What can we do to solve environmental problems?

[atheistgirl]

I am currently using grocery bags and when they are filled they are tossed. I don’t like this but I don’t know what to do.

Oh, when I have flushed their waste, even if I flush a small amount at a time, it clogs the toilet. I also end up wasting water by having to flush the toilet so many times (although for myself I follow the old saying: “If it’s yellow, let it mellow; if it’s brown, flush it down”). The Humane Society demands that everyone use biodegradable bags for cat waste. I can’t afford that - plain and simple. I just can’t.

If anyone has ideas about this problem, please let me know because I do feel guilty when I am throwing away bags that are not biodegradable.

Collect the waste and put it in a composter - but make sure to use this one just for waste and nothing else, not your veg scraps - to let it part compost and allow the heat to kill off any meds residue such as the worming tabs you may will have given your cat.

Once the waste is heated up sufficiently and part composted, simply put it into a vermicomposting bin - but again, one that you’re only going to use for poo and nothing else.

Not only do you kill off any bugs in the poo and any meds residue but by precomposting it the worm bin won’t get too hot when you feed it to them.

The worms will love it, and the castings they produce will be the best compost you’ll ever have.

A word of warning though - it’s best to use this composted cat waste just for non fruit trees and bushes and so on, and not on your veg patch or flower patch.

This is just a precaution.

We’ve been composting our pets poo since forever using worms.

All our horse manure is also composted in a similar manner but in much bigger ground based vermicomposting beds.

If you don’t know about vermicomposting there is a ton of free information on the net and if you need any help, just ask.

I’m not going to be around much over the next three weeks as we’re incredibly busy right now but I’ll reply when I can, or I’m sure there are other experts here only to happy to help.

Vermicomposting is awesome - the worms will eat just about anything - we’ve even composted old clothes and leather shoes that were not fit to be donated elsewhere.

And you will never buy commercial compost as good as the vermicompost you produce yourself.

Sarah x

 

[Ridgerunner]

My latest idea is to not eat animals that are by nature vegetarian, since if we’d meet in the wild, they wouldn’t eat me, so why should I eat them? Though other than hippos, I’m not sure what other animals I should be avoiding yet.

You can eat pork then, because a hog would kill you and eat you as soon as look at you if it thought it could get it done. Some can and would.

A chicken can’t kill you, but it would if it could, and eat you right up.

Not to quibble too much here, but do they really have to eat you? Meet a buffalo eyeball to eyeball and chances are it will kill you. Same with an elk bull in rut. Even a cow will kill you as dead as a hammer if you seem a threat to it or its calf. Granted, though, they won’t eat you.

 

[lynnvinc]

I just wanted to bring up the role of industry & biz in reducing environmental problems, since most of us work somewhere.

I can’t remember the figure I saw, but something like 80% or 85% of the waste, pollution, and energy use (including GHGs and other pollutants that involves) is done before we even purchase the products. Some have labeled this the “wasteberg” since our part as consumers in the waste is only about 15 or 20%, and the rest is “upstream” in the extraction, resource shipping, resource processing, manufacturing, product shipping, and wholesaling/retailing processes.

I guess what this means is that every product we buy entails a certain amount of pollution, GHGs, & waste of finite resources, depending on the particular processes used before we get the products. And this is why “reduce” is the first and most important principle, “reuse” being the second & “recycle” coming in 3rd. You all probably know all these things better than me.

But I’m thinking if any of us work for an extraction, manufacturing, or sales business, then perhaps we can have some impact in helping them find cost-effective solutions to reducing their environmental impact. For instact 3M’s 3P program (see solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/3M-Sustainability/Global/Environment/3P/ ).

It seems it really only requires one or a few people in the industry really committed to reducing environmental problems to keep up this good work. For instance I heard or read somewhere that as long as there was such an employee at DOW (can’t remember his name), they made great strides in their WRAP (Waste Reduction Always Pays) program (see pdf.wri.org/bell/case_1-56973-140-3_full_version_a_english.pdf ), but that after he retired, they didn’t make as great of strides, even though there many potentials they could have tapped into for reducing environmental impact while saving money without reducing productivity.

