missing the point

Monday's Wall Street Journal had a section on green energy. In the lead article, the authors lamented the fact that the current recession is preventing ordinary people from implementing "green technologies." It actually went a bit further than this and stated that the recession would prevent conservation, i.e. that it would be bad for the environment.

This is a well rehearsed refrain and the Journal has had earlier articles pointing out that the recession would stop industry from developing green technologies. The recession is stifling innovation. It is a set-back for the environmental movement. The cheap price of oil and gas makes  "green technology"  non-competitive.

I have pointed out before the irony in all this, yet very few people seem to see it or want to acknowledge it. Perhaps it is too obvious? Or else nobody feels like they have anything to gain from pointing it out? Maybe they fear it would expose what many see as a fundamental weakness? Yet it is so simple: the less people consume the better our environmental record will be. Consumption is what causes environmental destruction, and the more we consume, the worse off the environment will be.

There is also another irony. A strong belief that technology will save us all. A strong belief that technology reduces the environmental impact we have. Our strong belief in the power of technology -our religion of technology- is at the core of all this. And it is supported by numerous reports showing efficiency gains. Everything we build becomes more efficient, hence it must be better for the environment.

Unfortunately, quite the opposite is true. Technology has done nothing but greatly increased our capacity to damage the environment. And it has done so in many ways, not in the least by making it possible to have so many humans on the planet. The more humans we have, the more of a footprint we leave behind.

Efficiency too has the opposite effect of what is advertised. Efficiencies make it easier for people to afford things, so they buy more, use more and waste more. Efficiency is of no value to the environment. Nature does not "care" how efficiently we use our energy sources. All it "cares about" is how much we use.

Sadly enough, the depression is good for the environment. Even if it causes people to use less-efficient older items. As a matter of fact, it is good because it forces people not to throw out old stuff. It forces them not to buy new items, or travel or otherwise leave a big footprint. That is the good news.