Catch 22@PJ: Environment vs $

When it comes to the need of protecting the environment and expenditure for doing so, how do you strike a balance? This is a question many people will like to skip and avoid. Given an opportunity, everybody would like to make good and hence feel good by doing more for the betterment of their living environment. People tend to collect old newspaper for recycling and then earn some return. Some might go extra mile of planting trees and flora not only within their house compound, but also the surrounding area like garden and road shoulder in front of their house. This partly because of immense benefits they are enjoying and also the cost involved is not that high.

If you are asked to contribute more than you are willing to do so, would you still have no problem of carrying out the contribution towards environment that you are used to do? I was asked this question during a meeting. I made a proposal recently for replacing the billing with electronic and digital format. Instead of receiving hardcopy of the bill by postal, the receipients will be asked to voluntary himself to not receiving the bill and make payment through online system. By doing so, the cost on printing and sending the bills will be reduced and carbon footprint can be deducted. While the saving on billing is not that significant compared to the potential total collection from billing and possibility of non-payment, the process will bring in positive message to the public that carbon emission is possible even though with a small process of business doing that have a risk of non collection of due. In this respect, shall we go ahead facing the potential financial risk for the good of protecting our environment later?

I am fortunate that members of the meeting brought the arguement and agreed with the proposal. Perhaps many people out there would do the same if given proper guidance and information, that is preferring environmental conservation for public good rather than taking financial outflow as the only consideration.