> I'm wondering if there are some ideas out there on tackling the deeper cause. One rough way to think about it is I=PAT, where I is total environmental impact

> I'm wondering if there are some ideas out there on tackling the deeper cause. One rough way to think about it is I=PAT, where I is total environmental impact, P is population, A is affluence per capita, and T is environmental impact per unit of affluence. Population has grown exponentially, per capita affluence has grown dramatically, and reductions in the last factor T haven't been able to keep up. Worse, if you consider the "goals" of our major systems of economic organisation - or at least the observed behaviour - they aren't set up to minimise I, or even really consider it - it's more like our ways of large scale cooperation are focused on economic growth, i.e. roughly trying to maximise P*A. If you live in an affluent western "free market" democracy it is probably politically difficult to push for major reduction or limits to population P or affluence A. In terms of what can be done, it's probably better to focus on smaller scope/smaller scale problems. Not realistic for one person to solve the whole world's problems. If you can help push politically to regulate environmental impact in your area of local politics, that's probably very helpful. Not necessarily aligned with skills as an engineer, but this is probably more valuable than building something within current political/market framework. If you're able to set up a small business or not for profit that is able to help others save money with side effects of reducing environmental impact, that's probably also helpful. This is less ambitious and isn't tackling the main root causes, but is something that is more in your control.