There is one essential lesson in conservation. All actions are interconnected. What happens in one area will ultimately affect the environment in another area. We are living in a classic example of this axiom with the rapid economic development of the two most populous nations in the world, China and India.
An example of interconnectivity in the economic realm can be readily seen in one of the commodity markets, namely oil. All industrial development has been based on two essential ingredients; the availability of cheap energy and an efficient transportation system. The increased demand for oil to drive the industrial machine has driven the price to US $90.00, although the price seems to be softening because of the concerns about the United States economy going into recession. This is a classic supply and demand mechanism whereby the interconnectivity of increased demand on a finite resource is causing rapid escalations in the costs of a commodity.
“…what happens in one area will ultimately affect the environment in another area…”
The same fundamental principle holds true in the environment. As the world’s manufacturing centre shifts from the “developed” nations of Europe and North America to the Pearl River Delta Economic Zone, the impacts on the local ecology are now immense. In some respects the West has exported its pollution to China. We can readily see this change in the world’s economic structure in the abysmal air quality we are experiencing in Hong Kong. The latest data available records that 55% of the air pollution we experience in Hong Kong “comes” from across the border. Wait a minute that means that 45% of our air pollution comes from our own behaviour, be it individual or corporate. While this may be bad for our health, the positive aspect is we can do something about that 45% and we must do it now.
When WWF engages Hong Kong students in our Climate Change work there is often a sense that one individual cannot really make a difference, because our single consumption pattern is small in relation to our whole society’s consumption behaviour. That is true and WWF’s challenge is to encourage them to view their actions in a cumulative manner.
“…one re-charger may not use much electricity when idle, but collectively the impact can be considerable…”
Let me give you one small example. When I attend a conference in China, the Chairman of Nokia, the Finnish mobile telephone company, stated that their analysis revealed that if everyone who owned a Nokia mobile telephone removed the battery charger from the wall socket when not in use, the electricity saved would be enough to electrify 600,000 typical European homes for one year! One re-charger may not use much electricity when idle, but collectively the impact can be considerable. The same argument holds true for lights and air conditioners being left on when no one is present in a room. We need to be conscious of our actions and alert to the possibilities to reduce our own carbon footprint. That decision is ours as a consumer, and WWF urges you to be aware of your personal consumption.
