Although a bit late, my two cents on Prof. Manitates and his "trinity of despair"
These three variables do a good job of showing the different views on our decisions to participate in environmental change. The fact is however some of these factors are much more important and influential then others.

Although human nature and environmental strategy are measures that are easy to understand but the idea of social change presented by the professor is a bit complicated and is worth discussing. In his presentation notes, he described his disdain for patch work approach towards change by small dedicated groups and rather suggests a change of "system" thought. I feel this is an optimistic and unrealistic approach to understanding the social contect of promoting change. All change in the world has not come by an all of a sudden change in mentality, it takes the pushing and hard work by leaders and innovators. It takes this push by a few to create the pr and publicty that in turn will take these actions into the mainstream. Just like with securing rights for African Americans in the 1960s, it took the courage of a few to get the ball rolling to create enough controversy that the issue of rights became a mainstream discussion. The same can be seen with environmental groups today who are setting new ideas into the concious and discussion of everyday people.

The Solution: Make it Easy to do the Right Thing!

I found his argument especially interesting because it provides a different framework to think about how social change in fact happens. It is a misconception (one that I am guilty of having held) that in order to affect change,the masses need to be on board. But that simply is not true and this triangle clearly shows that. It is more important to have a strong dedicated core that can focus on setting agendas and later galvanizing the masses. This is evident when looking at all types of lobbying success. We need to stop acting like individuals and start acting like citizens otherwise the problems and at least the roots of the problems will continue to exist because we live with flawed systems and structures that allow these problems to exist. Overall I thought that the Triangle was very interesting and fairly accurate.

Great Idea, if the price is right.

There is no doubt that it is possible to create products and buildings that are both economically sound as well as ecologically beneficial for the environment. It seems almost idiotic why so little has been put into making buildings and products more environmentally sound for the very minimal cost increase. With the great examples of soil roofs and create non toxic goods as well as the very book itself shows that it is a very possible objective that more designers and architects should be considering.

If we manage to move away from these current consumption cycles into actual sustainable cycles as the authors have prescribed, we can avoid much of the destructive consumption patterns that we have found ourselves in. Although if the price difference between well designed and supplied building is comparable to a poor standard build one, there is no doubt that this technique will be choosen but the problem lies in when the there is a price difference between the two, and if the price difference too large for developers to handle. One possible solution for this could be to just make this new ecological building practices standard so all new construction and designs implement these techniques, although this might raise the cost of buildings, the earth reap the rewards.

William McDonough is brilliant!

Basically my title says it all. I totally agree with his philosophy and the ideas he portrays in cradle to cradle. I think they make perfect sense. People are not going to change or start to really think and apply environmentally friendly practices into their lives unless its productive, innovative and continues to move us forward. As we've discussed in the class, people aren't willing or accepting of moving backwards so we need need to move forward and apply new ideas that will help up preserve and live in harmony with the environment. I don't think we'll ever be able to get rid of industries and large scale companies so we should work with them and redesign they're production process so that waste can equal consumption. If we can apply these new design measures into all new development projects not only in the United States but in developing countries, we become that much closer to creating a sustainable environment, in which we live in sync with the natural world (aka we won't be destroying it!!)

Perhaps these plan is optimistic but at least its progressive and creative and more plausible then sitting around waiting for people to change there lifestyles back to the way they were 100 years ago. That will never happen. People change when they have an alternative. If we give companies a comparable alternative to their current means of production that takes the environment into consideration and ultimately ends up saving them money; they will choose the alternative. And as more and more companies do so, green architecture and design will become the standard. Being pessimistic and threatening has done absolutely nothing for the environmental movement because people feel there is no point to do anything sense we're doomed anyhow. I like this idea because its inspiring. It makes me want to jump on board and get involved because it makes sense and is ultimately I believe and hope the future plan of our country...or it better be otherwise we really are screwed!

The Greening Of That Work Meeting

After reading Jone's article, I think that green collar jobs are a great idea. IF we could replace jobs, boost the economy, and help to create more sustainable industries I honestly see no reason not to. While I do not agree that green jobs would solve all problems or that green jobs are all we need to save our economy I think they are a peice of the bigger puzzle. If greening these jobs allows for the education of workers, this would have a positive influence on the environment. Knowledge is not only power, nor is it simply jobs and a better economy, when it comes to the environment knwoeledge is fear. I think perhaps maybe we need to be afraid, becasue fear mobalizes us, it brings us together, and turns us into civilains rather than only consumers. Mostly I think green jobs would help the economy and would help to spread knowledge which would mean good things for the environment. Still, like I said this is just one step in the right direction.
-Tess

Green Jobs

There is no doubt that much of the opportunities in the future economy lies in Green Jobs. It would be naiive to believe that it is both environmentally and economically plausable to sustain the traditional manufacturing that has existed in the United States. Jones has some really strong arguments when he proposes new investments into new green industries because they are jobs that can suite our technological advanced industry and not easily be exported. Due to much of the focus of Green jobs are based on a reinvestment in the local community, the rewards are kept local rather then exported to other countries or lost among corporate shareholders.
By a refocus on the local level, exernatlities such as transportation costs and offshoring of jobs and profits are eliminated. Green jobs keeps everything inhouse.
Just like everything else in todays society, it needs to be market forces to lead a way for more green jobs. With increased fuel prices and more protectionistic trade politcies as a backlash against globalization, the forces are gaining ground for such a system proposed by Jones, hopfully it will be soon enough.

Reaching All Levels of Society: A Guide to Gaining Environmental Support

I believe Mr. Van Jones’ perceptions are extremely valid and legitimate. Individuals that are worrying about day to day crime and making enough to pay their bills are not in a position to think about the polar bears if it comes at an expense to them. This is precisely why green collar jobs are so crucial in getting the lower socio-economic class on board with environmental activism. I thought it was especially interesting when Mr. Jones was quoted as saying that he never plans on see a member of the NAACP going against environmental concerns or being sold out to polluters. This is extremely important because through his visions he has been able to create situations in which environmental issues on the ballot improve the lives of the socioeconomic class rather than taking their much needed tax money and spending it on a cause that seems so different from their everyday lives. In my opinion, green collar jobs are one of the only major ways to continue to gain support from people that normally would not feel as though they are in a position to support such acts.

Green-Collar Jobs to the Rescue!!!

I really like the idea of green collar jobs. Honestly it's the only thing that makes sense for dealing with our present economy, with people loosing their jobs and the environment. I don't understand how anyone could think this would be a bad idea. As Van Jones article points out, "a recent study released by the Political Economy Research Institute and Center for American Progress shows that the U.S. can create two million jobs over the next two years by investing $100 billion in a green economic recovery plan." That's one seventh of the cost of the original bail out plan! I don't understand why this wasn't done in the first place.

These new green collar jobs would provide the working class with secure jobs that are local and can not be outsourced like most of our old blue collar jobs. A bailout that doesn't address the job shortage here in the United States would not solve the economic problems even if the economy stabilizes. This green plan would help solve both. Also I like the idea of creating a Green Corps since its provides people with an opportunity to participate in community service and it teaches people how to perform green collar jobs, since new skills are going to have to be developed.

I believe this is the only way to address the environmental problems in the United States like Global Warming because it deals with saving the economy and providing jobs. No one has wanted to invest in the environment because it means reshaping how our economy runs and that could potentially mean some short term loss, something most people would not accept. But due to the current situation with our economy already in shambles I think presenting green collar jobs as a solution to our economic crisis, could get the process of reshaping our economy for a greener future underway.