So, I’m thinking if any of us are working where environmental improvements can be made – and we can, for the sake of Jesus and God’s kingdom, plow through & turn a deaf ear to the ridicule of being “recycling queen” or an earth-worshipper – then maybe we can have some further impact beyond our households. Probably most really big businesses like 3M and Dow already have people onto this and green programs in place, but I’m thinking many mid-size and small business may not. I remember during a “Model Communities” meeting in the mid-90s (headed by a woman from the area where all our landfill garbage went), a couple of small business people attended, and started thinking about ways the could reduce their env impact. For instance the Long John Silver proprietor thought of turning the waste oil into fuel (which can be done) and crumbs fed to pigs, and a few other things. I got busy with grad school and never followed up, so don’t know if he did those things.

We also need to look at our schools and churches, as well.

We’re planning on building a new church, and early on when they were asking for $1000s in contributions, I went up to the person in charge and said I had some qualms about contributing unless it was done in an environmentally sensitive way – like putting the bell tower on the north, rather than south, side, so if in the future we wanted to install solar panels on the south side they would get full sun, and other things, such as recommended in the LEED program (see usgbc.org ). Well, they got a LEED-certified architect on the job, and were really quite positive about doing EC (enviornmentally correct) things. Unfortunately people here are not very environmentally aware or interested, probably bec we are the poorest county in the country. We’ll see what happens.

I’m also thinking that we could do a “geo-thermal heat pump” ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_heat_pump ) – more for cooling than heating, since the main issue 9 to 10 months a year in our area is having to use the AC, and the heater maybe 2 to 3 months. The idea is that some 5 or so feet below the ground the temps are about 55F and in cold winter climates that’s warmer than outside temps, so water is run through the system to heat it to 55F, then it only has to be heated from 55 to 75 in the building. For our area we could use it to cool the building. The horizontal type could be put under the walk-ways of the church grounds (we have already purchased some 10 or so acres). They’ll have to dig a bit anyway for the path footing/foundation, so it would just be a matter of digging deeper for the heat pump tubes. I guess one issue would be avoiding tree and plant roots.

 

[M-Dent]

I admit I have grown on this issue.

Many of us have. It is an issue worth exploring deeply.

This article brings up some good points.

 

[lynnvinc]

I admit I have grown on this issue.

But can we please not refer to ourselves as environmentalists, and simply refer to ourselves as Catholic? It sums up our responsibilities in their entirety without making reference to a post-modern culturally trendy phenomena.

Well, I’ve been an environmentalist nearly all my life of 65 years from being taught Christian principles early on in Sunday school & at home re doing good and being good (and how good our God has been to us in so many many ways, that compels us in return to be good & reject bad).

It used to be a positive thing for many decades to be an environmentalist, and all sorts of people were proudly claiming they were environmentalists, even if they hardly did anything to “save the earth” or reduce environmental harms.

I think the recent anti-environmentalism over the past 2 decades is the result of industry-funded “mal-information” being cranked out that has poisoned the idea of environmentalism – and I’m sure they’re laughing all the way to the bank over their evil success & great profits while the victims of their pollution and harms from their “legal” and illegal (but not prosecuted) cutting corners suffer and die.

Of course there are over-zealous environmentalists that turn people off, like I do with my husband & others. Taking their own bags for shopping and making others feel funny or disgusted

But I cannot image a real Christian who is not an environmentalist, it just doesn’t compute, as you pointed out. Environmentalism flows out of being a Christian, a Catholic. I think it would also flow out of all the religions that teach morality at some level or another (Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, etc)…though not the Church of Satan, where they probably teach members to trash the earth.

I know Jesus said we should hate the world, but I think he meant we should be detached from the world and not be Mammon-worshippers, not that we should trash the planet. That to me fits perfectly with my enviornmentalism and Carmelite spirituality; it is our love of and attachment to material things, pleasure, and status-seeking, & lack of concern for others that has gotten us into serious environmental problems.

I’m proud to be a Catholic no matter how many people hate me for it (like some relatives on my side of the family). I’m proud to be an environmentalist no matter how many people hate me for it. I’d stand all alone for righteousness, take people’s spit, whatever. That’s what my mom taught me, be a nonconformist and do the right thing…best advice when sending a child out into the jungle of evil out there.

