Prompt: What did you think of Professor M. Avramovich's lecture?
My Response:
I felt that Professor M. Avramovich had a commanding presence in the classroom. His points were well thought out and direct. He was able to communicate sometimes-complicated concepts to a somewhat uninterested crowd.
To start things off he gave us a definition of globalization: The reduction or elimination of state enforced restrictions on trade.
I appreciate the history lesson he gave us in regards to globalization. So much of the history I have learned is “what year did this happen” or “who did this”. His approach to history helped me understand how the economics of globalization developed. The book “Wealth of Nations” by Adams Smith was one that I had never heard of before but sounded as though it was a good overview of world economics. I had never paid much attention to the shift from Mercantilism to Globalization. Nor did I pay much attention to the ramifications of both methods of doing things. Whereas mercantilism encouraged exports and not imports globalization showed that each country has something that it is really good at. His example used to illustrate this point was quite effective. It would take one employee with the right tools to do the accounting for a company whereas it might take 10 people in another country to do the same amount of work without the proper training and tools. There is a balance that must be realized between imports and exports.
One of his most interesting points was when he mentioned that no two countries with a McDonalds have ever gone to war against each other. The fact that a county has a McDonald’s means that they are open to the idea of foreign influences and trade. If they have no McDonald’s they are in essence shut off from the world and not open to new ideas or reason. As a result when a problem arises it is not resolved through words and diplomacy but rather military methods.
This, of course, is not to say that McDonald’s is the savior of the modern world but instead to illustrate the fact that if a company moves beyond national borders it is as a result of a certain level of acceptance of foreign influence.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
Research Paper on Biofuels Benefit.
King 1
Daniel King
North Park Dialogue II
Research Paper
April 4, 2008
Dr. Ankney
Title: Biofuels Bad Mark
Worldwide consumption of non-renewable fuels has inevitably led to a surge in the need for biofuels. This increased demand has opened up opportunities for biofuel producers to make money. In order to make biofuels you need land to grow the fuels. As a result forests are being destroyed in order to make room for these crops. In turn there is a reduction in plants that help reduce carbon levels among a host of other positive benefits. Furthermore, the economically deprived are being further strained as staple food prices increase with the competition of biofuel production. Biofuels can potentially be a good thing but not if they are continued at the current production standards and methods. In light of utilitarian ethics unregulated production and growth of bio fuels is ecologically unfriendly and socially unjust.
Fast and cheap transportation, supported by inexpensive fuel, is a vital component of both American and international economies today. Since the invention of the wheel transportation methods have continued to improve. The one remaining constant thing has been the need for a source of power to make it move. The power burden has been carried by everything from the backs of horses and oxen to the paddles and sails of ships. The most outstanding source of this power, in the world today, has been oil.
King 2
According to the Energy Information Administration “Total petroleum consumption of liquid fuels and other petroleum products averaged 20.7 million barrels per day in
2007” (one barrel of petroleum is 42 gallons). The Energy Information Administration has also published charts that indicate 85.7 million barrels per day were consumed worldwide in 2007. Though the consumption of oil in the United States continues to increase year-to-year it pales in comparison to the consumption of oil worldwide. According to the charts published by The Energy Information Administration worldwide consumption is up from 76.6 to 85.7 million barrels per day since the year 2000. The consumption of this oil becomes a problem when you understand the ramifications of this consumption, particularly for the United States. The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security estimates that “22 percent of the world's oil is controlled by states that sponsor terrorism and are under U.S./United Nations sanctions”. Gal Luft executive director of the institute, further states that "We are, in fact, fighting a war on terrorism and paying for both sides of the war". As the demand for oil increases those who control the sources of the oil gain more power.
Along with a decrease in the need for foreign oil the United States also hopes to reduce the greenhouse gas effect that is occurring as a result of increased carbon emissions. President Bush has repeatedly stated that we must “get off oil”. His most
King 3
recent declaration of this goal was given at the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference in D.C. He recognizes the truth of the fact that by importing foreign oil we are “paying for both sides of the war” and contributing to an ever-warming climate. The gradual warming of our globe has become an increasingly
prevalent issue among leaders internationally. The threat of monumental natural disasters has expedited the efforts to limit the amount of carbon that is being pumped into the atmosphere. World news is continually bombarded with new reports detailing the latest problems that come along with a warming globe. A quick glance at the BBC world report will show a host of environmental issues being dealt with internationally. More recently there was an article titled “Atlantic Glaciers Surge to Ocean” yet another sign of global warming.
Both the hope to relieve dependence on foreign oil and a hope to curtail environmental damage have been the driving force behind the development of alternative fuels. Though there are many alternative sources of power one that has remained popular is biofuel. Biofuels in their most basic definition are a fuel (as wood or ethanol) composed of or produced from biological raw materials (Merriam-Webster). Among these biofuels, ethanol has risen to the forefront as it, in theory, relieves dependence on foreign oil and reduces carbon emissions. The United States has supported the move to ethanol by providing “exemption from federal gasoline
King 4
excise taxes, whole or partial exemption from road use (sales) taxes in nine states, a federal production tax credit, and a federal blender's credit”. (Solomon, 416) With powerful support behind them ethanol and similar biofuels have taken off. Since 1980 ethanol has been produced in the United States (Solomon 414). At the same conference mentioned earlier, the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference in D.C., president Bush proclaimed, “Since 2001, ethanol production has
quadrupled from 1.6 billion gallons in 2000 to an estimated 6.4 billion gallons in 2007, with the vast majority coming from corn.” With each extra ounce of ethanol produced the demand for foreign oil decreases that much more. In addition, “Relative to the fossil fuels they displace, greenhouse gas emissions are reduced 12% by the production and combustion of ethanol” (Hill, 1118). These numbers are clear signals that the United States is slowly eliminating their dependence on foreign oil.
Fast and cheap transportation, supported by inexpensive fuel, will remain a vital component of both American and international economies today but, in light of utilitarianism the methods used to create the fuel are ecologically and socially unjust. Ecosystems and communities alike have experienced injustices as a result of the surge in biofuel demand. Utilitarian ethics primarily addresses the question, as is explained by Harris, “Will this action produce greater overall human well-being?” a
King 5
question that is applied to the animal world as well. Utilitarianism can be broken down into two parts; act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. The current biofuel situation, as is being discussed in this paper, will be examined in light of act utilitarianism in which, according to Harris, the morality of a situation is judged based on whether the act itself produces the most utility.
Biofuels can burn more effectively and put out fewer pollutants than regular gasoline as was stated earlier in the paper. The only problem is that you need a lot of it to meet the increasing demand. So much so that it is estimated that “Even dedicating all
U.S. corn and soybean production to biofuels would meet only 12% of gasoline demand and 6% of diesel demand.” (Hill, 1120). This is causing ecological and social problems that will continue if not regulated properly. Ecologically it is destroying forests that are vital to sustaining a planet that can support life.
