(a follow up to the second point in Footprint Fundamentals)
Virtually all energy on the planet Earth came from the Sun. Even the energy embedded in oil is from plant life that grew thanks to energy coming from the sun. Also, the sun is responsible for making our biosphere a liveable environment that provides us with air, water and food.
The sustainable use of energy is to only take as much energy from a natural energy store or source as can be replenished within a suitable period of time and will not do damage to nature in some other ways. Even oil can be sustainable if used at the same rate that it is being created at - but unfortunately we are nowhere close to using oil at a low enough rate! If we were using oil at that low rate then there would also be no environmental damage (if it was being burnt efficiently) as the carbon dioxide released would be matched by that being absorbed in the slow, natural oil making processes.
There is probably no way to establish how sustainable a given energy use, for a particular energy source, actually is. This is because no-one is fully aware of the consequences of using different types of energy generation. However, we can have educated guesses AND we can perhaps practice a little bit of caution and use energy systems that we understand well.
In turn this probably means that we must consume less energy... but that is another post!
As for food and water, our biosphere is limited in the amount of food and water that it can provide due to the limited amount of energy coming in from the sun. However, we boost both our food supply and useable water supply by providing additional energy from fossil fuels - unfortunately this is not sustainable long term.
Air? Well, as with other environmental systems, air exists in a cycle and in a balance where the environment can cope with a certain rate of pollution, but cannot cope with more - due to natural limits related to energy from the sun (as with water and food). We appear to be polluting our air at an unsustainable rate in many different ways.
Other environmental sustainability issues include changes in land use, mineral extraction and species extinction - all of which have time related impacts on our environment.
The fact of the matter is that mankind is living unsustainably. Why should we live sustainably? Surely the only answer is 'because we do not want to be responsible for inflicting hardship on others either now or in the future'.
However, there is a side affect to a more sustainable, less materially wealthy, lifestyle: That by not exploiting fossil fuels (etc) we will be restricting the amount of apparent, immediate good that we can do for people. There does appear to be a need to accept some of the harsh realities of life, in order to accept a more sustainable lifestyle for mankind as a whole.
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"
I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...
-
I've been watching the TV series 'Foundation'. I read the books about 50 years ago (I know!) but scarcely now remember anything...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
No comments:
Post a Comment