So What if Climate Change is a Hoax?

Over the past week, I have been following the climate change email controversy – regardless of the potential embellishment / fabrication of the threat – why is it so wrong that out countries, regions, cities, industries, or even people have become more aware of the footprint they leave on this planet? The fundamental argument for the Green Initiative is to become more sustainable and to reduce pollution.

Now is the time for our people, cities and industries to reevaluate their practices and address the various inefficiencies that have become apparent in daily life – whether it is driving too much, waste, or even public policies that help pollution to thrive. Although there are companies that exist and stand to benefit from a movement that promotes the green movement, isn’t it especially important, during tough economic times, to find ways to reduce our cost of living i.e. lower power bills, ways to reduce our transportation cost. If climate change has been an illusion by the Green Party, how is this any different than the warmongering companies that induce war for the sole purpose of maximizing their end of year profits?

With the Obama administration handing out $8 billion dollars towards transportation projects that strive to be sustainable projects (This funding will be awarded to high-speed rail projects), now is the time to be progressive in our cities. Sure, the expansion of I-269 is a cause of concern (it will become a precipitous for further eastern sprawl) for Memphis, but if the administration from Memphis and Shelby County begin to target projects that aim to connect the region to the downtown core, it may prove to be a successful formula that can curb pollution, congestion and begin to slow the eastern expansion of the suburbs.

Why is it an awful thing if contractors build with an ideology that not only embraces the bottom line of the developer but the bottom line of the individuals that will own these buildings? Why would it be a bad thing if public housing incorporates many green elements? Many of these technologies are successful in lowering utility bills by making the house more efficient i.e. making sure windows and doors are properly weatherized, ensuring that attics have the appropriate amount of insulation. If people utilizing public housing had to spend less of their money on bills, it would not only benefit them but taxpayers may have to shell out less dollars towards that expense.

I am not saying that all green technologies are efficient or even cost effective but reducing our impact on the world can be as easy as using compact florescent lights. Let’s say that climate change has just been an ingeniously crafted story, doesn’t it just make good sense to keep a little extra money in our pockets or if there are little to no savings but it is a practice that has a better overall effect on the environment, isn’t it worth it? I believe that it should be a priority to address these green standards for construction and especially when taxpayer money is funding the project.

When more cities are trying to create a new identity in their downtown cores, why not have green building be a primary focus of that identity. It can not only serve as an education tool for our children but it will make many of the large, abandoned buildings more viable for different types of revitalization. A commone practice in many of the U.S. cities is to take old, abandoned warehouse buildings and turn them into lofts for young professionals, or even empty nesters. The savings that is created by green technologies may serve as more money being spent in the local economy. Now is the time and if our overarching goal is to reduce our footprint, it will ultimately lead to a better world.