Sure, this is a little messier than the easier, disposable version. However, do you even realize the amount of disposable diapers that are filling landfills?? Cloth diapers are a choice that every mother should seriously consider. Let’s look at some facts that are quite alarming…
Disposable Diapers Sobering Facts:
* from birth to about 2-1/2 the average child will go through about 7,300 diapers
* the cost for that is about $2600
* 18 billion diapers enter landfills each year
* disposable diapers make up about 3.4 million tons of trash
* health risks such as fertility issues in males, eyes, nose and throat issues and even asthma-like symptoms have been connected to disposable diapers!
* long term negative affects on animal and water life.
* the chemicals that make disposable diapers white increase the risk of cancer
* affect development
* they use more water. yep. you may need to wash cloth diapers, however, way more water is used making disposable diapers!
* a study, conducted by Anderson Laboratories in 1999 and published in the Archives of Environmental Health, found that disposable diapers release chemicals called volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and dipentene. They have been shown to have toxic health effects, such as cancer and brain damage, when used over time or high exposure.
* they use 1.3 million tons of wood pulp. that’s about 1/4 million trees every year.
* they take up to 500 years to break down.
* more viruses than you want to know about…including polio, survive for two weeks or more after disposed of.
There are many many many more reasons to avoid disposable diapers. However, I think our readers are intelligent and the above information is enough to get you thinking! Research for yourself. You will be shocked!
Go for organic natural reusable cloth diapers. You will not only be helping the environment and saving money, you will also protect your sweet precious love bugs from harm!
About the Author: Cindy Taylor is a Christian stay at home Mom who love the Lord and cares about God’s planet. You can see her passion and writing at her website, Green Christian Network (http://greenchristiannetwork.com).
Green Shopping Basics - What You Should Know Before You Shop Green
Going green always starts with good intentions, but the massive amount of green terms can sometimes be overwhelming. Here’s some of the common green terms you’ll hear and what they mean.
Organic
The term organic can often be used very broadly, but typically refers to products that have only organic components, produced without pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, or fertilizers or other harmful chemicals. Look for: USDA Certified Organic
Sustainable
Products or materials that are described as being sustainable contain materials that do not deplete the Earth of its resources and is easily replenished. There are many common types of materials that are considered sustainable:
Bamboo - Bamboo is a fast-growing and renewable resource that can be used to make fabrics, flooring, furniture and other products.
Jute - Jute is a long and shiny vegetable plant fiber that can be woven into a strong thread or twine. It is commonly used to create cloth or used within carpets, and rugs.
Hemp - Hemp is a fast-growing plant that is most commonly used for its strong fibers to create cloth used in bags and clothing. It can grow organically and also be used to create oils for cosmetic products as well as be used in food.
Sustainable Wool - There are many types of sustainable animal wools such as alpaca fibers or merino wool that can be used to create strong fibers commonly used in clothing.
Energy-Efficient
Products that are energy-efficient are design to consume less energy when operating without sacrificing performance, reducing long-term environmental and cost impacts. Energy-efficient products can range from appliances to light bulbs as well as contain different levels of efficiency. Look for: Energy Star Qualified, EPEAT Rated
Post-Consumer Recycled
Once a product has completely served its purpose, what remains are post-consumer materials that would otherwise be disposed as waste but are instead recycled. This would include products such as old packaging, glass bottles, aluminum cans, and plastics. When you recycle from your home these products become post-consumer recycled.
How is this different vs recycled? Regular recycled materials can contain a combination of materials, often coming a scraps or other by-products as a result of manufacturing. This could include both pre-consumer and post-consumer waste.
Recyclable
A recyclable product means that it can be recycled and be used to create future products. Polypropylene #5 is a common plastic to look for in products which is one of the most easily recyclable plastics.
Look for: Polypropylene #5
Reusable
Reusable products mean that a product can be used multiple times before the product is discarded or recycled. Some common reusable products are shopping bags, water bottles and tableware.
Fair Trade
Fair Trade is a social movement that promotes certain standards of sustainability practices and empowering producers in developing nations. Fair trade supports fair prices, fair labor conditions, community development and environmental sustainability.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
VOCs are organic chemical compounds that have high vapor pressure and easily evaporate at room temperature. VOCs can be released from many household items such as paints, flooring, upholstery, and cleaners. These VOCs are not only air pollutants but have also been known to cause health effects as well.
