Posts

Posted on

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #1

Eco-Friendly Disposable Diapers
In 2007, 2009 and 2010, a company called terrachoice published a report titled “The Seven Sins of Greenwashing”. And although they found that 95% of “green” consumer products they surveyed were found to be guilty of one of the seven sins, things do seem to be improving. More manufacturers are really living it, not just selling it. In my effort to raise your awareness of “green” claims (and being able to discern the truth about them), I want to post the seven sins here so you can have a better perspective and keep your guard up about manufacturers’ claims.

GREENWASH
Greenwashing is “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.”

SIN #1 – THE SIN OF THE HIDDEN TRADE-OFF
The first sin is suggesting a product is “green” based on a narrow focus without drawing attention to larger environmental issues. The example they use is that of paper from sustainably-harvested forests may not take into account the incredible amount of water and resources that go into producing that paper.

I’m reminded of an old ad that said “8 out of 10 dentists recommend Brand X sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum.” Or “Brand Y Beer is America’s number one imported German Beer.” Both are very narrow areas of focus that may (or may not) miss the larger picture.

The eco-friendly disposable diapers shown above will still go into the landfills and, in my opinion, miss the whole point of whether or not disposable diapers are even a good way to go. Another example is the compostable or biodegradable disposable cups for coffee or water. An incredible amount of water goes into just making these cups, they are used once, then discarded. So while we have “backed up” from styrofoam cups to a more eco-friendly version, we have missed the point that we’re still throwing them away! A washable, reusable cup or glass (or diaper) will have a much more friendly impact on our world and our resources. And you know, it will cost less money in the long-term.

The three “R’s”, reduce, reuse, recycle start with reduce. We need to be willing to step back a bit and look at reducing what we consume first. Before we reuse something (which is the second step) and before we recycle something (third step), we should consider whether or not we should even be using it in the first place. And once we determine if we need to use it, do we really need something disposable or can we use something over and over? We get sucked into the “green” compostable cups or corn-based forks when a little extra time and effort washing glass cups and metal forks might be a better solution.

Our church is starting a new direction with our coffee bar on Sunday mornings. We are switching to glass cups and plates, metal forks and we’re going to wash them. It will be a bit of a challenge (the dishwasher is at the other end of the facility and a long walk), but our team is committed to at least giving it a try. Much of this stems from our belief of stewarding our planet and our spiritual response to our Creator, but you know, I think we’re going to find out we save money, too. And when you get into a win-win situation like that, it’s a good thing.

Next Post: Sin #2 – The Sin of No Proof

Posted on

The Carpet and The Dust Mite

For many years, the concept of wall-to-wall carpeting was marketed to us for our homes. The truly cool, hip homes had carpeting everywhere. Soft, warm and conducive to walking around barefoot, carpet was the status symbol of the 1970s and 1980s.

I remember the house I grew up in. It had linoleum in the bathrooms, kitchen and family room and wood flooring in the rest of the house. I guess in the early 1960s in Oregon, wood floors were cheap. Well, inexpensive at least. When I was in Junior High (Middle School for those of you younger than 45), my parents decided to join the “wave” and carpet the whole house. I resisted. I liked my wood floor. It was a beautiful, warm reddish-brown. And it was easy to keep clean. Not that cleaning my floor was anything I ever really did (I was 13, after all). So, after much prodding and stubbornness on my part, I convinced my parents that while they were going to carpet the rest of the house, they should leave my bedroom the wood floor. And I won.

So the entire time I lived at home (which was until I finished college and got married), my bedroom had a wood floor. I’d like to say I was smart and ahead of my time and all that, but really I just liked the wood floor.

Since then, I have learned that carpeting is probably one of the dirtiest, hazardous-to-your-health aspects of our homes. We spend almost 90% of our time indoors, so the indoor environmental quality (IEQ) of our homes is very important. And in a study “Allergy-Resistant Housing – Principles and Practice”, common allergens in the home list dust mites, pollen, pet dander and fungi and molds high on the list of importance related to the effects these things have on our health. Dust mites feed on human skin flakes and live and breed predominately in our carpets. Pollens get tracked in on our shoes and clothes and can easily be transferred to our carpets.

Cleaning carpet is an interesting concept. Most vacuum cleaners just stir the dirt, dust and mites around. Have you ever seen a vacuum when you first turn it on have that “puff” of dust and dirt go flying around? Think about that for a minute then tell me if you think it’s really doing any good, serious cleaning. We have a central vacuum system in our current home so at least the dirt goes outside our home into a canister in the garage.

