Isn't that the time when people should have been worried about green living, recycling, saving the planet. If we had worried about it then, we wouldn't be having the problems of today.
Unfortunately stuff that isn't indestructable isn't patentable and corporations don't see dollar signs in this concept? Is this the reason.
I'm leaving global warming out of this equation, cause there is too much hype surrounding it, and it is not clear as to whether man is causing it or not. While whatever we are doing is not helping it, the science just isn't clear cut to me as to whether we are the sole cause of it.
2007-10-29 02:41:38 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Green Living
Crabby_blindguy, uhh excuse me, but I do whatever I can to recycle, and be ecological. In the process I get called low life, weird and every other name in the book by people like you perhaps?
Global warming isn't the imminent threat that science makes it out to be, and even though I do may part to curb, one person doesn't make a difference, neither does a few. It takes the majority to make a difference.
2007-10-29 07:02:19 · update #1
In the times of the industrial revolution most peolpe were living 'green' lifestyles. No cars or flying, low food miles, and no consumerism as we know it today. What you are refering to perhaps is the use of coal in mills and trains, but that was very limited compared to today.
Since then, growth in industry has continually raised living standards, when not fighting wars, this is why industry grew. There was very little attention paid to its disadvantages, except things like the london smog and the thames river pollution. Global warming was only discovered in the mid 70s, and by that time consumerism was already the juggernaught we know today.
I agree there is too much hype surrounding GW, too much hype and not enough action IMO. The evidence is very clear, What is less clear is what we can do about the afore mentioned juggernaught, If sceptics saw dealing with the juggernaught as a possibility, then they may be more willing to accept the reality we are facing.
2007-10-29 04:03:25 · answer #1 · answered by John Sol 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
How naive can you get?! At the time of the industrial revolution (roughly between 1760 and 1830) NOBODY would have believed that the activities of puny little humans could ever be large enough to cause a world change. And they would have been right. At that time, the impact of all world industry combined was extremely small; almost zero by today's standards.
Recycling? Where was no trash pickup in those days. There was no disposable culture. People simply didn't use paper cups, disposable diapers, disposable razors; and the first first factory-made toilet paper was not sold until 1857! They didn't have old car tires, dead batteries and so on. All that is a very recent development. It gradually started building up after the industrial revolution.
2007-10-29 04:37:19 · answer #2 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We have a much higher global GDP now than we ever have and research has shown that it would only lake less than half a percent of that GDP to make significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The effect on the economy would be minimal although some dirty industries may suffer new ones would developed to cover for the losses. The cost of not doing anything would be proportionally higher than that of reducing emissions. The only problem then is if emissions are reduced and the trends reverse in however many years their will still be nutters suggesting that we should have never changes our ways. The first link shows the GDP vs emissions and the second is a good global warming info website.
2016-04-11 00:43:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because 150 years man didn't have the information, technology and knowledge to worry about green living. The Industrial Revolution was an era of innovation and invention. Few probably realized at the time what havoc their new developments would wreak on the planet.
Today we have the information, knowledge and technology to do something about it. So let's git 'er done!
2007-10-29 02:57:23 · answer #4 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
At the time of the industrial revolution many people were still far more concerned just with everyday survival. The were concerened aboout the basics of having a roof over their head and three decent meals a day.
2007-10-29 02:45:40 · answer #5 · answered by libaki 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they were dumb and selfish... basically we think "how could you not know the pollution isnt bad for you" and they WANTED the advancements more than anything (dont forget the child labor)
in the end $ won out over anything else..
this is the same thing that is occuring over in China today... so many factories producing junk for us, the sky is so polluted in many areas they NEVER see the sun - the smog is so thick.
who is to blame? Us of course.. every time we buy "Made in China" the same thing back then - people wanted stuff more than they cared about the environement and really back then they didnt know how bad stuff was (eg cancer causing).. but you cannot blame them if you dont also blame us now...
bascially now we are just selfish...
2007-10-29 02:56:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
maybe people back in the industrial revolution era were too much enamored on the technology that they are starting to discover, ergo they haven't gave much thought about conservation of the environment. also, since technology wasn't explored that much, people were using raw materials that were only proven to the harmful later on. for example, since the existence of biofuel was unheard of during that time, they were using coal to run powerplants, etc. coal, as what we know today. emits carbon dioxide.
2007-10-29 02:48:21 · answer #7 · answered by kitty_in_distress 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were just trying to survive back then. The Great Depression was then and do you spend your time recycling or trying to work and get food. Plus, I doubt back then they had knowledge about recycling and global warming.
2007-10-29 02:45:25 · answer #8 · answered by USAGUY 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
200 years ago the means to measure--much lessanalyze--environmental consequences--did not exist. To say people then "ought to have thought about it" is ridiculous.
A lot of people sit around now--when we do have the means to understand--and like to make pronouncements about things they are ignorant of --and expect their opinions to be taken seriously. I'm sorry--but you'e put yourself in that category. If the science isn't clear to you--then you need to learn enough to understand it. If you are not willing to do that, then quit trying to second-guess the scientists and other people who have made the effort to learn enough to have an informed opinion.
2007-10-29 02:51:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Look at the population explosion that has happened since! The by-product of all those new people have contributed to pollution exponentially! ;-(=
2007-10-29 02:45:49 · answer #10 · answered by Jcontrols 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