Look for: Low-VOC, Zero-VOC
Bisphenol A (BPA)
BPA is an organic compound that is used in the creation of many plastics and resins. Most commonly you will find BPA used polycarbonate bottles. While there is some controversy about the effects of BPA, some research has raised serious health concerns about the usage of BPA. Look for: BPA-free
Biodegradable
Biodegradable means that a substance can be naturally decomposed by biological processes. If a product is biodegradable, this means that it can be disposed of with no negative environmental impacts.
Solar-Powered
Solar powered products are powered using energy from the sun. Solar power can be used in a range of products from small household gadgets to entire home heating systems.
Now you’re ready to start shopping for green products!
The international passion to protect our planet from the ravages of pollution and to preserve our natural resources for future generations has become an everyday fact of life. With international support by “green” political parties, consumer organizations, celebrities and politicians, the green movement has become a powerful force with an agenda that needs to be addressed by industry, politicians and consumers. Discussions about the environment are taking place in corporate board rooms, legislative hearings, and by consumers in supermarkets and department stores.
Can we fully understand environmental concerns and energy implications without a working knowledge of basic green vocabulary? Do we understand all the issues relevant to tax incentives for oil companies? Can we properly compare the organic and nonorganic products that we decide to eat or wear every day? In essence, to think and live green you need to speak and understand green.
Understanding some key green terms and their implications can help us evaluate alternatives between our planet and sacrificing aspects our personal lifestyle. It can help us decide how we cast our vote or spend our money or how we live our lives. A green vocabulary can help us reduce our “carbon footprint “. The following represents what is best described as a green vocabulary of definitions and commentary to help eco-oriented consumers make informed green decisions.
A Green Vocabulary for Green People
Organic identifies products made under the authority of the Organic Foods Production Act. Organic production guidelines are established to use organic materials and practices that improve ecological balance. Organic production incorporates agricultural system components to enhance natural biological systems.
Organic Agriculture is an ecological farming system that promotes natural chemical and biological cycles that improve soil fertility and maintains a balanced and productive farming system. Any products introduced to this system for fertility or pest protection are of natural composition. It eliminates the use of harmful synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, growth stimulants or antibiotics. These essential restrictions can reduce contamination or pollution to our air, water or food supply.
Natural Fibersare “certified” organic fibers derived from organic agriculture such as cotton, bamboo and hemp.
Certified Organic Cotton is derived from organic agriculture. The cotton is grown without artificial pesticides or fertilizers. Conventional cotton farming ranks about fourth in the use of pesticides in the US. Several of the top pesticides used in nonorganic cotton farming are EPA recognized carcinogens. It takes 1/3 of a pound of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers to make one organic T-shirt disregarding the use of any toxic dyes (Organic Trade Association). A typical organic tee shirt is also about the same weight but without these harmful chemicals. Organic cotton is produced using conservation minded or “sustainable” approaches to crop production. Such practices help to retain and promote soil fertility and the natural recycling of soil resources.
Organic Certification is provided by various organizations. The most widely recognized standards are GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard) which is the basis for the statement “100% certified organic cotton” used by many green companies.
Fair Labor Practices are not necessarily restricted to agriculture but generally support fair wages and healthy working conditions.
Fair Trade Certification “…guarantees consumers that strict economic, social and environmental criteria were met in the production and trade of an agricultural product.”(www.transfairusa.org).
Sweatshop-free describes the absence of manufacturing conditions currently existing in many countries, referred to as “sweatshops”. They are production facilities or factories where goods are produced cheaply by minimizing workers’ salaries, and increasing working hours. Proper environmental health standards are diminished, yet demands for high levels of productivity still remain. These sweatshops may thrive from corporations seeking to increase profits by subcontracting inexpensive labor.
Sustainable means conserving and preserving limited natural resources and energy supplies. It is connected with the term “recycling” when natural products are re-used like rubber (for tires, shoes) or paper/trees (for books, business cards, magazines etc.), or wood (for recycled furniture). They are made from or made into recycled, carbon based products. A good example of preserving our resources is Trees for the Future, a charitable organization dedicated to replacing and planting trees. Unfortunately, most of our energy production is derived from organic (carbon based) fossil fuels that cannot be recycled as compared to wind or solar energy. All of this is connected to our lifestyle and our “carbon footprint” discussed next.