(I also used to be a tea-tottler and drive people mad, but I’ve softened on that a bit and take a drink now and then )

 

[M-Dent]

who is not an environmentalist, it just doesn’t compute, as you pointed out. Environmentalism flows out of being a Christian, a Catholic.

**This article ** makes a strong point explaining, “the Church isn’t some Johnny-come-lately to protecting the planet. Second, the Church’s understanding of what it means to be a good steward is not precisely in line with the thinking of many modern environmentalists.”

 

[lynnvinc]

This article makes a strong point explaining, “the Church isn’t some Johnny-come-lately to protecting the planet. Second, the Church’s understanding of what it means to be a good steward is not precisely in line with the thinking of many modern environmentalists.”

And who might those “many environmentalists” be who are against good stewardship in the way the Church says we should be? I’ve never really met one, tho people claim they are legion.

Well, I have read about some eco-terrorists (who torch SUVs, etc), like ELF members, but I think these are in a very tiny minority, and it seems some fellow ELF members ratted out on their brethren and got them put behind bars. (One of my Env Crime & Justice students is doing her term paper on that topic.)

And it should be remembered that not all environmentalists are Catholic, so we can’t really hold their feet to the fire for not strictly adhering to Catholic principles of stewardship, esp since they may not even know what those principles are. I don’t even think most Catholics know what those principles, papal messages, and teachings are.

(And it is really sad that there are some priests and lay Catholics funded by Exxon/Koch who are spewing out their version of Catholic enviornmental stewardship in a way that undermines the messages of the Holy Fathers and bishops on the topic – spreading insidious mal-information and influencing Catholics. The devil is always at work, brothers, esp on the “good people,” since he already has the bad people in his pocket.)

Some environmentalists are Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Jain, Baha’i, atheist (who basically get the good points of their morality from Christianity and other religions they left), … I imagine even some neo-pagans are environmentalists, tho the 4 or 5 I’ve encountered over the past 30 years do not strike me particularly as being environmentalists (but the topic didn’t come up); just bec they believe in animism does not make them automatically environmentalists, tho it may make them afraid to diss the tree spirits, etc.

Some “pro-choicers” are environmentalists – tho it really makes no sense and is completely evil to kill children in order to save the world for children, so I sort of think they are “pro-choice” for other reasons, and not bec they are environmentalists.

Some “pro-lifers” are environmentalists, and one just wonders why all pro-lifers are not enviornmentalists, considering how certain environmental harms kill and harm people, including fetuses. Is it that some fetuses are considered more valuable and worth saving than others, or ??

And then there is the issue of many types of environmental problems, including the tendency for hazardous waste sites to be located in predominantly minority communities. But even environmental justice activists tend eventually to expand their interests and concerns to other peoples and God’s other creatures being environmentally harmed in other places around the world. I think their suffering sensitizes them to the sufferings of others.

I’ve found in my own environmental endeavors that we need to cooperate with people on many environmental issues, not just our pet ones, bec there just aren’t too many environmentalists out there, and we need each others’ help. That sometimes puts me in contact with non-Catholic environmentalists, and I talk about our Catholic ideas of stewardship. There was at least one atheist who told me that because of me and my environmental works and ideas (he had read my “The Little Way of Environmental Healing”) he didn’t hate Catholics anymore. Well, he didn’t convert (or maybe he did by now…that was 8 years ago), but at least he got over his hatred.

I’ve known a lot of environmentalists, but I just haven’t met these bad types (whose bad environmental ideas flow out of their environmentalism, and not their prior religion or ideology). Maybe I’ve led a sheltered life.

Now come to think of it, I did meet one woman some 20 years ago, an ex-Catholic, who was into some goofy new-Age wind-water-fire-air eco-ritual supposedly based on Native American religions. But, no, she left the Church because of her radical feminism (I think she had had some bad experiences with men), and the eco-weird stuff came later, as sort of a supplement to her feminism (there is a small branch of the environmental movement called “eco-feminism” – feminists who have decided women are better than men on enviornmental issues…an idea I disagree with, bec both men and women are pretty bad, or at least women would be as bad as men if they had more chances to be bad ).

Quite frankly our little parish enviornmental group was much more into practical solutions to environmental problems than that woman was, so she wasn’t really much of an environmentalist compared to us.

