There are sooo many messages out there. And there’s a green version of everything. There’s a lot of annoying self-pride related to doing the responsible thing.. it’s practically a turn off.
Eat less/no meat, don’t drive, consume less, don’t gift so much, forget plastic bags, water bottles are bad, organic this, local that, go vegetarian but soy is bad.. the list goes on and on.
I often hear people say “how do you know?” wondering about the legitimacy of claims or how to prioritise in front of contradictory messages (eg: go local or organic, not synonymous and sometimes contradictory). This blog is about consumption, I will leave transportation out.
For some, the constant reminder of our negative impact is a big downer. Take me for instance; working in the measurement of environmental impacts made me critically aware of *everything*, or enough to make one go crazy. Sure, I used humour to notice how our use of automatic doors was selfish - when there were “manual” doors right next to them that did not consume energy, but the contrasts where still staring me in the face every time.
When you notice everyone else’s impact and selfish decisions/carelessness as well, it gets heavy. And uselessly so.
So how do you find balance?
Well, let's remove health choices as well from this debate.. you can be healthy *and* environmentally conscious as well. Antioxidants are everywhere in raw food for example, there is no need to have everyone consuming açai berries from Brazil on a daily basis.
When it comes to the footprint of being human.. lets remember that all beings have a footprint. Your dog has one (yikes!), but also the birds outside, the fish in the ocean, the tiger in the jungle.. yet no one wants to get rid of these guys right?
What differs between their actions + resulting footprint and ours is that our ecosystem has the capacity to absorb and adapt to everything they do. It is “sustainable” (highly overused word - what does that even mean?). What they consume is renewable. Renewable or sustainable are words that define an action that leaves no permanent impact. Renewable materials like wood are ones that can be replaced by nature. In what time-frame ? This is the tricky part that excludes fossil fuels for example from this category, although they, too, were made by mother nature. Many references use a “lifetime” as a reference. So if the tiger’s impact (mostly food) can regenerate itself within the tiger’s lifetime, he’s a-okay. Certain types of fish we eat however, will not regenerate themselves within our lifetime. In fact, we are quickly running out.
Food is the input of this animal being, waste is the output. The same logic should be used to look at the other half of the footprint. The tiger’s waste will ultimately be beneficial, fertilising the soils wherever he goes. Since we assume he lives in his natural habitat, there are no further questions necessary. However, if he was displaced and lived on a boat for a while (Life of Pi..), then we would have to critically evaluate the impact of the “delta” or the difference caused by this change in the ecosystem he is now part of. Fish farming, the “obvious” solution to the depletion of oceans, is causing huge amounts of waste (including antibiotics) in areas that cannot sustain it. Cause for concern.
Back to human beings. If this was the stone age, and we ran around living in harmony with nature, we’d be just like the tiger. Our consumption however has far exceeded simple needs of food and shelter, and our overall waste is tenfold what our body excretes if not more.
When I feel bad about buying and consuming even simple things such as toilet paper… or cheering myself up with a new piece of clothing, I remind myself of this forgivable condition. Is it renewable? Can the earth adapt? was it responsibly made (as there are social costs involved as well)? and what kind of waste will I generate with this?
Overall, so many things can find their way into the “excusable” zone, it’s quite a relief! Just avoid plastics and metals whenever possible, otherwise consume them responsibly and make sure to repair, reuse and recycle. Wood, paper, cotton, rayon, wool, all good! But buyers beware… really. Your shirt can be made locally from fibers produced in a sustainable manner.. or it can be made with cotton grown unsustainably, with poorly managed pesticides and fertilisers, using toxic dies, harvested and made by children and women who do not receive basic conditions, etc, etc.
So, once again, the idea is to be a critical and educated buyer. Figure out what you want and ask for it. Don’t let the corporations use shortcuts and tell you that’s what you want. You can also choose to associate with organisations that respect the same values, so you don’t have to ask yourself so many questions at every purchase. Go on, take those blinders off. If we all do our best, things can get better from here on.
