# "Green" ideas for the everyday Man/Woman



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

Let me preface this post by saying I'm truly not trying to insult or step on anyone's toes here. I'm just a guy that wants to be a better steward of the earth but I'm tired of the ultra "out-there" experts rattling off a list of less-than realistic steps that we need to take to save the earth. I want to do my part, but I'm not going to only use 1 square of toilet paper when I go to the bathroom. I would like to hear what the everyday person is doing and hopefully this tread will be a place where we can share ideas of a very practicable nature.

My contribution: Although it's not complete yet, I'm currently working on modifying my child bike trailer to accommodate more groceries so I can use it every time I go shopping rather than just the times when I only need a few things. I will post some pictures when I get it completed.

Other than that, I'm just trying to ride more places and drive less.


----------



## Jisch (Jan 12, 2004)

I saw this on someone's email siggy today (at work): 
"Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail"

Well actually it was:
"Afin de contribuer au respect de l'environnement, n'imprimez ce message que si nécessaire."

I just bought a cord of wood for my woodstove rather than a tank of oil for my oil burner - does that count? 

John


----------



## Rev Bubba (Jan 16, 2004)

*Use Mass Transit if available*

MASS TRANSIT
Twenty-two years ago I changed jobs so mass transit was an option. It may not work for everyone but it can certainly work for more people than those who choose not to use it.

I work in NYC and the thousands and thousands of cars that clog the roads driving to the city when a very good mass transit infrastructure exists is mind boggling. What are those people sitting at the Holland and Lincoln tunnels and GWB thinking?

THINK SMALL
I can't see how someone with a Prius in front of a 5000 square foot McMansion that requires heating and cooling can believe they are being green. We raised two boys and did lots of travel with many large toys (i.e. bikes, surfboard, skis, etc.) and never had anything larger than a VW Golf. I never saw the need for a Mini-Van, SUV or even a mid-size car. Our house is well under 2000 sf. Neither kid was deprived.

WALK

Those are my suggestions. Nothing new.


----------



## fishbum (Aug 8, 2007)

I'm with you: recycle vehicles. Don't drive a new one. And don't think you are helping the planet by buying a Prius.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

Jisch said:


> I saw this on someone's email siggy today (at work):
> "Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail"


reminds me of this gmail april 1 joke

http://mail.google.com/mail/help/paper/more.html

BTW, a green solution is to get fixed. Avoiding procreation eliminates a lifetime or more of energy waste--plus all that diaper smell.


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

lidarman said:


> reminds me of this gmail april 1 joke
> 
> http://mail.google.com/mail/help/paper/more.html
> 
> BTW, a green solution is to get fixed. Avoiding procreation eliminates a lifetime or more of energy waste--plus all that diaper smell.


Ah, now that's funny!


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

I'm buying fewer "disposable" goods. I prefer to invest, rather than keep buying. I use Sigg water bottles for this purpose.

I will be relying on mass transit in the near future, a long term dream I had. Finally.


----------



## u2metoo (Jul 4, 2006)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> II prefer to invest, rather than keep buying. I use Sigg water bottles for this purpose.


I gotta have my chemical fix (not a big fan of coffee or tea), so I have a couple of Diet Cokes a day. Is it outlandish to think that my impact would be lessoned if I switched from aluminum cans to 2 Liter bottles?

I'm thinking even though cans can be recycled, the penetration isn't uber high. And even though 2-liter bottles are made from petroleum the energy to make 'em could be much less than a can.

Just sumpin I've been mulling over.


----------



## sean salach (Sep 15, 2007)

get a library card and use. you'll watch less tv, thereby using less electricity. you'll also be reading used books and returning them so that they can continue to pass hands. 

go for food in large packaging. the really huge bag of rice, the 5lb bag of pasta, 2lb bag of corn chips. even the 2-liter bottle of soda(ugh) versus the 6pack of cans.

look for packaging that can be recycled. 

bring your lunch to work every day.

use a laptop instead of a desktop.

high efficiency lightbulbs.

eat more food that doesn't need to be cooked. 

grow your own vegetables(some of them anyway).


----------



## firch (May 12, 2006)

Another idea is to use canvas bags at the grocery store instead of the plastic bags. 

I also read somewhere that aluminium cans can be recycled over and over whereas plastic can only be recycled a certain number of times before it can't be recycled any more. I can't remember where I read that and I don't know if it is ture, just throwing it out there.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

Horn loaded loudspeakers. They require 1/100 of the wattage of typical consumer speakers.


----------



## PissedOffCil (Oct 18, 2007)

sean salach said:


> bring your lunch to work every day.


I go to the restaurant every day and don't really see the impact on environment to be honest. Now maybe if I had some take-out that would be a difference, expecially if it was styrofoam but I eat in a plate with washable dishes... no harm done IMO.

Anyways I cycle to work every day (or walk during the winter)
I use my car around once a month only and for 200-250km each time (gotta see my family)
I close my computer at work every night (suprisingly most people don't do this here)
I use fluocompact light bulbs everywhere in my apartment
I buy energy star appliances even though they cost more
I close the heating during night time

And possibly many other things I consider "normal behaivour" that are energy efficient.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Have lots of kids.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

1. Carpool. Make sure there is more than one person in your car when you drive your hummer to the neighboring city to save 5 cents a gallon on gas.

2. Replace the grow lights on your pot farm with efficient grow lights.

3. Turn your car off in the drive through when you drive to lunch everyday.

4. Turn your waterbed down a degree.

But seriously, there is another one that people don't usually realize that contributes to massive energy usage--eating meat.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?ref=weekinreview

I can't say I am a vegetarian by any means but eating less beef can contribute a lot to lowering energy use, lowering greenhouse gas and making one healthier. Plus, there is whole issue is apparently talked about in the book "Omnivores Dilemma.' (Which I'm about to read). regarding the Genetically altered corn fed to cattle, the e-coli resistance of cattle..etc.


----------



## McLovin (Sep 7, 2007)

Here is a short list:

* Ride your bike as much as possible to replace car miles
* Buy less stuff.
* Recycle everything that's recyclable
* Sell or give away stuff you don't use
* Buy from local farmers markets or have a garden
* Be a vegetarian
* Keep your procreation to a minimum, preferably zero
* Turn off lights and computers that are not being used
* Buy a programmable thermostat
* Walk around with a smug assurance that you're better than everyone else

This works for me anyways, YMMV.


----------



## Moto Rider (Dec 30, 2006)

I just watched ‘The Bible Code’ on the history channel. According to the code the world will end in the year 2012. I’m going to do what I can until then.


----------



## jaeman (Dec 16, 2007)

Actually, another one of the biggest source of energy waste is when our electrical appliances such as computers, video game consoles, DVD players, and televisions are on standby mode. They leak plenty of energy, just over 1 watt, it doesn't seem like much but year-round, it's a killer.

With that said, I practically unplug everything in my house unless I'm going to use it.


----------



## Moto Rider (Dec 30, 2006)

jaeman said:


> Actually, another one of the biggest source of energy waste is when our electrical appliances such as computers, video game consoles, DVD players, and televisions are on standby mode. They leak plenty of energy, just over 1 watt, it doesn't seem like much but year-round, it's a killer.
> 
> With that said, I practically unplug everything in my house unless I'm going to use it.


I heard it was something like 30% of the total output when it sits on standby.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

Moto Rider said:


> I just watched 'The Bible Code' on the history channel. According to the code the world will end in the year 2012.


I think James G. Watt's philosophy can be interpreted as that all we have to do is save the planet long enough for gods return.



Moto Rider said:


> I heard it was something like 30% of the total output when it sits on standby.


Could be since you might us the thing for an hour but it's on standby 24 hrs a day.....but if you play that PS3 12 hrs a day you can get that percentage down.


----------



## llama (Dec 15, 2006)

Move closer to work. That's my current focus. In the meantime, I telecommute twice a week (which is really more about quality of life). I've started running errands by bike and am trying to do that more. But it's a drop in the bucket compared to my 90 mile (round trip) commute.

In general, it's wise to just try to live more efficiently. Try to live with a smaller house/apartment/condo. Smaller car. Less stuff. Smaller stuff. Used stuff. Less meat. Less flying. All that. but to a degree that works for you, which is hard to figure out.


----------



## mondaycurse (Nov 24, 2005)

u2metoo said:


> I'm thinking even though cans can be recycled, the penetration isn't uber high. And even though 2-liter bottles are made from petroleum the energy to make 'em could be much less than a can.


Get a cup from a gas station and reuse it for refills them from the fountain. Wash it out when it's gooey at the bottom.

I also use my messenger bag for groceries, the stupid cashier looks at me funny, but I don't need paper or plastic.

Don't buy as much beef.

Recycle, it's free (for me anyways) and garbage collection costs money. Duh.

And if you really want to be green, get a composting toilet


----------



## Neen (Sep 27, 2004)

Register with www.freecycle.org and give away what you don't use, rather than filling up our landfills. I've used this numerous times and it works fantastic!


----------



## sean salach (Sep 15, 2007)

PissedOffCil said:


> I go to the restaurant every day and don't really see the impact on environment to be honest. Now maybe if I had some take-out that would be a difference, expecially if it was styrofoam but I eat in a plate with washable dishes... no harm done IMO.
> 
> Anyways I cycle to work every day (or walk during the winter)
> I use my car around once a month only and for 200-250km each time (gotta see my family)
> ...


making a sandwich at home and bringing a few snacks along with it, or taking leftovers from the night before in a tuperware container, i would think uses significantly less energy than travelling to the restaurant, having multiple people prepare and bring your food, and then the resulting dishes(restaurant, fast food doesn't create dishes, just trash), then travelling back form the restaurant.


----------



## HandyMan (Feb 25, 2008)

If you have to buy a house, try to get it pre-fabbed (it sounds cheesy but they produce MUCH less waste, and use much less wood)

Fly less (airplanes produce a LOT of pollution)

Use less paper products

try to use metal or glass containers and cookware whenever possible

If you have to use a motorized vehicle, consider a motorcycle or scooter. Most get better gas mileage than a Prius, and are WAY better for the environment throughout their entire life cycle (production to destruction)

If you need a car, consider something like a Geo Metro, it may be a POS, but they get as good of MPG as a prius, without the extra crap thats bad for the environment (and cost)

If you are in school, consider a tablet PC instead of a traditional laptop. It can replace all the paper you use to take notes on.

and most of all

FIGHT CONSUMERISM!!!


----------



## Moto Rider (Dec 30, 2006)

HandyMan said:


> If you need a car, consider something like a Geo Metro, it may be a POS, but they get as good of MPG as a prius, without the extra crap thats bad for the environment (and cost)


True! 
I remember reading somewhere that it actually takes up more energy and resources. If you look at the overall picture with the construction, maintenance and eventual demise then your normal every day auto.


----------



## HandyMan (Feb 25, 2008)

Moto Rider said:


> True!
> I remember reading somewhere that it actually takes up more energy and resources. If you look at the overall picture with the construction, maintenance and eventual demise then your normal every day auto.


Yep, not to mention hybrids still cost more, even with gas prices these days... I don't see the reason for them.


----------



## Moto Rider (Dec 30, 2006)

It’s a political ploy… Keeps us content. It makes the future look hopeful with the idea like their really doing something about it. 

I could be wrong...


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

u2metoo said:


> I gotta have my chemical fix (not a big fan of coffee or tea), so I have a couple of Diet Cokes a day. Is it outlandish to think that my impact would be lessoned if I switched from aluminum cans to 2 Liter bottles?
> 
> I'm thinking even though cans can be recycled, the penetration isn't uber high. And even though 2-liter bottles are made from petroleum the energy to make 'em could be much less than a can.
> 
> Just sumpin I've been mulling over.


Aluminum cans are actually the poster child for recycling. You save 96% of the energy required to make a new can from raw materials by recycling used cans, and markets for aluminum exist even in places without bottle bills or other comprehensive recycling programs.

Plastic bottles on the other hand aren't as widely recycled, and tend to get "cascaded" into lesser products. I heard Coca Cola was going to put big bucks into more aggressive plastic recycling, which, if true, would be a real stimulus to the market.


----------



## Whyteboy (Nov 12, 2006)

I had my H2 converted to E85!!!


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

lidarman said:


> But seriously, there is another one that people don't usually realize that contributes to massive energy usage--eating meat..


And how much energy does it take to ship produce and fruit from South America and New Zealand during the off-season or to meet demand? My main problem with all these things is that they simply shift the problems to different areas. The big problem is demand and overpopulation, and when we come up with these ideas another problem springs up or we revert back to the old way that can meet demands. People are selfish and can't think ahead. Here's one way to really make a dent, just buy used. Don't get a house built, don't get a new bike, don't get a new car, adopt children, etc. People want to have children to fill their own need to perpetuate their family and "leave a mark", but demand will just keep going up of course, and with our "compassionate" society will we just leave people out on the street? No, we'll build new homes for them and make products for them and so on. Demand will continue to go up of course. Even if everyone goes "green" the demand still continues to go up and we still have these problems. How can we curb the demand? As an example, if we somehow cut our waste by 30% or something, the actual amount will still continue to grow as demand increases, and we'll end up right back at square one in a few years. How does one address this?


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Moto Rider said:


> I just watched 'The Bible Code' on the history channel. According to the code the world will end in the year 2012. I'm going to do what I can until then.


Now, if I can just find some of those fanatics that would sign over their property to me in the year 2012 (because they won't be needing it after then).


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

Moto Rider said:


> It's a political ploy&#8230; Keeps us content. It makes the future look hopeful with the idea like their really doing something about it.
> 
> I could be wrong...


