Frugalism: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:carbon-inequality1.png|thumb|This page tells people to '''consume less stuff'''. Note that this is directed at people in '''"developed"''' countries, especially people who are middle-class or richer (i.e. the 20% of the world that uses 80% of resources). We are '''not''' telling poor people to consume less.]] | |||
'''More than a third''' of all [[energy]] usage is affected by '''what people buy, and how much of it.''' | |||
In this sense, we '''can''' save the planet by being '''cheap.''' __NOTOC__ <!-- I hid the table of contents here to help maintain readers' visual attention. --> | |||
<!-- | |||
===We can still have nice things, just not replace them ''as'' often.=== | |||
{{minor|If you take a walk in a middle-class neighborhood on garbage day, you'll see the type of perfectly-good [[home waste|stuff people throw out]].}} | |||
<!-- TALK: should this be here or elsewhere? --> | |||
====Examples==== | ====Examples==== | ||
{{empty}} | {{empty}} | ||
| Line 17: | Line 14: | ||
Consider various types of consumer goods, such as clothing, electronics, kitchenware, furniture etc. For each good, consider how long it ''could'' last. Then compare with the status quo of how often people ''actually'' replace it. Using the ratio between the two stats, we can calculate what percent of environmental impacts could be avoided if people chose to replace stuff less often. | Consider various types of consumer goods, such as clothing, electronics, kitchenware, furniture etc. For each good, consider how long it ''could'' last. Then compare with the status quo of how often people ''actually'' replace it. Using the ratio between the two stats, we can calculate what percent of environmental impacts could be avoided if people chose to replace stuff less often. | ||
}} | }} | ||
<!-- TODO: | <!-- TABLE could look like this: | ||
{|class="wikitable" | |||
!Product | |||
!How often<br />people replace it<br />(status quo)<br /><small>(statistical harmonic mean)</small> | |||
!Lifespan with<br />minimal effort | |||
!Lifespan with<br />maximum effort {{p|(i.e. being willing to keep it until it's completely unusable)}} | |||
!Note | |||
|- | |||
|Couch | |||
|6 years | |||
|10 years<br />(−40% <small>environmental footprint</small>) | |||
|20 years<br />(−70% <small>environmental footprint</small>) | |||
|Using data from... | |||
|} | |||
--> | |||
<!-- TODO: After adding some data to the table, add this commentary: | |||
'''Why do people replace things so much more often than they have to?''' | |||
* Hypothesis: Psychological motivations may include... | |||
*# Believing that one's current possessions are too worn out or not good enough (even when they're actually still okay). | |||
*# Wanting to "keep up" with trends (note that there are other less-wasteful ways to do this). | |||
*# Unawareness of just how much of an environmental/human-labor impact this all has. | |||
--> | |||
<!-- TODO: More talking points that need to fit somewhere... | |||
* Mention [[appliances]] - does replacing them really save energy when you consider the energy it takes to manufacture/deliver/install the new appliance? Rule of thumb: if it saves money (without gov't subsidizing the replacement) then yes. (also note that "big oil companies are subsidized too" is true but not a counterargument. manufacturing the appliance relies just as much on subsidized oil (maybe moreso) as the energy in your home). | |||
* Talk about [[thrift stores]] (make new page?) and how they get overloaded (too many donations, not enough buyers, stuff still ends up in the landfill) and the solution is for people to not buy so much NEW stuff in the first place. Culturally we need to make it our default that when we need some item we first check our own homes, then ask friends/neighbors if they have one they aren't using, then look for it in thrift stores or used online, and then only as a last resort buy it new. I can uncomment this talk when I phrase it better and after I filled out the 'examples' section above so people can first see why this matters. | |||
* Bring up '''excessive renovation''' in the context of both homes and commercial space. Some of this is done by ordinary individuals; some of this is done by landlords and business owners. | |||
* When small business consume goods excessively, this is still usually funded by middle-class customers. Say for example if a restaurant keeps replacing its decorations & dishes just to maintain an upscale vibe: This makes the place more expensive, but middle-class people are still choosing to eat there. So in a way it's still a function of middle-class choices. Unless maybe a lot of restaurant owners could reach a whole new demographic by being more frugal and lowering prices, but they just haven't realized it yet? | |||
* When large corporations consume goods excessively (i.e. office parties for upper management), maybe rich shareholders are to blame, and the middle class has zero market influence over this? In which case, that section of consumption{{qn}} could only be dealt with through [[anti-capitalism]]. | |||
--> | |||
====Tips==== | ====Tips==== | ||
| Line 23: | Line 53: | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
[[File:energy-usage-affected-by.png|thumb|Pie showing how much of [[energy]] usage is affected by the production/consumption of goods.{{minor|<br />See also: [[Why energy usage serves as a good general estimate of carbon emissions]].}}]] | |||
* [[Planned obsolescence]] | * [[Planned obsolescence]] | ||
* [[Code bloat]] | * [[Code bloat]] | ||
* [[Right to repair]] | * [[Right to repair]] | ||
Latest revision as of 08:51, 16 October 2023
More than a third of all energy usage is affected by what people buy, and how much of it.
In this sense, we can save the planet by being cheap.
We can still have nice things, just not replace them as often.
If you take a walk in a middle-class neighborhood on garbage day, you'll see the type of perfectly-good stuff people throw out.
Examples
This section has not been filled in yet.
Analysis needed for this section: Consider various types of consumer goods, such as clothing, electronics, kitchenware, furniture etc. For each good, consider how long it could last. Then compare with the status quo of how often people actually replace it. Using the ratio between the two stats, we can calculate what percent of environmental impacts could be avoided if people chose to replace stuff less often.
Tips
This section has not been filled in yet.
See also
See also: Why energy usage serves as a good general estimate of carbon emissions.