My post about all of us being responsible for the oil spill generated quite a bit of discussion over the last few days. Any time this issue comes up (on my site and every other one I’ve visited), there are always people who are quick to point out why their particular situation makes it impossible to drive less. Cars are so much a part of the American way of life that it makes sense that people will become defensive if they have to start questioning their dependence on cars. But rather than dwell on the situations where being car-free is impossible, I much prefer to focus on solutions. Cortney pointed out that cities aren’t going to start creating ways to make alternative transportation safer and more convenient unless they see a genuine need. If your area isn’t safe for biking or walking, are you going to every town meeting, writing letters to council members, canvassing the neighborhood to find like-minded people who can stand with you in asking for better bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.? The things that we complain about are things we could be changing… In addition, we should be focusing on what we CAN do to lessen our dependence on oil (and our overall ecological impact) rather than the things we CAN’T do. If you can’t give up your car, you can slow down on the highway in order to improve your gas mileage. You can commit to giving up disposable items in favor of reusable ones (diapers, napkins, food storage containers, cleaning rags, even personal hygiene products). You can slowly start eliminating meat and dairy from your diet. Even if you have to drive to work everyday, you can focus on making your weekends car-free and based around activities that lessen your impact on the earth (planting a little garden to reduce your need for trucked-in food, for example) rather than going to the mall to buy more stuff. The point I’m making is that we can all make a difference. We don’t all have to follow the same path to make a difference, but we have to be aware that we need to make a difference before we will start making changes.
I mentioned driving slower as a way to conserve gasoline, and I want to expand on that just a bit in case you’re curious. Basically, gas mileage drops off significantly once you go faster than about 55 mph. I drive about 60 mph on the interstate, and I try to avoid rapid speed changes in town (coasting slowly to a stop at traffic lights, and accelerating slowly from a stop). I also do some mental math every time I fill up my gas tank, and my average mpg is always in the 32 – 35 range (for the entire tank, including both city and highway). That’s not bad for a 19 year old station wagon. It helps that my car is a 4 cylinder stick shift, but if I were to go 80 mph on the interstate and not be as conscious of avoiding rapid speed changes in town, I’m sure my mileage would drop into the mid 20s. I recognize that there are valid reasons for needing to drive sometimes, but there’s no valid reason why we can’t all slow down a bit and focus on getting as many miles as we can from a tank of gas. Don’t leave your car running when you’re parked (that’s zero mpg), don’t keep your foot on the gas right up until you have to hit the brakes at a red light, don’t try to get everywhere as fast as you can. And start calculating your actual gas mileage every time you fill up your tank (zero out the trip meter when you fill up, and then see what it’s at the next time you fill up. Divide that number by the number of gallons it takes to fill your tank and you’ll have the average mpg you got from the last tank). Make it a game to see if you can beat your last average – trust me, it becomes fun, and it will help you to remember to drive with maximum gas mileage in mind.
About 1000 people are reading this blog everyday. And if I can inspire ten or twenty or a hundred of you to start making some small changes to conserve resources, I’ll feel successful. An added bonus is that most of the things you can can do to conserve resources will also help you to save money, which is probably the reason you’re interested in my blog in the first place. So I challenge you to think of something you can do today to reduce your use of oil, water, paper products, disposable items, etc. If you come up with an idea that you think other people could do too, share it here or in whatever forum you choose to get the message out. Most importantly, have fun with it! And thank you for taking the time to think about it.
Becky says
Cars running while sitting idle is my biggest pet peeve. My mom does it on occasion and it drives me crazy (no pun intended)!
NMPatricia says
I will admit, I am one who becomes defensive when it comes to giving up driving. However, the remainder of your post allows me to feel a bit better. I really work on limiting my errands into town – and bunch them when I do. I have made a game of only driving 55 on the one stretch of freeway I drive (although it continues to bother me when people sail right past me going faster than the 55 which exceeds that speed limit), coasting to stops, coasting when possible, etc. I have cut way down on packaging, using less plastic on everything. I am practicing being a locavore as much as I can to cut down on trucking. I don’t use disposables any more except for toilet paper. Working on that one. We built an energy efficient home and our utiliites will average out to be about 0. So I think I am doing my part. However, I continue to work at having less of an impact on the earth. I have lots of things I still want to do. But since I live outside of town, can’t give up the car entirely.
