Vinzen Josh L.

Borja STE(JAP) - Einstein

Use Less of Useless, Instead

With a future bombarded by the threats of Climate Change, it is imperative for us as a country to act
now before it is too late. However, while it is very important to address this with urgency—this should never
be at the cost of making reckless and irrational decisions.

Every step towards putting an end to the Climate Emergency is something that requires rational
thinking. We have to solve it with the understanding that there is no instant solution with instantaneous
outcomes. Hence, the outright idea of banning every industry in this country that causes the environment such
“harm” is not going to be an effective solution in the end. Here’s why:

Firstly, in terms of policy-making, this appears as an easy-way-out type of solution. It promises ending
every threat to Climate Change by removing the things that cause them—and while that may be ideal—it isn’t
really a feasible and well-thought-out solution.

If you’ll come to think of it, nearly every industry—if not all—are in one way or another harmful to the
environment. Even the renewable energy industry has its harmful environmental impacts; like building dams
that flood and disrupt forest ecosystems, windmills that endanger flying wildlife, and producing solar PV cells
that take up hazardous chemicals and minerals like Indium. To simply put, banning all industries that harm
the environment would mean banning literally all industries, and that’s not something we’d ultimately want.

We want proactive solutions that will not create bigger problems than that of what we already have.
Simply banning all industries, whether it’d be over a long period of time, or whether it’d only be for “really
harmful” industries like oil and mining, are still nothing but irrational and drastic measures that would have
detrimental outcomes for the weak and small economy of the Philippines.

Surely, if we had 300X of a larger economy and stability, then we could implement such policies. But
the stark reality is that we don’t, and unlike richer countries like those in Europe and United States who can
pass 100% renewable energy goals, we’re stuck facing problems the way a third-world country would do.

That doesn’t mean we can’t do anything, though.

There are always alternatives. Alternatives that are probably even better and more effective, and even
without the economic risks. One of the ways I see it, is using less of “useless”.

Using less of useless means abandoning our toxic dependence on environmentally-harmful products
and lifestyles. In this way, the solution becomes more personal and true-to-life, rather than being full of big,
unattainable goals and promises. After all, isn’t it easier to convince people to say “Hey, I don’t like using
straws anymore” rather than, “Hey, I think we should ban clothes, gadgets, meat, and everything out there
harmful to the environment!”

This approach gives importance to rational Climate Action. People should learn how significant they
can contribute to the cause against Climate Change if they stop using “useless” products like plastic sachets,
when there are already refillable packaging; straws, when they can just drink from the cup; even plastic bags,
and Styrofoam packagings, when there are already much more eco-friendly alternatives.

In the end, solving the Climate Crisis means seeing it from a bigger perspective—we can only move
forward if we learn to take a step towards the future without taking two steps back. #UseLessofUseless