Monday, July 6, 2009

Story of Stuff

This video (click picture for video) is a little over the top (for example implying that every use of flame retardants is evil) - but includes some real important points too. The big point is that we (it's American, but I'm including all of the "western world") consume too much instead of simply using items longer. Currently we cannot survive economically without growth. Many items are manufactured to fail (planned obsolescence) while many others are designed for us to simply "think" that something needs replacing (perceived obsolescence). Fact (I didn't check up on it): 99% of materials trashed within 6 months!

It's long been my opinion that the Western World's premise for economy cannot continue. Here in Canada we like to trumpet some of our social programs (IMO deservedly). However, most of those programs (like social security/old age pensions) cannot continue to be funded at current rates without continuous population growth. In fact, the Canadian birth rate isn't high enough to ensure this so we require immigration to support this. I am in no way against immigration, but I am saddened that this would be a reason for it. Many other things in our society also require the continuous growth. Watch the business news (occasionally - it's too boring to watch every day :-) and you will see stories of companies that are perceived to be worth less, simply because they failed "grow." They may have made excellent profits while offering useful products but since they only sold the same number as last year (last quarter, last month, last whatever) they aren't considered any good anymore. This is a clear example of how we force products into obsolescence. Obviously these companies MUST create a throw away product, just so investors want to own them.

The requirement for growth is much more widespread than many realize. My own employer is currently in a deficit position. The solution to that deficit is growth. With more customers, profit margins will increase and we can balance our budget. While I am aiming criticism here, it isn't at my employer per se. It doesn't have much choice in the current funding climate. It too is being forced into this situation by the overall strategies of government and economy.

How do we change this. Sadly I feel like most attempts are typical "tilting at windmills" examples of futility. Certainly supporting sustainable development is part of this. Simple things like recycling and re-use are very important but currently it is cheaper to throw away and get new stuff. Somehow it needs to become more expensive to replace with new. That statement smacks of government intervention which is something I dislike. An example that seems to work is the deposit on beer bottles (Ontario has a 95%-99% rate of return on beer bottles). I don't think that is extendable to every product we use though (what would the deposit on a car or house be?). My sadness comes from the thought that we will need some sort of crash (resource crash) to turn things around. Have you ever read "The Sheep Look Up"? A very scary book. Recently we have seen a large increase in interest in renewable energies and efficient vehicles. How come? In a large part because oil got expensive. Not because of some altruistic reasoning by the population. :-(

(Link to The Sheep Look Up search)

No comments: