What is to come for our environment in the next 50 years? In my opinion we have two options. We continue to use and abuse it like we do today or we work with technology and come up with a plan to use the resources we have in a new and positive light. If we choose to continue to live our lives like we do now, in 50 years we could have no trees, we will have more pollution than ever before, and it could even get to the point where we do not have fresh food and water to eat and drink. However, on the other hand, if we do change some of our living habits there is no limit to how much better we can make the world we are living in. The majority of people today want to see change, but want others to change it for them. In my opinion our population knows that we need to change our habits in order to keep our environment healthy, but I do not think that a lot of them know what to do to help or some of them think that what they do won't effect the world as long as everyone else changes their ways. This means that we need to change the mental modes, which is the values, beliefs, and assumptions, of the population. I think that if we educate today's society and show them how easy change can be they will be much more optimistic about it.
I think we can first educate people on limiting consumption. The media is making our customers feel like they need so many different items and lots of time more than one of the same item. For example, in an article we read earlier this semester it discussed how the average person had at least 8 pairs of jeans. Is this really necessary. The article Limiting Consumption, I learned that right now we are consuming faster than we ever have before. This is partially because material good are cheaper, therefore, people can afford to buy more even if they do not necessarily need these items. In all reality, most of these items end up going to waste.
We also need to teach consumers on the future of our environment. Are our consumers thinking about what is to come for them, their children, or even their grand children? In the article Thinking Ahead, it discusses just how important this is. Most people today have the pessimistic attitude that they can't change the environment and at this time it is not affecting them anyways. One of the biggest things we can do is educate them and change this attitude to a more positive one. However, after reading Visioneering: An Essential Framework in Sustainability, I learned that people aren't going to change their mind and their ways over night. We have to make them believe that our vision and plan for the future is worth following. We have to make today's society realize that our needs can be met in ways that will not hurt the future. I think this can be done by teaching consumers to only purchase what is truly necessary and to recycle items when they are finished with them. If we successfully do these things I think we can become a more sustainable culture.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Hemp Is The Way To Go!
Before reading the article Hemp: Historical Fiber Remains Controversial I knew almost nothing about hemp and I especially did not know that it could be used in so many different ways. I knew that hemp could be used in some fabrics, but I had no idea that it could be used in paint or even used in place of our most basic fabrics. Hemp has been used by some of the more famous fashion designers such as Calvin Klein, Giorgio Armani, and Ralph Lauren for over 15 years. Calvin Klein was even quoted saying that he thought hemp would be the fiber of choice in the fashion and home industries. I understand why there is some controversy over this issue, but in my opinion the benefits of using more hemp and even growing hemp in the United States definitely out weighs the downfalls.
Hemp is not near as damaging to our environment as other fiber such as cotton and other synthetic fibers. Since hemp is naturally resistant to mold, bacteria, and pests there is no need for the use of pesticides. Hemp plants can be planted very close together and produce more fibers that cotton. Hemp plants only take 2 to 3 years to regrow compared to flax plants that can take up to 6 years. I also learned from the hemp article that no part of the hemp plant goes to waste, it call all be used in some way. All of these traits of hemp can not only help our environment, but they can also help farmers save and make more money than they can on other crops. When hemp and cotton are compared hemp beats cotton at almost every aspect. Hemp has a greater tensile strength and also a better tear strength.
In the video Hempsters: Plant the Seed I learned a lot about the confusion and controversy about hemp. People opposing the growing of hemp plants in the United States think it is too closely related to and look too similar to the plant that grows marijuana. I understand this argument, but the two plants are very different. In fact, if someone were to smoke the plant that hemp is made from it would most likely make them very ill.
As you can tell from reading my blog thus far, I do think that hemp can be called a miracle fiber. In the article, Are you being bamboozled? we learn that we do not always know the truth about the fibers in the products we are buying. Most consumers think if they are buying something made of bamboo they are buying something that is not harmful to the environment. However, most consumers don't know that a lot of bamboo is actually made of rayon. So my question is why not purchase something that consumers are positive does not harm the environment. I think the solution to this is hemp. Being able to grow hemp in the United States would help our farmers make more money, hopefully lower the price for consumers since it will no longer have to be shipped into our country, and help our environment. If the growing of hemp is closely monitored with laws and restrictions I do not see any reason not to legalize the growth of it.
Hemp is not near as damaging to our environment as other fiber such as cotton and other synthetic fibers. Since hemp is naturally resistant to mold, bacteria, and pests there is no need for the use of pesticides. Hemp plants can be planted very close together and produce more fibers that cotton. Hemp plants only take 2 to 3 years to regrow compared to flax plants that can take up to 6 years. I also learned from the hemp article that no part of the hemp plant goes to waste, it call all be used in some way. All of these traits of hemp can not only help our environment, but they can also help farmers save and make more money than they can on other crops. When hemp and cotton are compared hemp beats cotton at almost every aspect. Hemp has a greater tensile strength and also a better tear strength.
