Going Green

[LotusElise]

If we all make a small effort, surely it will have some effect and encourage others to do so. We have to start somewhere!

[Mark]

Making an effort is absolutely what we should do. However, how far do we take things in terms of the government forcing changes in our behaviour? Many believe the population of the country will end up enduring hardship in order to server the environmental cause, whereas other countries don't bother.

Personally I'd like to hear more about positive things you can do in your house and your lifestyle, and less emphasis on saying what you can't do and what you must pay more for.

[schmenke]

... It is rather hypocritical of the West to tell China not to pollute when the West has been doing it for hundreds of years...

It is rather hypocritical to blame China when the all the bigger, better and cheaper consumer goods that we crave are built in Chinese factories.

[Daniel]

It is rather hypocritical to blame China when the all the bigger, better and cheaper consumer goods that we crave are built in Chinese factories.

Yup. I think people should vote with their money and try to buy goods which are more environmentally friendly in the way they are manufactured and in their operation.

For instance when I bought a power supply for my still yet to be build PC a few months ago I made sure I bought one which had a high efficiency rating so that it will use less power and of course this will mean less carbon dioxide being released

[ioan]

So, tell me, what is the point of me doing little things when not everyone else is doing the same thing?

If everyone would do it than without asking him/herself this question than we would already have a healthier environement.
I do it because I believe we have to do this if we want a better future.

[Hazell B]

Carl asked if I'd be getting rid of my Land Rover as I'm saying cleaner air is a national rather than international problem.

Daft question - of course I won't. Thing is, if I did sell it and buy a smaller engined vehicle, I would produce far more carbon! Taking ten trips to market with auction lots instead of one isn't exactly sensible, is it? Nor will I moan about raised road fund - in fact I've stated on this forum many times that I strongly believe silly women in 4x4s should be taxed out of ownership and I'm willing to pay to see it done.

Having spent most of today's miles on soil tracks that don't even appear on OS maps, I think my 2.5TD (with fuel efficiency magnet fitted) is a damned sight cleaner than the morons who drive them for fun in towns and claim they 'need' a large vehicle for twice yearly camping trips, transporting a spaniel or carrying golf clubs

[fandango]

If we all make a small effort, surely it will have some effect and encourage others to do so. We have to start somewhere!

If only this were true. Industry's effects are much stronger than consumers'.

I think the small effort we all need to make is to pressure the politicians to make big changes. I mean, in most countries (if not all) the Green Party or its equivalent is not in power. No-one can imagine them with a parliamentary majority. Why is that? Well, for a start, the general feeling is that they don't know a thing about economics, and so the economy would be ruined. So there we have a very simple priority: we care more about the economy than about the environment. If we voted green would they get their economic policies together quicker than the other parties would sort out the environment? I reckon so, because clever economists would go and work for them.

This may all seem too simplistic, but it'll probably come to that choice this century.

[BDunnell]

Making an effort is absolutely what we should do. However, how far do we take things in terms of the government forcing changes in our behaviour? Many believe the population of the country will end up enduring hardship in order to server the environmental cause, whereas other countries don't bother.

Personally I'd like to hear more about positive things you can do in your house and your lifestyle, and less emphasis on saying what you can't do and what you must pay more for.

Those positive things you could do with your lifestyle may well enjoy driving and flying less, though. The things that people may be told not to do or to pay more for are likely to be larger contributors to pollution than light bulbs and TVs.

However, I do agree that forcing changes in behaviour is a very difficult one, given that governmental interference can only really go so far. A balance needs to be struck.

[Lousada]

All these measures are rather ridiculous. They tax cars more because they pollute, but there is no sensible alternative to a car. So what happens: nothing.
They also tax for putting your container out. The reason is, if you put your container out more often, you obviously pollute more and therefore have to pay more. So what happens: people put bio with the regular garbage and vice-versa, just to fill one container to the very edge and keep the other empty. Or they put plastic garbage in glassjars, which go in public containers. Or they just throw it on the streets. Anything you can and can't imagine, just so they save some money (to spend on expensive petrol). The problem is, I'm not the one polluting, it's the damn corporations. Cookies for example are collectively wrapped in a giant platic... wrap. Following that they are also individually wrapped, so when you unwrap the big wrap, all the cookies are still wrapped. In this small wrap, most chocolate cookies also have a cardboard/plastic wrap, so they don't melt in your hand. I JUST WANT MY DAMN COOKIE. The other day I had to get a battery. This battery is about ten square centimeters from above. Yet it was packed in a piece of plastic at least 50 square centimers big up front and an equally big piece of cardboard on the back. No wonder people don't give a damn about recycling when they are confronted with such waste every single day.
You also have to pay to go to the dump. The dump is a drive way with a container alongside it where you put your rubbish in. Every time you go, you have to pay more. Because if you go to the dump regularly, you pollute a lot, and people who pollute should pay more. I don't pay for my dump though. My dump is the nearby forest, and I'm not the only one who goes there, seeing all the furniture that's lying around between the trees.

The goverment needs to stop this enviromentalist bull**** because people are not stupid. Everything we will do with regards to the 'enviroment' is infinite compared to what China and India blow in the atmosphere everyday. And the earth will also inhabit life, even human life, when all oil and coal and gas is burned down. They say oil will be gone 5-10-20 years. Let's say even 100 years. You really think the climate will change so drasticly within that timeperiod that the earth becomes uninhabitable?
What the goverment should do is change their propaganda. They should say, we tax your SUV's extra because these fuelslurping monsters run on a substance that's only found in dictatorships we do not approve but we are depended on. We want you to use energy-saving lights because oil and gas plants use so much resources that these dictators can charge whatever they want, and that way we'd only have to tax you more! We tax your containers because plastic uses up a lot of oil. Oil that is not renewable and will probably cease to excist within our lifetime. Oil that our whole economy depends upon! In short, show them the doom that happens to us when fossile fuels run out.
I am sure this change in propaganda strategy would have a notable effect on peoples behaviours. Because this way, people that save and recycle can actually make a difference to the greater scheme of things.

Long post