Erin Schrode: The Green Generation

Also, perhaps reading the great books in a dusty old library or in one's home does not make one smarter, I have personally found no internet site, or blog that could hold a candle to Von Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Tocqueville, Faulkner, Ricardo, Fitzgerald, The Federalist, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch, Adam Smith, etc., etc., etc. Nor can some indie band on Youtube, strumming a few elementary chords and singing about their teenage angst compare to Mozart, Shostakovich, Mahler, Art Tatum, Dizzy Gillespie, etc., etc., etc. Thank God that the masters did not have Pro Tools, electronic "instruments" and videos! The music has stood for centuries, and moves and inspires people to this day. 99% of every act in popular music disappear completely within a year or two. Great things are timeless and the themes they explore are timeless and have eternal relevance.


Certainly these are all subjective opinions.

Please let me restate -

This young woman is a bright, energetic, positive individual, full of potential. My question is, potential for what?

I'm no dinosaur. I use the internet. I admittedly do not get the whole Facebook/Twitter thing and, like the internet, I would bet a huge majority of it is a huge time waster of little or no value. Additionally, it implies a narcissism and unrealistic attitude about one's importance. It all runs on the belief that you believe you have something important or useful to say and that other people are interested in hearing it. I like P.J. O'Rourke's line about blogs, which could apply to all this Facebook?twitter stuff - "Blogs are free and worth the price." Our children have technology far superior to what I had growing up, but are they smarter? Are they deeper, more critical thinkers? Is the soundbite world we have created and its transmission the best use of technology? Is information for information's sake a positive?

I would much prefer that woman in India to have electricity, clean running water, private property rights and a reliable rule of law than access to Twitter or Facebook. Wealthy Western college graduates have been "helping" in Africa, Asia and India for decades. Are the people of these nations better off for this meddling? Perhaps in some cosmic sense, when one individual achieves happiness for a minute more in a day than he would have without the intervention of the Peace Corps, these things are useful, but in a flesh and blood, forward thinking way, wouldn't these people be better off with modern infrastructure and some of the technology we enjoy? I read an article in a magazine that went on and on about how some environmentalist charity gave African villagers solar powered lights. The problem is, the batteries lasted just a few hours. Is this progress? Marie-Antoinette would certainly think so.

My perception is not flawless, but it is my perception, based on alomst 50 years of living experience, living in many places, having many occupations and raising a family. I do not wish to tell anyone how he or she should live, and in return, I ask others not to tell me how to live.

I work for an agricultural business. I am deeply concerned about conservation and the environment, but I prefer voluntary cooperation over government coercion. What do I do for the world? I guess in the big scheme of things I do not do much. I clean up after myself, pay my own way, love my wife, raise my children and hope not to leave this world dumber than when I entered. I contribute to the degree that I can to charitable causes that I care about, practice my Faith and that's about all. I was not raised to believe that I could save the world as our children are today, with the nebulous notions of "social justice," "celebrating diversity," and "making a difference." I have friends who attend rallies and volunteer for the "social justice" causes, but drop their children at day care every da at 6 a.m. and pick them up at 6 p.m. I guess saving the world takes up a lot of time, and it cannot be disrupted by things like raising your children! This is a choice they make. It's funny how often they mention to me a story about their children and ask, "I have no idea where they learned that!" This saddens me.

Perhaps all this "change" is positive in your view. Not all change is good. It is just change.

Mark Sullivan,

You make a few good points (indeed, cleaning up trash does not relate directly to global warming), but I find your observations to be largely condescending. I spent 5 years in University studying Environmental Conservation, and probably only visited the library 5 times to do research. This is not sad and superficial, it is just the trajectory of modern education. I read countless peer-reviewed research papers and sections of text books, but I had to access this information mostly online. This is a product of the way the younger generation learns, as well as the way courses are now being taught and structured by learning institutions. I don't think that a romanticized vision of sitting in a dusty library poring over ancient texts of the great thinkers in history has anything to do with a better education. Open your mind.

You're saying that Picking up trash in a park doesn't impact on reducing global warming; agreed. But, you could put it in a rather subtle way, without discouraging a good deed. Everybody can talk, only a few can do, the least we could do is not De-motivate them.

Mr.Sullivan, you seem to have a really good knowledge about global economy, but what use have you put it to? Many knows/speaks stuff; my 90 year old, obnoxious neighbor has a rather interesting philosophy towards running a nation than our president. My 8 year old niece has read more books than any of us in our family, combined! You are looking at a rather disruptive way of doing things when you comment on Erin's intentions. Solar/Wind are not cheap enough, aren't gonna help 3rd world nations; agreed! But some day we are only gonna use green energy (Hydrogen fuel, fission power, whatever it is) and we aren't gonna jump over, the transition is gonna be slow.

