In Spring of 2007, magazines such as Vanity Fair and Elle offered readers ways to "green" their lives and help the environment. Now, the April issue of Glamour brings readers another "57 Little Ways to Save the Planet."
Announcing "Mother Earth needs our help," the article begins by accusing "we use too much fuel (which causes pollution), chop down too many trees, conserve too little water; toss too much waste into landfills."
Glamour tells readers it has consulted its "panel of experts" and come up with the best small ways to fight "these major problems." Of course, Glamour's "panel of experts" is comprised mostly of members of radical left-wing environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
The tips include writing on both sides of your paper, switching to online banking and buying music and movies only through online services to avoid packaging. The article also includes a brief interview with "No Impact Man" Colin Beavan and his wife, who went without toilet paper, deodorant, and processed food for an entire year in order to write a book (no word yet on what that will be printed on - he says it will be "sustainable") detailing the experiment.
Readers also are given 10 ways to "green-over" their homes. Glamour suggests such ideas as looking for wood furniture from "well-managed forests." But if the magazine really wanted to bow to the greens, it could consult the Forest Stewardship Council - which places its seal of approval on products from "well-managed forests" - mentioned in the "green-over" piece. That organization would probably rather see Glamour help to reduce the 5.1 million tons of mostly non-recycled paper the magazine industry uses each year (according to one organization that strives for "a just planet").
Glamour is not the only magazine to push the global warming agenda in recent months. In the fall, Marie Claire advocated "eco-beauty" and "global cooling" so that women could return to wearing coats that cost as much at $17,990.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Go for it Girls
March 13, 2008 - 15:12 ET by allanfYes, you girls at Elle and Glamour should walk up the stairs in your office towers. Keep the air conditioning at 85 degrees in the summer.
Have a good time saving the world girls.
So, we should...
March 13, 2008 - 15:18 ET by SyriusGenevieve,
Make the place in which we live worse? No matter how you slice, dice, and chop it...trying to clean up our messes for the future generations is a goal for everyone to achieve.
I'm not getting the point on why it is so wrong in trying to make the only place we can survive a better place to live.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius
March 13, 2008 - 15:21 ET by MrShyI continue to scratch my head, wondering how a lib's definition -- and recognition -- of the word "hypocrite" can be so different from a non-leftist thinking person....
* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change
MrS, So...raising
March 13, 2008 - 15:33 ET by SyriusMrS,
So...raising consciousness on being more eco-friendly, reducing your "footprint", creating less waste, pollution, leaving behind a better world is wrong?
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius
March 13, 2008 - 15:42 ET by MrShyArg, again.... what I said is, it's funny how you don't see hypocrisy and irony where I and many here do, and vice-versa.
* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change
My footprint is a size 9
March 13, 2008 - 15:51 ET by bassndudeMy footprint is a size 9 1/2. I aint cutting off my toes to make you, or anyone else happy. Trying to leave the world a better place when I am gone. Doing everything I can to see to it the terrorists are a thing of the past. That will ensure a better world. Not holding my breath. You, on the other hand...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Footprint of what?
March 13, 2008 - 19:44 ET by PopularTechWhat footprint am I trying to reduce? CO2? Is that a joke? Should I stop breathing?
I use as much energy as I need and always will.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Stop it before you get Popped again.
March 13, 2008 - 20:19 ET by SyriusPopT,
I truly enjoyed watchin' you get spanked in the other thread. I refuse to get into a battle of wits with the unarmed.
Rog has a better cut & paste with more credibility and humor. Your cut & pastes are just plain boring like your posts. Go away.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius... You are one
March 13, 2008 - 20:29 ET by Clear thinkerSyrius...
You are one sick dude! But do keep posting, I love to see you get your ass kicked at every turn.
