Fuelling confusion???
Earlier this week in a letter to the editor (printed in Monday's Province) I expressed my confusion over the stand that the NDP has taken over the issue of climate change, versus the efforts of one NDP MLA to force oil companies to lower the price of gasoline at the pump. As confused as I was (am) over this particular issue, a piece in today's Vancouver Sun seems to clarify my belief that one of the NDP's hands is clearly not talking to the other.
NDP MLA and energy critic John Horgan announced last week his plan to introduce a private members bill to address what he identified as "gouging" by the oil companies. His argument being that the price of fuel here in British Columbia is significantly higher than anywhere east of the Rockies. No argument from me there! Surely no one likes to pay too much for anything but, for some reason inflated pump prices always seem to hurt twice as much as anything else. The high price of gas was one of the key factors in my decision to down size from an SUV to a miserly 4 cylinder wagon.
My problem with Mr. Horgan's stand on this point is more about timing than content (as I've had to explain to more than one of my friends). Why now and why not last summer when fuel prices were almost 30 cents more per litre? Why now at a time when climate change is thebuzz phrase and fellow NDP MLA, environment critic and Vancouver-Hastings own native son, Shane Simpson has accused the Ministry of Transportation of ignoring the link between transportation and the environment? Why would MLA Horgan choose now to even suggest cheaper fuel when his own leader, Carole James has all but taken credit for the governments commitment to emission reductions? Why, oh why would the NDP want tosuggest cheaper fossil fuel if there is even the remotest of possibilities that the high price of oil could encourage people (like me) to make alternative transportation choices.
If your not confused yet... read on!
This past Tuesday the BC Liberal government unveilled its new energy plan that, among other things identifies the harsh reality that we will have to cut our energy demands in half over the next 13 years in order to effectively reverse the occurrence of climate change and to become energy self-sufficient by the year 2020. The government presents some very aggressive steps that it feels necessary to reduce consumption by some 15 000 gigawatts annually and to ensure that the energy we use is as clean as possible. The most significant change needed seems to be one in attitude.
In order to achieve this ambitious goal of energy reduction, British Columbian's will likely have to first change behaviours. As president of BC Hydro Bob Elton correctly points out "We have a province where people have never had to think about electricity and we need to change that view." (Sounds familiar to me) The problem, according to the NDP's John Horgan is that there is no way we will be able to change public behaviour as long as electrical prices remain low! That's not all, Horgan goes on to ask "Whats the incentive to move to more efficient appliances, for people to power smart their windows? There's nothing to encourage people to meet these goals."
Its true! You did read right, the very same person that's demanding cheaper gasoline prices in BC is also suggesting that the only way we will ever change our attitudes about energy is to hit us where it hurts, in the wallet. Increased electrical prices will encourage us to turn out the lights, turn down the heat and turn off the tv. Why not? If we get really cold we can always jump in our cars, crank the heat up and drive around the block a few times.
John Horgan tells us that the government is sending a mixed message (The News Feb 28). I don't know about you but I've never been more confused about a message than I am about the one that he's trying to peddle here.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Sunday, February 25, 2007
I really can walk the walk!
When I decided to jump onto the climate change band-wagon I did so with both feet. Environmental issues have been important to me for far longer than they have been fashionable but, I still admit to being a bit of a hypocrite in some areas. Mostly in respect to the car I drive.
The recent popularity of global warming and environmental issues has put my family and I at occasional odds and has done more than ripple the fabric of our lives more than once. As I've said here, in numerous previous posts I believe that the first and most important steps to becoming good stewards of the environment begin in our own homes, backyards and, in this case driveways. Unfortunately, the whole time that I have been writing here I have been one of those dreaded, evil SUV drivers.
When I decided to jump onto the climate change band-wagon I did so with both feet. Environmental issues have been important to me for far longer than they have been fashionable but, I still admit to being a bit of a hypocrite in some areas. Mostly in respect to the car I drive.
The recent popularity of global warming and environmental issues has put my family and I at occasional odds and has done more than ripple the fabric of our lives more than once. As I've said here, in numerous previous posts I believe that the first and most important steps to becoming good stewards of the environment begin in our own homes, backyards and, in this case driveways. Unfortunately, the whole time that I have been writing here I have been one of those dreaded, evil SUV drivers.
GASP!
We used to be a two car family but two summers ago, when insurance on one car expired we decided to make a go without it and see how we fared. There were some minor adjustments that had to be made but mostly the experiment went fine and so we never did go back to driving two cars. We adjusted our schedules a bit, took alternate transportation when we could and we managed to save a bit of money along the way. We felt good about what we had accomplished and all went well...that is until "going green" became a buzz phrase and the bandwagon threatened to collapse under the weight of all who had jumped on. I was beside myself.
