Eco Friendly Alternatives

Van Living Forum

Help Support Van Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
^^^Do you really think mankind doesn’t have the ability to destroy the earth totally or at least every living thing on it?
No, but we are able to destroy human civilization as we know it. And we have several ways to do it.

Even after nuclear war, there would be cockroaches. Small animals with shorter lifespan (so faster evolution) will adapt faster, even if many species will die out. Humans might survive, but our global civilization might not. Best way to do it is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse - destroying (on top of killing many people) most of the electronics. Including electronics is shops producing spare parts, so rebooting our technology would be ... interesting.

Another possible way to destroy most of the civilization is climate change, with melting the glaciers in Greenland, Antarctic, etc. increasing ocean level by some 200 feet. Big part of the arable land will be underwater. Most of humanity lives close to the seas. Carrying capacity of the Earth might drop to 1B people. Billions of climate refugees. USA would be better off than many other countries.

Might take few hundred years, but if we are unlucky, glaciers will just slip to the ocean much sooner, rising level, even if full melting would take centuries. Nobody knows. But it is like any other small, but devastating risk: you plan your response guided not how small is the risk, but how devastating for you and descendants.

That's why I am so excited about butanol oil from algae. It is fuel which in not only carbon-neutral: it is carbon NEGATIVE. It REMOVES the CO2 from the air. If we will have enough, we can pump such carbon captured in carbohydrates back underground.

Actually, some scientists consider the risk much higher, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter theory. We know about the great filters in our past (which we managed to overcome) but not he filters in our future. We know that even our Galaxy has hundreds of thousands of planets (and there are billions of observable galaxies), so life should be more common. Our Galaxy is just some 100K light years across, so any space-faring civilization, like ours will be in few hundred years, should spread over most of the Galaxy in just a billion years, even if traveling much slower than the speed of light. Our Galaxy is 13 BY old. Our Sun is newcomer, just about 5BY old. With such huge potential of life in our Galaxy, we should be visited by now, but apparently nobody came - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

So the risk is, that civilization like ours, will destroy itself before spreading out with 100% probability. And we do know we have ways and intentions to do it. Not destroying all life, just the civilization - much easier.

Quite off-topic to the products, but on-topic about the dangers, I hope.
 
Geez. Get us a legit website. So frustrating. Hint: try a .edu or a .gov
So if it's not gov or edu, or have a fancier website format, it's not legit? Then we can't bother with any other website outside of that. I can whip up a website that looks amazing in an hour or less. And it could be about baby poop.

Did you read the article? Or just assume it's quackery because of the look of the site? Whether I agree with the article or not, they do site and link to many government, professional, and educational institutions to support their ideas.

Which is what you'd want to see. Not just something made up without any actual facts or science or references.
 
Plastic...
Yes. It would be good to get it out of the land fills, but we certainly should not burn it "as is" since it is almost entirely made from oil and gas burning it is essentially burning a fossil fuel. ThePlastic2Oil idea seems to have promise since heating it to over 800degrees to produce a gas which it says can be burned cleanly. I don't know if this much heat offsets its value as a fuel, but it would be nice to remove it from the dumps.

As far as Happy's EV fanboy experience, I can't comment because I haven't seen it. I HAVE seen (right here on this forum) a lot of anti-EV folks pushing ANYTHING except for EVs. Should we call them "ICE Fanboys?" Somehow, I think Fanboy might be regarded as derogatory, so I'll pass on that low hanging fruit. :)

Back to plastic, I'd still rather see us just making and using less of it. Eventually stopping it altogether in all but a few rare circumstances. I've lost track of the number of things (tools, screws, etc.) that come vacuum packed in plastic which we immediately throw away and which have no excuse for needing such packaging. Where I am now staying the local service accepts only #1 and #2 plastic recycling and no glass whatsoever. I remember collecting soda bottles as a kid. It's not like new technology. It's just about $$$ and a few cents greater profit for them. They are not being asked to pay to remove the plastic from the environment, so why should they change?

No... This whole recycling is a scam pushed by the industry to make you and I think they are being responsible - when they are certainly NOT.
Post-consumer plastic recycling is mostly green-theater, cleaning and sorting post-consumer plastic is just almost never done, even when 'collected for recycling' - most just ends up in a landfill.

