Those who forget days gone by are condemned to do it again it. "
Indeed, throughout human history, we've learned about nov mighty empires like your Romans, Mongols, Aztecs, or anything else. We've also learned regarding the Bubonic Plague and how it wiped out 1/3 of Europe's population. More recently, we've witnessed the great Depression which plunged America in to a world of high jobless and desperation, Hitler's regime nearly conquering Europe and therefore then the world, and the Vietnam War which put a heavy toll on American lives together with its economics.
I'm sure these are events that most people would like to do not ever see again.
But with today's issues like Universal Warming and Climate Switch, the Credit Bubble Bursting along with the Global Financial meltdown, and also the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and also the oil shock, you get the experiencing we haven't learned with our past mistakes and get been condemned to repeat them over and over again.
We can see which Global Warming and Climate Change can be a more insidious consequence with human-based activities not unlike that the Bubonic Plague wiped out Europe due to poor disposal of waste or the way the deforestation of Italy can have led to the downfall of the Roman Empire. We can see how the combination of greed and the corporate-government collusion resulted in the Global Financial meltdown that's putting America and the modern world on a path akin to that of the Great Depression (which itself was caused by similar acts of greed and government-big business greed). We can also see how the Iraq War blocked America's resources and popularity while its motivation for oil by the few are highly questionable; much the same approach the Vietnam War broken down America and was according to some dubious anti-communist ideologies perpetuated by a vocal minority.
Indeed, the world would be a much better place in the event the resources we depended on were better shared together with managed. And the only way that's about to happen is if we have a world that's more sustainable from the way we live on the way we procure the planet's resources to the way we support governments that uphold these ideas.
But how do we go about doing this?
Clearly, people have different ideas on what their ideal world would be. And not all of these ideas are mutually arranged because there's bound being winners and losers no matter which scheme you pick.
But that's where we will have to dig deep and discover what it is that all of us value in life and make an effort to work from there as the foundation that drives some of our actions and policies.
So what on earth makes us qualified to offer up an opinion of what a utopian world we ought to achieve should look such as?
Well we've spent several years getting out in the field for the pleasure of getting into nature and using waterfalls as the motivation to go to different places. This has allowed us to look at many things firsthand which television, radio, newspapers, catalogs, websites, and world-of-mouth just can't provide. More important, learning about the world firsthand is far more persuasive than getting your details exclusively from the media (and also less prone to propaganda together with brainwashing). And with the observations, we wondered how together with why things became the way they are and always kept proper curiosity (and skepticism) about everything.
So with some of our years of experiences, our looking for answers whenever we asked yourself about something, and processing almost the entire package information, we're in a position to propose a world that's more sustainable, truthful, allows us to pursue the very things we value the majority, and reasonable to achieve with a modest amount of sacrifice from the unsustainable status quo of today.
While we know like ideas require an available mind and it's simple to lose someone on a nuance or detail, we ask you to try to get the big picture (you will still disagree with some or all of what's contained here). The purpose here is to attempt to spur more discussion and thought about how we can get from abstract ideologies to real life actions that will make this greater vision of a better world happen. For without the need of that vision, as stated earlier, we can't see the forest for the trees.
So we've stated earlier that we should instead identify core values that many of us can agree on before implementing the steps to leverage these values and improve our world. But just what just are these core principles anyway?
THE PURSUIT ASSOCIATED WITH VALUES
What is it that we should get out of lifetime? What makes life "fulfilling"?
I'm sure you'll get varying responses to this question depending on who you talk to, and it's easy to get off on a tangent and discuss ethereal and subjective ideologies that are nothing more than pipe dreams.
If you're a biologist (or on the truly scientific mind), you'll probably say we're here to help reproduce, period.
But, truly. What is it which drives us to want to earn more money, go traveling, collect more possessions (whether it's the new and greatest cars, Tv sets, real estate, furnishings, gear, jewelry, electronics, etc.), study more about the world, make friends, reproduce, raise a family, grow old, etc.?
