Print
Email
One of the toughest things about moving from the Pacific Northwest to the East Coast is the general cluelessness of Easterners about protecting the environment. Recycling is viewed as a weird hobby here, kind of like playing the accordion. Recycle bins in public places are hard to come by. When available, they're usually contaminated by tissues, banana peels, and other garbage. Littering is a common practice, even in "nice" neighborhoods.
But despite this civic ignorance about so many environmental issues, reusable shopping bags are ubiquitous. Everywhere you turn, shoppers are marching in grocery stores and neighborhood shops with their reusable bags like an army of green consumers.
Indeed, every Sunday morning masses of these "environmentally-friendly" shoppers pass by my house on their way to the Takoma Park Farmers' Market. With reusable bags in tow, they line the surrounding streets with their cars venturing from faraway neighborhoods deprived of organic local fruits and vegetables. As I watch them park, I can't help but wonder about the net impact of their shopping trips on the environment.
Does the fact that they aren't using those nearly indestructible plastic bags that plague nature compensate for the carbon dioxide their cars emit on the drive to and from the market? Do the items they purchase from local farms — not shipped across the nation on trucks or trains — improve the air quality enough to make up for their drive across town?
Or are we living in an age of symbolic, self-congratulatory environmentalism?
The media frenzy about climate change is certainly a product of successful marketing, well-connected spokespersons, and the grim reality of what rapid changes in climate could mean for the planet. But I wonder if we can't see the forest (that will soon be cleared for a highway) for the trees (that we will chop down to make paper). We take many symbolic actions like shopping with reusable bags, but how many Americans know that when they "recycle" a new computer it's sometimes shipped to a landfill in China where children dig through chemicals to make a few bucks for their families? Indeed, how many Americans simply throw their old computers in the trash?
In recent years, environmentalism has become trendy. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but the disconnect between people's actions and the actions people need to take to save our environment is wide. Environmental trendiness was not enough to get people to start using public transit; only $4 per gallon gas could do that. Enviro-hipsterism did not get people to stop buying houses in distant exurbs; troubles in the housing market combined with high gas prices caused that. Last year, NBC hosted a preposterous "green week" in which its sets were darkened to save energy, a ploy to capitalize on this trend that was certainly feeble if it wasn't completely absurd.
There is so much more that citizens could do to protect the environment, including reducing our use of cars, supporting public transit (time to move forward or get off the pot, western Washington) and Amtrak, buying homes near transit centers, supporting the use of clean energy, reusing things by taking advantage of craigslist and freecycle, and conserving what we already have. Perhaps in this time of economic troubles we could even rethink our culture of materialism.
I'm all for a little self-congratulatory environmentalism if it brings about some good, but we shouldn't let symbolic acts completely obscure the reality our planet faces. If we don't do more than carry around shopping bags and put a few bottles in the recycle bin, we may be toast. Literally.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Tue, Dec 23, 8:39 a.m. Inappropriate
"Or are we living in an age of symbolic, self-congratulatory environmentalism?"
The question answers itself.
But the answers to other troublesome little questions do get fuzzy for us consumers. I had a conversation with transportation expert Dan Sperling this past summer and, in discussing the relative fuel consumption of a single-occupancy car and a diesel bus with 20 passengers, he stated that the "dirty little secret" of fuel efficiency was that a reasonably small car wins the comparison. Even the arithmetic I can do suggests that he is right ( an empty diesel bus weighs about 40,000 lbs).
If "supporting public transit" means actually riding it (getting buses over half full) then it may do the good that you imply. Just voting for the bond issue may turn out to be a disappointment.
Posted Tue, Dec 23, 12:28 p.m. Inappropriate
I drive a big pickup truck. But I don't claim to care much for the environment. I am waiting for the humans to make themselves extinct.
But I do shop mostly at thrift stores (recycle products and would be manufacturing waste) and buy local food products whenever possible. The only time my credit card gets used at Wal-mart is when it is stolen by thieves in Texas. No lie.
