Raleigh introduced a tiered system of water resource management this week. Due to severe draught conditions, the city has scaled back watering lawns and washing cars. Mayor Meeker has asked citizens to drastically cut the amount of water used for showers, waste removal, and even asked people to eat meals on paper plates to conserve. But at the same time the city has decided to tier the system. What this means is those who consume the most water will pay higher rates. I understand the shrewd leaders of Raleigh recognize a revenue potential when they see it, but this gives us two messages. Those on the bottom rung of the ladder, the poor, are encouraged to conserve water. Don't flush the toilet unless you've had a bowel movement. Let your lawn die. But those at the top, the rich, can use as much water as they need, at a higher rate. You can't have it both ways. If we are truly having a water crisis, everyone should be encouraged to conserve. You can't tell one segment of society to conserve while encouraging another to consume. It sends the message: If you are rich, you can do whatever you want.
Along the same line of reasoning is Al Gore's Kyoto Protocol logic. This is another tiered system in which the very rich can by "carbon credits" to off-set their own carbon footprint on the environment. Another logical fallacy. If we truly have an environmental crisis of epic proportions, why are the rich allowed to pollute at will while the rest of us are lectured about our destructive lifestyles. If Al Gore buys carbon credits, does this somehow negate the gases emitted from flying his private jet back and forth across the country.
I am in no way slighting the efforts to help the environment, only pointing out you can't have it both ways. Besides, convincing people to change their habits is next to impossible. People don't want to be inconvenienced by having to wait ten minutes for the bus. They want instant gratification. They want green grass, no matter the cost. They want freedom of movement, even if gas prices are five dollars a gallon.
But the answer is not to allow a few to buy their way out of conservation. We all conserve or we don't.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment