Posted on

Kampuchea 2011

My wife and I recently returned from a week and a half trip to Cambodia. We went with a team from our church to work on helping to build a church in a village near Takeo as well as paint at a school near the same village.

While there, we accomplished quite a lot for 13 people, but the work was back-breaking (the building project) and tedious (the painting project.) During our few days working, we found ourselves saying things like “all we really need is a back hoe” or “an air compressor and paint sprayer would sure make this go faster and easier.”

Yet a simple comment from the missionary we know there gave me pause and created some contemplation. His remark was “Yes, but with that, you’d probably have just put about 5 or 6 Cambodian people out of work.” As I thought about that, I thought about my desire to live a simpler, more sustainable lifestyle.

Maybe all our time-saving devices aren’t necessarily the best things for us. Things like styrofoam cups are easy, disposable and cheap. But a glass cup is more durable and better for the environment (even if we have to wash it each time.) Disposable diapers are easy, but are clogging up landfills. What would happen in our society if we went back to returnable, washable milk bottles? We’d create (or restore) a whole segment of industry that we’ve lost.

And I think we’d restore some of the relational connections that we’ve lost with technology. We Facebook our friends, but how often do we actually meet them in person for coffee? Or lunch? Or dinner?

As my team in Cambodia was painting shutters, we had some very wonderful times of conversation. Talking, philosophizing, getting to know each other better. Did it take longer? Yes. Was it worth it? Absolutely.

Maybe as we live our lives, we should consider the face-to-face relational things more. Seems like it would help us politically in our Country (that’s a whole other post…) as well as with our desire to live a simpler, more sustainable lifestyle. I encourage you as you Facebook that friend, to see if they want to get together for coffee. Live. In person.

I think you’ll be glad you did.

Posted on

NewWood – A Revolutionary Idea

As a stark contrast to the Numi toilet I recently panned, I’m totally excited about the concept behind NewWood. Starting with a nuclear power plant in Washington that was never completed or brought online, some very resourceful entrepreneurs have come up with what just could be one of the most revolutionary ideas to come along in a very long time.

Taking a mix of 50% recycled wood and 50% recycled plastic, they have started production (just within the last few days) on a 4×8 sheet that could replace much of the way we currently make plywood and sheet goods for underlayment, etc.

We spoke with Steve Pottle, from NewWood and are getting some samples. Our primary thought is to use them in our kit homes endeavor for developing countries, World3Homes. We had been looking for a sheet good that was durable, insect and moisture resistant, flexible for earthquake resistance, lightweight and economical. So far as we can tell, NewWood fits the bill on all counts.

What excites me about NewWood is the wood comes from wood waste that would have gone into the landfills, like some construction demolition waste, so it’s appropriate to be taking that material and reusing it in buildings. The plastic comes from plastic bottles and bags that may or may not get recycled (there seems to be plenty of it to go around). And the factory is recycled, too — a nuclear power plant never finished that was going to be a manufacturing facility that never started in an area of Washington with chronic unemployment.

The other thing about NewWood that I appreciate is NewWood itself is 100% recyclable. When it has served its useful life, or someone remodels, NewWood can be broken down and recycled again and again.

That’s truly forward-thinking. Once I get my sample and we have a chance to try it in our first World3Homes prototype, I’ll revisit this and let you know how it performs. Oh, and thanks to Preston Koerner from JetsonGreen; that’s where I first heard about NewWood.

Posted on

Zero Waste and the Johnsons

I came across this video at JetsonGreen and just had to share it.

I first heard of the Johnsons via a friend sharing the link to her zero waste home blog and was intrigued by Bea’s take on the three Rs. Before you ever get to reduce, reuse or recycle, you should refuse, refuse, refuse. This is a concept I can completely support. I’ve often shared how we are such a consumer-driven society that we buy, buy, buy and really need to be stepping back and evaluating our lifestyles. That’s part of what I’ve tried to share here at thesimpleHOUSE.

I’m encouraged and humbled by the Bea and Scott. This gives me even more to strive for.

Posted on

Compromise or Consensus: The Heart or the Mind?

I’ve had some conversations recently related to compromise and consensus. Just like many people think compostable and biodegradable are one-in-the-same, many also think compromise and consensus are synonyms; but they aren’t.

