Browse
Engage
Research
“It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so.” -- Will Rogers
This nation’s energy policy for the past forty years is not that hard to judge -- it’s disjointed, shortsighted and largely ineffective. We know it, we say it, but we continue to ignore it. It’s the “what we know that ain’t so.”
But, with turmoil in the world, and fuel prices on the rise -- again, it’s well past time to continue ignoring it. We can’t afford to do so, either in our pocketbooks or in our security. It’s an energy policy of the past, not that of a once-again growing world economy that has become increasingly interconnected. We cannot let yesterday’s approach hamper tomorrow’s reality. As Will Rogers also said, “Never let yesterday use up too much of today.”
So, we need to use solutions like practical environmentalism in our approach. We’ve got to focus on the following:
(1) Performance: We must improve our usage of energy through commonsensical, responsible approaches. For example, here are some of Environmental Defense Fund’s driving tips that make a great deal of sense:
• Lighten your load. Carrying around an extra 100 pounds in your car reduces your fuel economy by up to 2 percent.
• Keep it smooth. Rapid acceleration and braking reduces gas mileage and can burn an extra 125 gallons of gas per year.
• Mind speed limits. In highway travel, exceeding the speed limit by a mere five mph results in an average fuel economy loss of 6 percent.
(2) Transparency: We must do a better job in communicating why these issues are important. Sure, the planet’s long-term health is involved. But, that doesn’t motivate everyone, and we’re naive if we believe it to be so. We must address the near-term personal risks and benefits, as well.
The tips above do just that, by stressing both the environmental and financial savings. There is nothing wrong with this. It doesn’t make these actions any less legitimate -- in fact, it makes them even more valuable and worth taking.
I agree with you and not so
I agree with you and not so much the anonymous commenter. Relentless preaching to people about environmental necessity hasn't worked and won't. Appealing to self-interest works a lot. "Stop smoking" is a case in point. As long as the feddle gubmint seemed to be interfering with the rights of smokers and tobacco companies offered a seemingly scientific counterargument on the health issue, attempts to curb smoking went nowhere. When anti-smoking advertising campaigns began to emphasize how ugly the habit looked and smelled and on non-smokers' rights to breath air that didn't stink--and when it became obvious that the anti-smoking campaign was more than merely government interference in personal lives--it began to catch on.
As long as anyone thinks that the government or those wacko environmentalists are trying to impose something on people, "sustainability" remains just another code word to sugar coat something undesirable. We need to have ready answers to "what's in it for me" and plenty of ideas for what people and businesses can do that doesn't interfere with their normal routines too radically.
In our time of partisan wrangling, I would like to see the public (individuals, businesses, local governments, etc.) take the lead and force the feds to follow.
*yawn* How long are we going
*yawn*
How long are we going to keep singing the same song? Why brood with lyrics like "Hate me less" when what we want is "Love me"?
Burning resources in any capacity will always harm the environment. Nothing could be more impractical than conserving dirty fuel. We need a simple new mantra:
STOP SMOKING
Oil, Coal, Nuclear, Natural Gas all burn. Wind, water, sun do not. Why complicate the matter with conservation? Salvation lies in switching, nothing less. Let's sing the song: "Stop Smoking".