(Close Window)
Topic: Inconvenient truth?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 8, 2019 09:07PM)
[url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/sep/08/producers-keep-sustainable-practices-secret]agree?[/url][quote]...companies and consumers seem unable to accept that sustainability does not have to cost more to create an equally good product. Apparently, we simply cannot believe that a business can be equally or more profitable while reducing its environmental harm.[/quote]What then do people believe?
Message: Posted by: Tom Cutts (Sep 8, 2019 09:36PM)
Letís start with what do you believe.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 8, 2019 09:58PM)
I have no idea what anyone else believes.

I had a hard time believing a company could make money selling Pet Rocks. I in no way could imagine that in six months the inventor would unload about five MILLION of them!

I had a hard time believing that a Tamagotchi would be a thing in the mid 90's. But again they sold about 70 MILLION of them for $20 apiece!

Needless to say there are other things people believe I can't imagine they do, but this keeps it fun.

Some businesses have been reducing environmental harm for decades. The ones who get it that is. It is not really hard to figure. There ARE big companies that are good stewards of our planet. Not all by any means and there are the opposite of that as well in some cases.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Sep 9, 2019 12:21AM)
Fiction.
Message: Posted by: Cliffg37 (Sep 9, 2019 09:08AM)
Three simple facts:

1) The overall temperature on Earth is SLIGHTLY hotter than it used to be.
2) Some extra ice is melting becasue of it, and storms are indirectly through several cycle steps more frequent and more severe for it.
3) The Earth experiences temperature cycles with or without human intervention.

These really are observable facts. We can argue the cause and effects till we're blue in the face.

Personally I like the Native American philosophy of "take care of mother Earth and she'll take care of you."
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Sep 9, 2019 09:43AM)
Two words:
Silly Bandz
https://www.inc.com/magazine/201107/how-i-did-it-robert-croak-silly-bandz.html
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 9, 2019 10:18AM)
[quote]we simply cannot believe that a business can be equally or more profitable while reducing its environmental harm.[/quote]

If a business is a niche business with few competitors, then perhaps it can survive profitably; branding itself as "green" it might win a market share.

But in most sectors, businesses seek to maximize profit to shareholders *in the short run* It is more cost effective for businesses to cut corners environmentally and pass the cost of cleanup or sickness/death onto taxpayers. It doesn't matter too much whether an individual CEO "thinks green," because s/he will soon be undercut by her competitors if s/he does not follow suit. It is always a race to the economic and environmental bottom unless there are regulations which provide a floor that all competitors must obey so that they cannot undercut each other.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 9, 2019 11:09AM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Cliffg37 wrote:
Three simple facts:

1) The overall temperature on Earth is SLIGHTLY hotter than it used to be.
2) Some extra ice is melting becasue of it, and storms are indirectly through several cycle steps more frequent and more severe for it.
3) The Earth experiences temperature cycles with or without human intervention.

These really are observable facts. We can argue the cause and effects till we're blue in the face.

Personally I like the Native American philosophy of "take care of mother Earth and she'll take care of you." [/quote]

Yea number two is sort of in dispute as a fact.

BUT why not keep our rooms clean? What is the benefit (Other than extraordinary profit for a few I mean.) in a dirty unsustainable planet? I can't find one.

Heck even without doomsday looming every 2 minutes I don't see why this idea of a cleaner more sustainable planet is so dividing. I mean we can discuss HOW to go about it, like maybe discussing the best route to a destination. But to pretend somehow it is not even worth discussion boggles my mind.
Message: Posted by: Animated Puppets (Sep 9, 2019 12:32PM)
Lots of products sold in the USA have very high profitability with minimal harm to the environment within the USA...

China, not so much...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 9, 2019 12:44PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Animated Puppets wrote:
Lots of products sold in the USA have very high profitability with minimal harm to the environment within the USA...

China, not so much... [/quote]
Looking at the news article about resource efficient factories - linked in the OP - that's the topic.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 9, 2019 01:08PM)
If it's cheaper to pollute than to become "resource efficient," then in the absence of govt regulation, the former will predominate. The article itself indicates that while a factory may be "green" in one aspect, it may be green deficient in many others. As of now, without an industry-wide or government-wide green infrastructure, the high initial cost of converting is generally a bar to immediate profits, even though it may pay off in the long run.

People sense this implicitly or explicitly. Thus the belief--because it's true if you live in a place with little such regulation and a high entry fee to new technology. It is not true if there are other political and social structures in place.

