Ex army wooly pullies can be had for very little, Charity shops can have great wool items for pennies, most washing machines have wool programs..... and your other arguments are...?
Be a mensch, don't wear fleece
- Thread starter big_swede
- Start date
Ex army wooly pullies can be had for very little, Charity shops can have great wool items for pennies, most washing machines have wool programs..... and your other arguments are...?
I admit to wearing both, but my all time favourite is that R2 jacket from Patagonia.
The ironic thing is, the bit that makes me want to wear Panda skin is people telling me I musn't in a tie dyed t shirt with a CND symbol on it.
I spend all day every day every day with other people's teenagers and bar a handful, they genuinely don't give a monkeys about the planet collapsing around them.
Let's deal with the big stuff, the list is so long the tiny fragments are a bit down the list.
My other argument, John, is that I believe I still have a choice in what I wear, and as for some in this thread don't feel the need to insult those who disagree. Picking the stuff up and ensuring ones own waste has a responsible end is sadly a responsibility too far for too many.
The ironic thing is, the bit that makes me want to wear Panda skin is people telling me I musn't in a tie dyed t shirt with a CND symbol on it.
I spend all day every day every day with other people's teenagers and bar a handful, they genuinely don't give a monkeys about the planet collapsing around them.
Let's deal with the big stuff, the list is so long the tiny fragments are a bit down the list.
My other argument, John, is that I believe I still have a choice in what I wear, and as for some in this thread don't feel the need to insult those who disagree. Picking the stuff up and ensuring ones own waste has a responsible end is sadly a responsibility too far for too many.
Everyone has the choice - but let us hope that it is an informed and responsible choice
but I agree that over zealous evangelism for any cause makes me want to do the opposite too!
Everyone has the choice - but let us hope that it is an informed and responsible choice
I know what you mean, it does feel that many are so passionate about what they put, they sometimes fail to see the choice others make, and I wasn't pointing fingers at you.
Bizarrely enough the ex army stuff is generally waay too thick. Too hot.
Plus do squaddies have skinny arms or something? I always feel like even though they are OK everywhere else they are tight under the armpits.
I prefer several thinner layers as it gives me far more options depending on my activity level.
Also you might have enough spare time to amble round charity shops in the hope that there might possibly be one single item that might fit you but I don't. I'd rather walk to a rack and pick up something that fits, pay and get on with whatever else I'm on with. Shopping isn't really my favourite pastime.
Oh and washing? Everything I wear gets fired in on the same wash cycle, my washing is either kill or cure. If any garment doesn't survive that first wash it never gets worn again. Colours? Do I separate? Nope, if it runs it either stays that way or gets fired out. Again I suppose it depends on how much time you have on your hands and how many washes you want to do.
On the waterproof thing though? Ventile is ferociously expensive, doesn't come in proper Hi Viz (work clothing) and takes ages to dry out. I'm not going to go out and buy special clothes for my weekend walks when I have perfectly good warm and waterproof gear already.
That would be wasteful wouldn't it?
Maybe if the OP had a bit more evidence and a little less of the Mensche craic I might not have extracted the urine quite as much out of the yoghurt weavers. Meh.
Last edited:
Plastic bags are by a long long way a bigger issue than manmade fabric washout.
When it comes to material for me, synthetic drawers and long sleeve top, polly cotton breeks wool shirt and either a wool jumper or a double helly hanson field jacket, then it's gortex/ventile/oilskin shell depending what I'm doing.
So wool every time over fleece (the double HH isn't a fleece)
When it comes to material for me, synthetic drawers and long sleeve top, polly cotton breeks wool shirt and either a wool jumper or a double helly hanson field jacket, then it's gortex/ventile/oilskin shell depending what I'm doing.
So wool every time over fleece (the double HH isn't a fleece
)
This is getting to be a gloomy thread. My dad and grandad died age 58, the other grandad got to 60 and I have recently passed 58 (no kids either). Should we start a tontine? The last one standing gets the bonus.
Nice try, but politics are one thing, economics go from personal household budgets (and affect fleece or wool buying power
I too mind the 60's and 70's........strikes, no fuel, no heating, people on the breadline, interest rates on mortgages unachievable for the majority, school dinners and free milk because otherwise a hell of a lot of kids went hungry...it'sa better world now than then, and my rose tinted spectacles might look pretty
The last wild wolf in Scotland was shot near Culloden around the time of the last uprising, you can howl all you like but there'll no' be any to call at your door.
The National Debt is actually lower now, even at this last peak, than it was in the 1960's.
http://econ.economicshelp.org/2009/03/historical-national-debt.html
Cycles of economic upheaval are normal.