"Abstain from McCain"
Syrius,
March 13, 2008 - 20:38 ET by tracheostomyThose fish probably weren't biting today, huh?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Delusional
March 13, 2008 - 22:27 ET by PopularTechI had no idea you were so delusional. But I can promise you I am not going away no matter how long you choose to stay off your meds.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Recycling is worse for the Environment
March 13, 2008 - 15:56 ET by PopularTechWe can start helping the environment by stopping failed socialist policies like energy wasteful and polluting recycling:
Bullshit! - Recycling (Video) (29min)
Recycling is Garbage (The New York Times)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
PTech, 5 cent bottle tax here, 99% ends up at the DUMP.
March 13, 2008 - 20:41 ET by upcountrywaterAs if shipping glass 2,500 miles is "worth' it.. It's cleaned with hot water and separated , stored etc.
yup SUR feels GOOD .
crock.
Iranian uranium; Iranian ICBM's; Iranian satellites..CHANGE is comming BELIEVE in that!
Like, we're serious, sort of
March 13, 2008 - 15:29 ET by Mica the MagnificentWhat would the 60 Minutes cameras discover if they followed the editors and staff of Elle, Vanity Fair and Glamour magazine around town?
They would find hypocrites.
Hmmm...
March 13, 2008 - 15:52 ET by SyriusMica,
Actually, they would probably get stuck in NY traffic. So, imagine for a second...seeing the sites and sounds of the great city unfolding on the small screen with good looking models in the latest fashions..."Hey, was that Spitzer(D)* in the back of that limo with Kristen?...screw this enviro piece- turn around, turn this car around right now!" as the 60 minutes crew turns around for a 'real' story!
Syrius
*making sure to show him as a democrat.
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Sooo. If the 60 Minutes
March 13, 2008 - 16:04 ET by Mica the MagnificentSooo.
If the 60 Minutes crew found they didn't write on both sides of the paper or take public transportation or whatever the latest 'little thing' to do was to save the planet, that wouldn't be a story to you?
Or do you actually believe these people, including the great Algore himself, live by these 'little things' they suggest we do?
I never hear about what Mikey Moore is sacrificing to save the planet.
You're being duped, but you seem to enjoy it.
Still not a valid point...
March 13, 2008 - 16:55 ET by SyriusMica,
What's wrong with following some sound principles in reduction of our own messes? Look if you don't like it, don't ever complain about people burning their trash in their yard, throwing their trash out of their SUVs, and just making the place you enjoy to recreate & live a polluted pigsty.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
U.S. Anti-Pollution Laws Already Exist
March 13, 2008 - 19:10 ET by PopularTechThe U.S. already has anti-pollution laws
- Air Pollution is already regulated in the: 1970 Clean Air Act (Amended: 1977, 1990)
- Water Pollution is already regulated in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Amended: Clean Water Act of 1977, Water Quality Act of 1987)
Who cares if people burn their trash we should actually be using it for energy. Not to mention burning trash is good for the environment!
Combustion Of Waste May Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Science Daily)
But Recycling is still a big waste of time:
Bullshit! - Recycling (Video) (29min)
Recycling is Garbage (The New York Times)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Mica,
March 13, 2008 - 19:19 ET by R D HelmI never hear about what Mikey Moore is sacrificing to save the planet.
Actually, I think I read somewhere that he has reduced his hot dog comsumption from twelve per day to ten per day.
After all, its all about sacrifice, is it not? :-)
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Bravo! Trivializing "Global
March 13, 2008 - 15:32 ET by Chris NormanBravo! Trivializing "Global Warming" hysteria by making it "enviro-chic" will hasten it's fade out. Then we can move on to sane environmental policies that aren't masquerading for socialistic economic policies.
Whatever term you like...
March 13, 2008 - 15:40 ET by SyriusChris,
Global warming, Global climate change, etc...
What would you consider sane enviromental policies?
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
To save typing: 1)Probably
March 13, 2008 - 15:55 ET by Chris NormanTo save typing:
1)Probably any of those you don't support.
2) Any policy that's designed to actually help the environment instead of imposing strict government control on people and economies - like I said in my last sentence.
3) "Global Warming" - and since it's colder this year - "Global Climate Change" (AKA: THE WEATHER) is the latest "crisis" invented to slip socialism under the door.
