the_siobhan (
the_siobhan) wrote2007-09-18 11:29 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
pleather thou?
I was thinking about something totally different tonight, and somehow two things converged in my head, and I started wondering.
How does the carbon footprint of leather shoes compare with those made out of petro-chemicals?
I think this popped up because I was reading about PETA's public statement that one cannot be an environmentalist while consuming animal products and then I started thinking about how I really can't see myself wearing clothes that are made of artificial fibres, and it kind of snowballed from there. Most leather comes from cows which are horrible for the environment. Artificial substitutes are made from a non-renewable resource, but the issue is less about running out of the stuff as it is what kind of mess we make using it.
So what do you think?
How does the carbon footprint of leather shoes compare with those made out of petro-chemicals?
I think this popped up because I was reading about PETA's public statement that one cannot be an environmentalist while consuming animal products and then I started thinking about how I really can't see myself wearing clothes that are made of artificial fibres, and it kind of snowballed from there. Most leather comes from cows which are horrible for the environment. Artificial substitutes are made from a non-renewable resource, but the issue is less about running out of the stuff as it is what kind of mess we make using it.
So what do you think?
no subject
A home-grown, home-killed, home-skinned, home-tanned boot would have a lower impact than a natural rubber and hemp shoe made in India and shipped to, and across, North America. PETA's argument, while essentially true, is disingenuous or, at least, over-reaching. But as consumers, we don't want to and frankly are not prepared to take back the means and modes of production. We have too much else to do; we have too little knowledge and access to the methods; we have the weight of social acceptance bearing down on us.*
These kinds of black-and-shite arguments (typo intended) make me crazy. At work, I am fighting with people to get them to use porcelain mugs for their coffee, and metal spoons. They have a millions excuses not to use renewable: they don't know where it's been (as if the plastic and paper alternatives were hermetically sealed before they used them); washing things wastes water (because you can compare water usage to landfills SO easily), it's not convenient (even though the receptionist runs the dishwasher for them so they don't have to "waste" time washing their mugs). I have not yet, but will soon, pull out the petro argument: every spoon you throw away takes a little more gasoline from your damn guzzling SUV.
The only TRULY environmental option, at this point, is to kill ourselves, if we want to be that specific about it. PETA can go first (and I say that as a nigh-vegetarian!), I'll watch. Or, we can step back from ridiculous zero-sum games and look at ways to change the entire system, not just the little pieces that please us most to change.
* You should see the looks of horror I get when I tell people that my dreads mean I don't have to wash my hair for 3-4 weeks at a time!
no subject
A couple ppl at my office in the "green" group have quoted a variety of studies that say washing reusable coffee mugs saves no more & may waste more resources than using paper cups. I think they're smoking crack, personally.
It's like you can talk out both sides of yr ass & find stats to support it. Nuts. I've been using the same mug for 6 years, 2 coffees a day, dammit, that's a shitload of paper cups not wasted. And I just do it bec. I like my cup better!
no subject
I think that's our operable word right there. It depends on the resource being used, and not all uses are equal, or equally wasteful.
Utah is looking to go solar in a big way; while solar power isn't free from all harm, I think that the combined footprint of solar power and reusable water has GOT to make less of an impact than the production, transport, and disposal of paper and plastic cups. Of course, we're not there yet with the solar.
My mind boggles at how one could even begin to calculate that, though. (It reminds me a bit of the claims that nuclear energy is emmissions free -- by leaving out any information about emmissions!)
washing reusable coffee mugs saves no more & may waste more resources than using paper cups
I guess I'm also at a loss about "savings" vs. other benefits. Even if buying paper cups costs the same amount as buying the porcelain ones and washing them, in the long run, the landfill "savings" can't be calculated; I'm not sure anyone knows the ultimate cost of that yet. As part of the "green" group at my office, we have tried to avoid any questions of monetary savings. We feel that if we use savings as a benefit now, it may come back to haunt us later if something we want to implement does NOT save any money, or even costs more. We're taking as much of an ethical position as possible. Actually, Utah being full of people with lots of kids, it's not as hard to make the "for your children's children" argument here.
A friend whose house was built on a landfill recently developed severe allergic reactions which, after a year, mysteriously went away when her plumbing had some issues and she had to live elsewhere for a couple of weeks. No one knows why she's sick, what about her place is making her sick, or if it's affecting anyone else, but those are the kinds of "costs" that are probably impossible to track or quantify in any meaningful way.
I don't have any answers. I wish I did.
(I like my cup too. It's huge and purple and has a spider on it. I cracked it the other day and still REFUSE to stop using it.)
no subject
no subject
I also maintain that if you're the only person using that cup and it's always being used for the same thing, as long as it isn't solid and full of grossness it really doesn't have to be washed every single time you use it. Once a day, maybe, if you're being fastidious. saves on water *and* on soap. And time. and effort. and time spent without coffee. :)
no subject
no subject
But I reuse my water glasses for a week or so. Sometimes longer. And the cup I eat raw oatmeal out of goes for a month or so between washes.
no subject
no subject
I've made the decision to not have children. Not for purely environmental reasons it has to be said. Still, it's remarkable how few people seem to see that as an environmentally sound choice.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2007-09-19 02:44 pm (UTC)(link)Jenn
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2007-09-19 06:36 pm (UTC)(link)Jenn
no subject
Tell me about it. I've been called a child-hater, accused of hate speech, and told that I'm no better than a racist or a homophobe.
The kicker is that I don't hate kids or parents or parenthood. Quite the opposite.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2007-09-20 04:52 pm (UTC)(link)Jenn
no subject
no subject
We also have decent response to our plastic and aliminum recylcing bins in the kitchen. We take these home ourselves and put them in our own bins, but people are surprisingly good about it.
no subject
It drives me nuts.