I am honored to be here, and I'm honored to talk about this topic, which I think is of grave importance. We've been talking a lot about the horrific impacts of plastic on the planet and on other species, but plastic hurts people, too -- especially poor people. And both in the production of plastic, the use of plastic and the disposal of plastic, the people who have the bull's-eye on their foreheads are poor people. People got very upset when the BP oil spill happened, for very good reason. People thought, "Oh, my God. This is terrible, this oil -- it's in the water. It's going to destroy the living systems there. People are going to be hurt. This is a terrible thing, this oil is going to hurt the people in the Gulf."
Mul on au siin olla ja mul on au rääkida sellel teemal, mis on minu arvates väga tähtis. Oleme palju rääkinud plastiku kohutavast mõjust planeedile ja teistele liikidele, aga plastik teeb kahju ka inimestele, eriti vaestele inimestele. Ja nii plastiku tootmises, plastiku kasutamises kui ka plastiku äraviskamisel saavad valusaima tabamuse vaesed inimesed. Inimesed said väga vihaseks, kui toimus British Petroleumi õlileke ja seda õigusega. Inimesed mõtlesid: " Jumal küll. See õli on kohutav, see on vees. See hävitab sealsed elusüsteemid. Inimesed saavad viga. See on kohutav, et õli toob kahju lahe ääres elavatele inimestele."
What people don't think about is: What if the oil had made it safely to shore? What if the oil actually got where it was trying to go? Not only would it have been burned in engines and added to global warming, but there's a place called "Cancer Alley," and the reason it's called "Cancer Alley" is because the petrochemical industry takes that oil and turns it into plastic and in the process, kills people. It shortens the lives of the people who live there in the Gulf. So oil and petrochemicals are not just a problem when there's a spill; they're a problem when there's not. And what we don't often appreciate is the price that poor people pay for us to have these disposable products.
Aga inimesed ei mõtle sellele, mis oleks juhtunud, kui õli oleks turvaliselt rannikule jõudnud. Mis siis, kui õli oleks oma õigesse sihtpunkti jõudnud? See oleks mootorites põlenud, andnud hoogu globaalsele soojenemisele, ja jõudnud kohta, mida nimetatakse "vähktõve tänavaks", ja seda kutsutakse "vähktõve tänavaks" seetõttu, et petrooleumitööstus võtab selle õli ja muudab selle plastikuks ja selle protsessi käigus tapab inimesi. See lühendab lahe ääres elavate inimeste eluiga. Seega pole õli ja kemikaalid probleemsed ainult siis, kui toimub õlileke, vaid ka siis, kui õnnetusi ei ole. Ja sageli ei oska me väärtustada seda hinda, mida maksavad vaesed inimesed selleks, et me saaks neid ühekordseid tooteid kasutada.
The other thing we often don't appreciate is, it's not just at the point of production that poor people suffer. Poor people also suffer at the point of use. Those of us who earn a certain income level, we have something called choice. The reason why you want to work hard and have a job and not be poor and broke is so you can have choices, economic choices. We actually get a chance to choose not to use products that have dangerous, poisonous plastic in them. Other people who are poor don't have those choices. So low-income people often are the ones who are buying the products that have those dangerous chemicals in them that their children are using. Those are the people who wind up ingesting a disproportionate amount of this poisonous plastic in using it. And people say, "Well, they should just buy a different product." Well, the problem with being poor is you don't have those choices. You often have to buy the cheapest products. The cheapest products are often the most dangerous.
Teine asi, mida me sageli hinnata ei oska, on see, et vaesed inimesed ei kannata ainult tootmisprotsessi käigus. Nad kannatavad ka tarbimise käigus. Neil, kes teenivad piisaval hulgal raha, on olemas valikuvõimalus. Põhjus, miks me tahame kõvasti tööd teha ja mitte olla vaesed, on see, et saada valikuvõimalusi. Me saame võimaluse valida jätta ostamata tooted, milles on ohtlikku ja mürgist plastikut. Vaestel inimeste aga pole selliseid valikuvõimalusi. Niisiis on madala sissetulekuga inimesed tavaliselt need, kes ostavad tooteid, mis sisaldavad nende laste jaoks ohtlikke kemikaale. Nemad on inimesed, kelle organism saab suure hulga mürgist plastikut. Ja inimesed ütlevad: "Noh, nad peaks lihtsalt teise toote ostma." Aga vaesusega ongi see probleem, et sul ei ole selliseid valikuvõimalusi. Sa pead ostma odavaimaid tooteid. Ja odavaimad tooted on sageli kõige ohtlikumad.
