Quality In Life – Living Smarter…


Save Time and Reduce Waste with Better Handling of Flyers & Community Newspapers

I don’t like clutter.  I know advertising works (which explains the billions spent on it) the question is…  Why would I subject myself to advertising and allow my house to be cluttered just to give someone else my money?

Four times a week we receive a community newspaper.  Now the paper is mostly ads, advertisements, paid advertising and ads.  There are relevant local articles, but it hardly seems worth the “filtering” to get to the content.  Out of 40 printed pages, I’d guess 4 or less actually contain news.  Now I don’t believe in mindlessly reading advertisements (and don’t know anyone who will admit to this), but I must admit my relationship to the printed newspapers that appear on my mailbox has been undergoing a transformation.

I was curious what the impact was on my time and on the environment to handle all the paper associated with the unsolicited flyers and community newspapers I receive. To try and estimate the impact on my city, I’m assuming everyone in town does exactly what I do, and I’m believing the newspaper’s circulation figures (averaged to 40,000 per paper) which I found on the Internet.  You will see some high dollar figures here, and this is because the cost to consumers is generally left out of the equation and ignored… Retailers don’t incur that cost, it is the consumer’s problem, so why would anyone bother to track or estimate that cost…  This is only a rough but fair estimate.  Now I’d love to make this more accurate, so if you take issue with the numbers, do us all a favour and contribute some research.  Here is the transformation in chronological order:

Handling Flyers and community newspapers (original version 1.0)

Initially we would bring the paper in, sort through the flyers “in case there was something good there”, and put the papers on the coffee table to be read.  Then I would flip from front to back through the paper making sure I didn’t “miss anything.  So including all the “handling time” bringing in the paper, reading through it. Picking it up off the floor after the small children decorated the room with it. Recycling it. I probably spent 30 minutes per paper and ended up skipping half of the papers completely.  The time spent “reading the paper” was time I didn’t spend with my kids etc, so I’m going to think of that cost to me as $20/hour for my like many people earn.  The 150 grams estimated weight of the paper is based on Canada Post’s “weight restriction” for mailing community newspapers (mine is probably larger) and 37 grams of flyers.  So 150 grams 4 times a week is 0.6 Kg per week or 31.2 Kg per year.

  • My yearly time spent “handling” newspapers and flyers: 52 hours $1040
  • My papers and flyers sent to recycling: 31.2Kgs (68.8 lbs)
  • My city’s yearly time spent “handling” newspapers and flyers: 2,080,000 hours $41,600,000   (this is the cost of consumer’s time!)
  • My city’s papers and flyers sent to recycling: 1,248,000 Kgs (2,751,369 lbs)

Handling Flyers and community newspapers (updated version 2.0)

Then I recognized the time I was spending “tidying up” these papers all over our living space and I wanted to get the papers re-routed to recycling at the earliest point possible.  What I would do is “intentionaly”  sit down and skim the newspaper articles for 5 minutes, if there was relevant content I save the paper for my wife and tell her what is worth reading, if not, I recycle it and all of the flyers stuffed inside before the paper even makes it up the stairs to our living space.  (Sorry advertisers, your advertising budget was not effectively spent).  But this skimming is still an interesting activity to me, I’m not doing it because I am (at that moment) interested in reading the paper or learning something specific, I’m “reacting” to the newspaper being delivered to my door.  I’m voluntarily spending at least 20 minutes per week filtering out advertisements….   Hmm, how is it that someone else is “making me” spend time reading their paper….  That wasn’t my idea.   Hey I could have used that time for something I WANTED to do.

