NY Times Article About New Secretary of Energy Fails to Mention Reduction is the Only Way to Prevent of Ecological Collapse

In elementary school, I was taught the 3 r's: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. What I liked about this simple phrase, particularly the first 2, was that it was logical, simple to follow, and would ultimately save the planet.

The NY Times reports the following:
Steven Chu, the new secretary of energy, said Wednesday that solving the world’s energy and environment problems would require Nobel-level breakthroughs in three areas: electric batteries, solar power and the development of new crops that can be turned into fuel.

We do not require Nobel-Level breakthroughs, as much as teutonic shifts in our consumption pattern. We'll learn more from indigenous communities who have successfully sustained themselves for millenia than from all the Nobel Laurreattes in the world.

Problems riddle both Chu's priorities and the Times article. The Secretary of Energy fails to mention reduction as the most important strategy in stopping the world's energy and environmental crisis. Why?

The idea of reduction is rarely popular. It requires people cutting back on their commodities, and most peopel prefer more than less. Chu's desire for scientific solutions that will allow Americans to maintain absurdly large levels of consumption will lead us towards certain ecological catastrophe and further wars.

In justifying the dangerous and absurd "clean coal" fantasy, Chu cites nitrogen fertilizers as a life-saving wonder of science:

Dr. Chu, who once called coal “a nightmare” in the way it is currently used, said the United States must also lead the world in finding a way to burn the fuel cleanly, because other countries with big coal reserves, like India and China, will not turn away from coal.

But Dr. Chu said such developments were not impossible. At the turn of the last century, he noted, scientists like Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch made Nobel-winning discoveries that allowed the development of cheap nitrogen fertilizers, saving Europe from starvation.

What Dr. Chu negelects is that those same fertilizers have contaminated the vast majority of North American and European waterways leading to a dramatic escallation of cancer. In celebrating scientific breakthroughs, he neglects to mention the scientific fantasies that never worked, that led to deeper crisis, that brought us into this mess to begin with.

Electric batteries need lithium and solar power needs basic metals. Both of these require extensive mining. If history is our guide, mining has devestated the environment, caused massive wars, and enormous labor exploitation.

Currenlty, biofuel is an unlikely candidate as we're already spending much to much of the earth's resources growing monocrops for fuel rather than a diversity of healthy foods. In order to grow enough crops to sustain biofuels, we would lose significant portions of space to sustain ourselves and ultimately use up the resource of the land.

Chu's philosophy as Secretary of Energy should prioritize persuading the public to use less, funding public educational campaigns about the perils of excessive consumption, and mandating strict regulations on energy use. It is noble that Chu is trying so-called green solutions, but the politics of optimism and scientific daydreaming are interferring with the harsh reality that if people are to survive, we have to do away with the industrial infrastructure we've grown to depend on.