No… not unless we turn our back on perpetual economic growth addiction. Sadly, there is zero data to suggest we are even TALKING about PEGA as a mainstream topic.
At about halfway in an excerpt from the TED stage, the speaker used just one single datapoint to say, in reductionist fashion, that GDP can grow – implying *perpetually* grow – without increasing our environmental impact. noting that several countries have increased GDP, while reducing emissions, she then said, “The notion that economic growth has to be incompatible with reducing our environmental impact is simply wrong.” Well, reducing coal use is a good thing, but it’s laughable to cite this as evidence that we can *perpetually* grow the economy without undermining ecosystem services in a long list of other ways.
And towards the end she’s doing overt cheerleading for the huge increase in corn yields in the United States, and just glosses over that this is only possible due to the extraordinary amount of petrochemicals, industrially mined fertilizers, fossil fuels, and in some regions depleting aquifers through water mining. There’s no mention of fertilizer runoff or soil erosion or increasing extinction rates among insects.
Hope is great. But drawing hope from obviously unsustainable fallacy is not the kind of hope we need. In the end, PEGA – perpetual economic growth addiction – will prove the antithesis of sustainability
Can i say it? What a bothersome title. Of course humanity is sustainable, technology allows for it, we can live well, live comfortable and in sustainable way. The main issue is capitalism and a bit of consumerism.
No need to pretend environmentalists think humanity is not sustainable.. not the major part at least..
Can i say it? What a bothersome title. Of course humanity is sustainable, technology allows for it, we can live well, live comfortable and in sustainable way. The main issue is capitalism and a bit of consumerism.
No need to pretend environmentalists think humanity is not sustainable.. not the major part at least..
4 comments
No… not unless we turn our back on perpetual economic growth addiction. Sadly, there is zero data to suggest we are even TALKING about PEGA as a mainstream topic.
At about halfway in an excerpt from the TED stage, the speaker used just one single datapoint to say, in reductionist fashion, that GDP can grow – implying *perpetually* grow – without increasing our environmental impact. noting that several countries have increased GDP, while reducing emissions, she then said, “The notion that economic growth has to be incompatible with reducing our environmental impact is simply wrong.” Well, reducing coal use is a good thing, but it’s laughable to cite this as evidence that we can *perpetually* grow the economy without undermining ecosystem services in a long list of other ways.
And towards the end she’s doing overt cheerleading for the huge increase in corn yields in the United States, and just glosses over that this is only possible due to the extraordinary amount of petrochemicals, industrially mined fertilizers, fossil fuels, and in some regions depleting aquifers through water mining. There’s no mention of fertilizer runoff or soil erosion or increasing extinction rates among insects.
Hope is great. But drawing hope from obviously unsustainable fallacy is not the kind of hope we need. In the end, PEGA – perpetual economic growth addiction – will prove the antithesis of sustainability
Can i say it? What a bothersome title. Of course humanity is sustainable, technology allows for it, we can live well, live comfortable and in sustainable way. The main issue is capitalism and a bit of consumerism.
No need to pretend environmentalists think humanity is not sustainable.. not the major part at least..
Can i say it? What a bothersome title. Of course humanity is sustainable, technology allows for it, we can live well, live comfortable and in sustainable way. The main issue is capitalism and a bit of consumerism.
No need to pretend environmentalists think humanity is not sustainable.. not the major part at least..