A Simple Lifestyle.
I truly enjoy my simple lifestyle, free from frills. I only wish to be rich so this lifestyle can be a virtue ....
I truly enjoy my simple lifestyle, free from frills. I only wish to be rich so this lifestyle can be a virtue ....
This morning, I was reading a post by my sister-in-law, the multi-faceted Nandita A about her unhappiness about how skin color was used as a comedy ruse in the recent blockbuster "Sivaji".
Flights in the US are supposed to the most bare-boned of them all - Service on most flights is just a little bit above Air Deccan levels - With a tiny bag of pretzels and a few drops of soda being the pretty much the summary of inflight service.
In the last few months, the environment has come to the forefront of discussions in the US and there is a huge push to become more environment-friendly through the use of better bulbs or cleaner sources of energy.
A few points:
Anytime you have to pay more for a service or product, you are automically consuming more resources to create the ability to pay for it.
For example, if you pay $1 for a regular bulb and in order to earn that $1, you and your affiliates (employer, spouse, suppliers, customers) used 1 unit of electricity (which is 85% dirty - from gas/oil/coal), you would consequently use 10 units of electricity to buy 1 $10 bulb.
Of course the bulb consumes less energy, but the energy needed to create the ability to purchase that bulb is higher (Unless a substantial portion of the country is already green).
Similarly, there is a feeling that if you drive a hybrid SUV, you are doing good things for the environment. I am going to call bull shit on this. Yes, it costs less to run the car, but what about the amount of energy to create/buy the car. If a small car weighs 750 kgs and an SUV weighs 1,500 kgs, you have consumed 750 kgs of extra steel/plastics which uses a huge amount of energy to produce.
And the worst fallacy is that if you pay a few dollars extra on your electricity bill, you have contributed to the environment. Rubbish! Certainly this might ensure that the source of your energy is clean (wind/wave/hydel/solar), but if that costs more, then by definition, your carbon foot-print is greater.
Wind, solar energy and other forms of "clean" energy are not clean in my mind, unless they are cheaper than other forms of energy. If you are spending more to use wind energy, then automatically the benefit of using wind is nullified (Bear in mind that the government is paying a lot more to provide you with wind energy through subsidies and tax rebates)
So, all of these easy ways to reduce pollution - energy efficient bulbs, alternate energy and hybrid cars are so seductively simple that they are dangerous - These are solutions that really dont help and make every huge home-owning, 10 car owning, private jet flying Hollywood star feel like they are the saviour of the environment.
So, what is my solution? It really needs an analysis of the true sources of large-scale energy consumption.
If any of you notice some errors in my logic, please let me know!