But the wake up call or realization or whatever you may want to call it came the first time we had the carpet professionally cleaned. The extractor water was black. And I’m thinking “I’m walking on this, laying on this to watch TV, breathing this.” And while we have some wood floors in our home, most is still carpet. The other thing we’ve noticed is when we dust mop or simply sweep the wood floors, there is an incredible amount of dust and dirt. And my wife and I think “this is also throughout our carpets…”

You may notice in my posts that we are designing a new, smaller home. We are also targeting a LEED Platinum rating. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a third-party rating system for sustainability and healthy buildings. One of the LEED emphases is hard-surface flooring. They, too, recognize the health benefits to not using carpet.

So as we are designing our new home (view the Lawrence Street House posts), we’ve committed to using all hardwood floors. Everywhere. We will have no carpet. If we have rugs, they will be throw rugs that can be removed and cleaned periodically. And we will have a healthier home.

Posted on

Simple Sometimes is Really Good

OK, so a few days ago I dissed on the one-cup coffee makers with all the disposables. Now for something truly sustainable and amazing. It’s the Niagra Stealth HET (High Efficiency Toilet). Made by Niagra Conservation, the Stealth toilet is a single flush, using only 0.8 gallons. Most of the new dual flush toilets are 0.9 and 1.6 gallons per flush, depending on whether or not you are flushing #1 or #2. This toilet uses air-assist to achieve the results and seems to work very well.

I haven’t actually used one or seen it “in action”, but all indications are that it’s pretty amazing. It recently received recognition as one of the Top 10 Green Products for 2010 by the Environmental Building News organization.

It also is simpler, with less moving parts. It uses air and vacuum in the filling to help the efficiency of the flush, is quiet and retails for about the same as a good quality standard toilet: $300. It currently comes only in white. But it may the future of HE toilets.

Posted on

Advent Conspiracy – Give Presence

Sunday, November 28 marks the beginning of Advent. A few years ago, a group of pastors in Portland, Oregon started the Advent Conspiracy. Their concept was simple: Worship Fully, Spend Less, Give More and Love All. You’ve probably noticed in my posts that I have a tug in my heart toward those who are the disenfranchised and the less fortunate. And actually, how this fits a simple, sustainable lifestyle is this: we have so much, if we lived just a little simpler, just a little less in the American-Dream-Consumption-Mentality, we could share. Even just a little.

I also have a good friend, Emily, who has a tug in her heart toward an awesome organization called Heifer International. Heifer International was founded in 1944 by a midwestern farmer named Dan West. His story is fascinating. Click here to read it.

Because of Emily and the Advent Conspiracy, I decided this year to lobby my online friends (Facebook and other) to donate an Ark through Heifer. The Oregon Ark is our team and our goal is $5,000. That $5,000 will provide a bevy of animals, two-by-two around the world to people in areas of extreme need.

The Advent Conspiracy mentions how Americans spend $450 BILLION every year on Christmas. Watch their video here. How many times have you bought a gift out of obligation? How many times have you received a gift out of that same obligation?

I’m suggesting, as they do, that you consider buying ONE LESS gift this Christmas. Just one. And consider sending that $25 to Heifer through The Oregon Ark Team to help people around the world who really NEED a sustainable source of food and income.

Food. Income. Hope.

Consider helping your neighbor this Advent Season.

Posted on

Easy Doesn’t Always Mean Simple

My wife and I were out and about today and visited Bed Bath & Beyond. As we wandered through the store we came upon one of those product demos for a Krups Nescafe Dolce Gusto Piccolo 15 Bar Single Serve Beverage Maker (whew!) in Titanium/Black. I had been talking about doing some product reviews and had some thoughts mulling around on different products I could comment on.

But this one tipped the scale for me. As we listened to the demo, we saw how you could take individually-wrapped “capsules”, insert them into the machine, flip the lever and, viola! have an espresso or cappuccino in just minutes. For regular espresso, only one capsule is needed, but for a cappuccino, it takes two. And, of course, the pods are disposable.

By now, you may have sensed where I’m going with this. To enjoy the easy brewing of an eight ounce cappuccino, I will throw away, two capsule containers (plastic, I think, but not recyclable since they are contaminated with food waste) and for every eight cups, will consume a small cardboard box (which at least is recyclable). And the cappuccinos will cost me about $1.13 each (for just the capsules).

There are many ways to brew coffee and espresso without disposing and filling landfills. I have an espresso machine that has a metal reusable portafilter. Nothing disposable in it. And my coffee grounds make a great addition to the compost bin (if you’re so inclined).

