The Toilet Paper Conundrum

We try to buy things that are produced locally from local resources when we can’t produce them ourselves. I spend a fair bit of time researching products trying to find out where they are made and from where the materials used in making them come. It is usually a frustrating and depressing project. So few things are made and sold locally. Even things made here aren’t sold directly here. They must first travel back and forth across the country to get to us. Take toilet paper for example. It isn’t made anywhere near here that I can find. So, logic would say look for the closest source or the most environmentally friendly one. The closest is at least 500 miles, and it is a brand that is not sold in any of the local stores. Environmentally friendly options involve mail order (at quite a high price and a lot of shipping) or a 140 mile round trip to Whole foods to pay a high price for a product that was shipped quite a way to get to the Columbus store. What is one to do? The non-toilet paper options are not very pleasant. I have looked at growing Mullen. It grows wild around here, has large soft fuzzy leaves, and I’ve been told that it makes good toilet paper. But, a field full of Mullen, and the energy and effort needed to cultivate, harvest, and process it seem a bit much right now. So we go to Wal-Mart and but the most eco-friendly brand they carry. Not the ideal, but it is probably the best use of our resources at the time.

Finding that balance between the vision and life in the ‘world as it is’ is a constant struggle for me. I know how I want to live, but it is a slow process dragging the rest of the world into a shape that allows me to live that way. It helps if I stop and list the things we have accomplished on our way to a better life. Here is a short list.

We have reduced our electricity use so far this year by 8% compared to the same time last year by turning things off, changing to compact florescent lights, and accepting a wider range of indoor temperatures.

We have found and are using local sources for all of our milk, most of our cheese, all of our eggs, most of our fresh produce, and some of our bread and grains.

We have cut our imported animal feeds to about 10% of total feed (except for dog and cat food which we still buy from non local sources.)

We have reduced our fuel consumption by 12% by driving less and making more efficient use of the trips we do take.

We have a long way to go, but we are on our way.

Help

The other day I was talking with a friend about what we were doing here at the farm and the subject of Organic Certification came up. My friend asked why we are not certified and I, in my usual flip way, said something like Organics is not enough. That led to a bit of a philosophical discussion which went very poorly. I know why we are doing what we are doing. The reasoning is crystal clear to me. But, I don’t seem to be able to articulate it very well. I’d like to try again to lay out my philosophy. I’d appreciate it if you would rip it apart. Question it. Find the holes, the bits that don’t make sense, the leaps in reasoning that you can’t make and let me know. I need to be able to explain this to people in a way that they can understand. I sometimes think I have a different cognitive framework to hang my ideas on; that I perceive things differently. Even if that is true, I got here through the same system that everyone else is using. If I can do that I should be able to help other people do that too. So…


There was a man who came to the doctor. He had a throbbing head ache that would not go away. He had tried all kinds of medicine, relaxation techniques, yoga, prayer, everything, and nothing worked. The doctor listened to the man, took his blood pressure, waited for him to stop bashing himself in the head with a hammer, and prescribed a potent pain killer. The man took the medicine, whacked himself in the head with the hammer, and went home wondering if the head ache would stop this time.

