Do you shop "nature-friendly" ?

[Lasse]

Since we all enjoy being outdoors, in the middle of the beautiful nature we still have, and most of us probably hate to see it ruined (littering in the local woods fe) I started wondering if we can do more than just the obvious (but therefore not less important!) like picking garbage others left etc, to protect what we love.
Most of us buy great (and often rather expensive) gear so we can enjoy the outdoors even more, but how many times is the production of our gear actually hurting what we love?
Let me give you an example: the cotton production uses a lot of pesticides, in fact, about 25% of all pesticides world wide are used in cotton production. But there are alternatives like organic cotton which are most likely more expensive in production but which don't use as much (if any) pesticides or fertilizers...

Unfortunately I find it very difficult to find cleaner alternatives, I know some urban jeans manufacturers who use organic cotton (Nudie and Kuyichi jeans) but don't have a clue which outdoor gear (or other clothing) is eco-friendly while I assume outdoor enthusiasts would love to wear environmentally friendly clothing
So far my only alternatives are buying wool instead of cotton (from brands that at least claim to have a clean production process) or buying second hand clothing (which probably is the best option, environmentally wise, I think, since there is no extra production needed but it's not new...).

So here's my double question: do you consider the effects of your shopping (or why not?) and do you know of any nature-friendly brands who produce outdoor clothing? (or other gear)

Not trying to point fingers or anything, only hope I'll at least know of better alternatives next time I need some new toys and maybe make some of you think about the same thing...

Cheers,
Lasse

PS: I'm absolutely no saint or anything, I'm buying way too much "nature-hostile" stuff, drive a car from time to time, eating "normal" meat etc. but hope I'll be able to change my attitude, at least a bit... (fair trade is also very interesting but less on topic on this forum I guess)


Edit: "No, I don't care" might sound a bit too harsh, if you have an other reason not to, please choose this option and enlighten us

 

[saddle_tramp]

I have several wool shirts/pulllovers and i guess wool is kinda green, mostly bought 2nd hand which makes them greener still.

tho the past transportation of said garments from New Zealand (or should that be China) no doubt adds to their carbon footprint somewhat

 

[robin wood]

Howies when there is a sale on for organic cotton.
http://www.howies.co.uk/
Good point to raise though when I look at the shear quantity of what we consume I think reducing it is the answer rather than (as I tend to do) occasional environmentally aware purchases to deal with the guilt. I sometimes wonder what my great grandfather would think of me driving 5 miles to pick up a takeaway meal, it's not something I make a habit of but it really is bonkers in world energy terms...I mean what if all the Chinese, Africans and Indians did that.

 

[robin wood]

double post sorry

 

[Mike Ameling]

I'm not an adherant of this new "green" or "environmentally friendly" fad cult religion floating around. And I am not going to accept the load of ... guilt ... they are trying to dump on everybody. If THEY feel guilty about something they have done, that's THEIR "cross to bear" - not something to be transferred to and impose upon others.

That being said, I am far more aware and far more concerned about nature and our environment than most of those zealots of this new fad cult "green" religion. They claim they have to be very vocal "activists" to shock people into changing their way of thinking to that ... one true path (as defined by these new religious zealots). So they chant scream, protest, shock, attack, and damage things - all in the name of making people "aware" of the "crimes" they are committing against the world - while driving their big SUV's and putting out their 2 garbage cans of trash per week out on the curb for pickup. And almost all of what they do/say is just publicity and political posturing instead of true physical work/action. I, instead, actually do choose what I buy carefully and am very conscious of what "trash" I create. I only haul 2 or 3 garbage bags of "trash" to the dump PER YEAR!

And I also know the consequences of cutting back or eliminating fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture. Production drops dramatically. Funny thing is, those "organic" farms still to use ferilizers and pesticides. Their versions just aren't as "chemically manufactured" or "synthetic" as the normal stuff. One of those ... nasty little secrets ... of "organic farming".