  • My yearly time spent “handling” newspapers and flyers: 17 hours $340 <reduced>
  • My papers and flyers sent to recycling: 31.2Kgs (68.8 lbs)    <No change>
  • My city’s yearly time spent “handling” newspapers and flyers: 680,000 hours $13,600,000   <reduced>
  • My city’s papers and flyers sent to recycling: 1,248,000 Kgs (2,751,369 lbs) <No change>

Handling Flyers and community newspapers (New Era version 3.0)

So I noticed that when those friendly guys from the “Globe and Mail” would call, I would answer.  “Not really interested, I use the Internet.” and they would simply drop it and let me go with no more “sales”… hmmm..  Maybe I could just use the Internet and replace my local community paper…  So I testsed this.  What I could find online (in several locations) had all the information with much less advertising.  In many cases it offered more than the news (videos and such).  I bravely asked my wife what she thought and when I learned that she really didn’t use those grocery store flyers I’d been saving for years, our course was set.  We put a “No Flyers or Newspapers” sign on our mailbox and suddenly our house is neater, our recycling is lighter, and I’m facing much less temptation to purchase things I would not have otherwise purchased.  I’m estimating that I only spend 15 minutes per month looking for local news and information.  Only God knows the value of the “impulse purchases” I’m not making.

  • My yearly time spent not “handling” newspapers and flyers: 3 hours $60 (Internet time) <reduced>
  • My papers and flyers sent to recycling: 0 Kgs (0 lbs) <reduced>
  • My city’s residents potential yearly time spent not “handling” newspapers and flyers: 120,000 hours $2,400,000 <reduced>
  • My city’s could potentially save  1,248,000 Kgs (2,751,369 lbs) of paper from going to recycling (or worse) <Join Me! It’s free!>

Adding back “The Internet”

Sure there is time spent on the Internet to find local information, but I don’t think it is the same as putting a paper on your doorstep.  I think that when someone is actually pursuing information, and not just having it “forced” on them, they are able to dig deeper and learn more.  Sure I will likely look up some local events using the Internet, maybe 15 minutes per month when I NEED to know something specific.  But that is one of the major points I’m making.  Newspaper delivery was someone else’s idea that consumed my time and wasted paper.

Other Resources for breaking your flyer addiction

We are fortunate to live in abundance where one of our major issues is TOO MUCH STUFF! And to keep us buying more, Canadians are inundated with $19 Billion worth of advertising each year. If the old adage is true, “half of all marketing works great, if only we knew which half” why don’t advertisers spend more resources understanding which half works and spend the other half supporting community?

Image:No flyers please.png

Image:Save our trees.png

  • The Canadian national “Do Not Call List” operated by the government of Canada promises to reduce phone based solicitation.  https://www.lnnte-dncl.gc.ca/
  • The “Canadian Marketing Association has a “Do not Contact Service” designed to get your name on a list their members might check before sending out mailed advertisements. http://www.the-cma.org/?WCE=C=47|K=224217
  • A ?grassroots? attempt to produce a better “do not call list” http://www.ioptout.ca/ trys to overcome limitations with the “Do Not Call List” (charities are not restricted etc).

(Use the comments to evaluate the usefulness of these links).

Please comment to let me know what you think of all this.  Do you have paper taming tricks? ways to find local information that work for you?  Would you consider joining me with a simple “no flyers or newspapers” sign on  your mailbox?  Why or why not?

Cheers,
Greg



Honda videos on Quality and the Future of Transportation

Honda has some beautifully produced short films addressing quality issues in production.  They consist of a series of exerpts from interviews with quotes from Honda engineers as well as others you might recognize for their vision for the future like, Orson Scott Card.

There are 3 short films ranging between 6 and8 minutes with the following themes;

It’s encouraging to see a large corporation thoughtfully discussing important issues like quality and sustainability.  My cynical side sees this simply as effective marketing, but we have certainly enjoyed Honda quality when we owned one of their cars.  Enjoy the informative eye-candy.

