gkb 30. June 2008 - 20:24
A large benefit concert was played a couple of days ago in Reykjavík, for the purpose of raising awareness and questioning the long-term benefits of building aluminium smelting plants in the rural areas of the country. (I'll admit, being where I am and being woefully unable to attend such events or participate in any real way in the dialogue regarding these circumstances, I don't know much about the event--Náttúra--but for anyone who's curious the details can be found at the website. There was also a webcast of the event presented by the good people at National Geographic.)
I'll admit that I'm a bit--okay, incredibly--one-sided about this sort of thing, so anyone looking for fair and balanced commentary and discussion on the subject should probably look elsewhere.
...
...
They gone? Cool.
I find it incredibly depressing and tragic, the things we've done to our planet in the name of industry, "progress", and personal comfort. I'm something of a podcast junkie, and it seems like there isn't a day that goes by when I don't hear something on NPR, BBC, or one of the university or science podcasts about some new discovery that's been made about how we've destroyed another corner of the planet, or how people/lawmakers/governments are wilfully disregarding long-term damage in favour of short-term, selfish goals.
Aside from the fact that I love Iceland, and not a day goes by that I don't wish I could hit the fast-forward button on life and be there now ... it's an unambiguously beautiful, pristine, unique place. The cold volcanic topography, the glaciers, geysers, waterfalls, barren interior and fjords are breathtaking in their austerity. Long have Icelanders worked in harmony with their natural environment, either through a desire to preserve the landscape or through happy accident. There are examples of both successes and failures (the obvious ones coming to mind are geothermal energy and fishing quotas, respectively) across the board, but with regards to world standards, they're doing pretty good.
Which is part of what makes it so ironic that the clean, geothermal energy is what inspired the frantic courtship by so many aluminium plants; it's vastly cheaper for them to do their smelting there. So there have been a lot of proposals, and some have been accepted already, causing huge amounts of damage. This is what motivated the Icelandic artists to put on the concert; to get people thinking and talking about this subject, to consider whether it's worth doing in the long run; if there are any other options that should be pursued.
When I read a post about this event on an internet forum that I frequent, I found myself surprised, and upset, by the commentary it sparked. Aside from the not-insignificant percentage of people whose thought processes apparently began and ended with "free Björk and Sigur Rós concert ... cool!!", and completely missed the purpose behind the performance, there seemed to be a lot of people who harboured an opinion toward the motivations of the organisers that I can only describe as resentful.
Perhaps it's just too much NPR; I've grown accustomed to actions taken by those who desire to preserve the natural environment to be pretty much universally applauded. Working to retain a landscape, or a habitat, or an unspoiled region seems like one of those universal goods, right? So, right on to these environmentally conscious artists who want to see their native land remain as unharmed as possible, to protect it from the rampant destruction and degradation that plagues so many other parts of the planet.
Apparently not, though. Running a close second behind the oblivious audiophiles were those who seemed to think that such an attitude was selfish, and even unacceptable. The theory seemed to be either that the country is a volcanic wasteland, so just drown it and make more soda cans, or that Icelanders have no right to complain because spoiling their homeland to exploit the cheap thermal energy is less bad than building the plant somewhere else. That they should just suck it up for the greater good, essentially. That other parts of the planet have been fucked up by shortsightedness, it's about time Iceland gets its fair share, and anyone who doesn't embrace this opinion with open arms should just sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up while their homeland is drowned and poisoned.
Clearly, I'm less than objective on this subject, but dammit, I don't want to be objective about it. This is hands-down one of the most beautiful, clean places I've seen, and the fact that it's managed to stay that way for as long as it has is something of a minor miracle in and of itself. I want it to remain as unspoiled as it is--for myself, for those that live there, be they plant or animal; and for the world at large. The fact that it's an island, and therefore somewhat less accessible than many other places that can be tramped into and logged or mined or dammed, less susceptible to pollution, is a boon. Use this advantage to keep this place as pristine as it is, instead of taking the Glampers approach and insisting that, since we've trashed so many other parts of our planet, it's time we trash this part too. After all, it's only fair.