There are only 4 main "natural" fibers for clothing out there - wool, cotton, linen, hemp - or leather if you wish to include it. Everything else it SYNTHETIC - chemically manufactured. So how much "processing" of these natural fibers OFFSETS the manufacturing of those synthetic ones? If you dig deep enough into it, you would be amazed at how much more "environmentally friendly" some of those synthetics are than those natural ones. More ... nasty little secrets ... buried under all the political posturing.

So my answer to the original question is NO, Don't Care. And that is a very well read and thought out answer. And I feel no "guilt" that so many people feel and want to share with everybody else. That's your problem, not mine.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands
- yeah, a true ... heretic - as defined by the new priests/priestesses

 

[Mang]

I use the Ecover washing up liquid and can recommend it but does anyone else use the other products? I want to switch to using more but my wife isn't so keen (despite the Washing up liquid working).

 

[Wayland]

If there is an environmentally friendly option that is close to the save quality or price I take it.

Not just because of the green movement, which I feel does have a point, but usually because it makes sense.

I've always understood that if there are only so many sweets in the jar there is only so much you can take out before they're all gone.

Stands to reason really. Of course there will always be people with a vested interest that try to tell you that's not true but I hope I'm not the sort of person that gets fooled that easily.

 

[JohnC]

I try to find what I can in the charity shops, it's cheaper and its recycling.

 

[Lasse]

I'm not an adherant of this new "green" or "environmentally friendly" fad cult religion floating around. And I am not going to accept the load of ... guilt ... they are trying to dump on everybody. If THEY feel guilty about something they have done, that's THEIR "cross to bear" - not something to be transferred to and impose upon others.

The problem is: one person changing his behaviour won't change enough, so it's important to tell people about the consequences of their actions WHILE/AFTER changing one's own behaviour. In our global market, we usually can't see the effects ourselves so don't have the normal guilt we would have when we saw what we're actually doing. Most people would feel guilty about dumping tons of dangerous chemicals in the river behind their house, I hope, but don't appear to care about loads of dangerous chemicals dumped thousands of miles away to produce what they want...

That being said, I am far more aware and far more concerned about nature and our environment than most of those zealots of this new fad cult "green" religion. They claim they have to be very vocal "activists" to shock people into changing their way of thinking to that ... one true path (as defined by these new religious zealots). So they chant scream, protest, shock, attack, and damage things - all in the name of making people "aware" of the "crimes" they are committing against the world - while driving their big SUV's and putting out their 2 garbage cans of trash per week out on the curb for pickup. And almost all of what they do/say is just publicity and political posturing instead of true physical work/action. I, instead, actually do choose what I buy carefully and am very conscious of what "trash" I create. I only haul 2 or 3 garbage bags of "trash" to the dump PER YEAR!

You're absolutely right, people should act and not just talk about it. I believe the best way of action is to show what's possible and promote better ways of living and create better alternatives. But it's also important to educate people, so they know the consequences of their actions and can than decide for themselves...
You personally sound like a great example regarding the amount of waste! Seriously, how do you manage with so little trash??? I'm very interested to learn!

And I also know the consequences of cutting back or eliminating fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture. Production drops dramatically. Funny thing is, those "organic" farms still to use ferilizers and pesticides. Their versions just aren't as "chemically manufactured" or "synthetic" as the normal stuff. One of those ... nasty little secrets ... of "organic farming".

