A "Green" Disruption

For my "green distruption" statistic I originally was paired with Alex Encarnation but unfortunately we could not find our statistic, so instead we joined forces with Billy Fiddler and Tony Thompson. We figured instead of "BSing" our own statistic we would help with theirs. Our statistic is the average American produces 4.4 pounds of trash...A DAY! That is an amazing statistic that I had never really thought of.

When one thinks of 4.4 pounds it does not seem like a lot of weight at first, but then when you consider that most of the stuff one throws away is either some type of plastic or some type of paper product that number grows exponentially. Also at first glance people might not realize just how much 4.4 pounds a day is, but it means that it is over 30 pounds of trash a week, after a single month you have thrown away enough "stuff" to weigh as much as a teenage girl; roughly 120-130 pounds. So after two months you have thrown away enough trash to weigh as an NFL Lineman, nearly 270 pounds. After half of a year the average American will have thrown away almost 800 pounds!! That is almost as much as the heaviest person in recorded history weighs. So that means after a year of trash-making the average American has produced over 1500 pounds of trash, or roughly the weight of a mid size car. When you take into account that the average American lives roughly 74 years that is over 115,000 pounds, this is the equivalent of 58 tons. This is larger than the humpback whale. So if you look at it from that point of view that meager 4.4 pounds of trash truly adds up, and fast; by the time one is 16 and gets their first car they have already produced 16 cars worth of trash in their lifetime!

As far as our actual "green distraction" we put our statistic on a used cardboard box and placed it by the octagon because that is arguably the greatest "trash producer" on campus. We also placed a full plastic garbage bag next to that message. I don't believe that this message will stop people from producing trash, but I am sure that the people that notice this message will stop to think about just how much trash they produce. I know it has made me think about how much trash I really produce. I definitely feel more self conscious about how many disposable products I use and I will try and use more re-usable stuff in the future.

Blog Assignment #3: Star Stuff Pondering Eco Stunts?

Now that I have completely finished reading the No Impact Man book and read a little of Colin Beavan's blog as well as reading parts of the Green as a Thistle Blog I feel that I have a pretty good perspective of being environmentally friendly and I now have the tools to if I so choose reduce my carbon foot print significantly. After reading the article "Green Like Me" by Elizabeth Kolbert and after reading about her bashing The No Impact Man project and others like it I have found some things I agree with her about and some things I do not.

I believe Kolbert is far too critical of these events. I understand that she claims that these are just "eco-stunts", but so what? So what if these events are meant to draw public interest and the authors' ideas weren't thought of just to save the environment but to sell books? That is their jobs, to sell books. I don't see a problem with them trying to make a living while still doing something that can change peoples lives as well as the world we live in. These authors do not claim that there project will save the world, and in all honesty it will barely make a dent in the world wide environmental issues. But at least they are doing something that can educate people and influence them to make better decisions about how they live. Perhaps they will not follow their example to the tee, but the more people these books/blogs can reach the better. Full participation is not required, in this case it really is the thought that counts. Colin Beavan and the others obviously aren't perfect and there are several instances in the No Impact Man in particular where Colin and/or his family has a moment of weakness and do something that is not environmentally friendly, but they choose to write about it anyways to show that they are human too and everyone makes mistakes. I do not think that Kolbert has any right to criticize these authors for their attempts to make the world a better place. I also believe the personal attacks at Vanessa Farquharson are appalling and completely unnecessary

There are however some things I did find interesting in Kolbert's article. I did understand her general stance that these books were just "eco-stunts", and I do see how their motives might have been affected by reasons other than to just to "save the world". I understand that, and as I stated in the last paragraph I still commend them for choosing to help out the environment even if they are trying to make money off of it and they do not always make the most "green" decisions. Examples of this that Kolbert used include Vanessa Farquharson flying all the time, and Smith and MacKinnon making the trip to the ocean to get salt instead of just buying some from around the corner. Who can blame these authors for living in today's world where being environmentally green is near impossible, and who can blame them for trying to publicize their books and make money off of it? With that set aside I found that even with all the effort that Colin Beavan put into his project his environmental output was still greater than two billion people on the Earth. I am not sure how accurate this number is, but that came as a reality check for me. People in undeveloped parts of the world still live without electricity and all the things we just take for granted. They do not even have the opportunity to be bad for the environment.