Nothing is cool

Huzzah!

* * * * * * * * *

Last week, Little Steven read Al Aronowitz's "August Blues":

August is the month when wars start. It's when the water dries up and the spirit begins to wither. Insomniacs pull down their shades and lock themselves in their rooms in August. Lifelong friends have fist fights. People feel like they're going to burst. Sometimes they do.

World War I started in August, or just about. The Austro-Hungarian Army began bombarding Belgrade on July 29, 1914, not quite August, but then August sometimes begins early. World War II didn't quite start in August either. A German pocket battleship anchored alongside the harbor fortifications while on a good will call to the Polish port of Gdynia let loose with a broadside at dawn of Sept.1, 1939, but then August sometimes lasts for weeks after you've ripped it off the calendar. It drags on and on like some kind of insanity that can only be snapped away by the first crisp shock of autumn. ...

August seems to be ending on time this year, but you never know. (You can read the whole thing here.)

* * * * * * * * *

Why is Jeff Passan, baseball columnist for Yahoo! sports, bothering to mark the 20th anniversary of the release of a .149-hitting backup catcher by the Double-A Williamsport Bills?

Because 20 years ago last Friday, Dave Bresnahan pulled the greatest hidden-ball trick ever.

* * * * * * * * *

Since we found ourselves discussing the mythological "ticking time-bomb scenario" the other day, let me belatedly link to Belle Waring's authoritative staking-through-the-heart of this muddling distraction: "By the Power of Stipulation: I Have the Power!"

* * * * * * * * *

Meet Dr. J. Matthew Sleeth, a medical doctor, a born-again evangelical Christian, a climate-change activist, a simple lifestyle advocate and the author of Serve God, Save the Planet.

Interesting guy. Here, via the latest issue of Creation Care magazine, is his list of the Top Ten Creation Care Technologies:

1. Keeping the Sabbath; 2. No television; 3. Clotheslines; 4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs; 5. Farmers' Markets; 6. Bird feeders; 7. Low-flow shower heads; 8. Bicycles; 9. Front-loading washer; 10. Cloth shopping bags.

(Now I'll have to check out the book to see why Dr. Sleeth views bird feeders as a useful technology to combat climate change. How do fatter squirrels help stop global warming?)

* * * * * * * * *

Andy did you hear about this one?

All in all is all we are.

* * * * * * * * *

I don't know where, exactly, my copies of The New Yorker are printed, but I imagine it's pretty far away. Yet somehow, each week, the magazine travels from the printer, to the warehouse, to the post office it is shipped from, then to my post office and, finally, to my personal mailbox. And then always, each week, as I take the new issue out of my mailbox, two subscription blow-in cards fall out onto the floor of the lobby.

I cannot figure out whether: A) the cards somehow know they've arrived at their final destination and refuse to fall out before then, or B) The New Yorker initially stuffs my magazine with dozens of these blow-in subscription cards and the others have all fallen out en route.

* * * * * * * * *

Credit/blame to damnedyankee for the link here, but after browsing through the 350+ comments in the previous thread, this song came to mind ...

Comments

[cjmr]

Well, bird feeders will give you something to watch when you no longer have a television. Unfortunately, they also attract birds to your yard, which then poop on the laundry you've hung on your clothesline.

[Jeff]

Also a good bird feeder will come with a ring somewhat below the feed station. This deters the squirrels (I don't think anything would stop them) from getting to the food.

[Michele]

Nothing can stop the squirrels! Did you ever see "Daylight Robbery" and "Daylight Robbery II" (by the BBC, as shown on the Discovery Channel in the US)?

[Victoria]

So as I was reading this figured I was going to end up with either a pretty good REM song or a great Nirvana song stuck in my head for the rest of the day. Then I clicked on the youtube clip. Damnit, Fred! How could you?!

[85% Duane]

Fred, as a practical joker, I appreciated the Bresnahan link. It's a damn shame it ended his playing career. Every time I set up a prank at work, I'm mindful it could be my last one there.

