Environmentalism: the good, the bad and the ugly.

As an environmentalist – well, perhaps an amateur environmentalist - I would like to believe that I am part of a respected community, one which has directed the environmental movement upwards so that the earth and its billions of inhabitants can live in peace and harmony, thus satisfying my inner-hippy.  Idealistic as this may sound, the majority of activists have helped in some way to propel environmentalism to new heights.  Unfortunately, on occasion, the agents of environmentalism prove to be their own worst enemy, undermining the very cause for which they stand and representing a detrimental force in the environmental movement.

It’s 1974, and the Indian ‘Chipko movement’ catches the nation’s heart; a group of innovative peasant women demonstrate such courage and initiative that they inadvertently inspire worldwide action to be taken at the grassroot level.   Was this a step forward for environmentalism? Most definitely.  However, with the vibes of Woodstock and the ‘swinging sixties’ still ringing in the air, it did not take too long before these proactive pioneers were stripped of their glory, and instead faced a harsher identity as hippy ‘tree huggers’.  As the hippy subculture and the environmental movement grew in tandem, mainstream society grew increasingly intolerant and wary of such radicalism; suddenly, all environmentalists, as brainwashed ‘greenies’, were the outsiders, and a new wave of environmental scepticism and  anti-environmentalism surfaced.

Now don’t get me wrong, the sentiments and proactivity of these particular environmentalists must be admired, but considering that the media loves so much to highlight the more bizarre of their escapades, I cannot help but feel that they have somewhat compromised the validity of the word ‘environmentalist’.   More often than not, that word conjures up stereotypical images of long-haired, psychedelic pacifists who drive around in Scooby-Doo-esque vans solving environmental crimes, making the activities of all environmentalists easy to automatically dismiss.  The more visible efforts of many extreme or radical environmentalists have jeopardised the efforts of others, whose invisible work goes unacknowledged and unappreciated.                      

This controversial form of radical environmentalism, whether successful or not, threatens to slow down the pace of the environmental movement, but little else.   Is this annoying?  Yes.  Is this dangerous? No. What is dangerous, however, is the ever-growing threat of eco-terrorism, which is rapidly embracing its identity as the new ‘religion of environmentalism’.  According to the FBI, these environmental fundamentalists can claim responsibility for over $300 million worth of damage caused within a relatively short period of time (between 2003 and 2008).  The ‘fear factor’ which they have sought to (and regrettably, successfully) establish has made use of vandalism, tree spiking, arson and bombing, leaving one wondering how exactly they can call themselves ‘environmentalists’ if they are so readily willing to destruct the thing for which they fight.

These fanatical ‘eco-warriors’ live up to their name as they engage in battle, whether against the survival of

our own species in ‘the voluntary human extinction movement’, or as members of the infamous ‘earth Liberation front’ which, in the past, has topped the FBI’s domestic terror threat list.    The indirect consequence of such detrimental action is the further depletion of respect for environmentalists and their field of study; by taking such drastic steps towards environmental sustainability, this set of radical environmentalists achieve the opposite of what they believe in and prevent environmentalism from reaching its true potential. 

As environmentalists, we must not presume that all acts on behalf of the environment should be supported.  While the majority of us are good, it goes without saying that the world of environmental protection has experienced it fair share of bad and ugly alike.

Conor Grehan.

Next Generation Video Conferencing



Halo Conference Room (image)



Multi-national companies (MNC) account for a large share of anthropogenic carbon emissions. One of the biggest costs associated with these companies both in terms of monetary and carbon costs is due to air travel. Many companies such as Hewlett Packard (HP) have begun “offsetting” their carbon emissions from air travel by donating money to offsetting companies which in turn plant trees and fund sustainability projects. This offsetting strategy is not a long-term solution. Whilst the number of flights is increasing exponentially and with it the carbon emissions, the amount of space available for forestry development and other offsetting measures is decreasing. There are also business related problems with this strategy. MNC’s are primarily interested in making money and any voluntary solution which costs companies money is not going to be widely adopted and successful.

It is out of this desire to save money and time that “telepresence” projects such as Halo which is developed by HP have arisen. Telepresence projects are business-speak for next generation video conferencing technology. The aim of this technology is to re-create a conference board room as accurately as possible. Business people have often claimed the delay and unrealistic nature of normal video conferencing requires that any meeting requiring more than one to one communication be conducted in person. This can mean lengthy flights. Thousands of people travel thousands of miles every day for business meetings be it from New York to Singapore or London to Tokyo. It is with this problem in mind that HP and Dreamwork’s have developed and started installing Halo rooms in their branches around the world including in their buildings in Leixlip here in Ireland. The benefits of the technology include an identical room in both locations to simulate both parties being in one larger room and more importantly a dedicated connection which ensures no time delay exists. Users of the facilities including heads of major companies have said they quickly forgot the people they were speaking with were on the other side of the world.