Anyway, fleece.....did you know that it costs less than 48p a metre x 60" wide, to produce ?......and look what they charge for a jacket
cheers,
Toddy
Ah - Economics essays taken from a website simplifying economics
Trouble is, they don't tell the whole story, or even bring in hugely important info. For example, the National Debt doesn't include state pensions. Not particularly relevant in the 1920s-40s (where the national debt was massively impacted by war/post-war expenditure), because the average adult tended not to live much past retirement age. Trouble is, state pensions are paid out of current state income, not out of funds put away from NI payments in the past. So - to include them as a debt (as any accountant will tell you you must, certainly if you are a company you have a legal obligation to show them as a liability in your annual accounts) - you have to add approximately £1.2 TRILLION to the current national debt, and it's rising every year.................As I said, rose-tinted spectacles
Agree with your comments about the cost of fleece garments though. But would you care to hazard a guess as to where the fleece is made, or the jackets, for that matter?As to the general view on this thread bout "It's important for all of us to do our bit" - I agree absolutely with the honourable sentiment. THe trouble is of course, its a bit like trying to empty the Sahara of sand by picking up a grain at a time, whilst for every grain you pick up, someone empties another lorry-load of sand right next to you. And to extend the metaphor further, the time you take picking up sand means that you can't earn any money to feed your family..................
On that cheerful note, Happy New Year to you all
Not in XXL-Tall sizes. And ironically, the current issue is mere and more synthetic. Oover here, the M65 field jacket was replaced about ten years ago with synthetic fleece and the sweaters have been largely synthetic for even longer.
Last edited:
Easy way to sort the pension problem, go back to the grass roots of the matter, the pension age was set at 65 when the life expectancy of those entitled to it (Men only I believe, married women would get a widows pension when there husbands died, but removed once they re-married) was around mid to late 50's, so now that the expected life expectancy is closing in on 80 to 90 then we need to adjust the pension age accordingly, so maybe make it that all state funded pensions (not just Old Age Pensions) won't be paid until the recipient gets to the age of 70, and of course outgoings will only be paid to those who have made sufficient deposits... That would help sort the national debt figures a little. Also raising retirement age to 70 for all.
Good economics? Political suicide though...
And with all these extra people looking for work we could get them knitting new clothing from dismantalling the old and remaking, thus minimising the use of the petrochemical clothing we won't be able to afford for much longer
Good economics? Political suicide though...
And with all these extra people looking for work we could get them knitting new clothing from dismantalling the old and remaking, thus minimising the use of the petrochemical clothing we won't be able to afford for much longer
Last edited:
There would be enough in the pension pot if successive governments hadn't siphoned it off for things like trident. It was originally supposed to be a protected fund.
I'm not sure it was ever designed to be a protected fund. Fact is, it has always been paid out of current year government income. Which was fine when the average life expectancy was around - or below - the normal retirement age. But it is now a huge - and increasing - millstone around the national debt (which not surprisingly is rarely mentioned....). The simple fact of the matter is that it is totally unsustainable, and consequently will have to be reduced at some stage (see what has happened in Greece/Portugal/Ireland etc)
So those of you still some way off retirement - don't depend upon it to provide you with a living income. Just saying..............
And with all these extra people looking for work we could get them knitting new clothing from dismantalling the old and remaking, thus minimising the use of the petrochemical clothing we won't be able to afford for much longer
Works for me
Workfare not welfare handouts
We could even sell off their inefficient houses to those who need them, cutting the need for greenfield building, and house them in communal housing - hey we could call that "Workhouses"!
One of my ancestors was a "Master of the Workhouse" in Borders town .. he introduces novelties like married couples being allowed to live together.... the big softie!
And, meanwhile, fibres on the beach(es) ...
The cynic in me wonders whether the thread will be purposely taken so far off track or otherwise and needlessly, politicised in order to get it locked ... could be wrong, wouldn't necessarily be the first time.
The cynic in me wonders whether the thread will be purposely taken so far off track or otherwise and needlessly, politicised in order to get it locked ... could be wrong, wouldn't necessarily be the first time.
Works for me
Workfare not welfare handouts
We could even sell off their inefficient houses to those who need them, cutting the need for greenfield building, and house them in communal housing - hey we could call that "Workhouses"!
One of my ancestors was a "Master of the Workhouse" in Borders town .. he introduces novelties like married couples being allowed to live together.... the big softie!
