Sustainable and money-conscious living with children

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

I say right at the start here that, more than likely, some suggestions may be a little controversial, at least to some readers.

Anyone who has children wants the best for them, that is obvious. But financial restraints do not always allow for doing all the things that one may want for them and giving them everything. Then again giving them everything is neither good for the children not is it good for the Planet and sustainable.

It is often said that the rich are rich because they live like poor and the poor are poor because they live like rich and that definitely often is the case as to poorer families with children who want to buy and do everything for their children so that they are not seen as poor. Totally defeats the object.

Wanting to to consider the Planet and to live as far as possible green and sustainable often meets with financial limits. But that should not, actually, be the case. On the contrary: A consumer behavior aimed to resource-conserving should actually benefit the household finances as it should help you save money rather than spend more. But, having said that, greenwash advertising tell us that we have to buy this and that.

Then there are the restrictions as to income and budget anyway and if one is on a restricted budget then what is one to do in this case. On the other hand those suggestions that I shall be making here can also be applied to any financial situation especially if one wants to be kinder to the Planet.

So let's consider a couple of ideas...

Clothes: Children grow very quickly, as those who do have them will know, that they very fast outgrow their clothes and that often well before those clothes are worn out. Unless, that is, you buy the very cheapest, but that is not really a sustainable option. So, what is one to do?

The answer here would be – OK, I know that that is not always what the kids would want – secondhand from charity shops and such like, or hand-me-downs from older siblings or even other families.

If they go to school where school uniforms are worn then, generally, they will have to be purchased new unless the school has a system of “recycling” those from older children to the younger ones. If school without uniform then anything goes.

Clothes for play should always be secondhand or even handmade by the parent. If they are at home, indoors or in the yard where it is possible, and now comes a controversial bit, let them be in their one-button suit they were born with. This saves washing clothes and this saves money on water, detergent, energy and is also is better for the clothes as too much washing also wears them out. It is easier and cheaper to wash the kids than their clothes. It is also better for the children and the Planet.

If you homeschool your children – and while that is not an option in many countries but where it is I would suggest to take it if possible – then no school clothes are needed at all (another saving) and if you (and the children) so desire the natural attire of wearing nothing is also an option.

Bedclothes such as nightshirts or pajamas: Here you should ask yourself as to whether they are really necessary at all. Sleeping in the nude is better for them as far as their health is concerned, and the same goes also for you, as their parents. And if it is a little too cold, say, then an old T-shirt will do with below the waist remaining bare. Never should children (or adults) sleep in underpants.

Shoes: Children's shoes are another one of those things that they grow out of at an alarming rate. So, the ideal thing is to have just a couple of pairs of shoes and boots for them and at other times let them go barefoot whenever and wherever possible. Better for their feet anyway.

Ditch the underpants: For the male of the species this, apparently, is especially important for health, and best start with the boys as soon as they are safely out of diapers and “accident free”. Apparently the restriction in those garments causes problems later as well, but it could also be the reason that many males later in life have health problems down there in the front.

Nudity for the children – and even the entire family – at home reduces the impact in the clothing department on the Planet and the wallet. Far fewer clothes are then needed and there are none that get dirty during play, craft activities, helping in the garden, and such. Paint, glue or dirt on the skin only need a bit of soap and water and not a whole wash cycle in a washing machine. It is a lifestyle that not only benefits your children and you but greatly reduces your family's impact on the Planet.

“Holiday camp” for and with children instead of long-distance travel

You want to give your children something special when they are on holiday from school (if you don't homeschool)? Sure travels are great – but not really always for the children many who rather would stay at home – but holiday “camps” and other activities organized by the local council or other organizations which will give the little ones many great experiences. At the same time the environmental footprint is reduced as there are no long distances to travel.

If such “holiday camps” are not available locally, though in many places they are, then create your own adventure with and for the kids in the local countryside. There is much that you can do yourself for and with the kids: a night hike, a scavenger hunt or the campfire by the river or lake (make sure you can legally make a fire there) with bread on the stick or such – such highlight cost next to nothing, don't use up much energy and are much more interesting and exciting for the children and much greener than any travel to foreign destinations. Children also do not necessarily take too well to such trips.

Let children make their own ways

This is very controversial nowadays as in some places this can be constituted as child neglect by the powers-that-be but really should not be.