What exactly are you trying to say Mr.Sullivan, do you have a plan drawn out which answers all the questions or provides solutions to all 3rd world nation's problems? we all have to start somewhere. I can't make a poor African country, able to meet their food demands by a magical wink, so can't Erin. But don't we all wish it would happen.

If you are thinking that Erin is just some kinda beauty pageant wishing for world peace on her stage, may be it's just your perception. May be you are wrong, may be she is more than that.

I didn't know about Erin's existence, before 10 minutes. Erin started a community and asked everyone to go/buy green. You are giving a page-long essay with a big frown, stating that her intentions aren't gonna constitute at a larger scale. But here is my answer to that in really simple words.

A QUARTER might not change the world. we all know that!
Every American spending A QUARTER each, just once, might.
Every American spending A QUARTER each, everyday in a year, would.
Every American spending A QUARTER every time they shop, definitely does change the world.

Big problems doesn't have to have big solutions, doing what we can from our power definitely constitutes at a large scale.

And you really shouldn't have said that about Google. Your libraries would've given a little more info about Google if you cared to sat in front of computers. I'm not against libraries, but I prefer Google. Google is the fastest, lightest, anorexic page which weighs 12KB. Google runs the best energy efficient servers ever, Google could give more than 3 million search results at same energy (electricity) consumed by an average US household/month. And there are better chances for a "third-world-nation" (which you were talking about) to get a $100 dollar laptop than to build a big library, full of books made of paper which are again from "trees". Haven't thought of it this way, have you?

And about twitter, do you have any idea what social-media (facebook, twitter, myspace, youtube, etc.) could do to our future? let me give you a quick 400-year recap!

Newspapers, radio, TV, www - evolution of "Broadcasting Media"
- 1:N (1 to many model; one-way)

Postage, telephone/telegraph, fax, mobile, email - evolution of "Conversational Media" - 1:1 (1 to 1; two-way)

Bottom-line:
where there is a group (wide-audience) there is no conversation (2-way communication)
where there is a conversation, there is no group

But now with Social Media it's N:N (many to many; two-way)
what's possible now wasn't possible for the past 400 years.

Or else an Indian won't be knowing what's going on at the other side of the world and be defending an American from another American. Thanks to our technology! What's really sad is that I can only see an obnoxious, self-righteous old man, who doesn't want to change, even for a better reason. If you beg to differ, I'd really be interested in knowing what you do for a living and how you contribute to this world in your own flawless perception.

Please respond, Mr.Sullivan!

LaurenMR,

I clearly stated - this young woman is obviously very bright, has a wonderful personality, is a good public speaker and cares deeply about her cause. Her intentions are wonderful. Intentions are not enough.

If she really thought about this topic, she would see that far more is at stake than what she thinks. There are still people on this earth with NO electricity. How are we to get it to them? This young lady, like all Americans have absolutely NO concept of what these people go through. It is a "millionaire's problem" to debate whether or not to build windmills or solar farms. There are hundreds of millions of poor living in huts, heating their homes and cooking with dung. Our children are taught that good intentions = good deeds. I say NONSENSE!

Mark Sullivan,
Instead of sitting here commenting on everything that you may see as negative with Erin Schrode’s presentation you may want to see how progressive her efforts are compared to the rest of her generation. Knowing her personally, I know how hard she works on a daily basis to influence not just her friends, but the world. Not only is she a student at one of the top universities, but she is the leader of her informative organization. Erin is much more than a small pebble thrown into our pond, she is a brilliant and enthusiastic boulder. I urge that instead of replying once more to this video you make an attempt to do something to actually make a difference (I find it somewhat unpredictable that you are worrying about keeping up with such responses about your urging to “Be creative, learn, think deeply about ‘big’ issues,” because I know Erin is doing just that.

Actually, we have screwed our grandchildren enough already with the mountain of debt and structurally unsustainable government budgets we are leaving them, persuing our utopian fantasies. Solar has been around, solely because of government subsidies, for over 40 years. It is still unaffordable (even with government subsidy), and is barely measurable as a part of our energy picture. What you are really saying is that the citizens of the world should all be willing to pay much more for energy than we should to fulfill an amorphous, utopian fantasy held by a few intellectuals, activists and high school children like this young lady.

