Welcome to the Green Forums! Please Register For Free Now!


The Green Forums member base includes well over 3,000 green forums members and 9,000 green forums posts! Be green and join our green community by registering for free today! Registration will give you full access to the Green Forums and takes just a moment to complete.
Please Join Us Right Now!
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5

    Default The real meaning of green education

    We all know the response and respect green energy education is getting these days. However, do we really know what green energy education stands for? or what are its major components?

    Green energy education is much more broader than conservation and going green. We need to know how this education can be used to secure our national interest and security. This will really allow us to enjoy the real benefits of green energy education.

    Regards,

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    9

    Default Real meaning of green education

    The main purpose of green education is not only to read and listen the lecture on going green. But the main purpose behind this education is to go green by using green organic products and implementing all green education tips to go green.
    Runka

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Re"The real meaning of green education

    Green typically means something which does no harm, or helps the environment, like fluorescent light bulbs, alternative fuels, etc.

  4. #4
    Val
    Val is offline
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    NW Kansas
    Posts
    1,567
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    The real meaning of green education is teaching ecology, biology, and exponential math to students. Then teach them about solar and wind energy, eco-homes like Earthships, composting of all kinds, growing their own food, all aspects of reduce, re-use, and recycling, and how to avoid green trinket and "organic" salespeople who are profiteers.
    http://www.cosmosmith.com/human_population_crisis.htm

    http://www.yourmedievalfuture.com/?p=276#more-276
    Last edited by Val; 09-25-2011 at 02:14 PM. Reason: adding population clock and site

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Green education, does not only involves going green but also involving green in day to day activities and making others explaining the importance and how useful it is for everyone.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Green education means changing our lyfestyles from the ad-driven commercial consumption that is growing and killing our life-supporting biosphere, to living in stability and balance with it, or else suffer ecocide and extinction. If humanity fails to make this change we wiill be among the last generation of life on planet Earth.

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default

    I believe green education is instilling knowledge about making a change and sustaining that change. It is about walking the walk and talking the talk. It is making a commitment to spread this knowledge so that together we can really make the difference we need to see in the world.

  8. #8
    Val
    Val is offline
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    NW Kansas
    Posts
    1,567
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    You can get green education best through books or kindle ebooks, like this new and important one.
    Aug9,2011 Amazon.com "End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality"---Resource Depletion, Environmental Impacts, Crushing Levels of Debt.
    Review
    Why have mainstream economists ignored environmental limits for so long? If Heinberg is right, they will have much explaining to do." -- LESTER BROWN, Founder Earth Policy Institute --Lester Brown - Earth Policy Institute

    Heinberg shows how peak oil, peak water, peak food, etc. lead not only to the end of growth, but to the beginning of a new era of progress without growth. --Herman E. Daly, Professor Emeritus, School of Public Policy, University of Maryland

    By the time you finish this, you will have 2 conclusions: This is the end of economic growth and it is our problem, not our childrens'. It's time to get ready. This book is the place to start. --Paul Gilding - Former head of Greenpeace International

    Richard has rung the bell on the limits to growth. Our shift from quantity of consumption to quality of life is the great challenge of our generation. Frightening...but ultimately freeing. --John Fullerton - President and Founder, Capital Institute
    From the Back Cover
    As energy and food prices escalate and debt levels explode, paths that formerly led to economic prosperty now lead to disaster. This book proposes a startling diagnosis: the global economy has reached a fundamental turning point--the end of growth. The Great Recession will not end in "recovery." Still, we can thrive in coming years if we abandon the futile pursuit of growth in consumption and aim instead for improvements in quality of life.

    Richard Heinberg's latest landmark work goes to the heart of the ongoing financial crisis, examining why it occurred, and what we must do to avert the worst potential outcomes. Written in an engaging style, it shows why growth can't continue in the face of resource depletion, environmental devastation, and mountains of debt.

    The End of Growth re-evaluates cherished economic theories and describes what policymakers, communities, and families can do to build a new economy that operates within Earth's budget of energy and resources. We can thrive during the transition if we set goals that promote human and environmental well-being, rather than pursuing the now-unattainable prize of ever-expanding GDP.

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Hopefully this means the word is finally getting out, and so maybe there is hope for us humans and life on Earth afterall.

