Health and Diet Scottish Recipes Ferret for Ferrets


Re: [pf] CO2 by average Americans and rich Americans. A statistic.
by Sharon Flesher
29 November 2000 16:31 UTC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Molly wrote:
> Sounds interesting. I know I shouldn't but I am patting myself on the
> back for accomplishing two of the three things you listed (vegetarian,
> no kids)!

I'm also good for two out of three: vegetarian, no car. Too late to do
anything about the kids, but at least we're stopping at two (and hopefully,
I will raise two children who will NOT add to the earth's misery, but will
work to reduce it -- I know, every parent's dream but few actually realize
it).
>
> The Union of Concerned Scientists' book, /The Consumers Guide to
> Effective Environmental Choices/, also focuses on the biggies -- Their
> "priority actions for American consumers" are:
>
> Transportation:
> 1. Choose a place to live that reduces the need to drive
> 2. Think twice before puchasing another car
> 3. Choose a fuel-efficient, low-polluting car
> 4. Set concrete goals for reducing your travel
> 5. Whenever possible, walk, bicycle, or take public transportation
>
> Food:
> 6. Eat less meat
> 7. Buy certified organic produce
>
> Household Operations:
> 8. Choose your home carefully
> 9. Reduce the environmental costs of heating and hot water
> 10. Install efficient lighting and appliances
> 11. Choose an electricity supplier offering renewable energy

We've done nearly all of these things: we have no choice of electric
company, but the one we have did put up a windmill a few years ago.

> They answer the question, why do Americans drive so much?, this way:
> * Driving is affordable

I would strongly disagree with them on this. Cars' direct internal costs
consume about 15 to 20 percent of household budgets in the U.S. and Canada
(Litman, Todd. Transportation Cost Analysis: Techniques, Estimates and
Implications. www.vtpi.org) Every year, the average U.S. household spends
more than a sixth of its budget on cars, more than on food and second only
to housing; poor households spend twice that proportion. Since the 1930s,
car dependency has helped to at least triple the proportion of personal
expenditures going to transportation. (U.S. Bureau of Transportation
Statistic, Pocket Guide to Transportation; Freund and Martin, Ecology of the
Automobile). In comparison, households in developed countries with better
transit spend less. European households, for instance, spend only 7 percent
of their budgets on transport. (Kay, Asphalt Nation).

I could go on (and on and on and on). External costs of automobile
transportation may be as much as double the direct internal costs, depending
on whose estimates you use. From personal experience, I can tell you that
our family budget has improved dramatically since we became car-free.

> * Communities are spread out

This is the heart of our transportation problem. Personal cars enable
sprawl, which requires cars, which supercedes use of and investment in
transit, which results in more cars and more sprawl, etc. That's why
transportation reform and land-use reform are mutually dependent. Efficient,
affordable, low-polluting transportation requires a certain amount of urban
density (not necessarily 50-story high-rise apartments!)

At this point, we could get into a discussion about what comforts,
conveniences, lifestyle choices people are willing to forsake for the sake
of the planet.

> * Driving is often convenient and satisfying - "Given our culture's
> emphasis on personal freedom and independence, this psychological
> motivation may be as important as any other."

No doubt.

> Next comes a section on "Avoiding High-Impact Activities" like
> powerboats, pesticides and fertilizers, gas-powered yard equipment,
> fireplaces and wood stoves, recreational off-road driving, hazardous
> cleaners and paints, and products made from endangered or threatened
> species.

Here in the north woods, every season has its small motor plague: in the
summer, our beautiful bay and inland lakes fill with noxious, noisy jet
skis; in the fall, healthy adults feel they must clear their lawns -- no
matter how tiny -- with leaf-blowers; in the winter, no cross-country ski
trail is far removed from the stinking, threatening, ear-splitting drone of
the dreaded snowmobile and neighborhood residents awake on snowy morns to
the sound of multiple snowblowers, usually employed by the same healthy
adults who favor the leafblowers; and finally, in spring, the lawnmower
resumes its reign. Could we but end these plagues!

> New wood stoves are much better, burning at 80% efficiency (vs. 50% for
> old stoves and 10% for some fireplaces), and EPA-approved woodstoves
> (from 1988 on) have less than half the pollutant emissions of older
> models. "More impressively, the best systems have less than 1/6 the
> emissions of an old wood stove and less than 1/12 the emissions of a
> typical fireplace."

Here in Michigan last winter, there was a program where people could trade
in their old wood stoves for a new, efficient model and get a big discount.
Maybe it was a national program. I have some friends who took advantage of
it.

Sharon Flesher
CarSharing Traverse, Inc.
Traverse City, Mich.
sflesher@traverse.net

"Be the change you wish to see." M.K. Gandhi