Reasonable question...
March 13, 2008 - 16:06 ET by SyriusChris,
I asked a very reasonable question on the type of sane environmental policies you would like to see enacted. I would support reasonable environmental policies...it's possible, very possible you may have some to share that I agree with. If you have nothing then just say so instead of trying to make it into some kind of anti-socialist, anti-liberal rant.
By the way, if you're Catholic, the Vatican just made you an environmentalist. Go, Pope!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius, Would you support
March 13, 2008 - 16:20 ET by mastersofdeceitSyrius,
Would you support this?
http://www.whittierd...
I support it and it's almost literally in my own backyard.
Will be interesting to see the fight over this if it gets off the ground.
Good for you! I hope you have stock in Maxis oil!
March 13, 2008 - 17:06 ET by SyriusChris,
That's great for your community. I hope you'll benefit. Just remember to save up for any mishaps or spills- I wouldn't want any of my tax dollars going to help in any clean-up. And how is this a sane enviromental policy? This would be classified as an energy policy for your community.
Syrius
However by the 1980s and `90s, oil companies
were beginning to shut down wells because at the prices of about $12 to
$14 per barrel, they were not economical to operate. Black gold, Texas tea...! I hope the wells don't dry up b/c oil $'s aren't coming down anytime soon...Plus, the oil will be shipped off to the highest bidder leaving you to pay the same average price as everyone else.
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Oil Spill Clean-up is no big deal
March 13, 2008 - 19:15 ET by PopularTechWe are getting better at it every day:
Clean Up - Burning Now An Option To Clean Up Ocean Oil Spills Previously Thought Incombustible (Science Daily)
Clean Up - No Trouble Removing Oil From Water (Science Daily)
Clean Up - Tripling The Efficiency Of A Mainstay Oil Spill Cleanup Technology (Science Daily)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Syrius, evidently, you did
March 13, 2008 - 16:21 ET by bassndudeSyrius, evidently, you did not read what the vatican said. Only what the news wires said. I know that to be true, because of the statement, "...the Vatican just made you an environmentalist....".
A shining moment, then that mouth.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Syrius,Since I am not an
March 13, 2008 - 16:49 ET by Chris NormanSyrius,
Since I am not an environmental scientist and this isn't a site dedicated to the environment, detailing the kinds of policies I might support would be ridiculous. However, without a science or an economic background, I can tell the difference between policies designed to conserve the environment and those designed to maximize government control on the economy and the people using an "environmental crisis" as an excuse. I'm old enough to have lived through the "crises" of "The Population Bomb", "The Garbage Crisis", "Global Cooling", and now "Global Warming". The "solutions" are always the same. As someone said recently,"Socialistic solutions are the 'answer', always looking for a 'crisis' to solve".
So...
March 13, 2008 - 17:08 ET by SyriusChris,
...you don't have any idea on what a sane enviromental policy actually is? Brilliant! We need more people like you at the EPA!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Equally brilliant:
March 13, 2008 - 17:11 ET by tracheostomyEqually brilliant: Beating people over the head with vague; subjective hypothetical phrases like, "sane enviromental policy."
Some would see every word in the phrase mutually contradictory (libertarians for example).
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I'll give Syrius points for not taking my bait though. . .
March 13, 2008 - 17:23 ET by tracheostomyChris: Then we can move on to sane environmental policies that aren't masquerading for socialistic economic policies.
His use of the phrase depended on the contrast that followed (sanity vs. socialism). Syrius attempted to capitalize on it by arbitrarily dropping the comparison and forcing it to hang there empty and alone.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
We need more people like you
March 13, 2008 - 17:22 ET by Chris Norman"We need more people like you at the EPA!"
This is where we stop. I said I was not a scientist and I would hardly be qualified to work at the EPA - as I doubt you are, either. Are only EPA employess permitted to comment about public policy? The difference is, I say it up front, while you traipse around here, acting like you're Professor Wizard. Your comment was ludicrous, pretentious, and obnoxious. Don't bother replying, because I won't.
