Although it's a self fulfilling loop. The more stuff we consume, the more energy intensive our lifestyle and then the motivation for extraction of materials to create that energy (fossil fuels or otherwise). Super and investments I do take that into account Angry, absolutely. Although I must tell you it was an interesting process finding a 'green' option that didn't package up a whole host of unrelated social agenda I was skeptical of.
And which is the preferable option? Keeping your 10YO car (that you bought as a 5YO used car) until it dies in another 10 years (as in, consuming astronomically less materials and energy in the manufacturing process). Or buying into the consumerist mindset that I must buy a brand new electric car so I can be seen, along with that nice new car smell. I look at Universities too, moving out of perfectly good buildings that have plenty of life left in them. The redevelopment funded by 'green bonds'. The new ones have more 'green credentials' sure. But is it really that green demolishing buildings that still have decades more life left in them, in order to consume a whole lot more resources and carbon emissions in the process of creating those resources? I’m aware that new architectural and engineering techniques are building into the lifecycle of a building that it will one day will be demolished, so they maximise how much of the building’s materials can be reused. Which I am a huge supporter of. I think that is great. But I dunno, it just feels so inherently wrong to me demolishing stuff that still has life in it. I think it’s in my frugal DNA that the throw away disposability mindset just feels so wrong from every angle.
I don't have all the answers, but I sometimes think the green movement has lurched into being a form of consumerism itself in a cruel twist of irony.