Same with corn based ethanol. It's a wash in terms of fossil fuel usage but it's driving all the food prices to the moon...next thing you know there will organic corn ethanol. Oh wait, ethanol is an organic molecule.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

Jayem said:


> And how much energy does it take to ship produce and fruit from South America and New Zealand during the off-season or to meet demand? My main problem with all these things is that they simply shift the problems to different areas. The big problem is demand and overpopulation, and when we come up with these ideas another problem springs up or we revert back to the old way that can meet demands. People are selfish and can't think ahead. Here's one way to really make a dent, just buy used. Don't get a house built, don't get a new bike, don't get a new car, adopt children, etc. People want to have children to fill their own need to perpetuate their family and "leave a mark", but demand will just keep going up of course, and with our "compassionate" society will we just leave people out on the street? No, we'll build new homes for them and make products for them and so on. Demand will continue to go up of course. Even if everyone goes "green" the demand still continues to go up and we still have these problems. How can we curb the demand? As an example, if we somehow cut our waste by 30% or something, the actual amount will still continue to grow as demand increases, and we'll end up right back at square one in a few years. How does one address this?


er uh,....I completely..............

.........agree.

You did see this earlier right?

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=4238245&postcount=5


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

lidarman said:


> Same with corn based ethanol. It's a wash in terms of fossil fuel usage but it's driving all the food prices to the moon...next thing you know there will organic corn ethanol. Oh wait, ethanol is an organic molecule.


Gotta disagree with you there. I'm not saying Ethanol is "the" answer, but I do think it's at least a step in the right direction. And there is a lot of mis-information about corn based ethonal. I had heard that it was a negative net energy value product so I looked it up myself and found out you really have to be careful who you believe. For instance, most of the studys that claim corn ethonal is a negative NEV are using corn yields from the 1970s. You don't have to talk to too many farmers to figure out those numbers are a whole lot different today than they were 30-40 years ago. Another part of the equation people love to leave out is the fact that corn has a viable feed by-product left over after the Ethanol extraction process.

I guess for me personally, if I'm going to pay $4 a gallon for gas I'd rather pay it to farmer John down the road rather than to some multi-billionaire in the Middleast using that money to bankroll a jihad against myself and my family.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

bikerfish said:


> Gotta disagree with you there. I'm not saying Ethanol is "the" answer, but I do think it's at least a step in the right direction. And there is a lot of mis-information about corn based ethonal. I had heard that it was a negative net energy value product so I looked it up myself and found out you really have to be careful who you believe. For instance, most of the studys that claim corn ethonal is a negative NEV are using corn yields from the 1970s. You don't have to talk to too many farmers to figure out those numbers are a whole lot different today than they were 30-40 years ago. Another part of the equation people love to leave out is the fact that corn has a viable feed by-product left over after the Ethanol extraction process.
> 
> I guess for me personally, if I'm going to pay $4 a gallon for gas I'd rather pay it to farmer John down the road rather than to some multi-billionaire in the Middleast using that money to bankroll a jihad against myself and my family.


Oh great.,..a viable feed product for the cattle or what?. How is it viable if the energy has been extracted in making ethanol? The cattle that are not evolved to eat corn, and thus have to be given antibiotics because it raises the acidity of their stomach too high? Cattle are evolved to eat grass.

Please show us a reference.

Here is one for you

http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/main/energy.htm

They claim 1.6 to 1 ratio and this is from the corn growers association (wonder if they are biased?). I have read other numbers that claim only 1.3 gallon yield per gallon of equivalent energy used. ( I wish I could find a good reference on my finger. I have one from South Dakota saying ethanol is great but they have the number 1.35 which is the wash number based on the energy content.)

But that is still nothing compared to 3:1 sugarcane or 7:1 cellulose.

But did you include that ethanol is only ~70 percent efficient in an engine to that of gasoline. CORN ethanol is not viable or sustainable. The only viable ethanols are cane sugar (and go see the effect that has on the Brazilians) or cellulose. based ethanols, which rely on some tech breakthroughs and biological dangers--but the way to go in my opinion.

I don't think it's a start when it's affecting food prices over the entire board.

And then there is the Jihad thing...How many glasses of George's coolaid did you drink?


----------



## Jerk_Chicken (Oct 13, 2005)

It seems people have forgotten how many farms are owned by corporations now.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

Jerk_Chicken said:


> It seems people have forgotten how many farms are owned by corporations now.


Actually I think companies like Monsanto own us too, because we ate their genetically modified corn than poor farmer john produces and now we have their patented gene in our cells.


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

lidarman said:


> Oh great.,..a viable feed product for the cattle or what?. How is it viable if the energy has been extracted in making ethanol? The cattle that are not evolved to eat corn, and thus have to be given antibiotics because it raises the acidity of their stomach too high? Cattle are evolved to eat grass.
> 
> Please show us a reference.
> 
> ...


lidarman I just wanted to appologize to you. You have shown me the light. I was very silly to think any steps we could take to get away from a completely non-renewable energy sources were a good thing. And yes, you caught me, I AM a George lover. I just can't wait to get up every morning and listen to George tout his pro-ethonal rhetoric.


----------



## screampint (Dec 10, 2001)

lidarman said:


> I don't think it's a start when it's affecting food prices over the entire board.


Agreed! I really don't want to increase the number affected by famine. There are other options out there as sources for cellulose. How about finding a way to turn all the pine kill in Colorado into ethanol? (yeah, far fetched, but you get my point).


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

bikerfish said:


> lidarman I just wanted to appologize to you. You have shown me the light. I was very silly to think any steps we could take to get away from a completely non-renewable energy sources were a good thing. And yes, you caught me, I AM a George lover. I just can't wait to get up every morning and listen to George tout his pro-ethonal rhetoric.


Do you drive a vehicle fueled by E85 when you are not riding your bike with your trailer to the store? If you support E85, it's the right thing to do to support your view.

Shopping by bike is a good step....it's conservation. I think an even better step.


----------



## BeanMan (Jul 6, 2006)

Elk, It's what's for dinner, from within site of our home. Pinto beans from my farm and veggies from my garden. Getting close to my food source.

BeanMan


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

lidarman said:


> Do you drive a vehicle fueled by E85 when you are not riding your bike with your trailer to the store? If you support E85, it's the right thing to do to support your view.
> 
> Shopping by bike is a good step....it's conservation. I think an even better step.


Hey, sorry I didn't mean to jump all over your case. Truth of the matter is, I do not drive an E85 vehicle (but only because I don't like buying new vehicles). I did however, grow up on a farm, and as another poster pointed out people forget how many farms are owned by corporations, and even fewer people know WHY so many farms are owned by corporations... because it's just incredibly difficult for the family farms to survive in todays culture. So I will drop the subject at that because this is really not the direction I wanted to go with this thread.

I will say that regardless of what alternative methods we come up with for fueling our vehicles/houses/ ect., the biggest challenge we're going to have to overcome is our attitudes as to how we utilize those things.

OK, really, off my high-horse now!


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

firch said:


> Another idea is to use canvas bags at the grocery store instead of the plastic bags.
> .


what do you guys do for baggies veggies? That is one shopping item I havent' figured a good sub for, the clear produce baggies. I leave a lot of stuff loose, but that doesn't work well with some things


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

formica said:


> what do you guys do for baggies veggies? That is one shopping item I havent' figured a good sub for, the clear produce baggies. I leave a lot of stuff loose, but that doesn't work well with some things


I don't worry too much about the produce bags. I use them where they are needed, like lettuce and salad mix, wash and re-use them where possible, then recycle them if I can. The recycle markets for film plastics are pretty robust.

Plastic bags are more of a problem in terms of litter, environmental damage, and social / economic costs from that litter. To the extent we can raise awareness about the downstream impacts of consumer choices, the current focus on plastic bags is a good thing.


----------



## KONA_in_SB (May 20, 2004)

lidarman said:


> Plus, there is whole issue is apparently talked about in the book "Omnivores Dilemma.' (Which I'm about to read). regarding the Genetically altered corn fed to cattle, the e-coli resistance of cattle..etc.


I am reading the Omnivores Dilemma right now. Excellent book. It really makes you think about a lot of things. Although his focus is on the food we (Americans) eat, he also digs inot the politics and economics behind why we eat what we eat in the American society, and why we are so fat as a nation. I highly recommend this book, it definitely isn't just another hippy vegetarian nonsense book.

Anyway, as to the original poster. I compost and am planting my summer vegetable garden this weekend. I try to ride most places, although i recently changed jobs and haven't worked out the schedule yet (that is a polite way of saying I am being a pvssy and it is colder and the commute is farther away than my previous situation). I try to buy locally and eat less meat. And of course I turn out the lights, computers etc. But the single most important thing I have done is gotten an education in the earth sciences so I can at least have a somewhat educated opinion about my place and role on this planet and how the decisions I make affect me and my community and each and every one of you. 
And on top of that, I am trying to find a way to spread the word without sounding like a self righteuos [email protected]

Great post by the way. :thumbsup:


----------



## KONA_in_SB (May 20, 2004)

lidarman said:


> er uh,....I completely..............
> 
> .........agree.
> 
> ...


Err, I don't. I think you are lumping American capitalist society values in with everyone's values. The demand is there because we, as Americans, are a capitalist society that depends on people buying CRAP (btw bikes don't count as crap, lol). So how do you diminish the demand? turn of the TV, don't listen to the corporations that are trying to sell you bottled water, flat panel TVs, new cars and IPODs. And quit buying crap. Goerge Bush will hate you...but fvck him, he's a jackass. Its not good for our nation or economy . It ultimately only benefits the top dogs in the multinational corporations and banks that don't give a fvck about the rest of us. 
Buy locally from your friends and neighbors. Keep the money in the local economies. Give the power back to the people.

And lidarman, this wasn't necessarily directed at you, i just started typing and it all came out.


----------



## KONA_in_SB (May 20, 2004)

formica said:


> I leave a lot of stuff loose, but that doesn't work well with some things


You mean like underwear? 

But seriously the best i do is not individually bag my apples, and onions and squash, etc.. I don't buy the bags of salad. Individual heads of lettuce are cheaper and don't come in their own bag (but i guess i do bag them so hmm...). I know, but more organic beer to offset the plastic bags


----------



## sean salach (Sep 15, 2007)

lidarman said:


> Oh great.,..a viable feed product for the cattle or what?. How is it viable if the energy has been extracted in making ethanol? *The cattle that are not evolved to eat corn*, and thus have to be given antibiotics because it raises the acidity of their stomach too high? *Cattle are evolved to eat grass.*
> 
> ..............


corn is a grass. nearly all plants grown for grain are.


----------



## scorpionwoman (Jul 7, 2006)

formica said:


> what do you guys do for baggies veggies? That is one shopping item I havent' figured a good sub for, the clear produce baggies. I leave a lot of stuff loose, but that doesn't work well with some things


I've had these cloth, mesh, pull-string produce bags for years. I assume they still make them?


----------



## WKD-RDR (Sep 1, 2007)

Buy locally grown or manufactured items to cut down on transportation costs.

Ride your bike everywhere you can, you can ride much more efficiently with an iPod.

Get off your dam computer and go ride.... like now


----------



## G-reg (Jan 12, 2004)

bikerfish said:


> Gotta disagree with you there. I'm not saying Ethanol is "the" answer, but I do think it's at least a step in the right direction. And there is a lot of mis-information about corn based ethonal. I had heard that it was a negative net energy value product so I looked it up myself and found out you really have to be careful who you believe. For instance, most of the studys that claim corn ethonal is a negative NEV are using corn yields from the 1970s. You don't have to talk to too many farmers to figure out those numbers are a whole lot different today than they were 30-40 years ago. Another part of the equation people love to leave out is the fact that corn has a viable feed by-product left over after the Ethanol extraction process.
> 
> I guess for me personally, if I'm going to pay $4 a gallon for gas I'd rather pay it to farmer John down the road rather than to some multi-billionaire in the Middleast using that money to bankroll a jihad against myself and my family.


Something people overlook with corn ethonal is that the only reason E85 shows up cheaper than regular is that it is massively subsidized by the govt. It burns a tiny bit cleaner than pure dyno-juice, but the mileage is lower so even that evens out.

Sugarcane produced ethanol on the other hand is some good stuff....


----------



## u2metoo (Jul 4, 2006)

Picture this, Phoenix isn’t really known for its high-rise towers and its big time hot here.

But Tempe currently has several towers sprouting up. I think it’s safe to assume that just like the house that have gone up, a reasonable attempt at making these condos efficient, but they aren’t being built with cutting edge environmental efficiency.

Anycow, I got into a discussion with somebody at work and she maintains that these building are gonna be extremely inefficient to keep cool, compared to a house. An apples to apples comparison is tough because the average sq is prolly gonna be much smaller in these condos. 

What say you?


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

Corn ethanol is a rediculous technology to invest in. The minimal return on energy investment is a joke, and you can bet the fertilizer used to grow the corn is mostly coming from natural gas. In comparison, wind turbines return over 10x the amount of energy invested. If we are truly interested in reducing carbon emissions thats the best way to do it right now. A hybrid plug-in diesel car is really the best short term solution as far as transportation. Ethanol is a short term solution too, but its not actually helping unless you own stock in an ethanol company. 

By far our largest use of energy is heating and cooling buildings. Investments in making your building consume less energy is the best thing you can do. Next to that, live closer to work. The amount the average american commutes is crazy, mainly so they can live in housing developments with huge, oversize houses that cost a fortune to heat and cool. I hope, in the future, developments like Rock Creek and Highlands Ranch get knocked back down. 