A couple jobs ago my cubicle was located periously close to the director's office. As we invariably had a noisy line of folks waiting to meet with her meandering past our workstations, a friend and I decided to go in on a weekend and build her a waiting area outside of of her office. We arranged tables and chairs in an L shape, hung a painting on the wall and placed magazines on the coffee table (that I had pulled out of my attic and spray-painted black the day before.)

She didn't look pleased at all when she came in the next day. When she found out who did it, she said, "You better keep your day jobs!" and I replied, "Does that mean we get to keep our day jobs?"

In fact, she had the chairs arranged differently and to my knowledge, our waiting area is still there many years later! (And I was fired much later for a different reason.. haha.)

[cjmr]

If you want a something to get that song out of your head, this guy's guitar playing is beautiful.

[hagsrus]

...two subscription blow-in cards fall out onto the floor of the lobby.

I live in hope that one day all those @#$%^^## cards will be bound in so that they aren't a constant source of litter.

Meanwhile, since they generally come with postage paid, I keep them in my bag until I pass a mailbox and can return them for recycling. Or whatever.

[Jeff]

Don't you people keep up with technology? Those cards are bound in by a special coded glue. When they finally reach your home, apartment or office, the postal carrier waves a decoder wand (it used to be a ring, but they were too small, didn't have enough oomph, and too many kids were turning up with amazing replicas) over the magazines, dissolving the glue and leaving the cards free, Free, FREE to go whither they willst.

I thought everyone knew that.

[ako]

The thing about the ticking-time-bomb argument is that it's not meant to seriously address the morality of extreme situations. That's why no one takes it seriously if you say "No".

It's meant to get you to agree to torture.

It's like a horribly grim version of the "Would you do it for a penny?" story.

Once they've gotten you to say "yes", you're reduced to haggling over the price.

[the opoponax]

I live in hope that one day all those @#$%^^## cards will be bound in so that they aren't a constant source of litter.

Personally, I live in hope that one day they will stop making those cards entirely.

I already subscribe to your magazine. WTF good is it going to do to throw in a bunch of little pieces of paper asking me to do something I've already done?

And if I'm reading a magazine I've purchased, seriously, everyone knows that magazine subscriptions exist. Every magazine I'm aware of has a website that allows you to subscribe paperlessly. If they really feel the need to inform you of what a great deal it is to subscribe, why not use a decal or small ad on a prominent page?

I hatehatehate those stupid cards!

[straight]

Other reductio ad absurdum arguments against the ticking bomb scenario (there's millions of them).

1. What if the terrorist says he'll tell you the location of the atom bomb if you give him a blow job?

2. What if the terrorist says he'll tell you the bomb location if you renounce Jesus and embrace Islam?

3. So, you're saying it's OK for the government to do something immoral to save American lives? Then I assume you'd be OK with the government confiscating all the assets of anyone with more than $500,000? Because I guarantee I can save more American lives with all that money than you can by torturing ay-rabs. (Better equipment for soldiers in Iraq, better medical care for all Americans, etc.)

What? You say that would have all sorts of other negative consequences for the economy? Gee, do you think torture might have some other negative consequences that you're not considering?

[mcc]

How do fatter squirrels help stop global warming?

Carbon sequestration?

[bad Jim]

Taking things in order:

1. Keeping the Sabbath

For a few years, when I was in my twenties, on Sundays I would leave my car at home and walk down the hill into town and back up again. Two miles each way, down a thousand feet, then up. In my forties, rediscovering my body, I trod all the paths that led to and from my hilltop fortress, putting half a thousand miles on my Teva sandals. Now I just drive my mother to the UU Fellowship and back, and I expect to be able to shop in between.

2. No television

In summertime there is no new Law & Order! Tonight we watched "Rabbit Proof Fence", last night "The Motorcycle Diaries". Kinda scraping the bottom of the barrel. And the Angels lost. So, no. We like to watch.

3. Clotheslines

Not a chance.

4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs

California had a major electricity crisis back in 2001, so yeah, we retrofitted whatever we could. The lights that are mostly on are efficienct, but my POSSLQ, damn her soul, has a thing for hot little halogens dressed up in brass. I follow behind her turning them off.

5. Farmers' Markets

I leave eating to my foody brother. He buys persimmons in bulk and dries them. He mills his own grains.