Suddenly I found myself at odds faced with what I felt were my responsibilities toward the environment on one hand and the fact that I own this truck that I really, really love on the other. The truck has been really good for my family. It has taken us to a lot of places, it carries our bikes, camping gear and other "stuff" really well. It really sucks at the gas pump for sure, but haven't we already done our part? After all, we've given up one car, small steps right? My wife and kids love the truck too. It fits us and our lifestyle but, on the other hand at almost $80 per week in fuel alone it is getting kind of expensive.
About two weeks ago the important discussions began between my wife and I.
There is more to the dilemma. Whether I like to admit it or not the truck has become a symbol of my success. I have been using all of the excuses in the book to justify owning it without admitting that I have been using this truck partly as the yard stick to measure myself with. I have allowed myself to be somewhat defined by the car that I drive and it took my realizing this to allow myself to finally consider letting go. Once this happened, Liz and I learned that there are in fact plenty of options (for us) out there that will allow us to continue doing all of the things we like to do and did before. All while reducing the footprint that we leave behind and keeping a bit more cash in our pockets. After all, if Premier Campbell can do it, why can't I?
Yesterday we traded the truck in for a much smaller, more economical Ford Focus wagon. Its fantastic and we couldn't be happier with our decision. Of course we got the sportiest one that we could find. We had to, after all... the car will have a small part in defining who we are.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Climate Change Shmimate Change
Talk about jumping on the bandwagon! This weekends Vancouver Sun contained no less than 11 different stories (more than 460 column inches) dedicated to, or otherwise mentioning climate change, global warming and/or environmental sustainability. That's before even reaching the 18 page special supplement entitled "Going Green" in the middle of the paper. There are stories that mention climate change in 7 different sections of the newspaper including the business, travel and West Coast Homes sections. Wow!
There can be very little doubt that climate change has officially become the flavour of the week, month, year and I personally think that this is great (to a point). I agree with Sun columnist Stephen Hume who tells us (among other things) that we need to get educated about climate change and as this weekends paper seems to indicate, there is an awful lot of information out there from a lot of different people with some very different points of view. Just take a look at the Douglas Todd piece in the Going Green supplement for an example of two very different perspectives. It would appear then that our job is to sift through all of this stuff, try and determine what is valid, what affects us and what our abilities are to make positive changes in our own back yards.
Yesterday a friend approached me at the Rec Center and, seeing that I was reading the paper asked "Whats new?", to which I replied "Looks like a lot of stuff on climate change." I'm not sure if I should have been surprised or not but she then proceeded to inform me that she thought the whole thing was being blown out of proportion. She then started to tell me that we had no idea what was going to happen as a result of global warming and that no one can predict the actual affect that we have towards climate change. She went on to inform me about a potential shift of the gulf-stream which will bring weather back in line to what it should be??? This is where she lost me!
I told her that while I agreed that we don't really know exactly whats going to happen in the future the evidence that our impact is growing increasingly negative seems pretty clear. Even so, if we know that there are things that we can do to make our air cleaner or reduce the pressure on landfills and so on, why wouldn't we do it? I went on to explain how my wife and I were seriously thinking about downsizing our current vehicle (its a V6) to one that is easier at the pump and therefor easier on our wallets and easier on the environment. Her response... if climate change and global warming are such a big problem then why don't they stop clear cutting!
That's about where the conversation ended.
The Premier has a daunting task ahead of him if he is to reduce our carbon emissions by 33%. I say "him and he" in this case since many of us prefer to place the blame on him rather than shoulder up to this task ourselves. I think its encouraging that 77% of us (according to a recent poll by Ipsos Reid) seem willing to make significant changes in our lives in the interest of climate change (Am I the only one that picked up the significance between the 77% in this Ipsos Reid Poll and the 33% in the governments plan?) but I'm not surprised at all that 50% of British Columbians don't want to pay any more for it. While it appears that 76% of us think that Canada should take a leading role in climate change, I am frequently reminded and alarmed at the number of people (like this friend) that refuse to recognize individual contribution and cling precariously to the argument that we don't know all of the facts or the facts are inconclusive.
I am certainly not a scientist or an expert on weather, climate change, ecosystems, global warming or any of these other things. That said, I don't believe that Victoria will become the new Atlantis within the lifetime of our grandchildren and I do believe that the earth is somewhat resilient and therefor able to recover a bit more than some of the more radical environmentalists give it credit for. But I'm also not blind and I have seen the affects of a warmer planet all around me.
