Eco-Friendly Living

Forum for General Topics not covered by other areas.
TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:18 pm

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Florida (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards told a labor group Tuesday that he would ask Americans to make a big sacrifice: their sport utility vehicles.

"I think Americans are actually willing to sacrifice," Edwards said during a forum held by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "One of the things they should be asked to do is drive more fuel efficient vehicles."

The former North Carolina senator was asked specifically if he would tell them to give up their SUVS. He said, "Yes."

Longshot candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio also spoke to the group and said he had a machinists union flag hanging outside his congressional office and that he is a strong supporter of workers.

Edwards was clearly popular with the group, several times drawing standing ovations, including once when he said weapons and equipment used by America's military needs to be made in the United States. He said now tanks and ammunition for M16 rifles are being made in other countries.

"If your tax dollars are being used to produce the products that keep America safe, that provide defense for the American people, those jobs should remain in the United States of America," Edwards said.

He also said as president he would ask residents to conserve energy and said the nation needs to focus on being a leader in creating alternative energy. He said he wants a national cap on carbon dioxide emissions that is lowered each year.

"We are the worst polluter on the planet. We are 4 percent of the world's population, we're putting out 25 percent of the world's greenhouse gas," Edwards said. "America's going to have to change."

Edwards was asked during his appearance how he explained the contradiction of asking Americans to sacrifice while he's living in a 28,000-square-foot mansion.

He said he came from nothing, worked hard all his life, has always supported workers and fought big corporations as a lawyer.

"I have no apologies whatsoever for what I've done with my life," he said to loud cheers. "My entire life has been about the same cause, which is making sure wherever you come from, whatever your family is, whatever the color of your skin, you get a real chance to do something great in this country."

Kucinich was also well received at the convention, and played up his reputation for being against the Washington establishment.

The machinists conference was held at a Walt Disney World convention center, and he told the crowd, "I come from a place you can call Disney World on the Potomac."
-------------------------------------------------

I think he makes a good point, although he is hypocritical for living in a 28,000 square foot mansion, and having a fleet of gas guzzlers himself. The story got me thinking about cleaner living. What would you change to better our environmental impact? Have you seen any good ideas floating around?
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

User avatar
Old Scout
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Born, raised and live in Tomahawk
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Old Scout » Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:01 pm

And you actually believe that BS about being the worst polluter when compared to China, Russia and most of the other third world countries that have no pollution standards. Typical political garbage that is wrong as usual. :roll:
The National Institutes of Health has just released the results of a $200 million research study completed under a grant to Johns Hopkins.
The new study has found that women who carry a little extra weight live longer than the men who mention it.

Dawn
Beginner
Beginner
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Dawn » Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:13 pm

So I take it you have no thoughts or ideas on how to lessen our environmental impact as Tenacious T asked Old Scout? Only smart *** comments??

<small>[ September 08, 2007, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Dawn ]</small>

TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:29 pm

Actually, I do believe that "BS" about the States being the worst polluter. True, third world industrial countries like India and China don't have pollution standards. However, we have "standards" that are catered to our needs. We have way more toys than the average Chinese family. Gas mowers, 4 wheelers, multiple vehicles, gas guzzling vehicles, motorboats....we could start a post on listing inefficient things around the home.

There are now vehicles available that, after 2,000 miles of driving, produce less emissions than the average lawn mower creates during one course over your front yard. The same vehicle (Ford Fusion ULEV) produces cleaner air straight from its tailpipe than you can breathe walking down the streets in Los Angeles. Ironically, this vehicle is not yet available for sale in the United States. Many other cars meet the same criteria, such as the Volkswagen Lupo (93 mpg on a non-hybrid engine) in Europe. The number of e85 plants are growing, but very slowly, and the number of cars that can utilize e85 to its full potential are small. Similarly, while the technology to produce low-emissions Bio-Diesel is readily available, efficient vehicles are few and far between (2 Volkswagen models, a few BMW, zero from the U.S. boys). Even fewer and farther between are stations that actually carry Bio-Diesel. Europe is passing laws that make renewable energy mandatory. Japan and China have been improving the electric vehicle marked for decades now. Small vehicles and public transportation are about all you'll find in India and Southeast Asia. So tell me again that the United States has a better environmental ethic. Think about it next time you drive somewhere alone, or when you drive a few blocks to save time. Many people do it, and it's time to change our lazy and inefficient habits. So again, I ask you, do you have any ideas to improve our current situation?
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:33 pm

