Is being green only for the rich?

Someone with a limited income may not be able to take certain, more expensive, steps. But that doesn't mean they can't do anything. For example:

• If organic produce is prohibitively expensive, opt for local produce. It didn't have to travel as far to get to the store (and will probably be fresher).
• See if there's a local organic farm that sells direct to the public. You'll probably get better prices and fresher produce.
• Slowly switch light bulbs to CFLs. Do it one bulb at a time.
• Install a low-flow shower head.

No one should be pressured to do more than they are financially able. But they also need to be better educated about what is within their reach. The CFL example above is one. You might say, "but CFLs are more expensive". True ... but if you end up saving more money on your electric bill as a result, it ends up being a net monetary gain. Same thing with the shower head. Drop 25 or 30 dollars now, but save money on your water bill every month. Eventually, that one-time expense will be recovered.

And the guy shouldn't be buying an '83 Chevy Caprice V8. He should be looking for a used car that uses less gas. Not only for the environmental impact of using less gas, but for the personal financial impact.

 

used cars are much more green than new cars

old Civics, Jettas etc have great mpg & they use a lot less resources as they are already built

 

Part of this depends on the persons location.

Many people in poor nations have taken up roadside and windowsill gardens to suppliment their diets. Some even form community gardens like seen in Cuba and some parts of subsaharan Africa.

If located in the U.S. there are many local food outlets that a person can buy locally grown fodd (some of which is organic) for much cheaper than they would pay at a normal grocery outlet. Quality is usually higher as well. For those people located in places like Hunters Point San Francisco, well they are kind of screwed and there are environmental justice organizations out there trying to help them. The problem there is many of the people don't give a damn and resist the help. They've been so brainwashed and marginalized by our system that helping them is not as easy as one would think.

The poor tend to have a lower ecological footprint due to the fact they buy less stuff. Even if an affluent person buys "green" products, they are still products and required energy to produce. A person on a budget can still be green as long as he/she has a mind to do so. Unfortunately a lot of the poor in my area don't care about anyone or anything but themselves and fall victim to our marketting tactics so they buy a bunch of stuff they can barely afford, throw the wrappers in the street as they drive by, and they buy large inefficient cars because in their "culture" it is cool. Like a customer who came in the other day with a "new" 1982 Ford Econoline conversion van. The guy had a 1yr old baby and couldn't afford our cheapest stereo system. Why did he buy such an ineffcient vehicle and why is he buying a stereo? If they were living out of it that kind of makes sense but otherwise it was an extremely poor choice of vehicle.

So I don't really see this as a social justice issue because the degradation cause by consumption levels of any class affect everyone in the world. That means it is better when anyone chooses to go green regardless of class, it does, however; make a difference if the person going green generally consums a lot then changes his/her ways.

 

Depends on the car.....

A 1978 Chevy truck is not more green than a brand new Yaris.

A 1992 Civic could be more green though.

 

1985 mercedes benz diesel converted to run on waste vegetable oil: $2275
we're super tightwads now, folks- with both of us in school, tuition takes priority. you don't have to roll in a shiny new car to be green.

now given the current state of things, if i needed a light bulb today i would buy incandescent. but i can pass up the bag of m&ms next week and buy a cfl...

it's all about reprioritization. and letting go of the "need" to buy things that we don't really need. after all, since we're not buying much... think of all the packaging we're not throwing away! :lol:

 

The poor generally are MORE green than the wealthy. PERIOD.
The poor don't live in large homes, they live in small apartments. That's a major reduction in energy use that overshadows ANY reduction the wealthy might have by driving a Prius.

 

That is exactly the point. Once a person does this it opens up a whole new world of possibilities.

There are great sources for this kind of information and help as well.

One could start with the book "Your Money or Your Life" (website)

I even posted up a podcast of a Bioneers show with the author of this book as they talked about overworking in the U.S. and the value of a dollar vs our time. It's quite interesting if anyone has time to listen.

Time is Not Money (mp3 clip 13MB)

 

yes being green is expensive. in the past 13 months i paid

$25,000 for my Prius

15,900 for my Zenn

760 for my locally grown, grass fed cow. ( after 6 months,we still have PLENTY of meat left)

our combined household income is probably less than half the average here but i have some investments made during a time when i made more and have dipped into those a bit to do these things, but i felt it was well worth the expense in all cases. The Zenn purchase is still too early to completely evaluate its worth but just getting the concept of NEV's out there was my main goal and i accept the fact that i am on the bleeding edge of that movement so i have high hopes but am ready to accept some setbacks

 

Hehe not here. I'm a broke mofo in school now. I work two days a week for $100/day and live with friends. Talk about downsizing!

 

Yes. In fact, it was the poor in this country that led the way in being environmentally friendly, but we've forgot that. The Depression and the War taught people lessons they've lost.

People had gardens and composted to fertilize them.