A quick drive to music lessons, to ballet classes into the next big town: especially when hobbies are concerned much money and gasoline can be saved because also the local municipal centers of have many possibilities and much to offer.

Many regional and local spots or music courses are offers which the child can often get to on his own steam without the need of the Mom or Dad Taxi. Walking and cycling should also be the main way to and from school.

Oh, but dare you suggest that in some countries nowadays, or even do it, that is to say to let the kids go alone to school, walking or cycling, or to the part or the woods, then you risk a visit from child protective services and a charge of child neglect, child endangerment or such. The world has gone mad, I know.

Toys

Regardless of age children really do not need many toys and definitely not expensive ones. All too often the new toy is being played with for five minutes – well, it may be a little longer but – and then put away often never to be played with again. So what's the point?

Pester power, obviously, can be very strong with all the ads on the television aimed at the kids during kids' viewing times and especially during the programs aimed directly at children. The only way to avoid this is to either limit the television viewing of your kids or, my recommendation, getting rid off the television altogether.

Many toys can also, safely, be bought secondhand, at, what we call in Britain, charity Shops, and such like, including stuffed cuddly toys. The best toys, often, however, are those that the kids learn to make for themselves, and the games.

Also and especially when we are talking here about sustainable and money-conscious living with children we want the children to learn and take up that habit of sustainable and money-conscious living themselves and how we raise them in that spirit will go a long way towards how they will become in that department.

© 2017

From ‘Sustainable’ to ‘Regenerative’—The Future of Food

Earlier this week, the paywalled site PoliticoPro reported that the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture wants "farmers and agricultural interests to come up with a single definition of sustainability in order to avoid confusing the public with various meanings of the term in food and production methods."

We agree with Secretary Tom Vilsack that the word "sustainability" is meaningless to consumers and the public. It’s overused, misused and it has been shamelessly co-opted by corporations for the purpose of greenwashing.

But rather than come up with one definition for the word "sustainable" as it refers to food and food production methods, we suggest doing away with the word entirely. In its place, as a way of helping food consumers make conscious, informed decisions, we suggest dividing global food and farming into two categories: regenerative and degenerative.

In this new paradigm, consumers could choose food produced by degenerative, toxic chemical-intensive, monoculture-based industrial agriculture systems that destabilize the climate, and degrade soil, water, biodiversity, health and local economies. Or they could choose food produced using organic regenerative practices based on sound ecological principles that rejuvenate the soil, grasslands and forests; replenish water; promote food sovereignty; and restore public health and prosperity—all while cooling the planet by drawing down billions of tons of excess carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in the soil where it belongs.

Read more here.

The Greening of the Self

Changing the way we can experience our self is the most important thing we can do to navigate ecological crisis.

Something important is happening in our world that you are not going to read about in the newspapers. I consider it the most fascinating and hopeful development of our time, and it is one of the reasons I am so glad to be alive today. It has to do with what is occurring to the notion of the self.

The self is the metaphoric construct of identity and agency, the hypothetical piece of turf on which we construct our strategies for survival, the notion around which we focus our instincts for self-preservation, our needs for self-approval, and the boundaries of our self-interest. Something is shifting here.

Widening our self-interest

The conventional notion of the self with which we have been raised and to which we have been conditioned by mainstream culture is being undermined. What Alan Watts called “the skin-encapsulated ego” and Gregory Bateson referred to as “the epistemological error of Occidental civilization’ is being unhinged, peeled off. It is being replaced by wider constructs of identity and self-interest – by what you might call the ecological self or the eco-self, co-extensive with other beings and the life of our planet. It is what I will call “the greening of the self.”

Read more here.

Will your city go 100% renewable?

The recent joint announcement that China and the US would both commit to curbing their carbon emissions was a welcome signal that the tide is turning on international climate action.

It was also, however, a reminder of just how pitiful most countries' clean energy ambitions really are.

While countries like Finland have committed to a legally binding 80% cut by 2050, most larger nations—the US and China included—are really only talking about modest cuts at this stage. (The United States is aiming for emissions of 26%-28% below its 2005 level in 2025. China intends to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030.)

