From: Corwyn J. Alambar (nettiger@best.com)
Date: Tue Aug 22 2000 - 13:22:26 MDT
Remember when technology was the best friend of most of the mainstream
environmentalist movement? New crops would limit the amount of farmland
needed. Solar power (and even nuclear power) would reduce our reliance upon
polluting coal and oil. Maglev trains would make nosy, fuel-guzzling
aircraft obsolete. Increased understanding of ecology was going to allow us
to clean up polluted sites and held up better manage and protect endangered
species.
well, what has changed? "No new rail" cry environmentalist groups in the Bay
Area. "Frankenfoods" cry environmentalists in Europe. Signs protesting
technology at all levels have been seen amongst the protesters outside the WTO
meeting, the World Bank meeting, and the RNC and DNC gatherings in Philadelphia
and Los Angeles. Ted Kazcinski (sp?) is slowly becoming what he most wanted
to be and what msot peopel scoffed at him ever becoming: a role model, an
architect of what is increasingly becoming the manifesto of the neo-Luddite
movement.
When and where did we lose ground, and how can we remedy this situation? I'd
begin by saying that many of the technological solutions have been poorly
implemented, overhyped, and require a lot of social reengineering to be
plausible on the scale they were sold for. Economic realities have sapped
the urgency of some of the broadest-reaching but expensive "green"
technologies. And finally, a combination of success in environmental causes
and a growing retrospiritual movement has led to the "religionizing" of the
Left.
Environmentalism is becoming more f a religion than a sociopolitical thought,
at least organized environmentalism. The initial arguement against GM foods,
for example, is the questions it poses for vegetarians, partticulaly those
who have spiritual reasons for not eating meat - how many animal genes must
be in something before it is considered an animal? Also amongst
environmentalists, the notion of corporations as evil, and technologists as
simply handmaidens for "corporate greed" (are these two words even separable
anymore?) is accepted axiomatically. In the eyes of most environmentalists,
ANY technology is evil, and will eventually aid and abet the "pave the earth"
mentality, regardless o fhow "green" it may seem.
The economic reality of the world has changed since the 1970s. OPEc seems
unwilling to play the sort of embargo games that gave the green technology
movement such a boost in the 1970s. Growth in affluence, especially in the
United States, has led consumers to accept higher energy costs as a simple
fact of life - there is no clamouring for a new clean technology in a world
where 8 MPG SUVs are a status symbol. Unfortunately, with the slowly lowering
costs of energy and steel and other manufacturing goods, green technologies
cannot really compete economically. And without price pressures to look for an
alternative, certain key technologies (i.e. batteries) are moving slowly.
Unforutnately, green technology was also oversold, without taking into account
certain social values that make it difficult to implement. Take, for example,
rail. Maglev rail has not really taken off as a means of moving people outside
of certain runs in Europe and in Japan, both places where society is less
car and space-oriented. In the United States, the "American Dream" still
involves owning a private home in the suburbs, far away from the noise, bustle
and crime of the cities. Unfortunately, this has led to suburban sprawl, which
is extremely inefficient for rail travel. Additionally, after airline
deregulation, in addition to the lowered cost of fuel, aircraft tickets have
become cheaper in real terms than hey were during the 1970s, for most
domestic flights in the US.
Fortunately, most of the public does not yet buy into the Fundamentalist Left's
ideas of what environmentalism is. There is still room to combat this image,
and promote a more rational environmentalism, where technology is a key part.
I would say we have little choice; it won't be long before there is a movement
to ban all space launches because of the pollution caused by rocket engines.
-Corey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:34 MST