Less production is no problem if people learn how to consume less, which would be evident since prices would go up. Currently there simply is too much production. And the farmers wouldn't get less money because they would be able to sell their goods for a higher price. In fact, if I compare prices of fair trade, organic jeans from Kuyichi with the price of other "up-street" jeans there hardly is a difference, if any at all. "Organic farming" using fertilizers or not would depend: in Belgium we've got very strict regulations about the use of terms like "biological" for food etc, so the use of the term would first of all depend on local laws prohibiting unjust usage and secondly on the certification, one certification is less strict than the other and I'm 100% sure there are "organic farms" out there who don't use pesticides or fertilizers (I'm studying bio-engineering, and my university is fe working with local, biologically perfectly normal, insects which replace the chemicals)

There are only 4 main "natural" fibers for clothing out there - wool, cotton, linen, hemp - or leather if you wish to include it. Everything else it SYNTHETIC - chemically manufactured. So how much "processing" of these natural fibers OFFSETS the manufacturing of those synthetic ones? If you dig deep enough into it, you would be amazed at how much more "environmentally friendly" some of those synthetics are than those natural ones. More ... nasty little secrets ... buried under all the political posturing.

No doubt about it, absolutely right, which is also why we have to think about the entire production process, which is why we would fe prefer organic cotton over "classic" cotton... It's also important to think about the transportation of the goods, this can add significant pollution to the process so it's best to buy locally manufactured goods which were made in a sustainable way. (buying knifes or leatherwork from locals would be a very on topic example)

So my answer to the original question is NO, Don't Care. And that is a very well read and thought out answer. And I feel no "guilt" that so many people feel and want to share with everybody else. That's your problem, not mine.

It is my problem that others don't care, because we all live in the same environment. The effects of your actions regarding the environment are also felt by all others.
But to be honest, it does sound like you care about buying "nature-friendly", but you do it in an other way, by buying carefully and thinking about the trash (and I don't know which way is best, but combining can only be better).


Thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts Mike! I hope you don't mind this zealot reacting

Cheers,
Lasse

 

[Celt_Ginger]

I don't go out and specifically look for "green" products. If I can get something that I need and it has been environmentally produced, then fair enough, but, being a "Ballymena Man" (A Ballymena man is noted for being like a Scotsman for meanness, except that the Ballymena man has had all the charity squeezed out, lol) I will insist on value for money. I am not prepared to pay an arm and a leg for something that has a "green" label but which is blatantly putting the arm into the "guilt ridden consumer" I simply don't know enough about the processes used in producing and whether it really does warrant a higher price tag. I may be taking a cynical view, but I look at it that the producer may indeed be making a greener product, but they also want to make maximum profits for their company. In other words, I will happily pay a bit extra for a green product, but I have to be convinced it is worth the extra

 

[dommyracer]

I try and buy from brands that have decent ethics with regard to nature AND people (ie, sweatshops)

Howies do pretty well, as do Patagonia.

I dunno what the situation is in the US Mike, but the green movement over here is a lot more moderate than you portray it.

I'm also wondering why you care about whether they are trying to make feel guilty when you personally feel you have nothing to feel guilty about.

Aside from the guilt, do you not agree that it is a good thing that people are trying to educate others abot helping the planet?

 

[Mike Ameling]

How do I manage to get by with so little trash per year? First, I don't buy lots of the stuff people consider all part of ... normal ... modern life. So that removes lots of "packaging" that would usually go in the trash. Next I "recycle" - papers, cans, bottles, plastic. A couple times a year I haul the "recyclable" stuff to the bins provided in town. Organic matter gets composted. And some of the waste paper/cardboard/plastic (that can't be recycled) gets burned. So for the last decade or so, it has worked out to around 2 or 3 normal sized garbage bags per year going to the landfill.

The two bottom rungs on the food chain ladder are the farmer, with the retailer being slightly above him. They get the least amount for the food produced and sold. Even the company making the plastic bag for a loaf of bread makes more money off of it than the farmer made on the food to produce that loaf of bread. The money being made is in transportation, processing, transportation, wharehousing, transportation, retailing. And now, the biggest part making money is those professional gamblers dealing in the Stock Markets - specifically the food/commodities Futures market!