Plants are vital to life in that they convert the carbon dioxide that many living things emit into oxygen that we in turn can breath back in again. As such it is important that in attempting to reduce effects of global warming we ensure their security and safety. Without carbon consuming organisms the world would quickly become uninhabitable for life, as we know it. A scientist by the name of Phillips conducted research to determine the benefits of tropical forests and their ability to consume more carbon than they take in. His research found that
King 6
“Long-term monitoring of plots in mature humid tropical forests concentrated in South America revealed that biomass gain by tree growth exceeded losses from tree death in 38 of 50 Neotropical sites. These forest plots have accumulated 0.71 ton, plus or minus 0.34 ton, of carbon per hectare per year in recent decades. The data suggest that Neotropical forests may be a significant carbon sink, reducing the rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.” (439)
The forests that these research findings were conducted on are the very ones that are being taken down to provide room for more farmland. Because such a large number of crops are needed to meet demand of ethanol more farmland is needed.
The South American country of Brazil is one of many nations that are seeing biofuel demand problems. They have a long history with biofuels dating back to 1975 when the Brazilian government recognized the advantage that ethanol could provide (Carlos, 401). Among other things they had the infrastructure in place to support production. And similar to the United Stats they noticed that an alternative fuel source would mean a decreased dependence on imports of foreign oil which made up nearly half, in monetary value, of their imports at the time (Carlos, 404). However, the recent surge in demand has disrupted the balance the maintained nationally. Their
King 7
role as one of the members at the forefront of alternative, renewable resource production has brought them a host of problems.
The Amazonian rainforests are continually being logged to provide more room for cropland to grow biofuels. The deforestation has escalated to such a level in 2007 that Brazil went as far as to dispatch troops in order to help regain control. According to Jeff Tollefson Brazil has had to launch “a military-style crackdown” (134) on deforestation. Just previous to the enforcement the deforestation numbers had been down nearly 59% over the previous three years. However, the National Institute for Space Research in Sao Jose dos Campos had clear satellite imagery that depicted that
much more of the Amazonian jungles had been forested than previously thought. This halted any celebration that could have been had and turned into a stern concentrated effort to fix the problem.
The first question that should be looked at is, what utility is there in destroying the forest. The deforestation is not only putting a strain on the environment but also affecting numerous species of wildlife. The intricacies of Brazilian rainforests are still not completely known. New species are continually being found, some of which have fantastic medical benefits. The easies measurement to take is to see where
King 8
forests had been and where they are now. It is much more difficult to measure the direct effect of the deforestation on certain species and their development in the region and the ecosystem at large. It would be easy to say that logging should ultimately cease in the rainforests of Brazil but the issue is not that simple. The money they make from logging the trees in that region allows them to continue living. Considering the statistic stated above in which “dedicating all U.S. corn and soybean production to biofuels would meet only 12% of gasoline demand and 6% of diesel demand” the loggers seem to have fairly good job security. The loggers could care less if the land is being used for crops or for a shopping mall. The fact is the logging industry provides “jobs for 2,000 to 3,000 people” (Saul Paulo). The loggers see what they do as a job that has one major consequence, a paycheck. The problem with this arises when you the destruction that is occurring “it is believed that more than 70% of wood felled in the area is of illegal origin.” (Sau Paulo). Yet the bottom line, for
them, remains that they will get a paycheck that will help them pay for bills, education for children, food, shelter and other essentials. Putting this into a broad perspective, however, their actions have far more ramifications than simply providing their families with food and shelter. In this regard there should be a way in which the loggers can continue their methods of life along with the environment, which effects the world, to preserve its integrity. This balance will only come through regulation.
King 9
At a national level the increase in demand for biofuels was a great thing for many people in Brazil. Sugar-cane mill owners were suddenly operating at full capacity despite low demand for sugars worldwide. Furthermore, commuters saw a drop in fuel prices. The cars people were already driving only needed minor modifications in order to utilize the new biofuels. However, even Brazil soon faced problems with their alternative fuel production. The rate at which the biofuels were needed was not being met by the expansion and production of the crops. Markets changed and farmers grew other things. The ensuing crises required major government intervention to prevent an economic and social disaster. Fortunately government regulation was able to handle the problems. Through various stipulations and standards the Brazilian government managed to keep problems from getting out of control. This situation is now occurring at an international, worldwide, scale. The demand for biofuels is greater than ever and it will require “expansion and production” at a much larger scale. However, when looking at an international scale major regulation is much more difficult to develop and not a main idea of this paper.
Another drawback to biofuel production is the resulting elevated food prices. Though the actual production of biofuels may not directly affect food prices it will have a generalized effect to the market at large. It is a simple supply and demand relationship. If there is more land that is being dedicated to grow crops that can be turned into fuel fewer fields are being planted with crops that can support human
King 10
growth and life. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in their report on fighting world food inflation “International prices of most cereals have risen sharply over the past two years and remain at unusually high levels”. The report continued to discuss the causes for the rise in prices and cited “an increase in demand from the biofuels sector” as a contributing factor. This demand continues as the world is estimated to be expanding by about 76 million people annually (Alexandratos, 237). Though this is projected to level off in the not so distant future the fact of the matter is that it is still increasing today. When the world’s population actually levels off is when assumptions for demand of basic food needs will prove correct. Until that point food production must increase along with the population in order to supply the demand. This goal will become ever more difficult to meet as biofuels compete directly with it. The promotion of life, whether it be wild animal or a developed human, is always more important in Utilitarianism. The moment biofuel demand causes necessary food to become unaffordable to the worlds poor is when any utility that could have been found in biofuel production disappears entirely.
The problem is gaining publicity as some lawmakers demand that biofuels not be produced unless they are put under strict standards. A recent news article by Tim Hirsch in the BBC highlighted this fact with the article title “Biofuels need strict
King 11
standards”. Without such standards there will continue to be pressure put on the fragile ecosystems found in the Amazon. The European Union met in attempts to try and reach agreements among bigger nations to help stop the misuse of biofuels and search for more efficient alternatives. Peter Mandelson, the EU Trade Commissioner, in a speech entitled “The Biofuel Challenge” at the Biofuel Conference stated, “Biofuel policy is not ultimately an industrial policy or an agricultural policy - it is an environmental policy, driven above all by the greenest outcomes". Though this statement might encourage others it does not reach the full range of the problem. The commissioner largely ignores the other potential consequences of an increase in biofuel production and merely looks at the environmental aspect of their production and use. This has not gone unnoticed by the public however. Most recently there have been protestors that have stopped implementation of mandatory ethanol requirements in Britain. The Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO), in the United Kingdom, hopes to have “2.5% of fuels” sold at the pumps containing biofuels. Protestors have urged that the policy be delayed until further review can be made as to the benefits of biofuels both environmentally and whether international need for food can be met at a reasonable price along with biofuels.