6. Bird feeders

This makes absolutely no sense, but I buy about 25lb of sunflower seeds a week. The feeder is my own design, parts shamelessly cribbed from the Droll Yankee feeder, made from a 2-quart pitcher, and the finches swarm it as long as it's full. Plus a conventional standard feeder with conventional feed to keep the doves happy, three hummingbird feeders, some baths. It's a noisy back yard, but we like our racket.

7. Low-flow shower heads

There's another kind?

8. Bicycles

Not serious transportation in my neighborhood. As a student in Berkeley I had to go up a waist size so my jeans could accommodate my thickening thighs, but nowadays I can't even keep up with my skinny niece.

9. Front-loading washer

Still waiting for the old one to wear out.

10. Cloth shopping bags

The clerks at Trader Joe's admire the bag I bought there with pockets for wine bottles (and, I imagine, shake their heads at the number of bottles I buy). We actually run short of bags to use for garbage. Wild Oats offers such made of recycled plastic, and I hope Whole Foods (if they don't close our store) will do the same.

[cjmr's husband]

hot little halogens dressed up in brass

I half expected that to be porn spam...

[cjmr]

What is it with you and spam lately?! If I cook you some for lunch, will you stop?

[Richard Hershberger]

The other aspect of the ticking-time-bomb argument is Mary Sue wish-fulfilment. Look at the later Tom Clancy books when Tom, er, Jack Ryan becomes Presdident. Tom, I mean Jack, is President while the rest of the Federal government is burned to a crisp, thus removing all that hippy-dippy "checks and balances" crap and leaving Tom (Jack! I mean Jack!) effectively as dictator. Then evil-doers do evil in a way that makes it perfectly reasonable--even necessary--for Tom/Jack to take the Constitution, rip it into conveniently sized pieces, and use it to wipe his behind.

Clancy is capable enough at plotting to make each individual step kind of plausible, if you squint and the light is dim. So the Constitutional toilet paper result seems inevitable, if you don't think about it too hard. In a third-rate action novel this is fine, but when you realize that the Jack Ryan novels are a giant Mary Sue, it turns out that what really turns Clancy on is an excuse to eliminate the Constitution, while piously intoning that it isn't a suicide pact. From a writer a third-rate action novels that is just mildly creepy, but then this guy appears on what purport to be news programs and is presented as an expert in, umm..., something: scary.

[the opoponax]

Tonight we watched "Rabbit Proof Fence", last night "The Motorcycle Diaries". Kinda scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Wow. You prefer mindless crap to either of those movies? Granted, they're not Casablanca, but I'd be happier watching either of them than America's Got Talent or Laguna Beach, or even a rerun of Law & Order on cable. I know there's some good TV these days, but wow...

Though I have to say given the choice to watch either Rabbit Proof Fence or Entourage, it would be tough.

[the opoponax]

Oh, and here's my rundown.

1. Keeping the Sabbath - whose Sabbath? I agree, I like to keep at least one weekend day as my "day of rest". Which usually means sleeping as late as I want, no chores or errands, staying home or somewhere I can go on foot/bike. But if he's talking about serious ultra-orthodox Shabbos, with the no electricity and having to eat gefilte fish because picking out bones counts as "work"? No thanks. I don't, however, see how this helps the environment at all, as I don't drive.

2. No television - check, though it's another rule I don't see the actual environmental impact of, as televisions are no more innately polluting than any other media toy or home appliance, and if I don't watch TV, but do play World of Warcraft, the energy use pretty much evens out. And "no media that is based on electricity" seems a bit much.

3. Clotheslines - would if I could. Great idea for someone who lives in California or the southeast and has a back yard. Not really functional for someone living in an apartment in the northeast. Though it does save a lot of energy compared to dryers.

4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs - duh. I'm pretty sure every bulb in my place that can be replaced with a CFL has been.

5. Farmers' Markets - double duh. the one adjoining my neighborhood park on Saturdays is part of my weekend routine. Though not so much in winter, when my choices of produce are limited to preserved apple-related products and potatoes.

6. Bird feeders - don't see how this helps the environment, either. Would maybe have one if I didn't live in a city. Because pigeons? DO NOT WANT.