Carbon Footprint is a descriptor of environmental impact. It describes the consumption of carbon based natural resources or the production of carbon by-products like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide or “greenhouse emissions”. It’s about lifestyle and the amount of carbon based resources we consume through transportation, climate control, manufacturing etc. Basically it relates to how much each of us consume in terms of natural resources to meet our needs. In general each of us should be committed to reducing the size of our “footprint” to sustain resources for present and future generations.
Eco-fashion is a general term describing organic clothing that has addressed the needs of the environment as well as socially responsible working conditions.
Eco-friendly suggests a product or process than has a reduced impact on the environment.
Low Impact Dyes refers to dyes used the manufacture of goods that should have minimal impact on the environment. Sometimes the term non-toxic is used here as well.
Green is a generally positive term referring to the environment, organics or even a green lifestyle to be discussed shortly.
Conscientious Clothingdescribes organic clothing has addressed environmental, ethical and socially responsible standards.
The Green Lifestyle
Green Lifestyle or Green Living describes a lifestyle reflecting a strong commitment to the environment. In addition, it addresses compassionate and positive thinking. It means choosing a life with charitable deeds and practices, reflecting compassion for the environment and others. Green living is being proactive and incorporates spiritual growth leading to ethical thinking.
Social Responsibility can be defined as accepting responsibility for others and taking action against social injustice. It includes meeting the needs of others through charitable giving.
Charitable Giving describes a sense of genuine compassion and reacting to it with charitable practices towards others.
In summary, a green lifestyle represents caring for the environment combined with positive thinking leading to ethical behavior and compassionate living. Ultimately, your deeds represent positive thoughts in action. The result can be a clean, safe environment and a better quality of life for yourself and others.
If you learned some green vocabulary, be sure to use it to make decisions and set priorities in your life. Think about adopting a greener lifestyle!
Bob Folkart is Vice-President of Live Life Organics, a company devoted to encouraging the living of a passionate life through environmental awareness. Live Life Organics has created a range of eco-friendly, organic cotton clothing from adults to babies. Every item of apparel displays positive inspirational messages promoting courage, hope and compassion and includes a plantable hang tag that recycles and grows into wild flowers. To view these organic products, go to: http://www.livelifeorganics.com.
Global warming is one of those topics that I still find myself wondering what to truly believe. Is our CO2 production really the culprit in the warming of the planet? Or are there some other larger influences at play here. I have a hard time believing mankind’s activities are solely to blame for any kind of climate change.
After all, CO2 is only one of many greenhouse gases that can affect the warming trend. Water vapor is by far the most abundant and effective at influencing the greenhouse problem. But I don’t see any kind of public concern over evaporation of water in any way at all. Okay, I realize that there is little or even nothing that can be done about that but the point is CO2 is just a tiny fraction of the greenhouse gases affecting our climate. So if water vapor is by far the largest greenhouse gas then why are we so obsessed by manmade CO2? Mankind’s ego.
We see a small trend in the planets temperature rising and of course we assume it must be what we are doing. I am truly pleased to see that we are taking an interest in reducing pollution from cars and industry but I really have my doubts about the connection to global warming at least in the significant way the media would like us to believe.
The media is sounding the alarm bell which of course sells more newspapers than reporting the less extreme predictions surrounding the warming trend. The weather models produced by scientists predict a reduction in the temperature differences between the poles and the equatorial regions. This will in fact reduce the number of violent tropical storms, as there will be less of a temperature discrepancy to stimulate them. Also the warming of the regions closer to the poles will allow agricultural pursuits in areas where it was not possible before. Food production would be able to rise accordingly. The alarmist media isn’t interested in those types of stories it seems.
The change in the world’s temperature is just that, change. There is irrefutable evidence that the temperature of the planet has and most likely will always be changing regardless of what we are doing. What are we so afraid of? Do the alarmists doubt mankind’s ability to adapt and cope with a few degrees of temperature change or even sea levels rising a meter or so? There will doubtless be hardships and even some displaced people in some regions but man has the ability to adapt and change. We have demonstrated this through the ages. I am confident that we will not only survive these changes but also learn to use them to our advantage.
