Exclusion of the poorer folks

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The greatest problem, in my opinion, with eco-friendly products, goods and services, as well as taking things for recycling, etc., is that the costs of most of those things puts them well beyond the reach of the poorer strata of society.

Let us not even talk about the poor in countries not as “rich” as the USA, the UK and Western Europe in general, or Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

It is nigh on impossible for those that do not have a car, for instance, to bring glass, cans and such to the recycling centers and there is also no real incentive for anyone to do so in the UK. If there be payment on the other end for bringing in the glass bottles and jars, the cans, and what-have-you, as there is in the USA, as an example, then just maybe but. Nor do many of those poorer people in the Western societies have a way to, say, compost food waste, without incurring the cost of, for example, buying an indoor composting unit. Then again, if they do not have a means to compost food waste they more than likely also do not have a way to make use of such compost produced.

Other eco goods and services are also, basically, unfordable to those in the lower and poorer strata of society in our developed world, e.g. the working class and even the lower middle class. Now, with the “credit crunch” biting this is going to be even more so the case.

While there are things that we all, I know, can do without it costing us really anything, the so-called green habits and the green mindset (we shall talk about that in due course – the mindset, that is), others are just well out of reach of those groups; financially that is, for those that are on a low and fixed income.

All of us can turn off the lights in the house when they are not in use and not needed. Does the landing light really need to be on when no one is using the landing and everyone is in the lounge? Or the lights on the stairs when no one is going up or down them? Same with any other light in any other location. If you do not need it then turn it off. It saves money aside from emissions and whatever else and is therefore good for wallet and Mother Earth.

The same is true as regards to turning down the thermostat of the heating by a couple of degrees to say 18 Celsius. This alone makes a great saving for oneself as well as for the Earth. Who needs to have the heating on in the house at 25 Celsius or even higher. That's fine for a sauna but for the living room and even bedrooms it is not funny.

Turning off appliances instead of leaving them on standby is another thing we all, rich and poor alike can do and it will make us just a little richer if we do, due to the savings that we can make. The same is true for turning off or unplugging that charger for this or that device. When nothing is being charged by them what are they doing turned on. They still are running even then and are wasting, needlessly, electricity, and, in the end, you money.

On the goods side, however, and the side of green services, it is a definitely appears to be a class thing as most products and services are well out of reach of those on the lower rungs of the income ladder.

If we do not wish environmental and eco concerns and the execution of same to be a class thing, and possible only to those with the financial means to do so then we must, by needs, make things more affordable and also, and this very important, be enablers of those on the lower level so that they can be, as I am sure they would with to, part in this endeavour to help this our Planet, and in the end humankind, to survive.

So far it definitely is still a class thing, however, when, as I said, it comes to green goods and services and those in the poorer strata of our society are not able to fully participate in this and thereby are also unable to reap any financial benefits from this, such as cost reductions in electricity and heating usage, though using energy efficient light bulbs (still rather expensive compared to the incandescent Edison bulb) and other such things.

I do know that CFLs have come done in cost considerably over the last number of years but to someone who has to turn a penny over a couple of times before they can think of spending same such CFLs are still rather pricey compared to the Edison bulb that can be had for 10% of the cost. And, I must say, I have, although I use a fair number of CFLs, have not found the incandescent ones to have a short lifespan. I have bulbs running here that have been here for years and years. That is how those that have to live within rather limited means look at things. While they wish to do their part, if they but could, they have to look how to feed their families rather than as to whether they can save a little money by buying CFLs that are lot more expensive than are the old style bulbs. The problem is that, in due course, they will no longer be able to by the Edison bulb (at least not in the UK, and also not in the USA, so I understand) while the CFLs will not come done to the level of the Edison bulbs in cost, of that I am sure. So, we are forcing people to go green even though they cannot, maybe, actually afford it.

Reliable wind-up flashlights too have come down in price and some are cheaper now that are good ordinary battery powered torches, but “Energy Star” white goods, for example, are those that are the most expensive, it would seem, and someone who has to watch the money, so to speak, will hardly pay double for “Energy Star” when they can get the same type of appliance without that rating at a much lower price. Personally, I must say that I cannot and do not blame them.