Have you seen other really well produced videos on Sustainable living and social issues or Quality and excellence in design that you would recommend?  Let me know in the comments.
Greg



Some energy efficiency is spending dollars to save pennies.
January 25, 2009, 1:34 am
Filed under: lifehacking | Tags: , , , , , , ,

 

Our local electricity provider has been running “power smart” adds where strangers suddenly appear in your home or office cheering when you turn out the light as you leave the room, or as you turn off the powerbar to your computer.  The message is that you should be encouraged for such conservation.  I have in the past mindlessly accepted the idea behind these ads as valid, since I have for my adult life turned out the lights I’m not using, but recently I’m coming to question some of what I’m hearing.

Sometimes you might leave a light on for a feeling of security, or if you were to turn off the powerbar, your appliances might lose track of the date or time.  So there are valid reasons for leaving these on when you are not using them.

In TV-Land, all the switches and powerbars are easy to reach (although ugly lying on the desk etc).  In my life I don’t have VERY convenient powerbars, and am more likely to have to reach behind your appliances to find the power bars to turn them on and off (shock hazzard from loose plugs you can’t see clearly is so remote I won’t address that at all).  So the activity isn’t as free as it appears in the ads.  It costs me something.  Convenience (when the remote controls can’t make the appliance wake up), time (running around the house turning things off as I leave).  There is a cost to me.  The concept of power leaches or vampires, that suck a tiny amount of energy constantly has been a popular topic in the press in 2008.

Additionally there have been a number of ads about replacing my old inefficient refrigerator with a new energy smart refrigerator.  I’ve realized that I need to do some research on my own.  What is the cost and what is the benefit to me to the utility and to the environment.

Now I am the kind of guy who turns the VCR or TV off when I’m not actively using them. The lights all go out at night (with the exception of the 0.3Watt LED night lights in the halls).  I turn off lights I’m not using, but I installed the lights so they could be used.  They work for me, not the other way around.   So with a heart that wants to conserve and show my thankfulness through not wasting what I’ve been given, I wanted to know where we were wasting energy.  I purchased a $17 (blue planet?) meter from my local hardware store that can show the Amps, Watts and Volts being used by an appliance in real-time.  Additionally it can log the electricity usage, showing you the total Kilo Watt Hours (KWH) consumed by the appliance over a period of many days.  After you enter the cost of electricity ($0.072 / KWH here) into the meter, it can tell you the dollar cost of your appliance for the time it has been plugged in.  I started making discoveries:

computer / adsl modem / router / UPS / printer : $0.25 / day

Old inefficient refrigerator from the last decade: $0.40 / day

TV / VCR / video game / stereo: $0.10 / day

Laptop computer: $0.05 / day

Microwave:  $0.02 / day

So this causes me to think carefully about what I’m hearing and being told.  I’m being told to switch off the power bar for my TV etc, when the use of the devices is only $0.30 / day.  So conceivably I might save 1 or 2 cents there.  Hardly worth the time is it?  Could I pay you a penny to stop doing what you are doing and spend 10 seconds coming over here and flipping this switch?  If you were paid $20/hour, that is 5.5 cents per 10 seconds.  Now its true, if you have nothing else to do it wouldn’t hurt for you to spend your spare time doing this, but the benefit seems really really minute compared to the cost?  Why is your utility spending $100,000s on this advertising?

My understanding of the issue is that it comes down to capacity.  If they need to build another power plant that is exceedingly expensive, but if they can continue to sell power from the existing power plants, that is a much more reasonable proposition for them.  The issue is nothing if we are talking about you saving $0.01 of electricity for flipping off the power bar.  The issue is really only significant thanks to the power of multiplication.  If you can convince 5,000,000 people to save that much electricity, you just saved $50,000 of electricity per day.  So the impact to your utility is huge, but the savings for you as an individual user of electricity is essentially nothing.