COMPROMISE
Compromise is defined by Webster as “settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions.” In plain English, this means when reaching a decision, each party gives up something. They concede.

CONSENSUS
Consensus is defined by Webster first as “general agreement” and second as “group solidarity in sentiment and belief.” Also known as buy-in. Its root is in the Latin word “consentio” meaning to “feel together.”

I’m big on consensus; I’m not so enamored with compromise. Compromise has such a negative connotation. We went to dinner with some friends and he made a comment that resonated with me. It applies here. He said “we need to agree at the heart level, not the intellectual level.”

What I took from this was that compromise is the intellectual level. Our mind rationalizes and comes to conclusions and we may get to a point of tolerating our neighbor. But we don’t really love our neighbor. That comes from consensus.

Consensus is the heart level. It’s the buy-in. The “feel together” aspect of a decision. We reach a conclusion with another and we own it. Too often, we give in or we argue to win and it’s really boiling down to how it affects me. Not my friend, not my neighbor. Me. Selfish, self-centered me. And when we “lose” or don’t win completely, we compromise. A decision is made not in line with our desire and we say something like “He’s not MY President,” or “She’s not MY Mayor.” (I’ve seen and heard those exact quotes — and I think you have too).

What I appreciate about consensus is the feel together, solidarity aspect it brings. The heart. We can disagree on compostable versus biodegradable versus recyclable versus reusable, but the real issue is do we care about the Creation around us? And really, when it gets to that heart level, I think we are all “feeling together” or in solidarity that we do. While I have friends with a vast range of opinions on global warming, climate change, drilling for oil and solar photovoltaics, I think one opinion we all share is we like this Earth we live on and want it to be a pleasant place to live.

And I guess that’s where I struggle with where we are at as a culture right now. In politics, in religion, we dig in our heels, we demand our way, we argue and refuse to even compromise, much less reach any kind of consensus. A public speaker I admire once said “This is really about That.”

We argue in the political arena about styrofoam cups or compostable cups. We debate the content of a book without ever having read it. And, I believe the bottom line in the argument has really nothing to do with the environment or the book, but rather a power trip to prove who is the Alpha Male. In the first situation, I’d like to believe both sides would really like to see less waste, less garbage, spoons that don’t break, etc. But we resort to positioning and strutting instead of addressing the issues of waste and breaking spoons. Because we don’t ever want to appear to compromise. And the second situation is positioning myself as the expert (back to that Alpha Male scenario).

I wonder what would happen if, in every decision we had to make as a group, in every political arena, every religious arena, we started with outlining what we agree on. Before we ever got into the issue, we listed the things we agree on. Then list our goals. What do we want to accomplish in this venue? And then (and only then), we worked toward consensus and general agreement and solidarity.

I think then, we would really be loving our neighbor instead of merely tolerating them.

Posted on

Good Earth Home Show 2011

This was the second year, we were at the Good Earth Home Garden and Living Show. My architectural firm, Arbor South Architecture had a booth last year and we did it again this year.

This was also the second year we did a seminar. In 2010, we talked about our award-winning LEED Platinum home, theSAGE. This year, I was asked to speak again as part of an Architect focus. By the time I was asked, the topics of building a smaller house, energy efficiency (specifically via the Passivhaus concept) and why to hire an Architect were already taken. So I thought I’d share some of my thoughts that I’ve been sharing with you all here on my blog.

So if you attended the seminar today and enjoyed it, thank you; I enjoyed presenting it. I know the topics were a bit circular and not linear, but as I mentioned, everything is connected. And when everything is connected, it’s very hard to go in a straight line. This affects that and so on. But it’s rewarding to realize how one thing we do can affect another, which in turn can affect yet another. It kind of makes the shift in our paradigm and lifestyle choices all worth it.

I appreciated your questions and comments today. I do welcome your comments on the seminar. What you liked and even what you didn’t like. I also encourage your suggestions on what I should talk about next. Topic ideas are always helpful. For those who are interested, Click Here for my Front Porch article.

Thank you for allowing me to present you with a “shameless plug” for this blog. And again, thanks again for attending!

