Recycling the carbon debate
I was pleased to see Larry Elliott step away from the finance column to write a long article of rational argument about climate change (24 April).
However as a “deep green” I feel misrepresented and dismissed by him. If I would have to use one word for the root of this problem it is “consumerism”, the belief that buying more stuff leads to more happiness. If I would use one word to describe Elliott’s argument it is “technofix”, the belief that future developments in technology will solve our problem.
Graham Andrews’ letter (Reply, 24 April) in the same issue puts it in a nutshell. I would rather hang my washing on a clothes line than buy solar panels to power an electric clothes drier. Alternative energy sources will never totally fill the gap left by leaving fossil fuels in the ground. The remainder must be filled not by nuclear energy but by conservation. We can choose to use less power now or be forced to drastically cut our use later.
Corporations control our governments through lobbying and funding and us through advertising. We have to change our lifestyles and regain control of our governments which, as Elliott says, “will be hellishly difficult”. But it is time to grasp the nettle if we are to avoid climate catastrophe.
Edward Butterworth
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
• Graham Andrews (Reply, 24 April) writes that: “Agriculture will be central [to mitigating climate change] because it removes CO2 from the atmosphere to make useful stuff.”
Then that “for every tonne of ethanol a tonne of pure CO2 gets released...” and asks “Why is this allowed?” Finally he mentions the “absurd [sic] idea that rainforests
absorb CO2” and the benefits of logging since, he says, “only growing forests” absorb CO2.
The carbon cycle is a complex subject, all too often misunderstood by politicians. But these statements (allegedly backed up by thermodynamics) only compound the general confusion.
First, while the CO2 taken up by food crops is rapidly returned to the atmosphere, biofuels substitute for fossil fuels. For every tonne of ethanol that is burnt, an energetically equivalent amount of oil remains unburnt. Second, old-growth forests really are net absorbers of CO2, and this is to be expected during a period when CO2 concentrations are rising. These forests serve a valuable function by taking up a significant part of the CO2 that we emit. Third, the notion that logging is needed to create a carbon “sink” – once advocated by some sections of the forest industry – is entirely misleading, because it conveniently ignores the carbon contained in the logs that are removed from the forest.
Colin Prentice
London, UK
• Larry Elliott says that there are three ways of reducing our carbon footprint: reduce the amount each person consumes, reduce the number of people, and make each unit of growth less carbon intensive. He rightly suggests that the best way to restrict population growth is to increase people’s standard of living.
However, at the same time the better off need to reduce consumption and meet the poor partway by not buying the latest phone, fridge and car, wanting the TV with the biggest screen, and eating strawberries flown halfway round the world.
It is not hard to have a comfortable life without excess.
Nicholas Martin
Auckland, New Zealand
• Thanks for giving climate change more space in the Guardian Weekly, which gives us a chance to think more closely about sustainability.
The relative balance of world climate is changing due to abuses inflicted upon Earth, sea, atmosphere, and nature by too many people. While there is still time, let us try to understand what sustainability is about. One of these temporal and relatively balanced conditions made life and evolution possible on Earth.
Let us try to preserve these conditions as long as possible, fostering sustainability before they change par force majeure; and let us avoid becoming ourselves the ones who cause the definite instability.
Ingo Niehaus
San Jose, Costa Rica
West’s Arab Spring backtrack
I agree with your editorial (Relentless judicial pursuit, 1 May) that the “easy acquiescence” of the United States and some European countries in the undemocratic removal of the Morsi regime in Egypt is regrettable. But it is not surprising.
Clearly, the so-called Arab spring was only welcome in the west while it was thought it mirrored our view of what a political system should be. When it became clear it didn’t, our enthusiasm for it waned.
The US, and the west generally, was most uncomfortable with the fact that the popular uprising in Egypt came up with an Islamist regime. Western countries are glad the Morsi regime has been toppled even though they have misgivings over the repressive means adopted by the current Egyptian military dictatorship.