I live in Canada and if you ask anyone living north of the temperate zone about rising temperatures the resounding response would be “bring it on, we could use a little global warming around here”. Life will improve greatly for huge numbers of the world’s population with a couple of degrees increase in the planet’s temperature. Migration to areas that were before considered uninhabitable by most will have a more moderate climate allowing for farming and other activities. You can’t sell newspapers with stories like that.
The scientific data indicates that 1998 was the warmest year on record. The planet has been cooling ever since. A quote from Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences “The earth is at the peak of one of its passing warm spells, It’ll start getting cold by 2012, and really, really cold around 2041″. So who are we to believe? A respected scientist or Al Gore who has made millions from his crusade for the planet and his questionable agenda and phony pseudo science.
If the planet is warming I can honestly say I hope so. We will get by and probably do well in the process. What really concerns me is the muzzling of real science in the debate. An objective media would go a long way in helping us all deal with the facts as they truly are. Focusing on the alarmist perspective only causes undue fear where none is warranted.
Is driving our SUV’s and minivans really the problem here? Or is our planet just going through another climate cycle like it has done so many times before? The only thing I know for sure is I can’t count on the media to provide the answers.
Really? Seriously? Is it still too expensive to be green? I am a little surprised when people say that cannot do anything to be green because the products are too expensive. This may have been the case eons ago but not anymore. People now say going green is too expensive as an excuse in my opinion. Granted, I am not able to afford solar panels on my roof just yet but that does not mean I am not green or trying to be green in my own ways.
Here are some simple things that you can do now to start you off in the right direction without too much money out of pocket. Keep in mind, that while you will spend money at first, the payback is well worth it for you and the environment.
One of the first things I did to start my own green movement at home was to buy canvas bags for the grocery store. They were $1.00 each and I bought 10 of them. I always leave them in my car so no matter what store I go to I bring a bag with me. Each time I visit the grocery store I get 5 cents back for each bag that I bring.
So each week when I grocery shop I get 50 cents back. Each week that adds up quickly and before you know it, I have made my $10.00 back and am no longer a slave to the plastic bags. U.S. consumers use approximately 100 billion plastic bags annually which require an estimated 12 million barrels to produce! Just think, the majority of these bags are used just once from for less than 30 minutes and then they go into our landfills or end up in our oceans where they are a serious threat to wildlife.
The second green thing I did was change my water bottle habits. I have to admit, this one was hard for me until I did the math and it was at that moment I went to Target to buy a water filter and ordered my CamelBak Better Bottle.
The funny thing is that people are so quick to complain about the cost of gas but have you ever complained about the cost of the water bottles at the grocery store? I paid $10.00 for my bottle and $30 for my water filter and I have never once gone back to the store to buy my 12 pack of water for $6.00. And to think, a 12 pack of water bottles was finished in one week or less! I really don’t like when people say they reuse their plastic water bottles…. Do you know the bacteria that are on the bottles and the plastic leaching that occurs? Please do yourself and the environment a favor and buy a BPA Free water bottle today!
How many of us use paper napkins each day for lunch and dinner? Time to save a tree! Even napkins made from recycled materials are not as innocent as they may seem since they too wind up in landfills. A family of 4 can easily go through 84 paper napkins a week and if you think of each paper napkin costing 2 cents - well that adds up quickly over the course of a week, month, and a year. Cloth napkins can be used several times before tossing them into the laundry. With a family of four, laundry is done quite a bit so go ahead and make the switch.
Finally, do you wash all loads of laundry in cold water? Did you know that if you washed all of your clothes in cold water your clothes would last longer? Not only that, but you would save on your electrical bill. Unless you are washing baby diapers or grease stains, cold water is the way to go. 85-90 percent of the energy needed to wash your clothes in a machine is used to warm the water. Only 10-15 percent actually goes into the washer. The next time you need to buy laundry detergent, look for the detergents that are specially made for cold water.
And of course, we all know about the light bulbs and such but these were a couple other reminders of what you can do today to start saving money and you can be proud of yourself for going green! Remember, it is cool to be green!
Genetically modified (GM) foods are not being found to be safe for humans, or for the environment. There are a number of reasons why there a growing number of people are against GM foods. Are Genetically Modified Foods Safe? The reason to resist the growth of GM food in our diet is that it has a negative impact on our environment; plants and animals grown organically are not distorting their genetic makeup.
