How to stay sane in a world with evangelical environmentalists?
Sunday, 31 October 2004 06:01 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
daIn the circles we both run in, we hear from a lot of people who consider themselves good environmentalists; and those people who don't agree with them are, de facto, bad environmentalists. Which is a problem on a number of levels. I don't like evangelical movements, and I don't like bi-polar black/white thinking on topics that I see as many shades of gray.
So, what to do if you're not hardline enviro enough to satisfy the strident ones?
I tend to think the answer includes listening to environmentalists who aren't ballistic. grist.org has some great content.
Among recent articles, one that caught my eye was this blurb, on public policy and tech development in the U.K.
Not only does it suggest environmental policy that isn't f*cked in the head, it's reasonably good news too. A quote:
I Come Back to You Now, at the Turn of the Tide
Brits look to public-service ads and tidal power to cut carbon emissions
On the heels of recent predictions that the U.K. will not meet its Kyoto targets, and a more recent report that the results of global warming will be "disastrous" for the country, Brits are casting about for new ways to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The government is undertaking a big ad campaign in print, on billboards, and possibly on TV, warning of the dangers of climate change and urging citizens to reduce their energy use by taking such steps as buying greener cars and turning down their thermostats.
Also, with Denmark beating them in the race for wind power and Japan winning the race for solar, the U.K. hopes to become the global leader in developing technology to harness the power of ocean tides. The total tidal power available to Britain has been estimated at roughly double its energy consumption. Wave farms, unlike wind turbines, are not visible, residing beneath the waves, and thus don't mar views. [citations]
So, perhaps part of the solution is counterbalancing the stridency with news from reputable sources. And, even, counteracting strident people's arguments with ones that make more sense.
So, what to do if you're not hardline enviro enough to satisfy the strident ones?
I tend to think the answer includes listening to environmentalists who aren't ballistic. grist.org has some great content.
Among recent articles, one that caught my eye was this blurb, on public policy and tech development in the U.K.
Not only does it suggest environmental policy that isn't f*cked in the head, it's reasonably good news too. A quote:
I Come Back to You Now, at the Turn of the Tide
Brits look to public-service ads and tidal power to cut carbon emissions
On the heels of recent predictions that the U.K. will not meet its Kyoto targets, and a more recent report that the results of global warming will be "disastrous" for the country, Brits are casting about for new ways to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The government is undertaking a big ad campaign in print, on billboards, and possibly on TV, warning of the dangers of climate change and urging citizens to reduce their energy use by taking such steps as buying greener cars and turning down their thermostats.
Also, with Denmark beating them in the race for wind power and Japan winning the race for solar, the U.K. hopes to become the global leader in developing technology to harness the power of ocean tides. The total tidal power available to Britain has been estimated at roughly double its energy consumption. Wave farms, unlike wind turbines, are not visible, residing beneath the waves, and thus don't mar views. [citations]
So, perhaps part of the solution is counterbalancing the stridency with news from reputable sources. And, even, counteracting strident people's arguments with ones that make more sense.
