h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

Petrol doesn't cost much less than that in many European countries (in fact some countries are probably dearer than that bearing in mind that an American gallon is bigger)and it has been proved it doesn't encourage car pooling or conservation. And the taxes made from these higher charges are very rarely used to build alternative transport links.

umm, you think amazon, etc. - individual shipping of books - is more efficient in gas/energy than having all the books somewhat centrally located in a large store?!?!?!?!?
!?!?

!!

??

!?!?!

Yes I do. As far as I know, Arnie, the post man comes to my house every single day except Sunday. They also go to Amazon's warehouse. It seems to me that having a package shipped from there to here is far more efficient than me driving to Springfield (45 miles one way) to the nearest bookstore so that I can browse at Barnes and Noble.

Did you not read the link talking about how much less energy a warehouse uses than the store? Or are you just liking to pick pick pick?

Sounds good but when I go to a bookshop I can normally put the books in my bag and carry it home. When I get an Amazon delivery, the books come shrink wrapped in plastic, then put into a cardboard box which has to be opened in customs (I live in Portugal and order over the UK site which has mainly titles in English, whereas the nearest site in Spain obviously doesn't) and then resealed again in shrink wrap!

All that packaging needs to be produced somewhere, probably at a higher environmental impact than driving to a bookshop!

How far do you drive to the bookshop? My trip is 90 miles round trip. That is 145 kilometers.

Now, I grant you the shrink wrap and the packaging must be produced at a cost. None of it is simple, is it? And the cost-benefit analysis for every little thing has yet to be done. However, packing materials can and are recycled.

Then I have to ask why the shrink wrap? There is no shrink wrap on stuff I am getting from Amazon, it's just in a cardboard box.

OH well. Maybe I should give up on my love affair with books that have pages to turn and hard covers. I should probably be downloading books. I do most of my newspaper and magazine reading on line nowadays. I think that running my computer may be more efficient than shipping newsprint around, but again, I don't know really.

Still, I do love curling up with a book in my hands. At least they are re-usable and re-cyclable.

For an English language bookshop with a decent selection, I have about a 90km/60mile round trip. Luckily, that bookshop is integrated in a huge shopping centre and so can do clothes, gift and hypermarket shopping in the same place. We tend to go about once a month and so when I'm picking books I get a whole month's supply in (I read probably about a new book every 2 days so we are talking about me buying about 10 books a time.) But we can also do any clothes and gift shopping that we need for the month as well as getting all the monthly groceries, toiletries, cleaning products etc in one swoop (day to day milk, bread, meat and fresh veg is done via local shops that we can walk to).

All my Amazon packages come with an inner shrinkwrap round the actual books which has the shipping invoice included then they are in a cardboard box with a further customs wrapping round the box after they have opened it. With a further customs invoice taped to the outside in a plastic packet. That's a lot of packaging!

again, recycling takes energy. Take your pick - either you're really chiefly concerned about the energy crisis/global warming - in which case recycling doesn't help, it hurts, and that extra material costs you - or your more moderate and you think there's a balance to be had.


I think listing a billion different small things that everyone should do is not the way to go. I think a list of 1-3 things that each person could do to help is a good way to go, along with some of those measures described by teh Granuaiard. Everyone posting here seems to have come up with a lot of good, unique solutions to their own situations - and I think that would be the ideal. But I think it's important to rank each of these, and not sweat the small things.

<>

Well, yeah. But does it take more or less energy than throwing stuff away and buying new stuff? If the answer is less, then let's do it.

Anything we do in the UK as individuals is pi$$ing in the wind. Whatever the sense of the arguments, most people just don't care. The vast majority view looking forward to the weekend as long-term planning. So long as it is more convenient to consume rather than conserve,that is what will happen.

Even if human activity is responsible for global warming, and that is still an "if" BTW, it will take large-scale efforts to make a difference. The bulk of the painless measures have already been done. Insulation is mandatory on new houses and the Clean Air Act removed the worst of the pollutants.

The current mania for individual measures is politics. The perceptions of the public are being manipulated to prepare the ground for more extreme, painful measures. The cost to the end-user of energy resources is spiralling already and is likely to increase further. When the cost of petrol or electricity becomes so high that the annual holiday or Friday night at the pub becomes curtailed, *then* we'll see a real desire to save energy.

Simple measures to decrease pollution?

1) Limit car engine size to 2L. This will not impact the majority of motorists, but will remove the worst pollutants.
2) Increase the cost of a driving licence. In Norway I believe a licence costs around £1000.
3) Nuclear Power stations. It's a proven technology available immediately with massive generating capacity. In forty years there have been precious few accidents and even they affected far less people than the doom-mongers predicted.


As I said earlier, we have an increasing population which inevitably means increasing demand. If you seriously think mankind is causing global warming, the only truly effective solution is to kill every 2nd baby and stabilise the population.

"Small Crimes Against The Planet"

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/ethicalliving/story/0,,1935614,00.html


az

They're wonderful Az

Maybe all products should be inspected for environmental impact before release? Unfortunately, that means another layer of beaurocracy and extra costs to be passed on.

I'm waiting for a delivery from Amazon and will check the packaging when it arrives. As I recall the stuff just comes in a recycled box/envelope type thing with the invoice inside. No shrinkwrap, no extra protective wrap on the outside. Unless they've changed their packaging since my last order.

<> (SWL)

How about gullibility tests for consumers as well?

az

It could be argued that we're doing our bit in the UK already. Car ownership here is 419 per 1000, whereas the European average is 460. Spain is 442. Luxembourg is 623, so maybe we should be vilifying the Luxembourgians

http://www.eurofound.eu.int/areas/qualityoflife/eurlife/index.php?template=3&radioindic=105&idDomain=9

Morning Arnie,

I have reverted to (nearly) the original thread title.

Daylight Saving....... Mmmmmm , probably means nothing in the US but here we put the clocks forward one hour in the spring, thus losing an hours sleep on the Sunday when this is done. Thus 9.00am Sunday becomes 10.00am with resulting #darker# mornings.

Then in Autumn ( last Sunday) we take it off again , thus 9.00am Sunday of the change is now 8.00am. One cannot benefit from the extra hour because the #body clock# tells you it is time to wake. However mornings are now lighter and evenings get darker earlier.

Stupid yes? .Pointless ? - probably. Costly - certainly, all thet clock changing.

The nett effect is to move the available hours of daylight forwards and backward within a 24 hr period to give 2 "Time Seasons " a year.

Much arguement goes on each year in the UK. Shall we stick to GMT etc etc.

(I think it is 'Luxembourgers')

I think making a licence cost £1000 will just lead to there being even more unlicenced, and uninsured drivers on the roads. Insurance for a young person is already approaching that amount and given that the fines they get for being uninsured are considerably less it is already cheaper for some to drive without insurance and take the fine if they ever get caught. Making the licence itself cost more means there will be an even higher barrier and even greater temptation to just not bother.

<>

Well yeah ... especially as it can't take much longer than half an hour to cross it on foot.

az

Novo: >Daylight Saving....... Mmmmmm , probably means nothing in the US<

FYI, we do the same here in the US.

Profound apologies Arnie,

Just 'Googled' Daylight Saving and found that Benjamin Franklin proposed it, and that is used globally.

<> (JCNSmith)

It's done in most countries, isn't it? Personally I'd prefer to have Daylight Saving time all year round.

az

Oops, missed your post there, Novo. I didn't know that Benjamin Franklin originally proposed it. Interesting!

Apparently there are some states in the US and one province in Canada that don't change their clocks. And in Australia different areas of the country change on different dates, which sounds a bit confusing. Is it done in *all* countries?

az