And in the rush to accelerate the production of genetically modified foods, scientists are short cutting testing methods. Recently, the United States Tufts University, School of Medicine was involved in testing the effects of genetically modified rice directly on children (by-passing the usual practice of testing on animals). This direct testing on children created controversy and a formal letter of protest from 22 international scientists to the University; the protest letter has been made public through various social media.
The letter protested the use of children as a breach of medical ethics code since children cannot legally give their consent (since it is not deemed to be informed consent) to participate in experiments. As Professor David Schubert, Salk Institute of Biological Studies said, “…it is completely immoral to feed this rice to children without proper safety testing … [i]t’s like putting a new drug on the market with no toxicology or safety trials”.
In defense of their position, the Golden Rice Organization issued a press release that states they “…us[ed] the correct Chinese and US government approved processes, the trials in China went ahead last year with the formal approval of their parents and the understanding of the children”. How do children understand the impact of genetically modified food on themselves or the environment? It’s a complex subject that many adults have a hard time understanding. Also, how can anyone (parents, children, or testing scientists) understand what the long term effects of genetically modified “golden rice” are on the human body without prior study or testing?
More importantly, will the overall risks of genetically modified foods over time out weigh the alleged benefits? Farmers have cross-bred plants and animals for hundreds of years to improve their products. Improvements to size, produce yield, taste, hardiness have been achieved through relatively natural means and within nature’s own boundaries; different species were not bred together.
With the discovery of DNA and a method of gene extraction, the concept of genetic modification was born. The intent of genetic modification is to create food that grows quickly, yields much, is resistant to pests, to disease, and to other natural events. However a number of scientists respond that the benefits are not worth the risks; genetically modified foods often become resistant to herbicides and pesticides requiring ever increasing amounts. There is the suspicion (still unproven) that pollinating bees have been affected by the increasing use of these chemicals and that both pollinator and predator species have been affected by the genetically modified crops (also known as transgenic crops) through habitat destruction and use of dangerous herbicides and pesticides.
Since the introduction of genetically modified foods, some scientists are reporting that food-related illness has increased. The only published human feeding study confirmed that genetic material in genetically modified soy transferred into the DNA of intestinal bacteria and continued to function. What long term impact will these foods have on the population and the environment? There are many more potential risks in the development of genetically modified foods. Animals that were fed genetically modified feed appeared to suffer from increases in fetal death, low birth weight, sterility, and more. The concern is that human reproductive failure and sterility or infertility will be long term consequences to using GM foods.
In the US, the Department of Agriculture reports that cotton and corn crops have been genetically modified to produce their own Bt toxins since 1996. Bt modified crops are insecticidal crystal proteins and are considered effective against crop-damaging caterpillars. The toxins are considered important for pest control and since resistance to herbicides and pesticides is growing, the sentiment is that these genetically engineered Bt toxins will help to protect the crops. The issue with the GM Bt toxins is that they are considered serious allergens; ever wonder why so many more children and adults are exhibiting allergic reactions than ever before?
The problem with genetically modified foods is that there is also a reaction for the action; unfortunately, globally, in our rush to grow food supplies, we have not taken the time to properly test and research the long term impacts and effects of genetically modified foods. It is easy to be against GM foods - our planet is at risk.
To read more about genetically modified foods and the healthy alternative - organic foods, please visit Is Organic Food Better? Kris Bovay is the owner of Voice Marketing Inc, the business and marketing services company, with a difference. She is also the owner of a small business website, more-for-small-business.com and an organic food website, Organic Food For Everyone. Kris has 25 years of experience in leading large, medium and small businesses … and a life-long passion for healthy food and a healthy environment. Copyright 2008 - 2009 Voice Marketing Inc.
Water Efficiency - The Resource Matrix Part 1 of 4 - Why We Have Water and Fuel Shortages
“The Resource Matrix is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth. You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.”
In my last water efficiency article (Water-Efficiency: Why Most Advice You’ve Read is Absolutely Inefficient), we began a slow turn away from lighting with a discussion of the 80/20 Rule and how your little positive behavioral changes with water aren’t even a drop in the bucket when your other positive behavioral changes - making homemade pizza - evaporate the entire year’s ocean of benefits in a few tasty bites.
