[Promoted from the diaries by susanbhu.)
(cross-posted at the Paper Tiger)
I must remember to make the Asia Times a daily stop on my web browsings – and so should you if you are interested in news and analysis about Asia or a different perspective on global events than what you’ll get in the US or UK papers.
Yesterday’s edition features an article focusing on the global ecological consequences of China’s increasing wealth. . . [MORE below . . .]
…if those increased incomes translate into the kind of lifestyle currently enjoyed by most US citizens, Chinese demands will overwhelm what the planet can provide, according to the analysis, “Learning from China: Why the Western Economic Model Will Not Work for the World”. While geopoliticians worry whether China will integrate itself into the current Western-dominated international system, Lester Brown, EPI’s founder, is far more worried about the impact of a wealthy China on the Earth’s diminishing resource base.
“If it does not work for China,” he notes, “it will not work for India, which has an economy growing at 7% per year and a population projected to surpass China’s by 2030.”
Brown lays out the potential consequences of a China whose consumers emulate the lifestyle currently enjoyed by most Americans – and concludes that the earth simply does not have the raw materials to sustain such consumption. Just one example:
If by 2031 the Chinese use oil at the same rate as the US does today, it would need 99 million barrels of oil a day, or 20 million barrels per day more than the entire world currently produces.
Brown’s purpose is not to chide Chinese for wanting to grow rich and consume like Americans, but rather to suggest that all of us, Americans most certainly included, must adjust our patterns of consumption and adopt more sustainable lifestyles.
“The point of this exercise of projections,” writes Brown, “is not to blame China for consuming so much, but rather to learn what happens when a large segment of humanity moves quickly up the global economic ladder … Plan A, business as usual, is no longer a viable option. We need to turn quickly to Plan B before the geopolitics of oil, grain and raw-material scarcity lead to economic instability, political conflict, and disruption of the social order on which economic progress depends.”
We do have a choice. As bleak as I sometimes believe the future for our planet might be, as disgusted and despairing of my country’s direction as I am at present, a part of me still maintains what I guess is that quintessential American trait of optimism – excitement, even. Just think. We could devote ourselves to developing alternative technologies and energy sources – a Manhattan Project to rid ourselves of fossil fuel dependency. We could dedicate ourselves to preserving our wild places and restoring our wounded lands. Such a project could revitalize our economy and rejuvenate our soul.
Okay, it probably won’t happen. Until of course the day that it must.
How do you personally conserve? Do you avoid consumerism?
Well, glass houses, stones, all that, I don’t do nearly enough…but I don’t buy a lot of stuff (well, except books, but Books Are Good). I keep things until they fall apart and wear out. My furniture is mostly second-hand. I turn off lights when I leave the room, keep the thermostat down, pay a “green energy” surtax to DWP, drive a high-mileage car (I also try to keep at least one weekend day car-free), recycle my cat food cans…
And I don’t shop at Walmart!
But it really is our government that needs to take the lead here. We shouldn’t have to be fighting here in California to maintain more stringent emissions and mileage standards (automakers have filed a lawsuit, I believe). I remember reading Barry Commoner years ago – he talked about the procurement power of the government – if the government, for example, insisted on making a certain percentage of its fleet cars hybrids or high mileage, it would create a bigger market and an additional incentive for automakers to create such things. There’s no reason that we can’t combine the power of government and the incentives of the market to encourage development of new technology and better conservation of what we’ve got – certainly business owners shouldn’t be getting tax incentives for driving Humvees, for godssake!
But first you have to have leadership that admits there’s a problem.
My mother grew up poor in North Dakota … her father died in the flu epidemic when she was 5 years old. Although she has done well in her life, she retained a few frugal ways … she always folded and saved already-used aluminum foil. She’d reheat leftovers, even in tiny dishes, until every mouthful was gone.
But, as she gained monetarily, she got some other habits … having to buy all of her clothes brand new, and at stores such as Nordstrom.
And it’s been fascinating to me that, for example, my stepfather thought it was “low class” for me to breastfeed my baby because, when he had his children during the 1950s, it was de riguerre to buy formula. Both my stepafther and mother were shocked I didn’t get a crib and a number of other accoutrements … thankfully, during pregnancy, I found great books that showed me how to have a baby wtihout running up thousands of dollars in debt at department stores.
I had to learn to be frugal as an adult. Harder than that, though, I had to learn how to be frugal without being ashamed, particularly since so much of our culture instantly judges people by all outward appearances of “keeping up with the Joneses.” I could go on and on, but I wish we lived in a culture that wasn’t so focused on the newest, the latest, the fastest, the biggest.
” I wish we lived in a culture that wasn’t so focused on the newest, the latest, the fastest, the biggest.”
Yeah….
Okay, I have looked longingly at one of those plasma TVs…but I don’t have one!
The car thing though, that’s what gets me. I hate that high gas prices impact poor people, especially in places like Los Angeles, where it’s very hard to get around without a car. But still, a part of me thinks, let the prices rise. I think it’s the only way to get people out of their damned Escalades…
Also related to this: somewhere recently I read an article about how the structure of American cities and suburbs are encouraging obesity. In most suburbs, you HAVE to drive to do the simplest things, go to a market, mail a letter, etc. And studies have shown that it’s not just not going to the gym that leads to obesity, it’s really more the lack of ordinary, incidental movement…the daily stuff, the short walks, the kind of things where if you live someplace with stores close at hand, you don’t even think about. It adds up.
Of course, the soaring obesity rates with their concurrent reduction in lifespan should at least mitigate our social security problem, no?
Is that true in China as well? A trend towards obesity?
My fun neighbor and I were just talking this morning how neither of us ever had the desire to be ‘house poor.’ It won’t matter how much our personal finances advance, we’re not moving out of our modest, afforable homes.
I love reusing other’s castoffs. My kids love going to the children’s resale shop for new toys, puzzles and clothes. I think it’s a great joke to decorate my house for next to nothing. I’m only profligate with the yard and plantings b/c I’m building from scratch and need trees and shrubs. But, that’s at least green, n’est pas?
Both cars are used and paid off. One was free, the other was a cash deal. No SUVS or minivans.
Kids are programmed to not waste water and know that there are water shortages elsewhere.
I have spring plans to remove the childcarrier from mine and my hsuband’s bikes and get them tuned up. Our grocery store is a rideable distance. I’m thinking about getting involved with citizen action to green up our commercial area to make it bike friendly.
In answer to your question, Susan, yes, very much so, at least in the affluent cities. The one child policy is thought to exacerbate this problem – all those parents and grandparents and aunties spoiling the one “Little Emperor” (that’s a Chinese expression for the single child phenom, not mine). Here’s an article on that subject in the English language China Daily – http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-03/26/content_428347.htm.
The flip side in China is that the horrible pollution is shortening lifespans there – perhaps along with the increased stress of modern urban lifestyles – a quote from another China Daily article: “In the meantime, in Beijing’s Zhongguancun area, where most of the city’s universities and research institutes are clustered, the life expectancy of staff members has experienced a decline from a decade ago, from between 58 and 59 to between 53 and 54.”