Environmental Action 9

[samv]

It is apparent from the thread regarding Kyoto that we will never all agree on Kyoto, climate change - why it's happening it and what to do about it...

However, it looks like everyone agrees to some degree that reducing pollution is beneficial

So, as an educational exercise, I'd like to ask you in this thread to share initiatives that have been undertaken by

1. your family / household
2. your workplace
3. your city
and if we can do this without dragging in politics

Thanks
4. your state/province and/or country

 

[metengr]

1. more recycling, bought a more fuel efficient auto in 2004

2. additional paper recycling containers at desks, automatic light sensors to shut the lights in your office or hallways if unoccupied or no movement after a certain period of time.

3. nothing here other than politicians blowing hot air. Maybe a wind farm would help to reduce pollution?

4. Currently cold Midwest in good ole USA

 

[Rich2001]

1. Pay more attention to packaging, recycle whenever possibel. I would like a new car but would the energy/pollution required to produce a new car be less or greater than keeping the older vehicle?

2. Recycle, change thermostats to programmable with auto setbacks.

3. Holds a Household Waste recycle clean-up day each april, hosted by several of the local Chemical Plants. CARE program.

4. Ohio Valley region

 

[SnTMan]

Use less stuff.

 

[samv]

1. still drive our little honda civic even though we now have two kids. we do camping, and we do haul 2x4's by lowering the back seat. I really don't mind not having a minivan or SUV.

designed our residence with less square footage than most new residences (reduces amount of building material needed while saving us $$), optimizing windows location and sizes to avoid north face, and take advantage of the sun on south face. little things that don't cost but make a difference.

Reduce Reuse Recycle

2. Have been involved in improving the efficiency of one series of the product we sell, but unfortunately up to now we do little in the way of waste reduction and recycling ...

3. Residents sort waste into compostables and recyclables that is further sorted by the waste management folks

City wide Christmas tree mulching (replacing the huge fire we used to have at the local park!)

4. One tonne challenge: for all canadians to reduce their yearly green house gas emissions by one tonne
I live in Eastern Canada

 

[BJC]

1. Bought a flat screen monitor.
2. Bought more sweatshits/ workout suits, turned thermostats down.
3. Take old magazines to the library- they sell them for 5 cents.
4.) Eat less.
5.) Drink warmer beer.
6.) Work at home 1-2 days a week.

 

[makeup]

Supermarketing to sell food free of packaging.

refillable , washing up, soap power, toothpaste, wine, beer, milk, spices, egg packs, packaging in general.

No plastic bags, recycleable paper.

take-aways will no plastic.

Charge people per sack of waste.
Go back to the milk bottle.
Give real cash benefits to those who do the above.

 

[samv]

makeup - these are suggestions of things that should be done correct?

At first glance I like the charge people per sack of waste idea - except that people will start dumping wherever instead of using municipal waste streams.

"Real cash benefits to those who do the above" though I think would be fantastic. It has gotten much too inexpensive to be wasteful - your average person doesn't even think about the repercussions of buying all of the new one time use items on the market (tupperware, cleaning products...) never mind all the great waste reduction suggestions you just made...

 

[SomeYahoo]

1) Only things that will save me money
2) Only things that will save the company money
3) Only things that will save the city money (or not drive money/tourists away).
4) Well, you see the trend

Maybe this is just my opinion, but a vast majority of the folks out there will only do things if they see immediate benefits. Lots of folks assume the scientists and engineers will find solutions before the "problems" cause problems (health, quality of life, etc.).

Sorry if this offends... just speaking the truth as I see it around me.

 

[moltenmetal]

Yep. The only thing which will be effective is to make people pay the true costs of their consumption. Tax consumption and use the revenue to promote conservation. Want the freedom of a personal automobile? In my world you'd pay for it- and society would use the money to fund public transportation for those who can't afford your kind of freedom.

Even though energy costs do NOT reflect the true costs of energy consumption, we do all we can to economize. We have a small car- small engine AND low frontal area, and keep it properly tuned. We keep the thermostats turned low in winter and really low at night. We have no air conditioning- well-placed trees shade our property in summer and the house is properly insulated. No snow melt system, energy-efficient lighting, no electric heat...

