Do ends ever justify means? That’s a question that politicians find themselves having to ask on a regular basis, but they probably never through they’d be asking it with regards to their environmental policy. We all want to save the planet and prevent global warming, and we all know just how important it is to stem global warming, but at what cost? Are we willing to kill off cows? Or to tightly control human behavior at the expense of our civil rights and freedom? As global warming becomes an ever-more imminent and real threat, these are some of the controversial solutions that politicians might start having to consider…
Killing Off Livestock
So let’s take a closer look at that ‘killing cows’ idea. How could that possibly help the environment? Well actually it would help in a vast number of ways – not least because cows and other livestock (but cows in particular) produce so much methane which contributes to the thickening of the atmosphere.
Furthermore, farmers have to use up huge amounts of energy to feed and maintain their herds, and huge amounts of land to sustain their production of meat and many suggest that this isn’t a particular efficient way to feed our species…
Eating Insects
But with all the beef and pork gone, where would we turn for our vital protein intake? Well one answer, which is understandably one of the more controversial ones, is that we start eating insects. It may sound disgusting, but insects actually have a very high proportion of protein for their body mass and they’re very efficient to breed. It’s just a matter of getting people to accept that their goulash is made from termites… Well McDonalds’ burgers probably already are anyway…
Everyone Becoming Vegetarian
Not sold on the insect idea? Well then you could always go fully vegetarian and stop eating that inefficient meat that way. Vegetarians have been trying to convince us that that’s the way forward for years now, but trying to get everyone to give up their meat would certainly be a rather controversial move…
Genetic Engineering
If we all became vegetarians, the human race would suffer. Sorry vegans – being a vegetarian isn’t quite natural for our body and means that we don’t get the amino acids, the vitamin B or the fatty acids that we need. One solution though would be to genetically engineer our crops to contain more of the things we need in them and that way we could survive on less as well.
In fact, even if we don’t all become vegetarians, there’s still a chance that genetic modification will play a big role in controversial moves to save the planet. We’re likely to see vegetation modified to be more resilient for instance so that it can be grown more easily and efficiently for instance. Then there’s the idea of modifying trees to consume more CO2 – but anything with the words ‘genetically modifying’ in it is going to be a hard sell with some groups as the record books have shown…
Even more controversial though (and way off fortunately), is the idea of genetically modifying people to make the human race more energy efficient. Humans with cat-like night vision for instance would have no need for energy-hungry streetlighting, while if we were all just a bit smaller we’d all eat less and live in smaller homes…
Ban Smoking
This might not seem like a controversial move to the non-smokers who are out there wondering why smoking isn’t already illegal, but try taking away a smoker’s right to kill themselves and you’ll probably find that they find it rather an affront.
But why would we take away smoking privileges in the first place? Well, although smoking doesn’t directly cause any harm to the environment, growing tobacco does and this is still a huge industry meaning that it’s wasting an awful lot all the time.
Ocean Seeding
The idea behind this ambitious proposal is to seed the ocean with iron in order to stimulate the growth of plankton and so the production of more CO2. While this might sound like a good idea, others are concerned that it could have unintended consequences, perhaps leading to an increase in other sea creatures and damage to the ecosystem in general. Our meddling doesn’t always go to plan…
White Paint
With all this talk about genetic modification and ocean seeding, white paint might not seem like a threatening proposal. The idea is that we could all paint our roods and pavements white, and that this would then reflect more sunlight back out into space.
The controversial part? Well once again there’s the issue of unintended consequences, but more importantly it could be the start of a slippery slope. If governments can force the world to paint their properties the same colour without argument, then it could only be a matter of time before we’re told to turn our TVs off after 5pm…
Turning Off Streetlights After 12
Interestingly this already happens in some cities, but it’s not without its detractors. While turning off all the street lamps might be a good way to save a ton of energy, it could also lead to an increase in accidents and even crimes.
Glacier Blankets
Glacier blankets would be a blankets designed to cover the glaciers and would contain materials that protected the ice underneath from the sun. The controversial part? That would be the price tag: $12 million per square mile.
The question once again then is, what price are we willing to pay to save our environment?