And if that weren't bad enough -- if it wasn't just the production of plastic that's giving people cancer in places like Cancer Alley, and shortening lives and hurting poor kids at the point of use -- at the point of disposal, once again, it's poor people who bear the burden. Often, we think we're doing a good thing: You're in your office, drinking your bottled water or whatever it is, and you think to yourself, "I'm going to throw this away. No -- I'm going to be virtuous. I'm going to put it in the blue bin." You think, "I put mine in the blue bin." And then you look at your colleague and say, "Why, you cretin! You put yours in the white bin." And we use that as a moral tickle. We feel so good about ourselves. If we -- well, OK, I'm just ... me. Not you, but I feel this way often.
Ja nagu sellest poleks veel küllalt, lisaks plastiku tootmisele, mis põhjustab vähki ja lühendab inimeste eluiga ja toob kahju vaestele lastele, kes seda plastikut kasutavad, ka äraviskamisel on just vaesed inimesed need, kes kannavad raskeimat koormat. Sageli arvame, et me teeme heateo. Sa oled kontoris, jood pudelivett või muud jooki ja mõtled endamisi: "Vot, ma ei viska seda ära. Ei, ma olen vooruslik. Ma panen selle pudelikonteinerisse." Sa mõtled: "Ma panen oma pudeli pudelikonteinerisse." Ja siis sa vaatad oma töökaaslast ja ütled: "Sa kretiin. Sa paned oma pudeli tavalisse prügikasti." Ja see on meile nagu moraalne kõdi. Meil on enda üle nii hea meel. Võib-olla ma andestan endale. Mitte sina, aga mina tunnen niimoodi.
(Laughter)
And so we kind of have this moral feel-good moment. But if we were to be able to follow that little bottle on its journey, we would be shocked to discover that, all too often, that bottle is going to be put on a boat, it's going to go all the way across the ocean at some expense, and it's going to wind up in a developing country, often China. I think in our minds, we imagine somebody's going to take the little bottle and say, "Oh, little bottle! We're so happy to see you, little bottle."
Ja niisiis meil on selline moraalse heaolutunde hetk. Aga kui me saaks sellele pudelile tema teekonnal järgneda, siis meid šokeeriks avastus, et väga sageli pannakse see pudel laevale. See reisib mingi kuluga üle ookeani. Ja see jõuab lõpuks arengumaale, sageli Hiinasse. Ma arvan, et meil on peas kujutluspilt, et keegi võtab väikese pudeli ja ütleb: "Oh, väike pudelike. Meil on nii hea meel sind näha, väike pudelike."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"You've served so well."
"Sa oled meid hästi teeninud"
(Laughter)
Talle tehakse väike pudelimassaaž,
He's given a little bottle massage, a little bottle medal. And they say, "What would you like to do next?" The little bottle says, "I just don't know ..."
antakse väike pudelimedal. Ja küsitakse: "Mida sulle järgmiseks teha meeldiks?" Väike pudel ütleb: "Mul pole aimugi."
(Laughter)
Aga päriselt seda ei juhtu.
But that's not actually what happens. You know? That bottle winds up getting burned. The recycling of plastic in many developing countries means the incineration of the plastic, the burning of the plastic, which releases incredible toxic chemicals and, once again, kills people. And so, poor people who are making these products in petrochemical centers like Cancer Alley, poor people who are consuming these products disproportionately, and then poor people who, even at the tail end of the recycling, are having their lives shortened. They're all being harmed -- greatly -- by this addiction that we have to disposability.
See pudel põletatakse lõpuks ära. Plastmassi taaskasutus tähendab paljudes arengumaades plastiku tuhastamist, plastiku põletamist, millest eraldub toksilisi kemikaale, mis jällegi tapab inimesi. Ja vaesed inimesed, kes neid tooteid valmistavad, petrokeemilistes keskustes nagu "vähktõve tänaval", vaesed inimesed, kes tarbivaid neid tooteid ebaloomulikult palju, ja vaesed inimesed, kes on taaskasutuse tsükli lõpus, elavad seetõttu lühemat elu ja saavad palju kahju selle äraviskamise sõltuvuse tõttu,
Now, you think to yourself -- I know how you are --
mille all me kannatame.
you say, "That sure is terrible for those poor people. It's just awful. Those poor people. I hope someone does something to help them." But what we don't understand is -- here we are in Los Angeles. We worked very hard to get the smog reduction happening here in Los Angeles. But guess what? Because they're doing so much dirty production in Asia now, because the environmental laws don't protect the people in Asia now, almost all of the clean air gains and the toxic air gains that we've achieved here in California have been wiped out by dirty air coming over from Asia. So we all are being hit. We all are being impacted. It's just that the poor people get it first and worst. But the dirty production, the burning of toxins, the lack of environmental standards in Asia, is actually creating so much dirty air pollution, it's coming across the ocean, and has erased our gains here in California. We're back where we were in the 1970s. And so we're on one planet, and we have to be able to get to the root of these problems.
