Went to the meeting of our local Eco-Group last night at which there was a presentation on carbon footprints. It looked at a 'typical' (but fictional) family called the Meanwells and the energy used and how that affected their carbon footprint. It was high, needless to say, and those of us there were asked to make suggestions on how the Meanwells could lessen their carbon footprint by, for example, using the car less, sharing the car, cycling instead of driving, buying more locally produced food, taking less foreign holidays, insulating the house and eating together to save on use of the oven. They were already doing some positive things, such as having a conservatory and double glazing. But as always in these issues it is not straightforward. For example, solar PV panels save on using fossil fuels and eventually can save money, but they have what is called embedded energy, which is the energy used in their maufacture and transportation which takes several years to be paid off in energy terms. Most solar panels seem to come from China. Is it better for someone who currently commutes to their job to get a flat as a single person in order to be near their place of work? Is it more energy efficient to drive to that Spanish holiday once a year or to fly? Is it better to buy organic vegetables in the shops if they come from half way around the world than to buy locally produced vegetables that have been grown using chemical fertilisers? These are some of the ethical dilemmas which people may face when trying to reduce their carbon footprint. I thought that some people have too much faith in technology to save the world and said so and that in my opinion it would be better if we all lived simpler lives. I realise that most people would not be attracted by that, but one day it may be forced on us by changing circumstances.
Towards the end, someone suggested we go round and ask who is optimistic and who is pessimistic about the future. We didn't go round but a handful of people declared their 'mism. A couple of people declared their optimism but I am a pessimist; always have been and always will be. It goes with the depression, I suppose but it also comes of experience. To me the glass is not half full but half empty! I tend to see the future through a glass darkly. As a Christian, I suppose I should be optimistic at the ultimate destination, but I tend to have a rather more pessimistic view of humanity or put another way, a greater sense of human sin than is probably good for me!
But having said that, if I thought the world was going to end in, say, two years time, I would carry on doing the things I am trying to do now to make things better, such as growing my own vegetables on my allotment, caring for nature and doing voluntary work because they are the right things to do and because whatever happens after we die, while we are alive, we need to have a sense of purpose to keep on keeping on.
Towards the end, someone suggested we go round and ask who is optimistic and who is pessimistic about the future. We didn't go round but a handful of people declared their 'mism. A couple of people declared their optimism but I am a pessimist; always have been and always will be. It goes with the depression, I suppose but it also comes of experience. To me the glass is not half full but half empty! I tend to see the future through a glass darkly. As a Christian, I suppose I should be optimistic at the ultimate destination, but I tend to have a rather more pessimistic view of humanity or put another way, a greater sense of human sin than is probably good for me!
But having said that, if I thought the world was going to end in, say, two years time, I would carry on doing the things I am trying to do now to make things better, such as growing my own vegetables on my allotment, caring for nature and doing voluntary work because they are the right things to do and because whatever happens after we die, while we are alive, we need to have a sense of purpose to keep on keeping on.
0 comments:
Post a Comment