7. Low-flow shower heads - my shower head is low-flow all on its own, due to being a total piece of crap that I insist I'm going to replace at least once a month, and never do. I hate it. Maybe it's just giving me a bad opinion of what "low flow" means, though. 10 little trickles of water does NOT a shower make. For this reason, I'm more of a bath person. Which I feel mega-guilty about. But I make up for it in lack of almost any of the big ticket polluting items like a car or central AC.

8. Bicycles - I think the first step here is for cities to become more bike friendly. Not very many people are going to be willing to get out on the road when the roads are made deliberately unsafe for bikes. I have a bike. I rarely ride it, out of fear for my life and worry that it's going to get stolen.

9. Front-loading washer - laundry drop-off is one of my big splurges. They use those industrial machines, which are front-loading, but I have no idea how energy or water efficient they are. I have no chance of actually owning a washer, anyway. I'd like to think that the fact that I have to pay to do laundry means I do a lot less of it, which saves more resources than a front-loading machine in my apartment would. But I fear all it's really done is give me an excuse to own like 60 pairs of underpants.

10. Cloth shopping bags - triple duh. Though I do use plastic bags to sort my recycling, so occasionally I will take them. But once I get a good supply, back to the cloth it is.

I spent a week in Montreal in June, and I noticed that a lot of this stuff is built into the lives of Montrealers, making "going green" much easier there. Every supermarket has its own cloth totebag you can buy for $5, and they charge ten cents for each plastic bag you use. There's an extensive network of bike paths, and as many bike racks on each block as parking spots. Greenmarkets everywhere, and local products are widely available. It just made so much more sense than the bullshit "omg this product is eco-friendly, you should buy it now!" American version.

[cjmr]

Re: TV

I haven't read the book, but I bet the prohibition on TV is that not watching TV (especially for children) is supposed to help cure the 'but I want it' and 'keeping up with the Joneses' mentalities.

[cjmr]

Should say 'is because not watching TV'. I failed to proofread for anything but tag closure.

[the opoponax]

I thought about that.

But then, I watch TV exceedingly rarely (basically Jeopardy! and PBS), and I never actually want anything I see on TV. And yet I still have my share of consumerist tendencies.

[cjmr]

Mind you, it's usually the internet where I see something, go "oooh, shiny!", and run off and order it. Like, I dunno, a cookery book from England.

[ako]

For this reason, I'm more of a bath person. Which I feel mega-guilty about.

Don't. I've checked once or twice (putting a stopper in the tub, and seeing how much water accumulates) and an average bath doesn't use up any more water that an ordinary shower (probably more than scrubbing for exactly five minutes under a low flow shower head, but less than how people who want more time in the water shower). Also, it saves energy, since a hot bath stays hotter for longer than a hot shower. Less contact with air, so less heat loss.

So if you're prone to taking longer to bathe, a bath's actually considerably more efficient.

[cya]

'1. Keeping the Sabbath; 2. No television; 3. Clotheslines; 4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs; 5. Farmers' Markets; 6. Bird feeders; 7. Low-flow shower heads; 8. Bicycles; 9. Front-loading washer; 10. Cloth shopping bags.'

Wow - your average German pretty much scores 6 out of 10, and if you add in the still enforced blue laws, you get 7. Without even trying. Bird feeders are actually somewhat illegal - it is only legal to feed birds in the winter. (Think about it.) No TV is unlikely, and low flow shower heads seems less important than low flow toilets, which are also mandated.

Sadly, this makes me think this guy has a long, long way to go before figuring out how to really care for the planet. And how far the U.S. has to go before understanding just how far it has to go before even beginning to understand what needs to be done in terms of living more responsibly.

[cjmr]

The 'average' American family, where everyone showers/bathes at home, but spends most of their day at work/school/daycare, will probably save more water by replacing their shower heads than their toilet(s).

So if you're prone to taking longer to bathe, a bath's actually considerably more efficient.

Wow. My typical shower uses barely enough water to cover my ankles in the bath (I too have tried measuring to see if it made a difference) including the cold water wasted waiting for it to heat up. What on Earth are you doing in there?

