As it’s my first post here I thought I’d head straight into a rant. Why not?
I’m a bit advocate of doing little things in your life to become green. I have done bigger things like giving up the car, but small things like using recycled toilet paper etc is all well and good. However there are some things that I can’t work out whether the change I’m making is really doing that much good. Can trying to be green actually be worse for the planet?
For example, if I download a film rather than buying one I’ve saved the production of the disc, the packaging, the delivery etc. But then what about the eight hours I’ve had the computer on downloading it and watching it? Then I might burn it to disc anyway. Is the energy used downloading it less than making it? What if everyone did it, the national grid can hardly cope with people putting on the kettle in the break in Coronation Street, nevermind on the day of release for the latest blockbuster.
At work we recycle paper. But the oversized bins that we put the paper in are made from plastic and so are the recycling sacks inside them. And on top of our normal refuse collection, someone comes in a diesel van and picks up all the paper and card.
And what about a wind-up radio? It saves on batteries/electricity but it’s made out of plastic.
And then there’s the other way round. My flat is damp so occasionally I forget about the environment as a whole and think about my localised environment and put the dehumidifier on. That’s bad right? But the water it collects waters the plants so is that okay to use it? I’m using electricity but saving water.
I originally had a point but it’s become lost a bit, and I think that’s what I’m talking about - people can become confused about what to do for the best. But sites like this one, Life Goggles which I write for and the other editor’s sites (see right) can help you muddle through.
November 23rd, 2007 at 11:57 am
surely there are clear answers to many of your questions (ie even if we didnt know we could easily find out)? It’s not uncertain, it’s just muddled. I read that 80% of home energy goes on heating. So that’s arguably quite a good thing to focus on. And sod lightbulbs really, lets just get the loft lagged first. I think as well as piecemeal advice we do just need ‘the big picture’ on what to do. Like an uber wiki or FAQ? Not 100 things to do, but what to focus on.
ps there was an academic paper recently someone told me that suggested that walking creates more greenhouse gases than driving. Now that IS confusing.
November 23rd, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Adam, I agree it can be difficult sometimes to understand whether your green actions have bigger environmental consequence. With regards to your queries;
1) Sharing DVD’s would be a greener option.
For example you and your friends could create a list of what dvd’s you already have and then set up a system to share. If you all wanted to watch a new movie, then one person could either download or purchase the film and then you could even save energy by all watching it together at one persons house (a house that uses green energy of course!)
If your friends don’t have a great collection, then why not walk or cycle to your local Blockbuster (or an equivalent) and hire a dvd instead, again watching it with a group of friends. This would be more energy efficient and green (as long as they did not drive to your house) – you could also all have a meal together which would save energy compared to all cooking separately at home.
2) Recycling paper is good – but reduction is even better.
Thus could the data be emailed or kept electronically. If not, is the document ready to print? There is nothing worse than printing a letter and seeing an error. So check, check again, think before you print, print double sided and always use recycled paper.
If you receive unwanted junk mail, register with the Mail Preference Service to stop companies sending you information that you have not requested. If you receive mail that you did request and if you do not need to keep it the why not use it as scrap paper first before you recycle. A pad of such scrap paper is much better than using new note books.
So you have reduced paper use as much as possible! However you have plastic recycling bins. Well don’t replace them as replacing such items with a so called ‘greener item’ is not an environmentally sound idea. If you do not have recycling bins in your office all ready, then get a second hand bin instead or even use cardboard boxes (formerly some kind of packaging – definitely not new boxes) instead.
Transporting recycled material - if you have a kerb side collection and the truck would be coming to your street anyway then it is best to leave things as they are. But you could lobby your local council to make the trucks more fuel efficient and less polluting.
If you have no kerbside collection then try and only take items to the recycle bank when you are actually going near them. Never ever drive to a recycling bank just to recycle items. A cleaner and more efficient way of transporting recycled goods is by walking or cycling – again only if you are going that way.
3) Radio’s
If you already have a working radio that can use rechargeable batteries – then I personally think that it is better to keep using this compared to going out especially to buy a new wind up radio. It is my understanding that rechargeable batteries are better than disposable batteries in terms of resources and reducing landfill. Yes, using rechargeable batteries use energy however if you are using a green energy company it is better than normal batteries. Even better – you could get a solar powered battery charger, though I have not personally used one so not sure how good they are.
If your old radio is broken and unfixable (it is always greener to fix an item than buying a new one) then definitely go for a wind up radio, to make it greener get a second hand one (they are out there).
4) Dehumidifier
I am not sure about this one, perhaps having a course of damp treatment would be better than using a dehumidifier. But using the recycled water is very good.
John Grant, I agree we need the ‘Big Picture’. I think a green wiki would be great as many people are confused.
In terms of walking creating more greenhouse gases than driving, this was declared by a guy called Chris Goodall. However I think that it is a very controversial and silly statement to make and will not help people to be greener or healthier. His argument is that in order to walk you need more food than driving, and as food production uses energy and creates carbon – a person who walks creates more carbon. Wrong, wrong, wrong!! There are too many factors involved in this, for example food consumption differs from person to person and also where they source their food from too.
