 |
| Beautiful example of (ab)using people's associations |
‘Environmental taxes’, on the first sight an innocent term, which is used often in (political) debates on how to tackle environmental problems. However, what does it mean actually, environmental taxes? Are we taxing the environment? No. Most of the times, it is used to refer to paying for pollution. Why then, are we talking of environmental taxes and not pollution taxes? Most people associate taxes with paying money, and of course paying money is bad. Taxes in general are, therefore looked badly upon. By linking such associations to the environment, probably people are less willing to pay. If it is clear that the taxes will actually only be paid by polluters, these taxes would most probably be broadly supported.
Another example is to talk about a ‘zero energy home’. This doesn’t mean that, as one is led to believe, there is no energy used in the home. However, all the energy consumed, is produced by the home itself and from a renewable source. Speaking of ‘zero energy’ actually denies the ability of renewable energy technology to supply in a household’s energy demand. A better terminology therefore would be an ‘energy autonomous home’, or ‘zero pollution home’.
Furthermore, renewable energy is often referred to as alternative energy. Alternative is associated with hippies and sandals. By using the term alternative energy, one therefore implies that these forms of energy are not for the average people and are doomed to play a marginal role in the energy supply.
Use the power for a good cause
So far, I feel that the establishment is far better in making use of this power of terminology. I believe proponents of a sustainable energy supply, could make much more use of this power, especially because the current system gives us such great opportunities. For example, I recently accused someone of fossil reasoning, because he was strongly supporting the fossil fuelled energy system. Fossils, of course, being quite old and dusty.
I am looking forward to your examples of interesting terminology that is (intentionally) used wrongly in the sustainability debate.
