You sound defensive.

Is that really what doing more with less means? Are you sure it doesn't mean wearing a single pair of shoes until they wear out (or, for kids, are outgrown)? Or figuring out ways to feed the family with the food that's available rather than what's desired at that moment? Or staying warm without reliable sources of fossil fuels or electricity? Because I'm pretty sure that's what "doing less with more" is likely to mean.

Arabella, I want to thank your for being the voice of moderation. I think that we will win more people to the pro-environmental side when keeping a car is not a sin and buying someone else's chicken is OK as well.

what's with the negativity? Our family of three doesn't own a car. We choose to live in the city, rely on public transit (even in Pittsburgh where it's not always reliable), and use Flexcar if we need to make long distance trips. Choosing to live in a city means we're making more use out of fewer resources (ie, smaller homes, apartment buildings sharing resources, etc). While we don't keep chickens, I know of many Portlanders who do.

I can see your point, that getting America on board with better environmental decision making is likely about getting most Americans to do anything, but don't knock those who really go the extra mile. :)

If you REALLY want to be green, just don't have any children at all. That will result in the least amount of wasted resources.

The world is already overpopulated with human beings. Why increase the burden?

What business of yours is it if a parent wants to raise chickens and rid themselves of the car? It's their choice and I'm sure they are not forcing their choices on you.

Most people here know my position on creating more humans rather than adopting.

But even if I were to set that aside for the first kid, some of these wackos are talking about how green they are since they had their SECOND kid. Monkeys, incapable of having their intellect over rule basic simian impulses. Do I sound angry? Do I sound like I'm coming unglued? Damn right.

Its people like this who have doomed us all. They are so happily smug in all their "green" choices, while adding the biggest possible burden to future generations: another hungry mouth. Special place in hell for them I hope.

...children as "wasted resources" and "burden".
Sigh... [shakes head]

The chickens and children make sense: the children take care of the chickens! I did it when I was a kid and I think it was a great learning experience. :)

"But keeping chickens and getting rid of the car? I say there’s a better chance of hell freezing over…"

What is this? Fox news? I thought for a moment I was reading a "news" story on a blog called treehugger. Spare me the pathetic, judgmental BS. If I want some of that I'll go to the aforementioned FOX or CNN or plethora of other sites out there. I started reading this site because I liked its tone of optimism, but after repeated disappointments like this one I find myself wondering if it is worth my time.

I have chickens in my backyard and have been living a decade without a car. Why these two lifestyle choices? Because they are easy, low stress, and coincidentally, better for society than the alternatives. I don't have kids, but I know two friends in similar situations who do. Oh yeah, I also garden. Another thing on the list of mostly easy things one can do for oneself and society.

In respect, why does choosing to live a green lifestyle that is not mainstream but helps the planet constitute an "unreasonable choice"? We don't have chickens (and don't eat meat), but we are trying to drive less and would love to get to the point where we can at least get rid of one of our cars. We don't buy toys and other items made of pvc because pvc causes all sorts of environmental harm at every stage, from its creation to its disposal. Please tell me what's wrong with the way we live. We don't judge other people for not wanting or having the option to live as we do.

All shades of green are good. Why can't people just respect each other's attempts to move in a greener direction instead of finding fault with those who don't live exactly as they do?

I actually find some of the green family things a bit sexist. In most cases, the mother is still the primary caregiver, and insane things like going diaperless and cooking everything from scratch and owning chickens (although I would still love to have a coop) just aren't realistic if both parents value their careers, the environment and their families.

First, I live in the suburbs so a car is a necessity thanks to terrible planning way back when.

Live closer to work. Some of us make conscious decisions on where we live, so that we don't have to use a car to get to work.

My husband and I sold our home, and decided not to buy another one because owning something in our price range would put us out in the suburbs. No thanks. That would mean he would have to commute. Instead, we are in a huge apartment, that would easily be cheaper than a mortgage, on a bus line that is ten minutes to his job. Since I am a nurse, I am looking for work at the facilities at the other end of the same bus line, also ten minutes away.

This has some serious bonuses. No commute. That means our wages are not depreciated by adding extra hours in the car. Also, no car needed. With gas prices climbing, that's a serious savings. And unexpectedly, we pay far less to live in an apartment, than the home we had. I don't have any upkeep, property taxes, or house (more expensive than rental) insurance. Per year, we are saving far more money, and more ecologically minded about it. Add to the last bit, we purposely fond an apartment within a couple blocks of a grocery store, and it's perfect.

It is doable, and has many perks. It's not a sacrifice.

We kept chickens, geese and ducks when I was 8 years old and I did most of the work. In the morning I opened up the coop to let them out. We kept a wading pool full of water and a dish with their food, but for the most point their foraged in the yard. When the fowl got to big we gave them away, but kept the chickens for many years. They are VERY low-maintenance pets and they give you the BEST eggs.

I'm planning on setting up a coop and raising them again. My mother raised chickens for years and had her own vegetable garden.

I'm planning on getting an Xtracycle to take to nearby stores for grocery errands, and when I can afford it I might get an all-electric ZENN car.

As a UKer none of that surprises me. All those things are the kinds of things people would expect from people who want to "go green". Very few people keep chickens (!) but the latest TV reality shows seem to have families "going green" and keeping chickens, turning chip fat into bio-diesel and installing a wind turbine.

"First, I live in the suburbs so a car is a necessity thanks to terrible planning way back when."
The survey was about the UK. We have some of the suburbia problems, but nowhere near as much as the USA -- there isn't enough space to spread out like you do! This family might use public transport, or maybe they live and work within walking or cycling distance, or perhaps car-share.