Yes unsorted plastic can be retorted and burned, but that is just as bad as burning petroleum. Entombing it in a landfill is probably better for the planet than turning it into a fuel, or letting it get into the eco-system. There are no good answers, but some are less bad.
 
Geez. Get us a legit website. So frustrating. Hint: try a .edu or a gov
Why be rude. BTW are you now the forum librarian? Last post of mine you jumped on you thought was on a different thread. I distrust gov & edu sites the most. If this is "So frustrating" you must be very unhappy.😢
To be intolerant of another viewpoint provides a huge disadvantage when it comes to being able to have any critical conversation. Have fun with the surface level he-said-she-said gossip, because that’s about the extent of what your interactions will be diminished to if you choose to limit yourself to intolerance.
The moment you become convinced that you’ve learned it all, is the moment you lose yourself to your pride. You’ve now created a wall that limits your potential to understand another viewpoint.
Do yourself a big favor. The next time you recognize a large bias that you possess, research something in support of the opposing view. It might take you a few tries to actually do it. It might hurt a little and make you cringe. But if you can just open your mind to it and be tolerant of the intolerance, you may find the growth you’re looking for.
 
Last edited:
So if it's not gov or edu, or have a fancier website format, it's not legit? Then we can't bother with any other website outside of that. I can whip up a website that looks amazing in an hour or less. And it could be about baby poop.

Did you read the article? Or just assume it's quackery because of the look of the site? Whether I agree with the article or not, they do site and link to many government, professional, and educational institutions to support their ideas.

Which is what you'd want to see. Not just something made up without any actual facts or science or references.
did YOU look at it? i did.
 
Gr8ful, This is from the page you linked to, that HC is standing behind, as well:


We would caution that models of future predictions of earth's climate have been notoriously gloomy... and wrong.

Whom to believe?​

That's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Common sense says, follow the money. If there is a person, group, organization or government that stands to profit from a dire prediction in terms of power, money or fame... be skeptical and demand to see the underlying data. When it is examined closely, we often find that it has been skewed, interpreted in a biased manner, based upon faulty data or faulty assumptions or flat-out falsified.

The most obvious conclusion is that humanity should continue to make every reasonable effort to reduce pollution, be more energy-efficient, use sustainable energy sources and reduce emissions, including those of CO2. But that must also be balanced against the harm caused by economic devastation, human poverty and its effects on starvation and disease.

To date, pretty much every model's past prediction has come and gone, and been wrong. We'd point out that our government has just admitted it has been lying to us about the existence of UFO's for the past 70 years. Scientists and Governments are not God, and are clearly fallible.

------------

And at the bottom of the page:

Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Want to make a donation?
EHSO.com does not charge consumers for anything, every! If you'd like to make a donation to help us pay to keep the website going, please make a donation through our secure donation processor. Just click the button below and follow the instructions:

Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!
All images and text © Copyright Benivia, LLC 2000-2024 Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.
Permission is given to link to any page on www.EHSO.com but NOT to copy content and republish it.
Sitemap

------------------

And Benivia:

Benivia, LLC is a privately held company that offers consulting services for web and emerging technology strategy and implementation, integrating enterprise business intelligence with web analytics. Our focus on innovation (Benivia principals hold over 13 U.S. patents) produces standout results.

Benivia also operates a number of websites that Benivia has designed to demonstrate the success of this approach. These mass consumer market websites provide market-driven using a market-driven look and feel.

=============

More samples of Benivia websites: https://www.benivia.com/websites.htm
 
Last edited:
I read the complete article & thought it gave facts & "what if scenarios & some might not happen comments" The main thing is why can't we agree to disagree & still respect each other? I may be wrong but thought you this brought up one time yourself. I didn't link to amazon or donate, just found the article & shared it, no more, no less. Sorry to offend you!
 
Gr8ful, This is from the page you linked to, that HC is standing behind, as well:
Happy camper isn't standing behind any website. I read many websites and see what information they provide. Then I look further.