The same is also true for many recycled goods. Those are the most expensive on the market often. In some instances you can now even get money for old rope, as long as you can dress it up as “recycled” in a crafts item.

Trying to be “green” is not being made easy, that is for sure, to those of the poorer sections of society in the developed world. As I indicated before, I do not even want to talk about and make mention of those (poor) living in the developing world; that part of our planet that was once referred to as “Third World”. Most people there do not stand a chance even in that respect.

It is a disgrace also that recycled goods produced by such poor people in the Third Wold countries, such as Africa, India, the Philippines, South America, etc. often in small crafts co-ops, and such, are being sold in the countries of the developed world at horrendous prices when the producers and makers only get a very tiny proportion of that in return for what they do.

Those buying “green”, and this includes those buying such goods, always want to also be seen as ethical shoppers. If that is so then we must vote with our pocketbooks in such instances and look for the products elsewhere and maybe buy them, if we so much want them, from those producers and makers that sell direct or via agents who do not charge the world for the products but just a percentage.

In conclusion, my question is, to a degree, how do we enable the poorer strata of our society to be able to be a part in this? If we do not, then we will leave them in the cold, literally even, maybe, and if it comes to the forced introduction, as we can see in the UK already, of this or that, such as the fact that no more incandescent light bulbs will be allowed to be sold and used, and also that people will be forced, as in legally forced, to insulate their roofs, install energy efficient glazing, and other such measures, then those that can least afford it will first of all see it as a definite class thing and secondly they will rather resent it all, instead of getting enthused about all things “green”.

© M Smith (Veshengro), June 2008

Post Title

→

Exclusion of the poorer folks

Post URL

→

https://national-grid-news.blogspot.com/2008/06/exclusion-of-poorer-folks.html

Visit National-grid-news for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection

Is the very concept of being 'Green' class thing?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Is the very concept of being 'Green' class thing, one for the middle classes and those higher up only?

This is, in my opinion, a very valid question. Is the concept of being “green” and “environmentally conscious” a middle class thing? “Green is the new black” scream some headlines. Yes, it definitely is trendy to be “green” and it is generating lots of interest.

Many of the tabloid newspapers for definite try to make being “green” out to be a middle class thing, but personally I doubt it to be just a middle class thing. Then again, how do you define the “middle class”?

Yes, it is true that many of the environmentally friendly goods and gadgets cost lots of money and you would need some spending power to be able to buy all those white goods that are A rated for less energy consumption to replace your old energy guzzlers with. It also would appear that, for some unknown reason, all those energy efficient white goods are the most expensive ones to buy. To be perfectly honest, and I believe I have mentioned this peeve of mine already elsewhere, the so-called environmentally friendly goods and all that are often so much more expensive than others and making it a more than a little out of the reach of the lower classes to do their bit on that level.

As far as the above mentioned white goods are concerned my question would be as to whether it is really better to replace the older washing machine or fridge or freezer with new A rated ones for less energy consumption or whether the replacement and the then required removal and safe disposal of the old goods does not have a much greater impact on the environment than me continuing to use it until such a time that it will, eventually, need replacing because it has, finally worn out and come to the end of the day.

Too many people do that with their computers because of the Microsoft Windows inbuilt obsolescence. Most older PCs do not need replacing; all they need is to be given a new lease of life with Linux.

You can spend a fortune on solar powered heating, lighting, double glazing, energy efficient light bulbs (oh, BTW, you cannot, or soon will no longer be able to, buy incandescent light bulbs any more) and assorted gizmo's; the list goes on, but not everybody can afford the cost of such items. Does that, therefore, mean that you can only care for the environment if you have the money to do so?

Not at all!

In spite of all the misconception that living sustainably requires independent wealth, and lots of it preferably, there are plenty of things anyone can do to make a real difference that will cost next to nothing.

Small changes are important. Recycling, composting, line drying, using cloth nappies switching off appliances when not in use, showering rather than bathing, car sharing are to name but a few. All these options can actually help to save you money as well.