People went to bed early to save candles, then to save light bulbs and electricity.

People repaired everything and what couldn't be repaired was reused as something else.

People used handkerchiefs. People mended socks. There were cloth napkins.

Instead of electric blankets there were real blankets, quilts and knitted and crocheted afghans.

We have become a consumerist society that finds it more convenient to throw away and buy new. This has been enabled by manufacturers that build obsolescence into products. Compare vintage furniture to what you buy now. Same price but one is wood and one is resin. The wood piece has survived over 50 years. The resin piece will be out in the alley within 10 years.

A "poor" person that has to drive an old car can keep that car in the best shape it can be by changing the oil, air filter, keeping the tires inflated and driving conservatively. They can do the best with what they have. They'l also keep it for 10+ years. (And many use bus passes instead of owning cars.)

It's not the poor that consume, it is the rich. Environmentally friendly living needs to become "fashionable".

 

To me it is an unintentional trick question. Financial position will definitely affect the path/purchases a person or family takes to be environmentally sensible. But 50 years of taking the right path has unbelivably good effects rich or poor. Even with just a few hundred dollars, an intelligent buyer can do far more long term good than someone (rich or poor) with no concern whatsoever.

The poor guy biking to work has done more than the millionare driving the Tesla Roadster to work.

 

I'm 100% with Darwood and Godiva on this.

"Being green" has become a consumer concept. Those of us who consume disproportionately but still want to "make a difference" have the choice of either consuming less, or consuming "green," or a little of both.

But as Godiva said, hopefully it will transform our culture a little bit to be more sensitive about their consumerism and their lack of thrift. Right now it seems like a lot of people think that they can keep their consumer habits just as they are but just buy different types of products. In reality if we ever want to deal with the underlying problem, we need the whole culture to simplify their lives a little and do away with the unnecessary.

So maybe in that sense, "consumer green" is still the right path because it may help popularize behavior that has a bad name right now. A lot of us have a reflexive reaction against someone who lives well below their means, but that should be rewarded instead. And thrifty behavior is certainly within the means of the poor.

I think the personal credit problems in this country really highlight the fact that many poorer people live beyond their means because of the pressure to live a consumer lifestyle. Or maybe personal credit encourages people to live that way... or a little of both. Anyway, consumer/disposable culture has got to go, and REAL green behavior (not just buying green labels) will save people money in the long run.

As for expensive cars, well, EVs can probably be pretty cheap once they're in full production in a number of factories. Strap a motor and a battery to a frame with some wheels, and off you go! Economies of scale will bring down the price of some of these products, but not buying them if you don't need them is the better option!

 

I love that book... I have that book!
It's one of the reasons I quit my job, btw...

Part of being green is being less of a "consumer", and more of a "producer"...
for example, rather than buying pre-made packaged food, cook up some homemade food, like beans and rice, or soups, stews, bread, etc.
Basic food ingredients is very green, and very cheap.
Even if you buy only organic, locally grown, fair trade, etc., it's much cheaper to buy the ingredients and make your own, than to buy pre-made food.
There are always ways to tighten the budget, really. And, there is always room to be greener. I am by no means as green as I could be, but I have made some major strides in the past few years... of course, back when I was living in the midwest, on acreage, I did grow my own garden, using organic methods, and most of what we ate was from what we grew.

 

All he can afford? $2k will buy a really nice bicycle. Or several OK ones. Or LOTS of entry-level ones. Turns out that many of us - no matter how rich or poor, do NOT need a car. Most of us want a car, certainly. And there's no question that having a car makes it easier to sit on our arses more and get fat.. you know - the American Dream and all that.

In general, saving the planet is a hell of a lot cheaper than destroying it. Yes, even in the short term.

 

Hey all- first post.

I have often thought about the cost of being "green" and how much some things can cost. My personal belief is to do what you can. Not everyone can use solar power, or buy a new hybrid, or even want to for that matter. i don't consider myself an environmentalist, more of a conservationist. I don't litter, I recycle, and I don't drive around needlessly. I think doing what you can is just as noble as spending ha lot of money on "green" power or a "green" car, if not more so.

 

Ask the people who live in the rubbish dumps of Manilla whether they recycle more than the people who are wealthy enough to throw out the stuff they live on.

Wealthy people create more of the problem than the real poor in this world, real poor people don't have huge homes to heat and cool, they don't have big screen TVs with surround sound in a dedicated home theatre room.

Look at the pollution created by the average American and compare it to the less than 50% of that created by the average person in China.

I'm too poor to buy a new Prius so I bought a used one. Does that make me less of a man? If it does I'll live with that. But the guy who bought my old Camry is probably greener than me, he bought a car that had 2 previous owners at an age when a lot of cars are being crushed. His daily commute is shorter than mine also.

To create a greener world we need to eliminate wealth. If there were no wealthy people there wouldn't be used massive V8 powered yank tanks for "poor people" to buy.