We are very much like the man and the doctor. We have been dealing with problems of environmental degradation and population growth for a very long time. We have tried and retried a vast number of programs to fix the pain, and have never found one that really worked. Why? Because we keep bashing ourselves in the head with a hammer. We keep seeing the same effects, even though we put great amounts of effort and resources into solving the problems. We pour millions into efforts to save this animal or that one and at the same time destroy the habitat of some other creature as fast as we can. Next year we will start a program for that creature. We fund hunger relief programs all over the world. We produce more food every year but millions still go hungry. We teach about birth control to help ease the population growth but it still races on at an exponential rate. Why? Because we are still doing the thing that causes these effects. (I could go into a long discussion of history and “pre-history” to show how we got here, but it really doesn’t matter.) The thing I find interesting is that none of the other creatures living on this planet have this problem. They have been living well in every part of the globe for hundreds of thousands of years with out causing massive environmental degradation. On the whole there are not large groups of any living thing starving to death or over running their normal range. (We sometimes see animals starving, or causing environmental problems, but that is always a result of our altering the system, not their normal way of living.) We humans managed to live for several hundred thousand years without causing the kind of problems we have now. So the question is; what are we doing that none of the other creatures are doing? How are they living that is different from how we are living? I think there should be some common law that is true for elephants, trees, fish, spiders, worms, etc. (Every other system in the universe operates on simple laws, why would life be any different?) I have published those laws in the side bar. Right now our way of life, our systems of production, violates the first basic law. We go outside our range for the resources used to produce an excess of food, water, and energy. When we have used up those resources in one area we go looking for them in another. This causes the environmental degradation we are fighting. It also fuels the exponential population growth we continue to see. This population growth must be met with more production which causes more population growth… which brings us to now. So, why would I say Organics is not enough? It’s like really nice aspirin. It will mask the pain for a short time, but if we don’t change how we live, how we produce what we need to live, we will keep whacking ourselves in the head with the hammer until we die.

Giving things up to save the world

Nathan has left a new comment on your post "Nathan has left a new comment on your post "A seco...": There is a lot that can be done within the limits of a home range but there are limits and many of us don't respect them. I eat fresh fruits and vegtables from South America all winter. If I stick to the food sources from my local area I will have to give up fresh fruits and vegtables out of season. That doesn't mean I can't eat well all winter. Fruits and vegtables can be perserved. When I say that we will have to give things up I don't mean we need to move into caves but I do believe there are limits to the what technology can do for us. Todays technological solution is often tomorows environmental problem as was the case with CFC's

My point isn't that we will not have to "give some things up", but that you can't expect people to accept a lower standard of living out of some guilty need to save the world. We will have to change how we live. We will have to learn to eat things in season and to preserve things for the off season. We will have to be more creative in how we produce our energy, how we process our waste, how we use our local resources so that we can live in a truly sustainable way. But we won't achieve that by going back two hundred years, or a thousand years. We won't achieve that by trying to get people to do without things.

All over the world now we are several generations removed from local economies. The local small producers of food and goods are gone for the most part. Some of these things will have to be recreated. We can draw on skills from the past, but doing what was done in the past is what got us here. We need to go forward and find new ways. If we keep our focus on using local resources in a way that continually renews them while producing the things we want and need then we will be taking some real steps in the right direction.

Nathan has left a new comment on your post "A second look":

I found your last post inspiring not hard core! I am working on my chart right now. What you are doing is appealing at least to me. You seem to be a likeable person who is as concerned about healthy family and community dynamics as you are concerned about fitting sustainable into you home ecosystem. Keep up the fun. I do want to take issue with your statement, "We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things." That is a tough one for me. On the one hand, it seems that you are right; people are not likely to get excited about giving up the extravagant life that most of us live. On the other hand, giving up some (or perhaps a lot) is probably the only way to achieve the goal of local sustainability. It seems to me that "sustainable" means not using up more energy than is being input into your home range. The main source of energy input for most of us is the sun. The sun's energy is then transferred and stored across the web of life and in the environment, which makes it more accessible to us. But, the bottom line is we can't sustainable use more energy than is being input into the system. Right now I use far more and so do most Americans. Right now there is a lot of excitement in the general public about going green and addressing global warming. But there is no one saying we need to consume less. Every report I hear puts a lot of faith in technology. As a culture we believe that there is an unlimited source of energy out there that we can use with no restraints and to no ill-effects. We believe it so strongly that no one is even talking about there not being one. The problem is that this kind of thinking simply defies the laws of nature and the laws of physics.

Here is a quote I like from Paul Molyneaux. “All the technology in the world could not compensate for a damaged ecosystem.”

I think that changing the world does require asking people to give up things. I think the trick is doing it in a way that is not shrill or condescending. I think you are on the right track. I like your humble approach and your genuine affection for humankind.