I believe you can pin that answer down to two basic principles (or values).
A lifestyle of variety (my partner and i. e. "Variety is the spice of life")
Leaving a legacy that lifestyles on (e. g. passing on our DNA, spreading our experiences with others, teaching others or our young ones, ensuring our children stay better lives than we do, etc.)
Why discuss these values?
Because I think at their very heart, these principles are what everyone strive for to some extent or another. And if these are values that most us can agree on, then these principles medicine guidelines (or tests) that our grand vision with the better world ought to fulfill, right?
After all, failure to minimize the amount of losers in any scheme can lead to a growing class with disenfranchised and desperate people ready to follow any strong standard promising to pull them out of their rut no matter whether that leader's means are generally agreeable or not. In other words, this becomes the fodder with regard to organizations like:
Hitler's Third Reich : to pull people out of the post WWI mess that Germany was in
Al Qaeda - for the people disenfranchised people in the middle East who won't are a symbol of the Western exploitation on their land and people for the corrupt few
The Taliban - who are offering up a militaristic and a thriving poppie-growing means of pulling the poor out of their serious situations
The Khmer Rouge - who offered a radical methods of eradicating the more important Chinese who themselves were becoming more influential in government in the expense of the rest of the people
... and the list moves on and on...
Indeed, any successful world order must strive to uphold the values that most the world can agree upon or at least tolerate.
So let's elaborate a little more about these principles.
First, the variety principle.
I've learned that a fulfilling life can be defined as a life where those has experienced as several things as possible over the sum of the that finite lifetime. Now what those different things are will differ from one individual to the next. For example, one might acquire a life of variety as a result of travel while another might find the experiences involved in raising a family group (and its associated ups and downs) a different yet no-less-fulfilling version of variety. Maybe someone might think having a large collection of possessions or friends can provide the variety in life that's desired.
Regardless of what manifestations an appealing variety of experiences comprises, I think we can agree that living a life filled with different experiences from traveling the world is more fulfilling than a life devoted to a monotonous routine of doing work a dead-end job all day long, watching TV or being on the computer in the evenings, and then sleeping at night only to repeat the cycle in the mail. I admit the latter seems like my rat-race existence, and that's why I strive to go traveling to depart it all whenever I'm able to.
So the big picture vision in the world ought to support these values. It can't have you stuck within a mundane existence unless you choose to do it that way. More importantly, all infrastructure, commerce, and laws need to aid this principle of multitude since it's something I think many of us can agree on.
2nd, the legacy principle.
I do believe we're pre-programmed (and by "we" Air cleaner will add every organism on earth) to want to reproduce and pass with our DNA to upcoming generations. If you look at it, this is why we're more energetic in our youth, more attractive, more durable, and more physically equipped. This tends to last until we're don't reproductively capable anymore.
By this time, we can see that any of us age, become more fragile, become more prone to help cancers and diseases, etc. (though we are more experienced and wiser).
Indeed, it seems Mother Nature has started its own rat race by letting the different organisms compete with each other for limited resources to find who can adapt, spread their genes, survive, and retain the species going.
But if this procedure is left unchecked, it's conceivable that most species (if you cannot assume all) experiences boom and bust cycles in which the overall population reduces (maybe by overpopulation-related problems like starvation, disease, or some other destruction of resources) or even just declines completely (in that case they become extinct). Undoubtedly, the bust cycle can be a frightening prospect for the human race, and this is abdominal muscles reason why it's desirable to find a happy medium between human population growth and sustainability. This way, down at the individual level, we can raise a family group, teach our kids, and watch them grow up into individuals without worrying as much about competing for scarce resources to survive. Meanwhile in the macro scale, we are less concerned about living beyond our means and worrying about our own future as well as that of our kids.
