It's Zero Waste Week everyone!
And I'm awfully late getting around to blogging something for it, forgive me, life seriously took over.
Some time ago I was flabbergasted by the story of the family behind My Zero Waste. They managed to get through a full year with just one tiny bag of rubbish. I was in awe. I mean really, how many bags of rubbish do you put out each week? Well, in my case it's definitely a bit more than one bag a year...
Anyway, I got pushed into thinking a bit about the waste we produce and how to reduce it. After all, each piece of packaging that goes into the bin doesn't just add to the mountains of landfill that will take years, many years to decompose, but it's also a waste. Not just of that wrapper but of resources to produce it. And once you get your head around just how much unneeded stuff is produced to wrap, package and display, and that the resources used that way are effectively taking away resources from our own children in the future, something has to happen. At least in my head.
With the help of the Rubbish Diet blog I looked at ways to reduce my rubbish. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in it for a competition and producing even less rubbish in a year. I know I'm not the My Zero Waste superwoman. But I know I can reduce my rubbish. Everyone can. And then I try to reduce some more. Bit by bit. Little by litte. One step at a time. Until the day comes when your neighbour's bin is overflowing (because we have changed to fortnightly "normal" rubbish collections) while ours, with a larger family, is still not even half full.
My top tips are:
1. buy in bulk.
With everything, consider the larger quantity. It's mostly cheaper, but it means less packaging. So we have 5 kg sacks of rice and pasta, the largest shower cream possible (though soap is even better on the packaging side of things) etc
2. buy loose veg and fruit. We get a net of fruit and veg from an organic box scheme which is recycled, any additional fruit and veg is bought loose if available, and I try to buy any other fruit and veg with packaging in mind (weighing it against food miles though).
3. Consider packaging with every item you buy. So for biscuits I will only buy those in just one item of packaging, rather than triplicate packaging of something like pralines.
4. Focus on one behaviour change at a time. So, one week/month, change over to only using reusable bags for your shopping until it's second nature. Only then do the next. I'm currently focusing on zero waste lunches for the kids and myself though I'm not quite there yet. When I worked with a primary school the other day, I saw 33 children take out a packet of crisps each at their morning break time. Imagine, one class, 33 foil wrappers, every single day. times every single class. Mind boggling. Surely this isn't necessary?
5. One biggie: cloth nappies or EC (elimination communication). I do use disposables occasionally and at night time and even with that occasional use, it makes for one shopping bag full of rubbish. So I tried going all cloth. It worked for a while, but since my return to work, well, something has to give. All I can say though is that a good cloth nappy leaks less than a disposable! EC is not for me I have to admit, as with everything, you have to weigh up if it's doable for you or not.
6. Look at what you can do outside the house. For instance, at work we recycle paper but we don't recycle milk bottles. So I'll be taking them home now for recycling in my recycling bin.
7. Find out if you can get your milk delivered in reusable glass bottles. It will be more expensive but a) you get them conveniently to your door and b) no more bit ugly plastic bottles!
8. Use tap water rather than bottles. Whenever I can't stomach tap water (in some parts it has quite a chlorine taste) I use diluting juice just enough to cover that taste. That way the diluting juice lasts for months and yet I don't get quite such a sweet tooth for drinks.
9. Get a compost bin. Even if you live in flats, there may be a way that you could get together with neighbours and get one for the block of flats? Community composting is doable, there's lots of support out there for it so you don't need a garden to have a composting bin.
10. Grow your own - on windowsills, in community raised beds, in your own garden. Every pea you eat that you grew yourself has no packaging at all, tastes so much better, gives great satisfaction and makes for better health in so many ways. And it's fun too!
11. Opt out of junk mail. You will have to contact various organisations for that and you may still receive some junk, but less than before at least!
12. Reuse: Look at stuff and consider if you can reuse it. Maybe for a craft activity with the kids? Maybe as a plant pot? Maybe you can use that old garment for sewing something else? Kindle that creativity spark!
And last but not least: Embark on the Rubbish Diet Challenge.
That's the stuff I've managed to do. I still have half a bin of rubbish every fortnight, but that's only half of what we used to have. Which is more than a good start in my eyes. Now I only have to drop some hints to the neighbours how they can prevent their bin from overflowing ...
