As I enjoy the day of the earth, I find a lot of rhetoric that concentrates the day around thinking instead of actually doing it.
Above all, the day of the earth raises awareness of the environment by focusing our attention on the damage caused by climate change.
By serving the environment for a whole day and remain aware of our practices, we want to create a planet that it is not only worth living, but also survive the already strong consequences of global warming.
But I have a criticism on the Earth Day – it doesn't do enough.
While the day of the earth sounds theoretically great, the labeling of a single “tag” as the day of the earth is far too limited – why can't we have “herding year”?
Shouldn't we always take care of our planet and look for ways how we can lower our individual and collective footprint?
The first day of the earth was created on April 22, 1970 by Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin to force the environmental awareness of the political landscape and to consolidate it as a national holiday.
Fortunately, in December 1970, the Congress authorized the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take into account the lack of legal or regulatory systems to protect our environment. The EPA brought U.S. citizens to clean water regulations through the law on clean water, eliminated the use of the harmful DDT (synthetic insecticides) and the catalyst installation in American automobiles produced after 1975.
Unfortunately, many of these great early steps of the EPA were overshadowed by public complacency and legal precedents.
This led to setbacks rather than a cleaner planet.
For example, the Sackett decision, which was created from the Supreme Court of “Sackett v. Epa” from the Supreme Court, significantly limited the ability of the EPA to regulate water and wetlands.
The prevailing consumption lean in the law on clean water reinforced “waters of the United States” in order to exclude wetlands without continuous surface connection to navigable waterways.
Instead, the short -term focus of the earth's day distracts the people from creating permanent sustainability habits in favor of superficial actions such as social media “commitment” or parrot clearance.
Note that it is possible to engage in both such actions and to pursue further activism without making permanent changes.
Many social media users have pointed out that companies also use Earth to use their products in marketing campaigns and business drive campaigns for “Greenwash”.
This act of “greenwashing” could contain free advertising campaigns such as pocket bags or water bottles that represent a “greener” alternative or use a coded language such as “environmentally friendly” or “plastic recycled after consumer” to convey a feeling of responsibility associated with their products.
This could also include a misleading language that hides greater environmental effects in favor of a short -term capital profit and brand recognition.
Marketing campaigns on the day of the earth often cover claims with vague or ambiguous language that grant the companies plausible refusal to present themselves as “environmental compatibility” or environmentally responsible at the same time and at the same time do little or nothing to maintain harmful practices and systemic challenges through this behavior.
However, some companies have really good practices that distinguish them on this day of the earth – if at all, it depends on whether they can support such claims or not.
After the day of last week and in the coming weeks in the coming weeks, pay attention to terms such as “natural”, “green” or “environmentally friendly”, without the adequate evidence supporting these claims. Be skeptical and don't let the marketers come to you.
It is no secret that we have to take care of our earth, but how is it that we have only assigned one day to maintain the planet that we all call at home?