To make this assertion is to ignore the real needs of the earth's people, in my opinion. The market, with its impersonal, efficiency-seeking character, has determined that in terms of power generation, its cost, its effectiveness, its reliability, as well as the negative potential costs, that carbon based systems are the best place to be for now. We could go ahead and take the contrary view and force people to pay more, in terms of the rates for energy, the increase in taxes required, the development of the distribution infrastructure necessary to implement a non-carbon energy/fuel system, the decrease in economic activity when businesses are forced to pay far more for energy, the rise in cost of all consumer goods and services with the embedded extra energy costs, subsidies, government agencies to manage this as well as the fact that this massive extra investment will pull money and investment from elsewhere, because as we all know, almost every nation on earth, as well as the United States, is broke. Who knows what will have to give from government expenditures and individual citizens' budgets. When weighing the true dollar for dollar costs required to end use of petro-fuels as well as the opportunity costs and damage to employment and economic growth, one has to conclude that for now, solar/wind/algae and all other petroleum alternatives are not viable except in the very tiny degree they are used now.

Europe may have made these investments, but they have massive budget deficit problems and structural unsustainability to their welfare states. Europe and China are hardly good comparisons, as Europe has perpetually high unemployment, even in good times, declining native populations and decades of social turmoil that we see play out in the streets of everywhere from Amsterdam to Athens to Paris. Spain, often held up as an example of a strong, smart "green" energy economy is on the brink of collapse. Where are these high paying "green" jobs that are to be the future of economic growth? They exist only "on paper," in the minds of environmentalist propagandists and activists as well as their bought and paid for members of governments all over the world. Is it any consolation for an unemployed French citizen watching from his flat in Paris, as unemployed, disgruntled "youths" burn cars, that his power is expensive and generated by nuclear power or a windmill? If Europe was expected to defend itself and build and sustain sufficient military power, that is now provided by the United States, their economies would collapse completely. Some day soon, the United States will see it can no longer afford to police the world and will close bases in Europe and elsewhere and expect Europe to defend Europe. China is a Communist Dictatorship. The state can command that things be done because they have all the money and can do what they wish. A prison cell awaits those who dissent.

Solar, wind and other alternative energy producers should put all of their energy into making their technologies affordable and efficient in their own right, without government subsidies, so that they defeat fossil fuels on the field of competition. When this is done, the opportunity costs will be neautralized and the poorest of the poor will have an opportunity to take part in them as well.

I would like to ask this young lady if a donor stepped up to put a small, coal fired power plant in all of the poorest areas of Africa as well as the infrastructure to transmit electric power to these poor people to give then lights, air conditioning, clean running water, and the dramatic rise in economic activity that would follow, if she would support this donor's efforts.

We can get off most fossil fuels within 20-30 years if we put a concerted effort into solar, wind, fuel cells, electric cars, algae biofuels, and new nuclear technologies.
We also need a new national smart power grid to move electricity.
We can use a carbon tax on fossil fuels to pay for it, and it'll provide millions of JOBS that can't be exported.
Europe & China are ALREADY doing this and America will lose out in future green energy technologies, if we don't.
We owe it to our grandchildren.

How sad - an obviously bright young lady proudly states she does not go to the library to do a research paper. She relies on the Internet for her information. This self indulgent, arrogant belief that she can save the world may make her feel good or important or quasi-intellectual, but it accomplishes nothing.

She does not speak for her generation. She speaks for herself. Nor should young people be persuaded to allow others to speak for them. A "green teen" was involved in my daughter's Key Club and claimed that spending an afternoon picking up trash in a small park in a small town in the Southern Caliofornia Desert would "decrease global warming." This young lady would call that enlightened. I call it silly.

My recommendation would be to go to the library and stop living in your "sound bite" world. Things cannot be summed up in a twitter poste. Fill your brain with the good things, the deep things, the biggest thoughts ever thought.

By the way, all of this twittering, e-mail, internet stuff we all do is run by server systems and infrastructure that uses tremendous amounts of electricity. Since wind and solar are unreliable and a tiny fraction of our electric generation, Google's countless servers are run by electricity from coal generation. If you were truly "green," you would recommend that Google and all sites use only wind power. They never will because wind is not reliable and cannot maintain the spinning reserve necessary to keep the site up reliably. Nor can solar.

God Bless you for your enthusiasm. You have much to offer the world. Be creative, learn, think deeply about "big" issues and do not allow every aspect of your life be based on shallow political ideology.