Making Smarter Environmental Choices
As Albert Einstein said, “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”
We need a single website that offers “The best way to do everyday things—with less harm to your health, your wallet, and the environment.” There is advice scattered among a dozen or more websites, but this is confusing to the consumer. The folks at TreeHugger, Earth 911, EPA Greener Living, Eartheasy, Going Zero Waste, EWG Healthy Cleaning Guide, Conservation International and other sites and environmental organizations should cooperate and create a single site that consumers can visit, type in their questions, and get the best environmentally friendly and responsible response. The website should consider the best environmental method, effectiveness, safety, cost, difficulty, alternatives, what to avoid, when to seek professional advice, and provide references for their advice. Here’s an example:
We need to be smarter on how we fix everyday problems. For example, most of us have dealt with a clogged drain. Many drain clogs are hair that gets trapped in the pipes and stops water flow. These type clogs are best handled using a cheap drain auger that twists into the hair, and it comes out easily. What about Drano and similar products? Many people turn to drain cleaners because they don’t know better. Drain cleaners are primarily made of strong caustic bases (like sodium hydroxide/lye) or acids (like sulfuric acid) designed to dissolve hair, grease, and soap scum through chemical reactions. They often include additives such as sodium hypochlorite (bleach) for disinfection, aluminum bits to generate heat, and corrosion inhibitors to protect pipes. So, we fix one problem with Drano and create a long-term environmental problem at the same time. American need a clearing house website to ensure that the most environmentally sensitive method is recommended first. Often, as in the example above, the easiest solution is often the least expensive and the most environmentally sensitive.
We also need to legislate the end of planned obsolescence. This is an additional way to keep appliances, for example, out of the landfill. Here’s an example that repeats itself millions of times daily in the US. My wife and I moved into our current home in 2002. It contained a very inefficient refrigerator that was built in 1976 and cost $250 per year to operate. When it quit working in 2008, we bought a General Electric (GE) refrigerator. The new GE refrigerator is energy efficient and takes only $50 per year to operate. In 2026, the freezer section stopped working and I called a repair person to evaluate it and make repair recommendations. The repair required the replacement of the main control board which are no longer made. Without a new main control board, I must now replace an otherwise perfectly good refrigerator unnecessarily. This craziness has got to stop.
It seems to me that consumers will pay a premium for quality goods if they know they can be repaired indefinitely. Since companies are unwilling to create products for long-term use, legislation appears to be the only option.