Also. Maybe look into this map on the positions regarding the Kyoto Protocol.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Kyoto_Protocol_participation_map_2005.png
You'll notice Australia and The United States are the big stubborn stains that won't budge.
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

User avatar
Old Scout
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Born, raised and live in Tomahawk
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Old Scout » Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:10 pm

Also. Maybe look into this map on the positions regarding the Kyoto Protocol.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Kyoto_Protocol_participation_map_2005.png
You'll notice Australia and The United States are the big stubborn stains that won't budge.
While you are at it, look up the reasons they won't budge. You may be enlightened.
The National Institutes of Health has just released the results of a $200 million research study completed under a grant to Johns Hopkins.
The new study has found that women who carry a little extra weight live longer than the men who mention it.

User avatar
logic1
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: born in Tomahawk - family
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby logic1 » Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:26 pm

well Dawn, do YOU have any ideas to offer? don't criticize Old Scout if you aren't willing to donate your ideas also........I wish I had some good ideas to share.

TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:37 pm

I read up on it. I was enlightened to the fact that the U.S. didn't want to reduce carbon emissions because China didn't have to. I've heard similar arguments before, mostly from children who had a gripe about older siblings being able to stay up later. What it comes down to is that reducing emissions and cracking down on industrial facilities is going to benefit the environment. As far as hurting the economy - If we're required to incorporate new equipment to keep our emissions to a minimum and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, the apparatus to do so will have to be produced somewhere. Why not here in the U.S.? By making our own products to reduce emissions, we will in effect reduce demand in other industrial nations (China, anyone?). But wait. That would mean....China would buy something from US!? And we'd have U.N. backing and patent protection? And more Employed Americans, which puts more money into our economy....wait. Slow down. My head's spinning. That can't be right. It appears that, given a long-term view, signing the Kyoto protocol would actually benefit the world, and the U.S. Economy. But you know, I'm sure our government, who are deeply involved in minimizing investment and maximizing production, probably know best. Long live Trickle Down Economics and Separation of Classes!
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:45 pm

While I'd love to do my part to reduce our "carbon footprint" in this country, I can't afford much more. While gas prices have gone up by ~ 50 % in the past two years, my health insurance costs have elevated by 50%, my energy bills increased by 20%, milk & groceries costs have elevated, my salary hasn't been raised in the past three years.

Hybrid cars cost more than I can afford & the energy savings they claim can't be recovered over the lower cost of less energy efficient vehicles over the life of the vehicles.

I'd love to buy a "hybrid car", buy an earth home, go green in every way, shape, or form that I could. However, it costs more than I can deal with.

It's so easy to proclaim to the world that we need to go "green". I bought the most fuel efficient vehicle I can afford. I recycle paper, plastic, aluminum, & "tin" cans. Tell me how I/we/the country can shoulder the costs to do more to make the shift??? What difference do I make, particularly since Russia, China, Hong kong now pollute at the rate the U.S. did back in the 60's??
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:23 am