Mummy do that!
Showing posts with label waste. Show all posts
Showing posts with label waste. Show all posts
Thursday, 8 September 2011
Wednesday, 30 March 2011
It's not cutting it
Admittedly, I'm not exactly on top of all the news at the moment. So when the big cuts were announced I neither managed to look in depth at the emergency budget nor in depth at the recently announced budget (though it's still on my to do list). It was a bit of a surreal experience, this maternity leave bubble. Everybody talking about cuts, and all that I feel of it was debates on the radio. Of course I knew that the voluntary sector would be hit hard, but how exactly, and when, seemed a bit more elusive.
Now however, I've experienced cuts even in my little bubble, and without particularly looking out for them. I'm not surprised but still very disappointed. Services for Refugees and Asylum Seekers were first to go - the housing contract Glasgow City Council held wasn't renewed, so rather a lot of support services are on the way out. This is hitting refugees hard - as well as everyone working in the sector. The cuts affect support for the most vulnerable, support for English language tuition and thus affects integration.
In another area, I tried to apply to volunteer as a breastfeeding peer supporter. However, the programme is stalled because the NHS has withdrawn their training element from the programme. So there you have a service which is actually all big societyish with volunteers doing the work, but the necessary training to enable them to do a good job has been cut. Again, it hits the vulnerable in our society, but also society as a whole because low breastfeeding rates are linked with poorer health in later life, increased risk of obesity and general health inequalities. It's short sighted and will in fact incur a delayed cost.
I have strong views on the suggested privatisation of forests and libraries. Again, I think it's the wrong approach. And the list goes on of course.
This is not to say that I'm all opposed to cuts, or opposed to all cuts. Muddling Along Mummy stirred up a bit of a debate on those who seem to think unrealistically that we can just not have any cuts at all.
However, I think we need to start with the right vision and not cut where it's quick and easy, but which will incur additional costs in the future.
So how about we look at what is costing the country money?
1. Crime. Crime is expensive because of the justice system, more so than the actual damage (though that counts too), and it also costs our society morally (in the sense that people feel insecure and don't use public spaces - a real detrimental effect on communities). Prison doesn't get rid of crime. I'm not suggesting that prison is wrong, just that it doesn't actually do anything to remediate the problem, however is important to show there are consequences to wrong behaviour.
2. Addictions. And I include tobacco and alcohol in this - alcohol in particular costs us an awful lot of money. The damage caused by people who are drunk, the violence caused by drink both outside and in the home, the consequences addictions have on the children of addicts.
3. Poor health that is caused by lifestyle choices. Most of us know what is good and bad to eat, yet bad food is cheap and convenient and it takes knowledge, real effort and conviction to make healthy choices.
4. Unemployment/worklessness.
All of these are linked to inequalities though it's a chicken and egg situation. Social inequality causes higher crime rates, poorer health and addictions, which in turn cause social inequalities. It's a vicious circle and I don't pretend there are any easy solutions out there because if they were, we'd have made appropriate choices.
There are two factors though which I strongly believe will make a sustainable positive difference to alleviate the malaises of our society. One is to aim to make our society more equal because it has been demonstrated that societies are happier and have less violence, crime, addictions and health problems if the gap between rich and poor is not as wide as it is in the UK (the widest in Europe, and it even beats the U.S. which surprised me).
Secondly it's about the early years and good and responsible parenting, as well as a recognition by all parents that they are the people who will set up their children for life. Hence it's absolutely essential to support parents to do a good job. I'm not talking about pushy parents here, just about parenting that respects the child, that gives the child love and attention, and ambitions. Education will then add to this foundation, but education cannot bridge the attainment gap caused by growing up in poverty and deprivation; in fact school has been shown to increases the attainment gap. I'm not suggesting that poverty has to lead to low attainment at school, just that children growing up in poverty are more likely to be low achievers at schools, that there is a very real link, for many reasons. Some to do with the parents, some to do with the environment and lack of facilities. It's complex as all of these issues.
