Your Questions About Green Living

The Expert answers:

Carbon offsetting during the games is one thing but it’s the building that could really make an impact. According to my brother-in-law, there are recruitment posters up in his college advertising for some 7,000 tradesmen to come to London to work on the project. I wonder if they have plans in place to deal with all the carbon generated through their travel.

The fact is that big business and sustainability aren’t the easiest of bed-fellows at the best of times and I have real doubts as to the validity of their claims.

The Expert answers:

The problem is that there is no organisation that could put all this together in time. The gap between what we want and what we can do in the time and with the money available is huge. But I don’t think any other city could do better. Just keep pushing for sustainability in general. I’m still fighting for windfarms out in the ocean around Wales. They claim it will keep tourists away! Most days, you would not even be able to see the windfarms, because of the greenhouse gas emissions.

The Expert answers:

Of course our current prevalent market economy and resulting consumerism is sustainable.

Socialist economies are not sustainable because they do not create wealth, Socialist economies merely redistribute wealth that was created by other people.

When the wealth runs out in a Socialist economy, then the economy collapses.

The Expert answers:

Elia – Good or bad? In the new scenario of alternative transport, a specific type begins to stand out: the bullet train. Several countries have already begun to adopt this model and plan to invest heavily to make real mass transit in this type of vehicle. Despite the promised environmental, economic and social, some environmentalists oppose this transport option.For advocates, the bullet train can help reduce global warming and protect environmental resources. Studies undertaken by the Authority Railway High-speed link from California to invest in bullet trains, rather than building new roads or airports can generate several benefits by 2030.These benefits include: lower environmental impacts, low energy (1 / 3 of what it takes to move planes and 1 / 5 required for car travel) and economy of 12.7 million barrels of oil, even with the improving the energy efficiency of transportation today. The study also shows that the construction of high-speed rail can prevent the emission of more than 5 million tons of CO2 by 2030.Today these vehicles can pass the 500 km / h and carry a lot of passengers in a short time. But experts DeFede that this speed can be much higher. This makes them more advantageous than the planes as they do not spend time with loading and unloading and are not subject to climate change. They are also safer and quicker than traveling by car.

Despite the apparent advantages, many people have sniffed for these investments. For some environmentalists, the implementation of this system requires the construction of new railways, since the high-speed trains require rails specific.He adds: “Do not get me wrong. With the decline of the airlines and the condemnation of the automobile transportation system, we desperately need a new rail system. But we already have a system that was envied around the world to be abandoned. And right now we have neither the time nor the resources to build a new parallel network.All the promise of government, so let’s wait –::

The Expert answers:

Basically a sustainable future would be one in which the majority of resources and energy sources we utilize are renewable, coupled with disposing wisely of waste (and reducing the amount of waste made in the first place), managing land responsibly and eliminating air, water and soil pollution. Renewable forms of energy include bio-fuel, solar, wind, hydro, and some would argue things like methane harvesting, hydrogen, and nuclear. This would include phasing out and ultimately getting rid of fossil fuels, which all pollute when “burned” to make energy (admittedly some far less than others) and are finite (i.e. Not renewable; once they are gone, they are gone). The mining/drilling to harvest them has a significant environmental impact as well. Renewable resources would include plant based plastic products & fabrics, fast-growing tree varieties that don’t deplete the soil, utilizing materials that can easily and cheaply be recycled again and again, etc. Better waste management also goes back to recycling and reusing (for instance millions of items are thrown out every year that could be donated to thrift stores, homeless shelters, etc) but also reducing the amount of unnecessary waste by producing products that are more durable, with less packaging that can be recycled when they are no longer able to be repaired.
Problems with achieving more sustainability include the following:
1.Resistance to phasing out fossil fuels – many of the economic and political powers of our time are involved with the fossil fuel industries in some way and are afraid of losing their fortunes. They fight to keep regulations weak and ultimately to work against renewable energy sources being researched, refined and widely implemented. The average American also does not want to pay more for alternative fuel or for a vehicle that will use it, even if the long term savings make up for (increased mpg, longevity, etc). Thus there is not a push on the government or large corporations to research alternative energy or improve mass transit (as it is in Europe).
2.Poor land management – for instance reducing meat consumption would reduce the needed amount of farm animals, reducing the demand on the grain supply. The grain we feed animals for meat would feed thousands of times more people than it does animals. We also need to think about WHAT we plant for renewable resources – for instance using all corn for ethanol and bio-fuels has jacked up the price of corn for countries that use it for food and has severely decreased bio-diversity (having a wide variety of crops), which is very bad for the soil. It has other economic factors as well. We also have to consider the way we farm – are we polluting the soil and rivers with runoff?
3.Laziness and apathy – People don’t want to do anything that takes extra time, money or effort; they don’t want to recycle, read labels, lobby companies and politicians for greener products and policies, pay a little more for organic or for an electric vehicle, etc. People believe the convenient lies some people weave about global warming being a face and pollution not being a “big deal” (or the often heard idea “I’ll be dead when it’s really bad so it doesn’t matter” or “one person can’t make a difference”) because then they don’t feel bad about themselves or their choices.
4.Lack of government initiative to “green” the country, even on a local level – many municipalities, and the state and federal governments as a whole, don’t put the effort into promoting green policies, renewable energy and conservation necessary to fuel real change. In the same way many Americans did not want racial equality but the government passed the Civil Right Act to force it, the government needs to step in and legislate green concerns. The conservative body always decries the government being involved in people’s lives, but frankly many people are selfish and uninformed and won’t “do the right thing” unless forced. We can’t sit back and do nothing about a huge problem just people don’t want to be told what to do like spoiled teenagers. Because the government doesn’t push harder regulations, or offer better incentives, the corporate sector is not willing to invest in utilizing or developing green technology, keeping it expensive and not easily accessible.