 

[lynnvinc]

I’m just thinking that a lot of the animosity towards environmentalism and environmentalists, and toward doing “eco-things” boils down to people’s narrow conception of the enviornment as wild (read “useless”) species in wild/uselss places – the polar bears and rainforests – when truth be known, the enviornment (God’s creation) is also the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the soil and conditions that provide the food we eat, the chemicals the permeate our skin, the climate that allows for life and us to exist.

Compared to the “economy” (which we have misconstrued as the mother that feeds us and makes us rich), the environment (the ecological-biological systems in which we survive and thrive) is fundamental, foundational to life, something God gave us for our well-being – material and spiritual; while the economy is merely contingent upon the enviornment and instrumental. I.e., food is fundamental, grocery stores instrumental – they help us get the food, but a grocery store without food is just no help at all. And animals don’t have economies, but they do okay. So it’s not really “owls v. jobs”; it’s “no jobs (or life) without the environment.”

If we have this deeper understanding of the environment, I think we can more easily start understanding environmental problems and then start looking for solutions.

God is very gracious in helping people to understand environmental problems, and also in helping people find solutions. My entire environmentalism rests on God’s great grace and help, tho my environmental overzealousness that turns some people off, well, that’s my own doing (due to my incomplete trust in God). We must be zealous for God and His kingdom (including putting forth efforts to reduce our harm to the environment/people/creatures/self), but should not be overzealous. I’m telling that to myself.

 

[Do_Good_Then_Go]

BTW, this can also apply to households. My husband and I have saved $1000s over the past 22 years while reducing our GHGs (mainly energy/resource use) by 60%+, without lowering our living standards, even increasing them.

It’s like if you seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, all (I mean ALL) things will be added unto you.

I guess, like many others, I didn’t really believe it – I thought we’d have to sacrifice – before we actually experienced it in reality for ourselves.

However, what I’ve found over the decades (to my shock, tho intellectually I’ve always known it) “there’s no such thing as an economic rational man (or woman).” There is some terrible blockage against doing eco-things that actually save money without lowering living standards. Maybe some Freudian death wish or something. Can’t figure it out for the life me (and I’m a social scientist and should be able to figure it out) Some of it is structural blockages – unless one builds their own home they can’t find a lot of passive solar homes on the market, but much of it is just simply resisting doing the right thing economically, environmentally, and spiritually…because ???

I have found the same thing, and I’m not sure why it is either. There are people who feel that it’s all too much trouble (and don’t we all get a bit like that from time to time?) and there are people who just don’t think about it too much. I can understand that but what I can’t understand are those who think it’s somehow wrong or ridiculous to even consider the effect of our actions on the environment. Many people have an attitude that it’s all there for the taking so why shouldn’t we take, take, take? It doesn’t strike me as a particularly sensible attitude.

If we all took reusable bags to the supermarket even half the time, that would halve the number of plastic bags in landfill and we’d still have plenty of plastic bags because after all, they can be useful to have around. That’s not ‘greenie craziness’, that’s sensible.

Many supermarkets here don’t automatically give you a plastic bag if you only buy a couple of items - you have to ask for one. That seems to make some people almost angry but the way I see it is if I run into the store after work to get milk, I don’t need a bag.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

I think my concern about environmentalists stems from my concern about the first world and unintended consequences.

Mass production allows us to feed and clothe the third world so long as the local political powers allow it. Environmental plan that inhibit or destroy that mass production stop not only the local economy but also the largess to help the third world.

My concern is the failure to use prudence. Common sense and not 10 million regulations.

Is a mercury filled bulb really better for the environment?

 

[lynnvinc]

I have found the same thing, and I’m not sure why it is either. There are people who feel that it’s all too much trouble (and don’t we all get a bit like that from time to time?) and there are people who just don’t think about it too much. I can understand that but what I can’t understand are those who think it’s somehow wrong or ridiculous to even consider the effect of our actions on the environment. Many people have an attitude that it’s all there for the taking so why shouldn’t we take, take, take? It doesn’t strike me as a particularly sensible attitude.

If we all took reusable bags to the supermarket even half the time, that would halve the number of plastic bags in landfill and we’d still have plenty of plastic bags because after all, they can be useful to have around. That’s not ‘greenie craziness’, that’s sensible.