Nüüd te mõtlete endamisi - ma tean küll, millised te olete - te ütlete: "See on nende vaeste inimeste jaoks tõepoolest kohutav. See on nende vaeste inimeste jaoks lihtsalt õudne. Ma loodan, et keegi võtab nende aitamiseks midagi ette." Aga mis meil kahe silma vahele jääb, on see, mis toimub Los Angeleses. Me oleme näinud palju vaeva, et vähendada sudu siin Los Angeleses. Aga teate mis? Kuna Aasias on praegu nii palju saastavat tööstust, kuna keskkonnahoiu seadused ei kaitse praegu Aasia inimesi, siis peaaegu kogu see puhas õhk, mis me reostunud õhu arvelt tagasi võitsime, mida me oleme siin Californias saavutanud, on nullitud, kuna Aasiast tuleb nii palju saastunud õhku. Seega mõjutab see meid kõiki. Aga just vaesed inimesed saavad suurima löögi. Aga saastav tööstus, mürgiste ainete põletamine, keskkonnastandardite vähesus Aasias, toob endaga kaasa nii palju saastatud õhku, mis tuleb üle ookeani ja teeb kasutuks meie saavutused Californias. Me oleme samas seisus nagu 1970. aastatel. Me oleme samal planeedil ja me peame jõudma nende probleemide juurteni. Minu arvates on probleemi juureks
The root of this problem, in my view, is the idea of disposability itself. You see, if you understand the link between what we're doing to poison and pollute the planet and what we're doing to poor people, you arrive at a very troubling but also very helpful insight: In order to trash the planet, you have to trash people. But if you create a world where you don't trash people, you can't trash the planet. So now we are at a moment where the coming together of social justice as an idea and ecology as an idea, we finally can now see that they are really, at the end of the day, one idea. And it's the idea that we don't have disposable anything. We don't have disposable resources. We don't have disposable species. And we don't have disposable people, either. We don't have a throwaway planet, and we don't have throwaway children -- it's all precious.
ühekordse kasutamise idee iseenesest. Kui te tabate ära selle, kuidas on omavahel seotud planeedi mürgitamine ja reostamine ja selle tagajärjed vaestele inimestele, jõuate te väga murettekitava, aga ühtlasi väga kasutoova arusaamiseni: selleks et risustada planeeti, on vaja risustada ka inimesi. Aga kui loote maailma, kus te ei risusta inimesi, ei risusta te ka planeeti. Praegusel hetkel, kui sotsiaalse õigluse ja ökoloogia idee lähenevad üksteisele, näeme lõpuks, et tegelikult on see üks ja sama idee. Ja see idee seisneb selles, et mitte midagi ei saa ära visata. Meil ei ole ressursse, mida saaks ära visata. Meil ei ole liike, mida saaks ära visata. Ja meil ei ole ka inimesi, keda saaks ära visata. Meil ei ole äravisatavat planeeti ega äravisatavaid lapsi - kõigel on väärtus.
And as we all begin to come back to that basic understanding, new opportunities for action begin to emerge. Biomimicry, which is an emerging science, winds up being a very important social justice idea. People who are just learning about this stuff: biomimicry means respecting the wisdom of all species. Democracy, by the way, means respecting the wisdom of all people -- we'll get to that. But biomimicry means respecting the wisdom of all species. It turns out we're a pretty clever species. We have this big cortex, we're pretty proud of ourselves. But if we want to make something hard, we say, "I know! I'm going to make a hard substance. I know! I'm going to get vacuums and furnaces and drag stuff out of the ground and get things hot and poison and pollute ... But I got this hard thing!"
