I’m currently in a training here in Portland, Oregon, on how to help people do the cool things many would like to do, but have trouble doing, i.e. carpooling, composting and cutting their energy bills. It’s delightfully practical and grounded in real life, and it’s led by expert Doug McKenzie-Mohr — check out his top-notch site on community-based social marketing.
I notice that the sustainability movement happens on a wide spectrum. It ranges from people’s lifestyles and consumption habits on the one end (the usual focus of both Diamond-Cut Life and community based social marketing) to high-level creation of policy on the other end (i.e. regulations and legislation that protect things like clean air for everyone’s greater good). Carbon cap and trade is in the policy category, and one version of it, the Kerry-Boxer bill, is being considered in the Senate currently. Unfortunately, Kerry-Boxer is a weak version of cap and trade. For instance, even the Wall Street Journal reports that under it, major oil companies like Exxon would end up with a net carbon bill of about $277 million, such a small percentage of its annual profits that it would change nothing Exxon is doing. Change, obviously, is what has to happen to address global warming.
I don’t want to criticize people like Senator Barbara Boxer who are putting themselves way out on the line for a bill that is actually progressive in relation to our change-averse culture. So I won’t. Instead, I’ll point out that our culture and our politics are dangerously out of touch with the natural world that is sustaining all our lives. The politicians, businesses and citizens who are opposing carbon cap and trade because it interrupts business as usual are ignoring that our rapidly warming climate doesn’t care about anyone’s business. We depend on the climate. The climate doesn’t depend on us. We have to get over our fear of change, and sharply reduce our carbon emissions. A carbon tax or fee would be more effective than carbon cap and trade.
Doug McKenzie-Mohr points out that policy changes for sustainability are the greatest leverage points to create change. California’s progressive energy policy is a prime example: it is the only state whose energy use is flatlining instead of growing. However. Politicians, ever mindful of the next election, will only pass legislation that the people electing them will accept. And it is generally only the people open to change, including changes in their own lifestyles and consumption habits, that will support the politicians willing to pass change-oriented legislation. Hence, my crafting of the diamond-cut life, the life high in joy and low in consumption, continues on.
A hard, question, Alison! How does change happen? Thankfully in America, usually by our own volition … but sometimes change can be painfully slow when people see no compelling, urgent reason to change. That’s why climate-related action (personal or political) can feel like it’s happening in slow-mo … the urgency factor is largely invisible. We have to TRUST the science that’s predicting global warming and its far-reaching, devastating effects. We have to CARE about the yet-unborn generations that will unfairly inherit a damaged Earth if we don’t change. And we have to CREATE a more sustainable planet through tough laws and concerted personal efforts. That, in my opinion, is how climate-related change will happen.
there’s a circularity to it in some senses, politicians feel they don’t want to make laws that will be unpopular but a lot of people won’t take their own actions if they don’t see action at higher levels.
Also a lot of people think that going green is only about self denial – cut down on this, don’t do this – or extra work – separate your waste – and it can all seem like a lot of extra effort. There’s a lot of joy in simplicity and a lot of environmental organisations don’t seem to get that message out as much as they could.
Finally its all about the economy, politicians in most countries are obsessed with the economy and it rules everything, no matter what the environmental cost. The recession could have been a real opportunity to go greener but mostly has not been really used for that. People are consumerists too and have got used to having nice new things whenver they want…..