Forget Shorter Showers -- http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/discuss/4801/

Photo by Chris LaMarca

[...] We can all jump on whatever life-sustaining, world resus[c]itating
bandwagon we wish; but if our behavior does not change...well then? Our demands are the industry's purpose, becau[s]e that is where the money is. What we pay for, they produce. This will go on ad infinitum until we say stop with our cash (hence, our behavior), not our vote.
I used the word "addict" for a reason. What is it you feel you cannot live
without? And, once you answer that question, what is its footprint via
water, carbon, air and whatever other resources we are depleting as collective?

If you wonder why things don't change, look at what you pay for and why.
We all play a part in the character that is destroying the world. No matter
what we protest, no matter our good intentions, if we do not act as
described above, we change nothing.
You can see the comment at the following URL:
http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/discuss/4801/



Maybe we need to work a bit harder on distinguishing among needs (what keeps
us safe and alive), culture (good familiar home cookin' and even mon's
roast beef), and created WANTS (all the stuff in those relentless consumer
culture surround-sound ads - credit cards, sexy cars, seductive short-lived
widgets, fast food, no down payments, getaway faraway, just do it, I'm
worth it, syrupybubbly bad-for-your-teeth drinks, happyfication, sing-along
team songs) that persuade us that we should call ourselves (even in school
curriculum) "consumers." We can, if we chose, become discriminating
choosers of all the pieces of our lives: the food we eat (knowing more about
it), the clothes we choose (maybe those workers in Dacca, Bangladesh won't
have died for nothing), the products we buy to look better (are they
healthy?), the idea of endlessly renovating our spaces (old and homey used
to be charming), what's important about how we keep warm and cool and get
around (how can we reduce our fossil fuel consumption?).
All of this is possible and, now, urgent. Urgent if we care about the future
and our kids. Easy to find out since if we're here we're on the internet,
we can all can quite easily find how to be responsibly, ethically, fairly,
discriminatingly, honestly green.

I once read that to become vegetarian should take seven years: that it's
good to spend some time learning how to cook some things that are great,
that you love, that aren't meat. Then eating less meat (or no red meat, or
no meat at all) won't be much of a sacrifice. (And yes, it does mean being
willing to spend more time cooking. Indians and Asians are champions at
making fantastically delicious non-meat food: we can learn from them. Get a
good, sharp knife, and learn to be adept at chopping vegetables! Or get two
- and invite your mate, kids, friends to chop together.) You might discover
(as I did) that it's good food that's addictive, not just the taste of
meat.

 For a few years I taught a course where everyone had to do his/her
"Ecological Footprint" calculation – for some it was quite a poke in the
conscience - if everyone lived like you, the quiz asked, how many planets
would we need ? Most of the students, who recycled and therefore thoght they
were green, were shocked to discover that, even as students, they were up at
three or four Earths. It taught me some things, too. It's not really
comfortable staring at your own unthought-through habits and their
consequences. But it's a good place to start.

Good intentions are a good first step. After that, being an ethical
“unconsumer” is an ongoing adventure in discovery, creativity, chopping
and surprising new kinds of satisfaction. (I'm still working on it, but now
I can grow carrots and eggplants and can spaghetti sauce and bake bread and
make some pretty mean vegetable, lentil (+sometimes tofu in assorted Asian
styles) -spicy-saucy-dishes.
If you're up for new cooking ideas, one of my faves is the Moosewood
Restaurant New Classics cookbook – a mix of familiar and interestingly
ethnic food.
http://www.amazon.com/Moosewood-Restaurant-New-Classics-Collective/dp/0609802410
It can be fun to shop at farmers markets, or garden, and eat local, organic,
low-meat (or meatless), homemade, spicy, tasty, healthy
good-for-everyone-including-

planet food.

You can see the comment at the following URL:
http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/discuss/4801/P408/

World Ecological Debt Day: Planet enters 'ecological debt'

Growing demand eats into Earth's natural capital, say the authors

Rising consumption of natural resources means that humans began "eating the planet" on 9 October, a study suggests. The date symbolised the day of the year when people's demands exceeded the Earth's ability to supply resources and absorb the demands placed upon it.
The figures' authors said the world first "ecological debt day" fell on 19 December 1987, but economic growth had seen it fall earlier each year.
The data was produced by a US-based think-tank, Global Footprint Network.
The New Economics Foundation (Nef), a UK think-tank that helped compile the report, had published a study that said Britain's "ecological debt day" in 2006 fell on 16 April.
The authors said this year's global ecological debt day meant that it would take the Earth 15 months to regenerate what was consumed this year.

WORLD 'ECOLOGICAL DEBT DAY' 1987 - 19 December 1990 - 7 December 1995 - 21 November 2000 - 1 November 2005 - 11 October 2006 - 9 October (Source: Global Footprint Network/Nef)

"By living so far beyond our environmental means and running up ecological debts means we make two mistakes," said Andrew Simms, Nef's policy director.
"First, we deny millions globally who already lack access to sufficient land, food and clean water the chance to meet their needs. Secondly, we put the planet's life support mechanisms in peril," he added.
'Eco-footprints'
The findings are based on the concept of "ecological footprints", a system of measuring how much land and water a human population needs to produce the resources it consumes and absorb the resulting waste.
Global Footprint Network's executive director, Mathis Wackernagel, said humanity was living off its "ecological credit card" and was "liquidating the planet's natural resources".


"While this can be done for a short while, overshoot ultimately leads to the depletion of resources, such as forests, oceans and agricultural land, upon which our economy depends," Mr Wackernagel said.
Fredrik Erixon, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy (Ecipe), a Brussels-based think tank, said he applauded the authors on their innovative way of focusing attention to the issue of resource depletion.
But he added he found the concept of ecological debt to be "quite ludicrous".
"When it comes to using footprints as a way to follow the micro effects of various economic behaviours on the environment, it can be quite good," Mr Erixon said.
"But the way they are collecting and assessing information is wrong. We don't really get any serious information out of this."
He also questioned the use of the term "debt": "A debt is where you have over-savings in one area of the economy, and under-savings in another.
"Then you have a transfer of savings from one actor to another in the form of a loan. But who are we indebted to?" Mr Erixon asked.
"Perhaps 'ecological exuberance' is better than ecological debt."
He added that history had shown that technological advances had led to more efficient uses of natural resources, and had sustained economic growth.