It is also true that food and oil are almost interchangeable. The fact that our world's crops are largely dependant on converting fossil fuel to fertilizer, and the average piece of food travels over 1000 miles before it is consumed are major problems. Besides health concerns, this is another reason to buy locally produced organic food whenever possible. This is also why food prices will follow energy prices....


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

u2metoo said:


> Picture this, Phoenix isn't really known for its high-rise towers and its big time hot here.
> 
> But Tempe currently has several towers sprouting up. I think it's safe to assume that just like the house that have gone up, a reasonable attempt at making these condos efficient, but they aren't being built with cutting edge environmental efficiency.
> 
> ...


"The devil is in the details." As you noted, it is hard to make a straight across comparison between condos and single family homes. But one commonality would likely be that if they are spec built, for sale units, they likely aren't cutting edge, as the builder is looking at construction costs and sales price, not the long term operating costs of the buildings.

But environmental impacts extend beyond the building shell. Phoenix has a lot of sprawl, which means lots of pavement, lots of driving. Well placed condos could be really beneficial for some folks. If you can walk to work or the store, or catch a bus or light rail, reduce the amount of time you spend driving, you are also reducing your overall impact.


----------



## Henrythewound (Jul 1, 2007)

Get a good coffee mug so you never have to get the paper kind. Some places won't fill mine claiming it's a "health" thing, I just get my coffee elsewhere (no my coffee mug is not nasty).

I also think using cloth bags when you can is great, recycle everything your local market allows, and push things like solar energy where it makes sense. I live in Tucson and there are not nearly as many solar panels as there should be. I think the cost needs to come down to increase viability for the common man (me) to jump aboard.


----------



## flowtron (Nov 17, 2006)

I'd consider high density housing more energy efficient than conventional single family homes. Much less external surface area per unit than single family homes, plus if its centrally located, the residents won't have to drive miles and miles through sprawl to get anywhere they need to go.



u2metoo said:


> Picture this, Phoenix isn't really known for its high-rise towers and its big time hot here.
> 
> But Tempe currently has several towers sprouting up. I think it's safe to assume that just like the house that have gone up, a reasonable attempt at making these condos efficient, but they aren't being built with cutting edge environmental efficiency.
> 
> ...


----------



## ronny (Apr 2, 2004)

Good thread. I chose to live in an area that is walking distance for almost all of my everyday needs. The mall, grocery store, bus stop, etc are all within a 15 minute walk or ride from my place. I absolutely DETEST suburbs unless they are planned properly. Most suburbs are designed around the automobile and it should be the other way around. 

I recycle and keep the lights and heat turned off whenever I can. Conservation is the key.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Hm. I guess you could say my lifestyle is pretty environmentally responsible.

- 95% of my food comes straight from the local farmer hippies at the weekend markets.
- I buy a new sweater or shirt once a year, pair of pants every couple years.
- If I have to go somewhere near, I walk, far, I ride, and anywhere on the waters edge, I swim, sail (an old sailboat my grandfather built), or paddle (a surfboard my father made).
- I play three guitars I built from trees of the forest I played in as a child, harvested when all 80 acres of virgin forest was cut & burned to build an overpass (which was recently made obsolete by another overpass, and abandoned). Haven't bought new strings in years. These old ones feel smoother on my fingers.
- I ride any of a dozen bikes made by the old legends, and a couple protos of my own when I worked for an mfg. I've got parts from my old work and racing days that'll last the rest of my life at the rate I use them up.
- In the six months I've been living here, I've filled my little kitchen garbage can up twice.
- I work in IT, Industrial Design, and Architecture, depending on the project, and steer projects toward renewable resources, sustainable solutions, & maximizing life cycles in everything. When your clients are investors, they like to see that you're saving them money in the long run. I donate old computers to schools and all the rest.
- These days, I use an Apple computer at home. After working on PCs all day, the last thing I want is to deal with all that nonsense at home. And whaddya know, Apple charges you for materials reclamation up front. Nice touch.

What's funny to me, is that I live like this, because above all, I am (for lack of a better word), cheap. I don't like blowing money on things that I don't need, nor things that are really worth a tenth of what I paid for them, nor things that will go straight into a landfill. I hate waste, but I hate paying for it even more. I'll pay $50 for a wool shirt from icebreaker.com, because I know they last five times as long as $10 cotton shirts, plus they're softer, warmer, and the money goes to good people doing quality work.

Little did I know, being financially conservative meant being environmentally liberal.

Essentially, my contributions to the economy are limited to food, ten bucks a month worth of electricity (computer and refrigerator) and an annual piece of clothing or two. What more do I need?


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

Henrythewound said:


> Get a good coffee mug so you never have to get the paper kind. Some places won't fill mine claiming it's a "health" thing, I just get my coffee elsewhere (no my coffee mug is not nasty).
> 
> I also think using cloth bags when you can is great, recycle everything your local market allows, and push things like solar energy where it makes sense. I live in Tucson and there are not nearly as many solar panels as there should be. I think the cost needs to come down to increase viability for the common man (me) to jump aboard.


If solar panels are your thing you should really check out a guy named "Stan Ovshinsky." They had an interview with him on Scientific America Frontiers - the episode was called "Hydrogen Hopes." Anyway, this guy's had like a billion inventions in his lifetime, one of which is a flexible solar panel he calls photovoltaic (I think). It's flexible, much less prone to damage, and he's making rolls of it up to something like a mile long.

They didn't sell it as a roofing product but that was my first thought. If we could develop this technology to the point where it's feasible to use it like shingles and just cover an entire roof how cool would that be!

This guy also has some pretty amazing inventions in the Hydrogen field as well (that's actually the main reason they had him on the program). Definitely worth a look anyway.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

who hangs their laundry out to dry? That is an easy one.


----------



## MOJO K (Jan 26, 2007)

formica said:


> who hangs their laundry out to dry? That is an easy one.


+1, and we wash everything possible cold. Bought a down comforter this fall and we keep the heat down at 58 or 60 all winter.Between hanging the clothes and unplugging all our appliances that aren't in use we saved about 40%.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

MOJO K said:


> +1, and we wash everything possible cold. Bought a down comforter this fall and we keep the heat down at 58 or 60 all winter.Between hanging the clothes and unplugging all our appliances that aren't in use we saved about 40%.


What? You wash your clothes?

hmmm? I wonder if this is why I have been doing so much solo riding lately???


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

sean salach said:


> corn is a grass. nearly all plants grown for grain are.


Not what I hear the corporate cattle are fed...I understand they are fed the grain to fatten them up and make them grow big, not the leaves. Sure they get some grass, but mostly corn grain.

makes me need to read up more.

Interesting pic taken on my ride today. I am bummed I didn't put my bike in the pic for the irony--a burrito on the saddle would even be better.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 3, 2005)

screampint said:


> Agreed! I really don't want to increase the number affected by famine. There are other options out there as sources for cellulose. How about finding a way to turn all the pine kill in Colorado into ethanol? (yeah, far fetched, but you get my point).


Not so far fetched. Cellulosed based ethanol is a much better option. I prefer switch grass. And drilling in ANWAR. And building new refineries. And Nuk-U-Lar. And solar-thermal. And wind, off the coast of the Hamptons. Screw Ted Kennedy, and all he stands for.


----------



## HandyMan (Feb 25, 2008)

HotBlack said:


> Hm. I guess you could say my lifestyle is pretty environmentally responsible.
> 
> - 95% of my food comes straight from the local farmer hippies at the weekend markets.
> - I buy a new sweater or shirt once a year, pair of pants every couple years.
> ...


you are an inspiration! :thumbsup:


----------



## 08nwsula (Oct 19, 2005)

Rev Bubba said:


> Twenty-two years ago...


I am twenty two years old and I have never really owned a vehicle. I ride my bike or hitch with someone else. If I really need to go somewhere, I will get there. Too many people drive on a whim. Not only am I doing my fair share of "green" duties, I am also keeping myself in shape.


----------



## chardog (Jun 30, 2007)

HotBlack said:


> What's funny to me, is that I live like this, because above all, I am (for lack of a better word), cheap. I don't like blowing money on things that I don't need, nor things that are really worth a tenth of what I paid for them, nor things that will go straight into a landfill. I hate waste, but I hate paying for it even more. I'll pay $50 for a wool shirt from icebreaker.com, because I know they last five times as long as $10 cotton shirts, plus they're softer, warmer, and the money goes to good people doing quality work.
> 
> Little did I know, being financially conservative meant being environmentally liberal.
> 
> Essentially, my contributions to the economy are limited to food, ten bucks a month worth of electricity (computer and refrigerator) and an annual piece of clothing or two. What more do I need?


Great for you! Many people blame capitalism for many of the worlds ills, but capitalism and free markets are actually the most efficient economic system. Its the best system for green choices as well as any other choices. The economic system is simply a tool for how we express our values. Typically, living cheaper means using less energy and raw materials.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

Getting back to the original post, I read a study recently about how much paper can be saved by changing the default margins on your printer. Default side margins are typically inch and a quarter. Change that to .75 inches on each edge. Some university did it and is saving six figures a year on paper costs. Those of us that work places where we can influence a policy like this could make a big difference.


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

HarryCallahan said:


> Getting back to the original post, I read a study recently about how much paper can be saved by changing the default margins on your printer. Default side margins are typically inch and a quarter. Change that to .75 inches on each edge. Some university did it and is saving six figures a year on paper costs. Those of us that work places where we can influence a policy like this could make a big difference.


That reminds me we have a new printer at work that prints on both sides of the paper, but this one actually does it well. I think I'll try to make it standard procedure to use both sides of the paper. Thanks for the idea.

I thought of another one yesterday to. I pee in the shower (only while I'm showering) but hey that's save 1.5 gallons per incident right!:eekster:


----------



## MOJO K (Jan 26, 2007)

lidarman said:


> What? You wash your clothes?
> 
> (


Not really, but I want Formica to think I'm cool. Don't tell...ok.


----------



## chardog (Jun 30, 2007)

Compost.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2008)

davec113 said:


> The amount the average american commutes is crazy, mainly so they can live in housing developments with huge, oversize houses that cost a fortune to heat and cool. I hope, in the future, developments like Rock Creek and Highlands Ranch get knocked back down.
> .


So get this... my wife and I were looking to build a new house, straw bale most likely, but maybe rammed earth. We were looking at about 1000 sf or less, but most of the towns in Maine wouldn't allow zoning for the house, not because it was an "alternative" building material, but because it was too small!!!

They want as much property tax as they can get and a 900sf home apparently doesn't cut it. Now that's sad.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2008)

bikerfish said:


> If solar panels are your thing you should really check out a guy named "Stan Ovshinsky." They had an interview with him on Scientific America Frontiers - the episode was called "Hydrogen Hopes." Anyway, this guy's had like a billion inventions in his lifetime, one of which is a flexible solar panel he calls photovoltaic (I think). It's flexible, much less prone to damage, and he's making rolls of it up to something like a mile long.
> 
> They didn't sell it as a roofing product but that was my first thought. If we could develop this technology to the point where it's feasible to use it like shingles and just cover an entire roof how cool would that be!
> 
> This guy also has some pretty amazing inventions in the Hydrogen field as well (that's actually the main reason they had him on the program). Definitely worth a look anyway.


There already are roof "shingles" that are PV (photovoltaic) panels. They've been on the market for a couple of years now. Good for communities that don't like the look of tradition solar arrays. "Stealth Solar"

Check 'em out here: http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17129&ch=biztech

and here:
http://www.opticalenergy.com/photovoltaic-solar-shingles-pv-energy-panels-roof-shingle/


----------



## dash (Mar 23, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> Hm. I guess you could say my lifestyle is pretty environmentally responsible.
> 
> - 95% of my food comes straight from the local farmer hippies at the weekend markets.
> - I buy a new sweater or shirt once a year, pair of pants every couple years.
> ...


Ding ding ding, Wrong answer. The correct answer is an organic HEMP sweater. Prohibition remains in effect for one of the most energetic and useful plants in the world and we still dick the middle east for oil. Let's face it, the byproducts of viagra won't get you a quarter of a mile per gallon. The world is not laughing with us....


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

*A thanks, and a wt...f...*

Thanks to those of you who said nice things about my little life here. I give up some things to make it work, but they're my choices, and it's nice to hear something other than "No car?", and the obligatory blank stare or "What are you some kind of loser?" once in a while.

As for this guy...



dash said:


> Ding ding ding, Wrong answer. The correct answer is an organic HEMP sweater.


Have you flipped? What a misguided post.

Hemp has many potential uses. Uh, wonderful, really. But:

A. BS reasons or not, it's currently illegal to produce, so it doesn't make a very versatile (able to be worn anywhere without causing a problem) piece of clothing.
B. I don't want to wear a hemp sweater. I like wool. It's been successfully grown for millions of years specifically to keep its wearer comfortably cool, comfortably warm, in wet or dry, and to stay clean forever. Hemp can be processed to make cloth, sure, but it's not its intent as a plant. So too can milkweed flowers and corn husks. So can old shoelaces and milk bottles. So why the insistence on this one material? Oh, I've got a pretty good guess!
C. Environmental impact of grazing sheep vs tilling a whole swatch of land under to grow enough hemp to make us all lovely burlap-sack sweaters.

Funny coincidence that all the people I've ever heard who honestly care about the great travesty that is hemp, just happen to be total freakin potheads. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but be honest. It's never: "My passion in life is materials sciences, and boy, this hemp sure is neat!" Reality is more like: "I just love me some smokin weird. Plus, hemp's neat, cause you could make just about anything with it, if it were legal. Which it's not. Those bastards."



dash said:


> Prohibition remains in effect for one of the most energetic and useful plants in the world and we still dick the middle east for oil. Let's face it, the byproducts of viagra won't get you a quarter of a mile per gallon. The world is not laughing with us....