It is this new immersive experience which gives Halo and other telepresence projects the potential to make a large dent in the 30% of air travel which is accounted for by business trips. It will of course be impossible to remove all business related air travel but with aviation expected to account for between 5-15% of carbon emissions by 2050, new technologies and a different mentality towards air travel in general is desperately required.

Niall Mortimer

Buyer Be Aware!

Hiring a dress is a sustainable option
Image: http://www.cariscloset.ie/

When you think of carbon footprint you think about carbon emissions from car and heating emissions, am I right? Although these do make up the majority of household emissions, I am going to discuss other types of emissions that make up a massive amount of the world’s greenhouse gases.

People often forget about carbon emissions from consumerism. Our clothes are mostly factory produced with machines. In other to run these machines we need electricity, oil and other resources which produce emissions, not to mention transportation costs. These resources cause thousands of metric tonnes of emissions to be released into the atmosphere from all around the world on a daily basis.

Times have changed in recent decades as having the most fashionable trends is of huge importance, gone are the days when people bought clothes when they needed them and washed them after sufficient use (we won’t even go into the fact people wash their clothes after every use). Fashion has become costly for the environment.

Consider what you are wearing right now! Ask yourself how long have you had these clothes? Where were they made? Were you cautious of these factors when you were buying them? If the answer is no, you are part of a majority. Most clothes are made in factories in China, I’m sure you are aware of the “made in China” label. China is the world’s largest carbon emitter and with no plans to limit emissions the number is continuing to grow. EU regulations limit carbons emissions and large industrial companies pay for emissions, so they produce products elsewhere. This is carbon avoidance!

We as consumers should be aware about the products we buy and were they originate from. We could also make the change by going one step further as there are many ways in which we can be more environmentally friendly. Here are some options available right here in Dublin:

·         Renting: If you are only going to wear/use something once, renting is a great option you are not only saving emissions but being more cost effective too. Cari’s closet rents dresses from high street to designer labels and is a great example of renting for those special occasions ladies.

·         Reuse/Recycle: Charity shops such as SVP offer a great selection of clothes for all ages and sizes. Reusing clothes is a great way to keep your personal carbon footprint down, and doing a good deed too! I have recently stumbled upon a great selection of recyclable jewellery a brand called “Alex and Ani” (see photo). They produce their jewellery from scrap metal and plate them in gold and silver. A great idea that’s carbon friendly and very fashionable too!

Taking the small steps discussed in this blog would really contribute to help saving our planet. Next time you hit the shops think of this blog, think of the product you are buying, is there a better option. Remember to always “Be Aware”!

Alison Lynch

Turn off that tap!

Although the concept of water conservation seems a daunting and impossible task, as the Tesco motto states- “every little helps”. With fresh water supply contributing to only 3% of total global water resources, the idea of domestic water conservation by individuals can make a significant difference. And with the introduction of water charges in Ireland next year, never has there been a better time to use our water more wisely- especially since these charges could result in an annual household charge of €370 (euro). On a survey carried out by world water day, 9 out of 10 Irish people were oblivious to how much water they consume - extraordinarily this number has been estimated at over 150 litres a day. So how can one person expend so much?
Ponder these points:

·         One bath can use up to 50 litres of water

·         A toilet that is flushed 5-6 times a day uses 40 litres of water

·         8 litres of water is wasted each minute a tap is left on

·         A dishwasher uses around 18 litres of water per wash

·         A washing machine uses over 20 litres of water per wash

From the above findings, provided by water use it wisely, it is apparent that everyday processes can cause this incredible accumulation of water wastage. As a result I decided to spend a day attempting to minimize my water usage to around 50 litres. Straight away I knew this task was going to be difficult and that I would have to utilise my water sensibly. To begin, I normally spend at least 6 minutes in the shower so I quickly realised if I was to stay within my limit I would have to face the day without my morning shower- a terrifying thought. Also I knew by flushing the toilet 5-6 times a day I would nearly reach my target so there would have to be great consideration into how to reduce this-much to my roommates despair. Here is my account of the day:

