Money, money, money.

Human nature is centered around money, consumption and eventually how much destruction we can cause to the Earth. We don't INTEND to cause this destruction, yet we don't care enough to refrain from the activities that help us in the short term, yet cause us harm in the long. As Annie Leonard states in the Story of Stuff, our entire existence is centered around how much we contribute to the global arrow of consumption. Our worth is weighed in how much we own, how much we buy and how much waste we create. It's incredible how indirectly the media, an entity which is supposed to reflect human nature, is encouraging us to destroy our environment. Annie Leonard also addresses the issue of the average human's daily routine. Our daily routines consist of; shopping, working (to sustain our shopping), watching TV (after a hard day's work) - then watching  a commercial that ruins our self-esteem, shopping again for the product suggested by the commercial, working to support our shopping, watching more TV to ruin our self image and so forth. A pathetic cyclic routine easy to put a halt to, yet how many are truly willing to let go of such a simple life style for our self preservation? Truly reflects humanity's self destructive nature.

However, back to the point; human's love money. Money is what makes our world go around. Well, as Karl Marx realised, the best way to tackle an almost impossible to solve issue is to break it down from the inside. Marx intended to overthrow materialism with another form of materialism. Appeal to human nature, keep the concept they are so adamant to follow, yet apply this concept for the betterment of the world. Using this theory, money is the concept I am tackling. I feel in order to reduce carbon emissions, save the environment and save ourselves (before it's too late. Though I must admit the human race has shown knack in the ability to step in right before the situation gets out of hand) we must put a price on carbon. This is where creating a global price for carbon comes in. It is the government's job to take an initiative in such a global paradigm shift and put a price on all carbon emissions. In my opinion, this is probably the best solution to have come out of the decades of pointless debate and excuses regarding our ecological issues. Nobody wants to part with their money and when there's a price on carbon, nobody's going to be emitting more carbon than absolutely necessary to run a business. A carbon price can be essential to stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that prevents extreme climate change. Annual global emissions will significantly decline since putting a price on carbon will limit the output of carbon hence reducing the levels of heat trapped in the air. As addressed in my earlier posts, there is the issue of passing the buck on to third world countries; forcing the third world countries to subject to the developed countries' selfish demands. Greenhouse gases emitted in one location are felt all around the world due to wind currents and the fact that we all share the same atmosphere. This is justification enough to put a ban on using other countries to produce one country's environmentally detrimental goods. Furthermore, it is for this very reason that no country may be exempt from putting a price on carbon. The countries of the world must come together on an intergovernmental level to ratify and enforce a law that gives carbon a price, a value in money; a number that reflects the value it has to our planet. As explained by the methods and concepts addressed above, putting a price on carbon is definitely a solution for the future. A solution liberal enough to appeal to all nations and detailed enough to prevent misinterpretations.