 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
Part 2
4 Laundry Fast fashion has created textile mountains in many homes, yet the environmental cost of this excessive consumption has an even less conspicuous twin: the energy used to launder it all. Cleanliness has become a touchstone of domestic life since advertisers convinced us that our shirts must always be “whiter than white”, our sheets should forever smell of spring flowers, and that to be dressed in freshly laundered clothes at all times is a badge of success. We live in a “wear once and wash” culture. In fact, only about 7.5 per cent of the average laundry load in the UK is thought to be heavily soiled. Much of the rest is made up of items that are stuffed into the washing machine simply because they are on the floor instead of in the wardrobe (Sustainable Fashion and Textiles by Kate Fletcher, Earthscan, 2008). This habit is shockingly wasteful in terms of water, detergents and energy. One study found that over 80 per cent of the CO2 emissions produced during the life cycle of a single polyester blouse arose from cleaning and drying it. The percentage can be even higher for items made of cotton, as they tend to require far more energy-hungry drying. It is easy to see how these emissions stack up. A full load in a washing machine uses around 1.2 kilowatt-hours of electricity per cycle and tumble drying clocks up a further 3.5 kilowatt-hours, resulting in over 2 kilograms of CO2 emissions per wash. With four or five loads per household per week, the total annual emissions from each home can easily pass the half-tonne mark. That's a significant proportion of the 10-tonne annual emissions of the average European. Line drying, washing at lower temperatures and ensuring full rather than partial loads will all help to reduce laundry emissions. For the largest cuts, simply washing less frequently is the way to go. 5 Food wastage Of all the facets of overconsumption that plague both human society and the global environment, food wastage is the most shocking. US households throw away around 30 per cent of their food, worth $48 billion every year. Similar levels of wastage are seen in Europe. In the UK, some 6.7 million tonnes of food is binned annually. Most of this joins the layers of unwanted clothing in landfill sites, where it decomposes, emitting the powerful greenhouse gas methane. Potatoes top the pile, with 359,000 tonnes going uneaten each year. Bread and apples are not far behind. Meat and fish are next, accounting for over 160,000 tonnes, followed by 78,000 tonnes of cooked rice and pasta. A staggering 4.8 billion grapes go the same way, as do 480 million yogurts and 200 million rashers of bacon. The annual cost to UK consumers of all this waste is £10 billion and the cost to the environment is the equivalent of an extra 15 million tonnes of CO2 (The Food We Waste, WRAP, 2008; bit.ly/urUFj). £10 billion The annual cost to UK consumers of wasted food The cost of food wastage reverberates down the supply chain, increasing requirements for storage, transport and packaging. But the biggest impact by far comes in food production. For almost all the food we buy, the bulk of its greenhouse gas emissions arise here. This is especially true for meat and dairy produce. For example, 40,200 tonnes of milk are wasted each year in the UK, adding up to the equivalent of 40,000 tonnes of CO2. This is comparable to the annual CO2 emissions of 10,000 cars, or of flying 30,000 people from London to New York and back. In their 2008 report, WRAP, the UK's Waste & Resources Action Programme, examined just why people throw so much food away. The most common reasons were that the food had been left on plates after a meal, was out of date, or simply “looked bad”. WRAP is now running a campaign to reduce food wastage. It aims to promote better management of food at home by encouraging people to prepare the right amount of food, keep an eye on use-by dates, and store food in appropriate conditions. As consumers we should also think more carefully before we shop. Check what you have already got, make a shopping list and, most importantly, don't do the weekly shop when you are hungry. This list is far from complete and you may disagree with my choices. Perhaps you would include air conditioning, flushing toilets or popular science magazines on your list. Maybe you consider soft toilet roll or your morning latte as non-negotiable. If so, join the debate in the comments below. What's not in doubt, though, is that the cumulative effects of our everyday decisions can make a big difference to the