That's why many clean energy advocates are looking beyond nation states, leveraging local politics at the city level to push much more ambitious, and potentially much more important, targets. The Guardian reports on a new grassroots movement aimed at securing commitments from cities to a goal of 100% clean energy.

Read more: http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/will-your-city-go-100-renewable.html

Which world are we trying to sustain?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Which world are we trying to sustain: a resource to fulfill our desires of material prosperity, or an Earth of wonder, beauty, and sacred meaning?

While many of us would want to, no doubt, sustain the Earth, and simply for the very fact that we need her to live there are others, the capitalists who do not think, it would seem of the future in terms of survival, thinking they can buy themselves out of any problem, who are but interested in the material things and in making ever more profit.

They and the governments that they control because they are indeed the shadow government of the world talk about growth, growth and still more economic growth, and of needing to grow the economy still more. Why? Not that we, the ordinary people, benefit but that they can fill their coffers and those of their shareholders.

They do not seem to understand, and many of the general public seem to also repeat the waffle that they are force-fed by the media on behalf of the government and its masters, that the world is finite and that growth is not possible as such.

And then we have the dear people in the American Republican Party, even law makers, who make statements such as “too many wind turbines will stop the world from spinning, as there is only that much wind available” and that the use of solar panels will reduce the sun and its light.

However, when the mention is made of peak oil and the fact that the world is running out of oil, natural gas, minerals and such, they reply with the statement that G-d has put those riches into the Earth for our use and he will continue to replenish them and thus we will never run out.

We have to learn to think differently and act differently. So far we have almost entirely destroyed the Planet, causing the extinction of animals of plants by the G-d only knows how many species, believing that we have the right to rob everything from the Earth for our benefit and profit, because G-d gave us dominion over the Earth.

But, as I said in my piece “Climate change crisis reminds us that we are called to care for Creation”, that is a total misinterpretation of what is written in the Scriptures for dominion in this context means being a good steward and must not be confused with domination and a right to do as we please.

The latter is, however, the approach that the capitalist system has taken in exploiting the riches of the Planet for the financial benefit of but a few and the detriment of the rest of Creation.

Changing our ways does mean taking a different approach, that is true, and one where we cannot have a new flat-screen TV or new car or new this or that every five minutes and where things must be used until such a time that they really can no longer be fixed and made to continue to work; like it once was, at least among all but the super rich.

The notion of perpetual economic growth is a false one that will destroy the very Planet that we depend on for our survival and cannot be sustained on a finite Planet whose non-renewable resources have almost been depleted in their entirety. Neither can we continue to burn fossil fuels. Not just in the way we have done and reducing their use but we have to cease their use, period.

It is not (just) the CO2 emissions either that are at issue here but the general pollution caused by them, and nuclear is not an option either as their may be no emissions and air pollution from the power stations, the extraction and processing of the fuel takes a great deal of energy and the end storage of the spent fuel rods, which will be radioactive, and thus dangerous for the environment and us, for thousands of years. It does not need, I am sure, another Chernobyl or Fukushima to get that message across, at least not to the general public, I should hope.

However, our governments keep telling us, and even supposed environmental organizations, that we must have nuclear power in order to fulfill our carbon reduction targets. Hello! Is anyone home? Are we all stupid?

If we want to sustain a system that will sustain us then there is but one way and that is to change our ways and yes, it will mean a change of way of life. Either we do that or there will be no life. It is that simple and it is your call.

© 2014

What’s More Important… Economic Growth or Sustainability?

“The world has physical limits that we are already encountering, but our economy operates as if no physical limits exist.” -Christopher Martenson

What will the earth look like in 50 to 100 years from now? To some of us that may sound like a long time, but in reality it will be here before we know it and even if we are gone, the children, grand-children, and great-grandchildren of billions of people living now will still be here.

Think of today, think about the lack of opportunities available to people trying to live free, happy and healthy lives and how many are struggling in various ways to achieve this basic standard of living, leaving millions homeless and begging for decent paying jobs or assistance. Think about the challenges the planet earth and all of its inhabitants have faced since the growth of modern human civilization. Entire species have been eliminated or are currently endangered, entire ecosystems are being destroyed, 75% of our rainforests have been cut down, oil prices are rising as fossil fuels become more dangerous and cost more to extract, and fresh wateraquifers lose more and more water everyday.