Excellent post, Jeff. One of the fundamental problems in "going green" is that it's so expensive. My personal feeling with hybrid cars is that they're only delaying the inevitable. If fossil fuels are essential to make them go, it's only a matter of time before they can't go anymore. I think E85 and Bio-Diesel are very good solutions, it's just that their quantities are limited, as are the number of cars that can utilize them. Fossil fuel reserves will be depleted, and soon. I think that by government aid to E85 producers, we could see the price of natural fuels go down, and the demand for farming families could increase. However, that just creates another problem, in that to produce more corn to create the fuel, the increase of pesticides and fertilizers will become an issue. But gas prices are going to keep going up, and because everything we use is shipped from somewhere, that cost is going to inflate as well. They say that the Mayan civilization fell because those in power weren't willing to embrace new ways of producing for the greater good. A trip for food or trees to make the plaster they used on a daily basis went from a few hours to a few days, until it was no longer practical, and a great empire was in the middle of a wasteland that couldn't support them. Had they been willing to acknowledge the change that was taking place, and meeting that change with different practices, they might still be around today. I think we can learn from history and realize that it's important to take a long look at our situation and make some changes for the greater good.

As far as making a difference, every little bit helps. To be cheesey and make an analogy, if a bucket is filled one drop at a time, it's going to take a while to fill it up. But if it starts raining...

<small>[ September 10, 2007, 01:25 AM: Message edited by: TenaciousT ]</small>
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:26 pm

Are you aware that it takes nearly the same amount of energy to produce a gallon of ethanol that we get by burning that gallon of alcohol?
No true cost OR energy savings there. Currently E85 is a mirage.

Wind, Nukes, & fuel cell technology should have been pushed in the 80's. Now they may be essential.

<small>[ September 10, 2007, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

TenaciousT
General User
General User
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 am
Location: T-hawk, Rock City
Contact:

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby TenaciousT » Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:55 pm

I have heard that about Ethanol. My faith in it is due mainly to the fact that it's a relatively new concept, and that with more research, it might be possible to find a more efficient way to produce it. I agree with you about wind and fuel cell technology. Nuclear is still scary to me, after seeing Chernobyl. I heard though that they've found a bacteria that is currently breaking down the radioactive material in the soil. I'm not sure of the details or validity in that story though. To comment on the other two sources, today on "How It's Made" they had a short clip on the testing of new hydrogen cell cars, and how they're working on crash tests to ensure that an accident wouldn't result in a hydrogen explosion.
Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:09 pm

There's a reason beer "maxs out" at 4 - 10% ethanol & wines at 18%. The yeast strains die. It takes energy to distill the alcohol to 95% pure.

Chernobyl happened because the USSR spent more on Arms research than power plant safeguards. Spent nuclear fuel rod storage can be accomodated for a long time. Research technologies to re-use the spent rods. No CO2 emissions.

<small>[ September 10, 2007, 11:19 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

User avatar
Kerry Tobin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 688
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: I grew up there & family
Spambot: No
Location: Madison, WI, USA

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Kerry Tobin » Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:28 am

I can't agree with the nukes idea... We can't even build something consistently that will last more than a few hundred years. With nukes we have to have the waste safe and protected for longer than any government has ever survived!

Also, even the US and Japan have, and still have, their nuke issues. It's a risky tech and very short sighted for use to think that leaving that kind of waste around forever is a good idea.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:31 pm

Kerry,
What's wrong with glowing in the dark?

Actually i think the proposed long term underground storage facility in Nevada might not be a bad option UNTIL technology learns how to "recycle" the rods.

Fuel cells, wind, & to some extent solar power are the holy grail. But nukes may be the stop-gap measure. We do have the technology to make safer Nuke plants.

<small>[ September 11, 2007, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

User avatar
Old Scout
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Born, raised and live in Tomahawk
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Old Scout » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:37 pm

I have a friend whose wife is a radiologist. He says it is kind of cool to have a wife that glows in the dark. Makes it real easy to find her. :D
The National Institutes of Health has just released the results of a $200 million research study completed under a grant to Johns Hopkins.
The new study has found that women who carry a little extra weight live longer than the men who mention it.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:46 pm

Kinky!!

Hey Scout, Brian ignored my question about making a donation in his name for the fire fighting school. Is there an address I could send a donation to since our bet was paid for by a very generous "third party"??

Or should I just post it to the veterans fund? (If so post the address here.)

<small>[ September 11, 2007, 11:51 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

User avatar
Old Scout
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Born, raised and live in Tomahawk
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Old Scout » Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:21 am

Tomahawk Fire and Rescue School address.