chacha says
I admire the life changes you guys made to reduce your impact on the earth. It really is awesome. I think, though, that not all of us are going to be able to make changes that allow us to work from home and drive very little, without other drastic changes that have other adverse affects. I have to commute 30 miles to work each way (I had a much shorter commute of 9 miles, but got laid off). The unfortunate thing is that the train is available, but costs twice as much as driving and takes 30 minutes longer to arrange all the connections. My husband is laid off and I can’t afford to pay more to commute. So I drive. I can’t live closer without selling my house at a loss (I am underwater like many Americans – not by a lot but still) and probably would have a hard time getting another decent loan/decent house with only my income.
I think the best we can ask of people is to cut back where they can. If it’s bringing your own bags to the store, carpooling when possible, eating less meat, composting, using less water, buying second hand (so that oil isn’t used to transport goods), etc. Not everyone can easily drive less. We have been just because of job loss the last year, but I can’t cut back anymore. I can’t move closer, and it would be a huge risk for me change jobs (to possibly less stable scenario with only me working) just for a reduced commute.
alexandra says
I see your reasons for saying that if we use a car we are responsible for the oil spill, I agree with you, but it is also true that the car industry has not given us the means to go for an alternative until recently. I used to live in London where I didn’t have a car and could pretend that i was much better than all the people driving to work, I used the bus, but really unlike France the bus I took was filled with petrol and I used plastic bags to go shopping, even if I reused them, and shopping at the supermarket meant everything was packed in plastic. We use oil for too many things there are alternatives, health food stores instead of supermarkets, a basket instead of shopping bags. If the only use we had for oil was our cars it wouldn’t be so bad. Knowing all that, we have to make efforts. I drive as you say people here in rural France where I’ve moved to, think I’m a crazy green extremist. I use the car as little as possible, I shop at markets, refuse plastic bags, I eat organic or free range food that is local. All these little things have an impact. People should not think that just because they use a car they are evil or just because they don’t have one they are better. All petrol-based products add up, be frugal with your car, say no to plastic bags and go to markets, shop local, bring your own bags. Little things every day are what makes a difference.
Tree Hugger says
I switched to cloth feminine products about 3 years ago and it has made a huge difference in my life. Not only have I saved hundreds of dollars but I have also saved hundreds of disposable pads from going to the landfill so far. Did you know that in the US alone over 13 billion disposable menstrual pads and 7 million tampons are disposed of every year? Disposable pads are laden with many harmful chemicals. It was the easiest “green” change I have made!
Charlotte K says
I’ve never owned a car and I realized long ago that it would limit me but I have continued to make the choice for nearly 35 years of independent life. I have lived in cities with public transportation, and I walk a lot. I mail order a lot of what I need, because I figure that’s a common service. I don’t drive at all, so renting once in a while isn’t an option but I know people who live that way, and that’s big step.
However I stand at the bus stop every day and watch car after car after car, really, hundreds of them, drive by with one person–the driver. And most of my friends and colleagues drive everywhere when they could easily take public transport–it might take them 20 minutes longer. People simply do not want to give up control and won’t until they are forced to.
I don’t have a lot of faith in us changing our habits. I must say that right now I feel very depressed about any capacity of most Americans to see beyond their own immediate desires which they will label as needs. But I think each of us should do what we can to raise awareness and change what we can in ourselves.
I hear “oh, I can’t do that, I have kids”–and yet I see low income people riding the buses with their kids all the time. When that’s the only way to go, you go that way. It’s just selfishness and unwillingness to change.
Beth D. says
For a fun way to track your milage and cost for gas, use http://www.fuelly.com I have been using it for almost two years and it is really interesting to see the changes over time. (The cost of gas has gone up and stayed up and seeing the seasonal fluctuations in mpg is eye opening.) I think they have a phone application to make it easier, but I just write down my odometer reading on my gas receipt.
If you want to cut down significantly on oil usage, stop using anything with the ingredient “fragrance”. They are usually made from oil and cause cancer anyway, so even more reason to get rid of them.
“95% of chemicals used in perfumes and as fragrances in cosmetics are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum” http://planetgreen.discovery.com/go-green/womens-personal-care/womens-personal-care-definitions.html
Rachel says
Thank you for this post. I get upset when people who cannot give up their cars all together (and there are a lot of those people!) hide behind this fact as a barrier to making other changes for good in their lives.
