Lost Password? Register
  • Narrow screen resolution
  • Wide screen resolution
  • Auto width resolution
  • Increase font size
  • Decrease font size
  • Default font size
  • default color
  • red color
  • green color
Member Login
HOME arrow NEWS arrow News arrow Discussion breaks down Great Collision
Discussion breaks down Great Collision PDF Print E-mail
Written by Johnathan Silver, The Shorthorn senior staff   
Wednesday, 07 October 2009 08:22 PM

Jeff Howard, former President’s Sustainability Committee co-chairman
Wednesday’s presentation by the former President’s Sustainability Committee co-chairman called for experts and non-experts to unite in order to solve the global environmental crisis, which left some attendees satisfied and others wanting more.

Jeff Howard’s talk, Sustainability and the Crisis of Expertise, focused on how a wide range of expert opinions have contributed to the problem known as the Great Collision, how expertise is received by society and how, through a joint effort, experts and non-experts can work toward a solution. The Great Collision is a term coined by author James Gustave Speth, which reflects the depletion of natural resources, increase in paper usage and vehicle production, and other resources used daily by society.

“When things crash – cars, space shuttles, buildings, bridges – we generally want to know who’s responsible for the problem,” said Howard, School of Urban and Public Affairs assistant professor. “We have to ask the same question for the Great Collision.”

Howard projected an image that listed professionals responsible for the current environment. The list included job descriptions like engineers, lawyers, pundits, lobbyist, public relations specialists, stockbrokers, teachers, journalists, scientists and others. He also intentionally left spaces blank and told the audience that the blanks were for them to fill in.

“We need more science, more efficiency and smarter technology,” Howard said. “It’s time for some global-scale engineering projects.”

Leila Ahmadi, an environmental science graduate student, said that the talk should have focused more on environmental education.
“In Arlington, there is no public transportation because people don’t know how driving in personal vehicles affects the environment,” she said.

Ahmadi suggested that the city impose public transportation.

Howard referenced a series of diagrams also used by Speth, who is Dean of Yale University’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. The diagrams labeled population growth and the increased natural resources use, which has contributed to the Great Collision.

Michan Connor, interdisciplinary studies assistant professor, said he liked the talk and thought it was provocative.

“Dr. Howard did a good job of introducing a very complex set of problems that affect our society,” he said. “Without the participation of the wider public, experts are liable to create problems or make existing problems worse.”

Nursing freshman Anh Dang said she and fellow English 1301 classmates were required to attend Howard’s lecture.

“The information was kind of hard to understand,” she said. “I’m glad I went though. It wasn’t a waste.”

English chair Wendy Faris said Howard gave a good talk.

“It’s hard trying to have these experts get more input from society because we don’t feel like we know what’s going on. But he’s saying too bad,” she said. “He’s saying that we’ve got to have a consensus.”

Views: 352 | E-mail

  Comments (1)
RSS comments
 1 Written by Jeff Howard, on 10-08-2009 07:57
The story quotes me as saying: “We need more science, more efficiency and smarter technology. It’s time for some global-scale engineering projects.” Unfortunately, the story does not make it clear that I identified this view as part of the “standard prescription” that I regard as naive. While I\'m very much in favor of greater efficiency, it\'s unrealistic to expect it to be sufficient and unrealistic to expect it to be adequately exploited without political intervention. And in my conversation with Mr. Silver after the presentation, I emphasized that I deeply distrust large-scale geoengineering projects, which are almost certain to bring about major, unexpected, adverse side effects. My presentation argued that the Great Collision ultimately is a manifestation of \"fundamental political and economic assumptions and values\" and that using vigorous democratic debate to develop a new set of assumptions and values is essential if we\'re to rise to the enormous challenge humanity now faces. The PowerPoint file is available on the university\'s sustainability blog: blog.uta.edu/sustainability.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 27 January 2010 03:35 PM )
 
< Prev   Next >


Advertisement

Social Media


Share this
submit to reddit
StumbleUpon.com

Related Items

Advertisement
Advertisement