For regular coffee, there are the cone filters that are washable and reusable. Single cup and for the brewers. And at $1.25 per cup for the Krups Nescafe Dolce Gusto Capsules, you’ll pay for the cost of a $10 reusable filter in a few days and even a fancy, durable $300 espresso machine in several months. I’ve had mine for two years and it’s still going strong.

Does this take more time? A little. Is it less money? A lot. Is it better all-around? Absolutely.

Posted on

Mary S. and the Egan Warming Center

The other day, I saw a post on my Facebook News Feed about the Egan Warming Center. I’ve lived here in Eugene for most of my life and had never heard of the Warming Center. Administered by St. Vincent dePaul, the Egan Warming Center’s mission is to provide homeless people in Lane County a place to sleep indoors when temperatures drop to 28º or below between November 15 and March 31. Several churches in our area open their facilities for people to sleep when it gets cold. So I reposted the link on my Facebook and said, “this is worth getting the word out.” Then I went about the rest of my day.

Little did I know that on my way home that night (I had a late meeting downtown and was catching the late bus), a lady who appeared to be homeless got on the bus wanting to know where a particular church was. It happened to be one of the churches that host the homeless on cold nights.

I told her it was a couple of stops after my stop, and a young couple on the bus also said they were headed there, too. She was grateful for the help and caring and we struck up a conversation. Actually, it was more I got to listen to her story for the 15 minutes until my stop. About halfway into the conversation I said, “My name’s Bill, what’s yours?” and she said “I’m Mary S.” and we shook hands.

It’s interesting how it’s easy to judge someone by their looks yet when you talk to them (I did get a few words in), you find they have a lot on the ball. Mary S. had thin hair, deep furrows on her perfectly-round face and meticulously-applied pink lipstick. Yet her lipstick wasn’t gaudy; it was tastefully applied.

I listened as she talked about the atrocities of shooting gray wolves, the slaughter of seals, global warming and the awfulness of animal farming and how selfishness was really at the root of it all. It was a fascinating time. She had some very deep insights into this world and life in general. It looked like she had most, if not all, of her possessions in the two plastic grocery bags she carried with her.

And it made me realize just how fortunate I am. As I came home to my warm house, hot mocha and electric blanket, I thought of Mary S. and the wonderful volunteers who will spend all night giving her, the other young couple on the bus and who knows how many others the ability to have a warm, dry place to sleep.

And it made me think how the simple act of riding the bus goes way deeper than just reducing my carbon footprint and living a simpler, sustainable lifestyle; it’s an opportunity to meet people you wouldn’t normally talk with. And that can open up some amazing conversations and friendships.

By reducing my carbon footprint, I think I just increased my heart footprint.

Posted on

Empty Buses and Mass Transit – Part 3

Social Equity and Culture

I briefly talked in my last post about the free-market and bus fares of $15 and $10-a-gallon gas. I wanted to expand that some more here.

Even though we are in a culture where most people own cars, there are still those who do not. So what about them? How can or should they get around? And even if everyone DID have a car, how would that affect our street and road system? To answer that, if you live in or visit the Eugene-Springfield area, just drive out West 11th most any time of day or Beltline Road any weekday afternoon after about 3:30 pm.

Building and widening roads is not the answer. You can find all sorts of evidence that transportation options (cars, buses, bikes, walkability) all contribute to a more livable community and greater social equity. When people have options, are able to walk or bus or bike or drive, then the financial impact in their life becomes more of a choice than a burden. And I hear people complaining that LTD is cutting routes and services while wanting to spend money on the EmX route. The problem with that is the monies come from different sources: regular routes are largely payroll taxes and constructing the EmX is largely Federal funding. If we don’t spend the Federal money on the EmX, the Feds will spend it somewhere else. It can’t be used for regular service; plus Bus Rapid Transit such as the EmX is much more efficient.

I’m fortunate enough that I could afford to drive my car every day to and from work. It’s a nice car and gets relatively decent mileage. I can afford to pay the regular service on it and all that. But when I discovered my transportation choices, it has done several things in my psyche.

First, when I ride my bike, I get exercise and fresh air and my metal attitude when I arrive at work is much calmer. Multiple benefits.

Second, when I ride the bus, I can read a book or strike up a conversation with a new acquaintance and broaden my circle of friends. Multiple benefits.

Third, when I drive, I can have the option of not having to plan my day quite as tight. Multiple benefits.

But some people don’t have all three choices. And the most expensive of those three options is the car. While there may be many who ride the bus because they want to (and I think there are; after all, I’m one of those), there is also a segment of our society who need the option of mass transit in order to make their monthly budgets work.

