The Problem with Consumerism

this video was made possible by the people who support me on patreon in 2009 south korea did something remarkable the country poured 2 percent of its gdp some 38.1 billion us dollars into environmental projects hoping to create 1 million green jobs over the next 5 years the goal was to spur growth in a slumping economy while simultaneously creating a low carbon society in one sense the plan worked south korea's economic system did eventually recover but in a more important sense the plan failed from 2009 to 2014 korea's emissions rose 11.8 percent so despite massive investments in clean energy railway expansion and energy efficiency south korea's emissions still climbed what happened why didn't south korea's green growth strategy work today we'll answer that question and more in order to understand one of the insidious specters that haunts the green energy revolution consumption it's december and the streets of new york city are filled with christmas stores trees lights bags packages and trash christmas in america is a sacred capitalist holiday wherein the average american explodes their average yearly emissions footprint by roughly 650 kilograms of co2 equivalent while spending a cumulative 2.6 billion dollars on wrapping paper up until around 150 years ago however the holiday rarely saw a wrapped present in sight but then unofficial holidays like black friday and department stores like macy's started to encourage shoppers to fill their carts with tech and trinkets as a means of expressing care and love now christmas shopping epitomizes the consumer experience in the united states it's driven by a complex mix of personal desire social pressures status signaling stress and propaganda that work in many instances not to increase personal well-being but to pad the pocketbooks of corporations advertisements on instagram and billboards in times square bombard us with visions of what we could be if only we had that watch or phone which locks us into a world where in order to find happiness or comfort or political change we need to buy stuff but a range of studies consistently found that once a person's needs are met extra consumption does not increase their well-being and buying new phones clothes and gadgets all have an environmental price tag despite the fact that 100 companies were found to be the root cause of 70 of global emissions the reality is that the people using those companies products and burning their fuel are us or rather i should say primarily rich communities and countries because consumption levels are not equal across the world the average american uses over 100 times the energy as someone from india and if everyone in the world were to live in the same way the average german does right now global emissions would double so as those in rich countries gorge on luxury items and the newest tech they use energy and emit at much higher rates than countries in the majority world which often are the ones feeling the brunt of climate disasters the blame for overconsumption should not and cannot be placed solely on individuals companies and corporations have a vested interest in making you buy more stuff because if they don't they go bankrupt which is why they slap green labels onto their products and advertised everywhere indeed the whole idea of a personal carbon footprint is a propaganda campaign created by the fossil fuel giant bp the move allowed them to lock in decades of fossil fuel use by turning the attention away from their complicity in climate change and instead blaming the individual for not living a low-carbon lifestyle or not buying the right thing the natural conclusion in a system riddled with ads and cultural norms imploring all of your senses to buy more is that your dollar is your vote an idea which stands in stark contrast to the democratic ideal of one person one vote we are led to believe that growing the economy which for the individual means buying more whether it be supporting new green tech or wearing sustainably made clothing is how we stop climate change but the reality is that this capitalist growth model counteracts the work being done to decrease emissions over the last 40 years global emissions have skyrocketed despite dramatic expansions of renewable and energy efficiency technologies yes growth does lead to an expansion of new sustainable innovations but it also leads to the expansion of fossil fuel intensive industries just one percent growth in gdp leads to 0.5 to 0.8 percent increase in carbon emissions and if we continue to grow at 3 percent per year by 2043 the global economy will be two times larger than it is now which means energy consumption will be larger and the task of transitioning towards a zero carbon world will be much harder so something's got to give and that something is consumption in rich countries [Music] the unfortunate reality is that expanding zero carbon technologies to meet global energy demands or what's known as decoupling emissions from growth will be an extremely difficult task a task that south korea attempted back in 2009 and ran head first into the consequences of a growth-centered economy the reason why south korea's emissions still rose 11.8 percent over five years is that their total energy consumption outpaced renewable installation and energy efficiency projects so the emissions they saved with green technology were nullified by their overall increase in consumption levels so then what options do we have one recent study modeled that by 2050 the world could support the equivalent of three times the current global population if global consumption levels dropped 60 percent back down to 1960 levels most notably though the paper claims that this is possible while still maintaining or even improving a decent lifestyle for all and within their definition of a decent living the researchers include laptops comfortable climate control access to robust transportation networks and universal healthcare and in order to achieve this world wherein everybody is able to enjoy a decent lifestyle while also avoiding a climate emergency the researchers suggest a dual-pronged approach on the demand side consumption levels must drop by as much as 95 in countries with today's highest per capita consumers that means no more second houses or eating red meat every single day of the week this then must be simultaneously coupled with massive roll outs of advanced technology in energy efficiency renewable energy and other sectors together the model predicts that these scenarios could allow the global population to live well in a zero carbon world and if all that sounds scary hope jaren author of the story of more compares this future lifestyle to that of someone living in switzerland in the 1960s which to me doesn't sound that bad especially considering that everyone in the world would be able to live the 1960s swiss life the key point here is that reducing emissions or what's known as decoupling emissions from growth is not enough to quickly prevent the worst case climate change scenario reducing consumption has to be integrated into our solutions toolkit if we are to quickly tackle the climate crisis before 2050 but the burden of this task should not be laid upon the individual it's the job of governments and the very corporations who created the mess in the first place to facilitate this drop in consumption imagine for a moment if instead of lobbying for fossil fuel subsidies and spending millions telling us to decrease our carbon footprint bp was required to address its complicity in climate change by leaving fossil fuels in the ground and developing renewable energy rapid public transportation and energy efficiency technologies i'd imagine the task of reducing our own consumption and emissions would probably be a lot easier ultimately d growth is a path we need to take seriously if we are to tackle the climate emergency while i can't pretend to predict the far-reaching consequences reducing growth would create i do know one thing the smaller our global needs the easier the transition will be hey everyone charlie here if you've been watching our changing climate for a while or just stumbled across this video and are wondering how you can help me make more videos then consider supporting the show on patreon as an occ patron you'll gain early access to videos special behind the scenes updates as well as a members only group chat in addition each month my supporters vote on an environmental group that i then donate a portion of my monthly revenue to so if you want to support the channel or are feeling generous head over to patreon.com our changing climate and become an occ patron if for whatever reason you're not interested or aren't financially able to then no worries i hope you enjoyed the video and i will see you in two weeks

Channel: Our Changing Climate

Views: 532,900

Keywords: Video Essay, Environment, Climate Change, Our Changing Climate, OCC, what is consumerism, the problem with consumerism, consumerism and materialism, materialism and minimalism, consumerism and social media, consumerism and the environment, consumerism and minimalism, consumerism black friday, degrowth economics, degrowth in the suburbs, degrowth economy, consumerism advertising, consumerism christmas, consumerism vs capitalism, consumerism capitalism, fast fashion consumerism

Id: x0ckvo2Z5BU

Length: 10min 22sec (622 seconds)

Published: Fri Nov 20 2020