Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9850 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #105 on: March 10, 2018, 10:07:32 pm »
Not really. The Canadian lifestyle takes a lot of energy to maintain. The differences in individual choices do not really affect the energy and resources consumed to keep society functioning on behalf of everyone. If anything, the people who posture by making "eco friendly" choices often consume more resources because "eco friendly" often means "less efficient/most costly".

Yes the person who walks or bikes to work, and shops in their community, is less efficient than the guy with the SUV that takes it everywhere including 4 miles to the supermarket to pick up a quart of milk.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #106 on: March 10, 2018, 10:12:31 pm »
Yes the person who walks or bikes to work, and shops in their community, is less efficient than the guy with the SUV that takes it everywhere including 4 miles to the supermarket to pick up a quart of milk.

Maybe not but they rely on oil products to produce and bring all those things close enough that they can lead that lifestyle.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #107 on: March 10, 2018, 10:24:34 pm »
Yes the person who walks or bikes to work, and shops in their community, is less efficient than the guy with the SUV that takes it everywhere including 4 miles to the supermarket to pick up a quart of milk.
The difference in energy/resource consumption between the two individuals is insignificant when compared to the energy needed to keep the city/economy running. For example, bikers need local stores - that means more stores which need to be kept stocked with goods vs. larger "warehouse style" stores that car drivers use. The local stores consume more energy per consumer served. The same argument would apply if the bikers relied on delivery trucks to drop stuff off at home instead of going to the store themselves.

The "i am eco-friendly because I bike to work" argument does not hold up if you look at the total cost of sustaining a human.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #108 on: March 10, 2018, 10:24:51 pm »
Maybe not but they rely on oil products to produce and bring all those things close enough that they can lead that lifestyle.

Yes, we all have an environmental footprint. Some of it is beyond our control, much much of it is within our control. On the consumer side you point out, there is much we can do to lessen that footprint. All those avocados you consume are enlarging your footprint dramatically, as opposed to eating local fruit and berries in season.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #109 on: March 10, 2018, 10:29:24 pm »
For example, bikers need local stores - that means more stores which need to be kept stocked with goods vs. larger "warehouse style" stores that car drivers use.

In the winter I walk to local stores about 1-2 miles away, and in the non-winter months I bike to warehouse style stores 4-8 miles away. The energy consumed and pollution created by the daily SUV trips to the warehouse store is many orders of magnitude greater than the delivery truck to local stores.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #110 on: March 10, 2018, 10:30:43 pm »
Yes, we all have an environmental footprint. Some of it is beyond our control, much much of it is within our control. On the consumer side you point out, there is much we can do to lessen that footprint. All those avocados you consume are enlarging your footprint dramatically, as opposed to eating local fruit and berries in season.

True but consuming avocados has nothing to do with how far you live from the store you buy them in or how you get there.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #111 on: March 10, 2018, 10:36:14 pm »
In the winter I walk to local stores about 1-2 miles away, and in the non-winter months I bike to warehouse style stores 4-8 miles away. The energy consumed and pollution created by the daily SUV trips to the warehouse store is many orders of magnitude greater than the delivery truck to local stores.

I live in the Fraser valley. I can get produce locally that Vancouverites have to get shipped to them or they have to drive 80 km up the valley to buy. I get a little tired of city dwellers who think they live in a bubble and all the things that have to be produced and brought to them don't have an impact on their environmental footprint.

I make one or two trips to a warehouse store a month. You would need about 20 bike trips to carry one load.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 10:38:40 pm by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #112 on: March 10, 2018, 10:42:35 pm »
I live in the Fraser valley. I can get produce locally that Vancouverites have to get shipped to them or they have to drive 80 km up the valley to buy. I get a little tired of city dwellers who think they live in a bubble and all the things that have to be produced and brought to them don't have an impact on their environmental footprint.

I don't think city dwellers are ignorant of their environmental footprint, that doesn't mean however your environmental footprint is smaller. That 12 miles you drive to the local store or market has a significant toll. Unless you raise your own produce or get it from your immediate neighbours then you are probably consuming far more than the city dwellers. How many pounds of potatoes and carrots do you have stored in your cellar?