Now how about that refrigerator.  $0.40 per day to keep my food from spoiling seems like a good deal to me.  I don’t have to go down into a cellar, I don’t have to drop my food down a well, or deal with bricks of ice, or food poisoning.  I think it is a bargain.  Through my study of the new energy efficient fridges on the market it appears that the new fridges would use half the electricity per day.  Over the course of a year that would save me $73 in electricity.  However a new fridge costs around $800 (depending on what you buy).  So it would take me 10 years for the fridge’s energy savings to pay for the fridge.  I don’t know about you, but with the quality of manufactured goods dropping, I’m not sure I would expect my new fridge to last me 10 years.  This old fridge on the other hand, continues to work and looks after the food just fine.  So the marketting says “buy a new energy smart fridge”.  To do that, somebody needs to manufacture the fridge with all its glass and plastic and metal and compressors and chemicals and foam.  Then they need to ship it across the country or around the world, advertise it, house it in a store, get it here, and dump my old fridge in a landfill or recycling depot (landfill that sells metal).  It seems to me that the most environmentally responsible thing I can do is to make my existing appliances last as long as I can. 

So suffice it to say that the meter has probably paid for itself in debunking “new appliance savings” and in giving me some peace of mind about the little power leaches plugged in at my house.

 I am happy to say that we enjoy the light provided by the current generation of Compact Flourescent light bulbs (CFL)s  Instead of 100W we use 50W of light over our sink.  Instead of 160W we use 44W in our bathroom. The list goes on of the places we have installed these.  The hallway light behind me, the lamp in the corner.  They aren’t the best light for all situations, but we know that the 33W we are using right now beats the 150W we would have had otherwise.  To my mind this is a very smart energy saving, because apart from purchasing the bulbs initially, there is no incremental cost to turning on a CFL over a standard incandescent light.  It just saves me money and saves us all power without inconveniencing me or introducing an additional cost.

We need to take a very strong stand against “GreenWash” in all its forms.  Keep your brain engaged as you are urged to do this or to do that to save the planet.  Among the genuinely good information there is certainly hype that is designed to pad someone elses wallet at the expense of your own.



No more GreenWash
October 15, 2008, 11:45 pm
Filed under: lifehacking | Tags: , , , , ,

Greenwash is the attempt to make something appear more environmentally responsible. Cleaner, more efficient, less toxic. It is generally a marketing ploy that has little to do with improvement of any substance. It is about looking good rather than making real change. It has some very negative impacts. The public who grow accustomed to hearing environmental rhetoric become “jaded” and believe less of what they hear because they start to see through the insincere marketing. This has the potential for genuinely “green” products, programs and ideas to be discarded without true consideration. It also has the potential to distract the public from truly good solutions. A manufacturer who uses “greenwash” in marketing their product may gain more customers who are convinced they are doing something environmentally responsible when really those customers were persuaded for reasons with no real merit.

Not all that is "green" is green.

Not all that is "green" is green.

 

See this wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwash

And this entry http://www.howstuffworks.com/greenwashing.htm

The public are perceptive and will pick up on many of these greenwashing messages, but truly people are busy and don’t have time to research and verify each and every claim that corporations are using. And those corporations have huge budgets and entire departments dedicated to getting their message across. What can be done?

1. Educate the public about greenwashing so these marketing messages are less effective and less attractive to corporate marketeers. By exposing those messages.

2. Notify corporations that their greenwashing messages have been heard, analyzed and rejected. Encouraging them to make real change rather than talking about it.

3. Persuade governing bodies to regulate and restrict the abuse of greenwashing since it is essentially a deceptive practice that entices customers to make choices not based on a real benefit.

4. Encourage all people to disregard “rhetoric” and to pursue real environmental progress.

Interested? Lets get started.

I am welcoming volunteers to do the following:

1. Identify existing greenwash education efforts that are underway (why re-invent the wheel if someone out there has a perfectly good wheel).

2. Post occurences of greenwash which the public should know about.

3. Strategize around which governing bodies should be contacted to improve their response to greenwash.

4. Complete a strategy for notifying companies that their greenwash is not acceptable.

(Yes we are at the beginning here, but with a little collaboration and a few tools we can make a very real difference.)

Do you share my concern?  Drop me a comment.