Eat less/no meat, don’t drive, consume less, don’t gift so much, forget plastic bags, water bottles are bad, organic this, local that, go vegetarian but soy is bad.. the list goes on and on.
I often hear people say “how do you know?” wondering about the legitimacy of claims or how to prioritise in front of contradictory messages (eg: go local or organic, not synonymous and sometimes contradictory). This blog is about consumption, I will leave transportation out.
For some, the constant reminder of our negative impact is a big downer. Take me for instance; working in the measurement of environmental impacts made me critically aware of *everything*, or enough to make one go crazy. Sure, I used humour to notice how our use of automatic doors was selfish - when there were “manual” doors right next to them that did not consume energy, but the contrasts where still staring me in the face every time.
When you notice everyone else’s impact and selfish decisions/carelessness as well, it gets heavy. And uselessly so.
So how do you find balance?
Well, let's remove health choices as well from this debate.. you can be healthy *and* environmentally conscious as well. Antioxidants are everywhere in raw food for example, there is no need to have everyone consuming açai berries from Brazil on a daily basis.
When it comes to the footprint of being human.. lets remember that all beings have a footprint. Your dog has one (yikes!), but also the birds outside, the fish in the ocean, the tiger in the jungle.. yet no one wants to get rid of these guys right?
What differs between their actions + resulting footprint and ours is that our ecosystem has the capacity to absorb and adapt to everything they do. It is “sustainable” (highly overused word - what does that even mean?). What they consume is renewable. Renewable or sustainable are words that define an action that leaves no permanent impact. Renewable materials like wood are ones that can be replaced by nature. In what time-frame ? This is the tricky part that excludes fossil fuels for example from this category, although they, too, were made by mother nature. Many references use a “lifetime” as a reference. So if the tiger’s impact (mostly food) can regenerate itself within the tiger’s lifetime, he’s a-okay. Certain types of fish we eat however, will not regenerate themselves within our lifetime. In fact, we are quickly running out.
Food is the input of this animal being, waste is the output. The same logic should be used to look at the other half of the footprint. The tiger’s waste will ultimately be beneficial, fertilising the soils wherever he goes. Since we assume he lives in his natural habitat, there are no further questions necessary. However, if he was displaced and lived on a boat for a while (Life of Pi..), then we would have to critically evaluate the impact of the “delta” or the difference caused by this change in the ecosystem he is now part of. Fish farming, the “obvious” solution to the depletion of oceans, is causing huge amounts of waste (including antibiotics) in areas that cannot sustain it. Cause for concern.
Back to human beings. If this was the stone age, and we ran around living in harmony with nature, we’d be just like the tiger. Our consumption however has far exceeded simple needs of food and shelter, and our overall waste is tenfold what our body excretes if not more.
When I feel bad about buying and consuming even simple things such as toilet paper… or cheering myself up with a new piece of clothing, I remind myself of this forgivable condition. Is it renewable? Can the earth adapt? was it responsibly made (as there are social costs involved as well)? and what kind of waste will I generate with this?
Overall, so many things can find their way into the “excusable” zone, it’s quite a relief! Just avoid plastics and metals whenever possible, otherwise consume them responsibly and make sure to repair, reuse and recycle. Wood, paper, cotton, rayon, wool, all good! But buyers beware… really. Your shirt can be made locally from fibers produced in a sustainable manner.. or it can be made with cotton grown unsustainably, with poorly managed pesticides and fertilisers, using toxic dies, harvested and made by children and women who do not receive basic conditions, etc, etc.
So, once again, the idea is to be a critical and educated buyer. Figure out what you want and ask for it. Don’t let the corporations use shortcuts and tell you that’s what you want. You can also choose to associate with organisations that respect the same values, so you don’t have to ask yourself so many questions at every purchase. Go on, take those blinders off. If we all do our best, things can get better from here on.
No comments:
Post a Comment