"Crow (4/19, Springfield, Tenn.): I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming. Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of forest conservation which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required."
The only way one square of toilet paper would work is if people washed themselves with water first then tried to dry up with the toilet paper. Then we would be using excessive water of course.
These kooks are always trying to impose rules upon the general population that they are never bound to themselves. I wonder if she rations toilet paper within her own home.
There are things that do this, called bidets. You can also get a bidet attachment for toilets. Unfortunately, this doesn't much good for all the pooping that goes in offices, schools and public facilities where bidets are less practical.
Her rations wouldn't work very well. For example, the paper saved would be offset by increased usage of bleach for cleaning underwear or water for taking more frequent showers.
More practical would be learning to use less toilet paper, like folding it when using it so that the newly colored portions are folding inside and using the appropriate amount of paper for the job.
Other ways of saving paper include using cloth napkins at home (although the increased wash load might offset any environmental savings), giving kids the back sides of paper to draw or write on instead of clean paper, and improving the tax system so that far less paper is used in filing taxes. I wish we could stop junk mail. If the junk mail were printed on toilet paper, I would never need to buy toilet paper again.
Who gives a fart about TP? Most of it is made from recycled paper anyway! That's what I mean about Greenies: they don't investigate anything before they open their mouths!
I got a better idea. Just use your bare hands and then wipe THEM on your paints, then in a week or so wash your paints in the creek. Saves paper, water and soap. You will be green with envy from your friends and co-workers. They will say, you dirty dog, why didn't we come up with that idea. You will be doing your part to save the earth.
Let's assume for the moment that toilet paper is made of recycled paper. The paper has to be processed, which requires energy to transport the paper to the toilet paper plant, the paper has to remade and bleached, packaged, and trucked to the store, and then taken home, and the used toilet paper ends up in sewer plants, which also use energy. Packaging the paper also uses plastic. So, even if toilet paper is 100% recycled, there are still significant environmental costs that can be reduced by using less toilet paper.
Most of the fiber in toilet paper is not from recycled paper:
We just love you kooks to keep posting. You forgot about switching to plastic bags to save tons of paper. Not to worry, people are so fed up with all of the liberal newspapers that the circulation of every one of them is in the toilet. Soon most will be bankrupt and millions of tons of paper will no longer be produced.. The Earth will be saved from man. LOL
I could just dig a hole in my backyard and $h!t there, too. But, outhouses are illegal in Mass. So I guess I'll just keep using recycled TP.
ALL the TP I buy says at least 70% recycled content. I believe the original post mentioned saving trees and generating oxygen.
There's a funny thing about trees: you can always plant more. If every time you cut a tree you planted another, then the reduction in the amount of trees would be Zero. Of course, if every time you cut a tree you planted TWO, then there would be a net GAIN.
Another thing the Greenies can't seem to understand.
And, you can make paper from a lot of things other than trees. Cotton is a good source of pulp, onion skins, rags and hemp to name a few. Of course, I wouldn't want to be wiping my delicate bum with Onion Skin or cotton paper, but I think you get the idea.
Greenies can't seem to think past the moment. For all the gum flapping they do about the 'future', they don't seem to think about it too much.
The job's not finished until the paperwork is done.
A bear is crapping in the woods, and looks down and sees a bunny also taking a crap. The bear says, "Hey, little fella, do you have trouble with crap sticking to your fur?" The rabbit replies, "Uh, no. Not at all!"
So the bear picks up the bunny and wipes himself with it...
Um, I dunno...whatever's cheap. Considering what it's used for, I ain't spending Lexus money... ;) (and the cheap stuff usually is recycled. Usually Marcal)
Again, Lexus money for something that's going to swirl the bowl? No thanks...
If Weyerhauser and G-P didn't replant, they'd be out of business FAST! If there are companies that aren't replanting, they won't be around. And the forests in the US aren't diminishing that rapidly. Must be those 3rd world countries. They'll find out.
I just gave a lot of alternatives! Get on it!
Not really. They don't get the Big Picture. It's MicroManagement at it's best.
Nobody's going to stop making paper. I don't think recycling costs any more than making new paper. And, making new paper is not very friendly, either. Ever seen a Sulfite mill? Or better yet, *SMELLED* one? Either way, it takes a lot to make paper. As far as the costs, eh? Paper is paper. I don't care if it's new or recylced.
Beside, my old man worked in a paper mill. I have all the Cotton Content paper I can use in a lifetime, from about 20 years ago. No 'environmental impact' on my part. Except for TP and Photo paper, my paper footprint is pretty small. I even have paper with a Ford watermark. Oilskin paper, sketching paper, pads and notepaper that folds up into it's own envelope.
And in 20 years, whatever forest gave itself up to make the 40 reems I have has long since been reforested.
Almost all my communications is electronic, in one form or another. So, except for a few spent electrons, I have little impact on the environment as far as paper is concerned.
Let's just not talk about Supras that get about 20 MPG...
You spoke the truth Mike. Our recycle container is quite large and it gets picked up every two weeks, it is plum full and most of it is printed newspaper media. When they raise the price of the paper it will be finished and I will be able to sell carbon credits to Gore.
"dbu.," wrote in message news:question* snipped-for-privacy@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
This is getting to be a major problem in my view. Between junk mail, electronic spam, and the ever-growing newspapers, most of which can be dispensed with without reading, there is one helluva lot of junk being manufactured and printed and disposed of, usually at high costs to everyone. People who have experimented with saving their junk mail (catalogs, charity appeals, grocery store ads, etc etc) come up with hundreds of pounds of the crap by the end of a year. Think of this multiplied by all the homes that receive the crap, and all the (millions?) of hours it takes letter carriers to deliver the crap, and you begin to see the picture. and Newspapers are even worse. The average joe only buys a car (or even thinks of buying a car every couple of years (in my case a lot longer than that) but each day he receives with his newspaper a section of car ads, which he promptly dumps without reading. For me, the sports section is a complete waste, for others it's the business/finance pages. and for others it's entertainment news, theatre schedules etc. In my daily LA Times I receive a listing of all the movie theatres and starting times for features in Southern California, yet I never read any of them, since I'd never venture out of my town, 100 miles from LA, to see a movie. Going back to junk mail, 'they' say the average response to advertising in general is 2 %. That means to me that 98 % of it is a total waste. It's finding out WHICH 2 % is doing the buying. If there were a way to opt out of mail advertising, newspaper ads and unnecessary sectons of the paper, (the way do-not-call lists has worked for phone solicitation) I'd be on it in a minute. This has become a long rant, but I'll close with something I observed some years ago. At my workplace, out front there are several newspaper vending machines. I once saw a fellow buy a paper, strip out the sports section, and throw the rest of the paper in a nearby trash basket. To me it was like buying a sandwich so you could eat the pickle slice that came with it!
Thanks, Mack! I was going to bring this up myself! *Nobody* says anything about the TONS of Junk Mail that gets dispensed of EVERY MONTH! Talk about saving a forest!
Here's another suggestion to help with conservation:
A man stops into this little backwoods restaurant for lunch, and after finishing his meal he inquires the way to the rest room. He was told that it's around the back of the building. He heads through the back door, finds the outhouse and takes a shit, only to discover there's no toilet paper. But there is a sign on the wall that reads, 'Wipe yourself with your finger, then insert the finger into this hole, and your finger will be cleaned with great attention'
So the man wipes up and sticks his finger through the hole. On the other side is standing a little boy holding a brick in either hand, who claps them together at the sight of the finger poking through. The guy screams in pain, yanks his hand back, and starts sucking on his finger......
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.