Ja kui me kõik jõuame selle lihtsa arusaamani, hakkavad esile kerkima uues võimalused tegutsemiseks. Biomimikri, mis on praegu esiletõusev teadusharu, kannab endas tegelikult väga olulist ideed sotsiaalsest õiglusest. Nende jaoks, kes selle mõistega alles tuttavaks on saanud - biomimikri tähendab kõikide liikide tarkuse austamist. Muide, demokraatia tähendab kõigi inimeste tarkuse austamist - ja me jõuame selleni. Aga biomimikri tähendab kõigi liikide teadmiste austamist. Tuleb välja, et me oleme päris nutikas liik. Meie ulatuslik ajukoor, me oleme selle üle päris uhked. Aga kui me soovime teha tugevat materjali, mõtleme: "Ma tean, ma teen kõva materjali. Ma võtan vaakumi ja suured põletusahjud ja kisun maapõuest asju välja ja ajan asjad kuumaks ja mürgitan ja saastan, aga lõpuks ma ju saan selle materjali tugevaks.
(Laughter)
Ma olen nii nutikas."
"I'm so clever!" And you look behind you, and there's destruction all around you. But guess what? You're so clever, but you're not as clever as a clam.
Ja kui sa vaatad selja taha, siis sa näed hävitustööd. Aga tead mis? Sa oled nutikas, aga mitte nii nutikas nagu merekarp.
A clamshell is hard. There's no vacuums. There's no big furnaces. There's no poison. There's no pollution. It turns out that other species figured out a long time ago how to create many of the things we need using biological processes that nature knows how to use well. That insight of biomimicry, of our scientists finally realizing that we have as much to learn from other species -- I don't mean taking a mouse and sticking it with stuff. I don't mean looking at it from that way, abusing the little species. I mean actually respecting them, respecting what they've achieved. That's called biomimicry, and that opens the door to zero waste production; zero pollution production; that we could actually enjoy a high quality of life, a high standard of living, without trashing the planet.
Merekarbi karp on tugev. Seal ei ole vaakumit ega põletusahjusid, seal pole mürki ega reostust. Selgub, et teised liigid on tükk aega tagasi aru saanud, kuidas luua suurt hulka nendest asjadest, mida meie vajame, kasutades bioloogilisi protsesse, mida loodus oskab hästi kasutada. Tänu biomimikrile on meie teadlased lõpuks mõistnud, et meil on teistelt liikidelt palju õppida. Ma ei pea silmas hiirtega katsete tegemist. Ma ei mõtle seda niimoodi, väikeseid liike ära kasutades - ma pean silmas nende austamist ja nende saavutuste austamist. Seda nimetataksegi biomimikriks ja see avab ukse jäätmevabale tootmisele, saastevabale tootmisele - et me saaks nautida kõrget elukvaliteeti ilma planeeti reostamata.
Well, that idea of biomimicry, respecting the wisdom of all species, combined with the idea of democracy and social justice, respecting the wisdom and the worth of all people, would give us a different society. We would have a different economy. We would have a green society that Dr. King would be proud of. That should be the goal. And the way that we get there is to first of all recognize that the idea of disposability not only hurts the species we've talked about, but it even corrupts our own society.
Biomimikri idee, kõigi liikide tarkuse austamine, ühendatud demokraatia ja sotsiaalse õigluse ideega, austades kõigi inimeste tarkust ja väärtust, annaks meile teistsuguse ühiskonna. Meil oleks teistsugune majandus. Meil oleks roheline ühiskond, mille üle dr King uhke oleks. See peaks olema meie siht. Sinna jõudmiseks tuleb esiteks teadvustada, et ühekordse kasutamise idee ei too kahju mitte ainult nendele liikidele, kellest me rääkisime, vaid see rikub ka meie ühiskonda.
We're so proud to live here in California. We just had this vote, and everybody's like, "Well -- not in our state!"
Me oleme uhked, et elame Californias. Meil oli just hääletamine ja kõik mõtlesid: "Ei, mitte meie osariigis.
(Laughter)
Ma ei tea, mida need teised osariigid tegid."
I don't know what those other states were doing, but ..."
(naer)
(Laughter)
Nii uhked.
Just so proud. And, yeah, I'm proud, too. But ... California, though we lead the world in some of the green stuff, we also, unfortunately, lead the world in some of the gulag stuff. California has one of the highest incarceration rates of all the 50 states. We have a moral challenge in this movement. We are passionate about rescuing some dead materials from the landfill, but sometimes not as passionate about rescuing living beings, living people. And I would say that we live in a country -- five percent of the world's population, 25 percent of the greenhouse gases, but also 25 percent of the world's prisoners. One of every four people locked up anywhere in the world is locked up right here in the United States. So that is consistent with this idea that disposability is something we believe in.
