> The set up for our son is 'insurance' against the likelihood that current
> trends continue rather than change as you (and most I know) hope. I plan
> for probabilities rather than long shots.

But we have to be careful that this planning doesn't become a self-fulfilling
prophecy.  If the idea of "the coming cull" (as it is also being spread by
Hollywood) sinks in in the public mind, caring for the environment becomes
irrelevant -- thinking that the planet is doomed anyway --; on the contrary,
people will squander even more resources, trying to "enjoy" the "final few
days we have" as much as they can.  And one has to question the eco-footprint
of living far out in the sticks on a vast piece of land just for 2 people...

Rather, the doom/cull concept has to be rejected and fought as a non-option.


> http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/2009_Data_Tables_hectares.xls
>
> It has an ecological deficit of -4.3   Norway, Latvia, and some others
> have ecological credits.

The metrics used by this site are a bad joke, totally warped.  For example,
Romania is painted as pretty good.  But that's a country that literally
treats the environment like dirt, e.g. burning car tires in coal
powerplants without filters, making the black rubber pieces rain down
even 30 km from the powerplant.  Wanna bet that the ivory-tower guys
who made this chart have no idea of such practices?

Or take Norway.  This "great model" country has TWICE the per-capita oil
revenues of Saudi Arabia, literally swimming in hundreds of billions of
this polluter money, however it hardly spends anything on renewable energy
research (as that would ruin their oil profits) or even implementation.

Chris



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword
"igve".


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to