And in many cases if you're not into raising a family, I think there's a deep wish for us to leave a legacy behind that somehow makes a positive contribution to the world (something to remain remembered by rather than be that someone absolutely everyone has forgotten about). For example, it could be solving a hard problem that ends up for a breakthrough in science, or it could be being remembered for actively trying to help people by increasing their living conditions, or it could even be setting a good example for others (whether in the best freinds and family circle or complete strangers) that you follow.
Regardless of how we leave our legacy, I'd argue it's desirable to leave a future in which our children can enjoy a similar type of number of experiences that we by themselves have enjoyed (in any other case better) while leaving our mark on the world.
But in order so that noble goal is achieved, we have to always keep our individualistic desires for variety needs to be checked. For failure to uphold the value of legacy yields the down sides you read about in the headlines like Global Warming and Climate Change, Overpopulation, Unsustainable Condition Quo, Politics, Wars, or anything else.
And it's with this in your mind that the big picture vision of the world ought to support both in the variety and legacy ideas simultaneously.
And it turns out that the vision I'm discussing manifests itself in what I'm calling the sustainable paradigm.
THE SUSTAINABLE PARADIGM
A sustainable paradigm can be a world system in which often all goods and solutions, laws, desires, infrastructure, habits, etc. all support the values that a lot of people can agree on (which i argued were the ideas of variety and legacy).
It's basically a pc where all energy, transportation, reproductive tendencies, and food procurement are done sustainably by minimizing resource depletion, smog, overdevelopment, etc. while capitalizing on biodiversity, our own survivability, and also the sharing of resources amongst but not only different peoples but other organisms to boot. Such a system helps the legacy principle precisely as it assures the world is sustainable for the enjoyment of future a long time. Moreover, by focusing on the sustainability challenges, we put our energies into working on meaningful problems to drive our economics while learning more regarding the world.
Meanwhile, we'd still like to experience various things so the lasting paradigm must also support the intake of goods and services that allows us to travel, develop hobbies, meet people, raise a family, etc. But we should do so without trashing the globe.
When you add these together, you can see your principles come full radius in that energy must make these desires take place, but that energy generation and consumption must be sustainable so as to fulfill the legacy theory.
That's why I think harnessing the "free" energies available to us while minimizing their own detrimental effects is paramount to supporting the sustainable paradigm. Thus, solar electricity, wind energy, wave electrical power, and geothermal (and perhaps nuclear fusion if they ever get there) energy ought to be the exclusive means of procurement of one's since they minimize pollution, deterioration of natural options, and loss of biodiversity while meeting the requirements of our energy drinking. These are things which fossil fuels (coal, petroleum, and natural air), hydroelectricity, nuclear, and the vast majority of biofuels will never be able to fulfill.
Thus, you need homes that will generate their own electricity through solar and wind with the energy storage device (being a battery) to smooth out nature's intermittences. You also need an energy grid whose energy is exclusively procured from the aforementioned clean renewable systems. And leverage that grid drive an automobile electrically powered machines, vehicles, computers, etc.
Now we know nothing's perfect and your manufacture of goods and technologies to allow such a paradigm to occur must also minimize the degradation of our natural resources and not be subject to resource scarcity. This, mind you, is the crux of why a really paradigm is difficult to achieve (but clearly not necessarily impossible and certainly far better than anything fossil-fuel-based for a good compromised solution!).
To be sure that procurement of food together with fresh water, they also have to be done by lasting means. Therefore, we require desalinization plants to obtain freshwater. Such plants must leverage a mix of solar concentrators and a green grid for places which can be currently diverting or blocking a disproportionate amount of water from freshwater river systems. Plus, individual households must have rain catchments to boot to tend to landscaping, drinking water, and small-scale water usage at the individual level.
Now procuring food may be more difficult since this involves irrigation (thus water diversion) and get clearing. Something has to allow here, but there needs to be a cap on that mass production of food that ultimately results in waste and pollution. Which means more organic products, smaller scale production, and the minimization involving chemicals and/or preservatives used on them. Basically, we ought to eat locally and limit the quantity of travel the foods must make unless the method of travel of that food is via purely natural means.