In a four-part series, we talk about a resource besides energy: water.
Today, we begin far above this “turn off the porch lights and take short, icy showers” efficiency thing to show you how we got to where we are now both in fuels and in other resources.
Next week, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.
The following week, we continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.
And in the final week, we tie together the articles in a symphony of three movements, showing you how all the elements hold the Resource Matrix in place and how, like Neo in the movie, you can break the code that creates the graphical user interface and see the illusion for what it really is. (At least, my version of it, anyway.)
Ready to take the red pill and see how deep the rabbit-hole goes?
We start with one of the most boring subjects known to college students, one birthed out of the Enlightenment when extremely titled, idly rich, powdery wig-headed fancy foppish men dressed like women and walked in high heels and squealed like school girls:
Economics: it’s totally insane
Economics is described as the science of allocating scarce resources. Since it’s the study of human behavior, it’s a social science rather than a physical science.
And although any individual’s behavior may not be predictable, individuals as a group can be. Kinda like the weather: you don’t know much about a single raindrop’s effect but you can track the overall storm and predict what’s next.
Economics likes to fool itself that it can predict behavior based on the assumption that people make rational choices. Understand what people think and you understand what choices people will make.
It unfortunately leaves out the other part of being human: human behavior based on emotions.
And emotions weigh heavily in how we interact with each other, especially in exchanges of value.
Maximizing returns:
“I want your goodies for nothing”
Economics recognizes that people are motivated by self-interest to maximize their benefits at the lowest cost.
On an individual basis, this can turn into a “win-lose” proposition:
I want to acquire the best stuff for the cheapest terms
I want to dispose of the lousiest stuff for the greatest terms
In short, you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom.
May the Force be with you:
getting diamonds and gold for nothing:
Economics comes out of 18th century political economy, which studied production, buying and selling, and their relations with law, custom, and government. Political economy itself comes out of moral philosophy.
This moral philosophy apparently had room for colonialism, which comes pretty close to getting your diamonds and gold for nothing: forcibly take over a country and use its people to extract its resources to be reallocated to your bank account. And make sure nobody but you has any say in the matter.
Social good in the equation:
A few people didn’t see the morality in this philosophy. Enter the lousy, meddling individual do-gooders like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mohandas Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Upton Sinclair, and many others who messed with the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd.
And some of the individuals do-gooders formed their own organizations like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace.
They all worked to increase awareness that there are alternatives to being forced to give away your diamonds and gold for nothing while having no say in the matter, and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win.”
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd, who could only lose in the change to “win-win,” found their salvation in the late 1800s with the rise of modern psychology (the scientific study of mental functions and behavior). Applied to politics, it’s called propaganda. Applied to spirituality, it’s called religion. Applied to commerce, it’s called marketing and advertising.
All these applications are forms of hypnotism, and are based on the proven principle that if you repeat anything enough times, including a falsehood, your audience will grow to believe it and then to defend it as the truth.
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd used economics to hypnotically declare for 250 years that fossil fuels, the air, and water were without cost. They called them “free goods.”
And they used force (”Oh yeah, and what the hell are you going to do about it?”) to declare that pollution had no consequences.
What’s an Oxymoron?
“Free Good” in economics
The free good is a term used in economics to describe a good that is not scarce. A free good is available in as great a quantity as desired with zero opportunity cost to society.
Earlier schools of economic thought proposed that free goods were resources that are so abundant in nature that there is enough for everyone to have as much as they want. Examples in textbooks (even in the 1980s) included fresh water and the air that we breathe. However, these are now regarded as common goods because competition for them is rivalrous.
In short, there is no free lunch.
An additional moral philosophy:
“There’s a sucker born every minute”
becomes
“How can I help you help me?”
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd continues to rise early and work late to craft their “win-lose” deals every day.
Yet, out of those rising early and working late, a small radical fringe discovered the curious fact that if you don’t beat a dog bloody every time you see it, it’s less likely to bite your hand off, and it even might go out and hunt down a squirrel for your evening stew.
Their moral philosophy became a hybrid offshoot.
The Hybrids still want your goodies, but they are willing to help you get your goodies with less pain and damage to yourself so you’ll be willing to come back to them and hand over more of your goodies.
Both use the same mind-numbing hypnotic slogans: “We care about you.”
