The trouble with environmentalists

[T_i_B]

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_ball/2007/12/the_trouble_with_environmental.html

Environmentalists can be a demanding crowd. They variously want to save endangered species, save habitats, prevent damage from GM food and, of course, prevent catastrophic climate change. Worthy goals all, but often in conflict - both with each other and with humanity's basic needs for comfortable living standards and enough to eat. Widespread concern for animal welfare and promotion of vegetarianism can be thrown into the mix. We're left with a flurry of incompatible goals, and a cacophony of confused guidance on living ethically.

It's got to the point where humanity's assorted ills are judged so severe that some suggest the earth would be better off if we died out.

It's true humanity is selfish, causes extinctions, and has unchecked population growth. What's also true is that this is nothing new - the history of life is one of frenetic over-breeding, evolution and extinction. "Nature" could not care less who lives and who dies.

If we accept that we want humanity to survive in the future, environmentalism gets complex. Tackling global warming becomes (remains?) absolute top priority. All the evidence suggests that to begin dealing with climate change and cutting carbon emissions requires quick, practical action. This means taking steps acceptable to society at large, rather than idealised solutions. It may mean building wind farms in areas of outstanding natural beauty, or tidal plants on coral reefs. It could well mean building nuclear power for at least the short to medium term. These may not be the ideal solutions, but it is better to deal with scientific and political reality than campaign for pipe dreams.

[sam sarrha]

1. we have the technology RIGHT NOW to supply over 70% of daytime energy thru solar, 3 units across the

SW.. if people just used non carbon chain oils like AMSOIL, 250,000 MILE OIL CHANGE, ABOUT 10% better FUEL ECONOMY.. and extended wear to over 1,000,000 miles on an engine ..that alone would free us of foreign oil

ag hemp oil would free us of foreign oil and tie up auto carbon in a loop

what prevents us from saving the earth and ourselves are CORPORATE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.. BRIBES

[ixion]

2. yep, you said it, sam...

:applause:

There is ample potential energy out there to more than supply us with the energy we require to be 'comfortable'. Had we started this 30 years ago, both we, and the planet, would be in much better shape.

[DCKit]

4. Sorry I posted before I saw yours...

You are absolutely correct. Hemp can produce as much as 500 gallons of oil per acre and does not require chemical processing. Maybe some drying, but not processing with lye and methyl alcohol as with biodiesel. And you still end up with a high protein food product plus tens of millions of tons of animal feed/building/clothing/biomass material and better soil.

Use solar where solar works, wave, wind, eco-friendly hydro and biomass where they work.

It's not as if we don't have the options, we're lacking investment and will.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. How would "10% better fuel economy" free the US of foreign oil

"Imported oil accounts for about two-thirds of US consumption." - CIA Factbook

[DCKit]

3. Euthanize the rabid environmentalists....

You'd be surprised how fast we'd end up with only people who think that balance is possible.

[The2ndWheel]

5. Yeah...can't stop, can't keep going

That's the real problem.