With these two principles in mind, it may become clearer why libraries, breast feeding support (breast feeding is a health indicator of deprivation - some areas of Glasgow have breast feeding rates of only 8% at the 6 week check-up) and children's centres (in England, we don't have Sure Start centres in Scotland) in my view are cuts that are very wrong. I would go further and propose a whole reassessment of value of professions. Because, if a child care worker earns less than a car mechanic, does that not show that we value cars more than children?
I do want to propose alternatives though. There is a lot of waste of money, resources in all walks of the working life. Business trips, special VIP treats etc to me are spitting people in the face who are unemployed and struggle to make ends meet. Most larger organisations have an inflated management structure - and managers are paid more than the actual front line staff. I also very much believe in a progressive tax system (ours is regressive at the moment due to the effect of VAT). While I realise that there are too few high earners and thus taxing them more doesn't change the world, it would contribute and make our society more equal.
On top of that, waste is also in physical resources. How much paper is wasted, how much stuff produced that we don't need? How about taking this age of austerity as an opportunity to reduce and reassess what is needed from what is not? If everybody cut out their waste of resources in their professional and personal lives, surely it would be a revolution of sorts?
What we cannot do is talk big words of big society and then withdraw the necessary support for this. If I, as a volunteer, want to provide a service (that really should be provided by a statutory body in the first place) it is simply stupid to withdraw the funding needed to provide a few hours of training.
Oh yes, and bring on fuel duty. If it can be cut, the deficit can't be all that bad. Fuel is not going to become any cheaper any time soon unless we build a few more nuclear power stations. Better get used to the real cost of fuel and prepare sooner rather than later that we have to rethink our worship of the car.
Now however, I've experienced cuts even in my little bubble, and without particularly looking out for them. I'm not surprised but still very disappointed. Services for Refugees and Asylum Seekers were first to go - the housing contract Glasgow City Council held wasn't renewed, so rather a lot of support services are on the way out. This is hitting refugees hard - as well as everyone working in the sector. The cuts affect support for the most vulnerable, support for English language tuition and thus affects integration.
In another area, I tried to apply to volunteer as a breastfeeding peer supporter. However, the programme is stalled because the NHS has withdrawn their training element from the programme. So there you have a service which is actually all big societyish with volunteers doing the work, but the necessary training to enable them to do a good job has been cut. Again, it hits the vulnerable in our society, but also society as a whole because low breastfeeding rates are linked with poorer health in later life, increased risk of obesity and general health inequalities. It's short sighted and will in fact incur a delayed cost.
I have strong views on the suggested privatisation of forests and libraries. Again, I think it's the wrong approach. And the list goes on of course.
This is not to say that I'm all opposed to cuts, or opposed to all cuts. Muddling Along Mummy stirred up a bit of a debate on those who seem to think unrealistically that we can just not have any cuts at all.
However, I think we need to start with the right vision and not cut where it's quick and easy, but which will incur additional costs in the future.
So how about we look at what is costing the country money?
1. Crime. Crime is expensive because of the justice system, more so than the actual damage (though that counts too), and it also costs our society morally (in the sense that people feel insecure and don't use public spaces - a real detrimental effect on communities). Prison doesn't get rid of crime. I'm not suggesting that prison is wrong, just that it doesn't actually do anything to remediate the problem, however is important to show there are consequences to wrong behaviour.
2. Addictions. And I include tobacco and alcohol in this - alcohol in particular costs us an awful lot of money. The damage caused by people who are drunk, the violence caused by drink both outside and in the home, the consequences addictions have on the children of addicts.
3. Poor health that is caused by lifestyle choices. Most of us know what is good and bad to eat, yet bad food is cheap and convenient and it takes knowledge, real effort and conviction to make healthy choices.
4. Unemployment/worklessness.
All of these are linked to inequalities though it's a chicken and egg situation. Social inequality causes higher crime rates, poorer health and addictions, which in turn cause social inequalities. It's a vicious circle and I don't pretend there are any easy solutions out there because if they were, we'd have made appropriate choices.
There are two factors though which I strongly believe will make a sustainable positive difference to alleviate the malaises of our society. One is to aim to make our society more equal because it has been demonstrated that societies are happier and have less violence, crime, addictions and health problems if the gap between rich and poor is not as wide as it is in the UK (the widest in Europe, and it even beats the U.S. which surprised me).
