What is a Green Economy?

[OzWaveGuy]

Does anyone understand what a green econmy is? Or how we get there? And what the benefits should be?

Whilst I haven't read all of this document, this gives a view to a green economy. There's a summary of points in the first part of the doc and the intention is to make these points a topic for the proposed "Beyond RIO +20" summit for 2012.

Since the UN is on the Global Governance band wagon, you can start to see why here at home Labor is willing to drive a Carbon Tax and later the ETS - these are elements of the proposed Governance structure or to at least fund that structure.

Governance for a Green Economy
http://www.stakeholderforum.org/fileadmin/files/Beyond Rio20 Governance of Green Economy 2011.pdf

So what is a green economy?

 

[jbocker]

I FIRST thought it might be one left in the fridge too long...


but then I read through the doc a little and they have this...

What Is The Green Economy?
One could be forgiven for noting that this formula for a green economy strongly
resembles the descriptions of sustainable development that have been floating
around our society for a quarter century and gaining little more than intellectual
ground””what the French call “succès d’estime” (or “critical success”). Launched in
1987 by the Brundtland Commission report, calls to bring economic activity into
a framework bound by the limits of the earth’s ecosystems and to give priority to
social inclusion and poverty alleviation are now all too familiar. Would it not be
fair to say that the green economy is nothing more than a re-labeling of “sustainable
development”?
In some ways it is. If sustainable development has not prevailed over the past
quarter century, neither has it been discredited. Indeed, the reasons for insisting
that development be placed on a sustainable foundation have been growing
steadily stronger, at least in objective terms. While opinions vary on which of
the three pillars””economic, social, and environmental””should be given greatest
attention, there can be no doubt that the traditional economy has collapsed in
part because it ignored the other two pillars to such an extent.
Therefore, a green economy is one that takes us toward sustainable development.
Once a green economy is fully in place, we might say that our form of
development can be deemed sustainable. What, then, is new?
Perhaps the most significant difference lies in the recognition that an efficient,
functioning economy is a precondition for addressing the other two pillars of
sustainability. Much sustainable development activism over the past decades has
been a thinly disguised effort to give the environment priority over social and economic
concerns, betraying a deep suspicion of economically driven motivation
and doubting the attachment of the working masses to the natural environment.7
A green economy recognizes that it is the form of organization of humankinds’
economic activity that will, in the end, determine whether or not we are successful
in addressing the problems of social marginalization and environmental destruction.
If we get the former right, the others have a better chance of following””not,
it must be stressed, as a result of the wealth generated, but because concern
for social and environmental matters is an integral part built into the economic
organization. In a green economy, actions taken to reach economic ends also
advance social and environmental ones, just as actions taken to meet social and
environmental ends strengthen and develop the economy.
22 A Pardee Center Task Force Report | March 2011
Still, what are the boundaries of a green economy? At what point do we say that
we have one in place? Surely this state would be reached several steps short of
perfection, but if it is to avoid being specious, the anointment of an economy as
“green” must meet certain tests in terms of impact on sustainability. But what are
these tests, and who should apply them?
It is both an advantage and a disadvantage that the movement for a green
economy is taking place as neo-liberalism lies in ruins, its precepts disgraced
and its followers inclined to keep their heads down. It is an advantage because
the world is ripe for new ideas, new thinking, and new approaches. We are in an
intellectual environment in which assaults on orthodoxy are fair game, where
we are all casting around for alternatives to the discredited neo-liberal economic
paradigm. Fresh ideas are welcome; so, to some extent, are ideas that are not
particularly fresh but that have a new coat of paint and a freshly serviced engine.
A window of opportunity has edged open, but the gentlest wind could close it
again unless the opportunity is seized.
In a sense, the disadvantage of the present situation is that the window opened
before we were truly ready to take advantage of it, and we are all scrambling to
come up with a robust, complete, and compelling answer to the question: “What
next?” Unless we do so, the likelihood is that we will all, like victims of an earthquake,
straggle back to our ruined houses only to rebuild them on the traditional
design, with the same materials as before, because this is what we know, this is
what we are familiar with””even if we would be happy to sample new ideas if
they were genuinely offered.

I think my first suggestion might be right. And If you read all the above maybe you (and I) need to get a life.

 

[Julia]

With apologies for not having read the link, and even more apologies for being a bit facetious, I'd suggest a green economy is one where we no longer have reliable baseload power, so we become accustomed to frequent blackouts (oh Joy), therefore become happily used to no electronic communication, intermittent electric light and cooking (hey, candles and wood fires are just great!), make multiple claims on our insurance because our food in the freezer has gone off with yet another power cut,
always take cash when shopping because the usual checkout and EFTPOS systems won't work, and relearn how to walk long distances and ride bicycles because petrol will be a thing of the past.

I can't wait.

