pointing out the obvious

In a previous post discussing carbon neutral, Peter raised a valid question about the replacement of old technology with new technology, knowing that new technology will have a lesser net effect on the environment (and your wallet).

To describe this through an example:  A new, environmentally efficient, low water consuming laundry machine requires a huge amount of raw materials to build and ship to your home prior to saving you water and energy.  However, using the old washer uses twice as much water, and twice as much power.  So, the question is, when does it make sense to replace an older appliance with a newer one.

In other words, when does….

cost of running the technology + cost of removing old technology
EQUAL
cost of running new technology + cost of producing new technology
????

Where cost is the environmental cost.

Of course, this is next to impossible to determine.  Why?  Probably because the economy wants you to continue purchasing - it keeps them in business.  The same way 3 years from now, a new and improved laundry machine will be introduced, which everyone MUST have.  Thus the cycle continues.

Of course, I’m quite guilty of this myself, but I’m trying hard to consider this when making unnecessary purchases - like cameras.

Listening to TWIP on my ttc commute into work today, I had photography on my mind.  Apart from still thinking about selling my Canon XTi (400D) and purchasing a Canon T1i (500D) to play with video, which is something that fascinates me, I saw a great picture appear right infront of me.

Of course I didn’t take the shot, but if I had, it would have been important to give a copy of the picture to the subject.  Which made me think about polaroid cameras, and how they were great for that kind of thing.  But they’re gone, and digital has become mainstream and we no longer have anything like that.

I suppose (if I had taken the shot), I could have written down my website address, so they can find it later, but that seems impersonal.  Without being able to print out the shot right then and there, it’s hard to get that instant gratification.  Or is it?

Almost everyone has a ‘gadget’.  Most of those gadgets can display photos, or receive photos via sms (mms?).  Maybe the polaroid of the future is a DSLR shooting pictures that you can MMS to someone’s handheld device.

Instant gratification, no?

(i’m still chewing on peter’s comment from the last post… )

Everyone has heard of no impact, zero footprint and carbon neutral - but do you have any idea what that means?  It doesn’t mean buying recycled paper, or products in recycled packaging, or hybrid automobiles.

It means making due with what you have, not purchasing something new if at all possible.  Purchasing something ‘new’ means raw materials, pollution, and sometimes throwing something perfectly useful into a landfill.

This is a difficult concept to swallow for most.  Why?  Because most do not see the impact of their lifestyle on the environment - myself included.  The secondary problem is the economy - it’s based on consumption, which means not purchasing is not contributing.

So… what do you do?

Interesting dilemma - consuming helps the big machine (economy) go round and round.  However, consuming is what makes our lifestyles unsustainable.  Have you ever really thought about where that coffee really came from, and where the disposable cup goes once you’re done?

Most of us don’t think about our daily purchases, and what impact that might have on both the economy and the environment.  If you want to support the economy, you might focus your spending on locally sourced goods - most of us don’t.  If you want to reduce your impact on the environment, you would curb the unessential spending - which sounds crazy.

So, we’re stuck buying foreign made ‘green’ products that end up in a landfill.