Tuesday, Sept 2

Dear Reader,

A recent AP article is raising a bit of dander among the Bluedot crew. The story catalogues the choices that significantly impact, perhaps surprisingly, our personal carbon footprints. “It turns out many Americans aren’t great at identifying which personal decisions contribute most to climate change,” writes reporter Caleigh Wells. According to the study she cites, we overemphasize the impact of things like recycling and using lower-energy lightbulbs and underestimate the impact of actions like flying or — and here's where the debate got heated — owning a dog.

Why are pups such powerful drivers of carbon emissions? As with us, it’s what they eat — primarily beef. Pescatarian pooches are gentler on the planet, as are any of us who eat less — or no! — beef.

But Dot fears we’re yet again missing the forest for the trees. Why, we dog-loving Bluedotters rhetorically demanded, are our canine companions under scrutiny, while fat-cat fossil fuel companies continue to benefit from government subsidies and what feels like media absolution? “Personal responsibility,” after all, is the mantra of fossil fuel propaganda, convincing all of us that it’s our demand for cheap plastic and hamburgers that’s the real problem, not an outdated system that prioritizes fossil fuels, or the billionaire oligarchs who enrich themselves with the dividends of oil extraction while we’re arguing over cats and dogs. 

Which is not to say that we shouldn’t make better personal choices. Of course we should, and Bluedot is dedicated to providing guidance on what you can do — and showcasing what so many are already doing. But, as Dot put it in an internal message, “you can take my dog when you can pry her from my cold dead hands.” Besides, she’s already a pescatarian.

Doggedly,

Dot