In a thought-provoking piece in Orion Magazine, author Derek Jensen proposes that people individually can’t “save the world” by making small changes in their lives. His proposes people must work for political change because individual consumption contributes only a small fraction of energy use, trash, and pollution.
It is true that industry wastes more in a year than any individual could use, even over a person’s lifetime. It is also true that the individual is by definition only the tiniest of fractions, approximately 1/6 billionth. It seems impossible that the little guy could make a difference.
This is not cause to give up on your conservation efforts, however. It is a reason to accelerate change, spread the word, and hope.
To quote the Confucian teachings:
The ancient people who desired to have a clear moral harmony in the world would first order their national life; those who desired to order their national life would first regulate their home life; those who desired to regulate their home life would first cultivate their personal lives; those who desired to cultivate their personal lives would first set their hearts right; those who desired to set their hearts right, would first make their wills sincere; those who desired to make their wills sincere would first arrive at understanding; understanding comes from the exploration of the knowledge of things.
That is the point of this site: the exploration of the knowledge of things. The exploration of the knowledge of things leads to amazing results:
When the knowledge of things is gained, then understanding is reached; when understanding is reached, then the will is sincere; when the will is sincere, then the heart is set right; when the heart is set right, then the personal life is cultivated; when the personal life is cultivated, then the home life is regulated; when the home life is regulated, then the national life is orderly; and when the national life is orderly, then the world is at peace. From the Emperor down to the common man, the cultivation of the personal life is the foundation of all. It is impossible that when the foundation is disorderly, the superstructure can be orderly. There has never been a tree whose trunk is slender and whose top branches are heavy and strong. There is a cause and a sequence in things, and a beginning and end in human affairs. To know the order of precedence is to have the beginning of wisdom.
This is the message I’m trying to convey here: All things flow from understanding. Though it may take time, change at the grass-roots level means change in the world. In other words, knowing what to do to reduce your personal waste and sharing with others can lead to positive change.
What do you do to work for change? Even if it seems small, keep doing it. But always share the knowledge.
2 Comments
With regard to conservation, the only way to significantly change individual behavior is through economic means. If there is a (significant) free market incentive to conserve, which requires little or no thought, people will conserve. If there is not, the vast majority of people will simply not care or else will lack sufficient knowledge to effectively change — despite countless efforts at education. I don’t go out of my way to “live green” because the result is negligible. My time and money is better spent investing in technology companies who are researching new, more efficient technologies. (or inventing and marketing the technology myself!) Meanwhile, I think nothing of “wasting” more resources for my own convenience in the process. The environmental value of my inventive time is worth far more than the environmental value of presently available conservation means.
Note that I do care about saving money on energy because that affects my wallet significantly. I use CFL’s (but not LEDs), moderate the thermostat, drive safely and efficiently, take shorter showers, wash clothes on cold, etc. Combined, these save easily $1500/year with no additional effort. I do tell people how much they could save by trivial choices that do not significantly affect standard of living. From what I’ve seen however, most ignore the advice or apply it improperly. The proper solution is green technology you don’t have to think about. Default conservation. Everything else is a fool’s game.
Well, there are those who want to change on their own, though I have a self-interest in lower energy bills isn’t based on economic incentive. I don’t see that as a free market incentive, but a demand-side choice on my part.
I’m a big fan of Energy Star label, especially E* 5.0 for computers. They are beginning to certify power factor, and I think it’s a significant step. The apparent to real power gap needs to be closed. Low PF hurts the grid’s capacity to handle load, and I’m glad awareness is arising of this subject.
As for industry, they have no ‘free market incentive’ to improve their efficiency because they have no pressure on them. All of the pressure has been pushed off on to the consumer. The choices we make are heavily scrutinized while the 200 kVA machines they run are not. There are a number of formulas the accountants in manufacturing run that say changing out inefficient tech for newer tech is not worth it because it harms production. Sure, the new equipment could use 1/10th the power, but the line would stop, and the change out would do harm.
And even though some factories are off-line shutting down due to the economy, this is not the time a company can afford the hardware swap.