Posted on

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #5

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 #5 – THE SIN OF LESSER OF TWO EVILS
Well, I struggled with this sin. Not that I gave in (have never smoked, never had the desire to smoke), but that there were a couple of pictures I could have used. The lesser of two evils sin deals with making a claim that diverts your attention from the real problems. The picture I decided to use is that of a company that makes organic cigarettes. Really. Organic cigarettes.

And not only that, but the smoke screen (pun intended) continues because not only are these cigarettes organic (natural tastes better, after all), their tobacco has been grown “in a responsible, sustainable way through our earth-friendly and organic growing programs.” The ad goes on to list how they are reducing their “footprint on the earth by using recycled materials and renewable energy sources like wind power.” And, as ATIS547 from flickr (who posted the photo) added after their quote “protecting the earth is as important to us as it is to you” by saying “in other words, the earth is fine — it’s YOU we’d like to see dead.”

I used their picture because they seem to win the prize (at least in my book) for the most attempts at diversion. But I have to confess it was a close one between these cigarettes and the 2011 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid SUV.

The Tahoe hybrid gets an amazing 20 mpg in town (better than the 15 mpg of the standard Tahoe) and hauls up to eight people. My problem is I rarely see more than one or two people in most any SUV. And that’s where the issue arises for this sin: the increase in fuel economy actually diverts your attention from the real problem. And that is that most times, you don’t need an SUV for carting one or two people around.

So I guess I just want to point out that we should, once again, be very discerning in the ads that bombard us all the time. The cigarettes even have the disclaimer “No additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette.” Oh, really?

And I’ll be the first to say if you regularly cart six or eight people around, the Chevy Tahoe hybrid might be a good choice for you. But if you’re like most of us who drive around with one (at most two) people in our vehicles, maybe a smaller car (or the bus…) might be a better option.

Don’t get sucked into the hype; stay focused on the real issues.

Next Post: Sin #6 – The Sin of Fibbing

Posted on

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing – Sin #2

"Mother Earth Approved"
photo by Adam Kuban
Today we’ll dive into Sin #2, The Sin of No Proof. But first, as a reminder, here’s a definition of Greenwashing:

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 #2 – THE SIN OF NO PROOF
The Sin of No Proof is one where there isn’t a readily-available way to verify the claim. So my picture here of a wine “bottle” that claims to be “Mother Earth Approved” would be deceptive in that you can’t verify that claim. I visited the website for this wine and I think this is probably done largely in jest, but it’s still a claim that can’t be substantiated. The cartons are made of paper, “a renewable resource that comes from trees.” and are recyclable (much like milk cartons).

But many of the claims on this particular product’s website about package ratio, CO2 footprint, fuel efficiency (because they are lighter to transport) would be difficult to quantify. Sometimes a manufacturer will make claims that try to snow you with facts or figures or fine print that really can’t be determined or with data that is irrelevant or so vague as to be irrelevant.

“Green Guides” is a publication of the Federal Trade Commission that is seeking to set out some strict guidelines for what is appropriate in an advertiser’s claim and what isn’t. One example they give is a good indicator of what we need to be aware of:

“A trash bag is labeled ‘recyclable’ without qualification. Because trash bags will ordinarily not be separated out from other trash at the landfill or incinerator for recycling, they are highly unlikely to be used again for any purpose. Even if the bag is technically capable of being recycled, the claim is deceptive since it asserts an environmental benefit where no significant or meaningful benefit exists.”

As with all advertising claims, green or not, we as consumers need to be smart and aware. We need to pay attention, read closely how claims are worded and be sure we make the best decisions we can on our product purchases. The purpose of advertising is to get us to buy the product. And while many manufacturers will make accurate claims, there are those who will not. And with the proliferation of “green” as a consumer buzz-word and desire most of us have, we need to be even more aware.

Next Post: Sin #3 – The Sin of Vagueness

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

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

Hannah’s House Freedom Walk

Hannah’s House, a local faith-based recovery program had their Freedom Walk yesterday to help raise money for their very effective program.

You can visit their website to learn more about the work they do, but I just wanted to post how I’m personally glad they also care about our environment. The walk ended with food and snacks and as you can see by the enclosed photo, they separated compost, trash and recyclables. Kudos to Hannah’s House for caring for people and for our world.