I respect that not everyone can work at home and/or freelance (even if the internet tell us we all can). I don’t work from home, nor do I freelance. I am lucky enough to live in a bus line. I also respect that not everyone lives on a bus line.
However, there are other ways to cut down your car use and your impact over all. Even if you can’t give up your car – don’t shut out the possibilities of things like: carpooling, owning one car, car-free weekends, driving to a busway/subway, etc etc.
If it were all that easy – we wouldn’t rely on cars so heavily to begin with – of course they are more convenient. Of course, we all might have to slow down and ‘not get as much done’ as we wait for the bus etc.
So, I guess I just wanted to say thanks for writing this.
Lauren M says
I’ve been thinking about my driving habits a lot since the oil “spill” (more like continuous gush)… I now have my (almost SUV-sized) car for sale, with the intention of getting a smaller vehicle for winter and a scooter for my work commute in the spring/summer/fall weather. I would gladly use public transit, if the service wasn’t so dismal in my city. However, the most environmentally responsible choice we have made is to only have one child. The planet is overpopulated and just doesn’t have enough resources to sustain over 6 billion people… especially those who like to drive cars, eat animals and consume STUFF.
Leah says
excellent post! I’m commuting 45-55 minutes each way to work right now, and I am actively working on finding a no-commute option for the fall (tho it might involve moving). And I do feel so guilty that there’s no transit option. On the plus, my commute is entirely highway driving.
I’ve been calculating my gas mileage since the day I owned my car. 60-65 mph gets me the best mileage, and sticking with 70 drops my mileage by perhaps 1-2 mpg. I try to never drive faster than 70. However, I have a question for you: do you find that people frequently tailgate you or zoom around you only to come to the exact same stoplight? Since I’ve been committed to driving more carefully, I notice this happens really frequently. Or, say I’m passing someone but only driving 70 (it is the speed limit, after all) — I get tailgated almost every time when I’m doing that. I really wish we could spread the word better about the benefits of driving at or below the speed limit. I learned in a refresher driver’s ed glass — otherwise known as a required class due to a speeding ticket — and I’m so glad they were able to educate me. I wish everyone had to take the same refresher.
I’m also with treehugger on alternative menstrual products. I use a divacup, and I can honestly say it’s changed my life for the better just by using it. And that’s not even including all the money and waste I save. It’s just a much more convenient, simple way to deal with my monthly time.
Melissa Smith says
My husband and I are fortunate enough to have flexible schedules and jobs to only have one car. I work at home, he works 15 miles away. And even though it’s a long commute, at least only 1 car is doing it. He also saves on oil usage by walking during the day for his job. His job requires moving all over a college campus and although he has use of a vehicle if he requires it, he chooses to walk unless he has to carry more than 2 hands can hold. Most of his co-workers think he’s nuts- but it’s one small way to save a little gas.
I like what you said about making changes where you can- it hard for some people to give up driving but I’m seeing more and more people do it. Just recently some friends of ours decided to become a one car family! But there are still jobs that will require a long commute and in this economy a job’s a valuable thing! So I agree- make changes where you can! Every little bit helps!
Sarah says
Just because someone has a car doesn’t mean they’re not thoughtful about the environment. I think that assumption, along with a holier-than-thou attitude, is what makes people defensive. I do have a car. I also live 1.2 miles away from work in order to shorten my driving time, walk on days that it is possible, and limit my driving time around town. Most importantly I am vegan. http://www.veganoutreach.org/globalwarming.html
Tiffany says
I love the point you make about hiding behind things you legitimately cannot give up to continue to use resources you can do without. I drive about 1 hr to work each way. I hate it, but I have no public transportation option. I like to think that I negate that by using cloth napking, real towels (instead of paper!), non-disposable feminine hygiene products, carrying my Nalgene everywhere, and most importantly, not eating meat.
You may not be able to give up everything, but there is still plenty you CAN change.
I think in this day in age, people feel that they are entitled to ease and convenience in every aspect of their lives. The Swiffer with the disposable pad! So much easier than rinsing your mop. It saves 10 seconds! It’s like people don’t give a second thought to what they are doing. It blows my mind!
