Environmental clutter
Jul. 17th, 2007 03:57 pmI am a great believer in Not Hanging Onto Stuff (or at least, not hanging onto too much stuff). The "it might come in handy" mentality is a recipe for winding up with cupboards full of crap, unable to find the things you *do* want. And living with *stuff* all over the place is stressful, at least for me. If it turns out that X years down the line I need whateveritwas, I can get another one.
The flipside to this is the environmental one. If I get rid of things because they don't have an obvious/immediate/probable use, isn't that wasteful? I do my best to get rid of things responsibly (charity shop, Freecycle); but nevertheless, if I wind up needing X, and buying a new X, then that's wasteful consumption.
Buying a second-hand X in that event is one solution (although not always practical). And there are some things that I will hang on to (extension leads being one; also bits of wood, especially now we have the
allotment). But there's a lot of stuff that could be repurposed, as and when something comes up - should I hang on to all of it, as a grown-up version of the "stuff to make things with" box that parents sometimes keep for tinies?
Currently I think the Not Hanging Onto Stuff is still winning; but I am starting to think a bit harder about this of late.
(Of course, my consumption in general is a bit high, which is a whole 'nother matter; maybe I should think about that harder first. I am a rubbish hippy :-/ )
The flipside to this is the environmental one. If I get rid of things because they don't have an obvious/immediate/probable use, isn't that wasteful? I do my best to get rid of things responsibly (charity shop, Freecycle); but nevertheless, if I wind up needing X, and buying a new X, then that's wasteful consumption.
Buying a second-hand X in that event is one solution (although not always practical). And there are some things that I will hang on to (extension leads being one; also bits of wood, especially now we have the
Currently I think the Not Hanging Onto Stuff is still winning; but I am starting to think a bit harder about this of late.
(Of course, my consumption in general is a bit high, which is a whole 'nother matter; maybe I should think about that harder first. I am a rubbish hippy :-/ )
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:05 pm (UTC)You're a vegan cycling non-car owning allotment owner - that's got to be pretty low consumption by this country's standards. Unless you've got a secret vice I've never noticed.
I'm trying to follow the rule my dad set recently, of getting rid of anything not used in 2 (well maybe 5) years, unless it's *really* difficult to replace. Or has real sentimental value. Or something.
Then there's how to get rid of stuff - need to take and upload lots of photos after returning from holiday, as there's quite a bit of stuff I'd like to get some cash for. I hate clutter hanging around - but having DIY stuff and bits of computer so that new stuff and computers aren't needed does take up a lot of space.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:16 pm (UTC)Consumer electronics, also (about to get new work laptop as this one is chugging slowly to a halt; forked out for Treo680 recently...). And fabric/yarn/etc. Books. I don't buy many CDs (but only because P does, which is kind of cheating). By UK standards, yes, I'm pretty low-consumption, but UK standards are pretty horrendous!
I try to do the "not used in 2 years" thing, as well (with a couple of exceptions). I find Freecycle easier than Ebay for getting rid of stuff because it is so much less hassle - don't have to deal with posting & cash & so forth.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 04:00 pm (UTC)I've found LJcycle ("Anyone want my X?") and Pavementcycle (stick item on street with a post-it note saying 'Take me!') particularly low-hassle and effective. I was most impressed when a hideous bashed melamine wardrobe vanished.
My vices would be books (about 1/2 secondhand), travel (1-2 flights/year) and bits for doing up the house. On the other hand, the house needs repair (it's mainly repair not just cosmetic) and it's slowly getting more energy efficient.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:06 pm (UTC)If I were the sort of person who made jam, papier mache and my own macrame Christmas ornaments from left-over packing twine, I'd probably hang on to stuff more. But I'm not that sort of person - I'd rather curl up with a good book than roll my own tampons, thanks.
But then again I'm big on reducing. I avoid buying things which are over-packaged, and using carrier bags. I don't buy consumer electronics much - my existing stereo has been on the blink for a year but will still play CDs if I jiggle the switch and thump it just right, so I don't see much need to get another one. So I don't have all that much to throw out.
I'm with William Morris, really. I don't want anything in my life that I do not know to be useful nor believe to be beautiful. Anything else... is just rubbish.
I still have more Stuff than I really need, of course - I don't exactly live a pared-down life. But it's all Stuff I Love.
I'm curious - what do you throw away that you might need later?