For example a typical driver with a good appetite may eat meat, fruit and veg from all over the world. The further the food has come from the more air miles and the more carbon produced. Also meat and dairy products involve more energy and produces more carbon than vegetables and grains.
Now compare this typical driver to me. A non-driving vegan who aims to eat as much locally sourced food, with little packaging as possible. I don’t think that I eat more than the average person even though I walk and cycle.
Thus who produces more carbon? The typical driver with a good appetite and who eats meat, fruit and veg from all over the world…………….or someone like me who does not drive (thus walks / cycles etc), eats the same amount of food as perhaps a driver but is vegan and eats locally sourced food as much as possible?
Also walking is healthier than driving, and as a society we should be encouraging people to exercise. The driver may exercises which is great, but may go to a gym which guzzles energy and thus creates carbon.
Chris Goodall also said that exercise in general creates more carbon due to increased food production. But not doing any kind of exercise is bad for our hearts and thus creates a false carbon emission indicator as if we become ill and have to undergo medical treatment – then that produces a lot of carbon, in many aspects.
So in conclusion Chris Goodall made a terrible statement as it gives couch potatoes who drive gas guzzling cars an excuse to continue driving not exercise and be a drain on society in many ways.
Sorry for the rant
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Anna-Lisa - thanks for helping me out, I’m not actually that confused but you make some very good points so thanks for that.
On the walking/driving debate I walk most places and don’t eat any more than a driver, in fact people who driver can be said to be fatter and then eat more as well as pollute the planet.
November 24th, 2007 at 9:59 am
I think I saw John’s comment from a different angle (not that Chris Goodall’s statement is giving people an excuse to drive), that sometimes the advice given can seem nonsensical. And I agree.
Without being an academic in physics, maths and chemistry (and having lots of spare time) there’s no way we could precisely work out some of the puzzles of which of our actions are doing more damage to the environment. As John says surely it would make more sense to concentrate on the biggest, most damaging things and then step by step make other changes. I wouldn’t say “sod the lightbulbs” though!
In my view, the fact that we’re even considering our actions in the first place is important. Its those who just don’t care or think that trying to make changes now is pointless who concern me the most.
Again, Adam’s point in his last comment “people who drive can be said to be fatter and eat more as well as pollute the planet” shows how silly some of these arguments are. We’ve got to seperate the ‘wheat from the chaff’ so to speak in terms of what does and doesn’t make sense.
I don’t want to make this into a driver / non-driver debate. I just want to say that I do drive but not needlessly. Others may not agree with this but, for example, I’m not happy walking / getting the bus on my own at night time. Previous experiences have shown me that’s just not safe (at least not here anyway). So, I will use my car but that doesn’t make me lazy or a couch potato or someone who doesn’t consider my actions or in fact a person who doesn’t care about the enviroment, it makes me someone who is careful about safety.
Generalisations and assumptions are unhelpful. Is there such a thing as a typical driver???? I don’t think so. If Anna-Lisa’s description of a ‘typical driver’ above is accurate then I for one don’t fit that mould. Everyone’s lifestyles are different (as they should be - we can’t impose our choices on others) and we have to work out how we, individually, are continually making changes for the better - for the planet. I think that’s the point.
November 24th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Adam, sorry for thinking that you was confused - I appreciate now that you were giving examples of what could be viewed as confusing for many people. However glad that you appreciated some of the points.
Vicky, I agree that sometimes advice given can seem nonsensical. Though I do think that a small minority of people could possibly use what Chris Goodall said about walking producing more carbon, literally - thus drive rather than walk.
It is fantastic that we are all considering our actions, and lets hope that more people will start to consider their’s too.
Sorry if I did turn it into a non-driver / driver debate it was not my intention, and using the expression ‘typical driver’ was wrong, as I agree with Vicky what is a typical driver, most likely not any GGG contriutors or readers. However perhaps I should have used the term ‘average citizen’, which could be someone who drives every day to work in there car and has a diet based on meat and food which may not be all locally sourced. And from my understanding and experience that fits the profile of a huge amount of people that I know, including some friends and family.
Driving is essential for many people and provides them with fantastic freedom and independance. I agree that in some areas it is not safe to walk or catch public transport at night, though many people still do it as even though they are safety concious it might be there only option.
I agree nobody can impose choices on others and we are all individual. However isn’t it great that through various outlets, including GGG that we can discuss such topics that can help people get different angles on important issues. These discussions can provide people with ideas on how they can make continual changes to make the planet a better place.
I think the comments on here has really helped me to get a different angle on things, so thank you.
November 24th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Yep, I agree, the debate is vital. Since the beginning of GGG and in fact from the days when writing for City Hippy, one of the most valuable things I’ve found from these experiences is learning a new way of looking at things - from others’ perspective.
As Adam says in his post, GGG and other blogs can help us to learn, share and work our way through the minefield of green dilemmas.