King 12
Production of biofuels such as ethanol must be regulated in order to have any type of positive effect. It is only at this point that the benefits of biofuels will outweigh the drawbacks and in turn produce the greatest utility. You cannot say biofuel is good if it is contributing to the overall destruction of the world’s environment and the increased strain of daily living for the world’s poor. These activities as Harris puts it “would not promote the general welfare” (111). There is potential that the very market that is promoting the destruction of these forests could help prevent the destruction. The trade of carbon credits has been a recent phenomenon in which businesses have seen that it is beneficial, economically, to be environmentally friendly. The idea could potentially be put at a larger international scale thus promoting countries and other influential businesses to be more environmentally aware. Issues of monitoring and overall market regulation would be some of the issues that could arise as a result, but the idea would be in place to further environmental gains.
In conclusion, biofuel production in its current state is environmentally unfriendly and socially unjust. The only way in which it will become anything else, and provide the greatest amount of utility, is the introduction of stricter regulations. There are some that are on the right path and see the need for regulation and even economic reward for better regulation. However, it will take many more people and much
King 13
more time for the wider public to become aware of the issue and in turn create sweeping change. Countries like Brazil have shown that being too lax in the past with their regulations can result in environmental and social unrest. They have also shown that stepping up their enforcement of basic standards in order to keep things from getting out of control can work. Their example can be modeled and potentially implemented at a larger scale to induce the same effect. Without these regulations the biodiversity of forests and the environmental benefits of ecologically diverse ecosystems will be lost. In addition, the humans that inhabit this planet will find themselves unable to afford the food they need to live. An ecological and socially just biofuel producing world is possible but not without the help of regulations to prevent ecological destruction and social injustice.
King 14
Bibliography
"Short Term Energy Outlook." Energy Information Administration. 8 Mar. 2008. United States Government. 10 Mar. 2008.
Lindenmayer, David B. and Jerry F. Franklin. Considering Forest Biodiversity: A Comprehensive Multiscaled Approach. Washington: Island Price, 2002.
Millar, Constance I., and Margaret Olwell. Restoring Diversity: Reintroduction of Endangered Plants. Ed. Donald A. Falk. Washington D.C.: Island P, 1996.
Hoogstraten, Hans Dirk Van. Deep Economy: Caring for Ecology, Humanity and Religion. Cambridge: James Clarke & Co., 2001.
Hill, Jason, Erik Nelson, David Tilman, Stephen Polasky, and Douglas Tiffany. "Environmental, Economic, and Energetic Costs and Benefits of Biodiesel and Ethanol Biofuels." Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences os 103 (2006): 15-18
Turner, Kerry, and Brendan Fisher. "Environmental Economics: to the Rich Man the Spoils." Nature 451 (2008): 1067-1068.
King 15
Schulze, Mark. "Technical and Financial Analysis of Enrichment Planting in Logging Gaps as a Potential Component of Forest Management in the Eastern Amazon." Forest Ecology & Management 255 (2008): 866-879.
Hess, M. S. "How Biodiesel Works." How Stuff Works. 2006. 1 Mar. 2008.
Barney, Jacob N., and Joseph M. Ditomaso. "Nonnative Species and Bioenergy: are We Cultivating the Next Invader?" Bioscience 58 (2008): 64-70.
McCarl, Bruce A., and Uwe A. Schneider. "U.S. Agriculture's Role in Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation World: an Economic Perspective." Review of Agriculture Economics 22 (2000): 134-159.
Lee, Jae-Won, Bon-Wook Koo, Joon-Weon Choi, Don-Ha Choi, and In-Gyu Choi. "Evaluation of Waste Mushroom Logs as a Potential Biomass Resource for the Production of Bioethanol." Bioresource Technology 99 (2008): 2736-2741.
Hirsch, Tim. "Biofuels 'Need Strict Standards'" BBC News. 22 Feb. 2008. BBC. 1 Mar. 2008.
King 16
Motavalli, J. Opposing Viewpoints: Reducing Meat Consumption Will Help Conserve the Environment. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Lou, Dobbs. "That Old Black Magic." U.S. News and World Report 138 (2005).
Luft, Gal. "Reports and Study's on Energy Security." Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. 2008. Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. 19 Mar. 2008.
Kelly, Nicholls, and Campos Stella. "Are You Driving on Blood Fuel?" Ecologist 37 (2007). 27 Feb. 2008.
Solomon, Barry, and Justin Barnes. "Grain and Cellulosic Ethanol: History, Economics, and Energy Policy." Biomass & Bioenergy 31 (2007): 416-425. 13 Mar. 2008.
Bush, George W. Address. United States Government. The Washington International Renewable Energy Conference. Washington Convention Center, Washington D.C. 5 Mar. 2008. 28 Mar. 2008
King 17
Duffy, Gary. "Troops Sent to Stem Amazon Loss." BBC News. 26 Feb. 2008. British Broadcasting Company. 18 Mar. 2008.
Harrabin, Roger. "Call for Delay to Biofuels Policy." BBC News. 24 Mar. 2008. British Broadcasting Company. 25 Mar. 2008.
Fighting Food Inflation Through Sustainable Investment. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. London: European Bank, 2008. 1-16. 15 Mar. 2008
Alexandratos, Nikos. "Population and Development Review." Nature 31 (2008): 237-258. 17 Mar. 2008.
Phillips, Oliver L., Yadvinder Malhi, Niro Higuchi, William F. Laurance, Percy V. Nunez, Rodolfo M. Vazquez, Susan G. Laurance, Leandro V. Ferreira, Margaret Stern, Sandra Brown, and John Grace. "Changes in the Carbon Balance of Tropical Forests: Evidence From Long-Term Plots." Science ns 282 (1998): 439-442. 1 Apr. 2008.
King 18
“Biofuel” Def. 1a. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. 11th Edition. 2003
De Mello, Jose, and Carlos Machodo. "Social Interests, Contextualizations and Uncertainties in Risk Assessment: the Case of Methanol as a Fuel Component in Brazil." Social Studies of Science 3 (1998): 401-421. 29 Mar. 2008.
Hill, Nelson J., D Tillman, S Polasky, and D Tiffany. "Environmental, Economic, and Energetic Costs And." PNAS (2006): 1116-1121. 20 Mar. 2008.
Mandelson, Peter. "The Biofuel Challenge." European Commission. Biofuel Conference. Charlemagne. 5 July 2007. 2 Apr. 2008.
