If we say to the average citizen: plastic pollution in the oceans is a major problem and the first step is to do something that will have NO impact at all, why should we expect the average citizen to listen to the second step?
If we say to the average citizen: Climate Change is a major problem, just look at the science. The average citizen can say "Well you didn't look at the simple math, let alone the complex science, when you were banning plastic straws. Why would I listen to you about Climate Change?"
It is also important to recognise that the green movement's opponents in establishing protection for the environment don't trifle with meaningless gestures. They have a very clear message that making money (for them, not for you) is much more important than protecting the environment. They also know that meaningless gestures weaken the green movement's credibility.
Advertisement
Solving plastic waste in the oceans isn't going to be easy. It is going to take big changes in the way we (but mostly Asian and African countries) are now doing things.
If the green movement really wants to solve tough problems, such as plastic waste in the oceans, it needs to be seen to be the source of sensible, science based solutions that are likely to have a significant impact. It can't be about meaningless gestures. Meaningless gestures erode the credibility of all environmental protection policies and play straight into the hands of the opponents of environmental protection.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
34 posts so far.