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Green education at this point almost seems kind of revolutionary. Of course green/environmental education is taught to many places, but like some of you folks have pointed out, it's not ONLY about being educated. "talking the talk and walking the walk" is exactly right. Once people are educated they need to listen to Ghandi and be the change they want to see in the world. I think it mostly stems from modern folks thinking that the world was given to them, and they exist in a world where things are as they are and won't drastically change, but we are also reaching a toppling point.
    What I'm trying to say is that Green Education should be like the laws of ecology = "there is no such thing as free lunch" (all that food in the supermarket TOOK ENERGY to be made) "there is no such place as away" (when you throw something in the trash, it may be out of sight, but IT'S STILL MATTER, and it's on this planet.) "change happens" (there are reactions to actions, entropy/exponentials)
    These things sound so simple when heard, but to a mind caught up in the hustle and bustle of modern techno-life, it may be hard to grasp or believe in hope. bring on the green revolution baby.

  11. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Yes indeed, and maybe the Green Revolution folks should get together with the Occupy Wall Street folks, because spreading green technology can create jobs for everyone, including 100% safe recycling of all garbage, sludge, junk, smoke and fumes, so this biosphere planet Earth can survive for everyone's children and grandchildren.

  12. #12
    Val
    Val is offline
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    NW Kansas
    Posts
    1,567
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Many of the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators were members, like me, of 350.org, Bill McKibben's green group to lower CO2 levels to the "safe" level, from the present 397ppm and rising toward 450ppm if 90% of fossil fuel burning isn't stopped soon.
    Of course, big money corporate powers and their corrupt political cronies want even more fossil fuel burning to increase profits. They want more people to sell to, for more greedy profits.
    The fact is the atmospheric CO2 for at least the past 1.1 million years has fluctuated slowly between 180 and 280 ppm. Personally, I think the goal should be a return to natural variation within those parameters. However, 350 is achievable with means at hand for replacing fossil fuel burning and slash and burn agriculture, and reducing population through massive educational and free contraceptive efforts. Time is of the utmost importance, it should all be done within a decade for the greatest chance of success.

  13. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    4

    Default

    I agree completely that these changes need to occur quickly, and this is why I think OCCUPY is such a neat idea. It is about time that we realize that we are CONDITIONED BY OUR CULTURE in such a way that a lot of our real human desires and interests are restrained due to classism. I hope that the whole thing picks up and that more folks like yourself can be real dedicated to not only educating people on the matter at hand, but cooperating with others to come up with a timely solution! the solutions are out there, such as Transition Town style living (separating communities from peak-oil disasters), or tight community based living, or even something larger like the Venus Project, more folks just need to hop on board.

  14. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    4

    Default

    and the point i meant to make with being conditioned by culture and classism is that this consumer-culture has gotten to a point where the paper dollar is more sought after than what people in the planet truly
    1. desire - for healthy minds and relationships between others
    2. need- access to health, food, resources, clean water, happy environments
    3. community- over self-absorbed goals
    and thats some education that could help the green movement as well, it's important to be aware of the world we are born into and how the culture creates consumers, for the culture thrives from consumption, which means it is destined to be used up.

  15. #15
    Val
    Val is offline
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    NW Kansas
    Posts
    1,567
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Here is some "green" education!
    The "Horsemen" and the blame. 1.) Aquifer depletion is to be blamed on the people who are over the aquifers, not on outsiders. 2.) Soil depletion can only be blamed on the countries where they are or have depleted their own soils(by not adding organics/composts, salinization by over-irrigation with river waters high in salts, citification by uncontrolled population growth and sprawl, and by not fallowing the land), not on outsiders. 3.) Oil depletion can only be blamed on the countries with oil who have sold it for their own wealth to outsiders. 4.) AGW has a number of sources of blame; the countries burning oil, the countries burning coal, the countries using slash and burn agriculture, the countries cutting down their forests--not outsiders. 5.) overpopulation beyond sustainable is the fault of the countries involved. It may be their culture. It may be their average stupidity. It may be religions. It may be their immigration policies. It may be the greed of some. It may be a combination of factors. 6.) world fisheries collapse can be blamed on drift netters, shark finners, and 3 billion people who get 60% of their protein from fish/seafood. 7.) Surface water pollution/depletion can be blamed on the people in the areas it is occurring and the people upstream who over-use and pollute with everything from agricultural chemicals, industrial waste, excrement, and pharmaceuticals.
    THE LANGUAGE OF ECOLOGY
    Reduce population with a moratorium on having kids for 30 years, and stop 90% of fossil fuel and slash burning. Plant billions of trees, and compost everything from excrement to human bodies.

