NY Times: Individuals Can Totally Do Their Part In Fighting Hotcoldwetdry

This NY Times article on Doing Something seems more like something from the first decade of the century in their ideas

In Fighting Climate Change, What’s an Individual to Do?

Climate change can seem like such an enormous problem that individual actions would have little impact. Consider Europe’s wide-ranging proposals this week to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, including eliminating sales of new gas- and diesel-powered cars in the next 14 years.

But people can have an impact, experts say, both by how they spend their money and how they spend their time.

Mary Weathers Case, for instance, chose to offset the carbon cost of a cross-country plane trip for her family through the site Gold Standard. Dr. Case, a psychiatrist who lives in South Salem, N.Y., with her husband and two children, said she had been reading and watching more news about climate change during the pandemic and had been motivated to do her part after hearing about the searing temperatures in the West.

What surprised her, though, was that after spending $3,000 on plane tickets to Portland, Ore., she could offset that carbon for $150.

Or, they could simply not take fossil fueled flights. Carbon offsets are like paying tickets because you refuse to stop speeding. And most Warmists refuse to stop speeding. And most won’t pay for offsets for their world killing behavior.

With certain investments — namely those that reduce or remove carbon from the atmosphere — there are defined ways to measure their environmental impact. With others, like water conservation, the metrics are not as clear because there isn’t an agreed upon unit to measure.

Climate change has little to do with the environment.

When Leah Weinberg, owner and creative director of Color Pop Events, which plans weddings, was moving from Long Island City, N.Y., to Forest Hills in Queens, she found a company that had done away with cardboard boxes. Instead, the company, Movers, Not Shakers, provides the plastic, flip-top boxes that retailers like CVS use to deliver products to stores.

Using less cardboard is environmental. However, those plastic boxes are made with petrochemicals, and even if the trucks use biodiesel, that has been called bad for climate change, too.

This ethos can be woven into however people spend their money. Paul Greenberg, whose new book is “The Climate Diet: 50 Simple Ways to Trim Your Carbon Diet,” said continuing to work from home at least a few days a week was one significant way to reduce the carbon emissions from driving a car. But such decisions are not always so straightforward.

Take buying clothes. A shirt made with a synthetic material, like polyester, which is derived from petrochemicals, is more carbon-intensive than a cotton shirt. But that cotton shirt requires huge amounts of water to produce — more water than a person drinks in a year, Mr. Greenberg’s research found. His recommendation? Consider buying used clothing.

Some choices are harder than others. Dogs and cats may be beloved companions, but they are carnivores that are bad for the environment. “If you had a choice between a carnivorous dog and a guinea pig that eats seeds,” Mr. Greenberg said, “go with the guinea pig.”

My goodness, these people are nags, and just need to mind their own f’ing business. But, hey, you can also replace all your natural gas burning appliances. Because that’s cheap, right? And what happens to the old unit? They forget to mention that

Solar panels have grown in popularity, as their costs have fallen and their efficiency has increased. Milton Ross, who has owned a brownstone in Brooklyn’s Park Slope neighborhood since 1979, no longer has an electric bill because of the panels he had installed on his roof.

“My system back in 2015 was around $30,000,” Mr. Ross said. “My neighbors don’t do it because of the cost. I used my home equity line of credit, and I could claim the interest as a tax deduction. It just made sense to me. Meanwhile, everything is all paid back, and I don’t have an electric bill anymore.”

Well, sure, cheaper, but, can most people afford $10,000 plus to get some extra power for the house which won’t repay itself for decades?

Dr. Case said she would feel better when she and her family moved to Brooklyn this summer and got rid of one car and started walking more in their neighborhood. She’s also committed to buying things locally and not ordering them online.

Get rid of the other car. What can she buy locally? Most food and goods are grown/manufactured outside of NYC. These are just old miniscule ideas from well over a decade ago. Time for Warmists to practice what they preach. No fossil fueled travel, no AC, no ice makers, short showers, live in 300 square foot homes, no flushable toilets, and so much more.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “NY Times: Individuals Can Totally Do Their Part In Fighting Hotcoldwetdry”

  1. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    What surprised her, though, was that after spending $3,000 on plane tickets to Portland, Ore., she could offset that carbon for $150.

