July 08, 2007

The limits of environmental action as defined by Severn Suzuki

The world is about to collapse. The environment is on the verge of complete and utterly irreversible destruction.

We are all going to die!

But there are still limits to what humans can be asked to do avoid this calamity.

Well, there are limits to how much Severn Suzuki is willing to do. The rest of us, of course, have to carry the load.

David Suzuki and his daughter Severn Suzuki are going to teach us how to be more environmentally conscious.

With just these five simple, budget-friendly tips, anyone can embrace today's eco revolution and make a "real life" move in the right direction.

They may not be as visually impressive to your neighbours as cruising up your driveway in a new hybrid car or basking in the glory of your new solar panelled "smart" home. Yet these small steps can change your world and benefit the entire planet, according to this dynamic duo.

So what are these "world-changing" ideas? Ride a bike. Use a bus. Brilliant ideas. Never thought of that.

But the best idea is the first one.

Use your own coffee mug instead of a disposable cup:

"I never use disposable cups," says Severn. "Just because I can't really justify using a resource that was once a tree or a plant for just 15 minutes and then throwing it in a landfill." According to the Say No to Trash website, Canadians throw away 25 billion styrofoam cups each year, and they will still be sitting in landfill sites 500 years from now.

I never use disposable cups. Well, doesn't that put me in my place. I am so ashamed. I wish I was as good a person as Severn Suzuki.

OK, I'm not ashamed. I'm laughing. At least as far as this is concerned, I'm a better environmentalist than Severn Suzuki. I don't drink coffee.

Severn Suzuki is the product of the mocha-latte-sucking intellectual coffee clatch crowd in British Columbia. She'd never suggest that you give up on coffee altogether:

Of the 50 countries in the world with the highest deforestation rates from 1990 to 1995, 37 were coffee producers.

In Vietnam, Papua New Guinea, Laos, Myanmar, and Mexico coffee production is expanding into previously pristine natural areas. Colombia, in turn, has increased production by converting to more sun-grown coffee. It is not clear whether the land used for new producers in China, New Caledonia, Samoa, and Mauritius has come from converting pristine areas, or from conversion of other agricultural lands. There is little data globally to indicate what the previous land use was for new coffee production areas.

Another driving force of habitat conversion is the increasing market for high-grade speciality coffees. These coffees tend to be produced in new, out-of-the-way areas with unique soils and topographies that give the beans unusual flavour profiles. Such coffee is often produced in areas that are too steep or otherwise of too poor quality for the production of other food and cash crops.

These are precisely the types of areas that are rich in biodiversity or, at the very least, have become local biodiversity refuges in the face of the expansion of other forms of agricultural production. They are also typically the types of areas that are most prone to erosion. Consequently, the demand for higher-quality arabica coffee may exacerbate environmental degradation.

You want to affect the environment? Ban coffee.

But, then, Severn Suzuki likes coffee. So let's ban cars and power plants and overpopulation. But not coffee. No, let's just use coffee mugs. That'll make up for the deforestation.

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:16 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 612 words, total size 4 kb.

1 "So let's ban cars and power plants and overpopulation. But not coffee." Whew, I'm glad we're not banning coffee, 'cause I really like my espresso. (NOT in styrofoam cups, please!) But can we ban the Suzukis instead?

Posted by: Gabby in QC at July 08, 2007 11:49 AM (CwAx9)

2 Sign her up for a charter membership in the Climate Catastrophe Hypocrite Club along with all the do-gooder talkers like Al Gore and Madonna who have eco-footprints the size of Nunavut but lecture me about using too much electricty or to walk not drive. Bunch of lying, useless skanks the lot of them. Reformers ALWAYS want some one else to change.

Posted by: Fred at July 08, 2007 11:56 AM (1J6rs)

3 "Reformers ALWAYS want some one else to change." I agree with all your other points, except that last sentence. It was because of the Reform Party's ideas that Paul Martin undertook some of the belt tightening measures needed to bring back Canada from the brink of fiscal bankruptcy. Your take on Gore, Madonna et al. is right on, though. It was hilarious to see one of the first bands in the Sydney concert sporting T-shirts with "stop nuclear power" or something similar written on them. It is my understanding that nuclear power is far cleaner than other types of energy, producing practically no GHGs. It is thanks to nuclear power that some European countries have been able to boast about meeting their Kyoto targets. France, for instance, has 59 nuclear power plants, producing about 80% of its electricity needs, whereas in Canada, nuclear power contributes about 15% of the total electricity supply. The European Union (when 25 members) has 148 nuclear power plants which provide 31% of its electricity requirements. France alone generates almost half (45%) of nuclear-generated electricity in the European Union.

Posted by: Gabby in QC at July 08, 2007 01:38 PM (CwAx9)

4 It is thanks to nuclear power that some European countries have been able to boast about meeting their Kyoto targets. I wonder how many members of the Kyotology Church of Canada are also against nuclear power.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at July 08, 2007 03:23 PM (am0pv)

5 "I wonder how many members of the Kyotology Church of Canada are also against nuclear power." Well, for starters, according to Wikipedia: "[Elizabeth] May was born in Connecticut to affluent parents. Her mother was a prominent *anti-nuclear activist* and one of the original founders of the peace group SANE." Please understand, I'm not pushing nuclear power as THE solution. I would just like to point out that sometimes activists bring about unforeseen results that in the long run are more harmful than what they were fighting against. Perhaps if safer - after the Three Mile Island & Chernobyl incidents - nuclear power plants had been built, countries that rely heavily on fossil fuels would have lower GHG emissions now. Instead, what we have is more hot air emissions from the likes of the Suzukis, Gore, Madonna and all the other "priests & priestesses" of the K Kult.