Secondly it's about the early years and good and responsible parenting, as well as a recognition by all parents that they are the people who will set up their children for life. Hence it's absolutely essential to support parents to do a good job. I'm not talking about pushy parents here, just about parenting that respects the child, that gives the child love and attention, and ambitions. Education will then add to this foundation, but education cannot bridge the attainment gap caused by growing up in poverty and deprivation; in fact school has been shown to increases the attainment gap. I'm not suggesting that poverty has to lead to low attainment at school, just that children growing up in poverty are more likely to be low achievers at schools, that there is a very real link, for many reasons. Some to do with the parents, some to do with the environment and lack of facilities. It's complex as all of these issues.
With these two principles in mind, it may become clearer why libraries, breast feeding support (breast feeding is a health indicator of deprivation - some areas of Glasgow have breast feeding rates of only 8% at the 6 week check-up) and children's centres (in England, we don't have Sure Start centres in Scotland) in my view are cuts that are very wrong. I would go further and propose a whole reassessment of value of professions. Because, if a child care worker earns less than a car mechanic, does that not show that we value cars more than children?
I do want to propose alternatives though. There is a lot of waste of money, resources in all walks of the working life. Business trips, special VIP treats etc to me are spitting people in the face who are unemployed and struggle to make ends meet. Most larger organisations have an inflated management structure - and managers are paid more than the actual front line staff. I also very much believe in a progressive tax system (ours is regressive at the moment due to the effect of VAT). While I realise that there are too few high earners and thus taxing them more doesn't change the world, it would contribute and make our society more equal.
On top of that, waste is also in physical resources. How much paper is wasted, how much stuff produced that we don't need? How about taking this age of austerity as an opportunity to reduce and reassess what is needed from what is not? If everybody cut out their waste of resources in their professional and personal lives, surely it would be a revolution of sorts?
What we cannot do is talk big words of big society and then withdraw the necessary support for this. If I, as a volunteer, want to provide a service (that really should be provided by a statutory body in the first place) it is simply stupid to withdraw the funding needed to provide a few hours of training.
Oh yes, and bring on fuel duty. If it can be cut, the deficit can't be all that bad. Fuel is not going to become any cheaper any time soon unless we build a few more nuclear power stations. Better get used to the real cost of fuel and prepare sooner rather than later that we have to rethink our worship of the car.
Monday, 7 February 2011
Disposable Catering
:::PS: in the process of changing my blog template the comments feature has disappeared. I've enabled them now but have to repost so it takes effect. I had a thought provoking comment on my facebook account which I'll add to the debate and if you couldn't comment before, hopefully you can now:::
Every week I spent far too much time in the catering provided in Glasgow City Council facilities. The catering is outsourced to a private company, Encore catering. You'll find them in museums, sport centres and generally all Culture and Leisure Services establishments. Of course, Culture and Leisure Services is no longer part of Glasgow City Council in an attempt to half privatise non-essential services.
Anyway, this is what tickled my funny bone. A bit of context, I had a tea and a cake while Cubling and hubby went for a swim (I didn't go with Snowflake because I'm a bit paranoid now about infections and she hasn't had all her vaccinations yet. Instead I had a bit of lovely one-to-one time with her and me time while she napped. I even read a book, imagine.)
A cupa and a cake, right? Rubbish produced: one disposable cup, 5 empty milk containers, 2 empty sugar containers, one disposable plastic plate, one plastic spoon, one teabag.
I do appreciate that washing plates is time consuming and that kids occasionally break them. I also appreciate that it's safer to serve hot drinks to people with babies in paper cups.
However.
Isn't this health and safety gone too far? Snowflake was in her car seat so there was no immediate danger I'd pour my tea over her. In my mind I imagined the daily amount of waste this approach must produce. Waste that will cost the council an arm and a leg in landfill charge (because cardboard can't be recycled here, and neither can the plastic used in the plates and milk containers). Surely the council, and associated companies, should lead the way in reducing waste? Instead, as far as cafe style catering goes, Encore Catering uses a comparatively excessive amount of disposable items. More than, say, Morrisons or Ikea, who at least serve the food and drink in real cups.
