Writers:

May 2008 archive

Is It Better to Replace or Repair an Old Appliance?

Is it really better to replace a perfectly-working, older model appliance with one that is more energy efficient? You read this all the time in those lists of steps to save the earth: "Replace your old refrigerator/washing machine/dishwasher with an Energy Star model." (Energy Star is a government program that rates appliances; ones that use 20 to 30 percent less energy than required by federal standards are awarded the Energy Star. http://www.energystar.gov.)

I’ve had a hard time wrapping my mind around this. It offends my sense of thrift. And it seems to me that all the energy and fossil fuels that go into manufacturing and transporting an appliance, the fuel that’s used to light and heat the store where it’s sold, the fuel I would use driving around to shop for the appliance and having it delivered, and the fuel used to remove the old one must add up to a significant carbon footprint.

Laurene and I have debated about this for sometime, and will definitely do a podcast on this topic. But in the meantime, here’s some definitive info: According to an EPA spokesperson quoted in Alina Tugend’s May 10, 2008 article in the New York Times, any appliance over 15 years old is better off being replaced. The energy savings are that substantial. If it’s not 15 years old, hang on to it until it really quits working.

Tugend also points out that getting rid of an old appliance is not so terrible for the environment as you might think. Eighty percent of the machine parts are generally reusable or recyclable. (Metal Management at 1509 W. Cortland is one place in Chicago that will take it—there are others, and there are guys who will pick it up for you for free. If you've had good luck with someone, post it here.)

If you’re wondering about your ancient clothes dryer, don’t. They’re big energy consumers, and contemporary technology has done little to make them less so. So the model you have now is no worse than what you’re likely to buy.

I will say that when I bought my window unit AC, I went on the Energy Star web site; calculated the proper size I needed using their calculator; reviewed the list of models; searched for a store in Chicago that had the right size, right-priced model; and then ordered it to be delivered, all without leaving my home. It was a time saver and an energy saver. And this was seven years ago; I imagine the process is even easier now.

Posted on May 15, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. by Jill. Discuss (1 comment)

Good green goods: a carseat on wheels

For part of my follow-up on the blog about taxis and carseats I thought I should let you know about one of those products that I feel makes life as a green mama easier. Or, at least, makes life as a car-free green mama easier.

If you have ever tried to take your kid on transit or in the Igo shared car you know what it feels like to be a camel: stroller, carseat, and diaper bag piled high and, somewhere in all of this, the baby.

The Strolex TriplePlay 5-in-1 carseat helps reduce your burden down to the point where you might feel closer to a St. Bernard.

It isn’t the fanciest stroller ever, nor the sturdiest seeming carseat, but Consumer Reports gives it good ratings. They also have very good customer support in my experience.

You’ve probably seen the Strolex, aka the Sit ‘n Stroll, in the airport where lots of parents rely on it as a way to stroll their toddler around the airport, keep the little one secure on the plane, and provide a safe seat in Grandma’s car on the other side. The best thing about it is that you can leave your child in the seat as you convert it back and forth between stroller and booster.

For an urban green mama, it is almost too good to be true.

Posted on May 15, 2008 at 9:22 a.m. by Green Mama. Discuss (4 comments)

Is Eco-Friendly Barbie an Oxymoron?

The Eco Child's Play blog (http://ecochildsplay.com) has had a lively conversation going over Mattel's new Barbie doll that, according to the New York Times, "repurposes excess fabric and trimmings from other Barbie doll fashions that would otherwise be discarded, offering eco-conscious girls a way to make an environmentally friendly fashion statement."

While I could happily go on a long riff about Barbie, and know few women, in fact, who can resist the temptation to go on a long rant when Barbie's name is mentioned, I'll resist.

Commenters on the blog object to the idea that any Barbie could ever be remotely green. Even though this one particular style of Barbie has clothes that come from Mattel factory scraps, her bodacious boobs continue to be composed of purist plastic. Her whole body, every accessory, and the container she comes in--all are hard-core PVC. (I'm sorry, Barbie, to out you like this; but honey, you know it's true.)

Which brings me to something I've been puzzling over since having children. Toys made of natural materials are lovely. Cotton dolls, wooden blocks and stacking cups, carved wooden puzzles--I love them. How could you not? But what I've realized is that plastic really does have its uses. There were summers when having a little plastic swimming pool in the backyard saved my sanity. (And no, I did not carefully wash off the grass and mysterious murk off of it at the end of the season and save it for the next year.)

There are toys that simply have to be plastic. A ceramic frisbee, anyone? How about a wooden ping pong ball?
And for babies, sometimes plastic is the least dangerous material for a toy that might be chewed on. Our 80-year old environmentalist friend Lee Botts told me that she gave her babies thick carrots for chew toys; that worked for me until my daughters had teeth that shredded the carrots and made them oh-so-chokable.

There are products where plastic is the perfect choice of material. And plastic is the perfect material for Barbie. On so many levels.

Whether Barbie needs to exist in the first place...well, that's another question.

Posted on May 10, 2008 at 7:47 a.m. by Jill. Discuss (1 comment)

Short trip options

Just back from several days in downtown Denver, I'm still marveling over the free (free! really!) electric transit on 16th Street that takes you from downtown to the Lower Denver neighborhood. At street level, it's a constant reminder of the mass transit option, unlike Chicago's subways and elevateds.

And given that the ride is free, it would make you feel dumb to instead drive and pay for parking.

I don't live there, of course, so I don't know what boneheaded things the city government has done; but I do know that as a visitor I was impressed both by it and the Cherry Creek bike path, which pretty much took me where I needed to go.

Posted on May 4, 2008 at 5:16 p.m. by Jill. Discuss (1 comment)