LAist: Use Your Head when Going Green or Risk Hurting the Environment more than You Help It.

Henry D

Fri, 03 Aug 2007 09:06:32 -0800

Not a viable option, I have to agree. I was reading that it would take 7 States blanketed with corn fields to run the US...

csharp7

Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:36:50 -0800

Kiran - *I* for one, totally agree with you that Ethanol is not the right way to go. My biggest problem with it is that it doesn't return the same amount of energy when burned that was used to produce it. Plow and plant a field with a diesel tractor. The hydrogen to make ammonia fertilizers is stripped from natural gas. Of course, a diesel tractor is then used to spread the fertilizer. Later it is harvested and shipped to a processing facility, again using diesel. Petroleum, though, is processed with much greater efficiency: pipelines, super-tankers, etc... Ethanol works well in Brazil, which proponents cite, but they overlook that there it is produced from sugar cane which has more sugar per ton of biomass, and it is planted, grown, harvested, and brought to market largely with pack animals and manual labor...not really a viable option here in the US.

kiran

Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:07:33 -0800

Hey Henry D, what are you thoughts on the push for using ethanol as a "green" source of fuel? You mentioned that hybrids were a technology that wouldnt make it out of the decade...thats kind of how I feel about ethanol. With the methane emissions, deforestation and the fact that its not fit for our engines, it feels as though "someone" really doesnt want us to move towards the electric vehicle.

csharp7

Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:13:44 -0800

Thank you for writing this. I sometimes feel like I'm beating my head against a wall when I try and deliver this message. Here's another thought: Next time you're complaining about gas-guzzling SUVs (which I do - a lot) consider cutting back on the hamburgers. Cattle ranching is responsible for almost 25% of greenhouse gas emissions by the planet as a whole and methane is over 25 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2. Not to mention the rampant de-forestation that is required to maintain and expand cattle ranches. And eating less beef is a way cheaper way to help the planet than buying a new hybrid car. Okay - so I know this link is from the Christian Science Monitor, so that means many liberals will likely dismiss it out of hand. But before you do - consider that this piece would pretty much be taken as anti-farming by most conservatives, and farmers are (forgive me) a sacred cow to conservatives. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p03s01-ussc.html

guest

Tue, 24 Jul 2007 00:54:50 -0800

Regarding hybrid cars and fuel-efficient cars - I just want to put in a word for my car. I bought a new a Scion xA last year and get about 32 mpg (probably 50/50 highway/city driving). I wanted a hybrid but couldn't afford one. I'm really happy with my choice. It gets great gas mileage and looks cute too. Anyway if you're in the market for a fuel-efficient car but can't afford the hybrid I say go for the Scion xA (that's the tiny one, not the boxy one). Regarding Fiji water - go ahead and buy the Fiji water if you really love those pretty bottles. But then refill the bottle with tap water (or water from your Brita) if you want bottled water while you're out and about. Any of you who use air conditioning may be tempted to turn off the A/C when you're not home to save energy and money. That's probably okay with a window unit but if you've got central air, you're better off leaving it on at a reasonable temperature instead of turning it off altogether. Generally, you'll use more energy re-cooling the house than leaving the A/C on all day. One more tip - someone I work with keeps cloth napkins at her desk to use at lunch. I haven't followed her lead yet but I keep thinking it's a good idea and I should get some cloth napkins too.

Henry D

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:03:35 -0800

Actually when I used the word asshole I was referring only to you, asshole. What is a "cockSOCKER" anyway? Are you implying that I punch cocks? Cuz that would be both clever and retarded at the same time. Hey asshole, if you read your own snopes link, you will notice they are saying that the mercury levels in a compact fluorescent light bulb are not lethal to a HUMAN (which is a large animal by the way) IN A HOME. Read the damn post again. I don't give a shit about a single bulb breaking by accident in a home, which happens not-so-often. What DOES happen often is that these bulbs get thrown in the trash and compacted, releasing their 5mg of mercury vapor. This accumulates in landfills, and when it reaches the water table it can have an effect. Second, when it comes to epileptic pathology you need to check your own facts first. The whole point I was making is that FLUORESCENT LIGHTS can trigger epilepsy because they flash at 50x per second -- and they do. As opposed to using conventional HALOGEN LAMPS which DON'T FLICKER AT ALL and do not trigger epilepsy. Do you follow? Thank god we actually have editing standards here. If you were my editor I would have to jam a twizzler up my urethra. People who talk shit with a "guest" account get no respect from me.

guest

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:25:01 -0800

Hey asshole, who you calling an asshole? What a cocksocking asswipe you are. (That's for that your ridiculously stupid editor.) But seriously, is there any editorial policy at LAist? Any fact checking? Any honesty? Quoting the "WorldNetDaily" is not going to impress anyone with a brain or access to Google. http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp Oh, and they can trigger seizures in people who already have light sensitive epilepsy, like any number of fluorescent lights. That's a little different than "triggering epilepsy."

kiran

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:27:23 -0800

One more to add, please dispose of your electronics responsibly. There are numerous e-waste disposal sites that you can google. Retailers like best buy will also collect old cell phones, batteries, printer cartridges. As electronics get cheaper, smaller and cooler. Upgrading is understandable. Just dont toss your old zach-morris-cell-phone in the black bins.

christina

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:07:47 -0800

as part of the "reduce" advice... get reusable grocery bags! i'm glad to see so many stores now selling them for pretty cheap (ralphs sells them for $1 and target's are $1.50). it's not easy to get into the habit of taking them out of my trunk every time i go to the grocery store, but i'm getting better. yesterday i remembered mid-shopping and left my cart while i ran to the car to get them. i used four of my own bags and only ended up using one plastic bag for what didn't fit into the ones i brought with me. they also hold a heck of a lot more than your standard plastic grocery bags.

fredcamino

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:50:12 -0800

I like this.