I know that the world is getting warmer because I can remember winters growing up in Langley where we actually got a lot of snow, every winter. I've also seen pictures of my Dad as a young boy in Port Kells with even more snow. Lots of snow! I've worked at one of the local ski areas since 1991 and I have seen the affects of global warming as every year the winter season seems to get shorter or less predictable. The need for snowmaking on many ski hills in BC, Canada and North America in order to guarantee a full season is becoming greater as the years go by.
I also know that the population of Langley District Municipality (where I grew up) has grown significantly over this period from a population of 39 000 in 1977 to almost 100 000 in 2006. I know that the population of the Lower Mainland has increased by about 750 000 in the last 20 years and I'm told that the number of vehicles on our roads increases by about 20 000 per year. I also know that it took me an extra half hour to get home from North Vancouver yesterday thanks to an antiquated infrastructure and a major accident north of the Second Narrows Bridge. I'm pretty sure that an extra half hour idling in traffic is probably not great.
While I'm certainly no expert, I know that despite the confusion in some of the information we're getting there are many things that we can do to generate some positive change. I also believe that although some of the steps we take may seem small, we must recognize the significance in all of them. I believe that Premier Campbell and his team are leading us in the right direction but I also think that most of us are reasonable and intelligent people capable of making reasonable and intelligent decisions. We just need to remind ourselves of this fact.
I agree that Canada and British Columbia should take a leadership role on climate change, but I certainly don't see leadership in a person that justifies a poor vehicle choice by saying "We go off road sometimes in the summer." Finally, I'm starting to believe a friend of mine who told me recently that I've been watching the same movie for too long soooo... I'll step off my soapbox for a minute. Only a minute though.
Phfew!
Talk about jumping on the bandwagon! This weekends Vancouver Sun contained no less than 11 different stories (more than 460 column inches) dedicated to, or otherwise mentioning climate change, global warming and/or environmental sustainability. That's before even reaching the 18 page special supplement entitled "Going Green" in the middle of the paper. There are stories that mention climate change in 7 different sections of the newspaper including the business, travel and West Coast Homes sections. Wow!
There can be very little doubt that climate change has officially become the flavour of the week, month, year and I personally think that this is great (to a point). I agree with Sun columnist Stephen Hume who tells us (among other things) that we need to get educated about climate change and as this weekends paper seems to indicate, there is an awful lot of information out there from a lot of different people with some very different points of view. Just take a look at the Douglas Todd piece in the Going Green supplement for an example of two very different perspectives. It would appear then that our job is to sift through all of this stuff, try and determine what is valid, what affects us and what our abilities are to make positive changes in our own back yards.
Yesterday a friend approached me at the Rec Center and, seeing that I was reading the paper asked "Whats new?", to which I replied "Looks like a lot of stuff on climate change." I'm not sure if I should have been surprised or not but she then proceeded to inform me that she thought the whole thing was being blown out of proportion. She then started to tell me that we had no idea what was going to happen as a result of global warming and that no one can predict the actual affect that we have towards climate change. She went on to inform me about a potential shift of the gulf-stream which will bring weather back in line to what it should be??? This is where she lost me!
I told her that while I agreed that we don't really know exactly whats going to happen in the future the evidence that our impact is growing increasingly negative seems pretty clear. Even so, if we know that there are things that we can do to make our air cleaner or reduce the pressure on landfills and so on, why wouldn't we do it? I went on to explain how my wife and I were seriously thinking about downsizing our current vehicle (its a V6) to one that is easier at the pump and therefor easier on our wallets and easier on the environment. Her response... if climate change and global warming are such a big problem then why don't they stop clear cutting!
That's about where the conversation ended.
The Premier has a daunting task ahead of him if he is to reduce our carbon emissions by 33%. I say "him and he" in this case since many of us prefer to place the blame on him rather than shoulder up to this task ourselves. I think its encouraging that 77% of us (according to a recent poll by Ipsos Reid) seem willing to make significant changes in our lives in the interest of climate change (Am I the only one that picked up the significance between the 77% in this Ipsos Reid Poll and the 33% in the governments plan?) but I'm not surprised at all that 50% of British Columbians don't want to pay any more for it. While it appears that 76% of us think that Canada should take a leading role in climate change, I am frequently reminded and alarmed at the number of people (like this friend) that refuse to recognize individual contribution and cling precariously to the argument that we don't know all of the facts or the facts are inconclusive.
I am certainly not a scientist or an expert on weather, climate change, ecosystems, global warming or any of these other things. That said, I don't believe that Victoria will become the new Atlantis within the lifetime of our grandchildren and I do believe that the earth is somewhat resilient and therefor able to recover a bit more than some of the more radical environmentalists give it credit for. But I'm also not blind and I have seen the affects of a warmer planet all around me.