All farmers use some sort of fertilizer. The "organic" farmers just don't use the processed/synthetic chemical versions. Organic fertilizers would be - "green manure" (grasses grown and then plowed under to improve the soil), animal manure (a lot now coming from the large "factory" livestock businesses), and "sludge" from the city waste water treatment plants. All meet the qualifications for most "organic fertilizer" regulations. Yes, SLUDGE from the city waste water treatment plants - as long as it doesn't have ... too many or the wrong types of ... chemicals in it.

Pesticides/herbicides? Check those "organic" regs carefully. There are lots of chemicals that qualify for organic use.

Organic is one of those great ... buzz words ... but a real "can of worms" when you really start looking into the specific details. The main benefits of organic farming right now are those people who can now market it as such and sell it at higher prices. Many people do follow the ... spirit ... of organic farming, but so many "businesses" just meet the minimum standards to be able to tap into that new higher dollar market.

Education of the public. This tends to involve a disturbing "philisophical" view point with too many "true believers" in the "green" or "environmental" movements. So many just can't understand that many other people may have an honest disagreement with their way of thinking and belief. The common response is that people just need more "education" in these matters. That if people would just read a bunch more of the "right" material that those people will then also come to think and believe in the "one true way". If they don't, then they just need to be "educated" some more. It's a disturbing "philisophical" view point - starting with people thinking and believing in the "one true way". If you don't do that, then you just have to be "educated" a bunch more till you also then think and believe it that "one true way".

Having an honest difference of opinion and reaching a different conclusion based upon the available evidence from that "one true way" just can't be accepted by these ... true believers. And that's when it crosses over into the realm of the ... religion with associated zealots.

"Thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts Mike! I hope you don't mind this zealot reacting "
No problem. My only problem is with those who feel the "debate" is already over, and want to restrict the expression of "contrary" opinions. I've dealt with way too many people who actively tried to restrict other people's free speech - just because they disagreed with what was being said. They would DEMAND their right to speak their thoughts/ideas, but would deny that same right/courtesy to anyone who they didn't agree with. To them, Free Speech only applied to that which they approved of!

But that's just my humble "poorly educated" heretical opinion. Take it as such.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

 

[British Red]

I dunno what the situation is in the US Mike, but the green movement over here is a lot more moderate than you portray it.

That is your opinion and one you are entitled to. For the sake of balance, I must say not only do I disagree with you but that I think the "green" movement is the most dangerous movement I have seen - guilty of flawed thinking at best and jeopardising the future of this country and planet at worst

Aside from the guilt, do you not agree that it is a good thing that people are trying to educate others abot helping the planet?

Not when the information they convey is so flawed and blinkered that it increases the problems it purports to cure and ignores true root cause issues

Not being contentious but, despite leaked memoranda stating that people should "act as though the argument is won", please don't imagine that all people buy into that nonsense the "greens" spout. They don't - here or in the USA

Red

 

[durulz]

Lasse - you raise some very interesting and pertinent points.
I, like most most guilty-feeling white middle-class males, try to do my best. In truth, I don't give it much thought. I suspect the reason for that is the reason for you raising the issue - I assume that my interest in things 'natural' is enough to assuage my part in the cause of the problem.
I honestly wasn't aware of the issues surrounding the production of cotton, and am grateful of you mentioning it.
The answer to your question is that I do not think about the environmental impact of my purchases. The reasons for that are quite convoluted, but I suspect that prime of that is that I assume that my honest motives are also the motives of the manufacturers. Which, as you highlight, is probably nonsense.
An interesting post. I think that these issues and questions are the real strength of this site. For me, anyhow.

 

[Mike Ameling]

I dunno what the situation is in the US Mike, but the green movement over here is a lot more moderate than you portray it.

I'm also wondering why you care about whether they are trying to make feel guilty when you personally feel you have nothing to feel guilty about.

Aside from the guilt, do you not agree that it is a good thing that people are trying to educate others abot helping the planet?