Tomahawk Fire & Rescue School
PO Box 475
Tomahawk WI 54487
The National Institutes of Health has just released the results of a $200 million research study completed under a grant to Johns Hopkins.
The new study has found that women who carry a little extra weight live longer than the men who mention it.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:58 pm

Thanks Gordy,
The check will be mailed tomorrow.

Steak sandwiches again next August? Brian, are you in?
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

User avatar
Old Scout
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Born, raised and live in Tomahawk
Location: Tomahawk

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Old Scout » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:03 pm

I'll plan on it ! Also try not to have a meeting to go to so I don't have to eat and run. Feel like I missed the best part of the get together. :)
The National Institutes of Health has just released the results of a $200 million research study completed under a grant to Johns Hopkins.
The new study has found that women who carry a little extra weight live longer than the men who mention it.

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:25 pm

Sounds like a plan. When C.J. finds out when he's doing his field study at Treehaven next summer, we'll make our reservation. I'll let you know. Kerry thinks we could expand this to a great Message Board Party.

MedicDVG could join us! It'll sure beat making a toast to his picture like we did this year.

<small>[ September 13, 2007, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

User avatar
Nimble
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: Work

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Nimble » Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:32 pm

Originally posted by Old Scout:
Also. Maybe look into this map on the positions regarding the Kyoto Protocol.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Kyoto_Protocol_participation_ma p_2005.png
You'll notice Australia and The United States are the big stubborn stains that won't budge.
While you are at it, look up the reasons they won't budge. You may be enlightened.
Yes I am enlightened. The reason they will not budge it that they both have extreme rightist, backward thinking governments. I have had my hybrid car for over 4 years. It cost about $2,000 more than the non-hybrid model. That year the tax incentive was almost $2,000. Since than gas has gone up nearly 100% and has sometimes surpassed that. I saved a mint in gas costs and it is a ULEV, so I've saved some lungs as well.
"Know ye not why We created you all from the same dust? That no one should exalt himself over the other." -Baha'u'llah

User avatar
Kerry Tobin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 688
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: I grew up there & family
Spambot: No
Location: Madison, WI, USA

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Kerry Tobin » Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:00 am

I'm not sure I believe it and I'm not going to go look for it to post a link but bragging about your hybrid might not have done the environment a lick of good... I've seen two studies that explain why.

1. The carbon emissions in creating a hybrid and all the special components and the emissions from the required disposal later put them at a higher overall carbon usage in the life cycle of the vehicle than the production, use and disposal of some SUVs.

2. A recent carbon emissions study in the UK suggests people DRIVE to the grocery store rather than walk. It seems the carbon emissions from fertilizing, growing, harvesting and transporting the extra food you would need to eat to replace the calories you burned walking to the store are higher than if you just drove your car in the first place.

As soon as you can explain how US businesses are supposed to not only attempt to compete on price but now do it while cutting emissions below currently achievable (affordably) levels against China, who is already beating us on price because they'll build anything for nothing (although it will probably have lead in it) we'll talk. If China doesn't have to do anything to meet the requirements it's pretty much a BS treaty and not really fair, not to mention it wouldn't accomplish anything. The way our emissions would have been lowered is simple, all the factories would have moved to China, our emissions lower and theirs go even higher because there won't be any incentive to build it cleaner, just cheap...

Jeff Boettcher
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2001 2:01 am
Tie to Tomahawk: vacation

Re: Eco-Friendly Living

Postby Jeff Boettcher » Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:31 pm

I ride my bicycle whenever possible. It's the alternative energy mode of transportation that I can afford and enjoy (weather & distance permitting.) Since I bought a decent bike, it has been a fun mode of transportation for many of the errands I used to use a car to complete.

(It might even be classified as a hybrid when I've had bean burritos for lunch!)

<small>[ October 09, 2007, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Boettcher ]</small>
What if there were no hypothetical questions?


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 3 guests