The emergence of what are seen as undesirable forces in the region is perceived as a major threat in the west. Perhaps the biggest challenge of all will be if Islamic State (Isis) manages to attain a popular following across a chunk of the globe.
Terry Hewton
Adelaide, South Australia
• It is not often that the injurious effect of retaliation is seen as starkly as in the recent killings by Isis. Starting with the capture of a Jordanian airline pilot, Isis demanded a huge sum of money for his release. This was refused, he was killed, and two Isis captives on Jordan’s death row were hanged in retaliation. Then came the beheading of twenty-one Coptic Christians, with retaliation as Egypt bombed Isis sites in Libya.
Throughout most of the world our leaders have consistently followed the dictates of ancient times, “An eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth” (Leviticus) and regrettably not the later “Turning the other cheek” (Matthew). This alternative seems to have died. Perhaps it is dormant, and could be wakened and reinvigorated by a stimulus from some quarter. Surely we should always try to find ways to lessen provocation, hatred and violence.
Reuven Kitai
Ancaster, Ontario, Canada
Civilisation and culture
You have joined the populist movement to make indigenous Australian culture not only a civilisation (The battle over indigenous art, 1 May), but the oldest. Why would anyone with a culture of equality and earth-friendliness bother? Mohandas Gandhi gently remarked of western civilisation that “it would be a good idea”.
However it is also a form of crude identity theft. The term has a pretty strong meaning in sociology that includes agricultural base, accumulation of surpluses and things,living in cities, a ruling class and a bureaucratic state.
To elide the very separate meanings of culture and civilisation, then take what kudos there may still be attached to the works of the recognised – I do not say great – civilisations and attempt to append it to a culture cruelly treated by western civilisation because it was not thought civilised (hence I presume the exhibition title) seems morbid.
Warwick Ruse
Brunswick West, Victoria, Australia
Briefly
• I read with interest your Comment article on bilingualism (1 May) – limited to two Anglo-Saxon languages – but was puzzled by the final paragraph where the author mentioned first and second languages. Surely bilingualism implies two languages at the same level – two first languages if you like – in contrast to simply being fluent in a second language?
True bilingualism, with its cultural and historical implications, is of course fairly rare and I fear the word is often misused today.
Alexandra Tavernier
Marcq-en-Baroeul, France
• The Eyewitnessed photograph of the old passenger jets in the California desert (24 April) revealed a more uncomfortable shift in the airline industry. Several of the aircraft were liveried as FedEx. Is this a sign of better or worse things to come in seat assignments?
Cameron Watts
York, Ontario, Canada
• Dispatches (10 April) revealed “A study has found that crossing the fingers can confuse the way the brain processes feelings of hot, cold and pain.” Assuming this is a recent study, how did Thomas Cromwell’s father know this in the 1500s, or perhaps more accurately Hilary Mantel in Bring up the Bodies in 2012?
Alan Smith
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
• According to the article Indian government hopes to profit from the nation’s temple gold rush (1 May), some Hindu temples hold “$1tn worth of gold”. What is the worth of jewels held in the crypts of Roman Catholic churches? Could the Pope sell some and use the wealth to help the world’s poor?
Marika Sherwood
London, UK
• Your Eyewitnessed photograph (1 May) of “a Turkish soldier rescuing an injured Anzac comrade” raises the question: as the Turks were at war with the Anzac forces at Gallipoli in 1915, why is the Anzac soldier called a comrade?
Alaisdair Raynham
Truro, UK
• There was a saying in the old west (The face value of beards, 10 April) that kissing a man without a moustache was like eating an egg without salt.
Berry Tibbitt
Eston, Saskatchewan, Canada
• Regarding Oliver Burkeman on influencing the way others perceive you (8 May).As Jean-Paul Sartre pointed out: to yourself you are a subject but to others, an object.
Edward Black
Pauanui, New Zealand
Email letters for publication to weekly.letters@theguardian.com including a full postal address and a reference to the article. Submissions may be edited for publication