Lauren (in PA) says
I down sized my 4 door Lancer to a Scion xA. It was pre-owned, and gets really great mileage. I also try to drive at 65 on highways. I only work a few miles from home, but due to the scary hairy turns with no shoulders and other lunatic drivers, I must drive, but do carpool three times a week. I try to keep my world local, doctors, banks, just about everything, which keeps my weekly mileage low. I also buy local when I can (fruit, veggies and eggs). Next week I am going to attempt, well, i’m not sure what it’s called, but when the sun goes down, not using elec. for lights/tv/etc. I read it on a blog once.
Tom says
I appreciate where the author was going with this but the debate around this seems a little one dimensional. There’s a lot more to environmentalism than not driving a car. For example, living in the suburbs or country alone leads to a lot more negative environmental impacts (habitat destruction, much more infrastructure is needed per person, increased water usage for lawns and pools, etc). What about people who don’t own a car but fly transatlantic or pacific several times a year? Are they helping the environment? People might say working from home is saving the environment but is it? Working from home usually involves a lot of telecommunications technology. The huge server farms that Google, Amazon, Ebay, etc are using suck up energy 24/7. We can strive for more efficiency but in my experience there’s usually an environmental trade off (e.g., CFL use less energy but more hazardous materials and are harder to dispose of properly). I think in the end the only choice may be that we must accept to have and do less if we want to save resources.
DeeDee says
I believe the use of oil and vehicles is like budgeting finances. You could say that it is impossible to give up the lifestyle you have in order to set up a budget and maintain it. But, with a few tweeks here and there and lessen the dependence of credit cards and keeping up with the Joneses you could eventually get down to a reasonable budget, maintain it, and live debt free and within your means. Therefore, everyone could do their part by combining errands into one trip, not cruising around for fun, and the like just as you would do for a budget. Then you could lessen the dependence of a vehicle and it wouldn’t hurt so much as it would to rip off a bandaid, so to speak.
But, I think it is ignorant to assume people can drop everything to make sure you are not dependent on cars and that if you drive a car you are a bad person. I enjoy living in the country. Yet, living in the country means that I am at least a 15 to 20 minute drive away from work or even a grocery store. It is not noisy, crowded, or polluted as the city can be. If I want fresh air and to walk around, I don’t have to worry about packing up the kids to walk to the park. I just walk out my back door to my huge back yard because houses aren’t stacked on top of each other like in the city.
I also have the room to grow a garden and raise a few chickens. Lets see you do that in the city!
mabinogi says
My husband and I have been a one-car household for 2 years now. We live within 2 miles of both of our jobs, and he has never driven to work. I usually bike, walk, or ride the bus, but tend to end up driving out of laziness at least a couple times a week. Your post inspired me to go out last night and buy an electric-assist bicycle, which is so easy and fun to ride that I don’t have an excuse to drive anywhere within 10 miles of my house any longer. We are seriously considering selling our remaining car, and will probably do so within the next few months. Thanks, FB!
Sam says
When gas went through the roof, we stopped driving on the weekends.
We stopped going to the nearest farmers market – 12 miles. We started getting groceries once a month (the only organic grocery is over 10 miles away).
We try to budget our time so we have the time to walk to the kid’s ball games, etc.
When we do drive to places close to home, it’s because we need the hauling capacity.
It’s not just driving that impacts the environment though – it’s buying stuff in packages, it’s buying stuff that breaks easily.
We buy in bulk and recycle/compost everything possible to the point we average a shopping bag of trash a week. My neighbors over flow their cans with pizza boxes, cans, paper, plastic and cups. It makes me sad. That plastic & metal should be getting recycled. I had a college professor once who said that someday we will have convicts in chain gangs mining old landfills for metal & plastic…
We bought metal mixing bowls & after 5 years they still haven’t broken. My old plastic ones would crack form use after a year or two. The glass ones… well, I have kids :) The metal bowls are not just for mixing – I can use ’em in the oven and they can go in the fridge with either a yogurt/whip creme lid or the huge ones get tin foil (that gets recycled).
I’ve started switching from metal (that eventually gets rusty or warps) & glass baking dishes (that chip) to cast iron because I know it’ll last till i die. I’ve been using my iron skillet for everything – leftovers go in the oven with it, some baking is now getting done in it, in addition to normal cooking.