Hemp, Viagra, Foreign policy, Oil Oil Oil... That's quite a case of mixed nuts ya got there.

So your solution is... preaching to the converted? The difference between me, once a year, buying an ugly hemp sweater, versus the handmade one from the old lady in Minnesota with the sheep... that's worth getting fired up about? Not, say, the four hundred McMansions on this street (x hundreds in this town, x hundreds in this state, x 50 in this country), each generating multiple full garbage cans of landfill-bound crap every monday morning, or the chemicals they all pour down their drains, or the pollutants generated to heat or cool their interiors & their water, or to propel their residents in gleaming escalades & hummers or all the air, water, and chemical pollution created during the manufacture and transport of every item on their property, including the property itself? No. The material of my annual sweater purchase is the concern.

Or was the intent simply to show your own smug sense of superiority in "greenness"?


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> Hemp can be processed to make cloth, sure, but it's not its intent as a plant.


Thats a _completely_ ignorant statement. Do some research :nono: Before prohibition it was commonly used to make rope and cloth. It has favorable material properties for this type of use because the fibers are very long, which makes it strong and long-wearing.

Fwiw, its seeds are a very nutritious food as well, high in omega-3 and protein.

Also, plants grown for fiber generally don't produce thc, and can't be used as a drug.

It seems your distaste for pot is _clouding_ your judgement


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

davec113 said:


> Thats a _completely_ ignorant statement. Do some research :nono: Before prohibition it was commonly used to make rope and cloth. It has favorable material properties for this type of use because the fibers are very long, which makes it strong and long-wearing.
> 
> Fwiw, its seeds are a very nutritious food as well, high in omega-3 and protein.
> 
> ...


Oh brother. Completely "ignorant" would be me not knowing the above, which I do. The statement wasn't about hemp not yielding a strong durable textile. The statement was about the natural intent of wool, to keep skin and meat warm, cool, dry and clean, which it does, and the natural intent of hemp, which is, to be a plant, to break down soil, store energy, provide moisture and food for insects, etc... The fact that we COULD make textiles out of it (with even more energy-intensive processes (gasp!)) is fine & dandy, if it were legal. However, as far as I'm concerned, it's still got nothing on the material that's been bred for millions of years specifically for the purpose. In making the materials decision for a product, the question is "What is the material best suited for this purpose?" (not, "what could I possibly turn this material into?"). No contest.

Hemp makes a fine rope, I'll give you.

Again, you can eat hemp seeds. Or you could eat a salad. Which would you rather do?

I don't care one way or the other about pot. Talking about hemp is always entertaining though.


----------



## dash (Mar 23, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> Thanks to those of you who said nice things about my little life here. I give up some things to make it work, but they're my choices, and it's nice to hear something other than "No car?", and the obligatory blank stare or "What are you some kind of loser?" once in a while.
> 
> As for this guy...
> 
> ...


That would be the pothead, Mr. hothead, that does circles around people at Hall ranch to you, uh uhh really. There are many "Sheep" lovers here at the Fort  so I won't argue about the hemp clothing being like brillo, but hemp has dodged the bullet somehow this time as the miracle plant of the year award vs corn and yet it truly is a benificial plant that is controlled and lobbied away by big money and that say's something about the domestic "product".:ihih:


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

I hear hemp was considered one of the best materials (or best?) for bow strings, before the times of synthetic fibers.


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2008)

screeeeeech..... crash...... thread derailed...


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

indigosky said:


> screeeeeech..... crash...... thread derailed...


Agreed...common folks, this is supposed to be a sharing of ideas not a heated debate. I hope we can get this back on track, I've really been enjoying the ideas so far. It would be a pitty to loose yet another thread to perpetual bickering.:madman:


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

bikerfish said:


> Agreed...common folks, this is supposed to be a sharing of ideas not a heated debate. I hope we can get this back on track, I've really been enjoying the ideas so far. It would be a pitty to loose yet another thread to perpetual bickering.:madman:


Yes, Agreed. Sorry to head off on a tangent there.

Reading it back, that post does come off angry. I'm not, really.


----------



## bikerfish (Feb 3, 2004)

HotBlack said:


> Yes, Agreed. Sorry to head off on a tangent there.
> 
> Reading it back, that post does come off angry. I'm not, really.


It happens, I did the exact same thing a few posts back. Good to have you back though.:thumbsup:


----------



## kristian (Jan 20, 2004)

Learn to hypermile! So far in this thread, hybrids have gotten a bad rap. Regardless, you can easily squeeze 20% less gas out of your current car by changing HOW you drive. If you see a red light in front of you, take your foot off the gas! There is no need to drive 50mph up to the light and the brake. Slow down! By driving 60mph instead of 85 on the interstate you will see a significant improvement. Inflate your tires to the sidewall maximum--this will improve not only your fuel economy but your tread life too!

I was a fairly efficient driver in my Subaru already, but when I started driving it like I drove my Civic Hybrid, I was getting 100 extra miles per tank (a 25% improvment). That's like finding a $10 bill at the gas pump for the economists, and a 25% reduction in the car's carbon footprint for the environmentalists. 

If you are going to buy a new car already, buy a hybrid. As some have mentioned above, it won't offset your McMansion, but they sure are better for the environment than a standard gas car. My lifetime average for the Civic is 49.7mpg with a best tank of 59mpg, and I can get 35mpg in the Mariner (AWD SUV) which is better than most sub compact cars. I'm still learning on both of cars so I expect this to improve with time. 

Driving the Civic hybrid for the next 100,000 miles, I will save about 1,000 gallons of gas over a standard gas Civic (hypermiling both--assumption 35mpg gas and 53mpg hybrid). Before anyone starts the: "but then your battery goes in the trash" BS, there is actually a bounty on the battery and whoever puts the car in its final resting place would be throwing away money by not recycling the battery (which is very easy to recycle I might add).


----------



## Christine (Feb 11, 2004)

I try to be green in some ways......don't eat meat, walk/bike for errands, avoid plastic bags when shopping, live close to work (luck), don't shop much, etc. etc. But in other ways, I suck at it- drive short distances b/c I sleep later that way, for ex. 

Once everybody starts analyzing carbon footprints and such, we'll all come to the same conclusion as George Carlin, that "we're all f**ked." But it helps to try.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*How 'bout...*



fishbum said:


> I'm with you: recycle vehicles. Don't drive a new one. And don't think you are helping the planet by buying a Prius.


... a used Prius?


----------



## Impy (Jan 6, 2004)

lidarman said:


> BTW, a green solution is to get fixed. Avoiding procreation eliminates a lifetime or more of energy waste


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

lidarman said:


> BTW, a green solution is to get fixed. Avoiding procreation eliminates a lifetime or more of energy waste...


Rich, This is probably the best advice, environmentally, socially, economically, just logically. Practicing a little self control with regard to breeding.

It's a wildly unpopular here in basic instinct-crazed America (even with all our warped social baggage regarding sex), but that hardly matters. At a point quickly approaching, if we don't do it ourselves, nature will start ramping up on forcing self-control upon us.


----------



## patineto (Oct 28, 2005)

Yeah Right...:madman: 









Is like French People using perfume as oppose to simply take a Bath.


----------



## Full Mountain (Mar 30, 2005)

HandyMan said:


> If you have to buy a house, try to get it pre-fabbed (it sounds cheesy but they produce MUCH less waste, and use much less wood)
> 
> Fly less (airplanes produce a LOT of pollution)
> 
> ...


Yeah and now if we could convince the publishers to put my $1100 worth books into pdf we could save even more....I'm hoping for this for the purely selfish reason of not want to carry 60lbs of books around all day next year



HotBlack said:


> Essentially, my contributions to the economy are limited to food, ten bucks a month worth of electricity (computer and refrigerator) and an annual piece of clothing or two. What more do I need?


10 bucks a month...wow...must be nice

DMR


----------



## GreenLightGo (Oct 24, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> Rich, This is probably the best advice, environmentally, socially, economically, just logically. Practicing a little self control with regard to breeding.
> 
> It's a wildly unpopular here in basic instinct-crazed America (even with all our warped social baggage regarding sex), but that hardly matters. At a point quickly approaching, if we don't do it ourselves, nature will start ramping up on forcing self-control upon us.


While I don't understand or don't agree with your rationale, I think you're not in tune with the declining birth rate in the US, and much of the 'West' (i.e. including western Europe). (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2003pres/20030625.html) In western Europe, it's significantly more alarming.

My personal belief is that we have a moral crisis, not a need to stop procreation. 1/3d of all births are to unwed mothers. I'm an oddball these days because I have four children, my wife stays at home to raise them and I manage to live and thrive on one salary? In fact, my wife and I are seriously debating adopting a child, probably from one of those draconian countries that limits childbearing so multiple kids are discarded or become wards of the state.

Oh, and how is nature going to force self control upon us? Are you talking about a divine being or some random tree attacking an unsuspecting mtn biker b/c he's got four kids? :skep:


----------



## jalopy jockey (Jun 7, 2007)

G-reg said:


> Something people overlook with corn ethonal is that the only reason E85 shows up cheaper than regular is that it is massively subsidized by the govt. It burns a tiny bit cleaner than pure dyno-juice, but the mileage is lower so even that evens out.
> 
> Sugarcane produced ethanol on the other hand is some good stuff....


Your mileage from E85 or pure ethanol would be better than with real gas if it wasn't a flex fuel engine. Combustion pressures and all that jazz. My brother in law explained it to me a while back, he's an engineer is a powertrain lab for a major auto company. He's building an ethanol powered race car due to performance improvements. It all made sense then but months later and with a few beers in me I couldn't repeat it to save my life right now.


----------



## xenon (Apr 16, 2007)

Riding on road shoulders, I always stop and pick up zip ties, lying there. Does it count?


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

Stop ironing clothes??

I don't know an iron that's really energy efficient...


----------



## Breakurnees (Dec 13, 2007)

You can refuse to buy bottled water. It is generally the same quality as tap water, has less strict purity standards and testing than tap water and gets shipped around the globe for no good reason. Huge waste of energy.


----------



## scorpionwoman (Jul 7, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> What's funny to me, is that I live like this, because above all, I am (for lack of a better word), cheap.


Here's a better word: frugal (i.e, cheap by choice).  :thumbsup:

Good work. One thing that occurred to me when I read your post and all the ways that you are self-sufficient: I bet you don't watch TV. Just think of all that time that we free up (to be frugal, to be creative, to interact with family/friends, etc.) if we don't watch TV!


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jalopy jockey said:


> Your mileage from E85 or pure ethanol would be better than with real gas if it wasn't a flex fuel engine.


Seeing as there's less energy in a given amount of E85 or pure ethanol compared to regular gas or diesel I'd love for you to try and describe how that's possible.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

A good green idea is to limit people to only having 2 kids.


----------



## GreenLightGo (Oct 24, 2006)

Dekes said:


> A good green idea is to limit people to only having 2 kids.


how is that green? :skep: What do you do with the third child to a couple that has triplets?


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

GreenLightGo said:


> While I don't understand or don't agree with your rationale, I think you're not in tune with the declining birth rate in the US, and much of the 'West' (i.e. including western Europe). (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2003pres/20030625.html) In western Europe, it's significantly more alarming.
> 
> My personal belief is that we have a moral crisis, not a need to stop procreation. 1/3d of all births are to unwed mothers. I'm an oddball these days because I have four children, my wife stays at home to raise them and I manage to live and thrive on one salary? In fact, my wife and I are seriously debating adopting a child, probably from one of those draconian countries that limits childbearing so multiple kids are discarded or become wards of the state.
> 
> Oh, and how is nature going to force self control upon us? Are you talking about a divine being or some random tree attacking an unsuspecting mtn biker b/c he's got four kids? :skep:


Your post demands either no response at all, or a response from at least twenty angles. The time and patience required would be great. I have no great interest in *converting* you to anything, the possible positive outcomes are moot, and there's very little chance that further discussion will do anything but deeply offend you and start an argument.

A starting point would be to consider cause and effect in a finite, closed system, and your place in it.

Good luck, have fun.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

GreenLightGo said:


> how is that green? :skep: What do you do with the third child to a couple that has triplets?


The reason this earth is in trouble is because 6.5 billion people is too much, end of story. Triplets can be an exception to the rule.


----------



## GreenLightGo (Oct 24, 2006)

Dekes said:


> Triplets can be an exception to the rule.


very kind offer - quadruplets off the table?


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

GreenLightGo said:


> very kind offer - quadruplets off the table?




Pointless.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

GreenLightGo said:


> very kind offer - quadruplets off the table?


Are you serious?


----------



## GreenLightGo (Oct 24, 2006)

Dekes said:


> A good green idea is to *limit people to only having 2 kids*.


I'm as serious as you want me to be. I'm just poking fun at the simplicity of your solution (not trying to e-argue as that is pretty pointless), though I recommend we peacefully and humanely euthanize the non-productive members of society so there is more space, since you say 6.5 billion is too much. (yes, more poking fun). :thumbsup:

I think Hotblack is a little peeved at me so I don't think I'll engage this anymore though. Never was a big F88 board fan.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

Ride more and drive less.
Get a car that gets good mileage and use good driving techniques to get better mileage.
If you can't become a vegetarian, at least try to eat less meat, especially beef.
Consume less.
Procreate less.
If you are building a house, use all the best passive and active solar technologies. Insulate like crazy and keep it smaller rather than larger.
Turn off lights when not in use, same with computer and other appliances.
If it's brown flush it down, if it's yellow, be mellow. (Composting toilets ROCK BTW)
Use CFLs
If you are into motorized toys like dirt bikes and snowmobiles, get rid of them, OHVs are wasteful, polluting way out of proportion to their size and destructive of the earth.