Jah, mina olen ka uhke. Aga California, kuigi me oleme mõnede ökoloogiliste asjadega maailma esirinnas, oleme me kahjuks esirinnas ka mõnede gulagi-sarnaste asjadega. Californias on üks kõrgemaid tuhastamise osakaale kõigi 50 osariigi hulgas. Meil on praegusel hetkel moraalne väljakutse. Me päästame suure kirega materjale prügimägedest, aga mõnikord päästame hoopis väiksema kirega elusolendeid, inimesi. Ja ma ütleksin, et me elame riigis, viis protsenti maailma rahvastikust, 25 protsenti kasvuhoonegaasidest, aga samuti 25 protsenti maailma vangidest. Üks neljast vangist maailmas on vangis siinsamas Ameerikas. See on kooskõlas ideega, et me usume äravisatavusse.
And yet, as a movement that has to broaden its constituency, that has to grow, that has to reach out beyond our natural comfort zone, one of the challenges to the success of this movement, of getting rid of things like plastic and helping the economy shift, is people look at our movement with some suspicion. And they ask a question, and the question is: How can these people be so passionate? A poor person, a low-income person, somebody in Cancer Alley, somebody in Watts, somebody in Harlem, somebody on an Indian reservation, might say to themselves -- and rightfully so -- "How can these people be so passionate about making sure that a plastic bottle has a second chance in life, or an aluminum can has a second chance, and yet, when my child gets in trouble and goes to prison, he doesn't get a second chance?" "How can this movement be so passionate about saying we don't have throwaway stuff, no throwaway dead materials, and yet accept throwaway lives and throwaway communities like Cancer Alley?" And so, we now get a chance to be truly proud of this movement. When we take on topics like this, it gives us that extra call to reach out to other movements and to become more inclusive and to grow, and we can finally get out of this crazy dilemma that we've been in.
Ja siiski, liikumisena mis peab oma poolehoidjate ringi suurendama, mis peab kasvama, mis peab oma mugavustsoonist välja ulatuma, on üheks väljakutseks, saamaks lahti plastikust ja muutmaks majandust, saada lahti kahlustavatest pilkudest, millega inimesed meie liikumist vaatavad. Ja nad küsivad: kuidas saavad need inimesed nii kirglikud olla? Vaene, madala sissetulekuga inimene "vähktõve tänaval" keegi Wattsis, keegi Harlemis või indiaanlaste reservatsioonis, võivad endamisi öelda, ja seda õigustatult, "Kuidas saavad need inimesed võidelda nii kirglikult plastikpudeli või alumiiniumpurgi teise võimaluse eest ja samal ajal kui minu lapsel on pahandused ja ta sattub vangi, siis temale ei anta teist võimalust? Kuidas saab see liikumine olla nii kirglik, öeldes, et meil pole äravisatavaid asju, kasutuid materjale, ja samas aktsepteerida äravisatavaid elusid ja kogukondi nagu "vähktõve tänav"?" Ja nüüd on meil võimalus selle liikumise üle tõeliselt uhked olla. Kui me hakkame tegelema selliste teemadega, annab see meile lisapõhjuse otsida kontakti teiste liikumistega ja neid kaasata ja seeläbi kasvada. Ja me pääseme lõpuks välja sellest segasest dilemmast, mis meil olnud on.
Most of you are good, softhearted people. When you were younger, you cared about the whole world, and at some point, somebody said you had to pick an issue, you had to boil your love down to an issue. "Can't love the whole world -- you've got to work on trees or you've got to work on immigration. You've got to shrink it down and be about one issue." And really, they fundamentally told you, "Are you going to hug a tree? Or are you going to hug a child? Pick. Are you going to hug a tree? Or are you going to hug a child? Pick." Well, when you start working on issues like plastic, you realize the whole thing is connected. And luckily, most of us are blessed to have two arms -- we can hug both.
Enamik teist on heasüdamlikud inimesed. Kui te olite noored, hoolisite tervest maailmast, ja ühel hetkel ütles keegi teile, et te peate valima ühe valdkonna, te peate suunama oma armastuse ühele teemale. Tervet maailma ei saa armastada, sa pead tegelema puudega või immigratsiooniga. Sa tagasi tõmbama ja ühe asjaga tegelema. Ja põhimõtteliselt öeldi sulle: "Kas sa kallistad puud või kallistad sa last? Vali. Kas sa kallistad puud või last? Vali." Kui sa hakkad tegelema teemadega nagu plastik, saad aru, et kõik on omavahel ühendatud, ja õnneks on enamikul meist kaks kätt. Me saame mõlemat kallistada.
Thank you very much.
Suur aitäh teile.
(Applause)
(aplaus)