The difference is the Hybrids actually do some of those same things that someone who cares about you would do. Even if they don’t actually give a hoot about you. Contrast that to the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd, who merely sends you more hynoptic slogans when they want your goodies.
Where Do You Want to Go Today?
Everywhere but here
We’ve all awaken to the shocking realizations that:
finite energy resources will run out
actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible, and
the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, you could just pop some soma and totally trip out.
But the cowardly old world we’re experiencing has quickly turned into a total bummer of a bad trip, man. Down with the Establishment and praise the Collective.
We’re all in this together, or
Toss the lousy, greedy bastards overboard
The decades of the Do-Gooders increasing our awareness of possible “win-win” possibilities and of the Hybrids backing their “we care about you” lip service with actual service has brought us to another realization:
There’s a price to everything, and if I don’t pay the price, someone else will, and somehow, some way, on some sunny day, they’re going to get even and make me pay.
And this has been an important change in the understanding of energy efficiency and global warming: the environment has a limited capacity within our human-lifetime periods to absorb civilization’s byproducts and transform them into resources. It usually needs geologic time to turn dead trees and critters into oil and gas. In the meantime, the trash piles up in the streets.
The solution: create less trash.
Thanks to the Do-Gooders, we have greater awareness or our actions and the desire to change, and have the Hybrids offering ways to change.
And the result is a shift of power away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd. It’s now Power to the People.
But wait, there’s more …
to the Resource Matrix
Just because you know about fossil fuels, their finite amounts, their polluting, warming effects on the environment, and alternatives offered by the Hybrids - even if you have done your part to the best of your ability to reduce, reuse, and recycle — you haven’t escaped the Resource Matrix.
Energy to power our lives is one component of the Resource Matrix. And it’s the most visible in discussions of global warming and being resourceful. But there’s more:
Coming Attractions!
In the next three articles, we will talk about concepts concerning the resource that makes up 75% of the planet and 75% of your body:
Water.
You’ll learn that, although 75% of the planet is water, only 3% of water is potable (can be consumed), and of that 3%, only a small fraction is available, and of that small fraction, only a small fraction is potable, because the rest is polluted for hundreds of years to come.
You’ll learn how the actions of an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed peasant on the other side of the globe affects you where you are.
You’ll learn how, unlike oil, water is transferred invisibly from poor to rich by sleight of hand, like paying your utility bill through your online bank account.
You’ll learn how poor water decisions, rather than fossil fuel’s atmospheric effects described in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, leads to those drybeds of the formerly humongous Aral Sea and along the Amazon.
You’ll learn how to measure the global water impact of any nation, city, corporation, even yourself - to the nearest gallon or liter.
You’ll learn the little changes you can make - the water equivalent of “change your incandescent lightbulbs to compact fluorescent lamps” - and still be able to take your wastefully long showers.
And all of this is for one purpose:
To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
Global Warming Alarmist - Global Warming Models show….
Many folks have taken to Global Warming, which by definition means the planet is warming due to CO2 from man-made emissions. If the planet were warming from any other source, it would be by definition called climate change. Unfortunately for the Global Warming evangelists the planet may not be warming, in fact, as of late the solar minimum is at a record low, and the planet is cooling.
Still, the believers in this doom and gloom scenario say that Climate Computer Modeling proves it. Oh, really, because as it stands humans wrote those computer models and the algorithms that generate these futurist prediction. In fact, one of the biggest issues with the climate modeling is they keep re-adjusting them to get the desired resultant. There is something seriously fishy about that.
Personally, I do not like pollution, land, sea or air, or even all that space debris up there. That’s just proof of inefficiency, which is not worthy of human potential or intellect. But, computer modeling is only as good as the program and data. Garbage in = garbage out.
If reduction of pollution, let’s say CO2 is the goal then let’s dump the scientific pretendism and get real; let’s just say that the human race has agreed to reduce greenhouse gases on the planet caused from mankind and then start doing it. But to hold this Global Warming doomsday theory out as real is really not helping anyone. In fact, we are liable to change our entire civilization’s infrastructure for no reason whatsoever.
Because the reality is that the Earth’s atmosphere and ambient surface temperatures heat up and cool in cycles and they have for billions of years, and there is nothing that mankind presently can do about that. Think on it.