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #113 on: March 10, 2018, 10:45:58 pm »
In the winter I walk to local stores about 1-2 miles away, and in the non-winter months I bike to warehouse style stores 4-8 miles away. The energy consumed and pollution created by the daily SUV trips to the warehouse store is many orders of magnitude greater than the delivery truck to local stores.
Yet it is nothing compared to the cost of keeping those stores stocked in the first place. Nevermind the cost of providing electricity, clean water, cable/telephone and sewage to every home. You also make the assumption that the SUV driver makes the trip every day. Having a large vehicle means fewer trips, on average, are required. A walker might buy 10kg max of groceries in one trip - an SUV driver can (and will) buy 50kg or more in one trip. That does make up for the additional energy required for the vehicle. If you add in the ability to by less energy intensive bulk products the advantage of the SUV driver would increase more.

Furthermore, your time is clearly worth little because you can waste so much of it doing nothing but getting to and from stores. That may be fine for you but many people with families do not have that luxury so living your lifestyle is simply not an option.  Keep in mind the people in the SUVs are often working providing services that you need to survive so can hardly say they should just stop working to save energy.

 
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 10:48:46 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #114 on: March 10, 2018, 10:59:05 pm »
Nevermind the cost of providing electricity, clean water, cable/telephone and sewage to every home.
...
That does make up for the additional energy required for the vehicle.
...
Furthermore, your time is clearly worth little because you can waste so much of it doing nothing but getting to and from stores.

I use under 1000 m3 of natural gas and under 3500 kWh of electricity a year - you?
I drive under 5000km a year - you?
My water is not metered so I can't give you a value.
...
5 bike trips of 10kg is still way less consumption than 1 SUV trip of 50kg
...
How many SUV trips do you make to the gym? That has to be my biggest pet peeve.


Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #115 on: March 10, 2018, 11:11:04 pm »
I use under 1000 m3 of natural gas and under 3500 kWh of electricity a year - you?
~380 m3 and ~4500 kWh in 2017.

I drive under 5000km a year - you?
About that.

How many SUV trips do you make to the gym? That has to be my biggest pet peeve.
None. Don't own an SUV. Prefer compact cars with good fuel economy.

But my personal choices are only possible because of my life circumstances. I am not arrogant enough to assume that everyone else is in a position to make the same choices I do. I also know that I depend on my neighbor driving to city works yard everyday to help keep the roads function. Or my other neighbor that runs a business selling carpets or yet another who runs an retail store in a mall. No one is an island in the city and no one can look at their energy consumption in isolation from the rest because society's energy consumption is determined by the collective - not the individual.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 11:32:01 pm by TimG »

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #116 on: March 10, 2018, 11:12:12 pm »
I use under 1000 m3 of natural gas and under 3500 kWh of electricity a year - you?
I drive under 5000km a year - you?
My water is not metered so I can't give you a value.
...
5 bike trips of 10kg is still way less consumption than 1 SUV trip of 50kg
...
How many SUV trips do you make to the gym? That has to be my biggest pet peeve.

The point is, you can't live without people and services that come from outside your city so it is a bit pompous of you to lord your lifestyle over them. Who really needs a gym anyway? We don't drive to a gym, we do an hour walk up and down the side of Sumas Mountain every morning before breakfast.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #117 on: March 10, 2018, 11:19:37 pm »
~380 m3 and ~4500 kWh in 2017.
About that
None. Don't own an SUV. Prefer compact cars with good fuel economy.

I assume you have another heat source.
Good for you if that is your daily driving, I would say 95% of my driving is when I am away from the city.
Yes, but do you take your compact car to your spin class?

b.t.w. currently driving a Subaru Outback (CVT), but getting almost the same mileage as my old manual Protege. The little efficiency guage helped me change my driving habits, less speeding and way less fast acceleration.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #118 on: March 10, 2018, 11:24:44 pm »
I assume you have another heat source.
No - but the house/heat is shared by more than one person. Living alone is a huge waste of energy.

Yes, but do you take your compact car to your spin class?
No.
Informative Informative x 1 View List

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #119 on: March 10, 2018, 11:56:01 pm »
by way of comparison, the average household in Canada is:

2400 m3 of natural gas
11000 kwH of electricity

As to be expected there is great variability across the country. Alberta is no surprise the highest for natural gas but it is also the lowest of electricity. When you look at the total energy consumption of all fuel types combined (natural gas, electricity, oil, wood & wood pellets, and propane) Quebec is the lowest and Alberta is the highest. Ontario and Manitoba are about average, and everywhere else is above with the exception of BC. While not quite as low as Quebec, BC is low but then a significant part of the BC population lives in a much more temperate climate.