Carbon Neutral vs Carbon Optimal
We can learn two things from Prince Charles' fancy new Carbon Neutral lifestyle:
- Hippy trends are still hip, even for squares.
- It takes the wealth of a king to achieve that lifestyle
Since it can be assumed that one person's abatement has a small market presence, we can assume to the total amount of abatement needed by society is greater than the individual can achieve. Therefore, stated simply:
One should abate carbon usage until they can no longer afford additional abatement. Whether subject to time or budget constraints, this is how the rational eco-minded individual will and should act.
As always, everything in moderation.
1 comment:
So the Prince has abated appropriately? If cutting carbon usage is a primary ethical consideration for some individuals, then I think your response, "until they can no longer afford additional" might be just the key.
I don't believe that most people concerned about the morality of carbon emissions are so introspective. Most of them are intent on imposing an arbitrary virtue on others involuntarily.
Your solution provides a good litmus test on whether or not to pay attention to enviro-evangelists.
Post a Comment