In connection with the pedaled transition to a circular economy, timid forwarding began. The picture drawn with ponies and the absence of emissions may turn out to be. To put it mildly, very far from what we all see in the output. In the Harvard Business Review, Luk Van Wassenhove from the French business school INSEAD, who is also involved in the circular economy, wrote an article. In that article, although he does not dispute the need for the transition. But he indicates its limitations. If you lack some adrenaline, even after reading recent news, then check the online live casino. It might give you more than just a good mood.
What Is It All About?
First, he makes a brief excursion into the history of where it came from. Here already there are oddities since the theoretical concept of it appeared in the late 80s after researchers from General Motors. The research considered a closed-loop model for the needs of production optimization. For 20 years, the concept was quietly working, and none remembered it. In 2009 one British grand dame, Ellen MacArthur, founded the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and began to popularize this concept. Now with 180 partner organizations, among others, the EU is actively promoting this agenda. All this splendor (circular economy) is based on three pillars. The first is zero emissions. The second is waste recycling. And the third is the use of renewable resources and renewable energy sources. The author notes that the EU expects the transition to a circular economy by 2030. It will add only 0.5% and create an additional 700,000 jobs. Remarkably, there is no debate in the EU about whether such a transition is worth the suffering or not.
Critics Are Essential
The circular economy, however, has many critics. They rightly point out that today there are no such technologies. The lack of such technologies would not allow for achieving the required level of waste recycling. Moreover, the restriction of consumption, which is being pushed by transition advocates, will not lead to an increase in quality of life and the improvement of the general ecological condition. There is a huge problem with waste sorting. More importantly, the recycling revenues will have to be sent to where the corresponding goods were produced. And this is China.
As the author of the article notes, this can have worse consequences for the environment. Worse than if such a product would be produced anew from the extracted raw materials, and not from recycled materials.
On another hand, everything is also not easy. With tons of durability, that is, again they want to make goods that will work for a very long time, and, if necessary, repair them. There was something like this before. So, the fact is that it is impossible to repair minor breakdowns on demand. You will have to immediately produce huge volumes of parts and store them somewhere. That is more costly in terms of energy consumption than the existing model.
In general, in the case of the implementation of the transition of the western kings, a world awaits that is much less comfortable than it is now.