Speaking of transport, we need to have something to your effect of solar electric vehicles where the car can be charged when it is in the sun or being plugged in to a green grid (in your house, in an office, within a parking lot, etc.). For better applications, you could leverage biodiesel (produced from photosynthetic sludge cultured from solar technology and not food) or some sort of yet-to-be-developed hydrogen fuel cell or carbon sponge technological know-how to power airplanes or even just ocean vessels. Meanwhile, every city should depend upon public transportation systems powered by the green grid while discouraging urban and suburban sprawl.
As for waste management, there can be a few significant improvement here with regard to minimizing the amount of runoff that resulted on getting dumped into some of our oceans. If we maintain treating the ocean like our toilet, then the life so vital to all or any life on land will decline in a version of mass extinction that's shown to have occurred in the past (and wiped out over 90% off life). So here, we can minimize the runoff by employing our compost as fertilizer, minimizing the quality of bulk waste generated within both industry and our day-to-day lives, and even using some of the methane emissions in landfills to help supplement the grid power. Whatever the case, the economic system needs to penalize polluters and use those penalties to help subsidize the maintenance and development in the sustainable paradigm.
As on an agreeable means of drinking, there are numerous applications in the sustainable paradigm to several industries. I'll single out sustainable travel since i have think it should be just about the most important industries driving economies around the world. Ok ok, sure I'm biased regarding this particular topic, but are you able to name another industry that will helps the locals' current economic climate, harbors a desire to share rather than take away, encourage conservation and ongoing availability, and meets our individual hopes to experience variety?
Here, you could stress natural and historic features where investment must be made to conserve and preserve as you move the features themselves should attract paying customers. Locals probably will be enthusiastic about their culture and heritage and become willing to share their homeland along with the world. Meanwhile, transport is (before above previously) by sustainable means by electric autos, or sustainable biofuel, or some other sort of yet-to-be-developed hydrogen-fuel-cell or cabon-sponge storage and energy-conversion system. Moreover, locals should be able to benefit from the injection of money into the economy, running tours, etc.
As for population regulate, you don't have to become as drastic as China's one-child insurance plan, but there ought to remain taxes (compared to tax breaks) with each dependent (since they're consuming resources) and utilize that income to offset the inevitable aid consumption and disorder generated by those individuals. And this tariff should persist until the individual has the capacity to give back to the machine. This would provide commercial incentive to reproduce responsibly and leave the decision up to the couple who must weigh the cost of raising more children at the expense of their own ability to survive and live easily.
Indeed, these are merely a few things that come in your thoughts that a sustainable paradigm would probably feature. I'm sure there are other topics I haven't quite possibly mentioned (like medical practices, working class support and incentives, etc.) that could be discussed in the context of the big picture. But realize that it's merely my opinion and I'm sure there are other differing ideas on which the sustainable paradigm ought to be.
The bottom line is that you can see that if all of our thoughts, actions, means of constructing money, and laws supported a sustainable paradigm, we should be able to support the principles with variety and legacy for not only the human race but the vast majority of other surviving species on earth itself!
But is your sustainable paradigm unrealistic?
I believe, I don't think so. All it takes is a willingness to do this in manageable steps today. So what are these steps to transition in the status quo to a better world?
THE TRANSITION TO HELP SUSTAINABILITY
So with the many ideas mentioned above to help a sustainable paradigm, it might seem like an unrealistic dream.
But is it really?
Believe it or not, there are actually things that can be done now or technologies that already exist allowing the sustainable paradigm to occur.
And while it may be expensive and relatively painful for any upfront investment necessary to help implement these sustainable actions, governments can provide incentives, tax breaks, jobs, and laws to establish such infrastructure that will pay dividends eventually.
So let's look in the specifics of what these kind of measures are and how they can be implemented given the present status quo while examining their advantages and drawbacks.
First, let's start using energy.
