How Sustainable is Our Consumer Culture?

[paw]

On a recent reality show a young couple wanted to purchase a second home in the pacific northwest as a getaway. They claimed to be strong environmentalists and wanted a 'green' home. So what is wrong with this picture? I mean they can afford it so why not?

Well there's nothing wrong with buying a second home if that's what you want. But I don't see how you can claim to be an environmentalist just because it's a 'green' home. The fact is you don't 'need' a second home. You may 'want' one but you don't 'need' it. So it becomes an anti-environmental choice to consume that which you don't really need.

Now if they said 'We want a second home and we know we're consuming unsustainably but, since we're going to do it anyway, we might as well spend a little more and reduce our impact' then I'd give them kudos for honesty. But to claim to be an environmentalist? I don't think so.

How about the people who replace the old inefficient refridgerator with a new energy efficient one? Well it depends. If the new one is 10% more efficient and 40% larger I say you can't claim it's for energy reasons. You want a new fridge sure, and that's Ok. just don't tell me you're saving the planet.

How about granite counter tops, they're a natural product right? Sure, but the energy needed to cut and polish them would keep a third world family for a year. So I say don't claim it's for environmental reasons. Formica will make a smaller footprint.

Replacing servicable carpet with sustainable bamboo? Not environmentally friendly. It might be nice, sure, but it isn't saving the planet.

Renovating the house? Well adding a couple of thousand watts of solar power doesn't justify the renovation on environmental grounds. Just admit that it's for asthetic reasons and we have no quarrel.

I think as a society we've bought into the most effective marketing campaign ever. Consume like never before and justify it in the name of environmentalism.

Now don't get me wrong, I know the climate is changing and I believe we need to do something about it. But I can't see how we can consume our way out of climate change. It's like trying to spend your way out of debt.

 

[brewnog]

Rubbish. I paid to insulate my roof to reduce my energy use. I paid for cavity wall insulation to reduce my energy use. I paid for compact fluorescent light bulbs to reduce my energy use. I fitted a wood burning fire to heat my living room. I lift share to get to work. None of this has anything to do with "need" or 'niceness', but it'll cut down on the amount of fuel I require to heat my house, it'll save me money, and it'll reduce my fossil fuel use too.

Were this couple actually justifying that they were environmentalists as a result of buying a new house, or just trying to minimise the environmental impact of their decision?

 

[paw]

Rubbish. I paid to insulate my roof to reduce my energy use. I paid for cavity wall insulation to reduce my energy use. I paid for compact fluorescent light bulbs to reduce my energy use. I fitted a wood burning fire to heat my living room. I lift share to get to work. None of this has anything to do with "need" or 'niceness', but it'll cut down on the amount of fuel I require to heat my house, it'll save me money, and it'll reduce my fossil fuel use too.

You clearly missed my point. There are many genuinely useful things we can do for the environment and you've mentioned a few. However, there are many choices that aren't justified from an environmental point of view and I mentioned a few.

I was hoping for some intelligent discussion about that.

Were this couple actually justifying that they were environmentalists as a result of buying a new house, or just trying to minimise the environmental impact of their decision?

They claimed to be environmentalists first. My argument is they can't consider themselves that if they are buying a second home. Nobody 'needs' a second home.

 

[NobodySpecial]

There are many genuinely useful things we can do for the environment and you've mentioned a few

Greed is good, greed works ...

Basically energy is proportional to money
Anything you do that reduces your energy usages AND saves you money will reduce the total energy usage - more insulation, using less fuel etc.

Anything you do to reduce your energy usage which COSTS you money in the longterm - solar power, hybrid car - is ultimately energy innefficent because that extra cost either comes from the extra energy needed to produce the 'green' item or goes into an excessive profit which will be spent in energy consuming ways.

 

[paw]

Greed is good, greed works ...

Basically energy is proportional to money
Anything you do that reduces your energy usages AND saves you money will reduce the total energy usage - more insulation, using less fuel etc.

Anything you do to reduce your energy usage which COSTS you money in the longterm - solar power, hybrid car - is ultimately energy innefficent because that extra cost either comes from the extra energy needed to produce the 'green' item or goes into an excessive profit which will be spent in energy consuming ways.

Exactly. Cost is usually a good way to gauge how 'green' something is. Granite is expensive because it takes a lot of energy to cut and polish. Cheaper, man made stone is a better choice from an environmental POV.

Now, I understand why people like expensive things. I do too. Unfortunately, many luxury items are labelled 'green' with very poor justification. I can only conclude that it's clever marketing designed to lessen the guilt of luxury purchases.

 

[apeiron]

Basically energy is proportional to money
Anything you do that reduces your energy usages AND saves you money will reduce the total energy usage - more insulation, using less fuel etc.

Anything you do to reduce your energy usage which COSTS you money in the longterm - solar power, hybrid car - is ultimately energy innefficent because that extra cost either comes from the extra energy needed to produce the 'green' item or goes into an excessive profit which will be spent in energy consuming ways.

That is a good rule of thumb. But it ignores the argument that fossil fuels have historically been underpriced (given their full usage costs, including environmental damage, scarcity value, etc).

In the longterm, consumerism-led economic growth will prove to have been a century-long free lunch at the expense of the planet and future generations.

Charlie Hall is good for the figures...

http://www.esf.edu/efb/hall/2009-05Hall0327.pdf

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19952799/Peak-Oil-EROI-Investments-and-the-Economy-in-an-Uncertain-Future

 

[paw]

In the longterm, consumerism-led economic growth will prove to have been a century-long free lunch at the expense of the planet and future generations.

And I think it will be made worse by supplying false rationalizations to fuel the consumerism. Without the rationalizations people might make better choices.

 

[Char. Limit]

Basically energy is proportional to money

Proportional, eh? Direct or inverse? Are we dealing with polynomial proportionality or exponential? Logarithmic, maybe?

 

[apeiron]

Proportional, eh? Direct or inverse? Are we dealing with polynomial proportionality or exponential? Logarithmic, maybe?

See slide 10 for a graph from a Deutche Bank study...

http://trainsnotlanes.info/Documents/HIRSCHHOUSTON-ASPO-USA.pdf

 

[Char. Limit]

See slide 10 for a graph from a Deutche Bank study...

http://trainsnotlanes.info/Documents/HIRSCHHOUSTON-ASPO-USA.pdf

What an odd proportionality.

 

[apeiron]

What an odd proportionality.

What do you mean by that?

There is of course much debate in the literature both about the linearity of the relationship as well as the direction of the causality.

Increased energy-use efficiency, for example, would exert a non-linear effect on the curves. And you have other issues - like the US off-shoring much of its energy consumption by having its steel made in China for instance - to complicate the analysis.

But broadly, globally, the relationship holds. People think we have become wealthy because we are such a clever species, however mostly it comes back to the fact that we have just burnt more fossil fuel.

Actual cleverness is going to involve achieving a better quality life while remaining within the sustainable limits of the planet.

 

[Danger]

I'm not even vaguely "green", and am irritated by local folk who express that philosophy. To me, the perfect fast food is a chain-saw and a cow; fire is optional. Never put off until tomorrow that which can be avoided altogether. If I catch something of a plant-like nature trying to grow in my yard, I park a car on it.

 

[apeiron]

I'If I catch something of a plant-like nature trying to grow in my yard, I park a car on it.

Am I allowed to be irritated by your philosophy then? For the sake of my kids perhaps?