Stupid Conservation Ideas from conservation minded folks:

LOL! She looks clean!

Her approach may be a little laughable, but she brings up an important point. I guess equally to how much toilet paper we should use, we could discuss other important qualities of toilet paper. Such as, is it made from recycled paper and is it bleached without the use of chlorine? Chlorine's byproducts are harmful toxins that are thought of as carcinogens.

 

When she says one square, is she referring to one square of single ply you find in most public restrooms, or is this one square of the Charmin quilted 10x ply they're trying to get us to buy now a days?

 

It may be an odd request, but it's not dumb. It's another way of "reducing," and the underlying thought is probably a good one. I think this was said tongue-in-cheek about the number of "squares"; if you saw her and Laurie on the tour, they were having a blast! Through their discussions on the bus, I'm sure this is just one of the many things that they thought about, as she said in your quote--good for them. And yes, I would dare say that we use more toilet paper than necessary.

I listened to a great sermon on Sunday about personal responsibility and the environment--how it's time to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, not because your neighbor is doing it: "The Earth is calling, and she's pissed off."

This conversation about toilet paper can lead to other conversations about the "disposability" of consumer goods. We use too many paper towels and plates; disposable diapers are ridiculous and have a perfectly good replacement; etc., etc. I've found lots of ways to reduce over the past few years, and while they seem perfectly common to me, they may not be to everyone.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Apr 23 2007, 01:50 PM) [snapback]428511[/snapback]</div>

Of all the places to start, this is not the one that will engender people to the eco-friendly cause! :huh:

There are easier, and much cleaner, ways to encourage less use of forest products - having napkin dispensers on the tables in fast-food restaurants and cafeterias instead of by the cashiers would help. Some people grab big handfuls before they sit down, and only use half of them at best. But if they're at the table, then you only use what's needed (except for the occasional bored kid). Excessive packaging on products is useless. Or we could put a tax on paper, right now it's cheaper than the ink, which doesn't make sense. Some companies have done very well with electronic signatures and e-mail, but others still go thru reams of paper without thinking about it. Construction companies toss out large quantities of scrap lumber (anything that's no longer 8' long).

I go along with the OP. I'm pretty environmentally-oriented (my son and I were out working in the forest preserve for several hours again Saturday), but this is either an April 1st statement by her (instead of Apr. 22), or she's really wacked out. About as effective as that duct-tape and plastic defense against terrorist attacks...

 

i agree the disposable culture has to stop.

but passing up on a decent number of TP squares? nuh-uh. i think re-using rags rather than tossing out paper towels makes up for my normal use of TP... :blink:

 

Ummmm, Sheryl, let's not forget the bidet!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Apr 23 2007, 03:24 PM) [snapback]428584[/snapback]</div>

Wondering if gray water is legal for these purposes...?

We could just retrofit an old water pik, maybe...

 

Well, during the WWII newspaper was used. It was my mother's job to cut them in squares just so. I asked her if they had problems with the newsprint as I remembered my brother's hands after he got done folding the newspapers for his route. She said....they never checked to see if their butts were black.

Of course using it this way means you won't be recycling it.

Maybe Sheryl should develop another sleeve for the other arm like her dining sleeve...only for the bathroom?

 

Um....YUCK?!?

I'd rather walk on my hands all the way to work and back before helping out that way!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 23 2007, 04:46 PM) [snapback]428702[/snapback]</div>

I bet it makes great mulch!

Wildkow

 

Not to muddy Cheryl's idea with the obvious.... Butt, I don't believe we are cutting forests to make toilet paper.

Trees are cut for other reasons and all that extra tree junk that's not made into lumber ends up in paper products.

So, we can let that stuff pile up somewhere and rot, or we can make toilet paper out of it.

If we ever get our wood use down to where we need to be cutting old growth to make toilet paper out of whole trees then I agree, we should take a look at alternatives.

Stop printing the top 10 newspapers in the nation tomorrow and go to 100% online. How hard is that?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Apr 24 2007, 04:59 AM) [snapback]428920[/snapback]</div>

The old growth is used to make pristine magazines and catelogs....

I believe paper products are the largest consumer of forestry material.

 

OMG! Yuck....

Just do like the men in India do wipe with your left hand with or without paper..... :huh:

LOL so cheryl how long have you been using the perfume? whats it called? "Essents of nice person". :lol: :lol:

 

I'd shoot right back at Cheryl:

Hey, howabout women go back to using washable sponges and rags instead of tampons?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Apr 23 2007, 02:50 PM) [snapback]428511[/snapback]</div>

I don't remember that verse from my Bible. Which one do you have and what book is it in?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Apr 24 2007, 09:55 AM) [snapback]428950[/snapback]</div>

my dad works in a paper mill. they make catalog paper 24/7. warehouses just full the the stuff waiting to be sent out... train cars full of trees going in. we walked through the factory and i could not imagine where all that paper would go and who needed that much of it...

 

I have worked on multiple EIRs and EISs where wetland ecosystems were eliminated for some sort of development. The "preferred" mitigation, just to get the development approved, was to create another wetland.

This is absurd as the "created" wetland does not necessary conform to topography or have a natural and sustainable source of water.