Reading Comments for Science of Sustainability Week 9

OK, I loved The New Yorker article and will mainly make my reading comments on that article for that reason, but I could have been largely swayed by the comments on obesity early on (page 2). The author (Specter) even used the "f" word - fat - that we (dietitians) are demonized by acceptance groups not to use despite it being an accurate medical term. However, it's true about larger footprint. Obese people do have more carbon-laden diets, they consume greater quantities of all foods, and they certainly have an aversion to walking. Everything has to be bigger for them, and it takes more fuel to cart their heft than it does for the average person. I could write tomes on this, and likely should, however, there were some other facts in the article that I found compelling as well.

I would like to research this Forum of the Future in Britain as well as their governmental Carbon trust. I personally shop at Tesco when I am in the UK. I used to shop there exclusively due to their stock of large 2 liter bottles of Strongbow, which amazes me, but now I have a better reason and I am truly eager to check out their labeling systems. Why is it so hard for large grocers in the U.S. to adopt some sort of carbon system? They are really lazy and backward and it is an unfortunate side effect of American culture in general, both on a consumer and a corporate level, to really not do things until they become mandated or so trendy that they are then profitable. This reminds me of how WalMart is going hunting for huge tax breaks making promises of greening in the form of solar, only to take the tax incentives and only install one of the proposed roofs. And that is part of what I almost find detestable in the green movement; that "Green is the new black." Everyone wants a piece of the pie and I for one am not the type to decry why a person, group, or corporation does something positive as long as it gets done. However, green washing is becoming all too commonplace, allowing the American public to subscribe to a new form of consumerism once again without solid direction or ideology. We are all to quick to jump on the bandwagon regardless of our often complete lack of education about what said bandwagon's tank runs on.

Also, another factor that came after the publishing of the article is how this new economic freak show is going to set back the movement. Yes, it is heralded to be the time for a Green Revolution, however, in the very McDonough way of cradle-to-cradle trade, it is a revolution that may quickly lose it's funding because it is simply not accessible to a majority of the market. "Green" living is something that is becoming a marketing ploy and in a recession of this magnitude, there will be diminished funding and consumers will certainly not be able to provide the base needed to swing a revolution out of the gates especially when the predecessors and purveyors of it seem to be focused solidly on charging top dollar for technology, products, etc. If this trend does not reverse or diverge into green luxury and green necessity soon, it will certainly miss it's mark and also it's window of time it could be meaningfully effective rather than a last ditch effort.