Be mindful of how you live, remember that the law of cause and effect is supreme.


----------



## patineto (Oct 28, 2005)

"I live simply, so others may simply live"

Bumper sticker in Berkeley california


----------



## Toff (Sep 11, 2004)

I'm frugal by nature.

I bought a small house on purpose.
Don't run the AC or Heat much, prefer open windows with the breeze.
Leave lights off, I got some neat blue led nightlights that I put up so I can see at night.
Big ticket items I buy used such as car and then I drive it into the ground.
Bikes I also buy used but I do replace parts with new as they wear out.
I don't have cable or internet but do have a TV for a semi-rare movie.
I cook at home instead of eating out.
Don't drive much, live within biking distance of a great trail system.

I checked out a few "Green" organizations where I live but they tend to have an "exteme" view of things.

By doing all the above and more I do feel that I am making a small difference.
Now if we have 1000 people do this, its a larger difference. 
1,000,000; now we are talking about change.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

Toff said:


> I'm frugal by nature.
> 
> I bought a small house on purpose.
> Don't run the AC or Heat much, prefer open windows with the breeze.
> ...


No internet? how do you visit this forum then? at work?

Being 23, i prefer internet over TV though. If I'd have my own house I'd only have a computer + internet


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

Can't remember if I posted this or not..

try www.blackle.com

What if mtbr.com went black? How much could we save? And how cool would the site be?


----------



## rocks'r'friends (Mar 30, 2007)

How about this...
Surf the net less. The internet, well all the structures that make it up, has a larger carbon footprint that the entire commercial airline industry! Massive server farms, using massive amounts of power to operate, and equally massive amounts of power to cool building. Don't know where the numbers come from, but it was discussed on the CBC, so it has to be true.


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

*um....no.*



rocks'r'friends said:


> How about this...
> Surf the net less. The internet, well all the structures that make it up, has a larger carbon footprint that the entire commercial airline industry! Massive server farms, using massive amounts of power to operate, and equally massive amounts of power to cool building. Don't know where the numbers come from, but it was discussed on the CBC, so it has to be true.


Can you imagine that? Instead of finding an answer online, you drive to (most people would) where ever to answer your question. Instead of reading about Moab online, you purchase a book (additional cost of paper, gas to drive to buy book etc.) and instead of e-mailing someone you either: drive to see them, use your cell phone, or write a letter.

You'd be better off hunting for manbearpig.


----------



## PCC (Sep 5, 2005)

*Unplug!*

All of those little power transformers that are used for charging your cellphone, GPS, toys, etc? Unplug them when you are not using them. They draw as much power whether you are charging your device or not.

I plugged all of my battery powered devices into a power strip and turn it on only at night when I have all of them attached to be charged and only for a few hours a day, skipping a day here and a day there to conserve power. My electric bill for the last month dropped by $50! It was consistently about $200 a month but this past month was $150. We will have to see how much our next bill is. I bought a timer for that power strip and now it turns on for 3 hours every evening automatically. I'll have to see how much of a difference this makes on our next electric bill. It would be better if I manually turn the power strip on and off as needed but my wife doesn't understand the concept and she gets pissed when she plugs her phone in and it doesn't charge like she expects it to and she will leave it turned on or I would forget to turn it off the next morning. This should be more economical as it will consistently turn this on every evening and we will just have to remember to plug in our phones to use it.


----------



## Maddog (Jul 4, 2004)

You must hate John and Kate plus EIGHT.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

as an environmental educator, i have studied the impact of a bunch of these things.

flourescent lights dont mean sh!t if you drive to work, even a mile. walk or ride your bike.

driving a prius is BS. there is more toxicity in the battery cell than driving a 30mpg car for 200k miles. the real ticket is to buy a cheap @$$ used honda that gets 35mpg. or a used volkswagen TDi that runs on veg. or dont drive. dont get a hybrid, they are only image.

the economy of the usa is tied roughly 82% to fossil fuels. that means, that out of any given product, about 82% of the cost of the item went to fossil fuel purchase (production, transport, salaries used for fossil fuels, etc), buy used sh!t and buy cheap sh!t. so long as it is not made in china. (before you argue with this, consider that the profit from items goes on to pay some dudes electric and gas bills, which the profit goes on to pay another dudes, and so on. Strung out by economists, this works out)

recycle. all of it. if it cannot be recycled, find a way to reuse it. if you cannot do either, find a way to not use it in the first place next time. I always say that 30 years from now I will be a rich man when I begin a company that will mine the landfills of America to recover the thrown away resources. 

live in a small house. meaning 1000 sq ft or less. anything more is just self-indulgent waste. argue all you want, but you really dont NEED that.

heat that damn house with propane, natural gas or wood. electric is the most wasteful. remember, electric is made by burning sh!t and then 50% of the energy is lost in transmission. cut out the middle man (and the waste) and just burn sh!t in your own home.

buying wind credits is the largest fallacy ever presented to the american people. (besides the kennedy assassination.) You are not really buying green power, so dont think you are special. alternative energies will never save your wasteful @$$, only conservation will.

solar energy has a 59 year economic payback and a 22 year energy payback. that means it will not save your @$$ either. dont understand what that means? then dont use solar panels.

if all you arseholes drove your cars 10% less this year than last, we wouldnt have to deal with Iraq for oil. if you drove 20% less we could reverse co2 based climate change. and no, your damn prius doesnt count. it already committed over a ton of chlorine to the environment when it was produced. and when its battery dies around 100k miles, it will add another 87 pounds of heavy metals to the environmental toll. All together, more than running all the lights in your house continually for life. 

being green is not about choosing what products to buy and smart purchasing. it is about NOT purchasing the crap you dont need. dont purchase green products. just dont purchase any products. even an educated consumer is still a consumer, and more consumption will not fix the problem.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

G-reg said:


> Something people overlook with corn ethonal is that the only reason E85 shows up cheaper than regular is that it is massively subsidized by the govt. It burns a tiny bit cleaner than pure dyno-juice, but the mileage is lower so even that evens out.
> 
> Sugarcane produced ethanol on the other hand is some good stuff....


not to mention that it currently takes around 1.03 gallons of oil (factoring in plant electricity, transportation of product, farming the fermentation product, etc) to produce and bring to market 1.0 gallons of ethanol.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

So is everyone on this thread planning to take a bike trip by car anytime in the near future? Just wondering. 

Make sure to post pics when you get back.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

chequamagon said:


> not to mention that it currently takes around 1.03 gallons of oil (factoring in plant electricity, transportation of product, farming the fermentation product, etc) to produce and bring to market 1.0 gallons of ethanol.


How many gallons of oil takes to make one gallon of fuel?


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Nat said:


> So is everyone on this thread planning to take a bike trip by car anytime in the near future? Just wondering.
> 
> Make sure to post pics when you get back.


Nope. Moabs full of Walmarts these days. That place is dead to me now.


----------



## Mike T. (Dec 30, 2003)

lidarman said:


> BTW, a green solution is to get fixed. Avoiding procreation eliminates a lifetime or more of energy waste


Why don't they do this in Africa to a few million people instead of trying to feed them? Those countries can't hope to sustain all those people without incredible amounts of outside help.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

Mike T. said:


> Why don't they do this in Africa to a few million people instead of trying to feed them? Those countries can't hope to sustain all those people without incredible amounts of outside help.


because loosely defined, that is called genocide.


----------



## Mike T. (Dec 30, 2003)

chequamagon said:


> because loosely defined, that is called genocide.


N-n-n-n-n-n-n-no. It's called being realistic. Cure the problem. Drastically reduce the massive birth rate. Then the land can better support the people. Better fix the leak than hold a bucket under the leak. But the latter gets better photo-ops for the celebs doesn't it?


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

Mike T. said:


> N-n-n-n-n-n-n-no. It's called being realistic. Cure the problem. Drastically reduce the massive birth rate. Then the land can better support the people. Better fix the leak than hold a bucket under the leak. But the latter gets better photo-ops for the celebs doesn't it?


Problem is not only in Africa... Just tell me of one country that is self-sufficient (meaning their soil can produce all the resources needed to feed their population) energy and food wise.

Besides, I find it hard to believe they consume more energy than say, India or China or the US. But it could be... I haven't seen the numbers.

Yup... we're way too many for this marble we're floating on... No other creature in nature had been able to cure itself or modify the environment like we have done... So mother nature can't really control us but by taking very drastic measures (for our species, at any rate).


----------



## f2f4 (Aug 10, 2007)

Nat said:


> So is everyone on this thread planning to take a bike trip by car anytime in the near future? Just wondering.
> 
> Make sure to post pics when you get back.


I am. NJ to Moab, then through all the spots in CO (Frisco, Durango, Great Sand Dunes, Fruita, etc), then back. About a month, and about 4-5,000 miles of driving when it is all said and done.

I'd fly there to make less of an impact, but we have so much gear to bring we'd be spending far too much on extra luggage fees (plus the hassle of it all being lost).


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

Mike T. said:


> N-n-n-n-n-n-n-no. It's called being realistic. Cure the problem. Drastically reduce the massive birth rate. Then the land can better support the people. Better fix the leak than hold a bucket under the leak. But the latter gets better photo-ops for the celebs doesn't it?


That is a western fallacy. They could actually do quite well for themselves and live at a reasonable level with what they have if the drug lords and war lords and dictators were not there. We dont send food there because they cannot grow it, we send food because the stuff they do grow is stolen or set on fire by the ones in power to continue oppression. Keeping them poor and starving is a good way to keep them controlled.

The real population that needs mandatory fixing is North Americans. We are living at a level around 400% higher than our particular land can support.


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2008)

chequamagon said:


> as an environmental educator, i have studied the impact of a bunch of these things.
> 
> flourescent lights dont mean sh!t if you drive to work, even a mile. walk or ride your bike.
> 
> ...


You forgot a big one... Don't eat meat. Seriously.


----------



## TheNJironHorse (Feb 6, 2007)

chequamagon said:


> driving a prius is BS. there is more toxicity in the battery cell than driving a 30mpg car for 200k miles. the real ticket is to buy a cheap @$$ used honda that gets 35mpg. or a used volkswagen TDi that runs on veg. or dont drive. dont get a hybrid, they are only image.


Today's hybrid vehicles are a stop gap measure and a live development mule for the auto manufacturers. The battery technologies and advancements that are being made today due to the competition between the automakers (and their striving to meet federal regulations) are crucial to the true "next gen" vehicles, ie the plug in electric cars, which will hopefully be charged by clean energy. That being said, I always recommend people buy a diesel golf instead of the prius they consider...the prius is an image car for the uninformed. We as consumers need to look at the new onslaught of hybrid everythings as a step to the future, even though at the moment that step is worse for the present.


----------



## klohiq (Mar 22, 2008)

zrm said:


> Get a car that gets good mileage and use good driving techniques to get better mileage.
> If you can't become a vegetarian, at least try to eat less meat, especially beef.
> If you are building a house, use all the best passive and active solar technologies. Insulate like crazy and keep it smaller rather than larger.
> If you are into motorized toys like dirt bikes and snowmobiles, get rid of them, OHVs are wasteful, polluting way out of proportion to their size and destructive of the earth.


Insulation, solar energy, thermal energy are all just crutches. With a population as big as we have now, even these technologies pollute extreme amounts. Think about it, the products need research and development which invariably uses resources. Then you have all the molds that are used to make the plastic parts, all the machinery to move and make use of the various components, the packaging, the marketing, all the waste that is caused by trucks delivering the product, machinery to install the product. The list goes on and very little of it could be referred to as green in any stretch of the imagination.

*Carbon Neutral is BS and pure hype. We will never be able to do what animals do and we will eventually kill ourselves through eating and polluting this world to death. This is unnavoidable.*

Even bike advocates try to pawn them off as zero impact vehicles. It takes energy to melt down the steel and lots of chemicals are used throughout the various processes. If any of you work in manufacturing you would know that even something as simple as a newspaper requires a lot of chemicals be used to make it look like it does when it lands on your door step. From the various blanket washes (essentially kerosene), oils and greases used that are non-recyclable to the paper that is created through fairly evironmentally unfriendly ways. The indians and other tribal people are about as developed as you can get before you start screwing up the ecosystem and permanently damaging the earth.

With that said I do agree with you on some points, I just think going to extremes will make your life less enjoyable and ultimately still lead to our extinction.


----------



## essenmeinstuff (Sep 4, 2007)

chequamagon said:


> as an environmental educator, i have studied the impact of a bunch of these things.
> 
> flourescent lights dont mean sh!t if you drive to work, even a mile. walk or ride your bike.
> 
> ...


Some valid points but mostly a lot of bs.


----------



## canuckjgc (Jun 22, 2007)

Low-flow shower heads use half the hot water of others by mixing water with air (roughly 25% of your household energy goes to heating water). Turn down your water heater and insulate your pipes as well, you'll save a ton of energy and it won't affect your lifestyle.

You folks who talk about "too many people" crack me up -- the logical extension of your argument is no people! And that child you want to prevent being born -- what if that child were the next "Einstein" in terms of solving global climate change? You just prevented that person from being born! Hilarious. Numbers of people aren't the problem -- distribution of resources and use of resources is the problem.


----------



## essenmeinstuff (Sep 4, 2007)

One thing I found that helps with gas mileage, as well as driving more conservatively, shift your AT into neutral when slowing down or stopped at lights etc. When in drive the transmission loads up the engine significantly and since it's idling it is in arguably its most inefficient operating mode.


