Shopping is Costing the Earth
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 08.29.07
A new study shows that the environmental impact of shopping for stuff, from from food and clothing to CDs and electrical appliances - far outweighs any efforts to save water and power in the home. The Australian Conservation Foundation and the University of Sydney note that shopping habits represent such a large part of greenhouse gas emissions that even if every household switched to renewable energy and stopped driving cars tomorrow, total household emissions would fall by less than 20 per cent.
The more you shop, the worse it is; The study, Consuming Australia, reports that on average, every additional dollar of consumption is responsible for 720 grams of greenhouse gas emissions and 28 litres of water. Australian Conservation Foundation's Chuck Berger concludes:
"People can make a difference to their individual contribution to greenhouse pollution by buying less, wasting less and choosing products that last"::Sydney Morning Herald
Food and consumer products, such as clothes, appliances, furniture and electronics often require large amounts of energy, water and materials to produce. "It is better to spend more of our money on services - from sporting event tickets to massages - because services in general demand fewer resources than goods. There is the bonus that services tend to be more labour intensive or, in other words, more jobs are being created per dollar output."
"The households with the biggest environment impact are high income earning, inner city, small or single-person households," said Chris Dey at the University of Sydney. "While inner city households have better access to public transport and are less car dependent, with their higher incomes, they typically buy more things and travel by air more often. But, having a high income doesn't have to have a high impact on the environment: all of us must consume smarter and more sustainably. Expenditure on energy efficient appliances and cars, on well-designed and insulated houses, and on services rather than goods, can significantly reduce your eco-footprint."
::Consumption Atlas read PDF of report here
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- China's Coal Fires Burn 20 Million Tons of Coal Per Year
- Top 7 Green Categories of 7 Green Lists of 7 Green Things
- Countries Falling Behind As World's Oceans Are Still "Vastly Under-Protected": Study
- Paper, Rotten Fruit Help Recover Precious Metals from e-Waste
Americans Care More About Gay Marriage Than Global Warming
|
yes Yes YES Organic Lube: For Your Pleasure
|
keep buying less and less to keep your energy footprint down.
At its illogical endpoint, no worries! No shopping turns into no economy mean no energy used.
Everything in moderation folks...
How does this relate to buying online?
no skip, Lloyd is right and makes a good point. Consumerism is bad. This "economy" you speak of is a false idol that was somehow made into something important by capitalism.
The "economy" is what we make of it, if that means everything is a service with little to no goods then that is what it is.
consumerism was an invention of industrialization and it is something that must go extinct because it is killing out other species, eating all the resources and contaminating the lands.
. . . . on the other hand, even though TreeHugger pushes "sustainable" consumerism, it definitely pushes it. Safer shopping is still shopping, I guess, but there's a lot of extra *stuff* out there, even hyped here.
China is having a hard week. With the pollution story in the NYT and now this, everything they are doing is coming under fire.
The whole 'consumerism is the devil' argument makes me wince because of its over-simplification. It is impossible to see the edges of the complex problem that is modern economy and industry. What is better is to help guide the consumers within that system to make the right, sustainable choices, just as this report is doing.
Bravo to the authors for making very, very clear recommendations to individuals and giving a clear set of choices.
I agree to a certain point. We have too much we don't need anyways...
I have a blog on eco friendly stuff --
http://www.ecoshopper.net
Producs such as clothes, appliances, furniture and electronics often require large amounts of energy, water and materials to produce I AGREE. But there are companies that are doing it in a sustainable way! Check my blog out...
The economy is moving more and more to a service economy but we will always have gadgets, and wear clothes, and sit and sleep on stuff... Be realistic. Shopping is here to stay...
I have an old touring canoe, its big and patched and I could buy a newer, sleeker one but I won't. I'm shopping for a racing canoe, which I will buy used. My next mountain bike will be used, my old one was 10 years old and is now retired to a commuting bike. My road bike is 3 years old and will last another seven. I've worn the same gym shirt and shorts for 3 years (washed frequently). I use the same shoes (mt bike) and pedals for both my road, commuter, and mountain bike, same helmet. In other words I reuse and don't buy in excess. As a society we need to not only recycle but reuse, we feel we have to be constantly buying new things all the time because the newest, flashiest products are constantly being pushed on us. Its true, support the service industry, local farmers, etc. Buy in bulk when you can, etc. If we stop buying goods we don't need and paying for services (even letting someone pump your gas, or take your toll) then CEO's will stop getting richer but perhaps the rest of us will have jobs. Perhaps we'll start eating better as a nation with more local produce and we'll become healthier. Call me crazy but a society where the rich don't get richer as quickly and we are all healthier and happier and more respectful of the environment is not such a bad thought. Though I realize its easier said than done.
Maybe we should leave food out of these calculations. I mean, buying food isn't consumerism...it's lunch.
Does anyone else think it's crazy the guy with multiple bikes and canoes doesn't think he has a lot of stuff?
How will people fill their empty lives during the re-run season?