Intro and Fish Response

Ok, sooo my name is Katherine, but my friends call me KB or Kat. As it happens, I've never blogged before so this should be interesting... or incredibly dull.
I grew up all over the U.S. because my dad was in the Army, but I've never lived abroad. I graduated from high school in Pennsylvania after attending ten different schools. I've finally settled in DC where I'm a junior at AU majoring in Environmental Science.
I'm not quite sure how or when I developed a passion for nature and the environment, but my friends have always thought of me as an "enviro-freak." Oh well.
Even though the subject of saving the Earth can (and does) become extraordinarily depressing, I can usually find comfort in the fact that I'm trying to make a difference-- and sometimes you just have to accept the fact that if you're doing your best, there's not much else you can do. (Or at least that's what I tell myself so I can sleep at night).
As for my stance on issues brought up by Stanley Fish in his article, "I Am, Therefore I Pollute," I think Fish is accurate in his thinking, and addresses many key issues surrounding the environmental crusade.
As he points out, it is extremely irritating to be pressured into a fight that seems so impossible to win.
For one example, Fish writes about making the choice between paper products that are tested on animals, or products that do not utilize recycled materials. After being pressured by his wife, he is forced to compromise and nearly eliminate such paper products from his life. "[T]here are too many battles to be fought," he says,"and I find that I am losing most of them."
Fish also addresses the stigmas associated with remodeling. In order to be as environmentally friendly as possible, he found the price of a green kitchen would be double that of a normal kitchen, and it would take twice as long to obtain the materials. Surely he has not taken into account the long-term costs of environmental degradation, and the loss of natural systems, but what average American does?
Even if Americans (and members of other developed nations) are given the facts on this subject, it often comes down to money and convenience. Time is money after all. And if green choices are less convenient and more expensive, what fiscally responsible adult would choose green over cheap 'n' easy?
In my opinion, people must learn to compromise and reevaluate their norms. We all need to alter our lifestyles to become more eco-friendly. But we also desperately need organizations to continue to develop cost-effective alternatives to diminish the toll we are taking on our planet's resources. In addition to this, we also need government regulations to control waste and perhaps reduce consumption in the U.S.
We need an all-inclusive plan that incorporates these three aspects into the lives of typical Americans thus making green lifestyles affordable and available to the masses.
And until that happens, Stanley Fish, and others like him, will not jump fully on board the eco-train.