jan de man

Summer readings #3

I've completed reading The World Without Us by Alan Weisman. It took a while, both because it is a demanding read and because I've been busy the last weeks with handy work on my house.

My general impression is that this is a book well worth reading. But it won't be very uplifting if you can't zoom out properly and see Earth as a habitat for all species, not only humans.

The message is that the planet will do just fine without us. And depending on your perspective you'll find that very comforting or scary as hell. I mostly find it comforting, but quickly find myself immersed in thoughts of how we - a supposedly very intelligent species - put ourselves in this mess. And seemingly can't get us out of it.

The book is full of interesting examples of places that could be "prototypes" of life without humans. Oddly interesting, these places flourish with animals and plants. Odd because these places are the mine infested DMZ between North and South Korea, an abandoned resort after the war on Cyprus and Chernobyl.

You'll also find an abundance of other insight-giving facts in the book. Such as if all humans were to adopt a one-child-per-family policy today, the human population would halve by 2075. That could make a serious difference for us... But would obviously challenge the idea of eternal growth...

Lastly a quote from Les Knight in the book: "By definition, we're the alien invader. Everywhere except Africa. Every time Homo Sapiens went anywhere else, things went extinct." Les actually wants to phase out the human race. Non-coercively. But still...

//jan

Next book and a podcast

I'm well into book #3 now - The World Without Us by Alan Weisman. Was intrigued by the title and so far it has been quite interesting. Will report when I'm through reading.

Also have a podcast on Timothy Ferris' The 4-Hour Work Week I'll be listening to. My friend Paul gave me the tip on that one.

//jan

Peter Senge on sustainability

Paul Holmström pointed me to this article. Peter Senge has always been a wise thinker and in this article he is interviewed on sustainability. It is a long read so make sure you have a little time. I pulled out this bit as a flavor of what he says:

On another level, it’s [sustainability] just a bad word. It’s technically what we would call a “negative vision.” We don’t want the unsustainable, we don’t want civilization to collapse, we don’t want the human species to fail. Well, of course we don’t want that, but those images don’t move people. “Survival” is not the most inspiring vision. It motivates out of fear, but it only motivates for as long as people feel the issues are pressing on them. Soon as the fear recedes, so does the motivation.

What we’re talking about is arguably the greatest challenge to innovation that humankind has ever faced: reinventing our whole way of living. And every single example I know of where something meaningful has happened, where people have worked at something that’s taken five years, 10 years, 15 years, it’s because of people’s excitement toward something that really draws them. It’s aspirational.

//jan

Reflections on Home

I've now spent the full 1 hour and 33 minutes to see Home. If you haven't I urge you to (it was supposed to close June 14, but seems open still). It is a remarkably beautiful film with a really grim message. A message we don't seem to be taking seriously enough...

Nothing in itself in the film was new to me, I believe I have a fairly good grip on what challenges the planet and us humans face. The impact of the film has to do with the whole story coming together at once. 

Personally I'm once again struck by my relative inaction regarding this matter. Most people are probably concerned about the situation and believe they can't make a difference. I happen to think that things can be done, and that we should try. But I honestly don't think I'm trying hard enough.

I refuse to participate in a Titanic like charade; "we're sinking, might as well enjoy the ride to the bottom". I refuse not to take responsibility for coming generations - my kids, our kids.

We all have to rise above ourselves in this. And one thing comes out bloody clear. If humanity survives this mess, it'll be because we managed to change our life style pretty damn quick.

/jan

From the archive: Perspectives on sustainability

I wrote this almost a year ago to the day. The first bit seems to be changing a little. The second has an interesting connection to my last post.

//jan

Sustainability for most today seems to be about tackling climate change. Damn, that is narrow. But arguably still an important an daunting task. 

