Climate change and American consumerism

In a commentary that was published back in 2007, I wrote about a strange way of life here in the US, which I referred to as "an American solution to an American problem."  I wrote then:

Well, a few weeks after I came to this country for graduate studies, it was nearing Thanksgiving and the television ad for Alka-Seltzer that I watched then is what I refer to as American solutions to American problems. In this ad, the audio commentary and the pictures presented all the wonderful foods that the viewer would end up eating at Thanksgiving, which then resulted in stomach aches and heartburn. And, presto, Alka-Seltzer to the rescue! My reflexive thought was simple: if the problems came from overeating, then why not simply advise the viewer to eat less? Of course, as I have come to realize, to consume less is not American. (Yes, I, too, am an American!) Instead, the American way is to consume more, and then when problems develop savvy entrepreneurs provide solutions to facilitate further consumption.

It doesn't take any smarts to figure out that we consume a lot in the US.  I mean a LOT.  And I don't mean just about food. Anything. Everything.

This consumption is a problem. A big problem.  It is our consumption that is the cause of climate change.

Think about it for a minute.  And you will soon arrive at this framework:

Transportation (cars, buses, trucks, and planes) leads in greenhouse gas emissions, while electricity (coal and natural-gas power plants) is a close second. Industrial goods and services are third; buildings, fourth; and agriculture, fifth.
This way of measuring blame, however, misses something crucial: people. These industries are spouting carbon because customers demand their products: travel, electronics, entertainment, food, all sorts of stuff.

We like to travel. We like the latest smartphone. We like air conditioning. We like Netflix. We like stuff. A lot. We consume. A lot.

We demand, and the market delivers.

So, why are we always pointing at Exxon and Walmart and China as villains?  Maybe because it lets us off the hook?

There will be little incentive for businesses and governments to make these changes, however, if the people who support them—with dollars and votes, respectively—aren’t also making change a priority.
“Individual consumers cannot change the way the global economy operates on their own, but many of the interventions proposed in this report rely on individual action,” the report reads. “It is ultimately up to individuals to decide what type of food to eat and how to manage their shopping to avoid household food waste. It is also largely up to individuals to decide how many new items of clothing to buy, whether they should own and drive a private car, and how many personal flights to take.”

“It is ultimately up to individuals to decide."

I have joked forever that I am yet to meet an environmentalist who refuses a pay-raise.  Environmentalists also want the pay raises in order to travel. To get the latest smartphone. For air conditioning. To stream Netflix. For stuff.

In order to fight the Nazis, Americans sacrificed. With blood, sweat, and tears. Through rations. Fighting climate change will require different kinds of sacrifices.

We will have to fly less, drive less, Uber less. We will have to eat less red meat, drink less dairy, waste less food, and generally buy less crap that we don’t need.
A lot of Americans won’t want to do this!

We won't. But, we will, however, talk about climate change. A lot.