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*The Human Footprint April 13, 14 and 20th*

On National Geographic Channel.
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/ET/popup/200804132100.html
It shows what we (one person) use(s) in a lifetime.

My bro just purchased an '83 Mercedes diesel wagon. He will convert it to veggie. My neighbor catches rainwater for his "medicine" and veggies in the back yard.

I will be going to the bike swap meet this weekend to sell "excess" bike parts and other odds and ends. I will not buy anything. I hope.:skep:

Gotta use that rebicycle method!! Just for encouraging the people who haven't gone to a bike swap, one can get SWEET deals from pros selling their extras. I scored an unused XTR 180 crankset for $100 and unused XTR rapid fire shifters for $10.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

TheNJironHorse said:


> Today's hybrid vehicles are a stop gap measure and a live development mule for the auto manufacturers. The battery technologies and advancements that are being made today due to the competition between the automakers (and their striving to meet federal regulations) are crucial to the true "next gen" vehicles, ie the plug in electric cars, which will hopefully be charged by clean energy. That being said, I always recommend people buy a diesel golf instead of the prius they consider...the prius is an image car for the uninformed. We as consumers need to look at the new onslaught of hybrid everythings as a step to the future, even though at the moment that step is worse for the present.


a diesel exhausts particulate matter as well as NOx many many times more than a gasoline car. Both PM and NOx are carcinogenous. If I have to choose between CO2 and cancer, I choose for CO2. I don't care about global warming, it's a hype. There are more important environmental issues such as sustainable development (eg. waste management, recycling, ...)


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

essenmeinstuff said:


> One thing I found that helps with gas mileage, as well as driving more conservatively, shift your AT into neutral when slowing down or stopped at lights etc. When in drive the transmission loads up the engine significantly and since it's idling it is in arguably its most inefficient operating mode.


You consume less when leaving the car in gear without touching the gaspedal when you approach a traffic light.


----------



## essenmeinstuff (Sep 4, 2007)

Dekes said:


> You consume less when leaving the car in gear without touching the gaspedal when you approach a traffic light.


I curious why you think this.

I would assume, all things being equal, that foot off the gas, engine at idle and coasting in neutral would use less gas then forcing the engine to some higher RPM through engine braking? More rpm, same air volume, means slightly more fuel to maintain correct fa ratio?

However I did drive a rental car (ford) recently that flipped out if the vehicle was moving and the transmission in neutral, and reved the engine to about 3krpm...


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

essenmeinstuff said:


> I curious why you think this.
> 
> I would assume, all things being equal, that foot off the gas, engine at idle and coasting in neutral would use less gas then forcing the engine to some higher RPM through engine braking? More rpm, same air volume, means slightly more fuel to maintain correct fa ratio?
> 
> However I did drive a rental car (ford) recently that flipped out if the vehicle was moving and the transmission in neutral, and reved the engine to about 3krpm...


Actually I heard that too (that leaving it in gear uses less fuel than coasting). It had something to do with the car's ECU (computer) knowing what you were doing. It knows that you are coming to a stop and will shut off flow to the fuel injectors, whereas in neutral it keeps feeding the injectors. Your method of coasting may have been applicable back in the old days before learning-ECU's. I learned that on a popular car site from some seemingly knowledgeable folk.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

canuckjgc said:


> You folks who talk about "too many people" crack me up -- the logical extension of your argument is no people!


I don't see the relationship, please explain.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

essenmeinstuff said:


> Some valid points but mostly a lot of bs.


well then refute the BS one by one and lets have at it. I got a master's in this stuff. bring it on.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

essenmeinstuff said:


> One thing I found that helps with gas mileage, as well as driving more conservatively, shift your AT into neutral when slowing down or stopped at lights etc. When in drive the transmission loads up the engine significantly and since it's idling it is in arguably its most inefficient operating mode.


you missed the point like a sailor walking off a pier in Seattle to catch a boat docked in New York.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

essenmeinstuff said:


> I curious why you think this.
> 
> I would assume, all things being equal, that foot off the gas, engine at idle and coasting in neutral would use less gas then forcing the engine to some higher RPM through engine braking? More rpm, same air volume, means slightly more fuel to maintain correct fa ratio?


did ya just guess at that one?

your assumption is entirely wrong because fuel/air ratio is not a fixed amount in a fuel injected car. higher rpm has nothing to do with fuel consumption, however resistance to the motor does.

however, gasoline is also a coolant, so there is a minimum. essentially, there is no difference there because they have essentially the same energy need for the motor. ICEs cannot reverse energy flow. So you are both wrong, unless you have an auto trans. holding the brake at a red light does cause drag in the torque converter.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

indigosky said:


> You forgot a big one... Don't eat meat. Seriously.


yes, yes, you are entirely correct. If I listed them all, I would have sounded even more preachy than already.

however, i do like to say do not eat _farmed _meat. with white-tails hovering around 200% carrying capacity around these parts, they are good eatin that actually helps forest health. Ducks are good too, but getting more rare. Turkeys are moving in recently, think im gonna whack a flock of those this year.


----------



## bigpedaler (Jan 29, 2007)

gave up my car three years ago. bike everywhere unless the traction isn't there, then i ride the bus.

live in a 1700sf house...with 8 other people, my family. (now, if i could get them to conserve a few things....)

disagree that cfl's are sh** if you drive even 1 mile to work; whether you use the cfl or not, you're still driving, still using all that gasoline, so save where you can. my cfl usage saves me a buttload on the electric bill every month.... (btw -- 'cfl' is compact fluorescent light, for those that don't know)

as much as some of my family doesn't like it, my sister & i are in agreement -- no a/c in the house -- open windows & the occasional box fan.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 3, 2005)

The only thing green about this thread is the money Big Gubmint is gonna collect from the little guy.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

The original post asked what people could do as individuals. I think each of us has to look at our personal situation and see what we can do to lessen our impact and live more lightly, that is more efficiently, less wastefully, and looking at the larger picture of the choices we make.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

bikerfish said:


> ...WHY so many farms are owned by corporations... because it's just incredibly difficult for the family farms to survive in todays culture. So I will drop the subject at that because this is really not the direction I wanted to go with this thread.


Hang on there, I think it's more relevant than not. A people not self-sufficient is only acceptable when the society as a whole is. This is what made the Agricultural Revolution work ten thousand years ago, and what enabled humans to specialize and work as societies. Now, however, thanks to a total failure on a massive scale of our Government to act in the best interest of the majority of its people, we're no longer self sufficient as a society either, though we have every ability to be. It's because health and solving hunger is not the point of the current system we've got in place. Welcome to capitalism baby! The system that makes the most money, wins. And what makes the most money is not a population well fed with fresh, clean, healthy food from dedicated, hard-working independent farmers. We could easily have this, with the resources we're squandering today, but then, you'd hear the profiteers cry about shades of communism.

Sure, the vegetarians have the numbers and love to blab about them, like for every pound of meat that makes it to your mouth, the resources required to produce it could have yielded a hundred pounds of consumable grains & veggies instead, which have none of the negative health problems (& eventually costs) associated with meat consumption either... etc, etc... all that old stuff we've heard a hundred times, but don't care about, because if we don't see a problem actually happening visually, we don't really consider it real.

But instead of crabbing about it (yeah, like I did here. hm.), or boohooing yet another of Americas great perils, I decided to try fixing it. I (gasp) planted a freaking garden! The ten by fifteen garden yielded far more than our household could eat. We gave the rest away to neighbors and the hungry, and took some to farmers markets to barter with for eggs and yes, venison sausage. Easy, and cheap cheap cheap. Also, really kind of fun, when you're out there growing your food, watering & weeding & chatting away. Watching the sun go down through the tomato plants and corn, while nibbling a glass of wine... thoroughly beautiful. No reason more people can't do this.

As with all of these issues, the solution is "Do-It-Yerself!", and don't make a mess you wouldn't want in your backyard doing it.


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*CFL bulbs*



bigpedaler said:


> my cfl usage saves me a buttload on the electric bill every month.... (btw -- 'cfl' is compact fluorescent light, for those that don't know)


 I do not know how much is in them, but there IS mercury in the cfl bulbs. I am sure that at some point it will be illegal to throw them in the trash.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

noslogan said:


> I do not know how much is in them, but there IS mercury in the cfl bulbs. I am sure that at some point it will be illegal to throw them in the trash.


It already is illegal to trash them in California. They are legally "universal waste", which is a category sort of like low grade hazardous waste. There are companies that recycle the cfls, as well as traditional tube fluorescent lamps. Recycling is a reasonable option for big companies, but kind of a nuisance for the average homeowner or small business, as the lamps have to be handled carefully and separately.

There is a small dot of mercury in each cfl, about the size of the ball in a ball point pen.
I saw an interesting interview with the CEO of a cfl company. He regards them as a transition technolgy, and thinks LEDs are the future.


----------



## Method of Rhythm (Nov 20, 2007)

Warp said:


> Problem is not only in Africa... Just tell me of one country that is self-sufficient (meaning their soil can produce all the resources needed to feed their population) energy and food wise.


One of the most fertile regions in the world is able (may not be doing it, but able) to sustain itself agriculturally off its soil.

U.S.A.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

Method of Rhythm said:


> One of the most fertile regions in the world is able (may not be doing it, but able) to sustain itself agriculturally off its soil.
> 
> U.S.A.


What about energy??


----------



## Method of Rhythm (Nov 20, 2007)

Drill Alaska. I don't seriously mean it, but I wanted to give you a legit answer.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

Method of Rhythm said:


> Drill Alaska. I don't seriously mean it, but I wanted to give you a legit answer.


I don't think that's enough... for enough time, I mean.

There's no such thing as a self-sufficient country. Not nowadays.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

f2f4 said:


> I am. NJ to Moab, then through all the spots in CO (Frisco, Durango, Great Sand Dunes, Fruita, etc), then back. About a month, and about 4-5,000 miles of driving when it is all said and done.
> 
> I'd fly there to make less of an impact, but we have so much gear to bring we'd be spending far too much on extra luggage fees (plus the hassle of it all being lost).


Yes, you're not the only one. I'll be traveling unnecessarily too, but until then I'll feel good about myself by eating locally-grown organic produce that I got from the farmer's market, sipping organic cappuccinos, commuting by carbon fiber bike, and recycling my mountains of chit.

That is, until it's time to recreate. I'll load up my $4000 bike onto my $30,000 car, fill it with $2000 in performance clothing and gear, and drive halfway across the country at $3.69/gallon in order to ride new terrain that I track on my wrist-GPS. While I'm there supporting the local economy I'll be sure to buy some souvenirs and eat out at restaurants for $30 per person each night. Then I'll burn up some electricity sharing the experience (it was amaaaaazing!) with my friends on high-speed internet.

Nothing stands in the way of having fun.


----------



## winchboy (May 2, 2006)

chequamagon said:


> because loosely defined, that is called genocide.


 I thought that was their prefered form of government, silly me.....


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

*LOL!...good stuff.*



Nat said:


> Yes, you're not the only one. I'll be traveling unnecessarily too, but until then I'll feel good about myself by eating locally-grown organic produce that I got from the farmer's market, sipping organic cappuccinos, commuting by carbon fiber bike, and recycling my mountains of chit.
> 
> That is, until it's time to recreate. I'll load up my $4000 bike onto my $30,000 car, fill it with $2000 in performance clothing and gear, and drive halfway across the country at $3.69/gallon in order to ride new terrain that I track on my wrist-GPS. While I'm there supporting the local economy I'll be sure to buy some souvenirs and eat out at restaurants for $30 per person each night. Then I'll burn up some electricity sharing the experience (it was amaaaaazing!) with my friends on high-speed internet.
> 
> Nothing stands in the way of having fun.


Nat, I didn't have you pegged as a yuppie! You left out the part where you're staying out at that dude ranch near Moab, drinking $100-a-bottle wine every evening on the veranda.

I see the population issue that you and I touched on in another post surfaced again. I can attest to the fact that I sleep soundly at night knowing that I have reduced my carbon footprint and otherwise vile impact on the earth by consciously deciding not to have children. No, I'm not a eunuch...been married to the same woman for 35 years, and it was a mutual decision. Man, I can burn fossil fuel like there's no tomorrow, as I justify my impact by calculating the potential impact my lineage "would have" caused in the big scheme of environmental issues. However, I've been reading Al Gore's book and some other sources searching for the mathematical formula that my lack of offspring brings to the table so that I can responsibly assure that I do not exceed my "allotment". Anyone have any figures on that?


----------



## FeloniousDunk (Apr 30, 2007)

noslogan said:


> I do not know how much is in them, but there IS mercury in the cfl bulbs. I am sure that at some point it will be illegal to throw them in the trash.


I'm not an expert like some claim to be, but I've read that the amount of mercury in a typical CFL is far less than the amount that would be released into the atmosphere by a coal fired power plant while making the electicity to power a typical incandesent light bulb minus the power to run a compariable CFL. You can read about it here. http://environmentaldefenseblogs.or...l_mercury-2/?gclid=CNbCvLSVv5ICFQ4aHgodEz5EYg

If anyone knows differantly, I'd love to see a reference to a good study showing the math.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

TNC said:


> Nat, I didn't have you pegged as a yuppie! You left out the part where you're staying out at that dude ranch near Moab, drinking $100-a-bottle wine every evening on the veranda.


Relaxing in my $80 Patagonia organic cotton pants, reading Omnivore's Dilemma...



