Blogger Template by Blogcrowds

The End of Suburbia

Thursday, December 4, 2008

"Reality is bad for business; what's good for business is the fantasy."

It's common knowledge that fossil fuels are finite, but did you know that they will run out in our lifetime? After World War II, Americans invested their wealth in the suburbs where they could lead a peaceful life with their family, away from the noise and chaos in the cities. The suburbs are like dormitories, and there is nothing but houses for miles. In order to get to work or shop, people had to drive cars everyday to get to the city. This kind of lifestyle required cheap fossil fuels, and at that time they were abundant.

Decades later, resources are running out. We're passing the peak period of the best oil extraction, and we're going on a descending slope. But still, we're living the same as before, ignoring the fact that this can't go on much longer. Even though I'm aware that fossil fuels are quickly depleting, I've never considered what we should do when the day that we can no longer rely on oil and gas finally comes. No kind of energy can replace these natural fuels.

The thought that someday everything we do will have to become local is really shocking. If, for example, the US and China become competitors in getting hold of the remaining bits of fuel, then they will no longer do business with one another, and considering how many things are made from China ("from pants to underpants"), Americans will have to be prepared for a big change in their lifestyle. I couldn't imagine what life would be like if Taiwan had to be self dependent. A lot of the things we use are imported from overseas, including food and clothes.

Before I watched this documentary, I also never really focused on all the things that require natural fuels. The most common things that come to mind are mostly transportation and the like, but foods processed in factories need a lot of energy too.

If I was an American, I'd probably be even more shocked than I already am. As far as I know, there aren't many suburbs in Taiwan, but even so there are a lot of cars (and scooters) that use up gas. Taiwan is rather tightly packed and you can go to any place in a matter of minutes (no matter where you live, there are restaurants near by, shops nearby, etc).

Personally, I wouldn't want to live without imported products from other countries, just because I'm so accustomed to having them in my life. This fuel crisis makes me wonder about the future, how we will get around. Will traveling (especially by plane) become an extreme privilege? Will the world revert back to the time when the planet seemed bigger because it was harder and took longer to navigate? If things will become local, what kinds of new jobs will be created, and which ones will no longer be of use?

When we think about the future, most people draw up images of advanced technology, wondrous sources of energy, and diversity everywhere. With the oil age coming to an end, what will our next source of energy be?

Microwaveable organic TV dinner!

Monday, December 1, 2008



We watched a documentary two classes ago about Enron, a powerful corporation that went corrupt and eventually fell. Then we read a chapter titled Big Organic from The Omnivore's Dilemma, a book written by the American writer, professor, and activist Michael Pollan.

I never thought much about labels, and it was interesting to see it as a literary experience. It takes a special kind of skill to market a product through writing. But it's true, when I see something labeled organic, I draw up a very nice mental image of healthy flowers and happy cows. The descriptions are wordy and descriptive, tricking the consumer into assuming imaginary facts. You may read, for example, that the chickens grown at a certain farm are "free range," and it sounds good to the average buyer, but if they don't specify "free range," it might mean only having the chickens spend a few days or weeks out in the open. In a way, they're abusing the word "organic" to better sell their products.

Enron is similar in that it never tells the public the details of its profits, or even details of what they do. It shows you the final result (numbers) which isn't even true, which is similar to the vague labels. In both cases, whatever is shown to the public is what the people want to see and believe, what sells, but in the end all the things behind these vague figures are lies.

In my opinion, "organic"and "industrial" are words that can't go together. In my mind, they don't make sense as a single idea. If organic means going back to the roots and having a more direct connection with the natural, I can't imagine it being done at a large scale... at least not at the moment. Once you cross a certain number limit and industrialize, measures are taken to make things more efficient in space, time, and money. Everything has to be made precise, like the "mosaic of giant colored blocks" that are carefully and precisely cut. How does this pattern follow nature?

I think it's very possible for an organic farm to be successful, but many fall victim to bigger, industrialized companies, who only want produce at a large scale. Organic farms, however, can produce a large quantity but with different varieties. Since this is not "convenient" for big stores like Costo, Wal-Mart, etc., small farms like these usually have it harder. It's easier to submit to do things the fast way with quick and visible results. Since this is what people demand, it will slowly change to fit their needs.

Organic farms are understandable. They're in a tight spot. But Enron? They had a choice to do things morally, but they chose to lie instead. They should have known that, like chemicals that quickly produce beautiful plants but destroy the soil quickly as well, the effects are short lived.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)