My concern is the WAY it is being done. Some groups have already decided (amongst themselves) that any/all debate is over, any/all facts lead to only one conclusion, and anyone who doesn't agree with that must be ... re-educated ... until they also think and believe in that "one true way". The "hard-core militant" people are actively trying to ... ram it down the throats ... of all those "unbelievers". And now the shift has been to change things in the government - to change the laws to that same "undisputed" (in their eyes) way of thinking/believing/acting. So then they are getting the government involved in ... stomping it dow the throats ... of anyone who does not think/believe/act as these groups/people think they should. THEY have decided that THEY know best how everybody else should think/act, and are working to impose THEIR will upon everybody else.

And all this is based upon ONE view point in an ongoing active debate.

They are entitled to their views, and I am entitled to mine. I object to them deciding that my views are wrong and feel it their Duty to beat me into submission to their view.

But this is now starting to get too close to debating ... politics. So enough from me.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands
- and who will never be ... the perfect man - where's John Galt when we need him?

 

[mortalmerlin]

I would prefer to buy nature friendly but honestly if there was a piece of kit I wanted I wouldn't choose another just because it was greener. Most bush crafting kit lasts for years anyway so compaired to the problems caused by fasions combined with Chineese slave labour in everyday life I don't think bushcrafting registers.

As far as being no saint because you use your car, you should read more about the real effects of CO2 and not just buy into the government pushed propoganda which is a prelude to a carbon tax.

 

[mortalmerlin]

If you want to worry about something enviromental worry about what companies like Monsanto(the company that brought you agent-orange) are doing. You're not, as far as I know, trying to stick anti-biotic resistant markers and viruses into every plant you think you'll make a profit from regardless of the potential problems.

 

[locum76]

for those who are interested, here is a guide to what is involved with organic standards and how to meet them as a grower or processor. If you don't meet these standards you cannot market your food as organic.

http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sacert/sacertweb.nsf/e8c12cf77637ec6c80256a6900374463/4d7054234b8da20a8025740b0012f83f/$FILE/Standards%20for%20the%20farming%20&%20growing%20industry%202008.pdf

rob

 

[Rhoda]

I have just run a festival celebrating living naturally (last weekend). I think that it is important to support local producers, to use natural and sustainable products and to be aware of how our way of life may affect our environment locally and globally. We did not aim to ram opinions down people's throats but instead just got together a group of 'experts' and offered options - choices which could be made, challenged or ignored.
I see it from a different angle, I would personally like to return to a way of living that is a natural as possible. I would love to have a little house in the woods, off grid, using the skills that I have to live as we used to. Growing my own food, buying from local producers, making for myself as much as I can. I think that a lot of us here, given our shared interests, would prefer that way of life.
At the moment though we live near town, we use our car to buy food from the supermarket, we sometimes (when money is short) buy products on price not green credentials.
We are slowly trying to move towards a more natural way of life though, not because we have been made to feel guilty but because we really want to live that way. I will continue to run the festival too, not to try to force people to change but to try to bring back a sense of community in our area, to explore all the options we have, and simply to hear the thoughts and ideas of the people who offer workshops.
For me living more naturally equals a simpler, happier way of life! It just takes a while to change. I also accept that for the majority living that way without the comforts and conveniences of modern living would be a nightmare. It has to be up to the individual to choose to 'do their bit' in whatever way they feel is appropriate to their lifestyle.

 

[rik_uk3]

That is your opinion and one you are entitled to. For the sake of balance, I must say not only do I disagree with you but that I think the "green" movement is the most dangerous movement I have seen - guilty of flawed thinking at best and jeopardising the future of this country and planet at worst



Not when the information they convey is so flawed and blinkered that it increases the problems it purports to cure and ignores true root cause issues

Not being contentious but, despite leaked memoranda stating that people should "act as though the argument is won", please don't imagine that all people buy into that nonsense the "greens" spout. They don't - here or in the USA

Red

I agree 100% with Red on this, plus I don't have the money to afford the luxury of going green or organic, I live in the real world.