Carbon strikes wrong note
The world needs its icons more than ever to lead us out of the environmental cul-de-sac into which we have reversed our four-by-fours.
The likes of Radiohead woke up to smell the Fairtrade coffee years ago, and are so distraught at the size of the collective carbon footprint their tours create they are now considering knocking the whole touring lark on its head.
Presumably, from now on, they will be relying only on their very accessible albums to keep their career bopping along. Apparently, some experts proved to them that taking a ship to the stadiums is just as carbon costly as flying in a plane. Essentially, they would have been cutting off their carbonised feet in spite of their faces, had they hired the QE2 as their tour bus. From now on they might cycle on the shorter mini-tours. But, for America, that would be just ridiculous.
Suddenly, carbon and the size of our carbon footprint are the buzzwords on everyone’s lips.
Carbon is the stuff of life and, in an ironic way, it may also prove to be the death of us.
Last week some green woman on the radio was telling us to cut out all carbon-ated drinks because it was making us fart too much, and increasing the methane clouds above our heads.
All along we have been blaming the cows. “Ooh. what a pong, who left off?” “Not me, must have been Daisy over there, she looks like she just ripped out a big one.”
The “Are You Taking The Fizz” campaign should be a roaring success. Remember their slogan is “A moment on the lips, a lifetime in the stratosphere blocking out the sunlight.”
Where did this obsession with carbon come from? Years ago, we never heard of it, even in its primitive form. It’s a non-metallic compound that exist in two main forms, diamond and graphite, so it was known only to rich tennis players. Now, it’s even in fizzy drinks. Who do we blame?
It probably started with carbon dating, and before you know it, things got out of hand. Is it too late to put the pop back in the bottle?