Chris... Far as I am
March 13, 2008 - 17:24 ET by bigtimerChris...
Far as I am concerned the EPA has been one of the biggest destructive boondoggles in govt., the power they have had has been nothing horrendous.
Trial lawyers delight though....among other groups.
BT, No argument there, BT.
March 13, 2008 - 17:34 ET by Chris NormanBT,
No argument there, BT. Of course, according to Syrius, I have no right to comment on the environment because I'm not an environmental expert like he is. No, I'm just a dumb taxpayer and citizen who helps pay for all this stuff and then am forced to live under the results. Syrius proves my point about government control by snidely implying that we should all just shut up and accept whatever the government and environmental "experts" dish out.
Chris,
March 13, 2008 - 17:45 ET by R D HelmDon't feel too bad. I spent five years in the environmental engineering/consulting field during the EPA's mandated Underground Storage Tank program from 1989-1995.
Believe me, when it comes to "sane" environmental policy, the EPA is about as clueless as it gets (and I have several friends who once worked there).
These are the same government boneheads that decided that MTBE's in gasoline were a really good idea.
Right.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
RD, I can imagine. Yet, you
March 13, 2008 - 18:11 ET by Chris NormanRD,
I can imagine. Yet, you did escape the insanity with your sanity intact. One doesn't have to be an "expert" - like Syrius - to know the EPA has all the wonderful attributes of any government bureaucracy. One just has to observe. However, again, I shouldn't be commenting on this and just live happily under the "expertocracy" of environmental geniuses like Dr. Al Gore.
Chris,
March 13, 2008 - 18:29 ET by R D Helm...you did escape the insanity with your sanity intact.
LOL-Sometimes I wonder about that.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Chris and RD...they have
March 13, 2008 - 18:00 ET by bigtimerChris and RD...they have cost thousands if not millions of jobs in the long run over the years...destroyed businesses with false info., law-suits backed up to heck and back, while people have to move elsewhere and small thriving towns turn to dust to-boot, I could go on and on but I am not in the mood, it is one of my most aggravating subjects, that and oil dependency.
States should be in control, not the govt. when it comes to enviro policies...look at Ca. they have done a helluva job...lol.
I'm out of this subject, just couldn't help myself when I saw your post Chris....plus Sy is well, just Sy, I don't have the patience you do today.
Jumping in late here, but I
March 14, 2008 - 07:17 ET by motherbeltJumping in late here, but I agree on the EPA. In the 90's, President Clinton knew he couldn't get the Kyoto Protocol ratified in the Senate, so he didn't submit it. Instead he tried to implement it piecemeal through Executive Orders and EPA regulations. The EPA was just another tool to circumvent the regular law-making process.
Good job, Brownie!...
March 13, 2008 - 18:10 ET by SyriusChris,
Bye-bye...The comment was about the current Admin. having people without any experience in jobs they were given. Phew...!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius, sane environmental policy will never come from the EPA.
March 13, 2008 - 18:18 ET by R D HelmThat haven for politically-motivated and incompetent "scientists" was compromised nearly 20 years ago. It has been essentially taken over by a bunch of political hacks who have a fat budget and not a clue as to what to do with it as far as truely helping the environment. Ever heard of the "Superfund?"
This is what drove many of us out of the environmental consulting biz in the mid '90s. I still have contacts in that area, and from what I have been hearing, things have only deteriorated further in the time since.
That over-bloated collection of well entrenched, incompetent boobs needs to be either torn down and completely re-built, or, better yet, done away with entirely.
Only the blindest of the blind could ever say that hideous agency has been good for the environment. All it has really ever been is a giant leech which has firmly attached itself to the asses of American taxpayers.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Syrius, please enlighten us
March 13, 2008 - 15:46 ET by bassndudeSyrius, please enlighten us here. So far as Global climate change is concerned. Use your all knowing, infinite wisdom and tell me, just when it was, in the history of this Earth, that the climate was not changing, or has not changed. Inform the rest of us here. We want to know.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
***Crickets
March 13, 2008 - 16:24 ET by bassndude***Crickets Chirping***
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Syrius, I am shocked!