The skillet & metal bowls have replaced multiple items thus cutting down on our household consumption & trash output.
I think technology utilization has more of an environmental impact then country vs. city living. Although I’m in the midwest so there’s a ton of “country” here and those who live in the country consolidate trips to town, etc.
If people only buy technology devices that they will actually use for a long time and are well made I think that would help more. I know people who buy a new cheap printer every year – don’t tell me that doesn’t have an impact. I’ve had the same printer since 2001or 2002(HP laser 2200) and it works fine. I don’t need color – I can print pictures at Walmart for a nickel twice a year & still come in cheaper then the cost of inkjet ink.
I work for an IT dept and we have some models of laptops that can be run over by a car & keep going then, we have others that fail if they are tapped hard. If more sturdy laptops were made, our discard load would plummet. Right now we average a truckload a month – and trust me I do all I can to recycle or keep ’em going. A lot of this stuff is made to not be fixed. Also, I think there should be a requirement that all “stuff” be made of recyclable materials so it can be melted down & remade.
I get so upset over the oil spill I don’t even read about it anymore. It’s horrible but I do believe BP is doing all they can. I don’t think the media is accurately reporting on the depth of the environmental impact either. The ocean damage is so, so extensive.
Alexandra says
Feel successful because today’s post was great and helpful! I have already implemented many of your suggestions. For a variety of reasons I have given up meat and dairy and eat a primarily vegan diet and I love eating this way. We have a large vegetable garden at home, don’t buy anything that isn’t essential and have cut way back on disposables. We recycle everything that can be recycled.
Although I live in a suburb, I drive very little and use public transportation to and from work to the city every day. For me, this means transportation on a ferry boat.
I get discouraged however with how few bike lanes and trails there are in my town and in towns and cities in general. There needs to be a much larger and organized movement of people across the country pushing for transportation alternatives including the creation of dedicated bike lanes so there are safer ways to get from one place to another by bicycle. I would love to bike to work. It’s less than 20 miles but I would be taking my life in my hands with the amount of automobile/truck traffic en route and no separate bike lanes.
Sam says
It’s the same here – newer areas don’t even have sidewalks and there’s no public transportation.
I used to live in Indianapolis & I loved their bus system – it was usually faster then driving.
Oh & we eat meat once a week instead of daily- I get dizzy despite supplements, no refined stuff, etc and my doctor has ordered me to eat it lest I pass out again. Regardless I think most folks eatay too much of it.
But we buy a cow once a year from a local farmer who does it free range & drug free. We use the closest butcher we can to save on gas & support local business too. And I do function better with some amount of it in my diet but it’s the least consumed food group in our house & the second least consumed is dairy.
mabinogi says
Although it’s still taboo to mention it, the single biggest thing anyone can do to lessen our impact on the earth is to have fewer children, or no children. Adding another being who will someday drive cars, buy food in plastic wrap, use resources, and have children of his/her own far outweighs just about any environmentally irresponsible action a childless person could do.
Having said that, it’s also, for many people, the most difficult choice to make and one that few are willing to make for that reason alone. It’s not one I will make, although I do struggle with it.
FrugalBabe says
Mabinogi – you are absolutely right, and that is a decision I’ve struggled with for years. It’s not an easy decision, and I admire people who can make their choice based on what the planet needs rather than what they want themselves.
Tom says
mabinogi, frugalbabe — I think it’s not really that simple. Households with children are more economically (and environmentally) efficient on a per person basis. I think it’s fair to say that the upper bound of one’s environmental impact is constrained by his/her income. Households with children tend not to have the highest incomes (less impact per person and overall) vs DINKs.
World population has peaked so fears of exponential population growth are obviously false. The real environmental damage in the future will come from the burgeoning middle classes of Asia. As they aspire to the standard of material living that we enjoy in the Western World it seems they will try to do it the same way we did (by externalizing at least some of the costs to the environment).
I think the real issue is a way of life issue not a population issue. If we agree that everyone (on the planet) deserves to have a modern way of life there will be an environmental cost.
mabinogi says
Tom, I’ve heard that argument before (that households w/ children are more economical per person) and it just doesn’t make sense to me. The children in a household are people who would otherwise NOT EXIST, so the comparison doesn’t hold water. You have to compare that whole household, including the children, to an equivalent childless couple. Regardless of whether or not exponential population growth is a real concern — and I’m not entirely convinced that it isn’t — more people still equals more overall resource consumption, especially in developed countries.