Or we could have social housing again, you get what you need when you need it, when you no longer need it you get a different one... No need for mortgages, just rent and poor houses...Excellent, back to a system where if you can't afford it you don't have it...Excellent. All those on here with skills will be able to make things to sell, all those wooden spoons and Kuksa's will be excellent trade/sale items to keep above gutter level. Let's be honest we all could do with cutting back a bit, we are all in it together after all
Well, as far as the original issue of ocean pollution from micofibers produced during the washing process of fleece clothing, virtually all modern nations, US, UK, etc, do not simply dump sewer water into the oceans. The water goes through an elaborate filtration process. As such, it is highly unlikely that fibers from washing are getting into the ocean from any of those nations.
As far as using this as a justification for pushing for a switch to natural fibers, wool etc, it is very hard to tell if that would be a good thing without much more research. It could very easily be the case that the presence of certain concentrations of microfibers in the oceans is far less detrimental to the environment than the large scale sheep farming and industrial scale wool production that would be required to replace all those synthetic materials.
I think we all need to stop using every little piece of data as an end all and be all justification for why we should keep using the thing that we are already using. The bigger picture is often missed.
What we have here is an article which discusses research showing different concentrations of plastic derived microfibers in different parts of the ocean. It does not present any research for the source of these material, i.e. country of origin, etc. It certainly does not present any research as to the actual long term effects of these materials, and it certainly does not present any research which would compare that potential damage to the potential damage of any other fabric production method. Everything outside of the tested concentration of these microfibers in different parts of the ocean is pure speculation on our part.
As far as using this as a justification for pushing for a switch to natural fibers, wool etc, it is very hard to tell if that would be a good thing without much more research. It could very easily be the case that the presence of certain concentrations of microfibers in the oceans is far less detrimental to the environment than the large scale sheep farming and industrial scale wool production that would be required to replace all those synthetic materials.
I think we all need to stop using every little piece of data as an end all and be all justification for why we should keep using the thing that we are already using. The bigger picture is often missed.
What we have here is an article which discusses research showing different concentrations of plastic derived microfibers in different parts of the ocean. It does not present any research for the source of these material, i.e. country of origin, etc. It certainly does not present any research as to the actual long term effects of these materials, and it certainly does not present any research which would compare that potential damage to the potential damage of any other fabric production method. Everything outside of the tested concentration of these microfibers in different parts of the ocean is pure speculation on our part.
There's actually a great deal of on going research on the oceanic 'garbage patches'. Misnomer if ever there was one; the Sargasso Sea is often considered to be one by itself
There's a Pacific one, an Atlantic one, an Indian Ocean one......and they are all being researched.
If the topic interests then google garbage patch and add the ocean or sea of your choice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Garbage_Patch
cheers,
Toddy
There's a Pacific one, an Atlantic one, an Indian Ocean one......and they are all being researched.
If the topic interests then google garbage patch and add the ocean or sea of your choice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Garbage_Patch
cheers,
Toddy
There's actually a great deal of on going research on the oceanic 'garbage patches'. Misnomer if ever there was one; the Sargasso Sea is often considered to be one by itself
There's a Pacific one, an Atlantic one, an Indian Ocean one......and they are all being researched.
If the topic interests then google garbage patch and add the ocean or sea of your choice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Garbage_Patch
cheers,
Toddy
Good opportunity to send some super trawlers out and do some re-cycling...
Loads of products can be made that are less harmful. Saw someone making plastic fence posts a few years back, he just heats it all up and extrudes a 4" diameter pole, all the bits cut off to make the points go back in again...Our chicken coop is made from recycled bottle tops, easy to keep clean, not red-mite infestations and longer lasting than wooden ones...
It's the scale that's the issue. Yes there are large pieces, but UV light damages plastics and the constant motion of the water and bumping from other pieces abrades the larger bits.....add that to the stuff from our sewerage systems and you have several metres of the top layer of the water....that's the most active bit for sunlight and photosynthesis.....which has millions of particles per cubic metre. That can't be trawled to remove plastic bits because it would also trawl out all the phytoplankton too, and an incredible amount of microscopic sea larvae.
It's the actual physical size of the plastic pieces that's as much the issue as it is the pollution itself.
At that scale the plastic is ingested by creatures at the bottom of the food chain, and it just works its way up. Now fish caught for human food are being found to contain the results of the plastic pollution.
M
It's the actual physical size of the plastic pieces that's as much the issue as it is the pollution itself.
At that scale the plastic is ingested by creatures at the bottom of the food chain, and it just works its way up. Now fish caught for human food are being found to contain the results of the plastic pollution.
M