March 13, 2008 - 16:42 ET by tracheostomyYou are NB's champion of the "scientific community"!!!
That's his explanation for everything , "PJ! The scientific community!" LOL.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
My point is being overlooked...
March 13, 2008 - 17:55 ET by SyriusPJ,
You know, as well as I, Chris made a broad generalization about some kind of 'sane environmental policy' except it was an energy policy for his community. So, might you come along and help your brethren in their time of need. They need you. I'm waiting for an answer to my question. Asking me a question is not an answer to my question. I'm shocked at you. This isn't a God subject.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Geez. . .
March 13, 2008 - 18:05 ET by tracheostomySy: You know, as well as I, Chris made a broad generalization about some kind of 'sane environmental policy' except it was an energy policy for his community.
No, it was only a broad generalization if he had failed to contrast it with socialism. He even later clarified when forced into your fake corner (which he didn't even need to do).
Sy: So, might you come along and help your brethren in their time of need. They need you. I'm waiting for an answer to my question. Asking me a question is not an answer to my question. I'm shocked at you. This isn't a God subject.
I was giving you credit for playing dirty, now I'm wondering if you're just plain obtuse. Read my posts. I totally made my point long before you passed 'em up.
And no, don't make me quote myself above and lose all of the remaining respect I still have left for you. It's all there if you're only willing to read it.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Fine...
March 13, 2008 - 18:30 ET by SyriusPJ,
I'm going out to Ore. to do some fly-fishing, I'm just hoping to see my favorite wild rainbow trout alive and well, swimming in the Rogue. I just hope my tax dollars went to saving them. That's sane environmental policy. I'm going to make this into a lightweight argument...and withdraw if you don't mind. Thanks, PJ.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius
March 14, 2008 - 07:47 ET by ThisnThatIf you're going to Oregon to do some fly-fishing, then
A. I hope you are walking to Oregon (doing your little bit, you know)
B. Of course you will use a wooden fishing pole, not one of those hi-tech ones made of petroleum products -- and only use string, not nylon fishing line that, if broken away, will cause the death of little fishies that eat it
C. You won't eat any processed foods on your way out, or while you are there -- you'll catch and eat "renewable resources" -- you know, critters and vegetables. Maybe bark from trees. That sort of stuff.
D. And don't forget to only poop in the woods. Even low-water toilets consume resources. And use leaves, not toilet paper.
I, for one, am really into this whole "save the planet" thing. I heat my house with wood, and only wear genuine fur products, thereby maximizing my use of re-newable resources.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
LOL!
March 14, 2008 - 13:56 ET by SyriusT&T,
A.-Commercially flying to keep our economy going.
B.-I've have bamboo but love my carbon fiber Sage rod (it's not a pole), I'm allowed only so many trout for my breakfast in the morning. Dead little fishies decay and help with the food chain. You do understand or shall I type more slowly.
C.-I try to do my part by not eating processed foods if I can (that sh*t will kill ya). I will try to drink my fair share of the local selections especially the organic wines. Tree bark? You got a recipe to share? By the way, most of the trees are gone, seemed they've been shipped off to Japan.
D.-Consuming renewable natural resources is actually deemed okay! That's why they're called RENEWABLE! I normally do most of my pooping on other's outrageous comments and assumptions...
As a side note, reread what I had said. A sane environmental policy creates a world in which a wild rainbow trout is able to live. It means the river is fresh & clean of pollutants and is able to support the food chain in which the trout relies upon. It helps with the local water supply in supporting the local population. It helps in supporting the local tourism and fishing industries. The list continues...so, what kind of sane environmental policy would be better from your standpoint?
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
The question was posed to all of you...
March 13, 2008 - 17:37 ET by Syriusbass et al,
I'm waiting for the sane enviromental policies to spew forth from your well of knowledge.
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Damn it Syrius!