Posted by: Gabby in QC at July 08, 2007 05:12 PM (CwAx9)

6 Severn Suxuki should go all the way and demand that trees not be cut down for newsprint .. because every tree cut down reduces carbon absorption. No more Globe & Mail ... no more Toronto Star ... no more Halifax Herald .. no more La Presse .. no more Winnipeg Free Press ... a veritable decimation of the Liberal-friendly press. If we have a choice between toilet paper and all those Liberal-loving newspapers ... well I know what my choice would be .... !!!! STEP UP SEVERN SUXUKI ... STOP THE PRESSES .. SAVE THE TREES ...!!!

Posted by: Sophie at July 08, 2007 10:06 PM (h8gaU)

7 Speaking of the Suzukis, and I hope this is on topic, here in Ottawa we have giant billboards with David S. holding a compact fluorescent bulb. I suppose the point being to get us thinking Green. Is anyone aware of how much mercury is in one of those or what sort of breakage must occur for the stuff to expose a danger? I ask because of an article I saw on the freerepublic.com site about a woman in Conneticut whose child broke one is her room. A few phone calls and >$2,000 later after the Hazmat team left, the room was 'safe.' Is this going to be another 'unintended' consequence of the Green movement?

Posted by: Phil in Ottawa at July 09, 2007 06:58 AM (xUjnI)

8 Apologies. Further to my last post, once I submitted I then read up on that subject on a neat fact sheet prepared by the US EPA. Apparently household CFLs are not legally considered hazardous waste and contain about 4mg of mercury. Always dispose of properly and if broken, vent the room thoroughly, sweep up fragments carefully - do NOT use a vacuum - and dispose of properly. I guess the woman in Conn got conned...? I'll go put myself in the corner for a timeout now for cluttering the board.

Posted by: Phil in Ottawa at July 09, 2007 07:16 AM (xUjnI)

9 Phil: your post falls into the 'unplanned for' consequences theme of the thread. BTW: One of my front porch CF bulbs just died. They've only been out there 2 years. Regular bulbs last at least a year. So I'm not ahead on this one. And now have to research where I can return the bulb (in Ottawa they are considered hazardous waste but we only have 7 a year here in Ottawa and only 2 that are remotely (i.e. within 20KM) of my home. Here's an unexpected consequence. I'm trying not to buy anything except food. Therefore I don't go to stores. But to dispose of my CF bulb safely, I need to drive in to a store that accepts them for return. I know IKEA does but aren't mentioned on the the City of Ottawa recycling website, the only option there is a lighting store over 40km away from me or to line up one of the two days this year, 15km away from me at the hazardous waste depot. Being green sure takes a lot of energy.

Posted by: CanadianKate at July 09, 2007 07:44 AM (u3UzN)

10 These leftist halfwits don't think things through. How much water does it take to wash a coffee mug? I propose that everyone drink coffee straight from the spigot. This is actually a brilliant solution on several levels. First, coffee demand will drop significantly slowing related deforestation. Second, with the reduction in liquid intake, Sheryl Crow's 'single TP square' suggestion could become situationally viable.

Posted by: iowavette at July 09, 2007 09:55 AM (0p4xh)

11 anyone else questioning the 25 billion styrofoam cups per year? That would be 3 from each man, woman, and child each day of the year. I know I use maybe a half dozen per year, and my 2 year old uses none. I would guess we are fairly typical. So who the heck is using all these styrofoam cups?

Posted by: DKJones at July 09, 2007 12:53 PM (ClxyY)

12 Okay, I'm going to buck the trend here and defend Severn. At least the notion of using a coffee cup over a disposable cup is something. It's little but it's something. The whole global warming has become polarized where one side says it's a problem and we have to do all we can to stop it and the other side saying it's not a problem so why bother doing anything. Both sides won't work. If we all made minor changes in our lifestyle - such as using reusable containters over disposable ones where possible - it would cumulatively make a big difference. And even if global warming is a natural phenomenon, it never hurts to reduce our impact on the environment by reducing our demand for energy and resources. That said, one thing we can do with less of is environmentalists consuming resources at a shameful rate just so they can tell us why we have to reduce our consumption.

Posted by: Darren at July 09, 2007 01:23 PM (KNWxX)

13 "The whole global warming has become polarized where one side says it's a problem and we have to do all we can to stop it and the other side saying it's not a problem so why bother doing anything. Both sides won't work." I agree the issue has become polarized, but I believe there's a third side, which includes me. Yes, there are things we should and can do for the environment, regardless of whether we believe that climate change is man-made or "mother-earth-and-sun" made. What people like me object to is the catastrophic, cataclysmic, "we're in crisis" kind of talk coming from lobby groups that are pushing their own agenda - not necessarily a pure, altruistic one as Steve has shown in other threads - and by assorted self-appointed gurus - can you say Gore? - who don't practice what they preach.

Posted by: Gabby in QC at July 09, 2007 03:02 PM (CwAx9)

14 Gabby, Right on!

Posted by: Phil in Ottawa at July 10, 2007 06:47 AM (xUjnI)

15 "WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY. THEY ARE US." Pogo.

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at July 10, 2007 11:44 AM (GN3Xe)

16 ...That's an UNOFFICIAL GERMAN re-translation, from Walt Kelly's original ENGLISH into DEUTSCHE back into ENGLISH....

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at July 10, 2007 11:51 AM (GN3Xe)

17 If one pays attention to all what is being said about the environment and global warming, there is only one conclusion, just use common sense and carry on.

Posted by: Jan at July 12, 2007 11:03 AM (RhyHE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
29kb generated in CPU 0.0173, elapsed 0.1257 seconds.
94 queries taking 0.1147 seconds, 214 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.