TNC said:


> I see the population issue that you and I touched on in another post surfaced again. I can attest to the fact that I sleep soundly at night knowing that I have reduced my carbon footprint and otherwise vile impact on the earth by consciously deciding not to have children. No, I'm not a eunuch...been married to the same woman for 35 years, and it was a mutual decision. Man, I can burn fossil fuel like there's no tomorrow, as I justify my impact by calculating the potential impact my lineage "would have" caused in the big scheme of environmental issues. However, I've been reading Al Gore's book and some other sources searching for the mathematical formula that my lack of offspring brings to the table so that I can responsibly assure that I do not exceed my "allotment". Anyone have any figures on that?


Personally, having kids was the greatest thing to happen to me, and all other things became insignificant, but we each should try to do our part for the earth where we feel we're able. I shake my head though when I see people being self-righteous about their choices, feeling better than their neighbors when chances are they are guilty of something-or-other themselves.

It's humorous that some of our exhortations (Buy a smaller house! Buy less stuff! Eat less meat! Ride a bike! Recycle cans! Wash your clothes by hand!) are choices that the wealthy get to make. For many people without wealth, those are things they do not by choice but because that's all they can do just to not die.

We, on the other hand, get to choose to do those things, and at the same time also ride our Fox shocked, platform-valved, rising rate, sealed bearing pivoted, King headsetted, Industry9-wheeled wunderbikes on exotic terrain during our 4 weeks vacation per year away from our white-collar jobs. But it makes us feel less guilty to pretend we live simply.

When it comes down to it, we as a group have great wealth and are extremely consumptive.

God I love to rant.


----------



## kristian (Jan 20, 2004)

chequamagon said:


> well then refute the BS one by one and lets have at it. I got a master's in this stuff. bring it on.


OK, define the "toxicity" you mention regarding hybrid batteries and why that is an issue. A nickel metal hydride battery produced in a modern factory and recycled properly has very low toxicity. Lithium Ion batteries will have even less toxicity. Bot are a whole lot better than the sealed lead acid battery that is starting the old Honda you are advocating...

BTW, that old Honda won't get 35mpg in the city anyways unless you are a serious hypermiler, and I'm getting mid 50s in my "new" Honda in the city.


----------



## Dekes (Jan 3, 2007)

Nat said:


> Actually I heard that too (that leaving it in gear uses less fuel than coasting). It had something to do with the car's ECU (computer) knowing what you were doing. It knows that you are coming to a stop and will shut off flow to the fuel injectors, whereas in neutral it keeps feeding the injectors. Your method of coasting may have been applicable back in the old days before learning-ECU's. I learned that on a popular car site from some seemingly knowledgeable folk.


I heared it on an info-mercial on TV by volkswagen. And my onboard computer indicates 0 liter/100km (infinite mpg) when i roll out in gear. At freecoasting it indicates 0.9 liter/100km.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

Junk mail has gotta use huge amount of unnecessary energy.

Tell them to eff off and sign up right here.

http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs4-junk.htm

I did it a few weeks ago and I've stopped getting the never ending Comcast crap and credit offers.

The funny thing is when you get taken off the list they try to convince you you're being bad to the environment as shopping from physical catalogs saves you driving to the store. I guess they've never heard of the internet. Scum of the earth these people. Sell their own mother if they could make a buck.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

*was true a long time ago...*



essenmeinstuff said:


> I curious why you think this.
> 
> I would assume, all things being equal, that foot off the gas, engine at idle and coasting in neutral would use less gas then forcing the engine to some higher RPM through engine braking? More rpm, same air volume, means slightly more fuel to maintain correct fa ratio?
> 
> However I did drive a rental car (ford) recently that flipped out if the vehicle was moving and the transmission in neutral, and reved the engine to about 3krpm...


but modern cars cut off the gas completely and shut the intake completely when you take your foot off the gas, car in gear and not dead stopped.

idle uses a very small amount of gas anyway.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

pimpbot said:


> but modern cars cut off the gas completely and shut the intake completely when you take your foot off the gas, car in gear and not dead stopped.
> 
> idle uses a very small amount of gas anyway.


wrong - o.

no car will cut off gas and intake completely. that would make the engine stop, as well as lock up. remember folks, gasoline is a fuel, but also a coolant. that is why there is always unburned being sent out the exhaust pipe.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

chequamagon said:


> wrong - o.
> 
> no car will cut off gas and intake completely. that would make the engine stop, as well as lock up. remember folks, gasoline is a fuel, but also a coolant. that is why there is always unburned being sent out the exhaust pipe.


Engine seize??
I don't think so... engines don't cool down just like that. Maybe if you keep feeding gasoline without a spark to make it burn... but if you stop gas intake, only thing in the engine's combustion chamber will be air and ... uh... air.

Then you have the oil, which is slower to cool down than gasoline and as long as the engine gives power to the oil pump, it will flow through the engine avoiding seizure.

I do agree, though that the engine most probably doesn't stop completely and it should still be using some gas... Maybe firing half of the cylinders or something alike.

I have a friend who works in car aero-thermal dynamics at one of the big ones, I'll ask him about it.


----------



## thebigred67 (Mar 29, 2005)

I reuse the containers that food comes in. Like the big yogurt containers. The old pickle jar becomes a drinking glass.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

Warp said:


> Engine seize??
> I don't think so... engines don't cool down just like that.


precisely, the seize would be from getting too hot. Air/Fuel ratio is making sure you have enough gas for it to also be acting as a coolant. If you lean out your A/F, you will get better performance, but if you go too lean, it will be combusting all available gas, and then overheating the motor. Thus, is why when you see people who use carbureted motors, they will have a temperature sensor on the exhause manifold, testing exhaust gas temp. Too hot, you better richen up or your pistons will become one with the cylinder walls.



Warped said:


> Maybe if you keep feeding gasoline without a spark to make it burn... but if you stop gas intake, only thing in the engine's combustion chamber will be air and ... uh... air.


Again, you do not understand what A/F ratio does. It is not a constant. Stopping gasoline entirely can cause the motor to overheat, and will also cause the motor to lose power. Even though you are coasting down, the motor is still firing and "under power", even though it has to create no torque. If you have a manual trans car, go out and try it yourself. Get moving, start coasting around 50mph, downshift to around 4000rpm, and shut the vehicle off. Then you will understand what happens when the motor stops firing and receiving fuel, and you will understand why cars do not do this.


Wrap said:


> Then you have the oil, which is slower to cool down than gasoline and as long as the engine gives power to the oil pump, it will flow through the engine avoiding seizure.


I dont think you understand how a 4-stroke motor works. There is no oil in the combustion chamber. And it does not "flow through the motor". So wrong. Fail.



Warp said:


> I do agree, though that the engine most probably doesn't stop completely and it should still be using some gas... Maybe firing half of the cylinders or something alike.
> 
> I have a friend who works in car aero-thermal dynamics at one of the big ones, I'll ask him about it.


Yup! Gasoline is a coolant for the cylinder walls, as well as being a fuel.

Firing on half of the cylinders is how some motors work to save fuel at cruising speed (such as Cadillac Northstar), but not most motors, and definately none of them on coasting. Have you ever felt a motor that was not firing? It feels nothing like coasting down. All cylinders are still firing, and still getting some (albeit small) amount of fuel. Even those motors that can cut out cylinders for economy, they still have very small amounts of fuel going in, and the valves are still operating.

Oil is lubricant for the piston rings, piston rod, and all apparatus down below. There is no oil above the piston rings. When there is, that is the term "blown engine", in that oil gets into the combustion chamber, burns, and causes the white smoke out the exhaust.


----------



## kristian (Jan 20, 2004)

chequamagon said:


> wrong - o.
> 
> no car will cut off gas and intake completely. that would make the engine stop, as well as lock up. remember folks, gasoline is a fuel, but also a coolant. that is why there is always unburned being sent out the exhaust pipe.


No, actually you are wrong. I can shut off the intake valves and cruise without using any gas very easily in the Civic by manipulating the gas pedal and getting into glide mode. Honda has a great video on the web demonstrating how the engine does this--it's part of the VTEC used in the hybrid's engine.

It isn't as easy to do in most cars, but I can confirm that the Mariner will also go into a no-gas, quasi-jack brake mode on long descents too (evidenced by a reading of 9999mpg on my Scan Gauge). However, most of the time with my foot off the gas, I get readings of 160-190mpg on downhills so there is some gas going in. The car doesn't have a true neutral though so I can't confirm if there is a difference between gas flow in neutral and "D".


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

kristian said:


> No, actually you are wrong. I can shut off the intake valves and cruise without using any gas very easily in the Civic by manipulating the gas pedal and getting into glide mode. Honda has a great video on the web demonstrating how the engine does this--it's part of the VTEC used in the hybrid's engine.
> 
> It isn't as easy to do in most cars, but I can confirm that the Mariner will also go into a no-gas, quasi-jack brake mode on long descents too (evidenced by a reading of 9999mpg on my Scan Gauge). However, most of the time with my foot off the gas, I get readings of 160-190mpg on downhills so there is some gas going in. The car doesn't have a true neutral though so I can't confirm if there is a difference between gas flow in neutral and "D".


OK genius. You are talking about Hybrids. I am talking about ICEs. Everything you say is correct, but has no bearing on the current discussion. Those vehicles are engineered to do such things by use of special by-passes and the assist of the electric motors when needed.

It is literally impossible to shut off the intake valves on a normal ICE due to the simple mechanics of how cams work. In addition, doing so would cause a vacuum in the motor, causing it to stop.

And watching the video on the web is hardly giving you an honest understanding of how these systems actually work. Ive watched the vid, it basically dumbs down the workings of many different systems to a kindergarten level.


----------



## klohiq (Mar 22, 2008)

Warp said:


> Engine seize??
> I don't think so... engines don't cool down just like that. Maybe if you keep feeding gasoline without a spark to make it burn... but if you stop gas intake, only thing in the engine's combustion chamber will be air and ... uh... air.
> 
> Then you have the oil, which is slower to cool down than gasoline and as long as the engine gives power to the oil pump, it will flow through the engine avoiding seizure.
> ...


The engine won't seize, but depending on your speed and the compression ratio of the motor it may lock up your drive wheels. If you had a decompresser like some motorcycles then you would be fine, though the engine would obviously stall because it wouldn't be doing what it's supposed to do for two of the four strokes (no compression and no explosion...).

Someone mentioned that the engine will seize or have issues because it would be running too lean, well without fuel it won't be running lean at all. It will stop, like it does when you switch the ignition off. Have you ever run out of fuel? The car doesn't explode, it just sputters and finally once the injectors can't throw any meaningful amount of fuel out, it dies. And then magically comes back to life with more gas, no harm done (other than maybe to the fuel pump).

*If you put the car in neutral, you won't save much of any gas, though your brakes might last longer on an auto. If you actually want to get fuel saving benefits, why are you even bothering with autos in the first place? Most manuals get better fuel economy, are cheaper to maintain, and cost less when you buy them off the lot, other than maybe requiring a slight bit of effort for you lazy cage drivers...is there any downside to having a stick??? Plus you can bump start them if you kill the battery, speed shift if the clutch goes and do awesome burnouts...and much more stuff that an auto will never be able to do*


----------



## Maddog (Jul 4, 2004)

I agree Canuck! Population reduction ultimately leads to population elimination. Stalin, Hitler, the war lords and dictators in Africa and more have sought to systematically eliminate whole races of people; usually ethnic minorites, the disabled and/or the elderly. It's not just history either. China practices 1 child per couple now with forced abortions for #2 and optional abortion if #1 is found to be a girl. The idea is in sci-fi too. Remember Logan's Run with Farrah Fawcet and Jenny Ag-something? You turned 30, your palm light turned on and the government zapped you with a death ray at "Festival". How about Soylent Green? Charlton Heston "It's people! It's people!"

The "too many people" crowd should carefully consider what can develop from that thought especially when moral standards are set aside. If they're really serious they should consider volunteering themselves. Dr. Jack Kavorkian is out of jail. I hope none of them turns into another uni-bomber!


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

*Bingo!*



kristian said:


> OK, define the "toxicity" you mention regarding hybrid batteries and why that is an issue. A nickel metal hydride battery produced in a modern factory and recycled properly has very low toxicity. Lithium Ion batteries will have even less toxicity...


I keep hearing battery toxicity being raised as a concern with hybrids, and you nailed the thing that is being overlooked. Even regular car batteries get recycled as a rule; in fact, these days, they are a target for metal thieves in some areas.


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

HarryCallahan said:


> I keep hearing battery toxicity being raised as a concern with hybrids, and you nailed the thing that is being overlooked. Even regular car batteries get recycled as a rule; in fact, these days, they are a target for metal thieves in some areas.


Again, you guys are not comparing evenly. Yes, a normal car battery is also very toxic, but it weighs 30lbs as compared to 300lbs.

It is also not about the contents of the cell as someone else said, but about the heavy metals that are produced in the production of the chemicals and materials inside of the battery. The batteries are very similar to cell-phone batteries, and look at the campaigns to get people to recycle those.... It is for a good reason.

Yeah, Ive done a lot of criticism here. My solution is a diesel/electric hybrid that utilizes a small fuel cell for storage, a rooftop solar cell for non-moving charging, and a programmable electric system where you can tell the car to stay on just electric for short in town trips. Should average around 200 mpg when used 50% city, 50% highway for the average american that makes most trips 2 miles or less. And it is not a dream, it is perfectly feasible with today's technology.


----------



## sportsaddict99 (Mar 2, 2008)

I planted a tree today does that count?


----------



## chequamagon (Oct 4, 2006)

sportsaddict99 said:


> I planted a tree today does that count?


Yes, thank you.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Ah. The self-perpetuating chemistry of life, and the self-perpetuating argument for and against it.