March 13, 2008 - 17:43 ET by tracheostomyI just gave you credit for being smart enough not to respond, and here you are now beating the same drum!!! Chris' statement was a fair contrast and you're out and out cheating.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Since CO2 is not pollution we can scratch it off the list
March 13, 2008 - 15:59 ET by PopularTech"CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? - it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality."
- Richard S. Lindzen Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology MIT
The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty to regulate 'Greenhouse Gases' only:
- Carbon dioxide (CO2)
- Methane (CH4)
- Nitrous oxide (N2O) (Laughing Gas, Nitrous, NOS)
- Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
- Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
- Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
Car Exhaust consists of:
Harmless:
- Carbon dioxide (CO2)
- Nitrogen (N2)
- Water vapor (H2O)
Some Pollutants:
- Carbon monoxide (CO) *
- Hydrocarbons or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) *
- Nitric oxide (NO) *
- Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) *
- Particulate matter (PM-10) *
- Sulfur dioxide (SO2) *
* Your car's catalytic converter removes about 95% of these pollutants.
Smog consists of:
- Ozone (O3) * (formed from the photochemical reaction of Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) + Hydrocarbons)
- Particulate matter (PM-10) *
- Sulfur dioxide (SO2) *
Now since we already have "sane" environmental policies I propose we do nothing new since we already are doing what matters:
* Air Pollution is already regulated in the: 1970 Clean Air Act (Amended: 1977, 1990)
- Water Pollution is already regulated in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Amended: Clean Water Act of 1977, Water Quality Act of 1987)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
As For Recycling...
March 13, 2008 - 16:37 ET by aeroveloI cant view the links youve posted, but I think I understand how recyling REALLY works...
Here in Denver you see big purple bins made of plastic for recycling. There is also the smaller green bin in use as well. Now, there are plenty of bleeding heart libs around here so of course we have to have a recycling program. However, what really happens is all the paper, plastic, aluminum, glass that is tossed into those bins as well as all the stuff that people just toss into their regular old trash cans goes to the same place [gasp!] yes, its true, there are seperaton facilities all over the place that either, through automated means or with actual people, split the waste into groups based on what its made of. No matter how you dispose of your glass bottle, Coors recycles it. They buy 100% of all recycled glass in Colorado. All the paper is recycled, all plastic the same.
See, waste companies dont own the landfills, they own the trucks and the routes. They have to pay to dump in landfills, so they make their money collecting trash and selling a good chunk of it to companies that buy recycled material so their trucks deliver less poundage of waste to the landfills as each pound cost them.
The truth about recycling it is an extra effort on behalf of the waste management people as they have to make a special trip in a special truck to pick up your recycleables. Thats another CO2 spewing vehicle on the road just to make you feel better about yourself. The plastic bins need to be manufacutured, delivered, and replaced periodically, just so you can feel like youre doing your part.
So when you think youre saving the planet...what youre really doing is just making work for other people.
Oh yeah and youre making money for other people too, as neighborhoods have to pay extra for recycling programs since the trash truck companies know that greenies will pay through the nose to feel better about their habits of consumption.
---
Ask yourself: Do I want a good paying job, or do I want a government hand out. Its that simple!
OUCH!!!
March 13, 2008 - 17:02 ET by tracheostomyAero: The truth about recycling it is an extra effort on behalf of the waste management people as they have to make a special trip in a special truck to pick up your recycleables. Thats another CO2 spewing vehicle on the road just to make you feel better about yourself. The plastic bins need to be manufacutured, delivered, and replaced periodically, just so you can feel like youre doing your part.
Great post. I never saw it that way before. We have something similar in my state and I wonder if the details are the same as well.
Now I'm really confused, upset, disillusioned (pick one).
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
garbage truck math
March 14, 2008 - 09:23 ET by mom_roxI think it depends... from what I see on trash day, it appears that my neighborhood has 2 parts trash/1 part recyclables.
scenario A: no recycling - 3 garbage trucks to landfill
scenario B: with recycling - 2 garbage trucks to landfill and 1 recycling truck to recycling center
So the recycling scenario (B) has the same number of vehicles, but different types with 2 different destinations (assume one is closer than the other). Obviously the economies of scale are lost with recycling, but do other cost benefits (sale of recyclables/less landfill maintenance) make up for this?
