Sunny Friday: No Impact Man on the Colbert Report
Friday, October 09, 2009
Colin Beavan, aka No Impact Man, appeared on The Colbert Report last night to talk about his year-long project to live without having any harmful impact on the environment, documented in his new book and movie. Colbert, expectedly, goofs on him—he chastises Beavan for the fact that, since they don’t have a TV at home, his daughter had to hear about Scooby-Doo at school. But it’s pretty good natured overall, and Beavan gets an opportunity to talk about the No Impact Week that his is co-sponsoring with the Huffington Post.
I have to admit that I’m of two minds about Beavan’s project. On one hand, it’s marvelous that he and his family were able to explore living in a new way, and even better that they found their new lifestyle to be healthier, more fun, and far more rewarding than their previous mode of heavy consumerism. On the other hand, lifestyle changes are a poor substitute for the full-scale soup-to-nuts transformation that we have to bring about in our culture in the next several years. On yet another hand (who’s counting?), Beavan’s project has made a great impact on a great many people, getting them to think about the way they live in new ways.
What I love about his message is that seems to be pushing these small lifestyle changes as a gateway drug to considering larger and larger ramifications of what we are here for, and how we can reinvent our culture to support human health, wealth, and security instead of mere consumerism.
Here’s the video of his short appearance on the Colbert report, as well as a link to a recent critical New Yorker article about his and other similar projects called “What’s Wrong With Eco-Stunts?” and Beavan’s response to that article. Both writers make excellent points, and rather than choosing sides, I’m inclined to think that the most important thing is that this discussion is even going on. What do you think? Let us know below ...
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Colin Beavan | ||||
| ||||
... in the comments.
(1) Comments | Permalink
See more articles by Megan Dietz.
Just some random thoughts.
I don’t think focusing on lifestyle changes is a bad thing. In some ways this brings about large scale change. What and how we consume at a personal level can have great impact on the system at large.
Just an example, but if you want better public transportation, but no one uses the current system it makes it difficult for lawmakers to make a case for spending money to invest in public transportation. There has to be evidence that people are willing to use it or the billions of dollars it would take to build a better transportation system.
Also, projects that follow people through their daily life can highlight places where the system could do a better job. Why don’t I take public transportation more places? Because metro transit thinks the only place anyone ever goes is downtown Minneapolis. Because it’s cold as hell here and most bus stops don’t have a shelter. Because, if I’m traveling at night, bus stops are not well lit and as a female I’m wary of my safety. Because the buses come an hour apart and I can’t afford the kind of waiting time that requires.
They can also highlight potential solutions. Continuing with my transit example, perhaps I discover that, while taking the bus to work isn’t a viable solution, telecommuting three days a week is. Then, when telecommuting works out beautifully for me, my boss will be more open to letting other people do it, which saves even more in emissions. Eventually it may be popular enough that my company is able to reduce the size of it’s headquarters.
That said, some of the stuff no impact man did bordered on ridiculous. If you live in New York City, you’ll probably own a fridge. If people equate environmentalism with giving up toilet paper and their refrigerator, you’re not winning many converts and you are probably scaring a lot of people off.
Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.