I stand by what I said. Here is an example. One of the biggest energy users in the home is providing hot water. I have been to a number of energy efficiency workshops where the emphasis was on reducing how much hot water was used. That would save energy, but the only way to do it effectively was to have guard with a stopwatch timing peoples showers, baths, and every other hot water activity. Anna Eddy, a writer from Martha's Vineyard, was designing a new home for herself. She wanted to lower her energy impact, but she didn't want to have to time her showers or give up her bubble bath. She designed a system that used only energy produced on her property that provided the amount of hot water she needed to maintain her lifestyle. She didn't give anything up, she just met her need a different way. Another thing she did was design a "composting" toilet that functions just like a flush toilet. If you have ever used a composting toilet you would realize that the masses are not going to adopt them unless they are forced, but a flush toilet that processes waste in a more eco-intelligent way could easily be sold to the public. Ideas get adopted by the masses because they make life better (or create the perception that life is better). You can't expect the people in developing countries to stop their march toward "development". What we need is a new way to get there.

A second look

On looking over my last post I realize I came across a bit hardcore. Now that I am in a more mellow mood I'd like a chance to revisit what I wrote.

The thing I most want people to think about is living locally.

The next thing on the list is HAVE FUN!!! We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things. I've found that getting my kids involved in exploring alternatives that are locally sustainable is fun for me, fun for them, and results in things that will make a difference for a long time.

Lastly, (Connie would cringe if she knew I used that word. She doesn't read my blog because my spelling and writing style drive her crazy.) pick one thing to start with. You can't do everything all at once. It makes me crazy that I can't, but that is the way the world is.

What do I do?

I’ve been asked the question “What do I do?” quite a few times lately. It is usually in the context of some discussion about how it is wonderful for me to do what I do here in rural Ohio where I have lots of space and a wife who gets paid well enough that I can afford to play at saving the world. But what about the people who have to work for a living? Or the people who live in the city? Or the people without the skills or inclination to be small scale eco-farmers? What do they do?

I think my philosophy still holds up in other settings. I hope some of you will experiment with it and see what can be done. I’ve some ideas about where to start. The most important thing is to live locally. Ultimately your energy, food, and water must come from your local resources and your waste must be returned to that same local area in such a way that it helps build the local resource base. For a human tribe or community I think that the local range is probably contained in a circle about 20 miles in diameter. (This is based on the amount of space we can get to know intimately. If you can’t walk there and back in a day it is probably outside what is truly local. I haven’t had any chance to test this, but it is a starting place.) Now let me lay out some ideas about what to do.

1. Look at where your food, water, and energy come from and where your waste goes. Not just where the store is located, but where the actual product is made and where the resources used in its making come from. Make a chart of how much you are importing from resources outside your local range.


2. Explore your local area and see what you can get locally. Talk with local producers to find out how local the products really are. (We have things sold at our local farmers market which are shipped up from Florida. That’s not really local.)

3. Look at things you can do at home to produce more yourself. Catch rainwater to water your houseplants. Put some tomatoes and lettuce in your flower garden or in a pot on your window sill.

4. Explore what you can do with your waste. Compost everything (use a worm bin inside if you can’t compost outside) If you buy eggs from someone locally see if they want your kitchen scraps. Chickens love them! If you can get away with a “farm animal” pet have a chicken or two in your yard. They will do quite well on your back lawn and will eat all the kitchen scraps you can give them. They will gift you with an egg most days.

5. Energy – Switch things off. Use compact florescent lights. Walk when you can. Ride the bus or a bike. Explore how much energy you need and ways you can produce it at home. Solar is getting cheaper and even if you just do some it makes a difference.

6. Network. If you find a local source for eggs, food, or what ever, share that knowledge with your neighbors. Local produces need customers. If no one buys we can’t afford to produce.


I could go on and on. The most important thing is to decide to do something. Stop waiting for “THEY’ to do it. They never will. Take responsibility for yourself.