Does anyone else think twice when asked, “Plastic or paper bags?” Everytime I hear that, I think, the plastic bags are already made, the paper has roach eggs in the glue, and the trees have already been destroyed - I don’t want roaches, and …” On and on my eco-concerned mind wanders off in the check-out line. I’ve brought my home up to R-82, cutting my utilities by 50%, use gray-water to water plants, trees, and bulbs, reduced my driving by 50% and drive more slowly with less whoain’ and more steady goin,’ use much more waxed paper than anything else, cook greater amounts to freeze other meals, recycle via Free-Cycle.com, unplug everything at night, and when I leave for more than 12 hours, change blower motor filter when the electric bill comes in each month - out of habit; my home and gardens outdoors are all xeric and organic, and I practice no-till gardening with ease, save everything possible to use in the garden as decorative items, or ‘assists,’ and many more practices I’ve maintained since “The Whole Earth Catalog” alerted me to our earth’s demise. At the same time, I have to wonder why municipalities don’t ‘under-write” eco-wise changes - one of my pet peeves is sloped driveways that facilitate water run-off into the sewers during a rain, or haphazard “watering.” A minute speed-bump would direct the water back onto the turf or garden for very little investment. I have a slew (no pun int. again) of those ideas/gripes in my head but no one listens to me (governments). If a tree falling in the forest …?

Mugsy, that is indeed the crux of the problem. What is the periodicity of these oft-mentioned natural cycles? The Milankovich cycles are periodic, but are about 100,000 years long. The last ice age was about 15,000 years ago. There is a pseudo cycle about 1500 years long inferred from ice core samples. If one thinks about how much human civilization has advanced technologically in the last 1500 years, about how extensively we have manipulated and altered our surroundings to an unprecedented degree on an unprecedented scale - the planet has never been similarly affected by any of its past inhabitants in any previous cycles. Why is it so difficult to accept the possibility that our ever burgeoning mass of humanity is changing the state of our planet? And what is the downside of recognizing this possibility if it results in our being more responsible in our use of resources? Oh yes, I forgot about the inertia of industry. It’s just easier and less expensive in the short term to keep on going on. Much easier than getting some bright people to creatively solve some important and difficult problems or getting people to accept that we should want less. Much easier than retooling factories or choosing not to aim for a monster house in the suburb with two SUVs in the garage. While I “believe” in global warming, I must admit to fearing that it’s a moot point. I think there’s a greater likelihood that human civilization will self-destruct by nuclear means than global warming. We are only a few decades into the nuclear age, and only a few years into black market nuclear proliferation. How vigilant and clever will we have to be to avoid the use of nuclear weapons in the future? How vigilant and clever will we have to be to avoid escalation that leads to irreversible and irrecoverable destruction of human civilization? Can we really be that clever and vigilant, and for how long?