But then people in the US think that medical care has to cost twice as much as the rest of the Western world. Yes, but only under many of the same conditions outlined above.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 9, 2019 01:16PM)
You keep avoiding the China question. Inconvenient?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 9, 2019 01:31PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
You keep avoiding the China question. Inconvenient? [/quote] Maybe by "Asia" they mean China. The story is they are being coy about their technology. [quote]hereís a factory in Asia that uses only a single litre of water to make a pair of jeans. Thatís 346 litres less than Levi-Strauss estimated it took to make a pair of its jeans in 2015. Wouldnít you love to buy your jeans from this amazingly innovative factory? Me too, but I donít even know what itís called.[/quote]
Message: Posted by: magicfish (Sep 9, 2019 02:02PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
You keep avoiding the China question. Inconvenient? [/quote] Maybe by "Asia" they mean China. The story is they are being coy about their technology. [quote]hereís a factory in Asia that uses only a single litre of water to make a pair of jeans. Thatís 346 litres less than Levi-Strauss estimated it took to make a pair of its jeans in 2015. Wouldnít you love to buy your jeans from this amazingly innovative factory? Me too, but I donít even know what itís called.[/quote] [/quote]
Why would Asia mean China?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 9, 2019 03:20PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
You keep avoiding the China question. Inconvenient? [/quote] Maybe by "Asia" they mean China. The story is they are being coy about their technology. [quote]hereís a factory in Asia that uses only a single litre of water to make a pair of jeans. Thatís 346 litres less than Levi-Strauss estimated it took to make a pair of its jeans in 2015. Wouldnít you love to buy your jeans from this amazingly innovative factory? Me too, but I donít even know what itís called.[/quote] [/quote]

I was making a simple joke at Landmark. Not taking a position.

My only position in reality is that it is absurd not to want to leave a cleaner planet than we found, when we poses the tech to do so quite easily.
Message: Posted by: arthur stead (Sep 9, 2019 03:31PM)
Bottom line is that greed will always override common sense.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 9, 2019 03:50PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, arthur stead wrote:
Bottom line is that greed will always override common sense. [/quote]

Yea seems so doesn't it?
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 9, 2019 05:14PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
You keep avoiding the China question. Inconvenient? [/quote]

I'm not a fan at all of the present Chinese governing system, whatever one may call it's strange hybrid system at this point, but with the coming of Deng, there was a concerted effort to rapidly industrialize at any cost to the environment resulting in horrendous pollution, similar to Europe and the US under laissez faire capitalism in the nineteenth century.

What's interesting is that now that they have built quite an industrial base they are now starting to turn their attention to cutting pollution as they must. Because of their system, they can turn around their policy quickly and have a unified national policy, and evidently their efforts are starting to become successful in reducing emissions.

Here's an article from The Economist which talks about that:
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/01/25/how-china-cut-its-air-pollution
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 9, 2019 05:17PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, arthur stead wrote:
Bottom line is that greed will always override common sense. [/quote]

Very often, agreed. That's one reason there are governments and laws. We are not helpless.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 9, 2019 08:31PM)
Yes we are. Our government has become s leviathan. It is as simple as that. If we were not powerless then war criminals who lie to get us into wars would be prosecuted. If we had power you could not become wealthy through politics, and so on.

Make no mistake if you don't think you are helpless it is an illusion propagated to keep power. They steal from the public trust and get away with it. It happens and we let it happen.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Sep 9, 2019 08:43PM)
The article claims ďcompanies are loath to talk about their ecological credentialsĒ but in truth companies have been shouting their ecological credentials from the rooftops for decades.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 9, 2019 09:04PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
... Our government has become s leviathan. It is as simple as that. ...[/quote]Agreed.

********************************************************************************
*
[not for danny]
Imagine for a moment that someone [i]not[/i] of our culture wanders into our Platonic cave. On the way in they discover the smell of money. Further in, away from daylight they find the fire - illuminating walls of words to which the inhabitants chain themselves. By the light of that fire they see plain straight lines of law bend into non-euclidean geometry around concentrations of money.
*
Fortunately that dark fantasy vanishes. Abruptly becoming a commercial for a blue pill then attention settles on brightly colored images of well off people who seem agitated about something and an audience laughs - ah laughter.
?
Offered with apologies to H. P. Lovecraft and Albert Einstein, who both had the good sense not to write such things.
[/not for danny]
Message: Posted by: tommy (Sep 9, 2019 09:28PM)
USA companies in China not only get cheap labour but they also sell more of their products in China than anywhere else in the world.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 9, 2019 10:06PM)
@Tommy - Oxycontin, cigarettes and fentaynl too? :(

Okay back to [i]secret[/i] adoption of more efficient technology and strategy not to draw attention to such for purely market reasoning. :)

*Comic signoff line: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1171178388460978177 wow
Message: Posted by: tommy (Sep 9, 2019 11:05PM)
Yes, it all helps: there are too many people using too much stuff.

The more deadly the products the cleaner the world will be.