h a l f b a k e r yExpensive, difficult, slightly dangerous, not particularly effective... I'm on a roll.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This energy crisis in convoluted.
Anywhooooooos disagree???
I recently read that every pound of electronic housing contributes to 8 pounds of CO2... BAD!
This idea is to have equivalent CO2 contributions marked on every plastic: milk bottles, laptops, condoms, shoes, etc.
NOW! how do you
feel about YOUR global contribution???
charts and graphs from 2004
http://www.rexam.com/index.asp?pageid=625
emision ratio closer to 1.6:1, no where near 8:1. [ato_de, Jan 13 2006]
Software for calculating such things
http://www.pre.nl/eco-it/default.htm
[moomintroll, Jan 13 2006]
Life Cycle Assessment of products
http://www.lcacenter.org/LCA/WhyLCA.htm
[moomintroll, Jan 13 2006]
A bit more about ecological footprints.
http://www.abe.iast...ed/LCAFootprint.pdf
[moomintroll, Jan 13 2006]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
I feel like contributing a fishbone. |
|
| |
maybe the net energy consumption to make the entire product. more C02 just means a nicer tan and more tornadoes for president bush |
|
| |
I've got to dispute that m-f-d [bris], I think it an excellent idea to make us stop and think about our contribution to the depletion of natural resources. [+] |
|
| |
There are quite a few problems with exactly how you measure CO2 output from the manufacturing and use of any item. That's not to say that we shouldn't do it. [+] |
|
| |
Ah, you're right. MFD withdrawn. I missed a part of it. Sorry. |
|
| |
You can't restrict this to plastics. That would skew manufacturing towards other materials, which often involve more waste and are thus even less ecofriendly. |
|
| |
This is a big problem, and lots of people would like to see it happen. But it's hardly original, so no bun for you. |
|
| |
Thanks for the great links, [moom].. I guess your right, any buffooon could dredge up this kind of thinking. Though, I'm surprised not much has been done with the idea around here. |
|
| |
Hmm. Think about it further. Are there ways you could re-cast the core thought into a more fanciful and original invention? |
|
| |
One lame-o possibility: Outfitting a point of purchase system such that as items are scanned for purchase, the system, using UPC, calls upon a database that assigns each item a CO2 impact index value. At ringup, a total impact can be calculated for all items purchased as well as an individual breakout. This information can be printed on the receipt. |
|
| |
Aggregate purchase patterns can be used to inform manufacturers of the total impact of their products, both the packaging impact and the use impact. This can show the difference between the potential impact (products shipped) versus the more accurate consumer impact (products actually in the hands of consumers). |
|
| |
[miasere]'s suggestion can be approximated by keeping a fossil fuel bookkeeping and labelling products with this. |
|
| |
//energy gyms// I, don't, think, so. Hook your, Stationary, bike, up to an, old, ceiling fan, motor. Rig it, to, a 40w light bulb. |
|
| |
She can't take much more o' this abuse, Captain .. Is what I'd expect you to say when you see how hard it is to keep that light bulb lit. --- Sorry. |
|
| |
On Earth, there are far more legs than lightbulbs. |
|
| |