Tollefson, Jeff. "Brazil Goes to War Against Logging." Nature 452 (2008): 134-135. 1 Apr. 2008.
Harris, C E. Applying Moral Theories. 1st ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Company, 1986.
Daniel King
North Park Dialogue II
Research Paper
April 4, 2008
Dr. Ankney
Title: Biofuels Bad Mark
Worldwide consumption of non-renewable fuels has inevitably led to a surge in the need for biofuels. This increased demand has opened up opportunities for biofuel producers to make money. In order to make biofuels you need land to grow the fuels. As a result forests are being destroyed in order to make room for these crops. In turn there is a reduction in plants that help reduce carbon levels among a host of other positive benefits. Furthermore, the economically deprived are being further strained as staple food prices increase with the competition of biofuel production. Biofuels can potentially be a good thing but not if they are continued at the current production standards and methods. In light of utilitarian ethics unregulated production and growth of bio fuels is ecologically unfriendly and socially unjust.
Fast and cheap transportation, supported by inexpensive fuel, is a vital component of both American and international economies today. Since the invention of the wheel transportation methods have continued to improve. The one remaining constant thing has been the need for a source of power to make it move. The power burden has been carried by everything from the backs of horses and oxen to the paddles and sails of ships. The most outstanding source of this power, in the world today, has been oil.
King 2
According to the Energy Information Administration “Total petroleum consumption of liquid fuels and other petroleum products averaged 20.7 million barrels per day in
2007” (one barrel of petroleum is 42 gallons). The Energy Information Administration has also published charts that indicate 85.7 million barrels per day were consumed worldwide in 2007. Though the consumption of oil in the United States continues to increase year-to-year it pales in comparison to the consumption of oil worldwide. According to the charts published by The Energy Information Administration worldwide consumption is up from 76.6 to 85.7 million barrels per day since the year 2000. The consumption of this oil becomes a problem when you understand the ramifications of this consumption, particularly for the United States. The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security estimates that “22 percent of the world's oil is controlled by states that sponsor terrorism and are under U.S./United Nations sanctions”. Gal Luft executive director of the institute, further states that "We are, in fact, fighting a war on terrorism and paying for both sides of the war". As the demand for oil increases those who control the sources of the oil gain more power.
Along with a decrease in the need for foreign oil the United States also hopes to reduce the greenhouse gas effect that is occurring as a result of increased carbon emissions. President Bush has repeatedly stated that we must “get off oil”. His most
King 3
recent declaration of this goal was given at the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference in D.C. He recognizes the truth of the fact that by importing foreign oil we are “paying for both sides of the war” and contributing to an ever-warming climate. The gradual warming of our globe has become an increasingly
prevalent issue among leaders internationally. The threat of monumental natural disasters has expedited the efforts to limit the amount of carbon that is being pumped into the atmosphere. World news is continually bombarded with new reports detailing the latest problems that come along with a warming globe. A quick glance at the BBC world report will show a host of environmental issues being dealt with internationally. More recently there was an article titled “Atlantic Glaciers Surge to Ocean” yet another sign of global warming.
Both the hope to relieve dependence on foreign oil and a hope to curtail environmental damage have been the driving force behind the development of alternative fuels. Though there are many alternative sources of power one that has remained popular is biofuel. Biofuels in their most basic definition are a fuel (as wood or ethanol) composed of or produced from biological raw materials (Merriam-Webster). Among these biofuels, ethanol has risen to the forefront as it, in theory, relieves dependence on foreign oil and reduces carbon emissions. The United States has supported the move to ethanol by providing “exemption from federal gasoline
King 4
excise taxes, whole or partial exemption from road use (sales) taxes in nine states, a federal production tax credit, and a federal blender's credit”. (Solomon, 416) With powerful support behind them ethanol and similar biofuels have taken off. Since 1980 ethanol has been produced in the United States (Solomon 414). At the same conference mentioned earlier, the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference in D.C., president Bush proclaimed, “Since 2001, ethanol production has
quadrupled from 1.6 billion gallons in 2000 to an estimated 6.4 billion gallons in 2007, with the vast majority coming from corn.” With each extra ounce of ethanol produced the demand for foreign oil decreases that much more. In addition, “Relative to the fossil fuels they displace, greenhouse gas emissions are reduced 12% by the production and combustion of ethanol” (Hill, 1118). These numbers are clear signals that the United States is slowly eliminating their dependence on foreign oil.
Fast and cheap transportation, supported by inexpensive fuel, will remain a vital component of both American and international economies today but, in light of utilitarianism the methods used to create the fuel are ecologically and socially unjust. Ecosystems and communities alike have experienced injustices as a result of the surge in biofuel demand. Utilitarian ethics primarily addresses the question, as is explained by Harris, “Will this action produce greater overall human well-being?” a
King 5
question that is applied to the animal world as well. Utilitarianism can be broken down into two parts; act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. The current biofuel situation, as is being discussed in this paper, will be examined in light of act utilitarianism in which, according to Harris, the morality of a situation is judged based on whether the act itself produces the most utility.
Biofuels can burn more effectively and put out fewer pollutants than regular gasoline as was stated earlier in the paper. The only problem is that you need a lot of it to meet the increasing demand. So much so that it is estimated that “Even dedicating all
U.S. corn and soybean production to biofuels would meet only 12% of gasoline demand and 6% of diesel demand.” (Hill, 1120). This is causing ecological and social problems that will continue if not regulated properly. Ecologically it is destroying forests that are vital to sustaining a planet that can support life.
Plants are vital to life in that they convert the carbon dioxide that many living things emit into oxygen that we in turn can breath back in again. As such it is important that in attempting to reduce effects of global warming we ensure their security and safety. Without carbon consuming organisms the world would quickly become uninhabitable for life, as we know it. A scientist by the name of Phillips conducted research to determine the benefits of tropical forests and their ability to consume more carbon than they take in. His research found that
King 6
“Long-term monitoring of plots in mature humid tropical forests concentrated in South America revealed that biomass gain by tree growth exceeded losses from tree death in 38 of 50 Neotropical sites. These forest plots have accumulated 0.71 ton, plus or minus 0.34 ton, of carbon per hectare per year in recent decades. The data suggest that Neotropical forests may be a significant carbon sink, reducing the rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.” (439)
The forests that these research findings were conducted on are the very ones that are being taken down to provide room for more farmland. Because such a large number of crops are needed to meet demand of ethanol more farmland is needed.