Then there is a good old “make do” that also helps you to do you bit for the environment and at the same time saves you dough.

Regardless of the danger of repeating myself I shall say again that before you even think about the trip to the recycling bin with this or that item think as to whether there is not a way that you, or someone else you know (or even someone you do not, as yet know), can make use of that item, whether a box, a tin, a glass jar, or whatever, or you or someone else may be able to re-work and re-craft the item into something else useful.

Think “REUSE” before recycle.

This once upon a time was the way of being frugal. Bottles, in those day, you did not have to think about recycling; they were reused. All you had to do was getting them back to the store and get money for it while you were at it. Many a street urchin and countryside munchkin made his pocket money by collecting discarded bottles and bringing them back to the store for the deposit money. Why is no one talking about getting this system back in use. Glass is infinitely reusable and, when it finally breaks, well, then you can recycle it into a new bottle or glass jar.

Some years ago Neal's Yard in London was a company where you could go to get you peanut butter, your tea, your beans, your rice, etc. loose. You brought your own jar for the peanut butter and they filled it for you. The same with the other goods. You brought your own container and it was filled there.

When I was a child every grocery store did just that. There was no such thing as blister packs and today very often it is a blister pack within a blister pack, as with, for instance, with replacement toothbrushes for those electric one such as the Braun ones. Two individually and hygienically packaged brushes in another big blister pack. Why precisely?

Marks and Spencer have had a highly publicized campaign not so long ago about recycling plastic bags and will now charge 5p for their bags in future.

A new study by the Local Government Association, however, has cast much doubt on those green credentials.

The report has found that a typical shopping trip generated an average of 714g of packaging – and M&S was second from the bottom of the pile just ahead of Lidl, with 807g, and a lower percentage of it recyclable than any other retailer. Plastic bags seem rather beside the point when their packaging seems to be a much greater problem or at least one as great as plastic bags.

There was the suggestion ones, and I believe it is legal, basically, to do so on the Continent, such as in Germany, to actually remove all unnecessary packaging and leave same at the checkout.

My generation and the one immediately after me and definitely the ones before me seem to have been raised with the with the belief that the bounty of the Earth was inexhaustible, but it is not. Our children and children's children have had to learn this and that it needs to be guarded with care.

I have to say that the ethnic background of mine has taught me different from childhood and we never saw the resources of Mother Earth as infinite. To the Romani the Earth always was sacred and he only took as much as was sustainable to take, whether it was hazel rods for the making of pegs, or osiers for baskets, or what-have-you.

Mother Earth will recover from whatever we choose to do to it, of that I am certain. We only need to look at what She has survived the past. She has survived the Ice age, earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunami, and whatever else. Mother Earth will survive and recover. Humankind, on the other hand, cannot survive if we continue to use up and squander our resources at the rate we have been and that we are still doing.

We need to reduce our use of the resources. We need to rediscover the simpler pleasures, so to speak. We also need to learn how to cook from scratch again instead of “ping” meals and such. There are so many things that we must do and living a more sustainable life is what, in the end, we must do.

It is small steps that, in the end, will lead us all to a new way of living, to a sustainable way of living, a way of living in harmony rather than enmity with Mother Nature. This is the only way for the humans to survive and thrive on this planet of ours. We only, folks, have one earth. This is, as far as we know, the only inhabitable planet suitable for human life and living. Let's not destroy it.

We have done enough damage to it already. However, we may be able to reduce and reverse it, to some extent. I do not, however, believe that we can reverse so-called “global warming” aka “climate change”. First of all the “warming” has stopped, according to research from Australia and the temperatures have plateaued out and have not risen, not even by fractions, for the last 4-5 years; a fact that the head of the IPCC had to admit to when challenged by the Australian scientists. However, “climate change”, I am certain, will continue, simply because, as it would appear to me, from the research that I have conducted, a cyclic phenomenon through which the earth goes every so many centuries. We will have to prepare and get used to the fact. This does not mean, however, that we should abandon the “green” agenda. Far from it. We must do more and more recycling, reusing, and re-crafting. The earth's resources are but finite.