Now think for a moment what life will be like for future generations as this continues to get worse. Have you ever thought about the change you have seen since your childhood? Think of the places where you grew up that were still vacant and natural areas, now turned into shopping malls, highways and office buildings. I believe most of us can easily say A LOT has CHANGED and is still changing every year. In some ways we can say these changes have been positive, in other ways not so much.

With economic growth comes destruction of one world and the development of another. But is this development sustainable; meaning will it last? Will the future be left with collapsing buildings, crumbled roads and massive landfills? Will the shelves still be stocked in our stores, will businesses even be able to stay in business under a system entirely based on economic growth and profit margins? What’s more important… Economic Growth or Sustainability?

Read more: http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/whats-more-important-economic-growth-or-sustainability/

Freeplay Encore Player... from a different angle

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

No, it's not about taking a photo of it from a different perspective. I am going to be talking here about the sustainability angle.

While this Freeplay radio, MP3 player/recorder, cell phone charger and task/work light is made in China on other levels its sustainability scores are very high indeed.

Aside from the fact that the unit is powered by rechargeable batteries which are charged via solar or crank (and also via 12 V DC external source) the packaging is not wasteful at all.

With the exception of a few small plastic bags to keep small items safe while in the box prior to arriving with the customer, and a small bubble wrap “pouch” for the external solar panel, all is compostable.

The box itself is plain brown cardboard with minimal black print and the protection for the unit itself is achieved not, as is so often the case with electronic goods, by means of expanded polystyrene but by moulded cardboard material similar to that of cardboard egg cartons, and thus both can be thrown simply onto a compost heap for Nature to have its way with them. On the other hand they could also be recycled with no effort.

Not having seen the packaging of Freeplay Energy's other products the way the Encore Player is packaged is, surely, the way to go and should be an example to other producers that glossy coated print and other fancy stuff is not necessary.

Another great score for the Freeplay Encore Player and I believe this should become an industry standard.

© 2013

Sustainability – Book Review

Review by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Sustainability
A personal journey to a built sustainable community
... and an amazing picture of what life will soon be like.
By Stuart W. Rose, PhD.
Self-published
Approx 140 pages, paperback
ISBN 978-1-4392-6383-0

This book offers an upbeat and hopeful look at changes taking place in the world through the perspective of the author's experiences developing a sustainable community of homes in Virginia, as well as the research he did along the way.

The tone of the book is conversational and friendly, and written in my favorite way, namely from the “I” perspective.

Technical information and statistics are presented in down-to-earth fashion that readers will find easy to understand.

The manuscript is methodically organized; it’s easy to follow to progress of the Garden Atrium’s development and to understand how and why (he) developed a positive, enthusiastic outlook about the benefits of living sustainably in the broadest senses of the term.

The author succeeds at framing the subject of sustainability as an opportunity rather than a problem. Troublesome trends and data are presented in a serious and sober way, straightforward and free of hype.

He uses the lessons he learned from developing the Garden Atriums, as well as his own self-exploration, as the basis for a dialog with readers that emphasizes hope and positive change. The title and subtitle do a good job conveying the spirit with which he approaches his subject and the future.

When most people think about “sustainability,” they think about saving energy or being more “environmentally friendly.” You’ll find, in this book, that “Sustainability” actually goes far beyond saving on utility bills. As you’ll learn, sustainable living will be a completely new way of living … a new life style. It’ll also be magnificent.

The only one single problem I have is not with the book itself, which I loved, but the Garden Atrium Homes – the concept of which again I love – as the solution through the board for sustainable living for all.

While a great idea we do have a practical problem with this if we consider the number of people alone in the USA or the UK and trying to house all of them in Garden Atrium Homes, however nice that would be.

The book itself was a great read and has given me, as a writer and a consultant, much food for thought, which is something I greatly appreciate in books that I read, whether for leisure and general study or for review.

Much food for thought from the research of the author and his partner but much of is, as to community of Garden Atriums is all still theory and while it all looks great – on paper – and, in my opinion, should work, it will need committed people to make it work and is going to be the exact place where we are going to hit a snag or ten, I think.

That does not detract from a good book, however, with great, nay brilliant, ideas and, as said, much food for thought. And it is this what makes this book that can be well recommended.

Copyright © 2010