efficiency is cheaper too, if you don't happen to find the idea of squandering our planet's natural resources all that compelling.
The problem is that the plight of the environment isn't all that interesting to the vast majority of people. They're more concerned with other things, like how to fit in. Efficiency isn't sexy. It is the exact opposite of the kind of wealthy extravagance that is the bread and butter of modern western (and increasingly eastern) culture.
Concern for the environment is cultural, and until we start treating it that way, any attempts to cultivate mass appeal on its behalf are doomed.
It will be unfortunate if this whole global warming thing doesn't pan out (we're kind of locked in to this little experiment at this point) because it will mean that a possible cultural in for environmental consciousness has been squandered. But then again, if global warming doesn't end up being the doom and gloom it's supposed to be, that'd probably be a good thing.
|