The South American country of Brazil is one of many nations that are seeing biofuel demand problems. They have a long history with biofuels dating back to 1975 when the Brazilian government recognized the advantage that ethanol could provide (Carlos, 401). Among other things they had the infrastructure in place to support production. And similar to the United Stats they noticed that an alternative fuel source would mean a decreased dependence on imports of foreign oil which made up nearly half, in monetary value, of their imports at the time (Carlos, 404). However, the recent surge in demand has disrupted the balance the maintained nationally. Their
King 7
role as one of the members at the forefront of alternative, renewable resource production has brought them a host of problems.
The Amazonian rainforests are continually being logged to provide more room for cropland to grow biofuels. The deforestation has escalated to such a level in 2007 that Brazil went as far as to dispatch troops in order to help regain control. According to Jeff Tollefson Brazil has had to launch “a military-style crackdown” (134) on deforestation. Just previous to the enforcement the deforestation numbers had been down nearly 59% over the previous three years. However, the National Institute for Space Research in Sao Jose dos Campos had clear satellite imagery that depicted that
much more of the Amazonian jungles had been forested than previously thought. This halted any celebration that could have been had and turned into a stern concentrated effort to fix the problem.
The first question that should be looked at is, what utility is there in destroying the forest. The deforestation is not only putting a strain on the environment but also affecting numerous species of wildlife. The intricacies of Brazilian rainforests are still not completely known. New species are continually being found, some of which have fantastic medical benefits. The easies measurement to take is to see where
King 8
forests had been and where they are now. It is much more difficult to measure the direct effect of the deforestation on certain species and their development in the region and the ecosystem at large. It would be easy to say that logging should ultimately cease in the rainforests of Brazil but the issue is not that simple. The money they make from logging the trees in that region allows them to continue living. Considering the statistic stated above in which “dedicating all U.S. corn and soybean production to biofuels would meet only 12% of gasoline demand and 6% of diesel demand” the loggers seem to have fairly good job security. The loggers could care less if the land is being used for crops or for a shopping mall. The fact is the logging industry provides “jobs for 2,000 to 3,000 people” (Saul Paulo). The loggers see what they do as a job that has one major consequence, a paycheck. The problem with this arises when you the destruction that is occurring “it is believed that more than 70% of wood felled in the area is of illegal origin.” (Sau Paulo). Yet the bottom line, for
them, remains that they will get a paycheck that will help them pay for bills, education for children, food, shelter and other essentials. Putting this into a broad perspective, however, their actions have far more ramifications than simply providing their families with food and shelter. In this regard there should be a way in which the loggers can continue their methods of life along with the environment, which effects the world, to preserve its integrity. This balance will only come through regulation.
King 9
At a national level the increase in demand for biofuels was a great thing for many people in Brazil. Sugar-cane mill owners were suddenly operating at full capacity despite low demand for sugars worldwide. Furthermore, commuters saw a drop in fuel prices. The cars people were already driving only needed minor modifications in order to utilize the new biofuels. However, even Brazil soon faced problems with their alternative fuel production. The rate at which the biofuels were needed was not being met by the expansion and production of the crops. Markets changed and farmers grew other things. The ensuing crises required major government intervention to prevent an economic and social disaster. Fortunately government regulation was able to handle the problems. Through various stipulations and standards the Brazilian government managed to keep problems from getting out of control. This situation is now occurring at an international, worldwide, scale. The demand for biofuels is greater than ever and it will require “expansion and production” at a much larger scale. However, when looking at an international scale major regulation is much more difficult to develop and not a main idea of this paper.
Another drawback to biofuel production is the resulting elevated food prices. Though the actual production of biofuels may not directly affect food prices it will have a generalized effect to the market at large. It is a simple supply and demand relationship. If there is more land that is being dedicated to grow crops that can be turned into fuel fewer fields are being planted with crops that can support human
King 10
growth and life. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in their report on fighting world food inflation “International prices of most cereals have risen sharply over the past two years and remain at unusually high levels”. The report continued to discuss the causes for the rise in prices and cited “an increase in demand from the biofuels sector” as a contributing factor. This demand continues as the world is estimated to be expanding by about 76 million people annually (Alexandratos, 237). Though this is projected to level off in the not so distant future the fact of the matter is that it is still increasing today. When the world’s population actually levels off is when assumptions for demand of basic food needs will prove correct. Until that point food production must increase along with the population in order to supply the demand. This goal will become ever more difficult to meet as biofuels compete directly with it. The promotion of life, whether it be wild animal or a developed human, is always more important in Utilitarianism. The moment biofuel demand causes necessary food to become unaffordable to the worlds poor is when any utility that could have been found in biofuel production disappears entirely.
The problem is gaining publicity as some lawmakers demand that biofuels not be produced unless they are put under strict standards. A recent news article by Tim Hirsch in the BBC highlighted this fact with the article title “Biofuels need strict
King 11
standards”. Without such standards there will continue to be pressure put on the fragile ecosystems found in the Amazon. The European Union met in attempts to try and reach agreements among bigger nations to help stop the misuse of biofuels and search for more efficient alternatives. Peter Mandelson, the EU Trade Commissioner, in a speech entitled “The Biofuel Challenge” at the Biofuel Conference stated, “Biofuel policy is not ultimately an industrial policy or an agricultural policy - it is an environmental policy, driven above all by the greenest outcomes". Though this statement might encourage others it does not reach the full range of the problem. The commissioner largely ignores the other potential consequences of an increase in biofuel production and merely looks at the environmental aspect of their production and use. This has not gone unnoticed by the public however. Most recently there have been protestors that have stopped implementation of mandatory ethanol requirements in Britain. The Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO), in the United Kingdom, hopes to have “2.5% of fuels” sold at the pumps containing biofuels. Protestors have urged that the policy be delayed until further review can be made as to the benefits of biofuels both environmentally and whether international need for food can be met at a reasonable price along with biofuels.
King 12
Production of biofuels such as ethanol must be regulated in order to have any type of positive effect. It is only at this point that the benefits of biofuels will outweigh the drawbacks and in turn produce the greatest utility. You cannot say biofuel is good if it is contributing to the overall destruction of the world’s environment and the increased strain of daily living for the world’s poor. These activities as Harris puts it “would not promote the general welfare” (111). There is potential that the very market that is promoting the destruction of these forests could help prevent the destruction. The trade of carbon credits has been a recent phenomenon in which businesses have seen that it is beneficial, economically, to be environmentally friendly. The idea could potentially be put at a larger international scale thus promoting countries and other influential businesses to be more environmentally aware. Issues of monitoring and overall market regulation would be some of the issues that could arise as a result, but the idea would be in place to further environmental gains.