Many supermarkets here don’t automatically give you a plastic bag if you only buy a couple of items - you have to ask for one. That seems to make some people almost angry but the way I see it is if I run into the store after work to get milk, I don’t need a bag.

I read this editorial some 15 years ago in the Christian Science Monitor about how the author really understood enviornmental problems and that we all need to do things to solve them, and his Christianity made it all the more imperative, but that he found it very difficult to do even the most simple eco things, like recycling.

I think the behavioral change things are really hard. I still forget to bring reusable bags to shops. I’ve found if I keep them in the car, and loop them on the back door knob so I’ll remember to take them to the car, that helps (after which I promptly forget to take them from the car into the store). So now I do those things, plus I have a couple of “ChicoBags” in my purse – they are made of light-weight, strong material, with a little bag attached into which the entire big bag can be squeezed. I got them at a local healthfood store. It’s also online for $5.99 (the hefty sticker price made me hesitate a couple of years in getting the 2nd one, which I regret, bec their original original is bigger and better than their “original” one): chicobag.com/category/original

Then, of course, I sometimes forget I have them in my purse…and end up using the store’s bag.

I really love the enviro things we can simply buy, set-up, or install, then forget about them – that don’t require so much strenuous behavioral changes – like CF and LED bulbs, low-flow showerhead with on-off switch, going on GreenMountain 100% wind energy, buying a home close to work, energy efficient appliances (like SunFrost frig), Chevy Volt…

Great for lazy people like myself, and since I forget most of these install-it-&-forget-it things it tends to dampen by arrogance of parading around my eco-behavior, and I actually even often feel bad that I’m not doing nearly enough to reduce my enviornmental impact (having forgotten those install-it-&-forget-it things I’ve done). And it’s true, I’m not doing nearly enough. There is so much more to do, a Mt. Everest worth. So it’s one baby step after another…

 

[M-Dent]

And who might those “many environmentalists” be who are against good stewardship in the way the Church says we should be?

The Holy Father gave a good indication recently.

The environment must be seen as God’s gift to all people, and the use we make of it entails a shared responsibility for all humanity, especially the poor and future generations. I also observed that whenever nature, and human beings in particular, are seen merely as products of chance or an evolutionary determinism, our overall sense of responsibility wanes. On the other hand, seeing creation as God’s gift to humanity helps us understand our vocation and worth as human beings.

---

The Church has a responsibility towards creation, and she considers it her duty to exercise that responsibility in public life, in order to protect earth, water and air as gifts of God the Creator meant for everyone, and above all to save mankind from the danger of self-destruction. The degradation of nature is closely linked to the cultural models shaping human coexistence: consequently, “when ‘human ecology’ is respected within society, environmental ecology also benefits”.

Pope Benedict XVI

And then there is the issue of many types of environmental problems…

I agree there are many environmental problems. And you have some good tips.

In one area of weakness - I have made a more conscious effort to avoid being energy greedy. Finding ways to be more efficient in my use.

Though the greatest effort may be to educate myself. To the best a laymen can. Though, frankly, I tend to ignore a lot of the radical political agendas and try and find cold data. Which is quite laborious at times.

Thankfully, my youngest, in College, is quite well read in matters regarding the environment. It falls within his general area of studies. I enjoy talking and getting information from him on these issues.

Just recently we were in a discussion about a local watershed program and supporting it. We marveled at how the scientific minds back in the day thought, The solution to pollution is dilution. Its a wonder we survived! Heh

 

[Do_Good_Then_Go]

I read this editorial some 15 years ago in the Christian Science Monitor about how the author really understood enviornmental problems and that we all need to do things to solve them, and his Christianity made it all the more imperative, but that he found it very difficult to do even the most simple eco things, like recycling.

I think the behavioral change things are really hard. I still forget to bring reusable bags to shops. I’ve found if I keep them in the car, and loop them on the back door knob so I’ll remember to take them to the car, that helps (after which I promptly forget to take them from the car into the store). So now I do those things, plus I have a couple of “ChicoBags” in my purse – they are made of light-weight, strong material, with a little bag attached into which the entire big bag can be squeezed. I got them at a local healthfood store. It’s also online for $5.99 (the hefty sticker price made me hesitate a couple of years in getting the 2nd one, which I regret, bec their original original is bigger and better than their “original” one): chicobag.com/category/original

Then, of course, I sometimes forget I have them in my purse…and end up using the store’s bag.

