The confusing ethics of modern life

Two stories which resonated with me this morning...

1) A colleague forwarded this nugget from popb*tch:
An avatar in Second Life has a larger carbon footprint than the average Brazilian

2) Slashdot commented on the world's biggest digital dump, where Chinese locals harvest the gold, copper and other valuable parts within discarded PCs from the West.

How should I feel about these things? It's a confusing state, as both coins have 2 sides.

I'll accept that the environmental cost in energy consumption of spending so much time online is greater than the footprint of most Brazilians. But on the other hand, it could be argued that the typcial American sitting at home on Second Life hanging out with virtual friends is actually making less of an environmental impact than s/he would if s/he drove his/her gas-guzzling car to meet up with real-life friends for a fast-food meal.

And sure, it's a real shame that there are so many toxic chemicals being carelessly dumped and unknowingly inhaled by Chinese workers in these PC-dumping grounds. But shouldn't I be feeling the warm fuzzies that this stuff is being recycled in some way, while also generating healthy incomes for poorer families?

I'm left in an emotional muddle by these things. My brain hasn't evolved the coping mechanism to process these kinds of confusing signals that we are bombarded with every day. I feel the real impact of the globalisation of media is constant mixed-message syndrome, in which people end up so confused about which angle to believe, they end up shutting down in hopes of ignoring it all.

Is anyone out there working on Emotions 2.0 ? If so, I'll gladly invest.