As regular readers know, I've been steadily modifying my behaviors in order to reduce the impact I make on the earth's (strained) resources.  My efforts have been fairly simple.  I bought and use reusable shopping bags.  I bought and use reusable coffee cups for my Starbucks purchases.  I reuse ziploc bags (after washing them). 

I buy eco-friendly toilet paper, dishwashing liquids, cleaning agents and washing machine detergent.  I use cloth napkins instead of paper and rags instead of paper towels.

Small steps but positive ones. 

But one thing that keeps reverberating in my brain is the assertion by the authors of Cradle to Cradle that "less bad" isn't good enough.  We need to fundamentally rethink the way we do things if we're going to stop trashing the planet.  Literally.

Some of the wasteful things that make me go "hmmm...there has to be a better way" lately are:

--Buying small quantities of food in plastic tubs or glass jars.  (Think whipped cream--nonfat of course, Sally--and peanut butter.)  Shouldn't there be a way we could buy these things and reuse the container?

--Using wooden sticks to stir the sweetener in my reusable coffee cup.  The solution for me is to add the sweetener first, but what else could we do...make the stirrer out of sweeteners?

--Buying vegetables in little plastic wrapped containers that have styrofoam bottoms.  Shouldn't we be able to make a container that can be reused, broken down, repurposed?

--Plastic wrap over my dry cleaning.  Is it necessary?  Do I really care if my dress rubs shoulders with a stranger's jacket?

What are the eco-flubs that make you question?  See any solutions out there?

 


Comments

Cindy

Tue, 20 May 2008 06:09:48

Packaging in general, and especially of individual minute amounts of stuff. I'm sure there are some situations - sterile medical supplies come to mind - where packaging serves a vital purpose, but mostly it seems to have become habit. I'm constantly appalled at the amount of waste generated by one trip to the grocery store, even when I take my own grocery bags!

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Tue, 20 May 2008 12:08:12

Textbooks.

Some textbooks need to be updated periodically due to changes in the discipline. Others seem to come out with a new edition every 2-3 years, seemingly for no other reason than to make it harder for students and educators to use used books.

The previous editions become largely worthless, while reams of paper are used to print new copies of books which are largely identical to previous ones.

 

Hal

Tue, 20 May 2008 16:53:37

I see lots and LOTS of large school busses that only have a few children on them. Nothing like using a huge truck to deliver a few small children to school and not even give them seat belts. I could easily fit those same kids in my Toyota and they'd also have seat belts. Also, not to mention the bus driver that needs a special class of license and higher pay to drive that large polluting vehicle. We should outsource all of our school busses to FedEx or UPS. They'd figure out how to get the same job done for much less cost with (probably) much higher safety and on-time delivery.

 

Erik

Tue, 20 May 2008 18:24:44

I LOVE this posting! You rock dude! Yes, nuke the wasted packaging - all of it. And while we're at it, make all batteries rechargeable. And let gas go to $7/gallon - very hard in the short term, but needs must, as the Draka would say. (Was reading this morning that already in the Bay Area people are junking their SUV's, so much so that used car dealers are starting to refuse them as trade-ins...) Ban most plastic bags for carrying things. Stop all the stupid plastic packaging for USB cables and IPOD's and such.

But wait - let's get really serious. Let's rethink the whole fertilizer thing and stop savaging the planet's oceans. Let's begin serious small-scale atmospheric terra-forming (or, as it now called, geo-engineering) experiments to reduce CO2 in the air. Let's make killing elephants, tigers and rhinos a crime with the death penalty. Let's start whole-sale research into Solar to make it work NOW - so we can stop all those poor souls in India and China from burning kerosene and wood.

Cool thing is, it's all beginning. Winds of the Singularity...

 

Hal

Tue, 20 May 2008 19:00:43

Erik,

This a quote from you above:
"Let's make killing elephants, tigers and rhinos a crime with the death penalty."

I wonder if you feel the same way regarding a penalty for killing humans? I don't know you at all but my guess would be that you're against the death penalty for humans that kill humans. If I'm wrong then please accept my apologies.

However, if not, then where should we stop? If you kill a dog then you should be killed? What about that chicken I had last night? What about that karabu I ate when I was in Alaska? All the same to you?