Why this excess of disposable materials in a large chain? Is it to cut corners and reduce washing up? Does it reduce space needed? Surely so much disposable stuff needs space too, and with industrial type dishwashers I don't get how this can be a time issue, after all other cafes wash their dishes too.
Is it about safety and breakage, considering that many of such cafes are frequented by families and children will break the occasional plate?
I'd like to know, so will ask them. Maybe this needs to be raised from a few users of these cafes and they may change? I for one have a bit of a dilemma in that on the one hand I'm trying to live more sustainably, and I'm at least twice a week, sometimes more often, all my home efforts are outrubbished by having to significantly contribute to landfill just by having a cuppa.
And don't get me started on kid's lunch boxes (you know the cardboard boxes marketed at kids?).
Every week I spent far too much time in the catering provided in Glasgow City Council facilities. The catering is outsourced to a private company, Encore catering. You'll find them in museums, sport centres and generally all Culture and Leisure Services establishments. Of course, Culture and Leisure Services is no longer part of Glasgow City Council in an attempt to half privatise non-essential services.
Anyway, this is what tickled my funny bone. A bit of context, I had a tea and a cake while Cubling and hubby went for a swim (I didn't go with Snowflake because I'm a bit paranoid now about infections and she hasn't had all her vaccinations yet. Instead I had a bit of lovely one-to-one time with her and me time while she napped. I even read a book, imagine.)
A cupa and a cake, right? Rubbish produced: one disposable cup, 5 empty milk containers, 2 empty sugar containers, one disposable plastic plate, one plastic spoon, one teabag.
I do appreciate that washing plates is time consuming and that kids occasionally break them. I also appreciate that it's safer to serve hot drinks to people with babies in paper cups.
However.
Isn't this health and safety gone too far? Snowflake was in her car seat so there was no immediate danger I'd pour my tea over her. In my mind I imagined the daily amount of waste this approach must produce. Waste that will cost the council an arm and a leg in landfill charge (because cardboard can't be recycled here, and neither can the plastic used in the plates and milk containers). Surely the council, and associated companies, should lead the way in reducing waste? Instead, as far as cafe style catering goes, Encore Catering uses a comparatively excessive amount of disposable items. More than, say, Morrisons or Ikea, who at least serve the food and drink in real cups.
Why this excess of disposable materials in a large chain? Is it to cut corners and reduce washing up? Does it reduce space needed? Surely so much disposable stuff needs space too, and with industrial type dishwashers I don't get how this can be a time issue, after all other cafes wash their dishes too.
Is it about safety and breakage, considering that many of such cafes are frequented by families and children will break the occasional plate?
I'd like to know, so will ask them. Maybe this needs to be raised from a few users of these cafes and they may change? I for one have a bit of a dilemma in that on the one hand I'm trying to live more sustainably, and I'm at least twice a week, sometimes more often, all my home efforts are outrubbished by having to significantly contribute to landfill just by having a cuppa.
And don't get me started on kid's lunch boxes (you know the cardboard boxes marketed at kids?).
Monday, 31 January 2011
Waste not want not - Wer den Pfennig nicht ehrt
I grew up to the litany of "Wer den Pfennig nicht ehrt, ist des Talers nicht wert", loosely translatable as "waste not want not". My parents grew up during the war and lived through the war and post war years of rather a lot of want. As a consequence, nothing was wasted in our home and every spend was monitored and accounted for. Things were kept until they broke, we opened presents carefully to save the wrapping for next year. No scrap of food was ever thrown away but warmed up and included in the next meal. And my dad got all the out of date food, poor soul.
While my own parents had experienced hunger as children, I didn't. We weren't rich, but we also weren't poor. Ok, we didn't keep up with my richer peers at school whose parents held industrial jobs. We had no car but we had an annual holiday from when I was 7. I had less toys than others and we lived in a flat, but I played with our landlady's grandchild and his toys, or with my school friend on her farm, and my parents had a massive allotment (shared with a Turkish family). There were no trips to swimming pools but I attended music school and later, after years of pestering, was granted my wish to go horseriding.
