(February 1, 2018 at 7:30 pm)Khemikal Wrote: @shadow
You've got a leg up, there. It's an achievable goal. I think that many of our fellow conservationists are too locked into pie in the sky fantasies, forgetting that principles have costs, and so does -environmental- efficiency. Someone has to pay them. The trick is making it the other guy, even better if you can convince him he's getting a great deal.
There are a surprising number of business opportunities that are more sustainable and less expensive than how things are conventionally done. It makes sense - there's nothing inherently inexpensive about waste. Like, having windows that let out heat is not only bad for the environment, but it's a waste of money. There's a gradient of overall efficiency there, where there's economic and environmental profit to be made.
Same thing with renewable energy in 2018 - huge profits to be made there. So sustainability is often very efficient, it's just a different paradigm. Often the main cost is in overcoming this path dependency - like, electric cars aren't really more expensive than gasoline ones, but changing our whole society to accommodate them is going to be a hell of a cost, but in a different way. It still makes economic sense in the long run, which is why it can be accomplished through business.
