At a kayak guides meeting several weeks ago, Dave Mention of the Maine Island Trail Association stated that the slowing economy has been good for many wild Maine islands. Last summer’s high gas prices undoubtedly contributed to the decline in island visits during the summer of 2008. The decline in visits, in turn, helped some fragile island ecosystems get healthier again after years of overuse.
Observations of our own consumption habits and those of our neighbors might likewise convince us that to the extent we are spending less and using less gasoline, these economic hard times might, at least, be good for the global environment. Paul Crutzen, an atmospheric scientist, has stated that the slowdown in the world economy will likely lead to a decrease in global carbon dioxide emissions. It’s hard to sense even small reassurance from any such benefit, however, when the reality is that due to the economic downturn, there are people hungry and cold today who were not hungry and cold a few months ago.
Additionally, lack of agreement exists about whether an economic downturn will benefit the environment and slow global warming at all. A recent Scientific American article notes: “Despite a slowing global economy, carbon dioxide emissions continued to rise in 2007 . . . jumping 2.9 percent higher than the last year’s total.” The United States and China were the two nations that had the largest increases in greenhouse gas emissions.
It remains to be seen if U.S. lawmakers (many of whom recently named tackling global warming as their #1 goal for next year) can keep their eyes on the global warming ball, while also working to right the ship of the economy. As stated in a recent Washington Post article, “It’s quite possible that the economic mess will work against emissions reduction efforts by making governments and businesses more skittish about spending money to develop and deploy alternative energy technologies or enact tough new emissions standards.”
It’s essential that we not set the world economy and the global environment at odds. Ultimately they are inseparable. In the long term, neither one can do well without the other. If a bad economy and lack of clean energy resources only results in relaxation of pollution standards and continued destruction of the world’s forests, and if atmospheric C02 levels continue to rise as a result, the pristine islands off the coast of Maine — and all of us, in uncountable ways — will also be impacted.
That’s the important lesson here, I think. Any islands of prosperity will not survive long, unless the world economy improves. Any islands of ecological health will not last unless the global environment is put back on the path to sustainability.