Yes. I did read the article. I read the linked websites as well.
This section of the article you quoted says a lot of the same things. He isn't saying we shouldn't do anything. He's saying it's obvious we work on it in a balanced way. I'm unsure where the argument is.
The most obvious conclusion is that humanity should continue to make every reasonable effort to reduce pollution, be more energy-efficient, use sustainable energy sources and reduce emissions, including those of CO2. But that must also be balanced against the harm caused by economic devastation, human poverty and its effects on starvation and disease.
And to be extremely clear. Every website works to be profitable. The owners of the forum we're on at this moment bought the rights to the forum from Bob. Did they spend the money because they just love van life? They might. But when you buy a website with a certain amount of traffic, you're expecting a return on your investment. Profit. The platform is a business. Does that make the information wrong. Wouldn't it be detrimental to their business to put bad information on the Web?

In conclusion, I don't stand behind any website 100%. I don't blindly accept that if it has a .gov, .edu, or.org at the end of the address it's true and completely trustworthy. Nor do I accept that CNN, Fox, Politico, etc have no bias and are definitely correct.

I'm not here to have a back and forth about a particular website. If pushed, we can all find published articles from gov, .edu, or.org websites that aren't correct. Hopefully not many, but they are there.
 
I read the complete article & thought it gave facts & "what if scenarios & some might not happen comments" The main thing is why can't we agree to disagree & still respect each other? I may be wrong but thought you this brought up one time yourself. I didn't link to amazon or donate, just found the article & shared it, no more, no less. Sorry to offend you!
I'm not offended, but I started running message boards in 2000 and got in the habit of checking every source. I don't like having to do it, but it must be done... if you screw up once in a post (as an admin) the visitors will tar & feather you. Plus, the site and board are no longer trusted. I don't trust websites that make mistakes (unless they are rare and the error is corrected).

Anyway, it's habit (checking sources), and I do get frustrated when others don't do what I have to do:)

Also, I don't even try to get along with people I don't agree with politically. Because they are wrong;)
 
Last edited:
I feel really bad for you to lose friends over politics as we all know all parties lie & are crooked. So Sad!
Fattening Mean Girls GIF
 
Back to the climate question...

IMHO, yes we were inching toward another Ice Age. They do seem to come and go on this planet. And perhaps "some" global warming might help delay that. But, it's the RATE at which we are creating greenhouse gasses and warming the planet that is setting off alarm bells around the world. It's like using a sledge hammer to crack a peanut. Thus we have the famous hockey puck temperature graph. Our weather is getting worse and I don't see Big Oil paying the costs of all the damage these weather changes cause out of their higher profits. And while it might be convenient to just talk about the weather and warming, it also comes with some pretty major health problems caused by pollution and other effects.

I am sure there are some industries and their purchased politicians that would rather make a few more bucks before being forced to stop doing "bad things." And there are regular folks that don't want to change their habits either. Unfortunately, the rest of us have to live with the results.
 
I just have to say this. And I fully expect this comment will get deleted at some point.

Without oil or coal or any number of ways to generate power, we wouldn't have electricity, solar panels, computers, electric anything. Transportation would still be animals. Steam would still require burning something for heat. The population would be much less because people wouldn't live as long. Medicines wouldn't be made because the burners at the labs creating them wouldn't work. We wouldn't really have communication. The list goes on and on.

Sure, we'd have fire. And many civilizations grew and did many great things. But most things were regional to a large extent. So much so that salt was a huge trade commodity.

Oil and other fossil fuels have contributed to the negative as well. I grew up in extremely smoggy Socal. And the difference today is huge and appreciated. So I'm not against controlling what we do to minimize the negative aspects of them. I don't agree that we need to take draconian measures at every turn. But I agree we need to keep moving in a smart way towards better solutions.

But with the positives and the negatives, fossil fuels have done more good than bad in a real sense. Have the companies and countries in control of these resources held is back for profit and security? Absolutely. And I think we're moving in a better direction as a whole in relying less on them.

I'm not talking about just EV tech. Even has engines pollute much less than they ever have. Shipping cargo ships are testing new/old tech to reduce fuel usage. Solar panels, wind, natural gas, hydrogen, better nuclear energy options, etc are here, coming along. And improving.