Sustainability needs to be discussed and understood better. But not from the perspective of creating sustainable human life. That is also too narrow. Instead we should be building and protecting sustainability for ALL LIFEFORMS ON THE PLANET. Focusing on sustainability the for the whole system called our planet seems to me to be the only reasonable strategy to take care of our own egoistic needs of survival. We're interdependent on the planet. We need to look beyond our own needs to save ourselves.

Rare Earth Dependence

This headline + article at Treehugger caught my eye. Thought it was brilliant and started to read, only to learn that I has misinterpreted the whole thing. When I got to this bit I realized me and Treehugger were on different wave lengths:

"The main thrust of the article is that rare earths are only known to exist in a few places in the world: Mostly China, Australia and North America, with much smaller reserves known to exist in India, Brazil, Malaysia and South Africa."

Silly me. Here I was thinking that the only place this rare stuff exists is on Earth - the planet. Not earth, as in the ground. And that we actually have a Rare Earth Dependence, meaning a dependence on the planet itself. 

That was what caught my interest in the first place. The genius of saying that we don't have a fossil fuel dependence - we have a rare Earth dependence.

So much for that.

/jan

Are cul-de-sacs Earth's biggest threat?

A great little film. Both content and design with visuals.

//jan

Recession is good for nature

This article gives a little fuel to a homemade theory of mine. It seems recessions are good for nature and booms are bad for nature. In the middle of this we have GDP as our measuring stick. So one way to put it would be to say that GDP is a good way to measure how good we are at destroying the environment.

//jan

My kind of car race

Shell Eco Marathon

//jan

När börjar det bli ok att säga ifrån?

Jag är ingen miljöfreak på det sätt som många kan vara. Däremot är jag övertygad om att varje människa i västvärlden måste minska sitt "fotavtryck" om vi skall kunna leva hållbart på planeten. Min approach har varit att göra. I min familj har vi valt att bo i ett lite mindre hus. Vi bytt elleverans så vi bara får vindel. Vi har snart bytt ut alla glödlampor. Vi har sålt en bil och har således "bara" en bil. Den bil vi har är en elhybrid. Vi har minskat vår körning avsevärt och åker mer kommunalt. Vi köper allt mer ekologisk mat. Vi komposterar och har soptömning varannan vecka. Vi köper mindre prylar. Vi lagar och återanvänder det som går. Etc. Etc.

Väl inne i den här utvecklingen fungerar i alla fall jag så att jag funderar på vad jag kan mer göra. För även om vårt "fotavtryck" har minskat med hälften så går det att minska mer. Och behöver säkert minskas mer. Så vi gnager på i vår familj och tar ytterligare steg.

Samtidigt kan jag inte låta bli att notera att mina grannar (i vid bemärkelse, inte bara de allra närmaste) inte verkar göra sin del. De bygger ut sina redan stora hus. Eller river och bygger nytt. De kör på med sina TVÅ bränsleslukande monster. De köper båtar, fyrhjulingar och annat som ökar deras fotavtryck. Vissa verkar helt immuna mot idéer om ekologiskt mat. De genererar massor med avfall. Slit och släng. De flesta verkar helt enkelt inte gjort kopplingen mellan tanke och handling. För ingen här ute i min gulliga (och ganska välbärgade) småstadsidyll kan anklagas för att inte fatta. De tycker bara att det inte är tillräckligt viktigt att göra sin del.

Jag har låtit det vara så här för jag vill inte bli kvarterets besserwisser (mer än jag redan är). Men snart blir det väl min planetariska plikt att agera även mot grannarna. För den lilla förbättring jag kan fortsätta göra på min plätt nu är ju ytterst marginell i förhållande till hur lätt det är för ALLA mina grannar att snabbt minska sina fortavtryck med hälften. Det handlar om planetarisk utväxling på mitt insatta engagemang!

Men oj vad det tar emot. Det är ju trots allt att ingripa i hur andra lever sina liv. Och det görs inte lättvindigt. Är det någon som har tips och erfarenheter att dela som kan hjälpa mig?

//jan