Monday, February 15, 2010

Response #3: Promethians are Environmental Obstructionists

A bold title, I know.

Dryzek barely hides his own contempt for the notion that we can solve every problem by figuring out how to exploit new resources, or exploit old resources better. The Promethean argument extends as far as saying that we will eventually figure out how to harbor yesterday's pollution into today's energy source, which Dryzek compares to alchemy. There is only really one central point where I agree with Prometheans, but then feel that they take their argument in entirely the wrong direction.

I absolutely agree that there is no limit to human ingenuity. We are amazing creatures and can come up with a solution to any problem we put our minds to. However, unlikely Prometheans, I would argue that this is what we are doing right now. While the Promethean viewpoint appears to be, "we're smart, so we'll learn to live with global warming, depletion of resources, and pollution when the time comes," my viewpoint is, "we're smart, so we'll build wind farms, a smart grid, and take a sustainable approach to logging." Yes, we are incredibly resourceful as a species. That's why many of us are trying to nip this problem in the bud now, rather than wait for the economic tipping point.

At the risk of simply restating Dryzek's point, the Promethean viewpoint is unabashedly capitalist, and sees no other form of progress other than continued accumulation of things. It relies heavily on the use of misleading statistics such as global averages, which fail to account for regional differences. For example, it includes the absurd notion of "trickle-down economics," by stating that mean global increase in wealth equals increased prosperity and ability to solve new problems as they come up. In fact, what is happening is that one part of the world is accumulating wealth, and when these new challenges come up, that part of the world will be fine while the rest of the world is left by the wayside.

This time, in answering the question "what does this say about us?" I can't help but be a little sarcastic. It says that many of us in the wealthy part of the world are comfortable living the way we are living, and will come up with any excuse to protect what we feel is rightfully ours, regardless of whether or not we earned it. We are willing to cause very direct harm to people in other countries, or even the poor within our own countries, as long as it can be rationalized in terms of progress or blamed on some other factor. Critical? Yes. Harsh? Absolutely. But I can't see any other way of putting it. This is happening right now, and it's going to take a lot more pressure and education than previously thought to convince Prometheans of the error of their ways.

1 comment:

  1. 5/5 Eli,
    You put this so well here! I have a very similar experience when I think about the role of human ingenuity and what is possible and find it interesting to think that this belief-- in our capacities-- would then somehow lead us to assume that the best path forward is the "burn it, use it, pollute it until it's all gone" etc or that the best way to solve global warming would be to geoengineer our way out of it. I'll bet you saw a lot of this flavor solution in COP-15. And then there is this other idea-- very appealing (or hopefully so) to large numbers of people -- that clean, cheap electrons are what we really need to move forward and actualize humans infinite capacities. good job. AdB

    ReplyDelete