Random Irritations

       Saturday night, communities around the world turned out their lights for one hour. This "Earth Hour" devised by the World Wildlife Fund, was designed to draw attention to global climate change.  But isn't turning out lights for only one hour just a rather insignificant act of symbolism? Yet so much press attention was directed toward this rather silly accomplishment. Why not turn off lights every night, and for more than one hour?  Wouldn't that go some distance toward actually helping the environment, instead of just talking about it?

       I turned off most of the lights in our home Saturday night and left them off. I had on only enough to let us find our way around, and it was fine. We were watching movies on television, and Tom didn't even seem to notice what I had done.  It was ridiculously easy, and I think I'll keep on doing it. 

       Why not make a global campaign out of that?

       I picked up Tom's suit from the dry cleaner today and saw that I was charged a $0.35 "enviro" fee.  I know that dry cleaning chemicals are bad for the environment, and was curious to see what my dry cleaner might be doing with this fee to help clean up or prevent any toxic waste.  Their web site simply said that they "obey the letter of the law".  So what is my fee for? According to the web site, it's to cover their costs in complying with the law. Isn't that simply part of their cost of doing business? I mean, I pay for my cleaning; they pay their expenses; and, what they're left with is profit. If I'm paying an extra fee, I want to see them doing something extra!

       To punish them, and do my part for the environment, this afternoon I brought them every excess wire hanger I could find in our home. I hope they re-use them, as also promised on their web site.

       My recycled paper towels have not held up as well as hoped. They are nearly useless, for instance, for picking up dog vomit (a fact of life for dog lovers), cleaning up spilled liquids, or draining off excess fat from fried food. On such occasions, I first used my Marcal towels and then dug out my old Viva towels to finish the job -- meaning I was using twice the product I did before.  I think I'll return to my Viva, and use the remaining Marcal mostly for cleaning glass and countertops. But as it's probably better for the environment to use cloths for this purpose, I don't think I'll buy the recycled product again. 

       I was planning to at least praise Viva (and Marcal) for manufacturing select-a-size sheets of paper towels, so that one can use as little as one needs for any purpose. But a friend told me that when she uses such paper towels, she often ends up accidentally tearing off three of these smaller sheets, rather than the two that would approximate one regular-size sheet. So she thinks it's a scam to make consumers use more. 

       I was going to try some non-phosphate dishwasher detergent, until I read that in states where phosphate-based detergents are banned, people sometimes smuggle in Cascade or Electrosol because the eco-friendly varieties don't work.  We have put humans on the moon; we can conduct surgery through tiny holes; we are unwinding the mysteries of the human genome. Is it really so much more difficult to make eco-friendly products that work?