September 10th, 2005

The real challenge

Posted by jv in 100 MPG Challenge

This journey is not about a car, and it’s not about a driver.

It’s about questions, and perhaps some answers.

The questions are easily understood. Why does the consumption of natural resources continue at a rate we all know cannot be sustained? Why do we continue to ignore all of the obvious consequences of over-consumption in our world when we already have the means to reduce it without radically changing our lives?

The answers are a little more difficult; ignorance, greed, and hypocrisy.

Ignorance and greed are both unacceptable excuses, and yet, we can understand them as a weakness of mind and character, a condition that can be overcome by education and enlightenment. Hypocrisy, however, is a much more complex problem. When it comes to sharing our planet in a sustainable way, we are all hypocrites at some level. We want the world to be a better place, we want to make sure it will support our children and their children, we just don’t want to do the hard work ourselves.

When we fill up at the pump, we can’t blame the gas companies; they’re just playing the supply and demand game. We can’t blame the government; taxes are fixed to infrastructure costs. We can’t blame the car companies; they’re just marketing products we tell them we want to buy. We have only ourselves to blame.

Each one of us can make something better. We just need to choose to do it. That is the real challenge.

John Vissers

5 Responses to ' The real challenge '

Subscribe to comments with RSS

  1. Pete said:

    I ‘m not sure I understand your point you are trying to “save the planet from the evils of emission pollution ,yet you try to get your message out by driving a car accross Canada.The smart maay be very fuel efficient but , unnessecary use of a vehicle no matter how efficient is a waste of fuel and pollutes the air with the same co2 you preach against.

    September 10th, 2005 at 11:11 am

  2. Mike T said:

    Good commentary, John!

    I think one of the ways to look at this whole problem is in the context of common-property resources, and how poorly the “free market” addresses them. Basically, it doesn’t address them at all, and market interventions are usually required to mitigate the externalities and other excesses of the market, never mind making any headway. These market interventions typically are in the form of government regulations.

    Problems of a wide scope, in which an individual plays but a miniscule part, are terribly hard to address. This was best described in the landmark article “The Tragedy of the Commons” Garrett Hardin, Science, 162(1968):1243-1248. It details the inexorable descent into oblivion of most common-property resources like air, water, fisheries, pollution of these resources. It deals with matters of global concern, on a global scale. In short, it was a wake-up call, ironically from the optimistic 1960s.

    Addressing these problems requires a multi-pronged approach. Regulation to be sure, has its place. But education is a major component as well, and it is here that Keith and the One Tonne Challenge car have excelled. All of us who drive smarts or economical hybrids like the Prius or Insight, car pool, walk or ride bicycles instead of driving are playing our part and trying to set an example.

    Keith, you are the vanguard, and kudos to you and the organisers of the cross-country tour for that!

    September 10th, 2005 at 11:45 am

  3. Kathryn G said:

    I couldn’t agree with John more. This fatalistic attitude of so many people interviewed for their response to rising gas prices is pissing me off. “What are you going to do? I have to drive so I guess I’ll just have to pay.” What a crock! We all have choices - some that can be made immediately others in the medium- or long-term. Yes you can take the bus or cycle or walk. Yes you can live closer to where you work. Yes you can get a more efficient vehicle. While I realise that these choices are simpler for some than for others, they do exist. Perhaps rising gas prices will finally be a wake up call to personal responsibility.

    And I have to quickly respond to Mike’s reference to ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’. I agree that the externalities to our oil-dependent economies are a case of market failure well-illustrated by Hardin’s famous article. But the analogy is often taken too far and Hardin presents a very simplistic version of the commons which does not reflect how most commons actually function in practice. Check out anything by Elinor Ostrom for great analysis. In the area where I do a lot of work - intellectual property - a healthy commons/public domain is critical to future creative works (see, e.g., http://www.forumonpublicdomain.ca).

    Say hello to Nova Scotia for me, Keith!

    September 11th, 2005 at 9:19 am

  4. Mike T said:

    Hi Kathryn,

    Yeah, I fully agree about Hardin’s examples and analyses being simplifed, but the importance of the “Tragedy of the Commons” article is more related to its timing, where it was published and its theme.

    Similar things could be said about two other landmarks from the 1960s: Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring”, and Ralph Nader’s “Unsafe At Any Speed”. Both are great reads, despite their shortcomings.

    September 11th, 2005 at 12:53 pm

  5. Greg said:

    So what do you get if you meet the challenge? How do you meet the challenge?
    A certificate?
    A badge?
    A tshirt?
    A ball cap?
    Your name on a one ton rock?
    Your name on a brick to build something?

    I’ve been fairly enviormentally for a long time so it will be harder for me to see a reduction in my usage. Why not have a fair share usage challenge so as the vanguards aren’t punished.

    http://nl-outsidethebox.blogspot.com/

    September 13th, 2005 at 4:35 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.