I know that the world is getting warmer because I can remember winters growing up in Langley where we actually got a lot of snow, every winter. I've also seen pictures of my Dad as a young boy in Port Kells with even more snow. Lots of snow! I've worked at one of the local ski areas since 1991 and I have seen the affects of global warming as every year the winter season seems to get shorter or less predictable. The need for snowmaking on many ski hills in BC, Canada and North America in order to guarantee a full season is becoming greater as the years go by.
I also know that the population of Langley District Municipality (where I grew up) has grown significantly over this period from a population of 39 000 in 1977 to almost 100 000 in 2006. I know that the population of the Lower Mainland has increased by about 750 000 in the last 20 years and I'm told that the number of vehicles on our roads increases by about 20 000 per year. I also know that it took me an extra half hour to get home from North Vancouver yesterday thanks to an antiquated infrastructure and a major accident north of the Second Narrows Bridge. I'm pretty sure that an extra half hour idling in traffic is probably not great.
While I'm certainly no expert, I know that despite the confusion in some of the information we're getting there are many things that we can do to generate some positive change. I also believe that although some of the steps we take may seem small, we must recognize the significance in all of them. I believe that Premier Campbell and his team are leading us in the right direction but I also think that most of us are reasonable and intelligent people capable of making reasonable and intelligent decisions. We just need to remind ourselves of this fact.
I agree that Canada and British Columbia should take a leadership role on climate change, but I certainly don't see leadership in a person that justifies a poor vehicle choice by saying "We go off road sometimes in the summer." Finally, I'm starting to believe a friend of mine who told me recently that I've been watching the same movie for too long soooo... I'll step off my soapbox for a minute. Only a minute though.
Phfew!
Friday, February 16, 2007
flowery words or bold solutions?
.jpg)
In last Tuesdays Speech from the Throne Premier Campbell and the BC Liberal government unveiled what has been described by many as a "breathtaking and bold" plan to tackle the growing challenge of greenhouse gas emissions. The governments aggressive plan will see a reduction in emissions of 33% by the year 2020 and will require the concerted effort of provincial and municipal governments, industry and every British Columbian in order to be successful.
The preliminary plan introduced on Tuesday has received the approval of government leaders and environmentalists alike including the Governors of all pacific coast states (most notably Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger), the Sierra Club and David Suzuki himself who has said "...I think this man (Campbell) is capable of making this kind of shift, and I have great hopes for it.?
In fact, unless I've missed someone the only group slow to accept the Liberals plan of action has been... you guessed it, Carole James and the BC NDP. What a surprise!
This is odd however considering the words of Vancouver-Hastings MLA and NDP environment critic Shane Simpson who told News 1130 prior to the Speech from the Throne that "...they (the NDP) will be looking for meaningful action from the government and, if its there we will support it". Interesting! The government has promised to do its part to fight global warming and climate change by, among other things:
.jpg)
In last Tuesdays Speech from the Throne Premier Campbell and the BC Liberal government unveiled what has been described by many as a "breathtaking and bold" plan to tackle the growing challenge of greenhouse gas emissions. The governments aggressive plan will see a reduction in emissions of 33% by the year 2020 and will require the concerted effort of provincial and municipal governments, industry and every British Columbian in order to be successful.
"I'm very encouraged by this." David Suzuki
The preliminary plan introduced on Tuesday has received the approval of government leaders and environmentalists alike including the Governors of all pacific coast states (most notably Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger), the Sierra Club and David Suzuki himself who has said "...I think this man (Campbell) is capable of making this kind of shift, and I have great hopes for it.?
In fact, unless I've missed someone the only group slow to accept the Liberals plan of action has been... you guessed it, Carole James and the BC NDP. What a surprise!
"The fact that this government has even embraced the notion of a target is a really good sign." Karen Campbell, staff lawyer for the Pembina Institute.
- extending the $2000 tax incentive to anyone buying a hybrid vehicle.
- helping and encouraging individuals to make their homes more energy efficient.
- ensuring that all electricity produced in the province has net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2016.
- requiring 100% carbon sequestration for future coal-fired energy projects.
- introducing and supporting anti-idling measures for commercial vehicles.
- reducing congestion on lower mainland highways through the provincial Gateway Program and introducing a toll on the twinned Port Mann bridge.
- phasing in new, aggressive tailpipe emission standards.
- leasing or purchasing hybrid vehicles for government use.
- reducing energy consumption and emissions in the public sector.
- encouraging personal choices that are sensible to the environment.