I was shaped by the waste not want not philosophy of my parents. I still feel very strongly that it's wrong to throw food away. Just that the reasoning behind that has slightly shifted - it's no longer the starving children in Africa (yes, that was said in my house) but the knowledge that on the big scale of things, food production does not feed our world, that food production which feeds our wasteful and gluttonous part of the world is fuelled by unsustainable resources and that it's disrespectful to our fellow human beings who do not have the resources to feed themselves. More than that, the constant reminder of the possibility of leaner years to come which my parents testified through their own experience taught me never to take what we have for granted.
I'm still convinced that wastefulness is not a good thing, particularly in our generation. The temptation is almost irresistable, what with massive supermarkets, and everything being available just around the corner. It's an illusion of plenty.
This is why Hugh's Fish Fight has really struck a chord with me, as well as the initiative to get knobbly vegetables back onto the shelves of European supermarkets. As if it wasn't bad enough that one third of all food in supermarkets is wasted by consumers overbuying or supermarkets chucking away surplus (one third! this is food straight forwardly wasted and dumped, emitting green house gases too, nevermind the cost of production), European regulations have resulted in throwing away half the fish caught and vegetables that don't comply to quotas or preset shapes. Fish caught and food grown (both of which is a hard job) is chucked. For No.Good.Reason.At.All.
This has to change. It's stupid, disrespectful and unnecessary.
So please take a minute today, or tomorrow, but please don't put it off, and support two very worthwhile campaigns.
You can sign up to Hugh's Fish fight here, and follow on Facebook. If you want fun and tasty knobbly vegetables on your plate rather than in the bin, support the National Trust and Delicious initiative and ask your MEP to make his/her influence in Europe count. Also please consider sharing through your own networks. You could blog about it, tell your facebooky friends, tweet about it if you're a better tweeter than me, and do whatever else may get some much needed support to stop this nonsense.
Thank you!!!
While my own parents had experienced hunger as children, I didn't. We weren't rich, but we also weren't poor. Ok, we didn't keep up with my richer peers at school whose parents held industrial jobs. We had no car but we had an annual holiday from when I was 7. I had less toys than others and we lived in a flat, but I played with our landlady's grandchild and his toys, or with my school friend on her farm, and my parents had a massive allotment (shared with a Turkish family). There were no trips to swimming pools but I attended music school and later, after years of pestering, was granted my wish to go horseriding.
I was shaped by the waste not want not philosophy of my parents. I still feel very strongly that it's wrong to throw food away. Just that the reasoning behind that has slightly shifted - it's no longer the starving children in Africa (yes, that was said in my house) but the knowledge that on the big scale of things, food production does not feed our world, that food production which feeds our wasteful and gluttonous part of the world is fuelled by unsustainable resources and that it's disrespectful to our fellow human beings who do not have the resources to feed themselves. More than that, the constant reminder of the possibility of leaner years to come which my parents testified through their own experience taught me never to take what we have for granted.
I'm still convinced that wastefulness is not a good thing, particularly in our generation. The temptation is almost irresistable, what with massive supermarkets, and everything being available just around the corner. It's an illusion of plenty.
This is why Hugh's Fish Fight has really struck a chord with me, as well as the initiative to get knobbly vegetables back onto the shelves of European supermarkets. As if it wasn't bad enough that one third of all food in supermarkets is wasted by consumers overbuying or supermarkets chucking away surplus (one third! this is food straight forwardly wasted and dumped, emitting green house gases too, nevermind the cost of production), European regulations have resulted in throwing away half the fish caught and vegetables that don't comply to quotas or preset shapes. Fish caught and food grown (both of which is a hard job) is chucked. For No.Good.Reason.At.All.
This has to change. It's stupid, disrespectful and unnecessary.
So please take a minute today, or tomorrow, but please don't put it off, and support two very worthwhile campaigns.
You can sign up to Hugh's Fish fight here, and follow on Facebook. If you want fun and tasty knobbly vegetables on your plate rather than in the bin, support the National Trust and Delicious initiative and ask your MEP to make his/her influence in Europe count. Also please consider sharing through your own networks. You could blog about it, tell your facebooky friends, tweet about it if you're a better tweeter than me, and do whatever else may get some much needed support to stop this nonsense.
