Looking into the future

Optimism or pessimism? I would like to believe I'm a very optimistic person, however, I'm not. I don't really put effort into saving the environment or even think about what I could do to help. I recycle and I have my own grocery bags, but I wouldn't be considered a "tree hugger". After being in Dr. Peek's class last semester, and now reading in this class, it is clear I can make a change. In the reading Thinking Ahead: The Value of Future Consciousness, Tom Lombardo discusses that human behavior can change by relearning and training. I agree, just a couple changes of behavior and you can make a difference. 

What would I do to change my behavior? 

I think that my attitude towards the whole green movement is pretty much "over it". It is so over used and like I discussed last week, what are we to believe is true or just a fib? Changing my attitude would be a great start to changing the way that I live. After reading in Tom Lombardos article I believe I should be more open-minded about the future and would I could do to positively affect it. He also talks about decision making, which I think is a big one. You can either make a positive decision or not, its up to you to change. 

The key characteristics:

-recycle

-conserve energy

-help with awareness

My beliefs:

I think that recycling is really going to make a difference in the long run. I am a huge fan of bottled water, and I think that I could change my consumption. 

Anytime I leave my house the lights are always on, without fail. I need to be more conscious about turning things off when I'm not using them, and use less water. 

I talked about changing my attitude toward the whole green movement and I think that I could help give positive awareness throughout the campus. 

I think that we are very selfish people and don't think about conserving anything. What is going to happen years from now when there is landfills everywhere and sparse water? 

What holds me back? 

Laziness. Its so much easier to just throw it away than to drive somewhere in Stillwater to recycle my things. I think that is such a bad excuse. In the article Visioneering: an essential framework in sustainability science, they discuss how we are responsible for the future. We need to stop being selfish and teach others what they can do to help. After I have changed my behavior I can teach and educate others and then they can do the same. After awhile most everyone should be "followers" of the green movement. 

Communication is key:

I think that with all of the lies that advertising shows us it is hard for the consumer to believe anyone. Being real and giving facts about how crucial it is to recycle or help or even just be aware would open some peoples eyes. Giving solutions to the problem rather than just selling something would help consumers ease into this movement. 

I would hope that in 2050 there will be a change. The United States isn't the only country supporting this. I studied abroad in Italy and they are the most low key consumers and buy only necessary things. They live within their means and they recycle. I think its actually against the law to not recycle there. After living in Milan, I got into the habit of recycling. It really is just about changing your attitude and your behavior. Soon others will catch onto this trend and help us spread the positives to living a sustainable lifestyle.

 

Out with the old.

Green washing, an old concept now modernized. The idea of green washing is claiming that a product is sustainable. Sadly, this problem is growing throughout the world. In the UK they are reviewing their advertising "green claims" and France has announced new guidelines. In the united states, is trying to regulate current guidelines. When the typical consumer hears about the falsity of the green information they no longer know what to believe and won't purchase green products over others. In the article called the Greenwash Guide, they explain the difference between greenwash and "claims" so you too can spot the real thing. 


1. Using fancy language that lacks a clear meaning.
2. Look at green products and look where they are made or how. 
3. Pretty green images that suggest green. 
4. Irrelevant claims
5. Saying that they are greener than the rest
6. Not credible: Eco friendly cigarettes 
7. Jargon only a scientist could understand.
8. A label that looks like a third party enforcer that doesn't exist
9. No proof
10. Fake claims and lying about data.


Quail by Mail claims to be ethic chic, I feel like this company is legitimate. They claim that they use organic cotton, peace silk and other natural materials. They are environmentally friendly and recycle and they work in a green office and studio. 

However, Green Active Apple claims to be "ethically produced", "organic", and "Fair Trade Certified". After reading over the company profile I question their "unique" approach to providing a healthier alternative in the apparel market. 

It doesn't matter the product or how it is presents, but all company's have the same goal: to attract consumers to buy their product, and not another. I think that the US Federal Trade Commission needs to come up with a more specific regulations and make consumers aware. Promoting the idea of green washing to consumers would help consumers understand and trust the company, especially if they are transparent and communicate their efforts and use a credible approach. Consumers tend to enjoy reward programs, in the article called Eco-Promising, it suggests that companies increase availability of environmentally friendly products and remove poor performing products and come up with new reward programs to give customers the incentive to buy your product. I think that green washing is inevitable because people always manipulate claims just to get money. Hopefully the government and other regulations can make the popularity of green washing decrease. 

Cotton: the fabric of our lives

The touch, the feel of cotton, the fabric of our lives. 

The people who came up with the logo "The Fabric of our Lives" could not have known how accurate and foretelling this statement is. The Sustainability of Cotton talks about the water used for cultivation and processing. Cotton production is taking up the majority of our water sources because rivers are being dammed off. This is having a huge effect on the environment, more importantly it is even effecting the availability of water for humans. Different irrigation techniques would be one way to reduce this salinisation.  Salinisation is a term used for when evapo-transpiration is a threat for irrigated areas. Farmers should consider different regions that would accumulate more rainfall than others. If farmers do this than they will be able to reuse the land that they have already farmed fresh chemical free soil and not have to use dam water. 

One day I was watching a documentary about global warming and it talked about how farmers could simply use different livestock manure to fertilize the crops, rather than using synthetic fertilizers. Doing this would help farmers keep up to date  with farming techniques and they would not have to wait until the soil is ready to be used again. This process could sometimes could take up to about two years. Using natural fertilizer would bring nutrients to the soil and, simultaneously help with water retention.

 The Web Site Cotton, Inc. talks about how cotton helps the earth by preventing erosion with using cotton mulch. After going through the processing it because a natural mulch for grass. Cotton is beneficial for the earth, therefore, it is imperative that people remain advanced in this process.

 As I stated earlier, by using natural fertilizers for soil and crops we can help reduce toxic chemicals and pesticides that accumulate in the air, water and in food. Simply stated, organic means that no toxic pesticides were used, therefore, I believe that organic products would be a better way to protect this crop. 

Imagine this.

Imagine this. You are just hanging out around the water cooler at work and are approached by a co-worker to choose whether natural materials or synthetic materials are better for sustainability reasons. Which makes me think... How do these compare? Which is better for the environment? Over the year the fashion industry has become so competitive with the use of different materials. The amount of water used to produce cotton is incredible, it is a lot more than the amount it takes to produce polyester. The article Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys said that these two combined are used for over 80% of textiles and this is where the focus should be.

The large amounts of pesticides and fertilizers used in order to speed up the growing process of cotton has made the output of cotton triple. Using these product to help speed the process is very harmful to the environment. So much water is used to help produce cotton, as much as 8,000 liters of water.

A lot of people are hesitant to switch to the alternative because of the demand for manual labor. Because so much water is used to producing cotton, I think that the solution to this problem should be to use low water use cotton. Polyester is the most popular synthetic fiber and uses hardly any water compared to cotton. This is such a huge positive compared to the alternative, cotton.  Personally, I think that I will continue to use synthetics, but I will think about which natural fibers could be used instead of a environmentally harmful synthetic.