SAVING THE PLANET
Unusually for me it is an article of
14 December 2018 in the (London) Daily Mail that gives me pause for thought.
Headlined ‘Why organic plants may be
WORSE for the planet’, researchers led by Stefan Wirsensius of Chalmers
University of Technology in Sweden have
published a report based on the calculation of the amount of carbon dioxide stored
in forests that could be released into the atmosphere as an effect of
deforestation to make room for more organic farming. Their finding is that up
to 70% more carbon dioxide is emitted from this source as forests are cleared
to provide more land for organically–grown crops: without chemical fertilizers
more land is needed to grow the same quantity of food because the soils yield
less otherwise. Wirsensius claims that ‘Organic peas, farmed in Sweden, have
around a 50 per cent bigger climate impact than conventionally-grown peas…With
winter wheat the difference is closer to 70 per cent.’ While even organic meat
and dairy products are worse than their conventionally produced equivalents,
from ‘a climate point of view.’
Although vegan diets are not in
themselves to blame for anything, it is true that some features of faddish food
markets have proved highly detrimental to ecological and social balance. The avocado market is in some crisis; apart
from the fact that growing avocados requires vast amounts of water from a
planet that’s drying up, it has been overwhelmed by demand from Waitrose
shoppers and their kindred around the world, a demand it cannot hope to meet
long-term. And those who eat quinoa as part of a locally-sourced natural diet
are denied it by a market driven by its popularity amongst self-same Waitrose
shoppers and others. Yet we have a ready supply and rich variety of fresh
vegetables and fruits that are locally-grown relative to ourselves, both in
greengroceries and in farmers’ markets all around the country. Could demand not
lead also to the encouragement of vegetable and fruit varieties locally-sourced
that have become rarities because they are no longer fashionable (or even very
appetising without some knowledgeable preparation)? It is true also that much of our fruit and
veg displayed in supermarkets – and flown or driven in from great distances - is
only this side of manky, rather older than we may have thought. Amongst
anything else, wrapping produce up tightly in plastic gives this stuff a sheen
it would not otherwise deserve.
We also have a strange and ambiguous
attitude towards energy use, which is related to environmental factors such as
CO2 because ever-greater energy demand also produces undesirable environmental
effects. It is true that we utilise energy much more efficiently than we used
to, and it is also true that solar, sea and wind are going to provide a much
higher percentage of energy sources than at present. But the need for more
energy itself is ever greater, and we are still predominantly dependent upon
fossil fuels, including the dreaded fracking (the latter has made the USA
virtually energy self-sufficient).
Electric cars on the road are not
polluting in the way that internal combustion engines so notoriously are, but
the production of requisite batteries does present environmental issues, and
the National Grid presently does not even know where all the much-greater
demand for electricity for our traffic is to come from.
Then we have smartphones whose
increasing miniaturisation has raised their energy consumption level to an
all-time high: the more sophisticated and miniaturised the instrumentation the
more energy it consumes – far more than any ‘old-fashioned’ equivalent, such as
a land-line phone. A DAB radio gobbles up fantastic amounts of energy compared
to a conventional radio: so much so that customers are encouraged to purchase
battery-packs as well so as to save on their household electric bills. Do we
need electric carving-knives? Have we forgotten the art of winding up alarm
clocks? Why do I need an electric shaver or a single-use throwaway plastic
razor instead of a good old safety-razor with a supply of blades? It’s true
that hot water is used but not very much. Speaking of which, and allowing for
certain occupations where it is a necessity, do we really need to have a hot
shower or bath every day? Why not an all-over wash plus a shower or bath once a
week? I’ve done this for years and I’ve never noticed people distancing
themselves from me, though I may be insensitive. Obviously not for blogs, which must be typed
electronically, but for the drafting of
blogs (and for letters I send in the post or any off-line forms) I use my
manual portable typewriter. A typewriter is very hands-on – you have to adjust
the paper physically and correct errors with certain aids, change ribbons from
time to time, stick in carbon paper if you want copies without a photocopier, and
manually adjust margins, etc. – but if it’s
a manual (as opposed to electric or electronic) it will not have a ‘machine’
look about the results, but rather a human one. It also uses up no energy
whatsoever, except human energy – and I have to eat anyhow. Imagine an office
block once full of manual typewriters and then think of the same office block
years’ later, stuffed with PCs and other devices: and then imagine the huge increase in that block’s
hunger for daily energy since the changeover. I’m no luddite. By all means use and improve
the performance of powered devices that we really need to be powered. But
surely we are duplicating perfectly adequate human effort with electrified
effort which is just not necessary except in the cases of special needs. Well,
our planet has special needs, too.
We are going to have to alter,
radically, our long-held view of what constitutes technological ‘progress’. I
don’t see why it can’t be a mix of mechanical with powered. The wind-up radio
in the third world has been a great success. (And typewriters are used in many
parts of the third world because of the erratic nature of electricity supplies
with blackouts that could hamper computer work disastrously. Typewriters are
also very secure since they aren’t on the internet.) And we are going to have to eat less and drive
and fly less too. We might end up healthier along the way.
Of course the rich cannot deny
themselves any and every ‘labour-saving’ device and electronic gadget available
because using up energy is - in fact - what being
rich is about. But that to one side,
there is virtually no point in writing or talking about all this unless we
engage with the central issue of socialism – socialist democracy and socialist
planning. All the demonstrations around the world about global warming will
achieve nothing unless capital is appropriated and capitalism as a system
destroyed. Look at any capitalist proposal for saving the planet and you will
find a list of exceptions to this proposal a mile long.