"I am pleased that British Columbia has committed to joining the fight against climate change." California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
I don't know about you but all of this sure looks like "meaningful action" to me. So where is the support of the NDP as promised by Shane Simpson? Carole James calls the governments plan "flowery words" and accuses the premier of "grabbing onto the issue of the day." Ms. James says that Premier Campbell has a poor record when it comes to following through. This is interesting when you consider that The BC Liberals have already pledged nearly half a million dollars towards projects that directly reduce our footprint on the environment (these projects include the Green Cities Project, Hydrogen highway, Localmotion fund and more) and much more in projects that will indirectly reduce the occurrence of climate change.
"Our party has no idea how to deal with climate change and its implications for socialist principles." NDP MLA Corky Evans August 29, 2006
How does this compare with the NDP? Lets look at their stance on energy for starters. Shane Simpson is adamant in his call for government to reject any proposals for coal-fired energy. A week ago I read a piece where Carole James rejected "conventional" coal-fired energy projects but I do note that she is now against all forms of coal energy. As environment critic I suppose that it is reasonable to expect Mr. Simpson's skepticism in this area but how does this explain his position on environmentally clean "run of the river" projects like the one proposed for Ashlu Creek? Shane is against Ashlu creek (despite the fact that the project is supported by such groups as the Squamish Nation), primarily because the NDP does not like the idea of private ownership of energy. No matter how green it is. His stance with Ashlu would seem to put him at odds with what his responsibilities should be in respect to the environment as a critic.
"I will say that the record of the last government, being the NDP in the late '90s, was not good on climate change..." MLA Michael Sather, Hansard, April 5, 2006
Never mind the type of vehicle that the Leader of the Opposition drives and forget about the NDP's historical position calling environmentalists the enemies of the province. The NDP record on the environment leaves me wondering who has really "grabbed onto the issue of the day".
Within its opening paragraphs the throne speech asks "What can we do today to secure the future of our children and grandchildren?" This is a very good question. The speech calls for partnership and action to meet the objectives of a changing world and Shane Simpson has said that the NDP would support a good plan. Since almost everyone has said that this plan is a good one you have to ask what happened to the support? This session of the legislature isn't even a week old and the finger pointing by the opposition has already begun. This should be an interesting year. Stay tuned!
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Saved by the Throne Speech...
I got to go to the Speech from the Throne this year. I don't want to say that this was a once in a life time experience but it was great to witness first-hand, the announcement of a positive and aggressive plan that will, (among other things) help reverse the tide of climate change. The opportunity allowed my wife Liz and I to stretch the day into a much deserved three day mini-vacation and, despite the weather we had a fantastic time.
We left Vancouver on Monday afternoon, meaning that I was not able to see the unveiling of the 2010 count-down clock. A small sacrifice I suppose but unfortunately I did manage to see all that I needed later that night on the news. I was flicking through the channels when I happened upon the somewhat disturbing spectacle created by a few that oppose the otherwise great opportunity that the 2010 Olympics brings to Vancouver, Whistler and the province of British Columbia. Needless to say, I was glad I didn't go as if I had I would have surely brought my 3 year old son Jack with me. I don't envy the task that all of those parents who did attend with their children must have had explaining how such a small group of people can be so narrow minded and destructive.
You don't have to like the Olympics! You don't have to agree with any international sporting (or similar) events and you don't have to be happy that they are coming to Vancouver. You may believe that there are bigger issues in our communities that need to be dealt with and you may fool yourself into thinking that the money being used to host the Olympics would actually solve all of these problems. You may wish to tell the world exactly how you feel about all of these things and while your at it you may wish to tell all of the little children that there is no Santa Claus. These are your rights and while I obviously disagree with your opinion (if this is you) the fact that we can do this is what makes our city, province, country such a great place to live. Peaceful demonstration is your right.
I got to go to the Speech from the Throne this year. I don't want to say that this was a once in a life time experience but it was great to witness first-hand, the announcement of a positive and aggressive plan that will, (among other things) help reverse the tide of climate change. The opportunity allowed my wife Liz and I to stretch the day into a much deserved three day mini-vacation and, despite the weather we had a fantastic time.
We left Vancouver on Monday afternoon, meaning that I was not able to see the unveiling of the 2010 count-down clock. A small sacrifice I suppose but unfortunately I did manage to see all that I needed later that night on the news. I was flicking through the channels when I happened upon the somewhat disturbing spectacle created by a few that oppose the otherwise great opportunity that the 2010 Olympics brings to Vancouver, Whistler and the province of British Columbia. Needless to say, I was glad I didn't go as if I had I would have surely brought my 3 year old son Jack with me. I don't envy the task that all of those parents who did attend with their children must have had explaining how such a small group of people can be so narrow minded and destructive.