In conclusion, biofuel production in its current state is environmentally unfriendly and socially unjust. The only way in which it will become anything else, and provide the greatest amount of utility, is the introduction of stricter regulations. There are some that are on the right path and see the need for regulation and even economic reward for better regulation. However, it will take many more people and much
King 13
more time for the wider public to become aware of the issue and in turn create sweeping change. Countries like Brazil have shown that being too lax in the past with their regulations can result in environmental and social unrest. They have also shown that stepping up their enforcement of basic standards in order to keep things from getting out of control can work. Their example can be modeled and potentially implemented at a larger scale to induce the same effect. Without these regulations the biodiversity of forests and the environmental benefits of ecologically diverse ecosystems will be lost. In addition, the humans that inhabit this planet will find themselves unable to afford the food they need to live. An ecological and socially just biofuel producing world is possible but not without the help of regulations to prevent ecological destruction and social injustice.
King 14
Bibliography
"Short Term Energy Outlook." Energy Information Administration. 8 Mar. 2008. United States Government. 10 Mar. 2008
Lindenmayer, David B. and Jerry F. Franklin. Considering Forest Biodiversity: A Comprehensive Multiscaled Approach. Washington: Island Price, 2002.
Millar, Constance I., and Margaret Olwell. Restoring Diversity: Reintroduction of Endangered Plants. Ed. Donald A. Falk. Washington D.C.: Island P, 1996.
Hoogstraten, Hans Dirk Van. Deep Economy: Caring for Ecology, Humanity and Religion. Cambridge: James Clarke & Co., 2001.
Hill, Jason, Erik Nelson, David Tilman, Stephen Polasky, and Douglas Tiffany. "Environmental, Economic, and Energetic Costs and Benefits of Biodiesel and Ethanol Biofuels." Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences os 103 (2006): 15-18
Turner, Kerry, and Brendan Fisher. "Environmental Economics: to the Rich Man the Spoils." Nature 451 (2008): 1067-1068.
King 15
Schulze, Mark. "Technical and Financial Analysis of Enrichment Planting in Logging Gaps as a Potential Component of Forest Management in the Eastern Amazon." Forest Ecology & Management 255 (2008): 866-879.
Hess, M. S. "How Biodiesel Works." How Stuff Works. 2006. 1 Mar. 2008
Barney, Jacob N., and Joseph M. Ditomaso. "Nonnative Species and Bioenergy: are We Cultivating the Next Invader?" Bioscience 58 (2008): 64-70.
McCarl, Bruce A., and Uwe A. Schneider. "U.S. Agriculture's Role in Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation World: an Economic Perspective." Review of Agriculture Economics 22 (2000): 134-159.
Lee, Jae-Won, Bon-Wook Koo, Joon-Weon Choi, Don-Ha Choi, and In-Gyu Choi. "Evaluation of Waste Mushroom Logs as a Potential Biomass Resource for the Production of Bioethanol." Bioresource Technology 99 (2008): 2736-2741.
Hirsch, Tim. "Biofuels 'Need Strict Standards'" BBC News. 22 Feb. 2008. BBC. 1 Mar. 2008
King 16
Motavalli, J. Opposing Viewpoints: Reducing Meat Consumption Will Help Conserve the Environment. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2006.
Lou, Dobbs. "That Old Black Magic." U.S. News and World Report 138 (2005).
Luft, Gal. "Reports and Study's on Energy Security." Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. 2008. Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. 19 Mar. 2008
Kelly, Nicholls, and Campos Stella. "Are You Driving on Blood Fuel?" Ecologist 37 (2007). 27 Feb. 2008.
Solomon, Barry, and Justin Barnes. "Grain and Cellulosic Ethanol: History, Economics, and Energy Policy." Biomass & Bioenergy 31 (2007): 416-425. 13 Mar. 2008.
Bush, George W. Address. United States Government. The Washington International Renewable Energy Conference. Washington Convention Center, Washington D.C. 5 Mar. 2008. 28 Mar. 2008
King 17
Duffy, Gary. "Troops Sent to Stem Amazon Loss." BBC News. 26 Feb. 2008. British Broadcasting Company. 18 Mar. 2008
Harrabin, Roger. "Call for Delay to Biofuels Policy." BBC News. 24 Mar. 2008. British Broadcasting Company. 25 Mar. 2008
Fighting Food Inflation Through Sustainable Investment. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. London: European Bank, 2008. 1-16. 15 Mar. 2008
Alexandratos, Nikos. "Population and Development Review." Nature 31 (2008): 237-258. 17 Mar. 2008.
Phillips, Oliver L., Yadvinder Malhi, Niro Higuchi, William F. Laurance, Percy V. Nunez, Rodolfo M. Vazquez, Susan G. Laurance, Leandro V. Ferreira, Margaret Stern, Sandra Brown, and John Grace. "Changes in the Carbon Balance of Tropical Forests: Evidence From Long-Term Plots." Science ns 282 (1998): 439-442. 1 Apr. 2008.
King 18
“Biofuel” Def. 1a. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. 11th Edition. 2003
De Mello, Jose, and Carlos Machodo. "Social Interests, Contextualizations and Uncertainties in Risk Assessment: the Case of Methanol as a Fuel Component in Brazil." Social Studies of Science 3 (1998): 401-421. 29 Mar. 2008.
Hill, Nelson J., D Tillman, S Polasky, and D Tiffany. "Environmental, Economic, and Energetic Costs And." PNAS (2006): 1116-1121. 20 Mar. 2008.
Mandelson, Peter. "The Biofuel Challenge." European Commission. Biofuel Conference. Charlemagne. 5 July 2007. 2 Apr. 2008
Tollefson, Jeff. "Brazil Goes to War Against Logging." Nature 452 (2008): 134-135. 1 Apr. 2008.
Harris, C E. Applying Moral Theories. 1st ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Company, 1986.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Jotting #25 - Manietes article analysis. "In Search of Consumptive Resistance"
Prompt: Analyze Manieties structure.
My response: Outline major arguments. Look at smaller arguments and tell how they worked together to support the larger points. Look at the details he used to support the arguments that he is making.
Manietes is doing “reconnaissance” in order to help the reader understand the movement. To best do this he will be discussing what is being said about the movement and why these things are being said. Whether the reasons for the voluntary simplicity movement are good or bad, Manietes overarching goal is to develop an argument as to why the voluntary simplicity movement is here to stay.
Sustainable development is the buzz phrase in contemporary environmentalism today. It is the goal to which the contemporary environmentalists strive. This does not deal with the issue of consumption, however. This over consumption is spread to the entire world causing a “tyranny of expectations”. Manietes supports this by mentioning the fact that the middle class is gauging its wealth against the top 10%. Furthermore, consumption is glamorized internationally with shows such as “Melrose Place”. If these standards of living were to come even partly true, Manietes points out, among other things, “mainstream environmentalism stalls out”.