Obviously I don't have a cost/benefit analysis, so I can't say either way. Just something to think about.
(edited the original 3:1 ratio to 2:1. this morning was trash day, so I got a better guess at the ratios)
A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw, 1944
it’s a product of every
March 13, 2008 - 16:52 ET by Ruths husband Benit’s a product of every living creature’s breathing"
Great point! Maybe someone could develop a table or a calculator to figure out how many bunny rabbits one would have to kill to offset their own CO2 production. You know, like 1043 bunnies= a 1975 Buick Skylark. Then it would be a scramble to kill enough stuff to make you feel good about yourself (and I already have a hunting license for this year!).
Ruths...I would prefer to
March 13, 2008 - 17:10 ET by bassndudeRuths...I would prefer to know how many deer, elk and polar bears = a 4 X 4 Pick up truck and a belching 2 cycle outboard, and how many I need to kill to off set the CO2 they produce.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Save the Planet!
March 13, 2008 - 15:40 ET by aeroveloThats right...save it for the aliens because long long after humans have evolved into seals or killed ourselves off due to pandemics or out of control genetic engineering...the planet will still be here.
Its likely that the aliens will say "This place is hardly used!" when they get here. So, wring your hands over paper or plastic, illuminate your house with ugly flourescent lights, wipe with only one square or whatever else makes you feel better about being human, but know that the ONLY thing that will remain is this planet. We and every other living organism is but a passing fad.
----
Ask yourself: Do I want a good paying job, or do I want a government hand out. Its that simple!
"Save the Planet" indeed
March 13, 2008 - 19:22 ET by PopularTechGeorge Carlin - The Planet is Fine (Adults Only) (Video) (8min)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
No TP?
March 13, 2008 - 16:08 ET by sixlbs9ozI think I'll buy that dude's book, and then I won't have to use TP for a whole year, either, assuming the book has at least 365 leaves (730 pages).
look in the mirror
March 13, 2008 - 19:02 ET by goldboughApparently "we...chop down too many trees" doesn't include Glamour. I know their magazine is printed on paper. And I'm sure they use tons of ink to print all those pictures. Maybe they should shut down the magazine. Oh wait, that would put people out of jobs, but they don't want to lose their job, just other people's.
Regarding CDs, I never buy over the internet because they're compressed files and don't sound as good when burned to a CD and listened to on my stereo. I combine several CDs onto one throwing out a couple songs I don't like. A high quality MP3 and WAV file sound similar on earbuds, but not through larger speakers. If they sold full quality WAV files over the internet, I would probably buy some that way.
Save the Envronment!
March 13, 2008 - 21:39 ET by CobraManSave the environment! Force Mother Nature to cap CO2 and other pollution from: natural forest fires, volcanoes, bat farts, baby harp seal poop, lactose intolerance (a nod to my wife), compost piles (do you know how much Methane comes from the natural decomposition of biological materials? A hell of a lot.!!! Just hang around a swamp for a while if you don‘t believe me.), algae blooms (there's that damn methane again!), etc. etc. etc. As soon as Mother Nature starts to reduce the pollution she loves to dump in OUR environment, I'll do the same. How about it Gaia, wanna make a deal? You stop polluting my world and I'll stop polluting yours.
And now for some serious debate:
The world is "polluted." It always has been and it always will be. Just about everything we "dump" on the planet, from CO2 to industrial poisons, COMES FROM THE PLANET ITSELF! We're not creating new "pollution." We're just moving it around from place to place, just as the natural processes have been doing for billions of years.
We’re not in danger of extinction due to "pollution" or "Climate Change", but you’ll never know that from the “green” people. For tens of thousands of years we’ve been living in natural “pollution“, yet we continue to adapt and grow. Despite billions of years of natural "pollution" and climatic change, life on earth continues. And, not only does it continue, it actually thrives due to all the pollution and climatic change! Doesn’t that tell you something?