Trendy is not a bad thing...although remember that skinny used to be trendy (and may still be), however America is still one of the most obese nations...
Posted Tue, Dec 23, 1:57 p.m. Inappropriate
I agree with Keith that the first step of supporting public transit is riding it, and yes, there is something to be said about fuel-efficient cars vs. diesel buses. But many of the newer buses right now are use hybrid-electric, compressed natural gas, or biodiesel blends. The gas-guzzling diesel bus is quickly becoming passe. Also, the number of cars on the road has underlying infrastructure energy costs associated with increased paving, idling in traffic, and sprawl. Public transit can help reduce land use costs by making higher density living more attractive. It's just not as simple as one mpg versus another.
Posted Tue, Dec 23, 2:51 p.m. Inappropriate
Though I agree with Mr. Vogt's conclusion, his arguments strike this reader as very self-congratulatory. He makes very broad statements about the East Coast yet refers only anecdotally to his own neighborhood, a progressive, inside the beltway, suburb of D.C.
FWIW, it sounds like Mr. Vogt is ranting on his neighbors more than anything else.
For anyone to be a real success you need to deal with people on their terms, not insult them when they don't come to yours. You might find that difficult to take, but if you want to write with authority you need to do your research, on your subject and on your audience.
My Blog
Posted Wed, Dec 24, 4:17 p.m. Inappropriate
"Or are we living in an age of symbolic, self-congratulatory environmentalism?",
In a word, yes.
Before Oil Shock III and the onset of Great Depression II, Toyota's marketing people noted that, even though the company offers a range of hybrid vehicles, the Prius was the only one that was basically sold out. Why? You can only get a Prius as a hybrid, and a Prius is quite readily identifiable, as opposed to the Camry, Highlander, et al, which only have little "Hybrid Synergy Drive" emblems strategially applied to to the body.
The Toyota marketing people say Prius buyers "want to send a message about their concern for the environment." That message being, look at me, I'm driving a HYBRID and you AREN'T. NYAH! NYAH! NYAH!
What's funny is how people like Mr. Tooley can only respond by suggesting those who point out the nakedness of the emperor are themselves smug and sanctimonious. The pot calling the kettle black...
Posted Mon, Dec 29, 10:30 p.m. Inappropriate
I try not to take offense when Mr. Vogt casts aspersions on all Easterners, but he does have a point. I've lived on both coasts, and we could certainly take some cues from folks in the Great Northwest. Environmentalism is second nature there -- maybe it has to do with the proximity to the great outdoors.
Recycling was painfully slow coming to the Washington, D.C. area. I found this jarring too, having lived in Boston where recycling was serious business. There wasn't anything that couldn't be recycled and the town recycling centers accepted electronics and other toxic waste every day. In D.C., we have drives once or twice a year. I've often attributed D.C.'s laggard environmentalism to the transient nature of the city, but that's shifting and people are beginning to stay and care for their neighborhoods. Takoma Park, Md., is a model for this town and indeed, reminds of me of Seattle in many ways. Folks here - old and young - use push mowers and not gas mowers, for example. They also take great effort to keep water run-off from getting to the streams.
I have worked few places on either coast - btw - where recycling of anything other than paper was done - including in Washington state government. I set up baskets in my office for people to drop off cans, bottles and plastics, and then I take them home. Businesses could do a much better job at cutting waste.
So I have my bones to pick with the Great NW too. I cannot believe that greater strides have not been made in mass transit and the NW deserves more than a slap on the wrist. My mother-in-law was fighting for a mass transit system in Seattle long before Singles actor Campbell Scott dreamed of his Supertrain with java and Pearl Jam in the 90s. For all the environmentalism in the NW, folks still don't get out of their cars. Pollution, high cancer rates, and road rage are the norm in communities along I-5 stretching from north of Seattle to Portland. There is a solid bus system no doubt, but faster and more frequent options are needed for commuters as people travel greater distances to their jobs. I was never so happy to get back to a city with a metro. The Seattle metro area also has it fair share of McMansions sucking up lots of energy.