If, as I believe, “climate change” is here to stay and it will get worse before it will drop down into a cold to very cold period – if this follows the standard pattern this cycle of the earth has always run – then we must do all those things and we must prepare for severe changes in our lives.

We also must get off our dependency on oil. How this can be done is another question and, probably, not one that we will answer in this essay here.

Being “green” is not and must not be a class things and something that people believe only those in the upper areas, from middle/upper-middle class upwards can do. Being “green” is not about spending money on green gadgets and gizmos but it is about a mindset, a way of life, a sustainable way of living.

© M Smith (Veshengro), June 2008

Post Title

→

Is the very concept of being 'Green' class thing?

Post URL

→

https://national-grid-news.blogspot.com/2008/06/is-very-concept-of-being-class-thing.html

Visit National-grid-news for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection

Is Ethical Shopping Becoming the Victim of the “Credit Crunch”?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

There appear to be signs on the horizon that indicate that shoppers may abandon ethical shopping in the fact of rising prices, especially cost of food and fuel.

Organic foods and fair trade goods are being bought less, already, it would appear, than it was only a few weeks back.

Concern for others less well off and especially for growers and producers of coffee, tea, cotton and such, and concern for the environment are the first to suffer and go out of the window when it comes to prices, in general and especially for food, going up. Then even BOGOF offers not longer cut it and it is straight forward price reductions that shoppers look for.

Where does this leave Fair Trade and organics and green produce and products, as well as services and suppliers?

Considering that, more often than not, fair trade and other ethical products, goods and services are somewhat more expensive – in some case a lot more expensive – than “ordinary” ones people vote, in times of economic “hardship” and recession, even if it is only perceived “hardship” and recession, with the pocketbooks and their feet. That is to say they buy other goods that are not fair trade or organic or green or ethically produced. They will then go, mostly, for non-fair trade products which are significantly cheaper that any ethical goods and products. This is with the exception of some produce such as tea and bananas at Sainsbury's in the UK, for instance, where all of their own brand tea and all of their bananas are fair trade and the price remained the same as before.

While I am well aware, as I am sure other people are too, that a fixed price and premium is paid to the producers under the fair trade agreements, ate times, I am more than certain, retailers do put a nice little profit margin onto fair trade and other ethical goods, knowing that the ethical shopper is prepared to pay extra to have the money go to the producers. Most are not aware of how high that profit margin is, at times.

Not surprising at a time when such products are demanded by the buying public and the same is true for anything recycled and “green” and for any environmentally friendly goods. Here too, in the recycled and environmental friendly product sector, because of demand, many makers, manufacturers and sellers have added a rather big margin to rake it in. Is that ethical? No!

It is therefore not surprising that at times like these when fuel and food costs are going up and up shoppers are not prepared to pay through the nose often and therefore go for the non-fair trade and other products.

While the fair trade premium paid to the producers is one thing, in many of the other cases the costs are that high because the sellers know full well that people want to be and be seen to be green and to have a conscience. People who want to be seen to be thus are therefore also quite willing to pay such premium while the economy is more or less booming but, as it seems to ease their consciences to do so and to do “their bit” for the poor or for the environment. However, when there is a downturn and the economy throws a wobbly such ethical principles soon are abandoned and no such goods and produce are being bought, or at least they are bought less.

I must say that, with some of the prices charged for “green goods” I am not surprised that under conditions of perceived hardship people will not buy them. Some are a rip off as far as costs are concerned. There was a saying that one cannot get money for old robe. Today this, however, no longer holds true. I am not sure about getting money for old rope but some green “designers” and crafts people sure ask money for old rope (see my article elsewhere).

Sainsbury's has recently fought, it would seem, a price war with the likes of Tesco and ASDA as regards to “Delight” chocolate and, as far as can be seen from the restocked shelves, has now deselected the Divine fair trade brand and has gone for a much more expensive brand that is not all fair trade and I am sure we can see here, yet again, that money begins to speak against the principles that that company was claiming it had.

