Now. The question, my friends, is do I want to blog about Maisie's newest circus trick of waking at 5am and yelling until the entire household is up? It would be a safe, quick, harmless post.
Or do I want to address the contentious elephant in the room? The great big enormous topic that is dominating the media, and will only get bigger and more contentious over time? The topic I know I cannot cover properly in a blog post, yet one which is too important to ignore?
Ok. The contentious topic it is. Twist my arm, why don't you?
Have you seen or heard the media furore about "Carbon Cate" and her involvement in the new advertisement about the carbon tax? Cate Blanchett, Michael Caton, and several other volunteers have filmed an ad to "say yes to cutting carbon pollution". Contrary to immediate responses, they were not paid to do this. It was not a tax-payer-funded venture. And although some people are very mad at the wealthy Ms. Blanchett telling ordinary households that rising energy costs are worth it, she's got a point.
Yes, energy bills with a carbon tax would be heinous. Yes, the cost of living is already terribly high. Yes, most Australian families are feeling the pinch. Some more than others - have you noticed how many houses have got caravans in their front yards now? I personally know more than a few people who have had to sell their homes, just to survive. Christian and I are only just holding our heads above water (and if we're being completely honest, our chins are under the water line, and our mouths are just starting to get wet...) But at what point does the economy cease to matter?
Normally, I'd avoid a topic associated with the economy like the plague. I don't "do" the economy. (Christian is most likely nodding his head vigorously at this point. Sorry, honey. I try.) I don't like to discuss things unless I understand them enough to sound half intelligent. Which is why I avoid conversations about politics, cars, cricket, and 'My Kitchen Rules'.
But talking about sustainability? That I can do. When I began my Masters degree in 2005, I had no idea how important it would become to me. I studied Science and Environmental Education, and quickly became engrossed in literature regarding the obsolete environmental education curriculum that was still being taught (occasionally) in schools. What was clear from my reading, was that our children should be receiving compulsory education in sustainability - above every other subject area in school, perhaps the only exception to that being literacy.
The problem was, children usually don't learn things in school unless the grown-ups lead them in the right direction (and ours being such a crowded curriculum, there's precious little time for self-directed topic choice - are you hearing me?) And since the problems of climate change, environmental degradation, endangered species, serious pollution and living in a sustainable manner weren't really considered widely one or two generations ago, there aren't enough adults around with enough knowledge to teach our children properly.
What hope do we have? There are still many *ahem* grown-ups who don't believe in climate change. Um, ok. So how's that working out for you, having your head buried in the sand? Is it sandy?
The fact of the matter is, the extent of damage done to our planet by humans is already so dire, much of it is irreversible. I read one paper by UNESCO that said something that scares me still. Unless Western civilisation abandons the idea of an economy, and completely changes all forms of industry to sustainable methods, the demise of the planet is inevitable. Any decisions made to "help" the environment based on the dollar are useless.
And it's not an impossible task. People have been working on developing sustainable practices in industry for years, ready to implement change when the funds were provided. We have cars that can run on hydrogen, and produce only water as a by-product. Our entire society could have energy provided by clean, sustainable sources. But just as composting your veggie scraps is a personal choice, most of Western consumption is left to the general population. Which means that the cheapest, easiest options are generally chosen. And we can't blame people for that - they're just trying to live happy (or at least average) lives.
Would there be job losses in some industries under a carbon tax? Yep. But there would be new jobs, in newer industries. So in order to bring this change about, there would need to be some differences in the training options available to those in the relevant areas. Would moving to renewable energy cost money? Yes. If we don't move to renewable energy, will the planet eventually (and sooner than we think) die, leaving the human race without a habitat? Yes. So really, putting our recycling bins out every fortnight and feeling as though we've done our bit for the environment ain't going to cut it.
If the world's population was told that there was no choice, that from tomorrow onward, all fruit and vegetables for personal use would need to be home-grown; that heating, cooling and light within the home must be from a sustainable source of energy; that transport must be completed on foot, on bike or in a vehicle run on clean energy; that every piece of waste from the home must be reused or recycled; and that any items purchased from a shop would be from a local source, then people would grumble and argue, and then they would do it. Because if there was no choice, that would be the end of the argument.
The point of the carbon tax, is that very soon, there will be no choice. If we continue to live the way we do, our planet will give up. Ecological health will be a thing of the past, the air will be impossible to breath, and life for humans will be over. Not to be dramatic or anything. The introduction of the carbon tax is an unpopular decision, without a doubt. However, as far as I'm concerned, it's only the beginning. Wait until the standard curriculum is scrapped in schools across the world, in order to introduce teaching methods for sustainable living. Now that's something I want to be around for.
4 comments:
I haven't read the post yet (i will get to it) but wanted to shout 'Hear Hear' on the heading. Me too. Hand my some mungbeans.
It's time our leaders LEAD rather than dragging along behind!!
Ok, now I have read it. And pretty much agree with all of it. My masters was in environmental and business management - and my studies lead me to the conclusion that as long as we keep trundling along the growth paradigm we are seriously screwed. A growth based economy is a dead end economoy in a world of finite resources.
The only thing I disagree with is that the population could be told there is no choice - and still ignore it. We could end up quite easily in a Mad Max scenario, because we humans are like the proverbial frogs in a pot of water that is slowly coming to the boil...by the time we realise how far global warming has progressed....
well anyway, you know the argument. I know depressing.... I just know how unsustainably I live, and I am one of those who does a lot of the good stuff!
Hi Andrea, thanks for reading! No, I totally agree with you. What I meant to say was, the only way humans would change enough is if their options were removed altogether. Love the Mad Max analogy!! But if we wait for everyone to make the right choices, we're screwed. That's why I want to place my hope in the current generation in primary school - but I doubt even they have a chance to get it right!! I appreciate your feedback. Cheers xxx
I am in your camp here. I can't personally afford it, but we can't afford not to have it. A great post - would love to read more about your sustainability ideas x
Post a Comment