Do we really care about our neighbors?

Posted on

Empty Buses and Mass Transit – Part 2

Money and Subsidies

It often really gets down to money. Seems like that’s always the case, doesn’t it? Just for the record, some facts from Lane Transit District (LTD) on the most recent costs and expenses…

LTD has, as of May 2010, an annual ridership of over 11 million boardings. For perspective, my daily ride to and from work alone would be considered 4 boardings. After all, there are only about 250,000 people in the Eugene-Springfield area. The average passenger fare is $0.62 of the actual expense of $2.91 (about 21%). The remainder is made up from payroll taxes. An all-day pass costs a passenger $3 and a monthly pass is now $48.

I am an employer so I know full-well about the payroll tax. I think there is part of the rub. Bottom line is none of us really like paying taxes. Doesn’t matter if it’s payroll, income, sales; if it’s a tax, we don’t like it. Now that we’ve got that on the table, taxes are necessary in our culture. And we can debate taxes and subsidies and name things whatever we want and probably reach no concrete solutions.

But the argument I often hear is for the bus system to be self-supporting. That we shouldn’t subsidize it and it should run just like a business. I understand that view, but unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective), virtually all forms of transportation are subsidized (maybe with the exception of bicycling, but let’s talk bike paths and bike lanes…).

Most of the argument is centered around cars when people talk subsidies for the bus. I really think that’s because those arguing that point only drive cars and don’t ride the bus. If it doesn’t affect me, it doesn’t matter as much. It’s much easier to support a tax on cigarettes when you don’t smoke.

But where this argument breaks down is in the oil subsidies that exist. Many people don’t realize that the oil and gasoline industry (even while raking in billions in profits), is one of the most heavily-subsidized industries out there. And I’m going to make you Google that yourself; do some searching and see what you come up with.

So my first thought was “let’s just get rid of ALL the subsidies; oil, gas, bus, etc” and let the free market rule it all. But then I got to thinking that would probably mean a bus trip would cost $15, a gallon of gas would cost $10 or more and what about the person making minimum wage trying to get to and from work? I think you can quickly see the vicious cycle we are in. As I am wont to say: Everything is connected.

I really think the answer is balance. And perspective. If you complain about the bus, do you ride the bus? If you complain about the new bike bridge over Delta Highway, do you walk or bike? If the answer to either of those questions is “no” or “no, but…” go back and read my Transportation Options post. Then walk, bike or ride the bus one day.

It can change your perspective.

Next Post: Social Equity and Culture

Posted on

Empty Buses and Mass Transit – Part 1

As you’ve probably read and figured out by now, I’m a proponent of mass transit. Even here in sleepy little Eugene, Oregon (well, maybe “sleepy” isn’t the right term, but I think you get my point). We are currently having a community “discussion” about extending the West Eugene EmX line. In many places, there are “No Build” signs from people and businesses who don’t want the extension of our BRT (bus rapid transit) EmX system.

One of the arguments against the BRT (and, I think the bus system in general) is the comment about “empty buses”. I hear people (generally non-bus-riders) often comment, “the buses are running empty most of the time, why am I paying subsidies to run empty buses?” or “we should charge riders what it actually costs to run the bus and not tax employers” and “LTD (Lane Transit District) is cutting routes, why are they spending money on extending the EmX?”

Over the next few posts, I’d like to comment on each of these.

Empty Buses
I’ve been riding now for about a year. Not every day, but often; probably about 35-50% of my commuting is now by bus. I won’t go into my philosophy on this (but I would encourage you to read some of my previous posts). But I do want to respond to the “empty bus” comments. As I ride to work, I catch the 36 at my Park and Ride in West Eugene, head to Eugene Station (our “hub”), then transfer to the 66 to my office. When the 36 arrives at my Park and Ride, there are probably 4 or 5 people on board. As we approach downtown, we end up with probably 20+. From downtown (on the 66), we start with 10-15 people. As we approach the midpoint of the “loop”, we drop people off at work and at Valley River Center (about the halfway mark), we’re often down to 1 or 2 people. And this continues for maybe one or two stops, then we start picking up people again as the 66 loops back into town.

And here’s my point: at any time if a person looks at a bus, it may have 20 or more people or it may have 1 or 2. At the times you see 1 or 2 people, I would bet the bus is at the midpoint of its loop, having dropped off a bunch of folks and is now starting to pick people up. A better observation would be to see how many are on the bus into and out of Eugene Station; that would be a better test of true ridership.

And I can tell you at those points, the buses are often standing-room only.

Next Post: Money and Subsidies