Don’t misunderstand me: I’m not criticizing your choice or that of other parents (although I am more critical of people who choose to have MANY children, including my sister who is a mother to 6). I plan to have 1-2 children within the next few years, and want them desperately. But I also believe that having those children will be the single most selfish thing that I will ever do.
mabinogi says
FrugalBabe – I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one who struggles with this question. Do you mind me asking how you managed to move past it and make the decision to have children?
FrugalBabe says
Tom,
To some extent, I agree, especially about the growing middle class in Asia. In terms of household resource use, definitely during the time our children are young, we can mostly control their impact on the planet. In our own household, we work hard to minimize our use of resources, and obviously our son lives the same way. But once he’s an adult, living in his own house, having his own children (if he chooses to), that impact will increase. I would say that it’s unlikely that a child raised by me and my husband would go on to have a large number of children or be careless with any resources, but details like that are no longer within our control once we send our children out into the world.
In addition, world population has not peaked: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
It’s expected to reach 9 billion in the next 30 years. The rate of growth has declined, but it’s still a positive number, which means that the world population is still increasing, rather significantly.
Tom says
mabinogi — I did not mean imply you were being judgmental of my or anyone else’s choice (I don’t have children).
I think the part of the equation that is missing from your line of reasoning is this: Luxury goods are disproportionately bad for the environment. They use tons of more resources than their low-cost equivalent (hence the expense). E.g. DINKs that can afford to take semi-annual transatlantic trips for vacations are doing a lot more impact to the environment than the family that carpools to take their vacation at nearby relatives. Households with children have less money for luxury goods. Most of the money goes to necessities. A lot of things that make up large parts of family budgets have comparatively little impact on the environment. For example, college education. It is very expensive but most of the cost is simply to pay for the expensive labor (professors). DINKs may not be adding another person to the planet but if they are using the money they saved by not having a child to buy a second residence (summer house) and are driving to it often that may be a zero-sum game for the environment.
Note: I do not mean this as a moral or otherwise attack on DINKs. I think that for most people this rule holds true: if you have extra money you will spend it. This is the root of the problem. DINKs on average have more money total and per person than family households this generally means more consumption (which is bad for the environment).
mabinogi says
Tom — You’re right that DINKs, on average, have more expendable income than families with children. But those couples who choose not to have children BECAUSE of their concern for other life on the planet are probably not the people going on semi-annual transatlantic vacations, buying Hummers, living in McMansions, and owning summer homes. If my husband and I choose not to have children, for instance, we will not be living that way; thus, if we do not have children, we will have FAR less of an environmental impact than we will if we do have children. Besides, as FB indicates, what’s to imply that my child won’t drive a Hummer, own a vacation home, and live in a McMansion, thus more than compensating for the resources we save while raising him / her?
Tom says
mabinogi —
I think you’re absolutely right in this regard. However, I think the statistics would show that most DINKs aren’t doing it for the environment. They’re doing it for extra freedom and consumption.
As to the behavior of your offspring. Hopefully if you are a household that is committed to lessening your environmental impact you could instill that in your children.
I was mainly responding to the blanket statement that not having children is necessarily good for the environment. The answer to that statement, as you have shown in your most recent response, is that it depends on what you do after that.
Overall reduction of consumption is good for the environment. Not having children doesn’t necessarily lead to that and I think in general in the West it isn’t the case.
FrugalBabe says
Mabinogi,
I know exactly how you feel, wanting one or two children but worrying about the impact on the planet at the same time. We eventually decided that while we’re willing to make a lot of sacrifices in order to use fewer natural resources and minimize our impact on the earth, not having children wasn’t one of them. We knew that having a child would add immeasurably to our own lives (which it has, absolutely). We knew we would use line-dried cloth diapers, breast feed, never buy baby food in tiny little jars, only purchase used clothing and toys, etc. We knew without a doubt that for at least the first 18 years (and hopefully forever, if we do our jobs well in terms of raising him), our child would use far fewer resources than the average middle class American child. So we made peace with our decision. We knew from the beginning that we would only ever have one or two children – we could never justify more than that.
