Contrary to what some people may argue, making ‘eco’ choices
are almost always also thrifty choices. I have provided dozens of examples
eco-thrifty decision making in this column over the last eight months. The most
recent one last Saturday profiled our daughter Verti’s first Christmas present:
a second-hand bicycle trailer spruced up by a local mechanic.
Keeping the holiday theme going for another week, I’ll focus
on our two eco-thrifty Christmas trees: indoor and outdoor.
If you are a frequenter of the website Pinterest, you may
recognize our Pinterest-inspired driftwood Christmas tree. We walked to the beach
from our home just behind Seafront Road, and collected two armfuls of weathered
branches. We carried them home, cut them to length, and tied them into a
triangle with yarn. Finally, we hung the branches from another piece of
driftwood with roots forming a self-supporting base.
Oh, and I almost forgot! Then we put on Neil Diamond’s
Christmas album and decorated our eco-thrifty-beachy tree! I suspect it is easy
for anyone to recognize the eco-thriftiness of this tree, although it is
probably not to everyone’s aesthetic. That’s perfectly fine. To each their own.
But some readers may be surprised that our outdoor Christmas
tree - the humble yet effective solar clothes dryer - has been outlawed in many towns and suburbs across
America. This is not a joke. But the States are not necessarily known for their
eco-ness or thriftiness.
Using a washing line rather than an electric dryer is like riding
a bicycle instead of driving a car: any way you slice it, the former is always
both eco-er and thriftier than the latter.
These days, our washing line is decorated with colorful
cloth nappies – another example of a choice that is both eco and thrifty. It
may be easy to recognize the environmental benefits of cloth diapers, but there
are also considerable cost savings over the long run. This brings back the
concept of payback period that I’ve written about regarding everything from
light bulbs to solar hot water.
The following information comes from www.diaperdecisions.com: (Sorry, this
is in US dollars.)
For a period of two and a half years, the calculated cost of
disposable nappies is $2,577 (3,123 NZD) averaging 36 cents (0.44 NZD) per
change. By comparison, the following versions of reusable nappies offer the
following savings. (Includes washing costs).
• Pre-folds and covers: $381 (462 NZD). Savings = $2,196
(2,664 NZD)
• Fitted nappies and covers: $1,263 (1,532 NZD). Savings =
$1,314 (1,594 NZD)
• AIO nappies: $1,413 (1,714 NZD). Savings = $1,164 (1,412
NZD)
• Combo cloth nappies: $1,468 (1,780 NZD). Savings = $1,109
(1,345 NZD)
• Pocket nappies: $1,677 (2,034 NZD). Savings = $900 (1,091
NZD)
The website also points out the obvious regarding cloth
nappies: they can be used for another child or sold once your bubs is potty
trained. Both options increase the potential savings, which build and build
over time.
Once again we see that the most ecological choice is also
the most economical choice in the long term.
This is also true for insulating and draft-proofing a home, energy efficient
light bulbs, bicycle trailers, laundry lines, and solar hot water. However, all
of these things share one or both of the following characteristics: 1) they
require an initial investment of funds; 2) they require an ongoing investment
of effort.
For various reasons, these conditions appear to be
significant barriers to many people adopting sustainable behaviors. As a social
science researcher, these barriers and potential strategies for overcoming them
fascinate me. But that, my friends, is a discussion for another day.
Peace, Estwing