I really love the enviro things we can simply buy, set-up, or install, then forget about them – that don’t require so much strenuous behavioral changes – like CF and LED bulbs, low-flow showerhead with on-off switch, going on GreenMountain 100% wind energy, buying a home close to work, energy efficient appliances (like SunFrost frig), Chevy Volt…

Great for lazy people like myself, and since I forget most of these install-it-&-forget-it things it tends to dampen by arrogance of parading around my eco-behavior, and I actually even often feel bad that I’m not doing nearly enough to reduce my enviornmental impact (having forgotten those install-it-&-forget-it things I’ve done). And it’s true, I’m not doing nearly enough. There is so much more to do, a Mt. Everest worth. So it’s one baby step after another…

Haha, yep exactly - I’m the same, I mean it IS hard to remember. I agree that ‘set and forget’ is the way to go wherever possible.

 

[lynnvinc]

I think my concern about environmentalists stems from my concern about the first world and unintended consequences.

Mass production allows us to feed and clothe the third world so long as the local political powers allow it. Environmental plan that inhibit or destroy that mass production stop not only the local economy but also the largess to help the third world.

Of course, we all need to eat and have basic amenities (and some splurge stuff). I don’t think most environmentalists are saying we should go back to cave-men days or even the 19th c.

We can, however, reduce the harms and pollution involved in agriculture and manufacturing, and workplace hazards. There is quite a bit that can be done in these areas, and many solutions actually save money without reducing productivity. We need to go for those solutions first, then in 10 or 20 years we can start thinking about sacrifice (and hope by then further tech innovation will make sacrifice unnecessary or at least reduce our need for it in order to maintain a viable world.

The issue is factories and ag fields are no good if the crops are unable to grow and people are getting sick and dying from pollution and the effects of environmental harms. We need to find an optimal balance that ensures least harm and death of people, while providing them with the things they need (and even desire to some extent).

Check your labels. I imagine a lot of them say, “Made in China.” I have this film I show my students about how China has extremely serious pollution problems and “cancer alleys” from their industrialization that surged ahead without concern for human life or well-being. Some say that while China’s GDP (economy) is increasing by 7% per year, their environmental harms are losing them 10% of their wealth (natural capital, expenses from enviro-illnesses & death) per year – so they are going backwards fast.

My concern is the failure to use prudence. Common sense and not 10 million regulations.

Regulations have helped to restore America to a somewhat more healthy environment (that and our shift from an industrial to service economy). People don’t want their kids dying from pollution.

What we probably need is better enforcement of existing regulations in ways that actually help businesses and people to reduce their harm, without harming their businesses and (prudent) lifestyles – and that’s actually how the EPA handles things – it set up to seek informal solutions first, and only prosecute extremely egregious cases of harm after trying everything else imaginable to get the polluting offender into compliance.

I went to the American Society of Criminology conference a couple of years ago, and an attorney had investigated environmental cases – he found out most weren’t prosecuted at all, and most of the very egregious cases were handled as civil cases, even tho they involved violation of criminal laws and could have been handled as criminal cases.

As one green criminologist in the UK pointed out: why is it a crime not to pick up your dog poop in public places, but not a crime to for a nuclear power plant to dump tons of radioactive waste in the Scottish Sea?

Is a mercury filled bulb really better for the environment?

From what I understand the mercury that is emitted from coal powered electricity for powering an incandescent bulb (beyond the electricity needed for a comparable CF bulb) far outweighs and is far more dangerous than the mercury from CF bulbs (which should, of course, be dealt with and disposed of properly). And I’ve heard there are solutions on the way for mercury-free efficient bulbs, aside from LEDs which are sort of blinding and obnoxious.

But it’s weird – as kids in the 50s we liked to get the mercury from broken thermometers and play with it, watch it bead up and roll around in our hands. We called it “quick silver,” and had no idea it was dangerous. I guess that’s why I’m nearly brain-dead now :hypno:

 

[lynnvinc]

Though the greatest effort may be to educate myself. To the best a laymen can. Though, frankly, I tend to ignore a lot of the radical political agendas and try and find cold data. Which is quite laborious at times.