Breeding a population beyond what your natural world can support. Are you really no more civilized than this? What a failure, the human mind, if it's not even capable of saving it's race from destruction by the two simplest of basic instincts.

Stop, for a second, thinking of everything from an entirely human-centric, social perspective. The relatively lighthearted fun and games of Hitler, Stalin and China are nothing, compared to brutal, heavyhanded tactics the natural world uses to keep its populations in line. Our best scientists are currently skirting them for you, but A, all that does is raise the stakes, and B, it's a game we're only able to play defense on. The longer the game goes on, the higher the stakes, and eventually, when nature sneaks a couple past us, it's game over. And nature always wins. (Has to do with us relying on it, and not the other way round).

Or, go ahead. Kill off everything, then die horribly yourselves because you were too self-centered and shortsighted to realize that you depended on it all for your own lives, even though every freaking sign from every possible angle of the natural world told you so in advance.

Really, who cares? Completely throwing anything resembling ethics or morals out the window, I could say I don't care about anything but humans, and our own short-term gratification. But then, I'd probably also say it's your offspring that will get to experience it, not mine, and they will come from a long line of people who deserve the consequences of their actions.

------------ The Options! -------------

Option 1: Say "Hey, it's nature. Eat, reproduce, die. I love my dopamine hits, and I'm gonna keep my mind chasing them, screwing like nuts and making lotsa little me's in mine own image to achieve the closest thing I can to immortality, regardless of the disasterous consequences. Damn the torpedoes, here we go!"

Option 2: Reach that golden plateau of evolution where you've advanced beyond being a slave to your biology, transcend the "birth-eat-breed-death" routine of the pathetic banana slug and human animal with disdain. But then, don't pass on your super amazing hyper-evolved genes & revelations either, and fail to make a lasting positive contribution anyway.

Option 3: Attempt to out-breed the mindless zombies who are unable to overcome their preprogramming, or wean themselves off their neuron receptors dope feed. How? Reproduce _in spite_ of your biological inclination to do so. Except, this has the same net effect as #1, which it so entirely opposes.

Rock, paper, scissors.

Now where are the pretty mountain bike pictures???


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

chequamagon said:


> Yeah, Ive done a lot of criticism here.


Yeah you have. Threw a few punches at everyone on this segment.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

sportsaddict99 said:


> I planted a tree today does that count?


Yup, and true to the original point of the thread. I lived in Sacramento 20 years ago, where it gets damn hot in the summer. The local power company would give property owners shade trees to plant on the east and west sides of their properties, because the shade lowered demand for energy. Buying trees was more cost effective than building another power plant.

If you live in an urban area with much rainfall, trees serve another very useful function. Trees soak up lots of water, and have a real positive impact on rainfall retention and minimizing stormwater runoff. In other words, trees are cheaper than new storm drains.


----------



## derek2 (Dec 4, 2004)

get yourself an xtracycle and park your car


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

chequamagon said:


> Oil is lubricant for the piston rings, piston rod, and all apparatus down below. There is no oil above the piston rings. When there is, that is the term "blown engine", in that oil gets into the combustion chamber, burns, and causes the white smoke out the exhaust.


That's what I meant... I'm no expert (which is very obvious)... And I also forget the little fact that while the engine is not firing, most probably the oil system will not work (most engines power the oil pump with a pulley moved by the crankshaft).

I never meant the oil runs through the combustion chamber...

But it's the oil that lubricates everything below the combustion chamber what avoids the engine to seize.

As for gasoline as coolant, I understand your point... But I think you're considering a total failure of the cooling system. Even if the engine stops firing and stops at all, what will avoid the engine to seize is the cooling system.

I'm positive on that, as once I blew a hose (that doesn't sound good  ) and lost all coolant in the cooling system and my engine overheated... No gasoline could cool it down. No other damage to my carburated Golf other than the hose. I stopped immediately as I saw the engine temp to hit the sky. But I bet the engine would have seized.

Klohiq... I see your point and I actually misunderstood Chequa's "lock up" for "seizure"... My bad.


----------



## f2f4 (Aug 10, 2007)

Nat said:


> Yes, you're not the only one. I'll be traveling unnecessarily too, but until then I'll feel good about myself by eating locally-grown organic produce that I got from the farmer's market, sipping organic cappuccinos, commuting by carbon fiber bike, and recycling my mountains of chit.
> 
> That is, until it's time to recreate. I'll load up my $4000 bike onto my $30,000 car, fill it with $2000 in performance clothing and gear, and drive halfway across the country at $3.69/gallon in order to ride new terrain that I track on my wrist-GPS. While I'm there supporting the local economy I'll be sure to buy some souvenirs and eat out at restaurants for $30 per person each night. Then I'll burn up some electricity sharing the experience (it was amaaaaazing!) with my friends on high-speed internet.
> 
> Nothing stands in the way of having fun.


I'm not sure if you are mocking me or agreeing with me, but either way your post was great.

Except I wish my car was $30k, and my bike was $4k, and I had $2k worth of gear! Haha.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

f2f4 said:


> I'm not sure if you are mocking me or agreeing with me, but either way your post was great.
> 
> Except I wish my car was $30k, and my bike was $4k, and I had $2k worth of gear! Haha.


I was mocking myself and anyone else who pretends to be an environmental mouthpiece until it's time to ride bikes, then suddenly and hypocritically has no problem with burning up a bunch of gas to do a completely unnecessary activity in a faraway place (i.e., probably everyone on this thread). Nothing personal.


----------



## transient (May 6, 2006)

I don't know if it's already been posted, but the best "Green idea" for the everyday person is to create dialogues like this one. If everyone starts thinking about the little things they can do, eventually with a little luck, things will change or at least move backwards a little slower. Even the mouth breathers might catch on eventually.


----------



## tomk96 (Nov 10, 2004)

transient said:


> Even the mouth breathers might catch on eventually.


nice


----------



## klohiq (Mar 22, 2008)

Maddog said:


> I agree Canuck! Population reduction ultimately leads to population elimination. Stalin, Hitler, the war lords and dictators in Africa and more have sought to systematically eliminate whole races of people; usually ethnic minorites, the disabled and/or the elderly. It's not just history either. China practices 1 child per couple now with forced abortions for #2 and optional abortion if #1 is found to be a girl. The idea is in sci-fi too. Remember Logan's Run with Farrah Fawcet and Jenny Ag-something? You turned 30, your palm light turned on and the government zapped you with a death ray at "Festival". How about Soylent Green? Charlton Heston "It's people! It's people!"
> 
> The "too many people" crowd should carefully consider what can develop from that thought especially when moral standards are set aside. If they're really serious they should consider volunteering themselves. Dr. Jack Kavorkian is out of jail. I hope none of them turns into another uni-bomber!


So if you guys seriously believe there is no correlation between population size and the amount of irreversible damage to the evironment it causes, we should be able to support an infinite population. Let's try to outbreed bacteria...

One mentioned that by not having as many kids the next Einstein might not come about to solve our problems. Well despite the possible truth to this, it raises an great idea: maybe we should reproduce as quickly as possible to exponentially increase the chances that a new genius will be born.

Population control to some degree has always happened. State and Federal assistance doesn't cover an infinite amount of kids, child support also has limits (if the children are all from the same guy), etc etc. In most cultures today there comes a time when people can't afford to have more children...Should they be given the green light to have more? The next Einstein might not exist without this whore....

Put any spin on it that you want, any living creature can only have a certain population for a given habitat and we are rapidly approaching that breaking point. Becoming a vegetarian or any other idiotic idea will not fix this huge problem.


----------



## Warp (May 24, 2004)

klohiq said:


> Population control to some degree has always happened


Yeah, but since the sabertooth tiger are extinct and we can control most of the ills ... we're growing faster than the Earth can sustain.

It's harsh to say that we're too many and some control has to be done... But it's the truth. We may not want to face it, but it's the truth.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 3, 2005)

Just a thought. If you outlaw birth, aren't you breading for outlaws?


----------



## Breakurnees (Dec 13, 2007)

The earth will be fine. 

Its us we have to worry about. 

(Anonymous- I think breaded outlaws might taste good with ketchup.)


----------



## ProfGumby (Feb 27, 2008)

Great topic!

As for me, the gloom and doom gets a little much once in a while, and some of the Green Alternatives can create more problems than they solve, for now. But I think to make an omlette one must break a few eggs.

I will not believe the US Gvt (Fed/State and Local levels) is/are really considering the environment till I see a few more realistic sized vehicles that get 80 mpg. Or more cycle lanes and trails in cities that make it safe for a rider instead of taking ones life in ones hands with discourteous or dangerous motorists. Inattentive drivers are as dangerous as drunk drivers, I'd like to see a few cell phones rammed up a few backsides..I'd like to see better law enforcement of these drivers as well as a public awareness campaign....I digress....

As to what I am doing? My lawn is mowed once every other week instead of every week. (Gas mower) I grow a lot of my own vegetables, have a flower bed or two and love my big ol Maple tree in my back yard. I compost all biodegradable waste (aside from meat and fish scraps) and lawn and garden clippings, use water bottles over and over, also have a water filter to avoid buying so many bottles and recycle papers and plastics. And I am riding my bike(s) more and more instead of using my car. 

I don't know if all this amounts to a hill of beans, but it makes me feel like I am doing something


----------



## Fat Bob (Mar 5, 2004)

Getting back on task. You don't have to sell everything you own and go on an oxygen diet. It's all about doing little things every day. Many have given some great ideas. 

My wife and I have started small, and are incorporating more and more. It's a bit of a snowball once it starts rolling down the hill it's just builds speed and keeps increasing. 

*We started by going veggie, this was more of a moral thing for us
*My wife took some of my old (torn) work shirts and made them into grocery bags that we use when we go to the grocery store
*We now have converted all lightbulbs to compact florescent (Looking into LED's)
* I work from Home and teleconference as much as possible.
* We built a small rain water collection barrel (55 gallons) that we use to water our plants & veggies
* We've started our own garden
* I replace airfilters monthly and have a programmable thermostat
* We're trying to eat more seasonally and try to purchase from local farmers markets when possible

Again, there is no right or wrong. If you're already thinking about it, go ahead and incorporate small changes to your life. Once you start you'll realize it's not all that difficult, and with it being "stylish" these days it's easier than ever.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Anonymous said:


> Just a thought. If you outlaw birth, aren't you breading for outlaws?


Hmm. Yes A, and in that sense, I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing at this point. "Anyone so mindless that they'll follow my rules not to breed, doesn't deserve to breed! We don't need more sheep genes!"

I should have been a Ceasar.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

Ask for your coffee in a mug, unless you're getting it to go.


----------



## tomk96 (Nov 10, 2004)

Fat Bob said:


> My wife and I have started small, and are incorporating more and more.


I think that is the key. it's easy to make small changes. eventually it no longer feels like you made a change and you make another and another. sure it takes longer to get to where you may want to be, but the key is to get there.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

derek2 said:


> get yourself an xtracycle and park your car


I was in Mexico City last week. We were having drinks on one of the plazas in one of the nieghborhoods ( Tlalpan) Lo and behold, a HERD of extracycles came spinning by. It looked like a group doing some bike touring. Very cool.


----------



## matteus (Mar 27, 2005)

chequamagon said:


> I got a master's in this stuff. bring it on.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Was that from "Place" University?... stuff... hahahahahahahahaha


----------



## Guest (Apr 9, 2008)

Steve71 said:


> Ask for your coffee in a mug, unless you're getting it to go.


Huh? Why not bring your own mug and get your coffee to go in that?


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

indigosky said:


> Huh? Why not bring your own mug and get your coffee to go in that?


For sure, if it's a regular thing you can bring your own mug for coffee to go. However how many people sit in star bucks drinking out of paper cups. Much less waste if they asked for a mug no?


----------



## mondaycurse (Nov 24, 2005)

I go to high school and so far I've saved a ream of paper this year by doing my writings on the back of old handouts. I know, I know, one whole ream doesn't make the slightest difference, but imagine the whole school doing it. What if the whole country used the backs of handouts? It's amazing how easy it is to save, but somehow I'm stereotyped as "poor" because I don't carry a notebook of paper with me. They cost about 80 cents and if I wanted one I would get one thank you very much. 
But I think that's part of the green opposition: personal status. Whether it is "I'm too mighty for this small-sized car; I'd really like a ford 350 with an 8-inch lift kit and knobby tires. Ah hell, put a hemi in it, I ain't no sissy!" or "I would buy a fuel-efficient car, but BMW hasn't released one yet." "Curly lightbulbs? What are these people thinking? They completely ruin the aesthetics of my 400 sq. ft. living room." In fact, body showers, which use up to 15 gallons of water per minute (2-2.5 is decent) are one of the hottest items at Home Depot. People are generally too consumed in their consumerism to realize that a 7-seat 13-MPG SUV is too big for their one child (my sister is one of these :madman and that a 150 sq ft bathroom is all show. And don't get me started on the 4-car heated garage .


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

mondaycurse said:


> I go to high school and so far I've saved a ream of paper this year by doing my writings on the back of old handouts. I know, I know, one whole ream doesn't make the slightest difference, but imagine the whole school doing it... .


I read a study recently where a university simply changed the default side margins on all their printers to .75 inches instead of the usual 1.25 inches. With no other changes to their printing practices, the savings to the U in paper purchases alone was well into 5 figures. Sorry I don't recall which university at the moment, but if anyone is interested, pm me and I'll look it up


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Regarding Compact Flourescent Lightbulbs. Dangerous, Recyclable etc...

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=are-compact-fluorescent-lightbulbs-dangerous&sc=rss

Sciam is probably the best source of good news in the world.


----------

