David and Goliath

This is a really inspiring project from the WWF.
I believe this project has real promise. We need to get the companies with us instead of fighting against them, especially the big multinationals. I'm not saying it's easy, but neither is fighting against such a powerful corporation.
David against Goliath is an inspiring story, but what would the result be if they work together?

Sustainable Living: Conscious Consumption

With increased awareness on sustainability issues, we are looking more closely at the things we buy. We are more and more aware of materials used in production that are harmful not only to our natural environments, but even to us humans. Bio or Eco labelling are becoming increasingly common across the globe in order to provide a more sustainable alternative. 

There are various labels and brands now that certify specific ecological or social conditions. These are very important, not just as an indicator to us as the consumer, but also as an awareness campaign amongst consumers, producers and sellers worldwide. These brands are spreading and creating a very positive influence on the various parties in production as well as the consumers.  However, that said, there are limits to these.

Firstly, there are many different brands, but most of these tend to focus on either ecological/biological issues OR social issues. While I am of the firm belief that they are interconnected and not separable, few combine the two categories. Therefore you must choose if you care about the future of our natural planet or of the people in it. This can be a difficult choice to make.

Another issue is that in order to create an official label, you will have to set official standards. Official standards must in turn have specific definitions and delimitations. If we take a specific example; just because something is marked Bio or Eco doesn't mean that no pesticides were used. The use of pesticides is clearly delimited and regulated, but still possible. This doesn't mean that we should just ignore ecological branding because it is useless anyway, but we should be aware that it is not completely pesticide-free. 

There are plenty of scientific or non-scientific literature out there discussing the pros and cons of this so I will not go further into the details of that, but suffice to say that things are complex and imperfect even if you chose all your purchases carefully after branding. There is room for improvement. However, we can still assume that the majority of the goods labelled with sustainability indicators are better from and environmental and social standpoint than the generic goods we buy.

The way I see it, the most important result of sustainability branding is awareness. Consumers are seeing a difference and given the chance to choose. Even those who are not interested in sustainability issues (though in my opinion we all should be) will be exposed to this information in they daily tasks. It might not change the behavior of those who do not particularly foster these opinions, but it creates an awareness and spread of information.

As they say of most problematic situations; recognition of the problem is the first step to recovery. 

Sustainable Living: Public Transport

The amount of energy consumed per person per km is significantly reduced if you take public transport compared to a private car. This effect is multiplied if it is a public transport vehicle using alternative fuels or electricity. In addition, it is often cheaper than owning a car. The further your daily travelling distance, the cheaper it gets. In certain countries the price will be more or less equal, but this is not taking into account the investment in acquiring a private vehicle nor the maintenance entailed. In many cases the government will subsidize public transport, making it even more profitable.

Public transportation can save 340 million gallons of fuel and 37 million metric tonns of CO2. Even those who do not use the public transportation system benefit from it as it greatly reduces congestion and therefore also travel time. Public transportation also reduces energy consumption and the general air quality.

Despite its reputation, it can actually help reduce stress. Instead of being stuck in traffic, you can use your travel time to relax, talk to a friend, read or listen to music.

 

Sustainable Living: Vegetarian Day

The amount of fossil fuels needed to produce meat-centered diet is three times more than that of a vegetarian diet. One calorie of meat protein requires 78 calories of fossil fuel as opposed to the 2 calories of fossil fuel required to produce one calorie of protein from soy beans.

Deforestation is aggrevated by livestock production. The rainforests are especially sensitive and 55 square feet of tropical rainforest is consumer in every quarter-pound.

Meat is inefficient as 90% of protein is wasted by cycling grain through livestock. Livestock eat 80% of corn grown in the US as opposed to the 20% eaten by people. It is following Pareto's law perfectly.

Regardless of personal views or dietary preferences, it is clear that a vegetarian diet is more environmentally sustainable. However, even from a human perspective, slaughters are one of the professions with the highest turnover and a high risk of injury.

However, humans were made omnivores and many of us find it difficult to completely eradicate meat from our diets. So why not instate a vegetarian day? Start small, set one day in the week where you skip the steak. One day is not so difficult. We can all do one vegetarian day per week. It can improve our health and reduce our carbon footprint. In an age of obesity and high cholesterol, I think we could all gain from one vegetarian day per week.