Global Cool Rocks. ECOSEXUALS UNITE! 31 January 2007

Certainly you’ve read something about Global Cool in the past few months, no? This week, the assortment of celebrities and green thinkers at Global Cool announced their “Ten Years to Save the Planet” campaign. While the campaign itself may be a bit thin on substance (legislation, sweeping change), it’s a solid step. The whole campaign, with its celebrity tie-ins and educational videos strongly mirrors the Mtv ‘Rock the Vote’ campaign of the ’90s, and I have to say I applaud the effort (how rare is that?). At the very least, it recognizes and points out quite clearly that we’re at the threshold of an irreversible ecological tipping point, after which, well, we’re absolutely doomed (it may be too late, already, but let’s be hopeful and say it isn’t).

Okay, that’s all well and good, and I’m certainly going to donate to the cause, as cutting a check is easiest way to save the planet, right? Yet, the greatest thing I found on the site is under a section called “Green Day(ting)”. Check this out:

If ‘metrosexual’ was the buzzword of the late 90s and early naughties, thanks in part to sensitive sarong-sporting types like David Beckham teaching men to shave properly, then right now ‘ecosexuals’ are all the rage.

Holy mother of god! I’ve had this, well. . . conflict . . .that I’ve been feeling within myself since I was a wee lad. I’ve felt different, not quite like the other boys in the gym. And now I know why!

I AM AN ECOSEXUAL!!!

Say it loud! I’m green and I’m proud!)

There. I just came out. Quite publicly, in fact, on a blog that is read by tens of thousands each day. In case I was at all nebulous, even a bit vague, as I don’t want to mirror Bowie’s waffling on the sexuality subject back in his Ziggy days (he really played the press that crazy Duke):

I AM AN ECOSEXUAL! I AM AN ECOSEXUAL! I AM AN ECOSEXUAL!

I wonder what my wife will think?

+++

P.S. - It all seems to have started here.

P.P.S. - Thanks to the eco-fashion house, GreenCloset for letting me appropriate their logo. Hopefully, this link will make it all square.

GOOD! Half the World Renewable Powered by 2050 BAD! By Then, We’re Cooked! 30 January 2007

So your pal walks up and says, “The good news is, I’ve found a job for you that will allow you complete happiness, untold wealth and travel, and security for your family.” You say, “Hey, that’s fuckin’ great!” and then chastise yourself, mentally, for cursing. But your friend isn’t done. He looks at his feet, winces a bit in that funny way some people do when they wince using only their lips (I have some friends who are lip-wincers so I know of what I speak) and says, “The bad news is, you’re going to be dead in a week.” That’s pretty much the kind of situation this article reminds me of.
The article seems so darned hopeful, reporting that “clean energies could surge to supply half of world demand by 2050 if governments crack down on use of fossil fuels.”
First of all, that’s a might big if. The odds of governments cracking down in earnest on fossil fuels seems quite slim, at least here in the U.S., until such a time comes that the public really demands this. At present, there is little such demand, at least judging by the rhetoric of 2008 presidential hopefuls - they clearly aren’t feeling the pressure to aggresively tackle environmental issues.

Second, by 2050 it will be far too late. If you read this blog, you know I keep harping about how we need to act NOW and not five years from now, and even then it may well be too late. The damage has been done. There aint nothing we can reverse. The glaciers are melting, the sea levels are rising, the fresh water is disappearing, and it’s all going to get a lot worse really, really fast. By 2050 . . . the world as we know it will be quite a different beast. Seems impossible, doesn’t it? We see ads for the 2008 Prius, the new iPhone, all the gadgets that make the world go down. I mean ’round. Business as usual. In as little as ten years, we’re going to look back at 2007 and wonder ‘Why the hell weren’t we scared?’

On a lighter note: HELIUM.

