Cradle-to-Cradle

One of the great things about Environmentalism is the delusion of designing the "perfect" system that will change the world. The idea that all we have to do is "change the system" and that the "tools are all there" is nice, but frankly unrealistic. Cradle-to-Cradle, in my opinion, is just that: nice, but unrealistic. There are however  some intelligent ideas and readily implementable solutions that should be given some credence. Although I do not think that we can end our entire system of waste and replace it with a sustainable "Cradle-to-Cradle" one, I do think that there are certain ways in which we can avoid unnecessary waste by implementing systems in which to do so.

For example, electronics. Although, unfortunately, not all parts of electronic products can be broken down and reused, there are many pieces of the products that can be; computer and laptop casings, certain metal components, rare metals, etc. Electronic recycling is still, for some reason, relatively unpopular. The market exists and there are systems set up all over the country, but there are still thousands of electronic products being thrown away and not recycled every day! This is a system that could use some reforming, and one in which a no-waste mentality would be smart considering the decrease in rare metal materials that are currently being put into "disposable" electronics.

The main problem with this kind of system is, in my view, the same problem with mainstream environmentalism: Idealism. It's the hope that if we can just change everyone's philosophy, everything will change. I hate to say it but, people need to wake up and smell the coffee, because that is NOT going to happen. People aren't going to suddenly realize their faults one day any more than you or I will ever be able to understand what cats are thinking. It is simply an impossible goal. Not only that, but to many people, the idea that they need to change everything in their lives and that everything they're doing is wrong is daunting and it will never make them change anything at all.

So, stemming from that framework, incremental, systemic change is possible, but only if people are given economic incentives for doing the "right" thing (other than catastrophic change). More efficient and AVAILABLE recycling programs (available is really an important thing), profitable economic systems for waste and redistribution and making the recycled products cheaper and easier to purchase than raw materials.

One concept that I found interesting from the reading was that of ecological intelligence. The idea being that you know what's in your product and where it came from before you purchase it. As romantic as that idea is, the fact remains that an electronic product you buy (because you probably can't afford anything more than the price offered) is likely made from parts from three different countries, as mentioned in the beginning of the book, whose regulations are hardly strict and who probably wouldn't even tell the manufacturer what replacement material they put in the product even if they asked. Ecological intelligence is definitely an important idea, but I think it would be difficult to practice in every day life. If I went to Target today to buy a sofa, or a table, I would have no way of knowing where that particle board came from or if there were some toxic coating on the furniture. That information would be very hard to find even on the internet.

I did very much enjoy this book because I like to feel optimistic about environmental problems. I want to feel like all I have to do is be smart and talk to people around me. But I know the looming truth is much less simple and that practically speaking, I won't see the changes I so hope for before the end of my lifetime.