1finny
Well-known member
Do they cover the carbon footprint of the alcohol industry?
No they don’t
They are going to do another series though and are asking for suggestions
Do they cover the carbon footprint of the alcohol industry?
Co-op don't sell clothes do they?!I’m not sure but I doubt it.
Must admit that episode was great - means you I can walk past clothes shops without even looking in the window.
I won’t be buying any clothes for years - got more than enough.
Does this figure include rainfall?I don't have any jeans.
It takes 320 litres to grow a pound of avocados. I don't eat avocados.
No. It's the quantity of irrigation water used.Does this figure include rainfall?
I more meant it as a cost saving for the supermarkets because they aren't providing them for free in the volumes they used to but I presume they are recouping costs via the bags for life. It is only the 5p single-use bags that have a requirement that the proceeds goes to charity. Depends how honourable the companies are as to how much of the bags for life goes to charity.
Plant based polyester manufacture:Water is always recycled eventually. The issue with cotton is that farmers use pesticides. However cotton is recyclable - for example UK banknotes used to be made of recycled cotton.
Meanwhile the clothing business is trying to make us all wear polyester clothes. Polyester is a petroleum derived product. You couldn't make it up.
Paper bags have a big carbon footprint to produce but a very small one to dispose of because they degrade easily (usually while you are carrying them). Plastic are really good environmentally, they just don't degrade and so even though they are much better environmentally than cotton they cause another problem in clogging up the oceans. I'm sure the conclusion was that the best option is plastic bags but to re-use them. Nothing comes close to using the same bag 5x.
I'm not a big environmentalist so I don't go out of my way too much but it annoys me when we get told to do something that seems like tokenism. The plastic bag charge annoyed me because the big supermarkets seemed to benefit the most because they now charge for something they used to give away for free and in reality the impact on the environment is negligible. It is especially negligible when you consider the amount of plastic you take home from the supermarket in those bags. McDonalds stopped giving out plastic straws but they still give you a cup you can't recycle with a plastic lid. The paper straw is fine until you order a milkshake and you can't finish it so you have to use two etc. There needs to be more understanding and information provided on life-cycle impacts instead of just picking one step in the process to make people think they are doing good that actually delivers no benefit.
And some stores do well out of this eg home bargains don’t do 5p bags, they only do bags for life
Then don't shop at McDonalds, they're hardly a beacon of virtue.
If you do need a straw, you can get pasta straws, 100% biodegradable.
And it's not tokenism if millions of people get in on it. We ALL need to change our ways.
Good God mister Finny that sounds extreme. My advice is, do not do anymore research on this subject your life will be not worth living!That, sir, is a startling stat - and, I might add quite unsettling.
5 mins ago just been told we are having avocado on toast for lunch
They will be my last avocados
Good God mister Finny that sounds extreme. My advice is, do not do anymore research on this subject your life will be not worth living!
Sadly - I’m an ‘in/out’ person.
Had the same conversation with my good lady who takes a more pragmatic approach saying basically she will have an avocado as a treat every now and then.
I tease her about destroying more of the planet as a ‘treat’.
She, again being pragmatic, ignores me and cracks on.
Are you full vegan or just vegetarian (apologies if neither and I'm getting you confused with someone else). Another fun fact about avocados is that technically they aren't vegan because they use farmed bees driven around in lorries to farms to pollinate. Not only are they bad for the environment but they use animals in their production (and they aren't the only crop to do so. I presume being that strict leaves very little left to eat so I guess you have to draw the line somewhere.
When you see stats like these it makes you think about the miriad other things that make small but incremental impacts on the planet.
This is why I believe we have to be more engaged in politics and to actually hold politicians accountable and redress the balance of power between the people and big businesses.
Maybe so, but we have to try as the apathy to politics we currently have will lead us further into authoritarian or autocratic rule.The problem is getting asked one question, i.e. which one of these people should make all of your decisions for the next 5 years which is heavily influenced by 1 or 2 key policies and the rest is ignored. It would be better if we were asked specific questions from time to time because there will be things from one party we like that we don't like in another. The whole system is just an illusion of having an input. We have nothing to do with how decisions are made unless you can afford to buy a politician or two.