|
By Janet Evans
Friday, Dec 14 2007, 07:05 AM
Divorce is not ecofriendly….
Divorce often takes a devastating emotional toll on families, and it has significant impacts on the environment as well, a new study suggests.
When couples split and form additional households, it dramatically boosts the consumption of water, land, energy, and other resources. In many parts of the world, such resources are becoming severely limited, says Jianguo Liu, an ecologist at Michigan State University in East Lansing. In the year 2000, nearly 15 percent of U.S. households were headed by divorced people, U.S. Census Bureau data suggest.
The separation of families aggravated urban sprawl, boosting the number of households by more than 6 million and increasing the number of rooms to be heated and cooled by almost 36 million, says Liu. Because the number of people in a household decreases after a divorce, efficiency of resource use drops as well, Liu and his colleague Eunice Yu note in an upcoming Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
As a result, average per-person costs for electricity and water in a household headed by a divorced person are about 46 percent and 56 percent higher, respectively, than in a married household. Using survey data gathered in 2005, Liu and Yu estimate that divorce increased water use in the United States that year by more than 627 billion gallons, at a cost of nearly $3.7 billion. Also, the team reports that divorce boosted electricity consumption that year by about 73.5 billion kilowatt-hours—about 2 percent of the nation's electricity use—at a cost of nearly $7 billion.
Read the entire paper by Eunice Yu and Jianguo Liu
Environmental Impacts of Divorce × here.
__________________________
You know, this one actually makes sense!
Maybe I won't get "unglued" about it.
But I'm sure someone out there will ....
It just amazes me that people actually come up with this stuff!
“Gee, what study do you think I should do now?”
“Wow, I dunno. How about the impact divorce has on the environment?”
“Yeah, that sounds like it might stir up some trouble! I’ll go for it!”
What do you think?
|
By Janet Evans
Monday, Nov 26 2007, 08:25 PM
Why can't we have Green Burial Cemeteries like this in Franklin?
Mourners gather around a natural pine casket at a green burial.
US funeral homes each year put nearly 1 million gallons of embalming fluid into the ground along with the departed, wrap them in tons of metal and concrete—and charge a fortune for it. All of which makes “green burial” a sensible and fast-growing alternative. Green burial sites replace tree-cleared cemeteries with woodlands, eliminate embalming, and use simple pine caskets. Traditional funeral directors complain that makeup is difficult to apply for viewing without embalming, which also prevents spreading of disease. But picturesque headstone-free eco-cemeteries, now in many states, are increasingly popular. Grave markers are usually flat stones natural to the area, and the money spent on plots is used to fund a trust to preserve the land.
Markers for "green burials" are flat and simple,
chosen from naturally occurring stones in the area.
Galisteao River Basin Preserve Green Cemetery  ◄Green Burial Council
"Unglued?" .... only when my cheap pine casket falls apart on the way to the cemetery. Actually I want to be cremated, but they say my "fillings" will let off too much mercury pollution .... You would think I would be dead by now if I had that much mercury in my filliings! Go figure ....
What do you think?
Would you want a Green Burial?
"Green burial provides us with a way of getting in sync with the natural process of death, decay, and regeneration, rather than having to stave it off, as conventional deathcare demands."
|
By Janet Evans
Sunday, Nov 25 2007, 07:05 AM
Enviro-Friendly Gift Wrappings ….
That’s right! It’s time for GREEN GIFTING!
Here are some examples of how you can wrap up those packages to make ANY
Franklin Environmental Commissioner smile broadly.
Please take this down in your minutes ….
Let’s start with eco-friendly wrapping paper.
We don’t want to use that nasty kind that’s filled with dye and chemicals. ICK!
Go to Paporganics.com and you can purchase vegetable-based ink-prints on hemp and recycled paper ($5 for two sheets).
Also, importica.com has vibrant, fabric-like sheets made from naturally shedding tree bark ($6 for two sheets).
And lastly, Classified newspaper sections also make great wrapping paper, the small type forms a pattern. Just make sure you wash your hands after handing
over the gift!
For a great decoration on top of your gift, how about a bundle of pinecones, holly berries, or poinsettias, tied with 100 percent biodegradeable, natural cotton ribbon from kidbean.com ($4.99 for ten yards). Just make sure you don’t leave your gifts under the tree if you have pets.
You might be smiling about the environment, but you will be crying all the way to the vet if your little kitty eats that poinsettia or holly berries!
Don’t forget the Gift Tag! Get one from bloomin.com made of biodegradable paper and featuring a dove, tree or star.
They are made with wildflower seeds so you can plant them ($7.95 per dozen). If you would rather just place your gift in a “bag,” there is a reusable type at luckycrow.com ($4.49 to $13.49).
They are cute fabric pouches that come with an attached ribbon tie.
And how about re-gifting? That's right, giving gifts YOU have already received back out to other well-deserving people. That one ought to go over real well!
“Unglued?” You bet!
It’s not cheap to be Enviro-friendly.
They must think money grows on trees . . . .
|
By Janet Evans
Friday, Nov 23 2007, 09:59 AM
Meet the women who won't have babies -
because they're not eco friendly
“Had Toni Vernelli gone ahead with her pregnancy ten years ago, she would know at first hand what it is like to cradle her own baby, to have a pair of innocent eyes gazing up at her with unconditional love, to feel a little hand slipping into hers - and a voice calling her Mummy. But the very thought makes her shudder with horror. Because when Toni terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to save the planet.”
Read the full story here from the Daily Mail ◄
Quotes from another Enviro-nutcase in the article, Sara Irving:
"I realised then that a baby would pollute the planet - and that never having a child was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do." What I consider mad are those women who ferry their children short distances in gas-guzzling cars."
_______________________________________________
What is WRONG with these women?
Aborting your baby to save the planet? Right ....
You made a big difference, didn't you, Toni?
Maybe your baby would have been the next great scientist.
Fine if you don't want to have any more children in the future.
It's probably better for the world that YOU are not a parent in the first place.
I have heard of many reasons to abort a child, but this one really has me "Unglued."
"When I tell people why I don't want children, they look at me as if I was planning to commit murder. "
You Toni are either fooling yourself, or you are a selfish freak of the environment you want to protect . . . .
A baby is not a disposable item for the environment . . . .
Alright ... so go back up and read the article if you didn't.
Then, let's get ready for the DEBATE.
I know there will be one.
WHAT DO YOU THINK???????????
|
More Posts
|
|
