There are really two kinds of schools of thought around conservation and environmentalism more generally. There are the back-to-earth types, and more high-tech oriented ways of doing things, emphasizing technological solutions to environmental problems like solar panels, lithium ion batteries, heat pumps, electric cars, etc.
The technocratic environmentalists are often pushing for top-down solutions that use the latest in research to provide solutions to human needs and wants that use advanced materials to reduce per capita carbon emissions. They often look at per capita emissions, multiplying them out by population, and have bold hopes that with the right technologies we as a society can be less polluting and less destructive to the earth. Their much touted-solar and wind farms sound great on paper, but what does it mean to the environment and landscape when a lot of our energy comes from them sprawled out over millions of acres?
In many ways, they seem hopelessly naive. For one thing, many of green things in aggregate are less green, especially those who which use heavy metals like cadmium-infused glass for solar panels or various rare-earths for magnets or even more natural materials like timber or farm crops rather then plastics. Often people are sold on things being compostable, even though they are quickly used and discarded to a landfill which is largely sealed from air, bacteria and water to speed biodegradation. Many material collected for recycling ultimately have no value and end up being landfilled. There definitely is a lot of scams surrounding the green-living, high-tech environmentalism put forward by some.
On the other hand, you have the back-to-the-land homesteaders, the off-griders, and country folk who produce a lot of their own needs from the lands they live in. While their per capita emissions might be higher — not everybody can live on 20 or 40 or even a 100 acres of land — in many ways they are living much closer to the earth. Where they raise and harvest their own meat and vegetables without plastic packaging, generate their own power on-site largely using renewables, manage their own waste by composting, burning, reuse and off-site recycling. Rather then consuming 10.3 MWh of fossil-fueled grid power electricity per year and 400 therms of gas per year, and having bins full of trash weekly trash-haul, they are much more self-sufficient.
Technocratic environmentalists often look down at homesteaders. All ruminants from cows to sheep burp methane when they breakdown hay and grass in their stomachs. Off-grid and farm living often means hauling large machinery and water tanks, which means fuel-hungry pickup trucks. Wood stoves and burn barrels produce noxious smoke at levels far above the urban-dweller who relies on gas or electric heat and uses a municipal landfill or incinerator to dispose of waste. Livestock produce manure and make mud which can run-off and is smelly. Even regulated hunting and trapping consumes animals, even if it’s below levels that significant impacts the environment. Remote locations often require longer commutes both for work and purchasing things.
I am not fan of feel-good environmentalism. Certainly I am willing to embrace green technology if it actually improves sustainability, reduces emissions and protects the environment but it can’t be like so many of green technologies popularly sold today to “do your part”. I do respect those who live close to earth, be it homesteader or farmer, who rejects technology and mass-media crass commercialism. That life might be more enviromentally-impactful on a per capita basis, but better for local environment and certainly the person who lives such a life.
As they say, we already know what the next recession will look like. Flooding the market with crappy junk people don’t need and can’t afford but are deceived by the easy-payments of Buy Now, Pay Later. Stuff that people will later on have to pay for get rid later on. Things often with little value, often with most of the value used up shortly after the product is delivered, and before it’s paid off. Stuff folks can’t afford and won’t be able to pay back. It just makes me sick.
I have never liked consumer credit for any purpose. If you can’t afford it now, then you shouldn’t go out and buy it. Instead, you should save money, put it away until you have the money to buy it. Don’t take advantage of zero percent financing, but instead take advantage of the interest you can get from FDIC-insured savings accounts, especially the higher-interest online accounts. And when you take your time, you can reconsider how essential the purpose really is.
There are a lot of people out there who are legitimately poor. I get it, I grew up that way too. But I also have always rejected credit — if I can’t afford something, I won’t buy it. If there is something I really want, then I will wait until I have enough money saved up to buy it. Time to consider the product more carefully before purchasing. And I have always learned to live with less, even if at times it’s less comfortable.
I read this Jane Jacobs book a few years back. I am starting to think she is right about the decay and rot that is creeping into contemporary society.
The following is a summary of Jacobs’ description of the decay in each area.
Community and Family People are increasingly choosing consumerism over family welfare, that is: consumption over fertility; debt over family budget discipline; fiscal advantage to oneself at the expense of community welfare.
Higher Education Universities are more interested in credentials than providing high quality education.
Bad Science Elevation of economics as the main “science” to consider in making major political decisions.
Bad Government Governments are more interested in deep-pocket interest groups than the welfare of the population.
Bad Culture A culture that prevents people from understanding the deterioration of fundamental physical resources on which the entire community depends.
But then again, if was sitting in the same seat in fifty years ago, the decay probably would have looked even worse — things weren’t exactly looking up when you looked out in the window of the world in 1969 with the Vietnam War underway, crime and inflation creeping in, and the wheels just about ready to come off the economy as the world plunged into the 1970s.
And she makes a still very valid point when it comes to ideology:
Overall, Jacobs argued that the very concept of “ideology” is fundamentally flawed and detrimental to both individuals and societies, no matter what side of the political spectrum an ideology comes from. By relying on ideals, she claimed people become unable to think and evaluate problems and solutions by themselves, but simply fall back on their beliefs for “pre-fabricated answers” to any problem they encounter.
I was told the other day, I should buy more shit. 💩
I’m like no, I’m tired of things breaking all the time and needing maintenance. I’m happy with the shit I already have. I don’t need anymore. I’d rather use the money, save and invest it, so I have a more secure retirement, and eventually can afford land that will be my own little kingdom in the wilderness.
I have to think about how much black smoke and how smelly most of that junk would be once it’s used up and you toss it in a fire to get rid of it! The best thing to do for your own life is to spend less money and invest more.
Since getting interested in nutrition and healthy living, I like to explore a wide variety of perspectives on healthcare and diets. I am interested in various medical conditions, and how I can avoid them to remain healthy. I also often review various not-for-profits for work by viewing their websites.
And now the Internet has decided I must have HIV/AIDS.
Like every other website I go to is now has advertising regarding the symptoms of HIV/AIDS, what to eat if you are immunocompromised, what medications are out there for treatment. It’s just gross and creepy at the same time that the internet has decided I have a live-threatening disease, and I must be followed around the Internet with information about HIV/AIDS everywhere I go.
