Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
It seem obvious on it's face, but probably not to people who can't distinguish the two.
|
I would argue that none of us can distinguish between the two, hence why it's fine to talk about a future in which we all voluntarily reduce our consumption, but this future is not likely to happen. I don't
need HVAC--I could just put on more layers of clothing when it's cold and minimize my exertions and stay in the shade when it's hot. I don't
need a car--everywhere I need to go is within a few mile radius, so I could walk everywhere. I don't
need to eat a banana every morning for breakfast (a banana which, it should be noted, traveled halfway around the world at great expense of energy to get to me).
Especially in our Western lifestyle, there are a thousand little contrivances we indulge in daily and never give a second thought to the huge amounts of energy that make them possible. Now expand that to the rest of the world, with huge swaths of people aspiring and moving up to a middle-class Western lifestyle (and the moral conundrum of us, who have indulged in this overly-consumptive lifestyle for generations now, telling them they can't because we need to protect our habitat--a habitat which, up to now, we have largely been responsible for altering). As a whole, we are not moving in the direction of lower consumption, and as long as human nature remains the same, I think this will continue in future.