> whether we like it or not, a big (if not the biggest) part of
> that is changing consumer behavior.
The behavior you're talking about was invented and sold to these consumers; it's not their fault, the marketing droids told them that it was cool. So I think it's up to the market and industry to provide better alternatives that consumers can change to. Just saying "no!" is really a formula for disaster, just like Doug's idea of charging $10/gal for gas without providing an alternative for people who are stuck with their old dirty cars.
It all comes back to a small number of people who could change the direction we're headed; pointing the finger at 600M consumers and their individual habits is a big waste of time. I think I've made this point before:
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2004/2004-September/021471.html
You can see some of this in the hybrid car market: consumers have been offered an alternative that they can a) feel good about and b) pay a little more for, and they've responded. None of that involved wagging a finger at people and saying "you can't drive" ... I say keep up the good work.
And it's easier to point your finger at a small number of big targets, isn't it? Aren't you doing PR work for them when you blame "consumer behavior" ...?
/jordan