You don't have to like the Olympics! You don't have to agree with any international sporting (or similar) events and you don't have to be happy that they are coming to Vancouver. You may believe that there are bigger issues in our communities that need to be dealt with and you may fool yourself into thinking that the money being used to host the Olympics would actually solve all of these problems. You may wish to tell the world exactly how you feel about all of these things and while your at it you may wish to tell all of the little children that there is no Santa Claus. These are your rights and while I obviously disagree with your opinion (if this is you) the fact that we can do this is what makes our city, province, country such a great place to live. Peaceful demonstration is your right.
What happened on Monday is another story completely!
What this small group of people did was nothing short of terrorism! Unfortunately, the issues that these people and other groups like them (the Sea Shepard Society comes to mind) hide behind are real. Homelessness, drug use, prostitution, mental illness, affordable housing, all present us with some very serious challenges that will only be overcome with the cooperative efforts of all communities, levels of government and citizens, including those most affected. These real-life challenges are somehow minimized when the so-called champions of the cause resort to violence to make their points. Suddenly the plight of the homeless, drug-addicted (and so on) becomes lost behind the hidden agenda of the "professional" protester and the true problem gets lost as these people move from one cause to another, all on the backs of the desperate.
The Olympic and Paralympic games are coming to Vancouver, Whistler and communities in between in 2010. Its a done deal and people should really try and get used to the fact. Events like this unfortunate one on Monday will not change anything. Pushing innocent people out of the way, screaming obscenities into a microphone in front of children and other forms of violent protest are just not acceptable. These kinds of acts do nothing to solve the real issues and the only attention that they give to the real challenges within our communities is negative.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
troubles with orange and green...
I've always been a fan of the colors orange and green. These aren't the only colors I like but they are certainly up there and in fact, I'm wearing an orange shirt right now as I write this post. Orange and green (separately) can be vibrant colors. They draw attention to themselves as well as their surroundings. Most of the time they make me feel pretty good about myself but the trouble is, lately I find that I have become somewhat overwhelmed by both if these colors to the point that (for me) they are creating an effect exactly opposite of the one that color experts say they should.
Take green for instance. What should come to mind when you think of this color? My thoughts immediately go to trees, grass and other things natural and peaceful (I also have a pretty great biking shirt that is bright green). According to people that profess to know about colors, green evokes harmony and understanding. "Green" people are generous, self controlled and adaptable as well as sympathetic and understanding. Green is my oldest sons favorite color however, (notwithstanding the fact that he doesn't really exhibit many of these "green" traits), my own recent experiences with green have made me question the claims of these so-called color experts.
I recently decided to become involved with an organization that, not surprisingly, has a lot of green in it. Color had nothing to do with my decision to get involved although there may have been some "green" influences behind this decision. Mostly I was interested in what they had to offer, I thought I could learn something from them that could help me later on ,(I still believe this) and in turn I thought that I might have something to give back to them (I still do). The trouble is that now, after only two meetings I have been faced with two conflicts between my impression of what green should be and the what the green that some of these "green" people actually paint themselves with truly is.
Rather than exuding the values of understanding, adaptability or harmony, I have left these green surroundings feeling as though I have been exposed more to to hostility, stubbornness and closed-mindedness. My recent green experience has taught me that the "big picture" is most important and that this picture can only look one way to be accepted. There is only one way to paint the picture and the steps to follow must be deliberate and very clear. Although the most prominent color in the picture is green, the big picture is a "paint by number". There is no room for individual interpretation as to the colors that each number represents. Green only recognizes the big picture and not the small steps that have been taken or that must be taken to get to it. According to green our efforts are often not good enough and the time it takes us to make them is never fast enough.
According to the color experts, the trouble with too much green is that it becomes too moralizing. It allows us (encourages us) to put ourselves up on a pedestal and ignore the multitude of other colors that are essential to making the picture complete.
And then there is orange...
I've always liked orange. If green is my sons favorite color, orange is mine. My Dad used to have a great orange car when I was growing up, I painted our basement orange and I probably have more orange shirts than I have shirts of any other color. Orange is exciting, the sun is orange, it is very difficult to be in a bad mood when your surrounded by orange. Or is it?
Orange makes us sporty (so the color experts say). Orange people are concerned about their health, they are full of joy and they are enthusiastic. Orange makes people constructive! How could anyone not want to be an orange person if these are the personality traits that you get to possess?