About those reusable bags, I confess to not always having them over my shoulder when I decide to stop off at the grocery store on the way home so I commend those who do. The bags blowing in the trees along my metro route are a reminder to me and brings back memories of black plastic bags blowing around in the deserts of Morocco. That visual makes me think we have to keep pushing even if via small steps.
Mr. Vogt is right that we cannot let hipster environmentalism obscure the realities of what needs to be accomplished. I'm hopeful that the cool factor will provide greater motivation. I see it every day - the same person pushing their friends to stop using plastic bags is now fighting for more bike lanes. Now they are springing up all over the city. (Portland, watch out!) We Easterners may be slower coming to party in some areas, but we are a bunch of Type-A personalities. Don't underestimate us!
Posted Wed, Dec 31, 1:39 p.m. Inappropriate
Data point from an interesting and detailed, statistics-based ranking of urban areas by a smart growth advocate using Census surveys and other data that I recently stumbled upon:
QUOTE
The cities with highest overall ranking in “Major US Cities Preparedness for an Oil Crisis” are as follows:
1. San Francisco
2. New York
3. Washington, DC
4. Seattle
5. Oakland
6. Chicago
7. Portland, OR
8. Philadelphia
9. Baltimore
10. Boston
Ranking highest are cities with strong public transit system ridership, well-organized and relatively dense city centers, a high degree of mixed real estate uses (retail, office, residential), and medium-to-high city population density.
UNQUOTE
From page 6 of
Major US City Post-Oil Preparedness Ranking: Which Cities and Metro Areas are Best or Least Prepared for Price Volatility, Supply Shocks and Climate Change Regulations?
November 10, 2008
by Warren Karlenzig, President
Common Current
524 San Anselmo Ave., Suite 141
San Anselmo, CA 94960
http://www.commoncurrent.com
One component of the ranking is percent of workforce using public transit for commuting to work. This research uses the national ranking from the 2007 American Community Survey of the U.S. Census, reported as follows (numbers following the cities are percentage of work force surveyed who reported riding transit last week).
1 New York 54.6
2 Washington, DC 36.4
3 Boston 34
4 San Francisco 33
5 Chicago 26.7
6 Philadelphia 25.3
7 Baltimore 19.4
8 Seattle 18.6
9 Oakland 15.8
10 Cleveland 13.6
11 Minneapolis 13.4
12 Miami 12.7
13 Atlanta 11.7
14 Los Angeles 11.3
15 Portland, OR 11.2
16 Honolulu 11.1
17 Detroit 8.5
17 Milwaukee 8.5
19 Denver 7.7
20 Long Beach 6.9
21 New Orleans 6.3
22 Las Vegas 5
23 Austin 4.9
23 Houston 4.9
25 San Diego 4.5
26 Dallas 4.2
27 Louisville 4
27 Phoenix 4
29 Kansas City 3.8
29 San Jose 3.8
31 Charlotte 3.3
31 San Antonio 3.3
33 Tucson 3.2
34 Columbus 3.1
35 Sacramento 2.8
Full report at
http://www.commoncurrent.com/pubs/MajorUSCityPost-OilPreparednessRanking.pdf
Posted Sat, Jan 10, 12:08 p.m. Inappropriate
I have lived in Seattle, New York and now Washington DC. I find Seattleites to be overall more environmentally aware but in the most self-congratulatory parochial and superior type of way--just like this columnist. Your average New Yorker is not running around with birkenstocks from a dumpster but they use less energy by far and emit less carbon per capita than people in Seattle. They have access to a tremendous public transit system, take transit seriously, and they live in small spaces --nothing like a 300 square foot studio apartment to conserve energy and goods.