I Hate to Criticize Clooney/Electric Cars are the PROBLEM not the Cure 29 January 2007

I love George Clooney, and this vehicle looks vaguely interesting. Yet, I’m waiting for George to stop endorsing electric vehicles (like this, the Tesla and the Tango) and start endorsing the immediate redesign of our urban and suburban cities into, as Richard Register puts it, “Ecocities”. The solution is not to rework the car, but to eliminate the need for the damned things. Okay, largely eliminate the need. We don’t have time to screw around with electric cars. Converting them all to electric will do far less good than reworking our cities. In short, alterna-vehicles are the wrong tree up which to bark. Okay, maybe not entirely wrong, but I sure wish people would be paying equal attention to the other side of the equation. Did you like that? “Up which to bark?” Oh, what a lovely language we speak.
Register puts it this way:

The car is part of a whole “living system” with all parts integral to one another, not unlike a literally living organism. The built infrastructure of our current city/town/village is this: Cars/sprawl/paving/cheap energy infrastructure. It happens to be a pathological system, but nonetheless it functions basically like any living organism with integral organs, one of which happens these days to be cars. To “improve” the car is to fool ourselves that we are improving the whole system. In fact we are making it possible for people to expand sprawl development because these parts of the whole do not exist in isolation from one another any more than do our organs, bones, muscles, sense organs and so on do. Thus “bettering” the car expands geographically and perpetuates in time the disastrous infrastructure we have now that is gobbling land, killing 500,000 people in “accidents” facilitated by policy (that which builds roads and promotes car ownership), paving agriculture, competing with hungry people for fertile soil as ethanol production from agriculture surpasses food production in many parts of the world so elitists can continue driving while many of those 90% of the world’s population who don’t own cars are hungry and some of them actually starving.

The eco-blogosphere is filled with drooling descriptions of vehicles these days. Isn’t that just fundamentally wrong? Eco-bloggers high-fiving each other at car shows? Our energies are being diverted. I hope we wake up fast. We’re almost out of time. No, really–we’re almost out of time.

For all you ‘baby-steppers’ out there, spare me your baby-steps bullshit. We were supposed to take those thirty years ago. If we can’t sprint, we’ll die.

Why Life After Oil Will Be Better (?) 28 January 2007

While the accuracy of the headline of this article by the Western Mail’s Molly Watson is debatable, the article touches on what I brought up in my last post. Namely, the world is going to change drastically, quickly. No paranoid rant, the lead paragraph says it all:

“Experts are predicting that in as little as 12 months’ time our global supplies of oil will start to diminish. Demand will exceed supply, prices will rise, and suddenly all of the things we take for granted like commuting from Swansea to Cardiff, buying roses in February and holidaying abroad will be out of the question.”

Again, if you have kids, or are planning on living for a few decades, it is imperative that you start paying more attention to the coming changes, and less attention to whether or not you can afford that new iPhone. Prioritize, my friends. Others are - and they’ll be the ones who make the transition.

China: Not Doing So Well

BBC News reports today that China is failing to meet its own climate change-related goals. Not really a surprise, given that “Current plans call for the opening of a new power station every week, most of them coal-fired.” However, I’m going on record as saying that I expect the world to benefit one day soon from environmental tech advances made by the Chinese as they wrestle with the conflict between explosive growth and environmental degradation. Additionally, the Chinese know very well that the oil supply is OVER in the next two decades. This knowledge will propel them to finding alternatives. . . which may or may not exist.

On a somewhat related note . . . Not to get too Kunstlerian on y’all, but the odds are not good that the world be making a remotely smooth transition away from oil. Don’t forget to read Kunstler’s “The Long Emergency”. If you have kids, if you’re planning to retire - if you’re the type of person who like to, well, plan ahead, this is the one book that you are going to have to read. In the future, there will be those who are prepared for a radically different world, and those who are not. Kunstler’s vision may be too dark, but it’s a lot closer to the truth than the current bubble in which we are living. Don’t forget to think ahead, is all I’m trying to say. Don’t presume that technology and politicians are going to ’save us.’

Ethiopia: On the Road to Sustainability

When many think of Ethiopia, one of the poorest african nations, they likely don’t think of a nation that devotes much energy to the creation of a well-thought sustainability plan. Well, that depends on your definition of the nebulous term “sustainable”.

