It was very interesting to read Andy Shadrack’s piece on installing solar panels to reduce his family’s carbon footprint.
Thanks for that Andy.
However there are a couple of points that need to be further discussed I feel.
One is the belief that if we each cut our personal/household electrical needs in half “that we could bolster our argument against the proposed Site C” on the Peace River.
I agree that it is essential to take personal responsibility to reduce our use of energy, be it gas, electricity, or oil. This should also be the primary task of our governments.
My understanding of Site C is to provide cheap, subsidized electricity for proposed new mines up north as well as for LNG finding, processing, and moving to the coast for export. I and many I know, are not interested in these industries being given anymore tax breaks at my expense nor in the environmental destructive trail that they leave behind themselves.
Me getting solar panels on my roof will not change the government’s preference for industrial lobbies while ignoring the needs of most “peasants and pagans’.”
I’m glad that the Shadrack’s had the $26,000 to invest into alternative energy that they believe in for future generations. Many do not have that extra money.
Another article in the same paper talked about 10 per cent of Nelsonites unable to buy the food they need for Christmas. Something feels off about the juxtapositions of these two views.
Both poverty and alternative energy can be fixed at the same time (look towards Germany and Norway) but they need an over arching plan of action, which usually comes from a forward thinking, humane government.
We don’t have them at the moment and many people are suffering the consequences from added fear, shame, and guilt as to what to do, to increased hunger, apathy, homelessness and mental health issues.
My suggestion is to get out and vote in the next election to revive democracy, save Canada’s face on the world scene, and to get a party in that will make the difference that you want to see.
As one systems engineer I read about from Manitoba put it simply — if we would all choose to simplify our lifestyle to that of the 1960s where we had adequate, but small houses, one car per household, no plethora of tech communication (which sucks up huge amounts of electricity) and no cheap junk from China that breaks in a year, he figures this would be more effective to shrink our carbon footprint than many other elaborate, costly plans.
And you know what, we can all do this.
We just need to change our spending habits and trim our desires. Now that’s personal responsibility at the gut level.
C. Burton
Balfour