First, a disclaimer: I have not read Mr. Moore's editorial...only the
reply...but in reply to that: I hope nobody on this list, even Mr.
Moore after giving it some thought, believes "the only viable
substitutes for wood as a building material are steel, cement, plastic
and bricks. He has either never traveled through the "third world" or
has done so with his "developed world" eyes closed.
Likewise, let's give up the myth that the energy sources that
launched and fueled the industrial revolution are the only viable
sources of energy that exist. That is simply ignorant...as is thinking
that
exporting the developed countries' ways of doing things is the only, or
even the best, way of raising standards of living elsewhere. There's a
cultural bias in that sort of thinking which has no place here.
I don't accept your 'either' nor your 'or.' I say 'neither!'
Developing countries are not necessarily playing a catch up game (though
it may seem that way after USAID is through with them). They can learn
from our mistakes, do better, and ultimately make us look like the fools
we've been.
The same goes for "underdeveloped" parts of "underdeveloped"
states in the good old USA. I happen to live in one of those areas, by
choice, and am the first to say 'no thank you' to attempts to conquer by
technological overkill. I am not envious when I go to the city. I feel
sick at the waste. This way of living has nothing for other countries
or areas to aspire to.
(Yes, I have a computer, you say...but appropriate technology is
part of the solution. Having the computer allows both me and my wife to
work at home and avoid two commutes or replacement of cars more than
once
every 12-15 years. It also frees up time (that I would have to work or
commute to support new cars) to do things for myself, allowing me to
stay healthy and sane, and save even further on resources...and you can
keep gazing into the reflection of the reflection of the reflection of
the barber-shop mirrors...savings beget further savings. I would hold
our standard of living up to that of any couple in the world...including
inhabitants of New York penthouses or posh seaside homes...and rest
assured they would come out envious.)
There is no purity in all of this, no single way of doing things, but
there needs to be a less-is-more attitude and humility pervading all we
do. All of us have part of the answer and none of us has it all. We
can learn by observing the masters of "non-conventional" building
techniques, can pick up clever ideas from those who at first glance have
nothing for us. Just because you can't build a skyscraper from bamboo,
straw, mud, or stone, don't dismiss them as building materials. Just
because wind, photovoltaics, biomass, solar-thermal, hydro, geothermal,
or wave energy is not likely to be useful in running your aluminum mill,
don't reject them as sources of energy. Just as these sources and
techniques are ill-suited to keeping a western city or industrial
complex running, they may be BEST suited for the vast majority of human
enterprises in a different area or culture.
How about exporting (or importing?) a different ethic? You can save
your wood AND your environment, and that is not just fuzzy thinking.
All the answers are correct, but they apply to different questions.
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0