Ecomodernism

Ecomodernism is the strain of environmental philosophy which argues that humans can protect non-human nature by using technology to "decouple" anthropogenic impacts from the natural world. Ecomodernism is an emergent school of thought from many environmentalist scholars, critics, philosophers, and activists. In their 2015 manifesto, 18 self-professed ecomodernists—including scholars from the Breakthrough Institute, Harvard University, Jadavpur University, and the Long Now Foundation—defined their philosophy as such:

"...we affirm one long-standing environmental ideal, that humanity must shrink its impacts on the environment to make more room for nature, while we reject another, that human societies must harmonize with nature to avoid economic and ecological collapse."[1]

Ecomodernism explicitly embraces substituting energy, technology, and synthetic solutions for natural ecological services. Among other things, ecomodernists embrace agricultural intensification, genetically modified and synthetic foods, desalination and waste recycling, urbanization, and substituting denser energy fuels for less dense fuels (e.g. substituting coal for wood and, ultimately, getting all energy from progressively lower carbon technologies such as nuclear power and advanced renewables).[2] Key among the goals of an ecomodern environmental ethic is the use of technology to intensify human activity and make more room for wild nature.

Ecomodernism emerged from various debates, including the debate over when homo sapiens became a dominant force acting on Earth's ecosystems (proposed start-dates to the so-called Anthropocene range from the advent of agriculture 10,000 years ago to the invention of atomic weapons in the 20th century). Other debates that form the foundation of ecomodernism include how best to protect natural environments, how to accelerate decarbonization to mitigate climate change, and how to accelerate the economic and social development of the world's poor.

In these debates, ecomodernism distinguishes itself from other schools of thought, including sustainable development, ecological economics, degrowth or the steady-state economy, population reduction, laissez-faire economics, the "soft energy" path, and central planning. Ecomodernism considers many of its core ideologies borrowed from American pragmatism, political ecology, evolutionary economics, and modernism.

An Ecomodernist Manifesto

In April 2015, a group of 18 self-described ecomodernists collectively published "An Ecomodernist Manifesto." The authors were:

As the authors write,

"Although we have to date written separately, our views are increasingly discussed as a whole. We call ourselves ecopragmatists and ecomodernists. We offer this statement to affirm and to clarify our views and to describe our vision for putting humankind’s extraordinary powers in the service of creating a good Anthropocene."

Reception and criticism

Several prominent environmental journalists have praised the Ecomodernist Manifesto. At the New York Times, Eduardo Porter wrote approvingly of Ecomodernism’s alternative approach to sustainable development.[3] In an article titled "Manifesto Calls for an End to 'People Are Bad' Environmentalism," Slate's Eric Holthaus wrote "It's inclusive, it's exciting, and it gives environmentalists something to fight for for a change."[4] The popular science journal Nature editorialized the Manifesto.[5]

Common criticisms of ecomodernism have included its relative lack of consideration for justice, ethics, and political power. In "A sympathetic diagnosis of the Ecomodernist Manifesto," Paul Robbins and Sarah A. Moore describe the similarities and points of departure between Ecomodernism and political ecology.[6]

Some environmentalists have also characterized ecomodernism as an excuse to continue the exploitation of natural resources for human gains. A major strand of criticism towards Ecomodernism comes from proponents of degrowth or the steady-state economy. 18 ecological economists published a long rejoinder titled "A Degrowth Response to an Ecomodernist Manifesto," writing "the ecomodernists provide neither a very inspiring blueprint for future development strategies nor much in the way of solutions to our environmental and energy woes."[7]

At the Breakthrough Institute's annual Dialogue in June 2015, several prominent environmental scholars offered a critique of Ecomodernism. Bruno Latour argued that the modernity celebrated in the Ecomodernist Manifesto is a myth. Jenny Price argued that the Manifesto offered a simplistic view of "humanity" and "nature," which she said are "made invisible" by talking about them in such broad terms.[8]

Open Letters

Save Diablo Canyon campaign

In January 2016, several authors of the An Ecomodernist Manifesto – including Robert Stone, David Keith, Stewart Brand, Michael Shellenberger and Mark Lynas – as well as Kerry Emanuel, James Hansen, Steven Pinker, Stephen Tindale and Burton Richter; signed an open letter urging not to close the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant.[9] It was addressed to California Governor Jerry Brown, CEO of Pacific Gas & Electric and California state officials.[10]

Save Illinois Nuclear

In April 2016, Shellenberger, alongside other scientists and conservationists - including James Hansen, Stewart Brand, Nobel Laureate Burton Richter, Kerry Emanuel and Mark Lynas - signed an open letter urging against the closure of the six operating nuclear power plants in Illinois: Braidwood; Byron; Clinton; Dresden; LaSalle; and Quad Cities.[11] Together, they account for Illinois ranking first in the United States in 2010 in both nuclear capacity and nuclear generation,[12] and generation from its nuclear power plants accounted for 12 percent of the United States total.[13] In 2010, 48% of Illinois' electricity was generated using nuclear power.[14]


References

  1. ↑ John Asafu-Adjaye et al (April 2015). "An Ecomodernist Manifesto."
  2. ↑ Vincent Ialenti "Generation (Lexicon for an Anthropocene Yet Unseen, Cultural Anthropology)"
  3. ↑ Eduardo Porter, The New York Times, April 14, 2015. / 'A Call to Look Past Sustainable Development."
  4. ↑ Eric Holthaus (20 April 2015). "Manifesto Calls for an End to "People Are Bad" Environmentalism." Slate.
  5. ↑ "Decoupled ideals: 'Ecomodernist Manifesto' reframes sustainable development, but the goal remains the same." (21 April 2015). Nature.
  6. ↑ Paul Robbins and Sarah A. Moore (19 June 2015). "Love your symptoms: A sympathetic diagnosis of the Ecomodernist Manifesto." entitleblog.org.
  7. ↑ Caradonna et al (May 2015). / "A Degrowth Response to An Ecomodernist Manifesto."
  8. ↑ "What Is Modern In Ecomodernism?" (14 July 2015). / "Breakthrough Institute."
  9. ↑ McDonnell, Tim (3 February 2016). "Closing This Nuclear Plant Could Cause an Environmental Disaster". Mother Jones. Foundation For National Progress. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
  10. ↑ "Open letter: Do the right thing — stand-up for California's largest source of clean energy". Save Diablo Canyon. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
  11. ↑ Conca, James. "Illinois' Nuclear Dilemma Embroils Famed Climate Scientist James Hansen". Forbes. Forbes Inc. Retrieved 7 April 2016.
  12. ↑ "Nuclear State Profiles". Eia.gov. Retrieved April 29, 2012.
  13. ↑ "Illinois - State Energy Profile Overview - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)". Eia.gov. 2015-03-19. Retrieved 2016-02-27.
  14. ↑ "State Nuclear Profiles: Illinois". U.S. Energy Information Administration. 26 April 2012. Retrieved 7 April 2016.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/3/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.