Take a peek at the IMF’s report: Ethiopia - Sustainability and Poverty Reduction Program, PDF file linked below. It’s not your typical view of sustainability, but it reminds us how much basic work many nations have to do (and how much we need to help them via loan cancellations and other measures) before they can even consider the luxury of devoting resources to tackling climate change.

IMF ETHIOPIA REPORT

Look at Kiva.org AGAIN (Microfinancing/Microlending) 26 January 2007

The great thing about the internet is that it draws awareness to so many great causes. Unfortunately, that attention is all too fleeting. That’s why, even though Kiva.org was all the rage in the blogosphere just a few short months ago, I feel it necessary to bring it up again.

Organizations like Kiva.org organize microlending programs the help the poorest onto the first rung of the ladder of economic growth. The more of the extreme poor that can be brought to the level of sustainable existence, the better it is for the global economy and the environment.

I recently read a great piece, “Millions for Millions,” in the New Yorker. The article discusses the burgeoning world of microlending/microfinance, it’s key players, and the divide between for-profit and non-profit organizations who are pioneering the business model. The non-profit icon is Nobel winner Muhammed Yunus, whose Grameen Bank has helped countless people achieve economic independence. In the for-profit world, we have eBay pioneer Pierre Omidyar, whose adherence to Adam Smith’s economic principles is unrelenting. In short, Pierre believes that profitable lending institutions are more likely to spread, therefore giving greater opportunity to the largest number of people whereas Muhammed rocks the “profiting off the extreme poor is kind of evil” ideology.

KIVA is a great, small example of yet another approach, that of peer-to-peer lending. Take another look.

The photo above is of Aggrey Kasango of Uganda who is using the $800 supplied by a group of 30 different investors to expand the scope of his business of buying and selling assorted grains. There are many Aggrey Kasangos out there. Why not loan them twenty bucks right now? You’ll get your money back and these individuals and their families will be one step closer to a sustainable future.

Cleaning up New York City 25 January 2007

My friend Steve Lambert, founder of the Anti-Advertising Agency has teamed up with Graffiti Research Lab to clean up the environment in New York City.

Their progress has been stunning. Click the wee play button in the bottom left corner of the vid screen below to watch.

ENTERMODAL Website Launches! 23 January 2007

Sustainable luxury leather products. Sounds like an oxymoron, no? Not if your name is Larry Olmstead, founder of Entermodal. Not only is Larry recognized as one of the world’s top outdoor bag designers, but he and his wife Holly have a commitment to sustainable design that will push/drag the leather industry toward reducing its environmental impact.

From the newly launched Entermodal website:

…to assist in the assessment of our environmental impacts, we follow the Natural Step Framework, which contextualizes relevant considerations by comparing them across four categories to create a balanced and honest outlook. This process enables us to create yearly goals for improvement and annual reports, both of which facilitate our participation in sustainable industry and education, and provide transparency in our operations.

Aside from Entermodal’s dedication to sustainability, the bags are unparalleled in terms of quality and comfort. I don’t mean they’re simply really good. I mean that one would be hard-pressed to find a leather bag of finer build quality and ergonomic design. In short, Entermodal’s launch is one of great significance in the small but significant leather bag industry, as the company has instantly dethroned, by way of its revolutionary blend of responsible design and patented ergonomic advances, such high-end stalwarts such as Luis Vuitton, Hermes and Prada.

Check out all of Entermodal’s offerings and read up on their design philosophy at www.entermodal.com.

Google Tells Us What We REALLY Care About

Below are the top ten Google NEWS search inputs in 2006. Draw your own conclusions.

1. Paris Hilton
2. Orlando Bloom
3. Cancer
4. Podcasting
5. Hurricane Katrina
6. Bankruptcy
7. Martina Hingis
8. Autism
9. 2006 NFL Draft
10. Celebrity Big Brother 2006

Technorati Tags: paris-hilton, orlando-bloom, hurricane-katrina, american-idiots