Green Me

Comments

• Oliver Deex wrote on June 03, 2008, 10:10AM : Flag this comment as inappropriate

  It is frequently said out here in the hinterlands of western Massachusetts that people in Washington have no idea of how the rest of the country lives. Laura Wright's column in the Summer 2008 issue of "onearth" proves that the disconnect is not just with Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court.

  In her "Green Me" review Ms. Wright states: "So I checked the little number printed inside the recycling symbol: the base is made of plastic #5. Not even in my office, in the headquarters of one of the largest environmental advocacy groups on the planet, are you able to recycle #5."

  Number 5, as it states under the little triangle, is PP or polypropylene, a most versatile plastic used to package medicines and food among other things. It is one of the least toxic plastics around and food containers can be washed in the dishwasher and reused. Here in the wilds of Massachusetts, our town actually collects it (along with other recyclable plastics) every other week. The town even supplies free containers for its residents to use for the recyclables. Also, when the town decided to charge extra for people with more than 20 gallons of trash per week, the amount of paper and plastic recyclables rose substantially.

  I suggest, therefore, that "the headquarters of one of the largest environmental advocacy groups on the planet" hold a seminar for its employees and apprise them of some of the green actions that are going on out here in the wilderness.

  While I have your attention, I might also suggest that you work to improve the B- rating you get from AIP (American Institute of Philanthropy, www.charitywatch.org). I normally do not like to give to organizations with a rating lower than A- but you do accomplish things than no other organization does so I keep you on my list.

  Oliver Deex
  Longmeadow, MA 01106
  odeex@gis.net

• Justine Burt wrote on June 09, 2008, 09:03PM : Flag this comment as inappropriate

  Thank you for sorting through all the "How To Go Green" offerings and giving us your recommendations. I found the David Bach summary particularly helpful - saving money by going green. Bach makes a compelling case that a few environmental benefits here and there adds up to a large savings later.

  Sustainability colleagues agonize over the possibility that "green" is just a fad right now and the public's attention will soon turn elsewhere. It won't be a fad as long as there is some direct utility to people by living their lives in a greener way: save money, improved health for family and enhanced happiness overall.

• Laura Wright wrote on June 12, 2008, 03:53PM : Flag this comment as inappropriate

  Thanks for your comment, Oliver. Perhaps I should have been clearer in describing the reason why I wasn't able to recycle #5 plastic in our office: New York City will not accept it. You can read why that is here:

  http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycwasteless/html/waste_faq/waste_faq.shtml#plas...

  I sort every bit of trash I produce every day, as does every member of OnEarth's staff and the NRDC staff at large. We even compost our food scraps and take turns bringing those scraps to the greenmarket in Union Square where there's a collection booth operated by the Lower East Side Ecology Center.

  Each NRDC office also has an eco-committee that educates NRDC employees on proper recycling practices and conducts annual audits to make sure employees both understand and are following office recycling rules. Recently the New York eco-committee brought in a representative from the Lower East Side Ecology Center to teach employees how to set up worm composting boxes at home. So you see we do practice what we preach, and the point I was making is that the publisher who produced that eco-calendar should have realized that #5 plastic cannot be recycled in many municipalities and was therefore a poor choice for an eco-themed product. Yes, #5 can be reused, if it's in a reusable form (a plastic calendar holder can not be reused for anything I can think of), can be recycled into new products, but only if you live in a place that collects it! New York City is not one of those places.

• Diane MacEachern wrote on June 20, 2008, 01:18PM : Flag this comment as inappropriate

  Thank you for your mention of Big Green Purse: Use Your Spending Power to Create a Cleaner, Greener World. However, I must ask: Did you actually read the book? You dismiss it as something designed to "instruct shopaholic moms on how to buy their way green." Nothing is farther from the truth. Every chapter of the book strongly urges readers to, first and foremost, reduce consumption as much as possible. Every chapter also reminds readers of the value of reusing and recyling. There is also abundant information on the economic value of making smart environmental choices, along with suggestions for reasonable ways people can shift their spending without breaking their personal bank. The point of Big Green Purse is to remind people that their marketplace choices make a significant difference; hence the book's subtitle, Use Your Spending POWER to Create a Cleaner, Greener World. In many cases, consumer demand for greener goods is transforming manufacturing. In other cases, a consumer's choices (for nontoxic cleaning products, safer cosmetics, home energy saving devices) are the only recourse she has to protect herself or reduce her energy costs. Groups like NRDC are doing their best to educate consumers about the need to act. It seems irresponsible not to give them solid suggestions that begin with "Reduce, reuse, recycle" and continue through a spectrum of ways they can wield their marketplace clout -- especially since no environmental laws are getting passed and few are being effectively enforced. You seem to imply that you would rather NOT provide marketplace guidance to one of the most powerful forces for environmental protection that we have available. People are concerned, they're asking questions, and they're ready to act. If you think that group of people is restricted only to "shopaholics," I believe you are sorely mistaken.