We've established earlier that a decentralized energy procurement infrastructure and an exclusively green grid may be the most desirable way to satisfy the energy needs on the modern world. And you do this through heavily leveraging solar and wind electrical power while supplementing them with energy from wave, geothermal, waste products, etc. But in order to make it happen, we need to impose taxes and penalties on all polluting, resource-depleting fossil-fuel dependent forms and industries. Then, use those taxes and penalties to subsidize clean solar cell photovoltaics and other green technologies. That way, some of the record profits from oil companies may be given back to more meaningful developments rather than buying back their own stocks or in need of new places to look.
Imagine if every home, street light, traffic lightweight, rail station, office creating, etc. had solar panels on them. It's not so far fetched therefore would certainly clear away our oil addiction, wouldn't that?
Really, the only thing holding this back are status quo proponents protecting their profits, jobs, together with position of power.
Down those lines, governments need to take away coal and oil subsidies together with subsidies for biofuels that result in land clearing and competition for food resources. That way, the true cost of these dirty energies are reflected and they won't look so cheap in comparison to renewables. Thus, you have a more level playing field amongst the various options of electrical power procurement and consumption. Such as I said earlier, these dirty forms of energy probably will be taxed and a carbon cap trading scheme is only one step in that direction. And once all over again, the proceeds should subsidize better procurement thereby rewarding businesses innovative enough to pull it off while frustrating polluters and resource hogs.
2nd, let's look at taking care of waste and recycling.
Governments can potentially increase redemption values (and CRVs) for covers and aluminum cans to 25% or higher of the retail price tag. Currently, we have examples of CRVs of not many pennies for a might of soda that costs $1. 00 USD a can. If that CRV cost became 25 cents (something Actually, i know bottling and soft ingest companies will vehemently demonstration), then you can bet people could be more willing to recycle to obtain back some of that money. Meanwhile, the upfront proceeds may well maintain and build digesting facilities (and hire employees) so the recycling system becomes self sufficient. All this maintain a pool of effect of reducing landfill squander while reusing materials that will easily become scarce in any other case recycled.
Moreover, plastic bags (the kind you get in retail stores, supermarkets, etc.) should be charged. If each nasty bag cost a money, then you can bet consumers will don't forget to bring in their own re-usable bags to hold on to their goods. Ultimately, that'll keep us from continuing to fill our landfills with the disposable bags that wind up trashing our environment.
Next, let's look at vehicles and travel.
This is of energy consumption argued previous, but let's look much closer at how to improve transportation and travel since we all have somewhere to get, right? So here's where governments can pour greater expense into building up public transportation where the trains and trams are generally powered by an exclusively green grid. This should care for travel expenses necessary to commute to and from work and just getting around town.
As for long travel time travel, we know it would be a while before some sort of cleaner fuel enjoys widespread use. However, we can limit the utilization of gas-electric hybrids or SUVs to rental cars for holidays requiring a lot of driving. This can be achieved by making anything gas-powered to be prohibitively expensive leaving on those few able to afford it or business in the travel industry renting available such cars. Moreover, in the event you absolutely must self-drive to work or around town, then they must be electric vehicles. Recall in the beginning 1990s, General Motors (GM) ended up with the EV before destroying them. So we know the technology's already at this time there. We just have to maintain the human greed and corrupt politics out of it (something us voters may well sway).
As for air travel, biodiesels developed from photosynthetic sludge ought to be the norm for commercial aircraft unless there's something better and less resource serious.
And where compromised measures involving some sort of fossil-fuels are involved, they should be phased out eventually while development continues with regard to truly clean, renewable energizes.
Fourth, let's look at food procurement.
Governments can certainly help here by implementing laws which meats more expensive by way of taxes or penalties. Exactly why are we singling available meats? Because they involve a good amount of resources from maintaining the farm animals, providing give, transporting the products, clearing land for grazing, etc. On top of which, the methane emissions are serious contributors on the greenhouse gas concentrations in our atmosphere.