Thank you!!!
Monday, 9 November 2009
how much is enough?
At the weekend, a trashy glossy mag found my hands. There was a picture of a 3 year old celebrity toddler wearing high heels and having a wardrobe worth 2 million. Sorry, I don't recall if it was pound or dollar, and I don't care really because such minute details are beside the point. Thing is, I got fuming furious.
As I do when I see food being thrown into the bin. Not that I'm never guilty, just that I feel so flipping angry when I see people (including myself) doing it.
Excessive spending, excessive richness, excessive waste do my head in. In my world, there is no justification for the super rich. It annoys me unspeakably when people justify the amount of money some people earn, receive, inherit, or spend. To me, there's only so many resources going around and if someone has more than their share, there are people on the other side with less than their share. In the past, this had led to people calling me a communist. In times of the cold war, it was meant as the ultimate insult. But if that's what communism is about, well, fair enough, let me be one. Although I've never been comfortable with any label, political or not.
And yes I too fret over cute outfits and wish I had an excuse to buy them. In my case, there is no NEED to buy anything, yet I still DESIRE to buy stuff for my little girl. It seems in our parental nature. We want more. More. Ever more. Even if we've managed to disengage from buying ever more for ourselves, it all starts over even more viciously with our children. It's a daily struggle to resist the call for more, the desire to spend. I resent it when this competitiveness leads to mindless consumerism and, yes, greed .
At the same time as we can see from international comparison that those countries are more equal and fare better where the differences between the very rich and the very poor are least pronounced, where in fact a social Spirit Level
has been achieved. Maybe my anger at greed, the very rich, the wastefulness of every day life, consumerism is well founded because all of this seems to be at the bottom of our society's ill.I've been reading Not New Year blog with fascination over the past year - because of the very simple idea behind it, the attempt not to consume. It is more than an ecological statement. It is paying tribute to the limited nature of all our resources and the inequalities that our consumer society creates, the dependencies which, in the end, is likely to make us all suffer a rude awakening. I admire anyone who can make such a significant statement in their lives and not buy anything new for 6 out of 12 months. And they show us that it's possible, with conviction and real commitment, a commitment of action, not words.
A first step is of course to recognise our greed, our fascination with money and what money can buy us. The next step is to take stock of how much is enough: Do we really and truly need to consume the way we do? How can we consume less and in the process create a just society? Can we create general wealth by going with less (not without)? Is this possible to tweak our system or do we need to rethink it from scratch? Can we replace greed with compassion?
Above all, how can I make a small but significant start in my own life to waste less, buy less, give more to those who need (rather than desire) more? How can I free myself of the desire to have more when really and truly I have enough? Because at the end of the day, my gain is somebody else's loss.
Thursday, 15 October 2009
uphill struggle: kids and climate change
No, this is not an odd title. When it came to thinking about what my contribution to this year's Blog Action Day on Climate Change could be, I wavered between about 5 different ideas. Until it dawned on me that the biggest senseless contribution to climate change and the global challenges it brings is having kids in the developed world. And as usual, it's the grown ups who are to blame.
It's not because they themselves will contribute to CO2 emissions. Although that may be a good point too, just that I'd rather not suggest not having kids to save the planet. Let's for now stick to the premise that having kids is ok and after all, we are meant to procreate aren't we? No, what really enfuriates me, the child of parents who grew up during the war and the dire post war years, who knew hunger and the humility of begging for a slice of bread, a family where waste was unknown because the value of all things was known, is the amount of senseless waste and consumerism we live in now.
Take toys as an example. Our house is brimming with them. We still have less than many other houses. There is not a room without toys, most of them unplayed with, some even untouched. And don't get me started on soft toys. I've never counted them, all I know is that Cubling has only ever played with about half a doyen of them and wouldn't be unhappy if all she owned was Spencer bear (whom we almost lost on the trip to Germany but that's another story). Being A Mummy blogged about the nuisance of soft toys before. And she is right of course, they are mostly cute, some so odd I'd class them as disgusting to scary, but above all, they are unused dust gatherers, an utter waste of scarce resources, as are most of the toys owned by our 2 1/2 year old.
