From Alan Greenspan's book "The Age of Turbulence." "Although I am a strong advocate of 'in with the new, out with the old,' I am not an advocate of tearing down the U.S. Capitol and replacing it with a more modern, efficient office building. However no matter what one's depth of feeling is on such issues, to the extent that creative destruction is restrained to preserve icons, some improvement in material standards of living is forgone."
Treehugger advocates a complete ban on the demolition of buildings, citing the loss of embodied energy in demolished buildings. When I hear that, however, images of communist Russia pop up in my head .. it's hard not to think about the aging, dilapidated structures plaguing that country. We all watch TV, we've seen the images.
Similarly, why is it so easy to recycle away that huge trapezoidal Motorola car phone and replace it with the next new thing, whether it's the Blackberry, iPhone, or otherwise. Existing objects have embodied energy, and the thinking goes, why be so quick to throw that away? Is it easier to toss a small object because (a) it's smaller or (b) the benefits of the new technology outweigh the loss of embodied energy in the old (or (c) we want something new)?
Do we agree that people should give up the 1960s gas hog for a new Toyota Prius, or something similar? Read more via jetsongreen.com