That’s good. Just ignore those environmentalists and their tactics that don’t fit with Catholic teaching. It’s good you are not using that as a reason to avoid doing eco-things that are within Catholic teaching.

I’m thinking if more good people and good Catholics got on board the environmental movement, then the proportion of bad or extremist environmentalists would decrease.

 

[M-Dent]

One very promising area of development is Water Reuse.

 

[nordskoven]

We can beg the bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart so that she may convert Russia and stop Russia from spreading her errors leading to the annihilation of nations; including nuclear proliferation that would sterilize the whole Earth. But don’t worry, Chernobyl, literally “wormwood,” as in John’s Apocalypse, should take care of those parts of the water that Fukishima doesn’t.

 

[lynnvinc]

One very promising area of development is Water Reuse.

That’s great.

About 20 years ago when I was preparing a Business & the Environment course I came across an article about a plating company in Mass. It involved emitting lots of toxic water into the river, and they knew regs were going to kick in, so they tried various things to reduce their toxic emissions, but nothing got it down low enough. Finally they stumbled across the idea of reusing their water by filtering out the toxins (some of which were valuable chemicals & minerals). It also saved them a great deal on their water bill, which they figured would pay for the “closed-loop” system within 2 years.

Well, a few months after they had installed that system the city water main broke and the whole city was without water for 3 days – but not the plating company. They had their reused water, which kept them in business, allowing those 3 days of profits (which paid for their system right away).

There is also “greywater” systems, where we use our used sink and bath water for watering the garden, etc. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greywater . That also help save on water bills.

Unfortunately our home was already built (we try to buy homes at least 10 years old to avoid harms from new homes’ outgassing of formaldehyde from particle board and plywood, etc), and since it is on a cement slab we can’t use bath water, and I heard greywater is not within our city ordinances…

 

[anilorak13ska]

Many supermarkets here don’t automatically give you a plastic bag if you only buy a couple of items - you have to ask for one. That seems to make some people almost angry but the way I see it is if I run into the store after work to get milk, I don’t need a bag.

What boggles my mind is if I get a 2 gallon jug of milk, that comes with it’s own handy handle, why, pray tell, would I prefer to lug that thing in a plastic bag? I’ve also found that some store policies call for double bagging every last thing, which drives me bonkers. I literally take stuff out if they didn’t see my cloth bag or I didn’t need a bag at all bc if I was able to bring it to the register without a bag or cart, then I can certainly carry it to my car without a bag.

 

[lynnvinc]

What boggles my mind is if I get a 2 gallon jug of milk, that comes with it’s own handy handle, why, pray tell, would I prefer to lug that thing in a plastic bag? I’ve also found that some store policies call for double bagging every last thing, which drives me bonkers. I literally take stuff out if they didn’t see my cloth bag or I didn’t need a bag at all bc if I was able to bring it to the register without a bag or cart, then I can certainly carry it to my car without a bag.

I used to be some 20 up to 10 or so years ago when I brought my bags store clerks would react badly, including even ridiculing me, and my husband would be embarrassed, sometimes lamely saying, “Well, she thinks she has to save the earth,” which would bring on more ridicule.

Some would throw the bags away (if they were store bags I was reusing).

So now I say as I put my bags on the check-out belt before my groceries in a slightly raised and strong voice (with no humor in it), “Can you pack my things in these bags, and if you need more I have some more in my purse.” They now seem a bit more amenable to packing in reusable bags (sort of neutral), esp since their store now is even selling reusable bags with their logo. In fact, once the check-out clerk was my past student, and I had forgotten to put my bags on the belt, and he asked me if I didn’t have reusable bags…which I promotely whipped out of my purse (plastic store bags can also be squashed down and kept in a purse).

But I’ve hardly ever seen anyone else using reusable bags (maybe 2 or 3 people over the past 20 years), except 4 years ago one lady, who also had a bicycle helmet in hand. I thought, I’ve got to meet this lady, so I introduced myself as we were checking out, and it turned out she was chair of the business dept at my university. I kept in touch and when we finally got an environmental studies minor started, coordinated with her to arrange 2 environmental business courses – one on business consultancy (an individual-basis course, which can be done as an environmental consultancy) and another “Business and Sustainability,” in which they talk about the triple bottom line: “people, planet, profit.”