·         Breakfast- porridge made with a cup of water and tea = 0.2 litres

·         Drinking water- 3 litres

·         Brushing teeth with tap off = 2 litres

·         Washing hands throughout the day = 2 litres

·         Flushing toilet 3 times (it was a challenge) = 24 litres

·         Dinner- boiled rice with grilled chicken = 1.2 litres

·         Dishwasher put on at end of day= 18 litres

Total consumption = 50.5 litres

While water conservation cannot happen without consideration, it is not an impossible task. I was successfully able to decrease my water usage to around 50 litres. Although this may not be feasible everyday (a shower is essential now and again, clothes need to be washed ect.), it shows that huge cut backs are possible. I found a few simple solutions can reduce water consumption particularly in individuals. By minimizing shower time to two or three minute (which none of us want to do) you can save up to 60 litres per shower. By installing water-efficient dual flush toilet you can reduce water use by 2 litres per flush (on a full flush) and by 4 litres per flush (on a reduced flush). Another aspect that I had not considered before this was turning off the tap while brushing your teeth- such a simple task that can limit water wastage to 2 litres a day. Granting that reducing water usage to less than 50 litres a day is a very hard task, there is still a lot to be said for the amount we can save- so come on… turn off that tap!

Shauna Quinn

‘A week of Sustainable living’

After taking the Living Sustainability course at Trinity College Dublin I decided to undertake a week of sustainable living. Last week I began my sustainability campaign and here’s how it went.

Monday

Monday went well as I was full of enthusiasm for the coming week and my changing lifestyle. By 8 p.m. I had, taken a shower which lasted under five minutes (usually twenty minutes), went for a run outside instead of the gym, made dinner from locally sourced food and recycled my waste appropriately.

Tuesday

My new way of life continued into Tuesday. When taking a lunch break from the library I remembered to plug out my laptop charger and tell my friends to do the same. I was proud of my new environmentally friendly ways and decided to treat myself with take-out coffee from Starbucks, which, when finished, I tossed in the general waste bin in college. Oops, so much for my recycling today!

Wednesday

I filled my flask with coffee before heading out to lectures, not to make the same mistake as yesterday. Today went well. I noticed ways my friends could be more sustainable in their day-to-day lives, I may not have noticed if I wasn’t making such a conscious effort to change my own ways.

Thursday

I decided to change the light bulbs in my room so I proceeded to Dunnes Stores and bought three long life bulbs. LESSON NUMBER ONE: It’s good to be sustainable but make sure you have enough money in your bank account to support your sustainable lifestyle!

Friday

I went out for dinner with a few of my friends from college. I saw all the food that was being thrown away and wondered do restaurants dispose of their organic waste through composting. Not only am I being sustainable but I ate all my greens not to contribute to the restaurants organic waste.

Saturday

The sunny spell had gone and the rain descended upon the country. My run today would have to be done in the gym. I couldn’t get the flu running in the rain so close to exams!

Sunday

I filled my water and went for a walk to the market at Stoneybatter. I wandered around and bought fish and vegetables for my dinner that night, all the food was locally sourced.

My thoughts from a sustainable week of living:

I discovered it took a lot of discipline to stay on track but after making such an effort for the week I will find it difficult to go back to the way I was before. The sustainable living principles I have incorporated to my life in the past week are easy to adapt to day to day life. It was an enjoyable and worthwhile experience. Sustainable living takes a lot of planning and does not just happen without practice and discipline in everyday tasks. That’s a lesson not just for me, but for the world.

 Katherine Hickey

Agreeing to Painting Paradise rather than Conserving It

Society today is empowered with knowledge regarding sustainable living. We are more aware than ever of the devastating impact that we are having on our environment. Governments have implemented plans, strategies and quotas, yet we continue to cut away chunk after chunk of our natural habitat and replace it brick by brick with concrete and carbon dioxide. We side step the rules, cheat the system and admire the photos of nature while grumbling at our expanding dull, grey environment. Below I outline how we silence our conscience while disregarding the impact that we are having on the environment.

The Kayoto Protocol was set up in 1992 in order to reduce and stabilize emission levels. Although in theory the concept looks good it has ultimately failed because America refused to sign on, claiming that it was ‘fatally flawed in fundamental ways’. As the largest total emitter and the largest emitter per capita in the world this resulted in drastic under-achievements of KP.

The Cap and Trade system implicated in Europe in 2008 initially sounded positive. However we created loopholes for major companies allowing them to buy extra CDM/JI credits on the market, which now are too inexpensive to impact the emission levels of a company at any significant level. We also were extremely generous with the emission allowances allocated to countries, therefore impinging on the possible positive outcomes for our environment.

In short we seem satisfied with paying lip service to sustainable living in an effort to silence our conscience without really acting upon ideas. In order to actually make a difference we must begin to implement our policies correctly and be willing to come to a compromise between economics and sustainability.

Rebecca O’Connor