Result of the aforementioned things according to Manietes “simplistic moralizing about consumption that little advances the intellectual analysis or collective action necessary for taking on the consumption question.” Going on down the line, results of this are: “Rhetorical lambasting of advertising, condemnation of the immorality of over consumption, and a rosy-eyed, apolitical romantacization of the joys of simple living.”
Manietes then shifts his focus to the VSM. The VSM is viewed as exclusively American even though it is not. Americans wish to get their lives back and that is their reason for VSM. It is not out of a deep concern for the environment or a desire to bring about equality worldwide but simply be get a balance and stress free life.
VSM is not new, Manietes uses the words of Vanderbilt to critique the VSM in that it assumes people are living lives that need simplification. Those who are volunteer simplicists only got to that point because they were at one point in time, wealthy enough to afford to be voluntarily simplifiers. In addition they are oblivious to the fact that there are those who are involuntary simplicists. Finally, Manietes states, the VSM is for real. Proponents of the VSM have options, unlike those who are involuntary simplicists. VSM is also used to sell things.
The answer is to go for a consumptive resistance. Manietes uses the language of “Consumptive angle” – new call for sustainability. Manietes is convinced that voluntary simplicity would cause an unnecessary burden on the backs of the bottom 20%. VSM fails to look at the broader institutional dynamics. Manietes suggests that the powerful whose power is vast be held more accountable of the fact that they are large contributors to the reason that the masses consume so much.
My response: Outline major arguments. Look at smaller arguments and tell how they worked together to support the larger points. Look at the details he used to support the arguments that he is making.
Manietes is doing “reconnaissance” in order to help the reader understand the movement. To best do this he will be discussing what is being said about the movement and why these things are being said. Whether the reasons for the voluntary simplicity movement are good or bad, Manietes overarching goal is to develop an argument as to why the voluntary simplicity movement is here to stay.
Sustainable development is the buzz phrase in contemporary environmentalism today. It is the goal to which the contemporary environmentalists strive. This does not deal with the issue of consumption, however. This over consumption is spread to the entire world causing a “tyranny of expectations”. Manietes supports this by mentioning the fact that the middle class is gauging its wealth against the top 10%. Furthermore, consumption is glamorized internationally with shows such as “Melrose Place”. If these standards of living were to come even partly true, Manietes points out, among other things, “mainstream environmentalism stalls out”.
Result of the aforementioned things according to Manietes “simplistic moralizing about consumption that little advances the intellectual analysis or collective action necessary for taking on the consumption question.” Going on down the line, results of this are: “Rhetorical lambasting of advertising, condemnation of the immorality of over consumption, and a rosy-eyed, apolitical romantacization of the joys of simple living.”
Manietes then shifts his focus to the VSM. The VSM is viewed as exclusively American even though it is not. Americans wish to get their lives back and that is their reason for VSM. It is not out of a deep concern for the environment or a desire to bring about equality worldwide but simply be get a balance and stress free life.
VSM is not new, Manietes uses the words of Vanderbilt to critique the VSM in that it assumes people are living lives that need simplification. Those who are volunteer simplicists only got to that point because they were at one point in time, wealthy enough to afford to be voluntarily simplifiers. In addition they are oblivious to the fact that there are those who are involuntary simplicists. Finally, Manietes states, the VSM is for real. Proponents of the VSM have options, unlike those who are involuntary simplicists. VSM is also used to sell things.
The answer is to go for a consumptive resistance. Manietes uses the language of “Consumptive angle” – new call for sustainability. Manietes is convinced that voluntary simplicity would cause an unnecessary burden on the backs of the bottom 20%. VSM fails to look at the broader institutional dynamics. Manietes suggests that the powerful whose power is vast be held more accountable of the fact that they are large contributors to the reason that the masses consume so much.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Jotting #24 - Gap's Red Campaign
Jotting #24 - Prompt: In light of the readings, comment on Gap’s RED campaign. Have you ever purchased a product because it made you feel countercultural?
My Response: Gap’s RED campaign has all the hype of being a wonderful thing. When looking at the face of the campaign there is little I could personally argue with. However, it is not enough to simply look at the face of the campaign. When looking at what RED signifies to Americans as consumers it becomes a bit more disheartening. It does not cause consumers to change anything but merely shift their practices. It resonates with the words of Kilbourne stating that people are not concerned with changing their behavior but simply doing something to fix the problem, after the fact. Kilbourne uses several examples to illustrate this such as “If you drink so much you wake up with a hangover . . . take an Alka-Seltzer, don’t worry about your drinking”. In sense this is what is going on with the RED campaign. Their campaign could be summarized as “If you over consume and ignore the depravity of others . . . buy our product feel good about your purchase, don’t worry about the injustice of those foreign diseases.”
However, the utilitarian comes out in me when I look at the situation from a view of its overall utility. The Gap Corporation is in fact channeling money to help bring about social justice. This is better than doing something such as increasing the paycheck of the CEO. By sending money to those infected by AIDS they are helping preserve life and improve the quality of that life. The effects of the campaign can be positive and beneficial to the state of those who are adversely affected by AIDS in Africa.
As far as purchasing products in order to feel countercultural I must admit that I have done this. My counterculture stand has come, not in the form of different shoes, but in different types of food. I have intentionally bought more expensive drinks because I knew I was supporting a smaller business. I find that I feel better about purchasing and consuming a drink such as that then someone else.
My Response: Gap’s RED campaign has all the hype of being a wonderful thing. When looking at the face of the campaign there is little I could personally argue with. However, it is not enough to simply look at the face of the campaign. When looking at what RED signifies to Americans as consumers it becomes a bit more disheartening. It does not cause consumers to change anything but merely shift their practices. It resonates with the words of Kilbourne stating that people are not concerned with changing their behavior but simply doing something to fix the problem, after the fact. Kilbourne uses several examples to illustrate this such as “If you drink so much you wake up with a hangover . . . take an Alka-Seltzer, don’t worry about your drinking”. In sense this is what is going on with the RED campaign. Their campaign could be summarized as “If you over consume and ignore the depravity of others . . . buy our product feel good about your purchase, don’t worry about the injustice of those foreign diseases.”
However, the utilitarian comes out in me when I look at the situation from a view of its overall utility. The Gap Corporation is in fact channeling money to help bring about social justice. This is better than doing something such as increasing the paycheck of the CEO. By sending money to those infected by AIDS they are helping preserve life and improve the quality of that life. The effects of the campaign can be positive and beneficial to the state of those who are adversely affected by AIDS in Africa.