The decision to have children is an intensely personal one, and one that we each have to make on our own, for our own reasons. We’re very glad that we made the decision we did, but we can absolutely understand the position taken by people who choose differently. Good luck with whatever you decide!
Sam says
While I can understand the sunk enviromental cost of having kids, the thing that alwatys gets me is the people who don’t give a hoot are the ones breeding.
They are making the next generation as a generation of consumers if the environmentalists don’t contribute to that generation.
While I reconize everyone’s freedom to do as they choose, it would be of most benefit to the planet if mindless breeding were reduced.
What I’m speaking of here are the kids born to parents who don’t care, who just exist – no goals, don’t teach the kids hardly anything except to buy “stuff” – such children get dragged through such bad stuff as their parent follows what ever feels good or is convenient to them(the parent) with no thought to the childs well being. I used to work in the local child support office & it was so sad to see some of these kids and what their parents put them through. If only children who were wanted were born, it would benefit the planet & the rest of us because if the parent wants the child then the parent will probably teach the child, etc. No solution I can think of to that.
Although, I did hear of a lady traveling the country paying homeless ladies to get depo shots but I don’t remember the exact details – I just remember the local controversy when she came through a year or two ago.
I don’t feel bad having my kid – I know that I am raising a compassionate, ethical person who will contribute meaningfully to the planet when he’s older. It’s how I’m making sure that my & my ancestors knowledge makes it into the future where it can be used. It’s also my way to making sure that the concept to rejecting mindless consuming & simple living gets in to the future too.
I know – weird thoughts.
Also, most childless couples I know tend to consume more – have more toys, more vehicles, more new stuff, drive farther & more often, etc.
I know my kids & I have a much smaller environmental foot print then my childless Aunt & Uncle who fly the globe & get a new wardrobe every season. I think it all comes down more to lifestyle choices – not kids vs. no kids.
Although the really huge families I do think go too far and consume too much. But that’s just my 2 cents.
Tom says
I really agree with Sam.
The environmental crisis is a collective behavioral crisis. For the vast majority of people in the West the whole point of life is mindless consumption. We know it doesn’t have to be this way. For most of human history (the 99.9% of it that happened before industrialization) this couldn’t have been the case. Yet given that we have same capacity for happiness that our ancestors did there must have been some other purpose to their lives that made them happy. I’m guessing it was social interaction. If we want to save the environment I think we need to find another goal in life than mindless consumption.
Cortney says
I really liked the emphasize in this post on reducing where you can. Certainly, in some instances it would be near impossible to live without a car. So, knowing that, maybe focus on less plastic consumption, shopping local, etc. All the good strategies you laid out in the post.
I adore the quote “Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good”.
It’s so true. I think many people feel overwhelmed, thinking their little changes won’t make a difference- I know, lately, I’ve been feeling this way!- but if all of us reduced our oil consumption by even a fraction- in all of its forms, from internationally shipped produce to driving to plastic use- it would have a huge collective impact.
Sam says
Tom – I was lucky enough to have very old Grandparents & when i heard my Grandpa tell stories about the “good old days” before cars & electricity it was usually social stuff that made him happy. Doing stuff with his friends & family.
I have noticed this with my son too – he smiles more & is usually more chipper then his friends, who complain that we don’ have a lot of stuff to do but end up having a riot with non-electric toys.
At the end of the day, I think social interaction & making/accomplishing things is what makes most humans happy.
Somehow the “accomplishing things” part has gotten twisted to “acquiring new stuff that either adds to or replaces existing good stuff”. Like the Iphone thing – the big deal it is to have the new one when the old one worked fine.
Little changes can build over time to make a big overall difference. We do a lot of little things around our place but we don’t even notice them because all the little things have built up and become common over the years. When my son was a toddler I stopped using paper towels and now think nothing of grabbing a rag to clean up a mess or dry my hands. It’s strange, wasteful & foreign to me to be at someone’s house and have to use paper towels to dry my hands.
Tom says
I think the story of the last 50 years economically has been the massive success of corporate advertising. I’ve been doing my best to cut back on my consumption and to spend consciously for a variety of reasons (financial, environmental, health, time) but even so I think advertising still has an effect on me. You can see the power of it by how much money companies spend on it. Often times now at least as much or more money is spent on the advertising of, than in the production of, movies, games, etc.