 

Laura

Tue, 20 May 2008 21:21:36

Cindy,

I'm with you on the waste of packaging. It's not just groceries either...it's almost any kind of shopping we do.

Even when I shop for the garden (which should be a green activity), the plants come in plastic containers. Mulch comes in big plastic bags.

Part of the issue is that much of our production is centralized as part of a more efficient economy. But with this much waste, maybe we need to redefine efficiency.

 

Laura

Tue, 20 May 2008 21:23:21

Hey Ken,

Yep...textbooks are a big issue. Books in general are big tree gobblers, but when we have to come out with a new edition of textbooks to cut down on the used-book market--well, that's plain silly.

One way to solve the issue may be with paperless books like Kindle. A friend showed his to me and I was pretty impressed.

 

Laura

Tue, 20 May 2008 21:25:11

Hi Hal,

Not a bad idea to pair delivery of precious cargo with our most effective deliverers of packages. I bet those guys (and gals) would have some great ideas.

Fuel efficient buses exist...but not in SoCal.

 

Laura

Tue, 20 May 2008 21:29:46

Erik,

How's the lanai?

I'm with you on the plastic everything--bags, molded packaging, batteries, terra-forming.

I'm kind of with Hal on the idea of the death penalty for killing endangered species. Seems extreme to me. I'm against the death penalty for killing people so I can't quite get there with it as punishment for poaching.

There's got to be a way to get these guys to stop butchering the animals, though. The market seems to drive the poaching...small supply, huge demand. Maybe if we clone the animals (or the tusks etc that are so desirable) and flood the market through China?

 

Laura

Tue, 20 May 2008 21:31:17

Hal,

Not chickens. I like chicken too much. <smile>

Seriously though, there should be some drastic penalties for what's happening with elephants, gorillas, tigers and rhinos.

Where would you draw the line?

 

Hal

Wed, 21 May 2008 06:17:33

Laura,

I agree but I don't know where to draw the line. As with anything else, demand is driving the problem so I guess we start there. Seems it is just like the illegal drug market but we don't seem to have much success dealing with the demand side of that equation either. Maybe Erik is on to something. Maybe the death penalty for poaching is the solution?

Although I am officially against capital punishment I do find myself reevaluating my stance from time to time.

 

Laura

Wed, 21 May 2008 08:40:52

Our efforts to stem the drug problem with criminalizing those who "demand" the drugs have not proven effective.

How about life in prison for the poachers?

I can't get behind the death penalty...although it's easier to understand as I become older.

 

Erik

Thu, 22 May 2008 14:26:27

Animals, death penalty:

I stand by my original statement. The destruction of eco-systems in general needs to be taken damn seriously (as I don't know we'll have enough time to get enough skill at terra-forming before it gets ugly.) Stepping into rather deep waters here, but I don't oppose the death penalty for some criminals. Notice I didn't say crimes - criminals. I believe that with some effort and time most people who commit crimes can be given different life skills/retrained to get their shit together. I don't believe in all cases that's workable.

Also, some crimes are worse than others. Make it clear that careless destruction of the eco-system is a crime with a deadly deterrent, I believe it will impact said destruction.

And, while we're on the subject, somebody tailor a virus that eats tobacco plants and nothing else. Talk about helping combat global warming (and lung cancer.)

Erik

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Sat, 24 May 2008 08:56:12

Non-sequitur, perhaps, but harkening back to a comment above, a few days after reading this post, I noticed the following being offered as a "Blue Point" prize by my insurance company (they give incentives for exercising)...it's a "self-stirring" mug. Just put the ingredients in and push a button:

http://tinyurl.com/5wjesm

 

Laura

Sun, 25 May 2008 14:37:57

Seems completely counterintuitive. Your reward for exercising is a device that does your stirring for you.

Nice one, Ken!

 

Laura

Sun, 25 May 2008 14:39:34

Erik,

I must take issue with one of your assumptions. You said, "Make it clear that careless destruction of the eco-system is a crime with a deadly deterrent, I believe it will impact said destruction."

If the death penalty is not a deterrent for murder of human beings, how will it be a deterrent for destruction of the eco-system?


 



Leave a Reply