[cjmr]

What on Earth are you doing in there?

Maybe she has long hair? It takes a bit more time/water to wash.

[the opoponax]

It would also depend on the size and dimensions of one's tub, and the amount of bathwater they consider sufficient.

[cya]

cjmr-
actually, all German toilets fit the description of low flow - and essentially all allow the water to be stopped - it is not necessary to use the full amount for every flush.

Nonetheless, the point about home/out of home use is not incorrect. What is incorrect is assuming that the total amount of water used is somehow possible to subdivide - the total remains unchanged.

I could go on and on about Germany - for example, how bicycling is normal, as children are taught traffic rules around 3rd grade, how bicycles are included in traffic planning (bike paths are built alongside roads between towns, for example), and the legal framework that means when an accident occurs between a bicycle and a car, the car driver is charged with a moving violation (and if the bicycle rider is injured or killed, the driver is charged accordingly, and routinely - this is considered desirable public policy, by the way).

But the real point that Germany, for all its good points, has a long way to go before approaching any desirable level of something which could be called stewardship.

[Spalanzani]

What on Earth are you doing in there?

OK wise guy, where do you do your tax returns?

[Jeff]

Clotheslines: Not really functional for someone living in an apartment in the northeast.

What about all those scenes set in NYC with the lines between buildings? It may not be functional in all of the NE, but, granting that they were used more because of lack of other options, at least it was possible in parts of the city.

It would also depend on the size and dimensions of one's tub, and the amount of bathwater they consider sufficient.

I first read this out of context and wondered if it had something to do with the obnoxious Grover Norquist...

[A Texan in Bavaria]

cya: I was just thinking about that - here in rural Bayern, the blue laws are absolutely shocking for most new American arrivals. Two things are open on Sunday: restaurants and some gas stations. Bavarians are more frequent churchgoers than other Germans, but still, most don't go every Sunday. Sunday is a day for visiting family and/or doing some sort of outdoor activity (often, with a club).

The restricted opening hours and lack of consistent credit card acceptance seriously cut down on recreational shopping - Germans supposedly "save too much". Unfortunately, that's changing. Hope they don't get as deep into the credit card mess as Americans and Brits collectively have.

Have you seen anything on whether Germans (from any region) would prefer shops be open on Sunday? At first, I eagerly went to every town's yearly "Einkaufsonntag," but now, I'm glad there's a day that everything's quiet.

[cya]

A Texan in Bavaria-
first, some distinction between regions is important - Germany is quite regional, and the East/West split pretty deep in many ways. As is the differences between large city and small town, and Catholic/Lutheran. Where I live, hanging your laundry out on Sunday is considered a virtual breach of the peace by a number of townspeople, though it is no longer something that is scandalous.

Shopping is generally not considered a form of recreation - instead, spending the day at a local lake is considered a better use of time, or an evening at a beer garden.

The question about shopping is not as important as the idea of quiet - and on that, most Germans can agree.

[ako]

What on Earth are you doing in there?

Nothing terribly exciting, I'm afraid (while I do have a pen that can write underwater, the IRS yells at me if I get the paper wet). I'm just one of those people that really likes being in the shower. I'm forever balancing ambition to be environmentally responsible with how much I like luxuriating under warm water.

Also, I do have a small tub. I can't stretch out that much, and I'm short. So, since it's have knees poking out or overflow the tub, I get about as much water as I use for a bath in a ten-minute shower.

[inge]

A Texan in Bavaria: Have you seen anything on whether Germans (from any region) would prefer shops be open on Sunday?

I enjoyed the shops being open on Sundays when I was in the US, because with my working hours, Sunday was the only day when I could go into town and work my way through the bookstores. Now, back in Germany with less insane working hours, the normal (if greatly extended in the last 20 years) opening times of the shops are just fine. And "Shopping Sundays" are a madness. Everyone who would usually go to the countryside with their family goes into the city instead. With their family.

[Rozzen]

Also, I do have a small tub. I can't stretch out that much, and I'm short. So, since it's have knees poking out or overflow the tub, I get about as much water as I use for a bath in a ten-minute shower.

