No one likes to think they are at fault when it comes to
perpetuating egregious social problems. And environmental issues
are no exception ““ everyone from President George W. Bush to
many average students can think of a handful of excuses in
attempting to legitimize their environmentally abusive
practices.
In the UCLA and Westwood community, recycling is a pressing
environmental issue many ignore or belittle. When asked whether or
not they recycle, most students displaced the blame by saying their
apartment complexes do not have recycling pick up or their dorm
recycling dispensers are not easily found. Others said that,
regardless of their personal efforts, the indifference displayed by
other students ensures the problem’s perpetuation.
Wherever the blame is placed, it cannot be pinned on one person
or group. On the one hand, students should not have to go out of
their way to recycle; apartment managers and housing officials
should provide easy access to recycling facilities. But often many
care more about maintenance and rent than the environment. On the
other hand, students should not view the apathy of their housing
overseers as an incentive not to recycle. Collecting stacks of
newspapers or beverage containers in their apartments and taking
them down to a recycling center is worth the extra hour a
month.
Recycling is not difficult but neither is being apathetic.
Because of this, other simple environmentally-friendly methods of
conservation are also largely ignored. Californians still burn wood
fires instead of gas fires, people use water carelessly with daily
45 minute showers, students leave their computers on all night, and
drivers who are never going to use four-wheel drive in their
lifetime traverse state freeways in gas-guzzling SUVs.
Anyone who doubts the importance of being environmentally aware
should look back to the energy crisis and its outcome. Conserving
consumers bailed out California, not Gov. Gray Davis, the federal
government or the energy companies.
Californians must take initiative. The environment must be a
priority even if it takes a small effort. Citizens must also demand
more from their leaders. Although environmental lobbyists hold sway
in Washington, they cannot single-handedly stop the onslaught of
the Republican-controlled federal government on the water we drink
and the air we breathe.
Bush has committed environmental atrocities like suspending
protections against arsenic in drinking water and agreeing to a
logging proposal allowing the destruction of protected forests.
Bush’s most grievous act may be backing out of the Kyoto
Protocol in 2001. U.S. participation in the Protocol is vital for
progress because the United States is responsible for 36.1 percent
of greenhouse gas emissions. The Protocol aims to cut emissions by
5.2 percent from their 1990 levels. Bush’s reason for opting
out of the agreement was that American participation would have
cost the economy $400 billion and 4.9 million jobs. And he tried to
appease his opponents by proposing a plan of his own, but analysts
demonstrated that Bush’s plan actually increases emissions
levels to 30 percent above 1990 levels.
Bush’s warped perspective seems to be shared by some of
the citizens he leads; too many citizens think that the environment
can be sacrificed as long as people keep their jobs and our economy
does not take a short-term hit. The problem with the short-term
perspective is that environmental problems cannot be set aside on a
table and taken care of when it is convenient.
Environmental problems aggregate. The hole in the ozone cannot
be filled in later.