While I came into this class with a typical Western, romanticized paradigm, the arguments presented in Micheal Pollan’s Second Nature were extremely eye opening. He speculates that the capitalistic, resource-minded perception of nature and the Thoreau-based, naturalist view both stem from the culturally-ingrained, romanticized values which depict humans and nature as diametrically opposed, never to be integrated. However, as we learned through our readings, Pollan subscribes to an alternative perspective which includes humans as active and crucial participants in the natural world. As neither care-takers, nor alienated entities, Pollan asserts that humans should, and must, interact with nature in a responsible manner and should not be afraid to impact and alter nature accordingly, for we are just as much nature as are flora and fauna. Pollan’s arguments were very pivotal in shaping my own views regarding the interplay between humanity and nature, which Pollan argues are essentially one and the same. I have certainly come to evaluate many environmental issues, particularly the recent American Clean Energy and Security Act and Cap and Trade Bill, following this Pollan-instilled perspective, and I suspect many of my classmates have come to do the same.
The Cap and Trade Bill creates a system of allowances for companies to emit greenhouse gasses, the amount is a compromise between current and healthy emission levels. Companies can then sell unused credits to others companies who exceed their allocated “right-to-emit” credits, finally giving some incentive to stop polluting and start thinking about the future. Additionally, a Carbon Market Efficiency Board was established in order to supervise emissions and report sales of “right-to-emit” credits on the greenhouse gas emissions market. Failure to report emissions or comply with standards results in a fiscal penalties, $25,000 for each day of non-compliance. This cap and trade system finally gives companies an incentive to start thinking about the climate by using capitalism to motivate them into compliance. Of course this solution is not perfect, but over time it will certainly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sets the United States on the right path toward becoming an environmentally conscious society. In his second prime-time news conference since taking office, President Obama advocated the cap and trade bill, asserting that “it starts pricing the pollution that’s being sent into the atmosphere.”
The Cap and Trade Bill introduced in the American Clean Energy and Security Act facilitates a compromise between modern, industrialized society and responsible environmental consciousness. This represents a shift toward the melding of human activity and the environment which Pollan emphasizes as being so crucial in developing a new paradigm. As participants in nature, we will inevitably alter the environment; however, Pollan argues the importance of recognizing our impacts, when responsible, as part of the natural world rather than unnaturally changing its course . This is precisely what the Cap and Trade Bill aims to do in creating a system which integrates the capitalistic, resource harvesting temperament of industrialized society with responsible environmentalism. Accordingly, the Cap and Trade Bill seems to be very much in line with Pollan’s beliefs, those instilled in our class, as a means of facilitating this new paradigm of participation in nature.
13 comments:
Patrick, Thanks for this post--it's great to see you applying Pollan to possible large-scale solutions to global problems. Of course, it IS a compromise, which doesn't ask capitalism (if we can personify it for a minute) to change its perceptions of the natural world. In other words, it doesn't undo the view of nature as divorced from human culture. So in this sense, it seems quite different from Pollan's garden ethic. But the cap and trade scheme does, indeed, change the cost/benefit analysis for companies. Now, they not only will face heavy fines for exceeding their allowed emissions, but can add to their profits by emitting less--and selling the difference. It's still a strange world to me in which the right to add to greenhouse gases is now up for sale. But if capitalism is here to stay, at least for awhile yet, it makes sense to use its own paradigm for a larger public and environmental good.
In theory, the Cap and Trade Bill is a good idea but in reality, it does nothing to change the paradigms of the people whose companies are being forced to abide by its guidelines. As a result, as long as companies have either enough funds to pay off the $25,000 a day penalty long term (not an impossible thing as many of these companies are booming) or enough power/aptitude to elude the bill, excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses will still be vomited into the air without sufficient regulation. So, rather than throwing further bills into the faces of these companies, we who care need to focus instead on actually changing the paradigms of those people whose industries are most harming the earth. This is also a good idea in theory but as my experience in this area is limited, I have no idea how to go about this. Suggestions anyone?
Hi Patrick, Thanks for your post.
I believe President Obama is taking a pragmatic approach to the problem of emissions. He recognizes that we need to do something, now; the Cap-and-Trade legislation would essentially act as the "finger in the dyke," buying us a little time while we make the transition to an energy economy that's based on renewable and low to no-emissions sources, such as the sun.