Yikes ! When I was younger I was unable to take short showers (half an hour was average) (I have long hair, ok ?) and even then I used less water than a bath !
(I think my parents actually made me test this because they wanted to know how much I was costing them).
It must have been a big bath...

I add my testimony to ako's by the way, I find just luxuriating under the shower very enjoyable. It's even better than a bath, because now that I'm past the age of playing with my brothers in it I just get bored after a few minutes. At least with the shower you have the sensation of running water and the possibility to change the temperature quickly...

[bulbul]

1. Keeping the Sabbath;
The good old fashioned Jewish way, as in no travelling, no cooking, no turning on lights?

2. No television;
Check.

3. Clotheslines;
I'm asuming it's clothelines as opposed to dryers. If so, then I don't know a single household that has a dryer. Come to think of it, most electronics stores don't even carry them, save for those super-expensive combo-washers.

4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs;
Check.

5. Farmers' Markets;
Check.

6. Bird feeders;
My parents always put up a few of those in late October. But still, I don't see what it has to do with stewardship.

7. Low-flow shower heads;
Check.

8. Bicycles;
Good idea, but I'd need to get in shape first.

9. Front-loading washer;
Check. But why, what's the difference?

10. Cloth shopping bags.
Check.

So that's 8/10, perhaps 9/10 if someone explains to me what the purpose of 1. is. And that's without any considerable effort - only 10. required me to change my habits, 5. is a given because I like my tomatoes tasting like tomatoes. I guess what cya said about Germany pretty much applies to most EU countries as well.

[bulbul]

opo,

Not really functional for someone living in an apartment in the northeast.
Actually, I live in a studio apartment and I have one set of clotheslines - more like clothes-stand, really - in the bathroom right above the washing machine and one set right underneath the window both of which kind of fold out. Works pretty good.

[inge]

1. Keeping the Sabbath: I'd like to, but then the laundry wouldn't get done, the dishes would stay dirty and the floor unswept...

2. No television: No way. I need it to watch Buffy DVDs.

3. Clotheslines: What else? Can be used indoors, which is good as you're not allowed to put them on the balcony.

4. Compact fluorescent light bulbs: Sorry, but no. I see that it is basically a good idea, but even if they do not flicker and do not whine, the colour is like a November day with the heating broken and all friends out of town. Instant misery. I'll change my stance the day I find one that does not make the room feel cold, damp and lonely.

5. Farmers' Markets. Great thing.

6. Bird feeders. I know I shouldn't, in summer, but watching the cats watching the birds is just too much fun...

7. Low-flow shower heads. Again, no way. The shower is the only place in the house where I can fill the 10 litre water can in less than two minutes, and those petunias which hide the bird feed on the balcony from nosy neighbors need a lot of water.

8. Bicycles. Got a shiny new one! (What luck that my old, boring one got stolen -- otherwise I'd feel obliged to continue to use it, because replacing still functional items = bad. Of course, getting your bike stolen is easy...)

9. Front-loading washer: There are others?

10. Cloth shopping bags: What else?

So, hm, 6/10?

[the opoponax]

@ Jeff re clotheslines between buildings in all those old New York movies -- well, ok, I guess, if you like soot-covered clothes, and consider pigeon shit a really hip new accessory. Poor people living in tenements before laundromats became common HAD to do that. Notice, also, in photographs from the time, how grimy and soot-streaked everyone looks.

Though that brings up an interesting question. Well, actually, a boring question for anyone who isn't as interested in social history as I am. Most middle class people "sent out" the laundry back then. So where on earth did the laundries hang the clothes? Or did they have some kind of heat-drying setup?

The other problem (and reason I specified "northeast") is that during the winter, I'm not sure you really could use a clothesline at all. There's precious little sunlight, and the weather is cold and damp. More often than not the clothes would probably freeze before they had a chance to dry. Clotheslines here are generally a spring/summer affair, even for people who have access to outdoor space.

No television - check, though it's another rule I don't see the actual environmental impact of, as televisions are no more innately polluting than any other media toy or home appliance, and if I don't watch TV, but do play World of Warcraft, the energy use pretty much evens out. And "no media that is based on electricity" seems a bit much.