I live in a very orange community. While I fully admit to liking the color, I am surrounded by a lot of people that like orange a lot more than I do and probably for reasons a lot different than mine. Normally this doesn't bother me that much and I am still prone to wear my orange shirt from time to time but, every once in a while this over abundance of the sun's color rears an ugly head and on those days, things aren't so bright and shiny.
The trouble with too much orange?
According to our experts it can make us proud, destructive. Excess exposure to orange allows us to become too full of ourselves so that we begin making nasty messes with the expectation that someone else will clean them up for us. Orange can be especially dangerous when mixed with too much red as this makes us angry and inconsiderate. Orange mixed with too much yellow makes us difficult to live with.
My own recent orange experiences? Most mirror what the experts say. I've found that while orange has behaved true to its nature of drawing attention to itself, the color is not always qualified or experienced enough to deal with the kind of attention its seeking. Orange for me has become sanctimonious and in doing so, has dealt with current important issues by placing blame on all of the other colors. Orange is caught up in the moment, using its vibrancy to draw attention to whats on the surface, hoping people will overlook its lack of depth. Orange has no memory and it reminds me that even the brightest of stars fade eventually.
Finally, orange and green don't go too terribly well together. Think about it. Combine the two and what do you get?.... Besides a pumpkin!
Whats the point? There isn't one. I still like orange and green but I only wear them once in a while. Mostly I stick to primary colors like red and blue.
I've always been a fan of the colors orange and green. These aren't the only colors I like but they are certainly up there and in fact, I'm wearing an orange shirt right now as I write this post. Orange and green (separately) can be vibrant colors. They draw attention to themselves as well as their surroundings. Most of the time they make me feel pretty good about myself but the trouble is, lately I find that I have become somewhat overwhelmed by both if these colors to the point that (for me) they are creating an effect exactly opposite of the one that color experts say they should.
Take green for instance. What should come to mind when you think of this color? My thoughts immediately go to trees, grass and other things natural and peaceful (I also have a pretty great biking shirt that is bright green). According to people that profess to know about colors, green evokes harmony and understanding. "Green" people are generous, self controlled and adaptable as well as sympathetic and understanding. Green is my oldest sons favorite color however, (notwithstanding the fact that he doesn't really exhibit many of these "green" traits), my own recent experiences with green have made me question the claims of these so-called color experts.
I recently decided to become involved with an organization that, not surprisingly, has a lot of green in it. Color had nothing to do with my decision to get involved although there may have been some "green" influences behind this decision. Mostly I was interested in what they had to offer, I thought I could learn something from them that could help me later on ,(I still believe this) and in turn I thought that I might have something to give back to them (I still do). The trouble is that now, after only two meetings I have been faced with two conflicts between my impression of what green should be and the what the green that some of these "green" people actually paint themselves with truly is.
Rather than exuding the values of understanding, adaptability or harmony, I have left these green surroundings feeling as though I have been exposed more to to hostility, stubbornness and closed-mindedness. My recent green experience has taught me that the "big picture" is most important and that this picture can only look one way to be accepted. There is only one way to paint the picture and the steps to follow must be deliberate and very clear. Although the most prominent color in the picture is green, the big picture is a "paint by number". There is no room for individual interpretation as to the colors that each number represents. Green only recognizes the big picture and not the small steps that have been taken or that must be taken to get to it. According to green our efforts are often not good enough and the time it takes us to make them is never fast enough.
According to the color experts, the trouble with too much green is that it becomes too moralizing. It allows us (encourages us) to put ourselves up on a pedestal and ignore the multitude of other colors that are essential to making the picture complete.
And then there is orange...
I've always liked orange. If green is my sons favorite color, orange is mine. My Dad used to have a great orange car when I was growing up, I painted our basement orange and I probably have more orange shirts than I have shirts of any other color. Orange is exciting, the sun is orange, it is very difficult to be in a bad mood when your surrounded by orange. Or is it?
Orange makes us sporty (so the color experts say). Orange people are concerned about their health, they are full of joy and they are enthusiastic. Orange makes people constructive! How could anyone not want to be an orange person if these are the personality traits that you get to possess?
I live in a very orange community. While I fully admit to liking the color, I am surrounded by a lot of people that like orange a lot more than I do and probably for reasons a lot different than mine. Normally this doesn't bother me that much and I am still prone to wear my orange shirt from time to time but, every once in a while this over abundance of the sun's color rears an ugly head and on those days, things aren't so bright and shiny.
The trouble with too much orange?
According to our experts it can make us proud, destructive. Excess exposure to orange allows us to become too full of ourselves so that we begin making nasty messes with the expectation that someone else will clean them up for us. Orange can be especially dangerous when mixed with too much red as this makes us angry and inconsiderate. Orange mixed with too much yellow makes us difficult to live with.