As far as purchasing products in order to feel countercultural I must admit that I have done this. My counterculture stand has come, not in the form of different shoes, but in different types of food. I have intentionally bought more expensive drinks because I knew I was supporting a smaller business. I find that I feel better about purchasing and consuming a drink such as that then someone else.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Jotting #23 - Voluntary Simplicity
Jotting #23: How have your impressions of the Voluntary Simplicity changed after reading this article (Maniates essay, “In Search of Consumptive Resistance,” pp. 199-235)
“Value moderation over excess, spiritual development over material consumption, cooperation over competition, and nature over technology”
-Rich Hayes on the voluntary simplicity movement
This is a little bit of a snapshot that I hope my life entails. I find that Hayes has succinctly summed up how I hope to live out my life. The ways in which it manifests itself will of course, be different. But that is what the journey is about, figuring out how living in this manner will display itself. As Andrews puts it those who believe in the Voluntary simplicity movement are “returning to the good life.” A live that is moderated, lived in cooperation with others and with a connection to nature. Above all these, for me, I find that spiritual development is much more important than material consumption. The practice of voluntary simplicity would, in large part, be in hopes to pursue and further my spiritual development as a Christian.
Maniates comments of voluntary simplicity are intriguing to me. In particular I found one of his quotes rang true with me particularly well. In regards to spending time in the woods “it allows you to observe the unnecessary complexity in life.” The area in which I grew up had a tremendous amount of natural beauty that allowed me to continually observe the “unnecessary complexity of life”. So much so in fact that coming to the city I found myself overwhelmingly distracted by all the new options that opened up to me. It requires a great amount of discipline to be able to observe unnecessary complexity of life while in the midst of complexity. Until recently I had convinced myself that it was impossible. However, its impossibility is only made valid by my personal feelings as to how it should be done. Nonetheless, my life in a complex city has further inspired me to desire to live more simply in my life and not be wrapped up in keeping up with the top 10% of America (as Maniates notes).
I found Andrews observation of the Voluntary Simplicity Movement interesting. When looking at my personal thoughts to the Voluntary Simplicity Movement I recognize it’s “self-help” qualities. Her call to have the movement “take the next step” is appropriate and necessary. If it remains a self-help movement then it will move and stop. The movement will cease whenever it has lost momentum and people will forget about it.
“Value moderation over excess, spiritual development over material consumption, cooperation over competition, and nature over technology”
-Rich Hayes on the voluntary simplicity movement
This is a little bit of a snapshot that I hope my life entails. I find that Hayes has succinctly summed up how I hope to live out my life. The ways in which it manifests itself will of course, be different. But that is what the journey is about, figuring out how living in this manner will display itself. As Andrews puts it those who believe in the Voluntary simplicity movement are “returning to the good life.” A live that is moderated, lived in cooperation with others and with a connection to nature. Above all these, for me, I find that spiritual development is much more important than material consumption. The practice of voluntary simplicity would, in large part, be in hopes to pursue and further my spiritual development as a Christian.
Maniates comments of voluntary simplicity are intriguing to me. In particular I found one of his quotes rang true with me particularly well. In regards to spending time in the woods “it allows you to observe the unnecessary complexity in life.” The area in which I grew up had a tremendous amount of natural beauty that allowed me to continually observe the “unnecessary complexity of life”. So much so in fact that coming to the city I found myself overwhelmingly distracted by all the new options that opened up to me. It requires a great amount of discipline to be able to observe unnecessary complexity of life while in the midst of complexity. Until recently I had convinced myself that it was impossible. However, its impossibility is only made valid by my personal feelings as to how it should be done. Nonetheless, my life in a complex city has further inspired me to desire to live more simply in my life and not be wrapped up in keeping up with the top 10% of America (as Maniates notes).
I found Andrews observation of the Voluntary Simplicity Movement interesting. When looking at my personal thoughts to the Voluntary Simplicity Movement I recognize it’s “self-help” qualities. Her call to have the movement “take the next step” is appropriate and necessary. If it remains a self-help movement then it will move and stop. The movement will cease whenever it has lost momentum and people will forget about it.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Jotting #22 Voluntary Simplicity
Prompt: React to Elgin’s ideas. How appealing do you find the Voluntary Simplicity Movement? Do you feel as if you could implement these ideas?
My Response: In short I find the Voluntary Simplicity Movement intriguing and I feel that I could implement these ideas. However, in honest self reflection I do not believe that I would want to implement the movements ideas for too long, or at least not all of them. It is hard to say no to a movement that promotes itself as “not self-denying but life-affirming”.
The simplicity moment had components that, in my mind, have not been equated with simplicity. So often possessions are the focus of a simple lifestyle. However, Elgin makes it clear that there can be simplicity in communication. The part of the analysis of communication simplification, in reference to silence, spoke to me. Our methods of communicating with one another can become so cluttered and redundant that they lose their significance and power.
I have never considered myself a very consumeristic person. However, I have found that I value having high quality things. There may not be many of a certain thing but they sure are good. I consider myself an informed consumer. I am not entirely taken over by the newest thing but if the newest thing happens to be the best thing for my life at that point than I will give consideration to buy it. For example, I spend a lot of time on my feet. As such I feel it is important to have good shoes. Good shoes support my back and in turn allow me to function better. Some would consider buying $100 dollar shoes out of the question, but when you are considering your overall health it becomes much more important to have what will make you most comfortable.
Despite which side you fall on I believe Elgins words ring true in that there must be balance. In a balanced simplicity our lives become “clearer, more direct, less pretentious, and less complicate”. The issue then becomes what is the best way in which we can achieve that balance. A balance in which you are the most in touch with the life you were meant to live.
My Response: In short I find the Voluntary Simplicity Movement intriguing and I feel that I could implement these ideas. However, in honest self reflection I do not believe that I would want to implement the movements ideas for too long, or at least not all of them. It is hard to say no to a movement that promotes itself as “not self-denying but life-affirming”.
The simplicity moment had components that, in my mind, have not been equated with simplicity. So often possessions are the focus of a simple lifestyle. However, Elgin makes it clear that there can be simplicity in communication. The part of the analysis of communication simplification, in reference to silence, spoke to me. Our methods of communicating with one another can become so cluttered and redundant that they lose their significance and power.
I have never considered myself a very consumeristic person. However, I have found that I value having high quality things. There may not be many of a certain thing but they sure are good. I consider myself an informed consumer. I am not entirely taken over by the newest thing but if the newest thing happens to be the best thing for my life at that point than I will give consideration to buy it. For example, I spend a lot of time on my feet. As such I feel it is important to have good shoes. Good shoes support my back and in turn allow me to function better. Some would consider buying $100 dollar shoes out of the question, but when you are considering your overall health it becomes much more important to have what will make you most comfortable.
Despite which side you fall on I believe Elgins words ring true in that there must be balance. In a balanced simplicity our lives become “clearer, more direct, less pretentious, and less complicate”. The issue then becomes what is the best way in which we can achieve that balance. A balance in which you are the most in touch with the life you were meant to live.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)