Lower your standard of living by choice

Ashish Gupta
Nov 3 · 3 min read

Consider a person with a medical condition caused by too much smoking where their survival depends on a drug still in research. They can improve their condition by reducing smoking. Should they reduce smoking? Or wait for the drug? Or both? Further, imagine that their second hand smoke making ill the people around them? Now will our recommendation change?

Consumption is “smoking” the sustainability of the planet. If the whole world were to consume at the same level as the developed-world lifestyle, there are insufficient resources on the planet. This argument is well known and oft repeated to urge people to reduce their carbon footprint.

The challenge is how should an individual implement the advice of “reducing their carbon footprint.” It is hard to implement our intentions especially when they are complex. What does it mean to “reduce” footprint? What are “environment-friendly” products? What is the impact of paper straws instead of plastic straws? Is a compostible straw OK? I heard that China has stopped buying waste material so recycling does not work. So on and so on…. For most of us our carbon footprint is inscrutable.

Yet the damage continues to pile up.

In order to implement this intention, we need to change our mindset — and mindset changes come from constant appreciation as it has been built that way also. A proposed way to change our mindset is that before using ANYTHING we ask “can I do without this.”

This is 0 base optimization. First ask if the default answer can be nothing. And then find lower carbon alternatives, recycling etc. The mindset change comes from asking this question ALL THE TIME — paper napkin, plastic spoon, ice cream cone, vacation — everything.

Why?

  • Being “smart” is too hard. So simplify the approach. Further unintended consequences of smart solutions make it hard to evaluate choices.
  • Habits are hard to change and require constant attention.
  • Behaviour change is infectious.
  • Taking a hard line creates change and innovation (saying no to coffee because its in a paper coffee cup will increase the odds that I carry a steel mug).

Some counter arguments for the above given that nothing happens for free.

  • My material standard of living will fall: YES. That is precisely the point. Our current standard of living is not sustainable when extrapolated to the world (footprintnetwork.org, Vaclav Smil). So either we reduce our material lifestyle voluntarily or it will be forced upon us. Most people have realized though that reduction in material lifestyle results in improved quality of life.
  • Innovation will save us: Indeed innovation is needed. However this is like the drug problem. We need both reduction and innovation. Further, data argues that innovation usually reduces unit footprint but makes worse the overall impact on the environment. Independent of the latter argument, we need both reduction of consumption and innovate.
  • This is a giga-ton problem and nibbling at the edges dont matter. The developed-world has over a billion people who can each buy one shirt less, eat 10 fewer steaks, take one less flight. That is a MULTI giga-ton solution.
  • This is a sacrifice. Yes. From a narrow perspective maybe one shirt less is a sacrifice. However this will result in better old age, children’s lives, while experiencing a simpler life.
  • Reducing consumption will drive the economy into a recession. Indeed this approach will slow down economic growth for the developed economies. Continued economic growth is neither rational nor sustainable — that is a conclusion several economists are coming to. More importantly, if economic growth happens at the cost of making climate change worse then we need to sacrifice economic growth.

This approach is most needed from people living “developed world” lifestyles — independent of whether they are in India or the US or China. They are consuming the most and are role models for the rest of the population. People who are just entering the ranks of the developed life style are going to consume more. They are emulating the role models. These people are not about to put climate first. Hence this behavior change has to be led by those who already live a developed-world life style. However, just as the “consume more” lifestyle has spread so will the alternatives.

Ashish Gupta

Written by

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade