Gaining Perspective

We’re reading the new Auden Schendler book, Getting Green Done. He doesn’t pull punches, apparently doesn’t have a taste for sugar coatings, and isn’t out to make friends as much as he simply seeks to tell you how he sees it. He’s reporting from the front lines, as he says in his subtitle, of the sustainability revolution.

Here’s a strong message we’re getting from this work: one family in Michigan changing all our bulbs to compact fluorescents, improving the insulation in our house, switching to more energy efficient transportation, along with every other change we make this year, is a mere teaspoon of water in the ocean.

The scale of the climate change we’re experiencing and the environmental degradation our species is causing is so daunting that our humble 2009 project could actually have Negative consequences. That never occurred to me before, as I was in the camp that believes that every little bit is an honorable contribution, and hey, maybe a few others might take inspiration from what we’re doing. Not enough at all, says Schendler.

Here’s how our family project could turn out negatively: we spend the year learning how to reduce OUR energy consumption and Co2 output, we make changes and adopt habits that we carry into OUR future, and then we call it good. One more household on the good side. Maybe we bring along a few more who have visited the web site or read the book. And if those few households feel good about their changes and stop there, then it’s even worse. According to Schendler, that’s a distraction that allows us to ignore the real scale of the problem. As he says in his book, we’re just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Schendler is not a guy without solutions, however. But he also makes no claim that they’re easy or even likely. I love this guy’s realism.

Here’s how our project could turn out positively:  we go through the learning and the changes. We save our bit of energy and reduce our carbon output, but in the course of the work, we accumulate hard facts, perspective, and some credibility where environmental stewardship and climate change are concerned. This perspective motivates us to seek larger scale change, and we leverage whatever knowledge and credibility we gain to bring it about.

Schendler’s point is that the change our household represents is quantifiably not even on the chart, but if we could translate that change into something on the scale of our entire city, that might be something. And if the example of our city became a model and inspiration for other cities, then now we’re talking about a noticeable dent.

Yes, I’ve been at social gatherings where the subject of climate change has come up, and I’ve listened to angry lectures by people arguing that there is no such thing as global warming or that it’s all part of the natural cycle of ice ages and climatic shift. Well, here’s the thing: I’m no climatologist, nor can I claim to be a scientist of any sort. I’m not analyzing climatic data to draw my conclusions. What I am analyzing is my information sources. My challenge is determining who to believe. Here’s what I’ve experienced so far: in the last few years, the only arguments I’ve heard or read denying global warming and catastrophic climate change were put forth by scientists or others who either have no basis from which to make such arguments at all (for instance, loud drunks at parties with no scientific backgrounds) or are funded by interests that profit when the population behaves as if there were no such concerns. Every opinion that I’ve seen from what seem the most credible sources is that we have a serious problem and we can attribute it primarily to human activities. The differences among those opinions are in degree, but not in premise. That's good enough for me. The problem is real and right here for us to deal with. If we leave for our children, it's too late.

So here’s where I start dreaming.

I’m already seeing small changes in our household and learning startling facts and measures. For instance, if every household in the United States were to replace even one incandescent 100watt light bulb with a compact fluorescent, we could eliminate two large coal-fired power plants. That’s tons and tons of greenhouse gases and pollution. 

I also know that our local utility in northern Michigan is considering investing in a new coal-fired power plant to meet the perceived needs of our growing population. I don’t want that plant. I don’t want my kids and their kids to have to deal with the consequences of that plant.

What would it take to make that new plant unnecessary? How could we prevent that plant from being built while still meeting our regional energy needs?

It’s clear to me now that these are the types of questions that our family project is really about.