    Or, they could simply not take fossil fueled flights. Carbon offsets are like paying tickets because you refuse to stop speeding. And most Warmists refuse to stop speeding. And most won’t pay for offsets for their world killing behavior.

    Let’s face it: the offsets are like indulgences, payment for forgiveness for sins committed, but the sins are still there. The lady in question paid her indulgence fee, but that didn’t reduce her ‘carbon footprint’ by a single molecule. She’s simply paying for someone else’s carbon reduction, a reduction which had already happened, without pay.

    • Zachriel says:

      Dana: the offsets are like indulgences

      It is possible to offset your carbon emissions by reducing emissions elsewhere. One popular alternative is reforestation. Or you can fund green projects, such as methane capture from abandoned mines. However, by itself, offsets can’t address the underlying problem. That will require new technologies, either new sources of green energy or efficient carbon capture.

  2. Dana says:

    Solar panels have grown in popularity, as their costs have fallen and their efficiency has increased. Milton Ross, who has owned a brownstone in Brooklyn’s Park Slope neighborhood since 1979, no longer has an electric bill because of the panels he had installed on his roof.

    Solar panels require maintenance. Not a lot of it, but maintenance nevertheless. Primarily, they need to be cleaned of dust, dirt and grime, which cost the panels in efficiency. Does Mr Ross have ladders to get to his roof and clean his solar panels? Residential roofs in a snowy area like New York tend to be steeply pitched, making walking on the roof a risky activity, and Mr Ross, who has owned his brownstone since 1979, if he bought it when he was just 20, would be 62 years old by now.

    Our retirement home would actually be an excellent candidate for solar panels, with southwest-facing roofs on both the house and the garage, but by the time they would pay for themselves, we would be stone-cold graveyard dead.

  3. Dana says:

    There has been a lot of talk recently about the “urban heat island” effect. The warmunists want everybody to move to the cities and use public transportation, but that would add an enormous demand for sparktricity to power air conditioning.

    Meanwhile, here in the hot and humid Bluegrass State, I’ve been using the air conditioning sparingly. I’m surrounded not by concrete and asphalt, but by grass and trees. Alas! our house itself is not in any way shaded, and the roof is a darker green metal one, but I find that the west doors being open to the screened in porch, and the windows open as well, leads to a decent cooling breeze. The critters like it, too, as they can come in or go out as they please.

    • Professor Hale says:

      Dana,
      “…but that would add an enormous demand for sparktricity to power air conditioning.”

      I see your problem there. You assume communists care about people being comfortable. Hint: If they would kill you to force you into urban living, they would not relent just because you didn’t have air conditioning, or indoor plumbing, or working elevators, or a reasonably low crime rate. These are already characteristics of city living.

  4. Kye says:

    Who gets the money confiscated by “carbon offsets”? I ask because now that I’m involved in the Biden Junta’s “immigrant” housing scam and already making good bucks I’d like to try my hand at the carbon offset scam.

    My non-profit low income housing company already owns and is collecting off of three properties and we have three more in the pipeline due to close between now and the end of August. Creating a carbon offset company may increase our income dramatically since there is really no inventory to maintain.

    The Biden Junta has now decided to piss away another 3.5 trillion to pay off their supporters and fund door to door “volunteers” to force vaccinations and collect information for the Stasi, Gestapo and other Deep State Junta operatives as well as tax the working class (mostly Trump supporters) via inflation tax. Their old stand by. I assume the 3.5 trillion is to be used on “shovel ready” jobs, climate change propaganda and Wuhan Population Control and a bunch of Solyndra type energy scams.

    Expect the lies from the illegal junta and their comrades in the press as the 2022 elections grow closer to metastasize. Now that their ability to steal elections is SOP there is no limit.

    Viva la Insurrection!

  5. st says:

    Privacy Anyone? Try out these alternative platforms for search, browsing and social media

    https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2021/07/privacy-anyone-try-out-these.html

  6. Jl says:

    “She could offset that carbon for 150$..” But the plane went anyway, correct?

Bad Behavior has blocked 9624 access attempts in the last 7 days.