The problem is that people enjoy giving presents to children. I don't blame them, there's nothing like that face of delight when a present is announced, handed over, unravelled, discovered, explored. Unlike giving presents to us, the grown ups who have it all, and are hard to please, nothing is easier than pleasing a toddler. It makes us feel good. And contributes to our destruction of the earth.
And so our house has become, for want of an apter term, a skip of toys and soft toys. We can't throw them out for fear of upsetting a respected friend or relative. And yet they keep accumulating.
To make up for it a little bit, I'm resolved to buying second hand only wherever and whenever I can. Not to save money (although that's a lovely side product) but to combat that senseless consumerism, which wastes unknown quantities of water, oil, and other resources which are really not in unlimited supply, in the process creating CO2 and in the end contributing to landfill and further contamination of the place we live in. I've bought toys from charity shops, clothes from ebay, accepted ridiculous amounts of handed down clothes from when Cubling was born and it's not an easy choice. I always had to combat feeling like I didn't give my daughter the best I could get, that I may be seen as tight or even daft.
The only person who honestly doesn't care that her beloved rocking horse came from a charity shop or all her clothes are from her one-year-older friend is Cubling herself. Which helps. Yes, I do love shopping too, and I miss not having an excuse to spoil her rotten. Until I see her spend full days outdoors, exploring the world without a toy at hand, with her telling me how happy she is. It is then that I realise that the real loss is not the new and shiny toys she doesn't get, but the fact that nature kindergardens haven't made it to Glasgow yet.
It's not because they themselves will contribute to CO2 emissions. Although that may be a good point too, just that I'd rather not suggest not having kids to save the planet. Let's for now stick to the premise that having kids is ok and after all, we are meant to procreate aren't we? No, what really enfuriates me, the child of parents who grew up during the war and the dire post war years, who knew hunger and the humility of begging for a slice of bread, a family where waste was unknown because the value of all things was known, is the amount of senseless waste and consumerism we live in now.
Take toys as an example. Our house is brimming with them. We still have less than many other houses. There is not a room without toys, most of them unplayed with, some even untouched. And don't get me started on soft toys. I've never counted them, all I know is that Cubling has only ever played with about half a doyen of them and wouldn't be unhappy if all she owned was Spencer bear (whom we almost lost on the trip to Germany but that's another story). Being A Mummy blogged about the nuisance of soft toys before. And she is right of course, they are mostly cute, some so odd I'd class them as disgusting to scary, but above all, they are unused dust gatherers, an utter waste of scarce resources, as are most of the toys owned by our 2 1/2 year old.
The problem is that people enjoy giving presents to children. I don't blame them, there's nothing like that face of delight when a present is announced, handed over, unravelled, discovered, explored. Unlike giving presents to us, the grown ups who have it all, and are hard to please, nothing is easier than pleasing a toddler. It makes us feel good. And contributes to our destruction of the earth.
And so our house has become, for want of an apter term, a skip of toys and soft toys. We can't throw them out for fear of upsetting a respected friend or relative. And yet they keep accumulating.
To make up for it a little bit, I'm resolved to buying second hand only wherever and whenever I can. Not to save money (although that's a lovely side product) but to combat that senseless consumerism, which wastes unknown quantities of water, oil, and other resources which are really not in unlimited supply, in the process creating CO2 and in the end contributing to landfill and further contamination of the place we live in. I've bought toys from charity shops, clothes from ebay, accepted ridiculous amounts of handed down clothes from when Cubling was born and it's not an easy choice. I always had to combat feeling like I didn't give my daughter the best I could get, that I may be seen as tight or even daft.
The only person who honestly doesn't care that her beloved rocking horse came from a charity shop or all her clothes are from her one-year-older friend is Cubling herself. Which helps. Yes, I do love shopping too, and I miss not having an excuse to spoil her rotten. Until I see her spend full days outdoors, exploring the world without a toy at hand, with her telling me how happy she is. It is then that I realise that the real loss is not the new and shiny toys she doesn't get, but the fact that nature kindergardens haven't made it to Glasgow yet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
