So we hear a lot about our use of oil. There are limited amounts of it, and we are taking as much as we can find, hurting whoever gets in our way. There are other similar resources though. Tropical rainforests come to mind. They take hundreds of years to generate, but more importantly contain a large percentage of the dio-diversity of our planet. Why is bio-diversity important? Because when the environment in which we live changes (as it always does, whether or not we create the change) that bio-diversity is what allows the Lord’s work (evolution) to be done. It is this desire to see our ecosystem continue that drives my ecological thinking. So when I see an article about a less renewable than we think resource (rain-forests) being chewed up to fuel the machine that is US (and world) consumerism it is a little distressing.
That article tells a tale of three countries, Papua New Guinea, China, and the US. For New Guinea it is the story of habitats being destroyed. And I’m talking habitats for humans, not animal. When local tribes are no longer able to fend for themselves, there is something of a problem. Why can’t governments realize that these resources are precious, and when the decision is made to utilize them, the wealth should be spread around? Especially when one of the stake-holders is actually loosing their livelihood in the process. Why is it that management like in Botswana where the wealth from a natural resource is spread throughout the country, are so rare?
Then there is China, who’s industry is thriving on the use of these materials. They have perfected the old colonial system that we seem to be botching in Iraq right now. If you have the locals doing the dirty work for you, you come out smelling like roses. Unless of course the country realizes that their natural resource is going to run our in four years, and you haven’t been paying export taxes for years, and kicks you out like Indonesia did to China. Then you have to go looking elsewhere for your profits. This is a more global problem than just China though. Companies that produce product need to sell as cheaply as possible to outbid other companies because consumers want the cheapest product possible. This means that they don’t look beyond the current profit margins for their morality. One of the reasons that I love working for myself is that if my company ever took off I could try to make it be a more ethical company. I realize that it would never grow beyond a certain size because of that, but maybe that is the point? Perhaps transparent management systems like the Chicago Climate Exchange which monitor resource usage is a viable way of bringing companies into a more ethical stance with regards to resource use. (Interestingly individuals can buy credits on the exchange to offset their own energy usage, driving, flying and home through Terrapass. This is an interesting experiment even if you don’t intend to sell your credits, just so you can see how much pollution your create.)
But the final line in the article, points to the last country: “If America likes it,” Yao said, “then eventually it will be gone.” As consumers we need to be willing to pay a little more and pay a little more attention to purchase more renewable resources, before our greed kills the bio-diversity that is pretty much the only thing that is going to get us through whatever global scale mistakes we make in the future. The fact is, capitalism works. What the consumers want, industry will provide. This puts the impetus on consumers to realize the consequences of their desires, and to make informed decisions when purchasing, or just going through our daily routines.
Or maybe I watched too much An Inconvenient Truth this weekend.
