Sustainability, renewable energy and alternative fuels. They all come in one color, green.

During the last several years, Elon has moved toward a “greener campus.”

Greater restrictions on student parking were put in place to encourage a pedestrian campus, as have the newly constructed walkways.

The Colonnades dining hall is intended to be a “green building” using recycled materials, which limits the carbon footprint of the building.

This summer, incoming freshmen were required to read “An Inconvenient Truth” by former Vice President Al Gore.

These occurrences are symptomatic of something going on nationally and internationally. We see it from automotive companies advertising fuel economy numbers before they advertise safety ratings, as well as manufacturing companies advertising how they are “greener” than their competitors.

It is a symptom of “Pop Environmentalism,” which is a term used to describe the culture of environmentalism that is appearing among student populations.

Musicians such as Sting, Sheryl Crow and Dave Matthews pride themselves on their environmental activism. On June 7, there was a worldwide concert called Live Earth, which had the goal of raising awareness for climate change.

Although there were some cancellations, there were concerts at eight other venues worldwide.

While this growing sentiment of environmental responsibility is admirable, a new problem is arising: many of those who are becoming involved in this “Pop Environmentalism,” are not wholly informed.

For example, the Live Earth Concert, which was held to benefit the environment, happened to displace 74,500 tons of carbon, or 3,000 times the average Briton’s annual carbon output. It is estimated that around 100,000 trees should be planted to offset the carbon output of the event.

Many of the performers even flew in private jets to the event, and the litter left by spectators totaled in thousands of plastic cups left at Wembley Stadium alone.

Pop Environmentalism is a potentially dangerous phenomenon. While we should all be concerned about our environment and the unique events that have occurred in the last few centuries and their environmental impact, we must first be well-informed.

For instance, alternative fuels and forms of energy are a catch word used in both the media and the halls of congress to describe more environmentally friendly forms of energy. However, the ambiguity of this term leads to many problems.

First, the term alternative energy leads to the misconception that all fuel is created equal, or that this fuel is a “magic bullet.” This is far from true.

Ethanol, the often claimed environmental savior for America’s petroleum addiction, has a dark side. First, ethanol must be mixed with gasoline to run in most automobiles, with a mixture above 10 percent ethanol being incompatible.

Also, cars running with higher mixtures of ethanol face a myriad of problems, from poor gas mileage to corroded engines and parts and possible false fuel readings. There is also speculation that ethanol itself absorbs more energy during production than it produces when combusted as a form of energy, leading to highly expensive production scales.

A study commissioned by NASA found that ethanol may in fact increase air pollution. It is likely that few of us previously knew that.

Brazil, which uses large amounts of ethanol as an automotive fuel, has also slashed and burned vast amounts of its rainforests and displaced native villages to make way for corn used to produce ethanol.

Corn originally marked for animal feed in the United States is prioritized for ethanol production, increaseing the costs of beef.

Engineers are working on a form of hydropower that harnesses kinetic power from incoming waves to turn turbines inside of a large tube that runs perpendicular to the shore. Iceland runs mostly on geothermal power harnessed from the large volcanic activity present there.

All of these methods are likely to yield results, but they must all work together, and they require us to be informed, to understand that these technologies are a part of a whole.

The dangers posed by unwittingly getting involved with pop environmentalism, espousing an idea, or advocating a product that one does not fully understand is quite evident.

While the measures taken by Elon University are innocuous, and are examples of intelligent environmentalism, it deserves some concern that these measures are a symptom of this growing culture whose participants may not fully understand the ideas they espouse.

To be true stewards of our environment, we must investigate all options and aspects of the problems facing us.

We should always ask questions when being told there is a new “solution.”

We can never take one persons truth as our own if we are to be informed and to make a difference.

Staff: - 09/05/07