Now I know this is certainly painful because I'm some sort of meat eater myself and I'm sure this applies to most other people too. Besides, many agro-business proponents probably wish to kill me for hinting that this.
Nonetheless, by creating a financial deterrent for consuming meat, this should lessen the demand for the very things that destroy all sorts. Plus, I'd imagine we'd have a healthier population since it becomes very expensive to overeat.
The same goes for processed foods or production of foods that usually tend to pollute the environment. These should be more taxed and penalized to attempt to force companies to are more responsible, find a better method to manufacture their goods, and ultimately help it become more expensive to eat within a unhealthy way (thereby taxing our medical process).
Again, foods that want lots of transportation, pesticides, etc. should be made more expensive through taxes and penalties. This should spur more local businesses in support of export and expand their products when it's sustainably responsible to do so.
Fifth, let's look at freshwater procurement.
Currently, we've got lots of hydroelectric dams and water diversion to provide both energy and nurture agro-business. But we might eliminate hydroelectricity (or drastically reduce their use while destroying the excessive ones) by procuring clear, renewable energy via measures already mentioned. As for water diversion, we can eliminate or drastically reduce this as a result of desalinizing ocean water if the cities have been near the ocean. Although desalinization takes energy, a mass-rollout of a green grid are able to help fill this require, while solar concentrators are able to focus the sun's electrical power on hastening the evaporation in the water to make freshwater for delivery to the rest of the city or for additionally inland.
While some water diversion from freshwater water ways is inevitable, we can easily reduce this practice consequently our forests can far better thrive and scrub the air of carbon dioxide while keeping moisture inside local microclimate.
So so you see, all of the above measures are extremely achievable - not when you need it, but now! And I'm sure there are other measures I haven't mentioned that could be implemented (e. grams. overhauling the medical together with pharmaceutical system, books compared to. e-books, reducing urban sprawl and prohibiting overdevelopment, etc.). All it's going to take is a referee (we. e. a government and also regulatory body) that ensures people play inside these rules while mediating conflicts while upholding the durability principle. And the way this is certainly achieved is by voting in individuals who are serious about implementing these kind of principles.
Meanwhile, at those level, we can change and also implement habits that allow us to be less wasteful, teach others regarding the virtues of protecting some of our resources and living in the means, and not cave in to special interests (even though these interests are our own) when they not in favor of the sustainability paradigm (thereby violating the values with legacy and variety). Actually, if the above options about transitioning to durability are implemented, then the responsible decisions made in the individual level will be automatic since the device would hurt us in the wallet if we have been being wasteful.
If enough people and at last nations cooperate in maintaining sustainability principles, then they should be more enforceable, result with fewer resource conflicts, and help poorer countries catch up to more acceptable standard of living.
CONCLUSION: IS THE FOLLOWING UTOPIA?
Well if you're open-minded and patient enough you just read this far, I ask this question once again: Is the sustainable paradigm utopia?
Well it might look like utopia if you see how far we have to go from the status quo. But after seeing that there are indeed realistic small steps we as a society can take to help propel the sustainability paradigm, this better world we're aiming for doesn't seem a great deal like an unrealistic pipe dream, doesn't it?
Besides, to cast off the struggle to get a sustainable paradigm as a utopian fantasy and not take any steps inside direction for improvement is really a cop out. It's not only lazy and defeatist, nevertheless it'll violate the legacy principle, which is one of many principles I argued everyone can agree on trying to achieve and be free from life. And by violating your legacy principle, we end up passing on a wiped out planet as our legacy to our children and their children (assuming the human race can survive that longer).
So with that, I think the sustainable paradigm may seem like utopia right today, but it's totally achievable if we want it to happen.
Really, our survivability depends on our desire to brew a change for the better so that alone should motivate us to do this now - whether it's by improving our lifestyles, voting with regard to proponents of sustainability, shunning unsustainable items, etc. Heck, even encouraging discussion regarding this topic (the whole aim of this article in the first place) is a help the right direction.
Wind farm support vessels
Wind farm workboats