The truth is, and that applies to supermarkets and retailers as much as to the shopper, that the bottom line is all that the majority are concerned with and only when it suits them will they, the majority that is, be interested to be seen to be green or ethical. There will remain some that will stay true to their principles but I doubt that many retailers will. The same will also be true for many shoppers. To the seller any fair trade that does not sell is a loss-leader and something to be replaced, period. To the shopper who has to watch his pocketbook it is the price that counts for the food or what-have-you in times of economic wobble and not whether or not he is green or does good. That is the bottom line. Now where does that leave fair trade and the green sector?

© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008

Post Title

→

Is Ethical Shopping Becoming the Victim of the “Credit Crunch”?

Post URL

→

https://national-grid-news.blogspot.com/2008/05/is-ethical-shopping-becoming-victim-of.html

Visit National-grid-news for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection

Green Budgeting

Helping the environment and your pocketbook

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

By now, we have all heard, I am sure, how hybrid automobiles are supposed to be saving the environment and extending gas dollars. Oh, do I sound a little sceptical here? Well, I am. Aside from that many households run on a tight budget, and a new Prius or Accord seems miles down the road.

Is it possible, therefore, to create and refine a more "eco-friendly" lifestyle without seriously breaking the bank?

You bet it is. Anything is possible when it comes to helping Mother Nature. And no matter what type of lifestyle you lead, there is always something you can improve as regards to “green living” and also, “ethical living”.

For many families, especially now with the “credit crunch” crunching and biting a new car is miles down the road, let alone a “hybrid”. Downsizing might be a much better idea. That is to say changing from a 2.5 liter or bigger gas guzzler to a 1.2 liter car already would enable you to make significant saving on gas and even a used vehicle of that kind would be a good step to take, for starters, in the motoring field. Maybe also, and this is better for your healths as well, cycle to school, to the stores and such and even walk.

Nearly all of it is second nature. It is very easy to do. And, most importantly, it is good for my bottom line."

Buy an energy saving light bulb, like a compact fluorescent. Not only do they reduce your daily energy intake, but also they are pretty affordable and easy to find.
Sometimes local utility companies will actually give away light bulbs, so it doesn't hurt to ask. Estimated cost: £4.00

Utilize a rain catcher. Be it a bucket under the windowsill or a rain barrel under the rain gutter, find a method to catch unused rain. Use this water for irrigating your garden, as drinking water for pets, or any of your other water needs. Estimated cost: £1-£2 for a bucket, if you cant actually get the bucket from some other sources free, such as from catering establishments and such.

Recycle. There seems to be a forgotten drive to recycle common household products. And yet, the savings by recycling and taking various items to the appropriate waste facilities is enormous. Separate all your items into categories, put them in empty garbage cans, and when the can is full, it's time to go recycle and pick up a nice little check as well. Estimated cost: £0

The recycling centers that pay your for bringing in the recyclables do not exist everywhere, not even in the USA, and certainly not in places such as the Britain and other European countries.

Practical recycling is also something that should be considered and I have written about this in the pages of this publication a number of times.

Make sure your cleaners are environmentally friendly. Wonder what you may be scrubbing those huge messes with? Simply changing your cleaning products from potentially toxic disasters to natural and safe for the environment doesn't have to cost anything. With clean and natural products that carry a competitive price tag, this option just needed an alternative solution! Estimated cost: £3.50

There are also recipes available to make your own, much more environmentally friendly cleaners. Grandma's recipes will be a great source of information there.

Plant your own home garden, or start a community garden. Whether dangling from a
windowsill or in the backyard, most residences have a spot for you to grow your own little nursery of edible extras. Grow an herb garden for extra fresh seasoning, or take on some hardy salads with tomatoes or cucumbers. The possibilities are only limited by your space and your imagination. Estimated cost: £5-£10 for seeds and materials

© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008

Post Title

→

Green Budgeting

Post URL

→

https://national-grid-news.blogspot.com/2008/05/green-budgeting.html

Visit National-grid-news for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection