Environmentalism vs. "Pragmatism"

[athelind]

From TomPaine.com:
How the Western White House came to be so "green" may have more to do with the pragmatism of Laura Bush and her architect than any devotion to energy conservation. The First Lady worked with David Heymann--an architect who specializes in cultural and environmental relationships between buildings and landscapes--to design a ranch home that would blend into the landscape. The Crawford home uses efficient passive solar and geothermal energy and captures rainwater in a 25,000-gallon cistern for use in irrigation.

In a 2001 USA Today story about the ranch, Laura Bush downplayed the environmental benefits of the house’s design and attributes. "The features are environment-friendly, but the reason for them was practical--to save money and to save water, which is scarce in this dry, hot part of Texas," she said.

*sputter*

And, um, how does that differ from what environmentalists smart enough to do math have been saying for years? Intelligent design and alternative energy saves resources and money. Environmentalism IS pragmatic.

I guess the "environment-freindly" aspects of the Crawford Ranch design are a flaw, not a feature. I'm sure that if Lady Bush had her druthers, she'd rather have a way to save money while still polluting and contaminating that nasty old nature out there.

Take Home Message: when the Grand Old Corporate Lackey Party says that environmentally-sound design and alternative energy "costs too much", they don't mean that it will cost the consumer more -- they mean that it'll cost them too much in lost income. And that's what matters, right? If Big Money makes more Big Money, then we all prosper -- right?

Comments

As the Good Book says...

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

When the poor man eats a chicken...one of them is sick.

Or something like that.

[pathia.livejournal.com]

Have you ever taken a peek at the price tag of that ranch?

[archteryx.livejournal.com]

Can't cost much more then your typical multi-multi-millionare "vacation home". Which is to say, a helluva lot more then the rest of us will ever be able to afford. :P

-- ArchTeryx

[pathia.livejournal.com]

Exactly, it saves water and electricity, thus money, but what time scale is she thinking on?

Given this is the Bush clan, they probably intend it to be their vacation home for generations to come.

Spending a million bucks to save $5000 a year only makes sense if you're owning the property for generations, which is not the case for 99.9% of citizens.

[archteryx.livejournal.com]

If Big Money makes more Big Money, then we all prosper -- right?


Yep. And people who live in slums are really Lucky Duckies because they don't pay taxes. (The rich envying the poor...what a masterstroke of propaganda THAT was)

And peasants lived comfortable, pastoral lives in medieval Europe.

And you'll get a 40% raise next year like your friendly neighborhood CEO.

And pigs will, indeed, fly. And go on dive bombing runs.

-- ArchTeryx

[pathia.livejournal.com]

There's a backlash movement of CEO's against fellow CEO's who get pay raises for cutting jobs and 'cost cutting' to beef up net income, thus netting themselves a raise/bonus. Look for big shakeups in the next five years or so.

[archteryx.livejournal.com]

Really? I haven't seen any sign of such a movement. The corporate aristrocracy has thus far done an astoundingly good job to insulate themselves from anything but a bloody, hands-on revolution. Even the law, such as it is, can't touch them, as witnessed by the stunning failure to indict Ken Lay of Enron. Even where prosecutors manage to indict these modern-day robber barons, they either get off entirely or get off with a slap on the wrist.

And touchy-feely boards of directors packed with their cronies are going to do any different?

Geez. I'm starting to sound like Athelind now.

-- ArchTeryx

[pathia.livejournal.com]

Oh, their ways deal outside the realms of law.

Besides, I can do damage within eventually, I am an MBA student.

However, I'm already corrupted, they can't take control of me, mwahahaha.

[araquan.livejournal.com]

   Of course, my favorite whipping boy when it comes to this sort of thing is Microsoft. Isn't it funny how quickly the DoJ wanted to settle that case and 'move on' after Bush took over? Even after they'd been found to be in violation of those oh-so-pesky antitrust laws. And Bill Gates is still smugly grinning from at least one business publication on the shelf every time I go to Borders or Barnes and Noble. He's still the darling of many folks' eyes.
   And hey, sometimes Athelind is right. Every now and then. };> < G >