I'm wondering though, do TVs or computers burn more power?

Most of the people I know with both have small high-end laptops, and large high-end TVs, so my impression is that the TV would use more power. But I don't actually know.

[ako]

Though that brings up an interesting question. Well, actually, a boring question for anyone who isn't as interested in social history as I am. Most middle class people "sent out" the laundry back then. So where on earth did the laundries hang the clothes? Or did they have some kind of heat-drying setup?

I don't know about the northeast, but I know that if you have space enough to put the clotheslines under an overhang, the soot and pigeon-shit problems can be minimized (when I was in the Peace Corps, I'd hang clothes under the eaves of my house, although it was more lizard-shit I was trying to avoid).

I imagine it would be a lot easier to arrange space if you were running a professional laundry service than if you could just barely afford an apartment.

It's alway possible, as well, that they sent them outside the city.

[the opoponax]

@ bulbul -- that would be a clothes rack. Which in my mind is a totally different thing. I don't have a rack at the moment, but I have in the past. Mainly for sweaters and a few other items that can't go in the dryer. But there's no way I could dry ALL my clothes that way, unless I washed a few things every night before bed, rather than saving up 2 or 3 loads to do at once.

[the opoponax]

To Mr. No-name (Ms. No-name?) -- a small laptop uses considerably less power than a TV, but in the grand scheme of "stewardship", it probably doesn't make all that much difference.

This is why I sometimes get frustrated by the folks on blogs like treehugger.com. That's great that you're so enviro-obsessed that you've done the math and figured out that a Dell with a 15 inch screen uses 20% less power than a Thinkpad with a 13 inch screen, or whatever. But if every American went with the Dell over the Thinkpad, this would still not fix our energy issues. And if every American trashed their Thinkpad, or their desktop setup, and/or their TV in order to buy the more efficient Dell, we'd be even further up shit creek than we already are (this point, especially, seems to escape the folks at many of the product-centric green blogs).

On the other hand, though, if everyone got rid of their TV and didn't replace TV viewing with a comparably energy-sucking hobby, THEN we'd see a real change. I doubt most members of the first world are really willing to do that, though.

[the opoponax]

I see that it is basically a good idea, but even if they do not flicker and do not whine, the colour is like a November day with the heating broken and all friends out of town. Instant misery.

I'm a big fluorescent light hater, too, and I thought this was how the CFLs would be. But i've been gradually replacing my bulbs with them over the last few months, and I don't notice a significant drop in light quality. That said, maybe what's available in Germany is different?

[bulbul]

opo,

that would be a clothes rack.
No it ain't. It's not exactly a stand, either, to be honest, because it is attached to the wall.

[the opoponax]

well, OK. my point here is that "thingie in your bathroom to hang a few sweaters on" is not the same thing as the clothesline J. Matthew Sleeth is romanticizing. It's also possible that the sort of thing you have is something that doesn't exist in the US, and thus something I've never seen. Which is probably why more Americans don't use them.

[ako]

Yeah, that was me about the laptop (my name didn't get added for some reason).

And I agree with you about not buying our way into environmental efficiency; you can make definite improvements by buying better products when the opportunity comes up, and sometimes it's better to replace a functional but energy-sucking appliance with a more efficient one. And I'm all in favor for giving people credit for taking any positive step. But environmental problems are not going to be solved purely through smarter shopping (at least not in the foreseeable future).

[stinger]

Fred's first link reminded me of this LeGuin masterpiece:

Omelas

[inge]

the opopnax, re: CFL bulbs: Most people I know who use CFLs were early adopters and still use their very old bulbs, because replacing them is expensive and you don't throw away things that still work. I heard that the new ones are better -- I keep meaning to inconspiciously check lightbulbs in friend's places where the light is good, but as with many things, good light seems so natural that I rarely remember to check (and when I do, it's mostly 500 watts halogen). I have bad eyes and like my artificial light to be very bright. The day I find a good CFL, I'll switch.

Biggest energy eater in my place are the water heaters (no running hot water in the house). My electricty bill went up 40% when I moved here. They are very comfortable (hot water, correct temperature right now!), but if the landlord ever replaces them, good riddance.