Tiffany- while I agree that what we ultimately need is some major paradigm-shifting, at the moment we're so stuck in the capitalistic mindset that the only way to induce most of these companies to change their polluting ways is to provide an economic incentive. There are those rare companies that have taken the lead and voluntarily adopted cleaner, more environmentally-conscious strategies. I think that as these companies prove themselves successful other companies will follow their lead. I believe some European countries are way ahead of us on this; I will try to get some web sites together. I'm sure we could all use the inspiration!
Hi again,
One webpage to check out is climateark.org.
This site has articles on many different topics; do a search for energy subsidies and see what you can find!
Also, Spie.org has good information on the state of solar power around the world. I found a very inspiring article about Germany's solar market. (and if I were smarter about these things, I could paste the direct link for you!)
In a nutshell, the main reasons some European countries are so far ahead of us are 1)taxes on fossil fuels are higher and 2)their governments provide strong incentives, often in the form of subsidies, to develop alternative energy.
Not that we don't have any local examples to follow. The Las Gallinas wastewater treatment plant is totally self-sufficient. They draw power from a huge solar array on-site; in addition, they convert heat from the decomposition of solid waste into electricity. Sometimes they generate more electricity than they need, and sell some of it back to the city! They reclaim a good amount of water; some of it they use on-site for irrigation, the rest they send to the city of San Rafael to water landscaping in parks and medians. It's very cool- and they offer tours.
Field trip, anyone?
Tiffany, I agree with Juliet that the Cap and Trade Bill is a necessary short term solution for an overwhelming problem that is going to require further problem solving in the future. It's true, the most efficient change would come from a real paradigm shift in the corporations mindset, but I do not think that is realistic for now. President Obama has to start with something now, as our environmental state is in rapid decline. Patrick, I really agree with your statement about the Cap and Trade Bill... "Of course this solution is not perfect, but over time it will certainly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sets the United States on the right path toward becoming an environmentally conscious society." In our current economic state, I think we have to take what our President is giving us and work with it as best we can. And I think it this Bill will slowly contribute to a change in the corporate paradigm toward nature, and its relationship with her.
Thanks for the feedback everyone. It's a given that our current paradigm regarding the environment is in drastic need to realignment. The roots of this perception are so ingrained in our society, and inherent in our economic system, that immediate legislation cannot even begin to address them at this point in time. It's a little idealistic to dismiss progress as inadequate, we can't just change societies and economic systems overnight by picketing outside the White House. As Dr. Seeley pointed out, Capitalism has a long way to go before it can even begin to responsibly interact with the environment, if this is possible at all. Taking our economic system for granted, the idea behind my post was simply analyzing how Pollan would interpret the legislation, according to my understanding of his views. Of course it would be wonderful to wake up in utopia without all these environmental and societal problems, but for the time being small steps will have to suffice and hopefully initiate the major changes needed. With this in mind, it seems Pollan would be in favor the Cap and Trade as progress, not a solution. Thanks again for the feedback!
This seems like a good idea to start getting major companies and such develop more of an environmental conscious. Although such a proposal makes one wonder as to how companies will be able to meet the demands without affecting their production or anything else in a negative way. As well as other loop holes that could emerge. Otherwise, I feel this could be a a good step forward in becoming a more environmentally friendly industry.
Respectfully, I feel that is one of the principle problems with our paradigm. The environment takes a backseat to the dollar. Ultimately, production MUST suffer in order to realign our relationship with the environment because for too long now we have been consuming at drastically unsustainable levels. As Dr. Seeley brought up, it will be very hard to negotiate a deal that will be beneficial for both the environment and capitalism, at least capitalism as it exists today. Thanks for the post and keeping the dialogue going!
Hi Patrick,
I think that you chose a very interesting topic, and I like how you incorporated Pollan. Thank you for educating us about this bill, I never knew it even existed. I agree with Juliet when she says that we need to do something "now." People need to remember that in order to see change, we must start small and then take bigger steps. The Cap and Trade Bill seems like a good start for those companies who contribute all those greenhouse gases that affect our environment. Though the results won't be seen instantaneous, it will surely make a difference for our future.
Krystina, many businesses are finding that it's indeed possible to meet their product goals, make a profit AND cut down on their emissions. Two interesting developments in the business world are 1)the new profitability of becoming environmentally responsible, which is driven by consumer demand; and 2) a new business model that embraces an expanded notion of profit and loss. If we include the cost to human and environmental health, then the cost of pollution to the collective welfare of the planet is clearly way too high. Many companies are now taking the lead in promoting the "triple bottom line." That means, a company is successful if it makes a financial profit, pays workers decently and provides safe working conditions, and creates its product sustainably.
Post a Comment