How often when you go to the grocery store are you asked if you want paper or plastic grocery bags? Well the best answer to that would be NEITHER. To keep the U.S. stocked with paper and plastic grocery bags, takes about fourteen million trees and twelve million barrels of oil every year! Investing in a few reusable bags makes a lot of sense.
Think about those little paper receipts you get at the gas pump and the ATM machine. If all people would simply note it in their checkbook, or in a small notebook when they made a purchase or withdrew money, it would be saving enough paper to encircle the globe fifteen times!
If every American would by one roll of recycled paper towels instead of the others, it would save over half a million trees. And how about turning the car off when you are waiting for someone, in the drive-thru lane or stuck in a huge traffic jam? When a car idles for more than a minute it is polluting the air and wasting your gas.
Cordless phones are replacing conventional phones. But think about it… sitting in a recharging cradle and using up your electricity twenty-four hours a day and every day of the week! Replace one or two cordless phones with your old conventional ones and you’ll save energy. The old fashioned ones use only a tiny bit of electricity, and will work when the power is off. If you insist on the convenience of cordless phones, make sure the ones you do get are Energy Star-rated, for high energy efficiency.
Lisa is a freelance writer with a specialty in Internet content and SEO articles. She has written thousands of articles, hundreds of ebooks and thousands of website pages and related content. She has also authored her own books and works as a consultant to other writers, Internet marketers and Internet businesses.
Professional wordsmith for hire: gamer, wife, mother, entrepreneur, published poet, co-owner of game guides company (http://www.liti4.com), public speaker and Internet business consultant. You can learn more or follow Lisa’s blog from her website: http://www.freelancewriter4hire.com
Environmental Statements - How to Address Contaminated Land Issues
Under the relevant European Directives, an Environmental Statement is the formal product of an Environmental Impact Assessment. Environmental Statements are often organised in a way that describes the environmental baseline, mitigation and effects for each type of environmental receptors: ecology, water resources, archaeological resources, human beings etcetera. Contaminated land is often managed in the same ways as the various environmental receptor groups, although it is principally a cause of impacts rather than a receptor. It also often refers to a pre-existing condition and its damaging effect is on a variety of different receptors such as human health, structures and buildings, surface water features, groundwater features and ecology. This often means that land contamination specialists struggle with integrating the issue in a logical manner in an Environmental Statement. Sticking to the structured approach of an environmental statement is essential to ensure a clear description of the existing environmental condition, the potential impacts and the actions taken to avoid, minimise, offset or manage the impacts. This article is based on UK practice and legislation, although fundamentally the issues should be similar within other contexts.
Contaminated land is in many countries considered on a source-pathway-receptor basis. This is important to understand the impact land development can have on the issue of contaminated land. Development can interfere with any of these three elements. It can introduce sensitive receptors by changing the use of land, for instance by building new residential units on a site that was previously used for heavy industry. New pathways linking pre-existing contamination with an existing receptor can be formed, for instance when piling through a non-permeable layer connecting a layer of contaminated soils with a deep aquifer. Finally by introducing pollutants on the site a development project can introduce a potential source of contamination.
The second element to consider is the structured approach of an environmental statement. Apart from the introductory and procedural elements described in the environmental statement, a good environmental statement comprised the following sections:
environmental baseline conditions
potential environmental impacts
mitigating measures
residual environmental impacts
There should be a logical relation between the different sections. Any receptor that is affected and described in the section about the potential impacts and effects should have been introduced in the section describing the baseline. Any material impact should be assigned a mitigation or management action etc. Implementing this structure allows a clear description and understanding of the environmental impacts and the way it will be managed.
Applying these principles to contaminated land will result in a baseline condition section that describes the current sensitive receptors that are present within the potential sphere of influence of the development, the sensitivity and importance of these receptors, the presence of any pre-existing contamination and the presence of actual and potential pathways. The next section, potential environmental impacts or effects, first considers the impacts that the development will have in terms of the introduction (or removal) of sensitive receptors and the creation of new pathways between existing and potential pollution sources and receptors. In addition this section will describe the potential environmental impacts that are associated with the introduction of new sources of contamination. In the third section, mitigating measures, a description of the actions to mitigate each of the impacts that may occur should be provided. Finally a statement of the residual impact of the development is provided in the last section: residual environmental impacts.