We minimize consumption PERIOD and teach our kids to do the same. We scavenge what others throw away and take this as a matter of pride. We do not base our personal esteem on what we own but rather on what we accomplish. And we value our freedom more than anything- less money wasted on consumption of goods frees it for other things- hopefully including an end to the work-a-day rat race while we're still young enough to enjoy the free time.

 

[Zapster]

I recognize that there are serious environmental consequences in my purchasing decisions. That is why I shop at Wal-Mart, paid a premium for a well insulated home, and buy fuel efficient cars. I don’t want to dirty up my own neighborhood.

The environmental impact of my life is a shell game. Regulations here have cleaned up the air, water, and earth dramatically in the last 40 years; however, this happened at a cost. Now a greater percentage of the products I use come from nations that have less stringent environmental regulations and less regard for their own citizens’ welfare. I am living large at the expense of the new manufacturing nations. It looks like China is taking a considerable environmental impact from the products they make for me. I assume that after they dirty up their environment and develop a considerable economic and military force they will export their environmental problems to a new developing nation.

Now, I am right up front about what takes place from my life style. Most environmentalists are not! I observe that they typically live in homes that are larger than 1000 square feet. They travel more than the Wal-Mart crowd that I hang around with. Their quest to travel and explore has developed an airline industry that consumes huge quantities of fuel. End destinations have back alleys that are rampant with pollution. The environmental footprints from their adventures are huge. All that cool camping stuff at REI comes at an environmental price. Ski vacations come with an environmental price. Nope, the way I see it, most people with the most concern for the environment talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. They make token gestures to prove to themselves and mostly others how they are concerned with the environment. How many environmental mental types acutully go about living the small life?

 

[moltenmetal]

Zapster: that's why I advocate the simple notion that people should pay the true, full cost of what they consume. If that's not reflected in the purchase price of the goods in question, it should be made up with tax and the revenue used to offset the harm caused.

Once we stop subsidizing waste, the self-righteousness and hypocrisy will quickly go out of it. People won't waste as much when that waste hits them in the pocketbook, period. It won't matter if people spend their gallons of fuel over a year driving to Wal-Mart in their SUV, or heating and cooling an extra 1000 square feet of home, or in a single plane trip half-way around the world: it'll cost them the true cost of that use- including a tax to compensate the rest of us for the environmental impacts we'll bear as a result.

Believe me, the Wal-Mart crowd you hang around with probably look down on the dumpster-diving crowd that I hang around with, so don't feel bad about those jet-setting so-called environmentalists looking down their nose at you! In my grandparents' day, thrift was a virtue- living on the farm with 10 kids during the Great Depression you learned to make do with what you had, and you counted every penny that left the family. In our screwed-up world, thrift has become a vice called "cheapness" in a world where people derive their value from what they own and what they consume rather than what they accomplish with what they have. Commercialism has become a religion for most people, and you get branded a heretic if you step outside the roles expected of you by that religion.

 

[GregLocock]

So to pick an obvious example - what is the true cost of a barrel of oil? Is it any different to what it was 110 years ago?

What is the true cost of a tonne of Aluminum? is it any different to what it was 110 years ago?

What is the true cost of a semiconductor chip? is it any different to what it was 110 years ago?

I think you'll find the phrase 'true cost' is contextual at best, and meaningless at worst.


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[PSE]

Recycle at home, Programmable Thermostat, smaller home (still close off low usage room(s)), flourescent lighting where able, solar landscape LED lighting, combine errands to reduce number of "last minute trips"

Recycling at work, Attempt to use returnable/reusable packaging with various suppliers, "returnable" soft drink containers are collected separately for charity. Lights off when not in use philosophy.

Municipal supports recycling, christmas tree collection, and is working on more efficient wastewater treatment proceses.

