The graph on the left comes from Michael Pollan's essay in defense of individual environmental virtue. It's not really related to the article's central argument, but it's interesting. Why are my Brazilian brethren so much more concerned about global warming than the Eygptians? It's peculiar!The rest of the piece is a bit less convincing. Pollan mounts an argument in favor of individual, non-legislated action to fight global warming, because it's good for demonstrating political will, good for the environment, and good for us. On that, I'm skeptical. The problem is that, insofar as global warming goes, I'm not terribly good at calculating my own carbon footprint. I don't know how much carbon a particular combination lock required. And while I like shopping for local ingredients and feeling virtuous about my decisions, attempts to do so are invariably haphazard and poorly informed (as Pollan admits -- sometimes, well-shipped produce require less energy than locally grown goods; sometimes taking the bus is better than stopping off and getting a cup of coffee with milk). They're good for the soul, but of questionable utility to the environment.Stopping global warming, in other words, should not be a question of virtue, much less of being able to mentally carry out incredibly complex energy usage equations with very limited information. It should be right there in the price. If I want to live virtuously, I should be able to do so. If I want to do some eco-sinning, I should have to sin responsibly, paying for the carbon I use. To be sure, I agree with Pollan that people should grow food -- I'm trying basil, thai basil, and habanero peppers -- and cook dinner and shop at farmer's markets and walk places. That sort of lifestyle need not be sold in terms of environmental virtue or self sacrifice. There's a lot of joy in it, and good food, and good health. It can be good living for its own sake. But insofar as fighting the energy wars goes, it's tremendously inefficient and complex and anxiety-producing if you take it seriously. Taking carbon into account should be an unconscious, unavoidable reality that's built into every price tag. Growing your own tomatoes should be a source of satisfaction and personal renewal. No need to conflate the two. THE LIMITS OF PERSONAL VIRTUE.
The graph on the left comes from Michael Pollan's essay in defense of individual environmental virtue. It's not really related to the article's central argument, but it's interesting. Why are my Brazilian brethren so much more concerned about global warming than the Eygptians? It's peculiar!The rest of the piece is a bit less convincing. Pollan mounts an argument in favor of individual, non-legislated action to fight global warming, because it's good for demonstrating political will, good for the environment, and good for us. On that, I'm skeptical. The problem is that, insofar as global warming goes, I'm not terribly good at calculating my own carbon footprint. I don't know how much carbon a particular combination lock required. And while I like shopping for local ingredients and feeling virtuous about my decisions, attempts to do so are invariably haphazard and poorly informed (as Pollan admits -- sometimes, well-shipped produce require less energy than locally grown goods; sometimes taking the bus is better than stopping off and getting a cup of coffee with milk). They're good for the soul, but of questionable utility to the environment.Stopping global warming, in other words, should not be a question of virtue, much less of being able to mentally carry out incredibly complex energy usage equations with very limited information. It should be right there in the price. If I want to live virtuously, I should be able to do so. If I want to do some eco-sinning, I should have to sin responsibly, paying for the carbon I use. To be sure, I agree with Pollan that people should grow food -- I'm trying basil, thai basil, and habanero peppers -- and cook dinner and shop at farmer's markets and walk places. That sort of lifestyle need not be sold in terms of environmental virtue or self sacrifice. There's a lot of joy in it, and good food, and good health. It can be good living for its own sake. But insofar as fighting the energy wars goes, it's tremendously inefficient and complex and anxiety-producing if you take it seriously. Taking carbon into account should be an unconscious, unavoidable reality that's built into every price tag. Growing your own tomatoes should be a source of satisfaction and personal renewal. No need to conflate the two. 
