opinions // no. 16 theotherpress.ca The future of the environment » An honest look at green energy Morgan Hannah Life & Style Editor [3 no secret that the downfall of the planet could happen someday. But what if I were to tell you that we are already amid that downfall and there seems to be nothing we can do to combat it? For a while, I’ve wondered what humans could do to prevent an awful fate for our planet and I have found that there isn’t anything that we would be willing to do because the true problem is us. Everything that humans are doing is destroying our planet—for example, capitalism breeds consumption and I feel that will lead to our demise. The truth is that there are too many people using too much, too fast. You might try to combat that statement with: “What about our green initiatives such as solar and wind energy? What about trying to be 100 percent sustainable?” But green energy will not save the planet—some feel that our human impact is just too great. After watching the 2019 Michael Moore documentary, Planet of the Humans (directed by Jeff Gibbs) my perspective of green energy has changed. The documentary explains that “green” technologies are just a distraction from making a real plan to save our Earth. Jeff Gibbs states that green “renewable” energy and industrial civilizations are one and the same. He claims that wind turbines and solar panels are “desperate measures not to save a planet, but to save our way of life,” and argues that just because we are using wind power and solar panels does not mean we are not also burning fossil fuels. Solar and wind energy are intermittent energy sources, which means that the reality of converting to 100 percent sustainable energy is impossible because of how unreliable they are. Backup fossil fuels-powered facilities are always running on idle. In Planet of the Humans, Gibbs went to an eco-festival in Vermont which was intended to be fuelled by solar energy, but when it rained, they converted to biodiesel and then hooked into the electrical grid. Biodiesel is just the use of plant and animal material as a “renewable” energy source. This moment was just the beginning of Gibbs’ revelatory unveiling of the truth behind humankind’s “green” initiatives. “Everywhere I encountered green energy it wasn’t what it seemed,’ Gibbs states early in the documentary. Major corporations such as Sierra Club and 350. org and public figureheads with Earth-saving promises have been in cahoots with Wall Street and billionaires in leading our environmental movements down a dirty path. Solar panels and wind turbines are not a long-term solution, they are not as renewable as we think they are, and they are far from carbon neutral. The conversion from diesel energy to solar and wind energy is a “green” movement that is peddled to the public as a game-changer... when in reality it isan illusion. Planet of the Humans illuminates the manufacturing process of solar panels, wind turbines, and electric cars and how they are all environmentally destructive with a lengthy and largely toxic list of elements required, including cobalt sourced by child labour; rare earth metals; sulphur hexafluoride (which is 23,000 times more warming than CO2); gallium arsenide; ethylene-vinyl acetate; hydrofluoric acid, and petroleum to name just a few. When taking a look at Are we ready to take the risk? >» Restaurants after COVID-19 Tania Arora Staff Writer e have all been waiting for the day when we can resume our normal lives. But at this point, even though officials are planning to gradually reopen the economy, the question arises: is it safe yet? Assuming it is safe, the question becomes which businesses should open first? Throwing 50 to 400+ people under the same roof and expecting them to be safe seems a little impractical here. Comparing restaurants to parks, we see the advantage of open spaces over confined places, and that’s even with the tightest of precautions. Small restaurants could change their seating arrangements and create a greater distance between the guests. But restaurants with expensive and immobile interiors will have to find ways to accommodate their guests without disappointing them, if they manage to reopen that is. The greatest risk to this situation is sanitizing the area after every guest exits the premises; this could entail a full- time staff member being responsible for sanitizing and rearranging the dining area. The scope of that activity would depend on the businesses size. Busy food chains like McDonald’s or Tim Hortons with self-service and huge hourly turnovers will face challenges creating strategies and ensuring proper implementation while small businesses could be impacted by operational cost. Still, no matter how promising or Illustration by Udeshi Seneviratne < iso] c fa 9) xr i o fy x 58 = e we) i a a i) 2 i a = how energy alternatives to fossil fuels are constructed, it begs the question whether these alternatives are worth it or if we'd be better off carrying on with the status quo, only at a highly reduced rate of consumption. By not taking the time to think about these data-backed arguments about the problems in our energy system, humankind is running headfirst into our downfall. Awareness can help cultivate the path to change. responsible an employee is, supervision is necessary. The entire setup would involve an increase in workforce. Half to ensure sanitization, the other half to verify it. But will that be enough? The food industry is one of the riskiest so caution will be imperative not just on the floor, but behind the scenes as well. Regardless, if someone does get sick, who will be liable? Will the guests be blamed for coming to the restaurant? If the restaurant is blamed, who will be held accountable: the company or the employees? If the employees are blamed, how will the authorities figure out the person behind the infection? Food goes through multiple hands before being served. Each case would involve tracing whether it was front staff, someone in the kitchen, the manufacturer, or the wholesaler. Is anyone prepared for these investigations and do we have a plan for containment? Who will be sent in quarantine? We all are aware that the symptoms of the virus appear after a week or two so if even a single person contracts it, the whole business is likely to unravel. Is the government ready to risk it all over again?