I just signed the Live Earth Pledge, and I’m wondering whether about the point to this.
When you go to the pledge page, (and don’t get me wrong, I suggest that you do), there are five actions that you can mark which you will pledge to do to help reduce greenhouse gases.
- I will change four light bulbs to CFL’s at my home.
- I will ride public transit or carpool one or more times per week.
- I will shop for the most energy efficient electronics and appliances.
- I will shut off my equipment and lights whenever I’m not using them.
- I will forward a Live Earth message to five email friends.
I checked all five boxes. I’ve been committed to #1 through #4 (plus as many as I can think of which are not on this list) for several years now, and I consider this blog to be step #5.
This does make me ask a few questions though:
- How many more non-CFL bulbs do I have left in the house and can I continue to check this box on these pledges once I have no more to change?
- If I already ride public transit daily, am I allowed to check this box?
- Where is the commitment to walk or cycle to my destination?
- If I already shop for and use energy efficient appliances and shut them off when not using them, am I allowed these checks? And what of the other, even greener choice, “I will choose to not buy the latest gadget?”
- If I already have done these things when challenged to do so by the One Tonne Challenge, the World Wildlife Fund, David Suzuki’s Nature Challenge, and the rest, can I really check the boxes and click the button saying “I commit to make this change”, when it’s not really a change at all?
I recently asked the same questions when I added the Carbon Diet Plan on Facebook (which doesn’t work, by the way, since it doesn’t pick up my friends numbers.)
Of course, there are two important messages here: They are not really speaking to those of us who are already aware and committed to changing our lifestyles, and this is just an awareness campaign, not a comprehensive list of actions.
But I’m wondering, how many people who are not already taking the above actions are actually going to this site and subsequently making a change in their lives?
And how long are we going to rely on people’s consciences and willingness to spend a premium to do the right thing before we get serious about climate change and put in place the right economic signals, such as the Green Party’s Carbon Tax and Tax Shifting policy?
I’m not suggesting that the Live Earth Pledge is a bad thing. It’s not. But it’s preaching to the converted.
And we need more action and less preaching.
show hide 4 comments
“I’m not suggesting that the Live Earth Pledge is a bad thing. It’s not. But it’s preaching to the converted.”
I don’t agree. The fact that upwards of 2000 Million people watched the presentations yesterday, is an incredible communications exercise. If even the smallest fraction of the 2 Billion heard something or learned something or thought about the issues …. then it was definitely a beneficial exercise.
For the hard core committed, as you are, it likely seems watered down, tepid, perhaps meaningless; but for the international mass who were part of the days activities, …. money cann0t buy this type of impact.
Well, I hope you’re right. As I said, it’s not a bad thing.
But I think my other point, that we need to move from motivating people into doing the right thing through guilt, conscience or some sense of altruism to motivating them by revisions to how the system works, still holds true.
Some things are artificially cheap since they don’t take environmental degradation into account. And this needs to change.
And if some more of those 2 billion are now open and willing to accept such changes, then I will concede that Live Earth provided a great service.
I have found some of the same problems with all of these types of pledges, ie. I’ve already done what they are asking me to do.
Is it “preaching to the converted”? Probably not. As the fellow above mentioned Live Earth (which ironically probably had the largest carbon footprint ever) reached millions of people, most of whom are not ‘with the program’. If They all commit to do the same things as we already have, that would surely have a non-trivial impact.
I’m glad I’m preconverted, I don’t think I could sit through that many hours of bands I’ve never heard of. Guess I’m getting old.
As for your action points 1-3 ditto, can’t do much more until I must kill the van and buy a new one. That said I will probably put on about 3 km from sunday to friday, walk and transit for work and try to squeeze all my shopping and errands into one big trip on the weekend. Talking about buying energy efficient appliances have a look at this post on the trend in home power usage, not pretty!
http://greenassassinbrigade.blogspot.com/2007/07/death-by-gadgets.html
4. other than this damn box which I occassionaly leave one when called away by the demands of daddyness, I’m pretty good.
5. I’ve been annoying my friends/co workers/ fellow commuters for several years.
So like you, this concert was a moot point for me.
I’m also leary of people who make sudden pledges like newyears resolutions, the “Promise Keepers”, understanding of the issue is required before people can make this leap. Today it’s the fad tomorrow it’s back to the status quo.
While it might awaken a few people, most were there for the tunes and not the message. I hope it does make some difference but I suspect the talk around the water cooler Monday will who wore what, which band sucked and who the hell was that? not Global warming
I also think these pledges give the masses a false grasp of the difficulty in solving our eco problems. There will be far more drastic demands on the public before we reach and substantive improvement in the GHG problem. These easy fixes do make a difference but not nearly enough, they will say “I did my part and it’s not fixed, so why bother.”
These pledges sell the problem short and offer an easy fix, it’s not going to be easy.