State of Michigan

 

[samv]

Agreed that it is difficult to assign "true cost"
but I'm sure economists can come up with approximations.
(Actually I've heard some are already working on it, had a friend who had a summer job doing that... not sure what her conclusions are going to be used for yet but interesting isn't it)

Yes it is different than 110 years ago because there are more people that ever before consuming more than ever before. It used to be that human existance and consumption habits had little effect on the overall planet - this is no longer true and must be accounted for.

 

[2dye4]

Plant trees. I have planted over 200 trees on
my parcel of property for personal recreation and
CO2 balenceing. If you don't own enough land then
volunteer with a enviromental group that is re-foresting
land.
Also tax energy use highly and let the free market
find ways to do with less.

 

[Zapster]

Moltenmetal, you state that, “people should pay the full cost of what they consume” and, “Once we stop subsidizing waste, the self-righteousness and hypocrisy will quickly go out of it.” Do you believe that environmental metal types will stop puffing their concern for the environment and what they and others should do to protect it; all the while they are creating significant and unnecessary environmental damage themselves? Anyone who lives life large and I define that as living in a home greater than 1000 square feet (this is total space, basement included) or taking vacations far away from their homes, should knock off the hypocrisy and talk about the gross quantity of pollution they are creating, not the token reductions in the pollution they create.

Because a person can pay the full cost of the pollution they create; does that give them the right to create more pollution? This is the way things work now. The affluent typically create more pollution than those that live the small life.

I create a larger environmental footprint on the planet than most people. I recognize that when I purchase imported products that they are typically made in locations that do not have the environmental regulation that are mandated here. I am comfortable with that, even if it is morally wrong. What I am not comfortable with is people puffing their accomplishments in protecting the environment and not disclosing the gross quantity of pollution they create. From my point of view, I could respect a person that says, “I consume 500 million BTUs of polluting energy every year, but I recycle plastics so that I can feel good about myself. “

 

[samv]

Zapster,

We are not at all pretending that we do not pollute, simply celebrating the steps we've been able to take to consciously reduce the size of our footprint. And from other peoples suggestions we may find that there are other things that we can do.
...
I don't understand why you are assuming that everyone that is environmentally minded goes off on these "adventures" far away. Not all of us environmentally minded people are young, have long hair and a volkswagon toaster van if that is the type of crowd you are refering to.

 

[moltenmetal]

Zapster: you're right that some environmentalism is tokenism. Just because some folks use recycling programs as an excuse to feel good about themselves in a hypocritical way doesn't make the recycling programs THEMSELVES any worse in terms of environmental merit.

Yes, the affluent can afford to pollute more than the poor. And yes, making goods more expensive so they reflect their true, total cost, would make that distinction between rich and poor even more obvious. But you don't solve an income problem by subsidizing CONSUMPTION, you do it by subsidizing income. You discourage consumption by taxing it. And you encourage conservation by subsidizing it. Tax fuel and road construction and use it to pay for safe, free-access well-serviced public transit and you get a behavioural shift which will have environmental benefit. Subsidize public roads out of the public purse and charge a fee to use public transit and you get what we've got now- more SUVs stuck in commuter traffic.

I have no patience for people who treat environmentalism as a religion- see my posts on other threads and you'll see that clearly. Religion of any kind has no place in public discourse on issues of technological nature. But VALUES DO have a place, and factors of critical importance to MOST people are currently valued at ZERO in the economic equation. We need to fix that if we're going to survive into the future rather than choking on our own filth.

 

[samv]

To get this thread back on its original tracks here are more environmental actions to take

at home:
- compost to recycle fruit, vegetable and cereal scraps to reduce waste and benefit your yard
- replace worn appliances with energy star appliances
- turn off computer, lights when not in use
- switch to "green" products whenever available (example toilet paper and computer paper made from most recycled fiber)

at work:
- evaluate raw material usage, can it be used more effectively? can the remaining waste be recycled / recycled more effectively?
- review HVAC installations, in the short term are there any obvious changes that could be made to save energy, in the long term are there investments/replacements that could make significant improvements to the systems efficiency? Are there processes in the building that could be coupled with HVAC so that one uses the others waste energy (example heat generating process in production could be coupled to heating system to heat offices) ?