Michael Pollan, who wrote The Omnivore's Dilemma, wrote an article in the New York Times that I think is worth reading.
It's challenging, though. Maybe we can feel okay about buying carbon offsets for the road trip... or maybe we should be planning a bike trip?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
first of all, thanks for linking to that. I have Michael Pollen fatigue and skipped the article when I saw it on-line. but it was good to read.
I have lots of feelings and complaints--most prominently the fact that pollen never accounts for time. As a person who, for the first time in my life, now considers a trade of money for time saved to be a decent proposition, there is simply no accounting for that.
secondly, he dismisses grand schemes as being clumsy and out of touch, but what he misses is that grand schemes (like a price on carbon) would drive the returns to gardenings, community, etc. If carbon were expensive, it would drive out the "cheap energy mind" and make BOTH MORAL AND ECONOMIC sense to garden, to carpool, to barter, to share...to bother. rather than asking people to subvert their economic desires to their moral ones, why not advocate a system that could give us both?
and I live in cambridge. There isn't a community garden plot to be had before the turn of the century.
Post a Comment