When I saw the film "Wasteland" http://www.wastelandmovie.com/ I realised I needed to change how I was living. Part of the film is shown on the site.

Going online to find some solutions, I found a New Zealand couple, who undertook a project of throwing out only one shopping bag of rubbish in a year.

http://www.rubbishfree.co.nz/information.php/info_id/98

Since then I have moved to a "zero waste, zero packaging" lifestyle, and I have been able to reduce my rubbish and packaging use by 75%.

However I see too many people wearing simplistic t-shirts about renewable energy or people protesting about climate change.

I recently saw a woman, wearing a renewable energy t-shirt, but her hands were full of junk food, in which the rubbish would be going in the bin or thrown out onto the street.

Is this why some, who believe in climate change and renewable energy, aren't taken seriously by others, because these "environmentally friendly people" simply "blame" the government?

Yes Nathan, there is a time difference between realising that there is
a fashionable campaign & a teeshirt to go with it and then starting
to do something about it.
Like me, do the easy things, take fabric shopping bags to shop.
Always try to make multipurpose trips in the car.
Fly instead of drive interstate. Uses less fuel.
The next thing to be done is perhaps attending a demonstration.
That is one thing I am unlikely to do as those demos concentrate on
global warming instead of the real problem.

Natham,
The real big one, in my opinion, is world population. Especially in countries that suffer famines. Obviously those countries cannot sustain the population.

Are you aware that it has been well demonstrated in Iran and Thailand that government sponsored family planning can reduce birthrates from 6 per woman to less than 2 per woman. Google family planning in either country.

I think this is what the UN should be concentrating on. The long term gradual reduction of our population by family planning. More people equals more resources used

Nathan,

Seriously, conservation is not a competition, nor a religion. One does not need perfect purity. If someone is making an effort, but eats junk food, he needs praise not sanctimonious finger wagging.

I believe in the pareto principle where 80% of the result can be achieved by 20% of the effort, so every little effort helps.

Agree Banjo, a reduction in population has a direct affect on consumption
of everything.

To get back to one of my obsessions, Egypt's population rose to 85 million
due to the ability to export oil and so subsidise food & fuel.
Agriculturists have been reported as saying that the Nile can only
support 40 million.
With Egypt now importing oil and subsidies being reduced, the cause of
Mubarak's downfall, how long before people start leaving Egypt ?

If any country needs a family planning scheme it is Egypt.

Shadow Minister,

People can't have it both ways. Either people are going to be pro the environment or they are not.

Screaming on the streets about climate change or wearing a t-shirt with something sustainable printed all over it is worthless in real terms when, based on (fact):

1. Australia is the second highest producer of waste per person in the world at approximately 650 kilograms per person. This is second only to the United States, which produces approximately 715 kilograms per person;

2. The average Australian family of four people makes enough rubbish in one year to completely fill a three-bedroom house from floor to ceiling;

3. Australians produce over 18 million tonnes of waste every year. That is the equivalent of three million Transpacific Cleanaway trucks full of compacted rubbish;

Most of this rubbish comes from households.

http://www.transpacific.com.au/asset/cms/Documents/Australian%20Waste%20-%20The%20Facts.pdf

Your council rates are also going up to pay for this unsustainable form of living. So if you want to thank your t-shirt loving and climate change protesting friends who supposedly care for the environment - go for it.

As for population levels - I agree in principle (including for Australia reducing its population intake), but poorer countries unfortunately, do not have the benefits Australia has, so more people are needed to undertake basic tasks, many here take for granted. Foreign aid and assistance is the better solution for poorer countries in that context.

NathanJ, production of rubbish is not itself a major environmental problem. Incorrect disposal of it is, but you have no evidence that the people you were criticising were doing that.

Recycling has reat advantages, including saving energy, but there are other ways to achieve that objective. The costs of correctly disposing of rubbish are mainly financial rather than environmental. And the financial costs of eliminating packaging are likely to be much higher.

Nathan,

I agree that waste must be reduced, but not how. For once I find myself agreeing with Aidan. While reducing waste is good, so is recycling and other efforts. The 70% with double standards who do a little to reduce their waste by say 20%, they do a lot more for the world than the 1% of self righteous prigs that reduce their waste by 90%.