 

[tothemax6]

The following is an ideal, green economy, which we should all aspire to create:

 

[Smurf1976]

Fundamentally, an economy which is not based upon the notion of constant growth.

That's really what it comes down to. 40 years of Green politics in this country has lead to many bitter disputes and left many scratching their heads as to what it's really about.

Opposition to dams, mines and pulp mills whilst saving the forests make the headlines. But they are really just symbols of Green politics much like McDonald's and the Statue of Liberty are symbols of the USA. Simply stopping construction of things like that isn't what it's ultimately about.

Using Julia's electricity example, and of course electricity is an issue at the absolute heart of Green politics in Australia, it isn't really about trying to clean up emissions from coal etc. Rather, it's about not using so much energy in the first place - even if it comes from wind and solar.

I've lost count of the number of times I've people strongly opposed to (hydro-electric) dam construction say that they'd actually not be opposed to the proverbial "flood the lot" scenario subject to one key condition. And that condition is that every single megawatt produced is an actual replacement for coal or some other energy source. In other words, they'll accept that a dam may well be preferable to a coal mine, but they are opposed to a scenario where we flood a river today and end up mining the coal tomorrow anyway.

 

[medicowallet]

Fundamentally, an economy which is not based upon the notion of constant growth.

That's really what it comes down to. 40 years of Green politics in this country has lead to many bitter disputes and left many scratching their heads as to what it's really about.

Opposition to dams, mines and pulp mills whilst saving the forests make the headlines. But they are really just symbols of Green politics much like McDonald's and the Statue of Liberty are symbols of the USA. Simply stopping construction of things like that isn't what it's ultimately about.

Using Julia's electricity example, and of course electricity is an issue at the absolute heart of Green politics in Australia, it isn't really about trying to clean up emissions from coal etc. Rather, it's about not using so much energy in the first place - even if it comes from wind and solar.

I've lost count of the number of times I've people strongly opposed to (hydro-electric) dam construction say that they'd actually not be opposed to the proverbial "flood the lot" scenario subject to one key condition. And that condition is that every single megawatt produced is an actual replacement for coal or some other energy source. In other words, they'll accept that a dam may well be preferable to a coal mine, but they are opposed to a scenario where we flood a river today and end up mining the coal tomorrow anyway.

And a green economy is extremely bad for a single country to do.

Because living conditions/competitiveness are all relative, so for us to stop growth, whilst other countries grow and develop, leaves us in a worse position than we are currently in.

 

[Smurf1976]

And a green economy is extremely bad for a single country to do.

Because living conditions/competitiveness are all relative, so for us to stop growth, whilst other countries grow and develop, leaves us in a worse position than we are currently in.

Totally agreed.

It's even worse when it's done in a single state within a country. Worse again when the only reason for doing it is to buy votes in the major cities located in other states. And even worse still when the local population ends up being substantially replaced by those from interstate who support such nonsense and actually vote to continue it.

 

[So_Cynical]

And a green economy is extremely bad for a single country to do.

Because living conditions/competitiveness are all relative, so for us to stop growth, whilst other countries grow and develop, leaves us in a worse position than we are currently in.

Good for us then that we will not be the first or last.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_Energy_Certificates

 

[Smurf1976]

Good for us then that we will not be the first or last.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_Energy_Certificates

We could, however, be one of the first to actually reduce emissions.

If it hasn't worked in the EU, which is not in the cheap energy game to start with and thus has little to lose, then that alone seems a very good reason to not even attempt it in Australia, a country with far more to lose.

 

[Glen48]

It is like Bio-fuel were you cut down trees using massive machinery, plough feilds to grown plants that could be used for food, the plants are then harvested using massive machinery and sent to a factory to be process into fuel which is then transported in massive trucks to delivery the fuel so we can get more cars on the road.

Just delete plants and insert manafacture solar panels etc. for green economy
or think about a man who is deaf and can't hear the phone ringing so you make a fitting for his head with a light on it when the phone rings the light come on he will know the phone is ringing...
all this is done after a massive amount of taxpayers money has been spent to get the sitting member re-elected.

 

[noirua]

US startup Carbon Rivers says graphene is the answer to toxic tyre chemical

Graphene added to tyres could replace the toxic chemical 6PPD, U.S. startup Carbon Rivers says, as pressure mounts on the auto industry to eliminate the widely-used compound that has polluted waterways and been found to be lethal to some fish. Carbon Rivers, based in Knoxville, Tennessee, says...

uk.finance.yahoo.com

(Reuters) - June 15, 2023 - Graphene added to tyres could replace the toxic chemical 6PPD, U.S. startup Carbon Rivers says, as pressure mounts on the auto industry to eliminate the widely-used compound that has polluted waterways and been found to be lethal to some fish.

Later this year, California is expected to be the first authority to demand tyre-makers demonstrate they are seeking an alternative to 6PPD.