tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5813525365834911757.post8155382077091668088..comments2023-11-05T01:53:40.235-06:00Comments on the Hipcrime Vocab: Techno-Fixes Are Counterproductive and MadUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5813525365834911757.post-53938286051544391472014-07-19T09:03:56.702-05:002014-07-19T09:03:56.702-05:00That's an interesting way of looking at it. Th...That's an interesting way of looking at it. The first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging that there is one.escapefromwisconsinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02369565788469048090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5813525365834911757.post-51409778243457879182014-07-18T17:38:15.360-05:002014-07-18T17:38:15.360-05:00You are making the argument that we shouldn't ...You are making the argument that we shouldn't pursue techno-fixes because it just takes the pressure off of us to address the environmental messes that we are making. I used to agree with this- except that I don't think that anyone is addressing them anyway. At least talking about techo-fixes states that there is a problem. To talk about geo-engineering you have to admit that the greenhouse effect exists. And that would be a step forward for many in this country.Jean Greyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13826037279061710386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5813525365834911757.post-21022120316446458492014-07-18T14:03:08.959-05:002014-07-18T14:03:08.959-05:00You actually make my points for me. Yes, the simpl...You actually make my points for me. Yes, the simple and common sense solution is to restrict the use of plastics. Yes, the plastics companies would object. That is exactly the point I was making - the simple, cheap, effective, common sense solutions are not implemented because elites want to maintain the status quo, and instead we are pawned off with expensive, fancy, untested, theoretical (yes, this is clearly theoretical) techno-fix solutions that are much more costly will probably backfire.<br /><br />Which, when you get right down to it - is the cause of most of our problems - our social/economic order. But we are not allowed to ever examine that thanks to the media. To digress a bit - plastics can be useful because they don't degrade or break down over time except in the presence of UV radiation (sunlight). So why are not making our underground buried infrastructure out of the stuff? That would be much more resilient for future generations than what we've used in the past, which is already ancient and breaking down (cast iron and in some cases even wooden sewers!). We should be replacing our decrepit and outdated infrastructure with plastic underground conduits and piping now, while we can, and embed the energy in that - it's highest and best use, but we are told we cannot "afford" to do this by the usual right-wing anti-government suspects. Instead the private sector makes disposable silverware and action figures out of the stuff. Insane!<br /><br />But back to the central point of the article (and it's Boingboing's point, not mine, but I agree with it), that sometimes, doing *something* is actually *worse* than doing nothing. Go back and reread the article - this diverts attention and resources away from effective, proven, common-sense solutions that will work *right now*. Thus, I don't accept your argument that doing something, anything at all, is laudable. I have no doubt about this young man's sincerity, but he is part of a culture that wants quick techno-fixes rather than face up to a system that caused these problems in the first place (throw-away consumerism). And there are people working for that who deserve more attention (for example, getting plastic bag bans in major cities).<br /><br />I'm sorry, but there is no way that building giant manta-ray ships to skim across the surface of the ocean and clean up garbage is cheaper and more energy-efficient that restricting plastics. In fact, restricting plastics costs nothing at all, except to the companies, and the goal of the economy is not to preserve specific companies or industries. If their products are harmful, then they should go out of business. That capital should find use elsewhere according to economics - a lot of things disappear, for example, asbestos and film cameras. In fact, it is the most expensive and complicated solution I can possibly think of.escapefromwisconsinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02369565788469048090noreply@blogger.com