January 27th – Environmental Problems, Their Causes, & Sustainability

“Every single person on this earth has the power to change the world”

— Emma Thompson

Word Count: 1106

When confronted with this broad array of information on the current state of the environment, “overwhelm” is probably the most accurate summation. From the dire warnings from the UN to the dry condemnation of Miller and Spoolmans text, it is difficult not to become apathetic towards the sheer scale of managing climate change. While having more information and data about a subject is usually the best way to form a comprehensive and effective plan, the variety of problems and serious nature of the issue often make gathering more material a mental roadblock. I myself too often tend towards demoralization when confronted with climate change due to the seemingly negligible impact of the individual.

                However, wallowing in the mistakes of the past, present (but hopefully not future) concerning the environment does not help anything. The amount of material available, while disheartening in its enormity, also represents a shift in international focus towards the issue at hand. The fact that there are now classes and even textbooks on environmental studies promises a more educated generation willing to rectify the atrocities committed against nature.

                On this subject, Chapter 1 of Miller and Spoolman’s textbook was very definition heavy and focused on the anthropogenic impact on the environment. As a finance major I appreciated their concern over the business side of climate change by bringing up concepts such as natural capital degradation as well as climate change’s effect on GDP. The idea of including the cost of harmful environmental and health issues in the price of a good needs to be a more widespread idea within the financial world and a highly relevant point in today’s discussion on climate change solutions (see case study on Walmart eco-pricing). Overall, the chapter was a good introduction to the present issue of climate change as well as the terminology associated with the study of it. Although not a main issue featured in the chapter, the figures for per capita ecological impact for various countries were very interesting in the case of both Kuwait and Denmark, the former most likely due to my lack of knowledge about the country and the latter due to its widely publicized environmental initiatives and socialist government. The concept of IPAT or Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology was also new to me and I appreciated it being featured in chapter 1 rather than as a later side note. Oftentimes environmental issues are seen as global issues and while their effects are felt internationally, it is key to remember the major perpetrators are isolated in a few high-production countries. Here the textbook’s phrasing about poverty’s effect on the environment was unfortunate, bordering on unacceptable. Although I am sure this was not their intention, the authors seemingly cast blame on impoverished individuals affecting the environment due to short-term outlook. This idea is not only in bad taste but also should not be a main feature in an introductory chapter which (in my opinion) should focus on the greater effect of elites on the environment than lower class groups. An element that was featured both in this textbook and the UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment was the idea that “People are increasingly isolated from nature” as one of the major causes of climate change. While this tends more towards the theoretical, the disconnect between ourselves and the natural environment that has occurred in recent years represents a major, relatively unexplored issue.

                The 1992 UN Earth Summit was an interesting snapshot into climate change issues from a 90s perspective. In the article they break down the issues into six environmental categories: the atmosphere, water resources, oceans, soil, forests, and living species (with an additional population category). While these same issues still exist today, it is interesting to note the difference in length between this article and the UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment which recognizes over 16 categories with far more in-depth detail. There are several major concepts missing from the 1992 Earth Summit article including carbon-dioxide levels, ocean trash, and plastics/micro-plastics which were either undiscovered or not as central in 1992. Although the general idea has remained the same, the progression of climate change thought throughout the past 20 years has become more specific and also switched focused towards arguably more pressing issues. Tackling the idea of “climate change” is made far more difficult by the plethora of differing and separate issues that comprise it. Because issues range from deforestation to fresh water pollution, it affects a variety of different industries and therefore makes it both financially and conceptually problematic to address. The main section I found of note from this article is “Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course… Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about (1992 UN Earth Summit Page 1). It is frustrating to see that scientists have been calling for the reversal or alteration of our current practices for decades as an urgent problem and yet it seems that we have exacerbated rather than acted to prevent our current issues. Although this is a bold, generalized statement that undermines the massive effort does by environmentalists all over the world, it partially holds true in terms of political policy and widespread acceptance.

                Being from Seattle, I would like to think of myself as a fairly green individual; however, taking the Ecological Footprint Quiz was sufficiently humbling. Although I do the usual sustainability-friendly behaviors including composting, limiting electricity and water usage, buying only thrifted clothes, avoiding single-use plastics etc. my score was 2.9 Earths. There were many factors in the quiz that never even occurred to me including the square footage, building materials, and type of living arrangement that I resided in. While this certainly makes a huge difference I never thought to examine the environmental impact of my apartment (especially in NYC where you are lucky to find a minimally cockroach infested place to live at all). While I am not currently in the financial position to think about something like building materials, it is an important to remember that there are less trendy and sexy ways for individuals to be environmentally friendly that can often have a bigger impact.

            While these readings were certainly overwhelming in both scope and material, it was more interesting to examine the emotional toll. Environmentalism has always been one of my primary interests but the emotional toll it takes to digest these statistics should not be ignored. Many of us believe we stand on the moral high ground as climate change activists and while history may prove this is the case, I can empathize with those who would prefer ignorance.

Question: How do you avoid emotional and mental overwhelm when discussing climate change?

SOURCES:

MILLER, G. TYLER., and SCOTT E. SPOOLMAN. LIVING IN THE ENVIRONMENT. CENGAGE LEARNING, 2020.

“1992 SCIENTISTS WARNING TO HUMANITY.” UCSUSA, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS, 16 July 1992, http://www.ucsusa.org/resources/1992-world-scientists-warning-humanity.

“ECOSYSTEMS AND HUMAN WELL-BEING” UNITED NATIONS, https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzKbjVLpnX0RdjJJVzQ3Ymszczg/view