missing the point

John Tierney is a would-be scientist who writes a column and a blog for the NY Times. The blog is called TierneyLab and he uses it "to check out new research and rethink conventional wisdom about science and society." It appears John prefers the court of public opinion over peer review. Not that peer review is all that much better, mind you. TierneyLab takes a conservative middle of the road position on most topics but has a definite "laissez-faire" bias when it comes to the environment. John likes to reassure us that all is well.

Now John has a short list of "10 Things to Scratch From Your Worry List." Numbered lists like these are very popular with the public and they pervade periodicals, magazines, and do-it-yourself books. Who has time to read a real book these days? What we need in "today's fast paced society" is action items. You know how the ad goes. You've seen it a million times. Still, it is hard to put down these valuable lists. It is not often that you can learn so much in so little time. Smart learning or smart bombs?

Unfortunately, numbered lists frequently miss the point. Their main purpose it seems is to either rally the troops, or to lull everyone back to sleep by telling them that they are doing just fine. Whatever the flavor, lists convey little useful information and they allow the writer to get away with pushing opinions without having to make a solid case for them. In short, lists are not just easy on the reader, they also benefit the lazy writer.

Here are some examples of non-information from today's list. 

#3. John thinks you need not worry about forbidden fruits from afar. This one fits in the category of condoning your bad behavior while giving you some ammunition to fight off your more environmentally conscious friends. The argument is that food from other countries is often produced and shipped "much more efficiently" than domestic food. Note that the local producers haul their wares around in small trucks. The argument is not just false, it ignores the big picture in favor of pushing an image of inefficient local producers clogging up the highways with their pickup trucks trying to deliver inferior food.

Never mind that the "efficiency" of foreign growers is largely due to predatory practices, lax environmental regulation, excessive use of pesticide and fertilizer, mono-culture driven to the extreme, exploitation of cheap labor, enforcement by the military, and most of all, cheap oil. There is a reason bananas are cheaper in the US than locally grown apples. 

John prefers to stick to apples from New Zealand having a smaller carbon footprint than apples in the UK. The NZ argument avoids nasty problems with banana republics. But it misses the point. The point is that efficiency does not matter. There are no brownie points for eating apples with a smaller carbon footprint. Certainly not if those apples are cheaper and hence we eat more of them. 

Shipping foods over long distances is an environmental disaster and no amount of whitewashing will cover it up. Becoming a locavore is the best thing you can do for the environment.

#5. Here is another one, evil plastic bags. In this case John again condones bad behavior and once again his argument is totally beside the point. He says, the EPA thinks paper bags are no better for the environment than plastic bags, and that is true. It is true that the EPA thinks that way, but who can trust the EPA any longer? Unfortunately, it is also true that paper bags as they are currently used are just as bad for the environment. The issue is that throw-away bags, be they paper or plastic, are to be avoided.

Americans are wrappers of the worst kind. Everything we buy is wrapped and sealed and packaged and bagged many times over. We put boxes in boxes and bags in bags. We use so much packaging that the weight of the package rivals that of the goods inside. We use more wrapping than an Egyptian mummy. And all of it is one-time use and gets discarded promptly. We are consumers of bags and wrappings as much as we are consumers of goods that we don't need. 

Yes the plastic bags are evil. And yes you should worry about it. As a matter of fact you should worry about ALL bags, boxes, wrappings, sealing, etc. It is all a huge waste of resources.

To top it all of, in #8, John thinks we need not worry about the missing Arctic ice. And in a clever juxtaposition he also thinks we need not worry about the universe's missing mass (#9). There is no doubt these two are listed in succession because the second one makes the first one look silly. The universe's missing mass is a scientific issue. The mass is not missing in a real sense, we just don't know (or don't agree) where it is. And it is only missing if you accept the leading hypothesis of the birth of the universe. It is an academic problem, and you need not worry about it unless you dream of winning a Nobel prize.

The missing ice in the Arctic is a different matter. It is missing. Granted it is happening far away. But it is real and it is a sign that something is going terribly wrong. Something that will have major repercussions, if not on our lives, then certainly on future generations. The ice is missing because it is melting. It is melting because our climate is changing. And regardless of your beliefs about the cause of global warming, climate changes are serious business.

Despite the drama of comets and other Hollywood-like extinction scenarios, mass extinctions were probably due to climate changes and not to acute events. Even if you doubt that, rest assured that most if not all successful human civilizations collapsed because of climate changes and over-taxing the local environment.

I would say it is the one thing you definitely do need to worry about.