I’m currently listening to a This American Life episode about harvesting natural gas as an alternative energy source. According to some scientists, it’s not as “clean” as natural gas proponents would have us believe. But for a small town in Pennsylvania that is learning to live alongside this new industry, natural gas means prosperity not just for moguls, but for them, the little guys.
It reminds me of a scene in Sabrina, the 1954 movie with Audrey Hepburn, Humphrey Bogart, & William Holden. Linus Larrabee (Humphrey Bogart) is explaining to his brother David (William Holden) the virtue of moving their plastics industry into the Caribbean: “So a new industry goes up in an underdeveloped area and once barefooted kids have shoes, washed faces, and their teeth fixed.”
I would certainly consider myself an idealist. It doesn’t matter how much something costs in the moment if long term the benefit outweighs momentary outlay. I say let’s invest in research for the best green energy possible (solar, wind) rather than settle for another fossil fuel source that will carry us for the next 20-50 years. Cradle to Cradle innovation is far and away better for everyone and everything than recycling plastic, for example, and merely postponing its eventual death in a landfill.
But there are those times when a 90% or even 70% solution is the best right now. Compromise is better than stagnation. How do you decide if idealism or compromise is the win?
2 Responses to “Idealism or Compromise?”
Can it be both? Unfortunately, we do not have the ability to see everything about the future; we can only surmise by virtue of what we know of the past. Since we are such flawed humans, we typically do not make the best use even of that knowledge. Sometimes, however, I think idealism can live alongside compromise by virtue of deciding that the best of what we know NOW, even though it may not be the best we think it can or could be, is the best it can be because of “all things considered,” not just the idealistic view.
I think that idealism is better but it needs the cooperation between all people and all countries, and also the problem of numerous population should be solve because when the population is very huge (like now that it’s more than 7 Billion people) it force humans to destroy everything just for sating bellies! but if we can control the population in the best way and in all countries, we have more chances to alternate renewable energies. but in renewable energies, I think some of them like wind are not very good because wind turbines are very deafening…
and also we should envisage natural disasters like blood and storm, that when they occur, we receive several damages in infrastructures that it needs to a huge time and endeavor to resuscitate….
and also I think if all governments in the world pay more attention to these subjects instead of make wars and weapons, it can be a great help….