Short term it will be difficult because much of the advances in technology to be more green will require research and development from non-green sources. In other words steady progreess will be the key. People who want everyone to return to the "faily farm" idea and be self sufficient are not being realistic unless you also want to kill off a large percentage of the world population. The truth is that family farms are great for individuals but the society as a whol ecannot support that type of agriculture. The tech advances people have gotten used to having are ingrained in society and most people will not give them up; the key is technical developemnt and cleaning what we are using until the next generation is ready to start. The bio-fuel idea is good but the problem is two-fold: the first is that using corn takes away from the American (mainly) excess that is used to feed the people of other nations which causes prices to go up and the fuel effiency is not close to break-even point at this time. It takes too much fertilizer (petro based) and farm equipment (petro fueled) to make it economically feasible for the majority of vehicles to be powered that way. The reason it is being done successfully now is that it is subsidized heavily by the government. Economic feasibility is a way off for it but it should still be developed as an intermediate step but is not a solution to the problem. Solar and wind power both have problems with area needed to have the appropriate equipment set up to provide power for large cities (California currently having complaints about that plus the noise and killing birds). I do not think anything we have available right now is the answer; the best choice would be continued research into fusion power for electrical demands in cities and then working on vehicle fuel possible in the hydrogen system if the safety side can be covered. Water as a by product sounds good until you think of freezing water on the roads from it during winter or in cold climates.
2007-09-04 07:47:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by GunnyC 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I read your profile, but my real question is what do YOU concider to be progress?
I use to work in the medical field, the whole 9-5 thing, owned a large home, and a rental property. It was in the 'burbs. Oh yeah, had car payments and a spouse I hated.
Got happily divorced, and started on the path I'd always wanted, which was to live on a farm in a VERY eco friendly way.
So here I am, grinding my own wheat to make bread, butchering my own animals, milking my goats and making cheese and buttter, and just generally working my butt off, rather like an 1800's housewife would, only with electricty.
For me personally, the only advances I would care to see are in solar, wind and other renewable power sources. I could give a damn if they invent another cell phone, elctronic gaget, medication, hollywood starlet, auto, plastic gizmo, skin potion, ect, so-on and so-forth.
I work hard, and can feed myself and my husband (extremely happily remarried). We have a solid roof over our heads and live in a house larger than we need. Someday we will build our own strawbale house.
We can make our own biofuel, and fix our own trucks and tractors. Frankly if those broke for good, we know how to use our horses.
People really don't need much in life. Clean air, clean water, land to grow their food, and graze their animals. Knowledge enough to build their own house, off grid with solar and wind power.
99.9% of the modern world is far too concerned with earning more money, so they can buy more of that "progressive" crap they advertise on TV.
Heck, the world would advance a lot, and be ever so much greener, if everyone would kill their TV, and never buy a new one!
Please add a note about what YOU concider to be progress. I personally do not see the modern working world, with the serrious lack of family time, and conection to be much progress at all.
~Garnet
Homesteading/Farming over 20 years
2007-09-03 16:38:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bohemian_Garnet_Permaculturalist 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Bemo,
Depends on your definition of progress, but I think that all but the most hardcore now realize that we have to become more green.
Our unquenchable thirst for oil has to change, and we're working on it: even our behemouth SUVs are getting gas mileage in the 20s whereas just 20 years ago they were barely breaking 12mpg. All of this with improved safety, more recycled materials, and a tenth of the emissions.
Now maybe the definition of progress is convincing each other that we do not need 5000lb vehicles and 4000sq. ft. houses!
2007-09-03 13:33:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
At the moment many of the world technologies are still dirty, but I believe with time, that could change if we just succeeded in putting enough of concern about environments in public schools...The awareness of the issue should become part of our daily routine; that could happen if our economic systems become interested in preservation of nature ( less taxes for those who respect nature are only one of many possibilities )...
2007-09-04 00:34:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by javornik1270 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Technology. Green progresion isn't always cheap, and not always easy, but it's cool. Look at hybrid vehicles, they're advanced, cost a lot, but they look cool and they save money over time (gas milage).
2007-09-03 11:55:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mitchell 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Go to think.mtv.com and climatecrisis.org to find out how you and the world can go green without breaking the piggy bank. (and don't listen to all of those people who say we can't because they are full of it.)
2007-09-03 11:37:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Beacon 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Easily. It is called Sustainable Development.
2007-09-03 11:38:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