Article: "The zero-waste home"
Lenona
it looks interesting to me!
http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-00418000069984/
Lenona.
Rod Speed
> From Northern California. Blogger Amy Alkon was scornful of this,
For a good reason, zero waste isnt even possible.
> but it looks interesting to me!
Minimising waste may be.
> http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-00418000069984/
Gordon
news:365eb96f-ec49-4855...@l22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
Got a link to that scornful Blog?
I also try to reduce waste. But I don't go to such extremes.
1) we have 5 canvas tote bags to carry home our groceries.
But sometimes we have to use a plastic or paper bag.
2) We fill a curbside recycling tip cart in about 1 month.
3) Our 30 gal garbage tip cart is only ever half full each
week. Pretty good for a family of 4.
4) We buy a lot of bulk items and fresh produce to reduce
packaging.
5) We reuse the plastic bags that the bulk food is bought in.
6) We also reuse a lot of the plastic tubs and trays that
some foods are packaged in.
7) The most extreme thing I do is to collect rain water in
a barrel and use it to wash the car.
We don't live much differently from most people. And if you
came into our house it wouldn't look too different tham most
others. Until you went around back and saw the rain barrel.
But other than that...
Lenona
> Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:365eb96f-ec49-4855...@l22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>
> > From Northern California. Blogger Amy Alkon was scornful of this, but
> > it looks interesting to me!
>
> >http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-0041800006
> > 9984/
>
> > Lenona.
>
> Got a link to that scornful Blog?
I do. (She's a syndicated libertarian columnist, I should have
mentioned.)
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/01/16/the_ridiculousn.html#comments
I cannot believe those like Kate Coe. Quote (from the blog):
"Why is reducing consumption supposed to be a good thing? People get
paid to make things, sell things, repair things, recycle things. I buy
more old stuff than new, but that's merely a function of taste than
any position on consumption. I like employment for myself and others."
Well, duh, because if you think recycling is silly, at least less
consumption means less recycling -and less pollution?
As a later sarcastic commentator said: "So, yes, bulldozing everything
is perfectly acceptable. Hey, go break a bunch of windows today.
You'll be creating jobs..."
Lenona.
Les Cargill
Sarcastic? Probably not. Probably just Bastiat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
>
> Lenona.
--
Les Cargill
Rod Speed
>>> From Northern California. Blogger Amy Alkon was
>>> scornful of this, but it looks interesting to me!
>>> http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-00418000069984/
>> Got a link to that scornful Blog?
> I do. (She's a syndicated libertarian columnist, I should have mentioned.)
> http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/01/16/the_ridiculousn.html#comments
> I cannot believe those like Kate Coe. Quote (from the blog):
> "Why is reducing consumption supposed to be a good thing? People
> get paid to make things, sell things, repair things, recycle things. I
> buy more old stuff than new, but that's merely a function of taste than
> any position on consumption. I like employment for myself and others."
Yes, she does have a point. Its the reduced comsumption thats currently
producing much higher than desirable unemployment rates in the US.
> Well, duh, because if you think recycling is silly, at least
> less consumption means less recycling -and less pollution?
Quite a bit of recycling actually means more pollution, most
obviously with the immense stacks of recycled paper etc
and what the chinese do when recycling car tires in spades.
> As a later sarcastic commentator said: "So, yes, bulldozing
> everything is perfectly acceptable. Hey, go break a bunch
> of windows today. You'll be creating jobs..."
Even sillier.
Gordon
news:8pou5v...@mid.individual.net:
> Lenona wrot
>> Gordon <go...@alltomyself.com> wrote
>>> Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>>> From Northern California. Blogger Amy Alkon was
>>>> scornful of this, but it looks interesting to me!
>
>>>> http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-
0041800
>>>> 0069984/
>
>>> Got a link to that scornful Blog?
>
>> I do. (She's a syndicated libertarian columnist, I should have
>> mentioned.)
>
>>
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/01/16/the_ridiculousn.html#
>> comments
>
>> I cannot believe those like Kate Coe. Quote (from the blog):
>
>> "Why is reducing consumption supposed to be a good thing? People
>> get paid to make things, sell things, repair things, recycle things.
>
> Yes, she does have a point. Its the reduced comsumption thats
> currently producing much higher than desirable unemployment rates in
> the US.
So Bush was right. Get out there and spend you mindless consumer
spending drones!
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> From Northern California. Blogger Amy Alkon was
>>>>> scornful of this, but it looks interesting to me!
>>>>> http://www.sunset.com/home/natural-home/zero-waste-home-0111-0041800 0069984/
>>>> Got a link to that scornful Blog?
>>> I do. (She's a syndicated libertarian columnist, I should have mentioned.)
> http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/01/16/the_ridiculousn.html#comments
>>> I cannot believe those like Kate Coe. Quote (from the blog):
>>> "Why is reducing consumption supposed to be a good thing? People
>>> get paid to make things, sell things, repair things, recycle things.
>> Yes, she does have a point. Its the reduced comsumption thats currently
>> producing much higher than desirable unemployment rates in the US.
> So Bush was right.
Nope.
> Get out there and spend you mindless consumer spending drones!
Or just stop being stupid about waste instead.
Bob F
>> currently producing much higher than desirable unemployment rates in
>> the US.
That could be partially true, if anything we "consumed" was actually made in the
US.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Yes, she does have a point. Its the reduced comsumption thats currently producing much higher than desirable
>> unemployment rates in the US.
> That could be partially true,
Its completely true.
> if anything we "consumed" was actually made in the US.
Corse hordes of it still is, most obviously with food, pharmaceuticals,
movies, music, PC software, cars and services in spades.
And even with stuff that isnt made in the US, consumers buying less of
it than they had done previously, increases the unemployment in retail.