global environment. Knowing just how damaging they are today may help us to make better choices tomorrow. Gas-guzzling gadgets Widescreen TVs Last year, consumer electronics became the biggest user of electricity in UK homes. TV sets have led the regime change. As prices have fallen, size and energy demands have risen. Some plasma TV screens now measure more than 150 centimetres and, assuming average use, cause the emission of almost a tonne of CO2 each year. In 2005, TV sets used 8 per cent of the electricity consumed in the UK and this is predicted to almost double by 2020 (The Ampere Strikes Back, UK Energy Saving Trust; bit.ly/4h7IM7). This will mean an increase from just over 5 million tonnes of CO2 annually to more than 8.5 million tonnes. In the US, emissions attributable to TV use now top 30 million tonnes a year. Plug-in air fresheners Compared to watching TV on screens so large that they need a reinforced wall to hang on, the energy used by a plug-in air freshener seems positively spartan. At about 1 watt each their electricity demand is tiny, but they are busy wafting their approximation of apple and cinnamon odours around our homes 24/7. For a plug-in fanatic, half a dozen of them chugging away all year will emit the equivalent of 28 kilograms of CO2 – another tiny addition to the less fragrant outpourings of our power stations. Patio heaters The must-have garden accessory of a few years ago, the patio heater remains the domestic antithesis of climate change mitigation. The little useful heat that does manage to redden the foreheads of those clustered nearby comes at a cost of around 10 kilograms of CO2 for just four hours' use. In-car gizmos Instead of I-spy and guess-the-colour-of-the-next-car, in-car entertainment is now more likely to feature a plug-in games console or a passenger TV screen. Meanwhile, the badly folded map book has given way to intermittent commentary from a dashboard-mounted satnav. The extra energy demands of such devices, together with ever more powerful aircon systems, can result in fuel efficiency plummeting by more than 20 per cent. Dave S. Reay is at the University of Edinburgh, UK. His new children's book on climate change is called Your Planet Needs You! And is published by Macmillan Children's Books |
||||
|
||||
 Originally Posted by NeedKarma
|
||||
|
||||
|
No Tom CO2 isn't pollution pursee, waste is pollution, excess is pollution and it leads not only to CO2 emissions but the using of resources. Cutting down forests to grow soya beans is waste, using corn to fuel vehicles when people starve elsewhere is waste. Time to stop the waste, if you can recycle tanks you can recycle SUV, not just to stop bleshing smoke into the atmosphere but to change from a throwaway society to one that builds fro the future
|
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by tomder55
|
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
|
||||
|
||||
|
Although this is on another thread... I want to correct the emperor and others who claim that the US has never defaulted before . It has actually happened before once in 1790... once in 1812... in 1933, and once more recently... in 1979. The 1812 one was excusable because the Brits were burning down Washington at the time. The 1979 one was another finger pointing affair between the executive and the White House. The difference then was that both Congress and the executive was Democrat controlled . What is notable is that these incidences have been lost to history and although costly (in 1979 ,T Bills yielded 10% + as opposed to close to 0% today) ,are but blips that are not remembered today.
Others have argued that the US repeatedly defaulted on domestic debt after the Revolution ,on greenback obligations during the civil war ,and on Liberty Bond obligations during WWII. And there are some like me who argue that intentionally weakening the US dollar is effectively a default . |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by tomder55
|
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
Check out some similar questions!
Eco cycle?
[ 1 Answers ]
My Kenmore front loading washer has an Eco Cycle and I don't know what that means
What is an eco error on a hot water heater?
[ 2 Answers ]
I have a Rheem hot water heater. Model PVP50F, it has the hooded vent/motor and electric starter/pilot lighter. The starter is displaying an Eco Error message. 4 flashes a second pause and 2 flashes. Is there a way to reset or is there a way to manually light the Pilot?
Criminal law
[ 2 Answers ]
How can I view my own police record for free?
View more questions Search
|