"Second, I simply don’t have the time to raise kids AND chickens while living life in 2008. And I don’t doubt that you’re in the same boat."
Just a question of priorities then! I know one family who keeps chickens, but only the dad works, so mum has time to keep chickens (and ducks) and grow some food. I think she gets more satisfaction from that than she would if she worked, so why should she?

These are all great points. And while I agree Arabella, that not all of us are cut out for raising chickens, I am inspired but those who are.

I've done a lot of research on green parenting lately as I will have a book coming out in the spring on the topic (http://www.thegreenparent.com). I found that there are many different shades of green when it comes to eco-friendly parenting.

And when I read about someone out there who is living without a car, or making his own electricity, or raising chickens to feed her family, it makes me want to drive less, turn off my lights, and make smarter food choices for my family.

Kudos to everyone out there working to make a difference!

Why is it an unreasonable choice if it works for that family?

"First, I live in the suburbs so a car is a necessity thanks to terrible planning way back when. "
And you are supporting the continuation of that terrible plan by living in the suburbs. Live in a city w/ good public transportation or is easily accessible on foot and your problem is solved. You DON'T need a car.
"Second, I simply don’t have the time to raise kids AND chickens while living life in 2008. And I don’t doubt that you’re in the same boat."
Then don't have kids. That's the real green solution.

I'm surprised by all the comments suggesting you can simply move to a city or within walking distance to your work. I would love to live in the city so that I could walk to work, but after a year and a half of job searching, I finally landed a position in the suburbs. There IS no public transportation I can take to get to work and I can't afford any of the housing options near my office. And what of people in two adult households, it could be a fairy tale to actually have two adults sharing a household who can afford to live in an area that makes public transportation to work an option for both.

For some, it really ISN'T an option. Not just an unwillingness to change.

Holy schmoly,
I too thought I was reading an article on a website called TreeHugger, so why on earth are people judging others choices. In my opinion people judge others choices to either a) justify why they are not doing it themselves, or b) toot their own horn about how much they do.
If you're judging to justify, no need. Be okay with the choices you make and if you are not, make new choices, and every little bit does make a difference.
If you want to toot your own horn ask yourself why you do what you do. Is it to help the environment or compete with the 'environmental jones'?
I was really surprised to see someone refer to children as wasting resources and burdens. Ouch! If you choose not to have children, thats your choice.
Kahlil Gibran said it best "Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself".
They are also the next generation for whom to pass the torch too!
-find alternative modes of transport even once per week
-eat organic when possible
-have chickens :)
-use natural cleaning product
-recycle
do what you can and be a POSITIVE influence to those around you

Having written the initial article, I must admit it's been fascinating to read the various comments.

Ultimately, the truth is that people are going to have children, and if you think that's going to change, it's not. In fact, I'll bet a buck to every person who reads this that many of those who wrote responses indicating "kids are evil, don't have them" will, in fact, wind up having kids of their own. Just not today. And they will love them endlessly to boot...

In fact, I was the first to say for years that I'd never have kids, and now I do. And becoming a Dad is one of the best things that's ever happened in my life... So go figure.

But my original point remains quite valid... If we don't find ways to make the things we already do greener without sacrificing our quality of life, sustainability is just not going to happen.

And I feel badly if my comments were misconstrued as declaring that those who consciously go without a car or raise chickens are unreasonable. They're not. But suggesting that the rest of humanity should do so is, in fact, unreasonable. They are choices that just won't work for everyone in today's world.

-kenny luna

Er, hello
I'm Alison
I commissioned this survey and wow - what interesting comments! Thanks everyone!
Funnily enough someone warned me that the chicken issue may cause controversy!
I agree with the comment about "shades" of green - I had loads of comments in the survey - it seemed to me that parents were individually doing the best they can - for some it was chickens and no car - but for others it was recycling more - others wouldn't use reusable nappies but would do other stuff.
We're a broad green church..

Dear Kenny,
Your comments "If we don't find ways to make the things we already do greener without sacrificing our quality of life, sustainability is just not going to happen." are valid enough.

However, the tone of the original article was not this, it was very judgmental about individual families who choose a greener way of life, as they interpret it.

I agree with the posters that cited how low maintenance chickens are. I grew up on farms, and of all the animals, chickens were the least work (which is probably why they became such a staple). But not everyone can raise them - most places have ordinances.

I also agree that most people aren't going to give up their car. Part of "going green" for my family, at least, is to get AWAY from the city. Bigger house with more land for "communal living" (read : renting out extra bed rooms to friends) and self-sustaining agriculture. With luck, we'll be using the car less, but we'll still need it.

As far as the anti-children comments, why? I have 3 children and plan on having more. They definitely aren't "hungry mouths" or "wasted resources". Is this TreeHugger.com or VHEMT.org?

"First, I live in the suburbs so a car is a necessity thanks to terrible planning way back when. "
And you are supporting the continuation of that terrible plan by living in the suburbs. Live in a city w/ good public transportation or is easily accessible on foot and your problem is solved. You DON'T need a car.
"Second, I simply don’t have the time to raise kids AND chickens while living life in 2008. And I don’t doubt that you’re in the same boat."
Then don't have kids. That's the real green solution."

While I agree with those who promote the idea of one child per couple to reduce the population and thus the strain on the planet's resources, I have to take exception to part of your comment. Real estate values in big cities are very high. Try buying or renting a house in Manhattan sometime. Most people don't earn enough in a year to make the mortgage or rent payments on such property. New York, Tokyo, London, everywhere is the same. Unless you are willing to live in a crime ridden area with dangerous people as your neighbors. I do not think you are doing your children much of a service if you are willing to relocate to a place where their lives are at greater risk just because there's a bus stop or train station on the corner.