TED Conversations

Annabelle Macneal

Iatse local 798

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Rationing of natural resources on a global scale to fight global warming.

During the Second World War, you couldn't just walk into a shop and buy as much sugar or butter or meat as you wanted, nor could you fill up your car with gasoline whenever you liked. All these things were rationed, which meant you were only allowed to buy a small amount (even if you could afford more). The government introduced rationing because certain things were in short supply during the war, and rationing was the only way to make sure everyone got their fair share. (American Historical Society)
We have a crisis of global proportions but there doesn't seem to have the same fervor that the war brought on for people to willingly and also reluctanly to an equitable sharing of basic goods. Is this an economic nightmare? How can a scheme like this be implemented? I am middle class, I eat really well. So many are like me, and we all eat very well. As a group, are we the class to appeal to to share our "good food" with whoever needs it? Rationing will end eventually when certain goals are met.

+1
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 30 2013: bart A great deal could be done without the cooperation of all the nations. Take CO2 production, for example. The reason for all the carbon burning is the clear correlation between cheap energy (has been coal and oil for a hundred years at least) and the "Standard of Living". For the last 40 years, it has been pretty clear that a safe, clean, energy source, potentially cheaper than coal, has been invented, and demonstrated, but not used. For various dubious, complicated reasons. (I mean the Thorium Liquid Fueled Reactor (LFTR), a secret Cold War aircraft engine project)
    Note that many feelgood, "renewable" emergy sources will not do the job, but rather lead to bankruptcy , or at least life on the level of the Amish . Which is not bad, but not popular. enough. If coal is "too expensive, "then it won't be burnt.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.