06.11.2009
Sustainability
Dr. David Orr, Environmental Science Professor at Oberlin College, gave s series of lectures recently in Charlotte. In some ways, it was more of the same — think Al Gore without the I-Shoulda-Been-Your-President animosity. But Orr particularly resonated with his audience when he described our environment and the threats of climate change using the mathematical concept of a “nonlinear system.”
Now, I realize that doesn’t exactly scream excitement, but stay with me while I explain. In a linear system, 2+2 = 4. That is, a linear system is made up of the combination of the individual elements of that system. Conversely, in a nonlinear system, the output is not proportional to its input. Therefore, in a nonlinear system 2+2 MAY equal 4 or 22 or 7 or something else entirely. read more
06.11.2009
Sustainability
In the previous installment of this multi-part essay, I suggested that we focus our environmental attention on hope rather than fear. I argued that Americans are drawn to possibility rather than pessimism and that our individual dealings with climate change should reflect that reality. And of course, I’m not alone in thinking that. In fact, there is a growing cadre of new environmentalists promoting the same bright green future I favor.
Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, recent authors of Break Through, are two such men. The two reached a level of fame — well, actually, infamy — among old guard environmentalists when they published the thought-provoking essay, “The Death of Environmentalism,” back in 2004.
That original essay argued persuasively that the traditional environmentalists’ decision to brand the environment as a special interest — as a “thing” — that must be protected by legislative policy (i.e., “the politics of ‘no’”) has backfired. And despite this backfiring, the movement hasn’t changed its fundamental approach to “saving the environment” in three decades. read more