I am really hoping the smaller safer nuclear reactors get the support they need to succeed. They would solve a lot of the current issues(no pun intended), without the downside of the old nuclear tech. And wouldn't take up the land that solar currently does and will continuing to take more. And we can get away from enormous battery storage facilities, the mining and environmental damage from that, and the disposal of them in the future.

I love me some solar. But I'm ready for the next big thing coming.

Edit: I didn't forget about water being able to generate electricity. But that would mean any population center would have to be around water moving in a certain way. We have seen that before in older civilizations. And even in the early parts of the United States. So water would be power. And controllable by a few. And you can't store water power or transport water power.
 
Last edited:
Well actually I believe some are proposing we pump water to higher elevations during the day with solar power and use the stored water to generate electricity during the night instead of using large battery banks.
 
I applaud your efforts. You might add the following:

1. Buy rectangular blocks of butter packaged in paper - the old fashioned packaging way. Then get a butter dish so you can let it get soft.
2. Look for powdered flavors for your drinks in paper packaging.
3. Never buy disposable water bottles - all of which seem to come in plastic. I use a good water filter for questionable water.
4. Get several Collapsible Shopping Totes and use them until they shred. Then duct tape them back together and go on using them. (Hint: store-baggers love these and will thanks you. They do me.)

Everything else you do looks great!
Already do all that...
The totes sometimes though I use the bags for my bucket for nighttime use,
I don't like flavored drinks so much and when I do it comes in a glass jar.
I never bought water in plastic bottles (didn't like the taste or the cost). I have had people buy it for me when traveling but ..... When I have to I buy the tea in plastic but only when it is the only way to get it.
I use butter in cubes, but still get a tub of margarine for hubby.

I read somewhere...So the bread, milk, potatoes, meat, cottage cheese, cookies, cereal bags in boxes, cheese, soap, shampoo, heck even my toothpaste and just about everything else that goes in my basket has plastic ...but yea my bags are the problem, the ones that I reuse 1-2-3 times. I am happy to see more non plastic packaging is coming out. The store we go to had to stop using the thinner bags that are made from recycled plastic because the state required some changes and started mandating charging for the bags as a tax. The thicker bags are supposed to be reuse friendly. Oh yea the old bags were biodegradable. Sometimes it feels like 2 steps Forword 2 backwards. I get paper bags when I have to change the birds cage... And when I have to wrap things for the mail or just need good thick paper for whatever. I want to go back to milk jugs that are returnable did that as a kid. Oregon has a great recycling system where some of the bigger stores have a return station outside their door so folks can get their deposit money back pretty easy.
 
Great read but you didn't mention an Ice Age. Scientists say we've had 5 already & many claim we're overdo & CO2 is slowing the onset. Here's a good link. https://www.ehso.com/Climate-Change-Ice-Age-Overdue.php
I skimmed that article.

Even if scientifically sound (yes, there were several ice periods, including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth and it is possible, or even likely, that without the CO2 pollution we could be moving towards another ice age in few thousands of years, there is a catch: it would be WITHOUT the CO2 pollution. And we live in a world WITH CO2 pollution.

Say, you have full tank of gas in your van, so you can expect to be able to drive 300 miles to get more gas. Sound? Yes, but I forgot to tell you that your engine is on fire, and so you are not going anywhere.

CO2 makes such radical changes in our climate that all those cycles are rounding errors. We are digging the carbon sequestered in coal and oil for millions of years. Since https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboniferous period.

EHSO seems like few guys with an axe to grind. Not scientists, not publishing peer-reviewed research. Everybody has a right to have opinion, but not all opinions are based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method - so obviously, those based on science, are somehow more reliable.

And I agree that politics and business is involved more than needed in our information. Also by financing such astroturf organizations like EHSO likely is.
 
Maybe this thread needs a moderator open a new thread and move into it the conversations of persons responding who insist on trying to solve the major issues instead of recommending eco friendly products they use in their own Van life? Those are two different topics.

Apparently it seems beyond responder’s abilities to actually stay on topic? Which is a shame because the topic is a useful one based on daily needs for such products.
 
Top