By Mr.Oku
Let’s Debate on Our Living Style
(Kyoto NHK ESS, 27-08-‘05: by Aou-Ping)
Our finite ecological world and natural resources: the great mother for sustainability
It is well-known that the human has been deeply tied to the forest. The root of the human was one of the mammalians that made a dramatic evolution principally through the life in the forest. Prior to, and during the Cretaceous and Jurassic period, mammalians did not come into existence partly because the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide was still too high for them to appear. As time passes over millions of year, however, the forest covering the global land surface absorbed the atmospheric carbon dioxide to fix it in the forms of solid resources such as coal, and so did the microbial in the ocean to form petroleum oil and methane hydrate. Thus, the atmospheric carbon dioxide content had decreased dramatically to the level under which the ancestor of human being was able to achieve an evolutional development.
At a certain archaeological stage, the human left the forest and moved to coastal area, plane, and savanna to live by fishery, farming and hunting. Though still being benefited by the forest, the human, particularly those living for hunting and fishery, gradually changed their life-style to ignore the great benefit and protection gifted by the forest. They would have thought that the forest was their property to use but not an essential part of the life.
In the present globally expanded society where people are only looking for the economical development, carbon dioxide is being emitted from coal, petroleum, and all kinds of manufacturing sites at such a speed as to consume all natural carbon resources within a hundred years. Could anyone believe that the forest and sea as are on the earth can absorb the same amount of carbon dioxide that was once fixed and concealed during a billion of years?
This is a very important profile of issues to discuss on environmental problems. When we describe ecological or environmental hazards, we are too apt to forget the finite nature of the earth by only viewing our closer and smaller vicinities and egoistic profits. We should be aware that how to overcome the global finiteness is the absolute key of sustainable human society. Politicians, economists, journalists and even scientists neglect this fact and persuade people with saying that the economic prosperity (Keizai Keiki) is the first fruit of everything in the present world.
We will soon realize the trick. Is there any absolute or definite goal to the economic prosperity? Up to now, most of the economic developments have been achieved and accumulated upon the sacrifice of finite ecological lives and natural resources. Yet, it is preached that the solar energy is infinite and biomass (plants and vegetables) are renewable resources. It may be partially correct, but it must be reminded that where the energy is consumed, non-renewable natural resources such as metals and petroleum are inevitably depleted with the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Also, under the veil of “Carbon Neutral Circuit”, an imported US concept for economic development, biomass is now regarded as the most reliable natural resource in our future. It may be correct if the biomass is grown, harvested, and transformed to materials and fuels with least consumption of energy and resources. It is quite unlikely for vegetables and grains. However, it is more or less possible for the forest, the mother place of the human races.
So and so on, this discussion continues endlessly and we will see the final answer of this issue in a few decades or, at most optimistically, in a half century. Would you sit and wait until the time comes? Why don’t you start discuss this problem and change your living style because you have, or will have the post family generations.
Today’s practice deals with debating on several problems concerning the topic described above. Some are realistic, serious, and attractive whereas the others may not for some of you. Nevertheless, they are chosen worthy of discussion.
<Debating Processes>
1) Make several groups consisting of four people.
2) Arbitrarily divide the four into two groups (i.e., pro- and con-debater groups).
3) Select the first problem from the problem list and start the discussion. Regardless of private opinions, pro-debater must develop the discussion from a positive side with an optimistic vision. Con-debater must describe his or her argument from a negative side with a pessimistic vision.
4) Average debating time allotted to one problem is about 10 min.
5)
After the first debate is over, proceed to the second problem of the group’s
choice, switch the role of pro and con sides, and start again.
(Let’s Debate on Living Styles, 2/2)
Problems to discuss
1) Do you need a big car or small car or none for your daily life? Do you drive a car in the places where frequent public transportation is available?
Describe the reason.
2) Are you a car-maniac, bicycler (bicologist), or neither of them if you have to choose one?
Describe the reason.
3) How long do you think the petroleum oil resource will be available if it is consumed at the same speed as is now? Do you imagine the oil will be still the main resource for the worldwide industries 30 years later, or depleted?
Discuss your reasoning.
4) Do you frequently refill an empty PET bottle with a beverage and reuse it repeatedly or not? Can you estimate the actual costs of drink, plastic, its molding, and merchants’ profit for a 500 milliliter bottled beverage sold by 150 yen?
Discuss and guess.
5) Based on the assumption that petroleum is depleting whereas biomass, which is an alternative resource of plastic materials, is non-depleting, do you think that plastic materials should be recycled or not?
Discuss the reason from both sides.
6) Is your living style energy-saving or energy-wasting? If yours is the former type, will you change it to the latter when your income increases? If it is the latter type, is it possible for you to change it to the former?
Describe the reason.
7) Suppose you are planning to buy a condo now. Do you choose or avoid a totally electricity-operated housing equipped with all-room air-conditioning, kitchen with induced heating cookers and disposer, and electrical warming carpet?
Discuss from both sides.
8) Do you think you are pro America? If so, is it the reason for studying English at the ESS? Do you like American style of living and its politics?
9) Suppose you are a billionaire. Do you want to purchase a space traveling ticket to see the earth from the stratosphere at the cost of ten billion yens?
Discuss hopefully from an ecological point of view.
10) Which do you think is better to study (not necessarily to believe) for our sustainable future, Christianity, Islam, or Buddhism?
Discuss the reason or difference if possible.
11) What the world will be after most of the petroleum and coal is depleted?
Discuss the ecological changes caused by increasing carbon dioxide, which is followed by global warming, climate change, change in human population, and finally its destination.
12) Don’t you believe that the spirit of frugality [節約] can solve the problems when it is spread over the world? Frugality is also equivalent to the spiritual concept [Mottainai] or Zen philosophy [Ware tada taritaru wo shiru: 吾唯足知].
Can you take these spirits into your living style?
Have a nice discussion and hot talking.
■Home