    The consensus in American politics today is that there's nothing to be gained from talking about climate change. It's divisive, the electorate has more pressing concerns, and very little can be accomplished anyway. In response to this evolving consensus, lots of folks in the climate hawk coalition (broadly speaking) have counseled a new approach that backgrounds climate change and refocuses the discussion on innovation, energy security, and economic competitiveness.


    This cannot work. At least it cannot work if we hope to avoid terrible consequences. Why not? It's simple: If there is to be any hope of avoiding civilization-threatening climate disruption, the U.S. and other nations must act immediately and aggressively on an unprecedented scale. That means moving to emergency footing. War footing. "Hitler is on the march and our survival is at stake" footing. That simply won't be possible unless a critical mass of people are on board. It's not the kind of thing you can sneak in incrementally.


    It is unpleasant to talk like this. People don't want to hear it. They don't want to believe it. They bring to bear an enormous range of psychological and behavioral defense mechanisms to avoid it. It sounds "extreme" and our instinctive heuristics conflate "extreme" with "wrong." People display the same kind of avoidance when they find out that they or a loved one are seriously ill. But no doctor would counsel withholding a diagnosis from a patient because it might upset them. If we're in this much trouble, surely we must begin by telling the truth about it.
    So let's have some real talk on climate change.


    For today's inconvenient truths (ahem), we turn to Kevin Anderson, a professor of energy and climate change who was, until recently, director of the U.K.'s leading climate research institution, the Tyndall Energy Program. Anderson is a publishing researcher himself and, in his capacity as Tyndall director, was responsible for weaving together multiple lines of research and evidence into a coherent story. This year, with his colleague Alice Bows, he published a must-read paper called "Beyond 'dangerous' climate change: emission scenarios for a new world" [PDF]. If reading academic papers isn't your thing, he also delivers a digestible presentation here, or here with slides. (Discovered via Alex Steffen's excellent Twitter feed.)



    http://dieoff.org/
    when TES started(2003)---population 6.3 billion, and when it ended(2012)----7.1 billion=no progress toward a sustainable future made. Too bad.
    [QUOTE=Val;380201]
    Quote Originally Posted by Val View Post
    http://www.cosmosmith.co...n_population_crisis.htm
    7 billion August 2011.....
    Add this one, too!! It's great!!!

    WOA!! World Ovepopulation Awareness
    http://www.dieoff.org/page14.htm
    :fyi:
    and this one!
    http://www.yourmedievalfuture.com/

    http://www.worldometers.info/
    These are VERY useful links. Plus this factoid:
    "Research from Murtaugh and Schlax at Oregon State University shows that a hypothetical American woman who switches to a more fuel-efficient car, drives less, recycles, installs more efficient light bulbs, and replaces her refrigerator and windows with energy-saving models, would increase her carbon legacy by 40 times if she has two children."
    And this food for thought; Overpopulation causes poverty, low IQ causes overpopulation and poverty.
    overpopulation>too many people for the number of jobs>lower wages/income>poverty.
    overpopulation>increased resource demands>increased depletion and increased prices>less money>poverty.
    overpopulation>increased pollution and depletion>lower food production and lower pure water per capita>collapse/crash
    area collapse/crash/economic hardship>migrations>collapse of host areas.
    Higher IQ>thinking ahead>lower breeding rate/knowledge of sustainability and ecology>higher income>population habits within sustainability and pollution/depletion at replenishment/absorption rates(known by increased knowledge for increased IQ).
    Lower IQ>easy influence by religions and cultures/lack of understanding ecology and ability to think ahead>high breeding rate>poverty>higher breeding rate>collapse economically and ecologically in one area>migrations>collapse in host areas.
    PC education, of course, will not give these facts or ideas.
    Last edited by Val; 06-10-2012 at 09:48 AM. Reason: adding a discourse from TES

Green Forums Thread Information for The real meaning of green education

Users Browsing this ThreadThe real meaning of green education

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Green Forums Threads

  1. Green jobs through energy education
    By bridgingnations in forum Green Education
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-06-2010, 11:46 AM
  2. Education for green jobs
    By bridgingnations in forum Green Jobs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-05-2010, 01:20 AM
  3. Along US Gulf coast, a new meaning for barrier island (AFP)
    By Cass in forum Green News | Global Warming Articles | Pollution | Recycling
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-16-2010, 06:33 PM

Members who have read The real meaning of green education

There are no members to list at the moment.

Green Forums Posting Rules for The real meaning of green education

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
The real meaning of green education

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1