In the video Hempsters: Plant the Seed I learned a lot about the confusion and controversy about hemp. People opposing the growing of hemp plants in the United States think it is too closely related to and look too similar to the plant that grows marijuana. I understand this argument, but the two plants are very different. In fact, if someone were to smoke the plant that hemp is made from it would most likely make them very ill.
As you can tell from reading my blog thus far, I do think that hemp can be called a miracle fiber. In the article, Are you being bamboozled? we learn that we do not always know the truth about the fibers in the products we are buying. Most consumers think if they are buying something made of bamboo they are buying something that is not harmful to the environment. However, most consumers don't know that a lot of bamboo is actually made of rayon. So my question is why not purchase something that consumers are positive does not harm the environment. I think the solution to this is hemp. Being able to grow hemp in the United States would help our farmers make more money, hopefully lower the price for consumers since it will no longer have to be shipped into our country, and help our environment. If the growing of hemp is closely monitored with laws and restrictions I do not see any reason not to legalize the growth of it.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Is one better than the other?
Most people today know that is some way, shape, or form the production on clothing is hurting our environment, but the better question is in which way do we hurt our environment less. Obviously, everyone needs clothes to wear on a daily basis and some people like to have an excess amount of clothes. Going without clothing is obviously not an option. So the next step is to figure out if natural fibers or synthetic fibers are better for our environment. However, I am not sure that there is a right or wrong answer to this question. I can see how my coworker, Sally, feels that natural fibers are much better for our environment, but at the same time I think she needs to be a little more open minded and research this topic a little more.
For example, in the reading Materials Diversity it compares natural fibers and synthetic fibers. Both kinds of fibers have positives and negatives. Cotton, for example, uses tons of our water. Water used for cotton varies from 29,000 liters per kg of cotton in Sudan to 7,000 liters per kg in Israel. Even though Israel uses much less, 7,000 liters per kg is still a very large amount of water. In some areas lakes have gone dry and oceans have decreases in size because of the amount of water used to water cotton crops. Large amounts of synthetic fertilizers are also added to cotton crops and can result in nitrate contamination in water. Pesticides are also used on cotton crops which eventually ends up in our water. Another natural fiber that you do not think would harm the environment because it comes from an animal is wool. However, wool actually does harm our environment in some ways. Pesticides are also used on the sheep and if they are not taken care of properly these pesticides can work there way into our water as well.
However, there are also down sides to synthetic fibers. For example, although it takes much less water to produce polyester than it does to produce cotton, it takes much more energy to produce polyester than it does to produce cotton. If the discharge from making polyester is untreated it can cause harmful chemicals to be released into the air. Acrylic is even worse for the environment that polyester. To produce acrylic you need more water and more energy than you do to produce polyester. Acrylic can also put off harmful chemicals if left untreated. However, if these synthetic fibers are treated they should not let off harmful chemicals.
As you can see there really is no right or wrong answer. In my opinion it depend on what specific item you are purchasing. For example if it is something that needs to last you a long time and will get lots of wear and tear, then you might want something made out of a synthetic so it will last longer. On the other hand if it is something that will not last you as long maybe you should take Sally's view point and go with the item made out of natural fibers so it will decompose faster and be healthier for the environment in the long run. I have again come to the conclusion in my blog that our costumers need to be more informed so they know exactly what they are buying and exactly how making it affected the environment and how it will affect the environment after you are finished using it.
For example, in the reading Materials Diversity it compares natural fibers and synthetic fibers. Both kinds of fibers have positives and negatives. Cotton, for example, uses tons of our water. Water used for cotton varies from 29,000 liters per kg of cotton in Sudan to 7,000 liters per kg in Israel. Even though Israel uses much less, 7,000 liters per kg is still a very large amount of water. In some areas lakes have gone dry and oceans have decreases in size because of the amount of water used to water cotton crops. Large amounts of synthetic fertilizers are also added to cotton crops and can result in nitrate contamination in water. Pesticides are also used on cotton crops which eventually ends up in our water. Another natural fiber that you do not think would harm the environment because it comes from an animal is wool. However, wool actually does harm our environment in some ways. Pesticides are also used on the sheep and if they are not taken care of properly these pesticides can work there way into our water as well.
However, there are also down sides to synthetic fibers. For example, although it takes much less water to produce polyester than it does to produce cotton, it takes much more energy to produce polyester than it does to produce cotton. If the discharge from making polyester is untreated it can cause harmful chemicals to be released into the air. Acrylic is even worse for the environment that polyester. To produce acrylic you need more water and more energy than you do to produce polyester. Acrylic can also put off harmful chemicals if left untreated. However, if these synthetic fibers are treated they should not let off harmful chemicals.
As you can see there really is no right or wrong answer. In my opinion it depend on what specific item you are purchasing. For example if it is something that needs to last you a long time and will get lots of wear and tear, then you might want something made out of a synthetic so it will last longer. On the other hand if it is something that will not last you as long maybe you should take Sally's view point and go with the item made out of natural fibers so it will decompose faster and be healthier for the environment in the long run. I have again come to the conclusion in my blog that our costumers need to be more informed so they know exactly what they are buying and exactly how making it affected the environment and how it will affect the environment after you are finished using it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)