My own recent orange experiences? Most mirror what the experts say. I've found that while orange has behaved true to its nature of drawing attention to itself, the color is not always qualified or experienced enough to deal with the kind of attention its seeking. Orange for me has become sanctimonious and in doing so, has dealt with current important issues by placing blame on all of the other colors. Orange is caught up in the moment, using its vibrancy to draw attention to whats on the surface, hoping people will overlook its lack of depth. Orange has no memory and it reminds me that even the brightest of stars fade eventually.
Finally, orange and green don't go too terribly well together. Think about it. Combine the two and what do you get?.... Besides a pumpkin!
Whats the point? There isn't one. I still like orange and green but I only wear them once in a while. Mostly I stick to primary colors like red and blue.
Friday, February 02, 2007
the art of influencing human behavior...
This week Premier Campbell and the BC Liberals were issued a "warning" by a group of labour, environmental, aboriginal and religious "leaders" stating that they must set tougher standards for greenhouse gas emissions. Given the announcement by the United Nations that concludes we are "very likely" to be the major contributors to global warming this seems appropriate I guess. We should expect leadership from our governments.
This coalition of leaders (including BC Federation of Labour President Jim Sinclair) issued a letter warning that "there can be no doubt that bold and immediate leadership is required of governments around the world to combat global warming". No doubt! Despite the fact that the Campbell government has done more in the interest of environmental sustainability than any government before it, I agree that there is still a lot of work to do. Moving forward, governments at all levels must recognize the key role that they will play in guiding all of us to make the right decisions to ensure a future for our planet, never mind our children and grandchildren. The challenge will be in guiding those that don't want to be guided and in ensuring that we all recognize our own roles.
The people making up this so-called coalition, those seeking leadership from our premier are supposedly leaders themselves. While it may be appropriate that they seek guidance from government it should also be expected that they come to the table with their own suggestions and solutions. As a manager, I don't wait for my boss to tell me to lead, more often I report to him on the steps that I have taken to improve the operation of my department. At the risk of singling one member of this coalition out, Jim Sinclair presides over a membership of almost half a million people. One should assume that he himself is in a great position to demonstrate some "bold and immediate leadership" of his own, guiding a significant portion of the population as to ways to minimize their own contributions to global warming. Yet... when I took the time to search the BC Fed's website I found nothing that provided me with any kind of direction or suggestions at becoming a better environmental steward. No policy, no recommended best practices, no position, not even a link!
As the debate heats up, along with the globe, people are going to need leadership and they are going to be looking for it in a variety of places, from many different people (like this coalition perhaps). We should expect leadership from our governments for sure, but its also incumbent upon every single person that calls them self a leader to provide a bit of their own.
This week Premier Campbell and the BC Liberals were issued a "warning" by a group of labour, environmental, aboriginal and religious "leaders" stating that they must set tougher standards for greenhouse gas emissions. Given the announcement by the United Nations that concludes we are "very likely" to be the major contributors to global warming this seems appropriate I guess. We should expect leadership from our governments.
This coalition of leaders (including BC Federation of Labour President Jim Sinclair) issued a letter warning that "there can be no doubt that bold and immediate leadership is required of governments around the world to combat global warming". No doubt! Despite the fact that the Campbell government has done more in the interest of environmental sustainability than any government before it, I agree that there is still a lot of work to do. Moving forward, governments at all levels must recognize the key role that they will play in guiding all of us to make the right decisions to ensure a future for our planet, never mind our children and grandchildren. The challenge will be in guiding those that don't want to be guided and in ensuring that we all recognize our own roles.
The people making up this so-called coalition, those seeking leadership from our premier are supposedly leaders themselves. While it may be appropriate that they seek guidance from government it should also be expected that they come to the table with their own suggestions and solutions. As a manager, I don't wait for my boss to tell me to lead, more often I report to him on the steps that I have taken to improve the operation of my department. At the risk of singling one member of this coalition out, Jim Sinclair presides over a membership of almost half a million people. One should assume that he himself is in a great position to demonstrate some "bold and immediate leadership" of his own, guiding a significant portion of the population as to ways to minimize their own contributions to global warming. Yet... when I took the time to search the BC Fed's website I found nothing that provided me with any kind of direction or suggestions at becoming a better environmental steward. No policy, no recommended best practices, no position, not even a link!
As the debate heats up, along with the globe, people are going to need leadership and they are going to be looking for it in a variety of places, from many different people (like this coalition perhaps). We should expect leadership from our governments for sure, but its also incumbent upon every single person that calls them self a leader to provide a bit of their own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
