Since its inception in the 1700’s, America has had the mindset that more is better. When the settlers exhausted the land in the east, they gradually moved west. For years, they thought they could move west perpetually, somehow forgetting that the earth is round, and eventually you come back to the starting line. Eventually, they ran into the Pacific Ocean, and were startled to realize that there was a limit to their expansion. Not satisfied, they built piers. Even this was not enough, so they began to move north and south, acquiring more land, resources, and wealth in their path. Wealth, by simple definition, is the amount of “stuff” you have. This idea has remained unchanged since the beginning of human civilization. Unfortunately, the US is a bleeding poster child for this state of greed. David Wann calls this Affluenza, as if it is a disease that causes one to consume more and more. If everyone lived like Americans do, we would need two whole more earths just to sustain that lifestyle. That is just the problem. Nearly everyone in the developing countries seeks this “buy now, pay later” lifestyle.
Consumption is not inherently a bad thing. It is a natural process that all organisms incur. The problem is that humans have broken the natural levels with intellectualism and marketing. If all organisms consume at a sustainable level, with no unnecessary waste, then the ecosystem is in balance. Humans come built in with hunger, joy, pain, rest, and pleasure satiety levels. When we push past these natural levels, or set points, we become over consumers. The question becomes two-fold: what are the set points and are they quantifiable? That is a hard thing to measure, but I believe the best way to quantify this with today’s science is through the concept of ecological footprints. An ecological footprint analysis determines the necessary amount of land to sustain one’s lifestyle. Certain things like eating red meat and petroleum fueled activities use proportionally more acreage than eating chicken and using solar power, for example. Americans, on average, are already using more than twice their share of land. This is what needs to be controlled.
I am not proposing that everyone sell their cars and become organic farmers (necessarily). If everyone reduces their consumption of things that require less land, that will be a huge first step to making the Earth’s resources more sustainable. Another important premise to this concept is to change both how much we consume as well as how we consume. By doing an ecological footprint analysis, one can pinpoint which areas of their life to minimize.
By taking these few steps, we can begin to quantify consumption. This works on a personal level because when an individual conserves one unit of x downstream, it saves an average of ten units of x upstream. Plus, it will save more money and time on an individual level. If we don’t buy as much, it is reasonable to assume that we won’t consume as much. If we can do things more efficiently, and with less energy, then it will most likely save time as well. This concept of reducing consumption on a personal level is essential to the health and welfare of our global community.
Posts
classified ads
No comments:
Post a Comment