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:19 pm (UTC)I do make jam, & I do keep jam-jars :-)
I've been increasingly aware of food packaging, & throwing that away - we don't get *that* much in packages, but there's only so many margarine tubs that can be put to good use :-/
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:55 pm (UTC)Books are the one thing I never get rid of. But then I don't believe I should - being surrounded by books is something that makes me feel safe and comforted. Plus I keep hoping I'll one day be rich enough to have a house with a dedicated library.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 04:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 03:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:07 pm (UTC)sorry, not very helpful. how do you stand on second hand books? cos that's where most of mine have been coming from lately,charity shops that is, and that's good obv but also means fewer royalties for the author. ARGH MORAL QUANDRY.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:22 pm (UTC)Second-hand books: that is also my dilemma! I think it is OK though to just keep doing the charity shop thing. Also libraries, cos then they do get royalties :-)
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:52 pm (UTC)The thing is, I need at least a week off to go through it all PROPERLY, read all the books, listen to all the CDs. But I ain't gonna get that week any time soon :(
(am deffo going to join the local library tho!)
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 03:57 pm (UTC)(Tho I do look at my flatmate - who I am CONVINCED fills a landfill of her own every other week - and feel just a *little* bit smug... but NO. MUST DO BETTER esp since our local shops are excellent for buying loose fruit and veg from :))
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 03:11 pm (UTC)Re soyamilk: I know what you mean, but I have concluded that at least for the moment I'll carry on with buying the stuff (see also: OJ).
I really must write to the council about including tetrapaks in the recycling - now that Southwark take everything in one big bag recycling is easier, & if they took tetrapaks too I wd be v happy.
Books/CDs - if you haven't got around to reading/listening to them yet, is it maybe a Sign that you won't, & you should just get rid of 'em & feel the weight of OUGHT TO DO X lift off? :-)
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 04:15 pm (UTC)I don't think buying things is bad per se (I buy most of them from charity shops). I've got a fair amount of spare cash at the moment, and I don't spend more than I can afford.
I don't really see what's being wasted if I buy stuff and then sell it or give it away again (and then buy more stuff later), apart from possibly people's time: if I sell things on, I earn a small amount of money and somebody else gets something that they might otherwise have bought new; if I freecycle things, as before but without me getting money; if I give them to a charity shop, then either a) the charity gets money, or b) they probably have more efficient ways of recycling stuff-they-can't-sell than I do.
Are you saying that it's somehow morally/socially/economically/environmentally wrong to buy/sell (or even acquire??) stuff, no matter where the stuff comes from and what happens to the stuff and/or money afterwards?
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 03:21 pm (UTC)Taking part in a passing-things-around economy is, I think, OK (whether that's cash-based or not). There are some things that are maybe more suited to this than others - books & clothes, CDs/DVDs. Electronic stuff (one of my vices :-/ ) is less suited to this because of the rate of technological progress; and they're also environmentally expensive.
I think that it is the acquisition of New Things that concerns me more. e.g. I don't really *need* more clothes. So I'm trying to make more of my own stuff - which in some cases means buying fabric (& I'm not actually sure that's all that much better, although at least it's *slower*!), but I'd like to start thinking more about remaking second-hand stuff. (This is however harder IME than starting from scratch!). But in that case, should I hang onto old clothes that don't fit in order to do something with them later? Or should I pass 'em on to the charity or whatever?
A passing-things-around culture is a good thing & to be encouraged, I think :-) As
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 04:24 pm (UTC)I've got a lot better recently at the not-using-carrier bags thing (my Glasto yoghurt bag has come in very useful indeed) and buying loose veg where possible etc. And we have Proper Recycling round our way that takes all sorts of shiznit, incl batteries and my rubbish old army coat. Hooray!
no subject
Date: 2007-07-17 04:43 pm (UTC)When I worked in RealHippyEnviroStuff I kept being given free 'environmentally friendly' cloth bags at events. I need to try dyeing them to hide the hideous branding and then I/friends might actually use them!
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 03:12 pm (UTC)I didn't know you could recycle CDs. That is v useful to know; thanks!
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 01:20 am (UTC)The more people who make a habit of Getting Rid Of Stuff responsibly (freecycle/bookswaps/etc), the more likely it is that the Thing you need is available when you need it.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 10:42 am (UTC)What sort of space have you got for keeping stuff that you don't immediately need? I'd say it's worthwhile keeping things that are multi-purpose eg. bits of wood, screws, nails etc that don't take up much space and could be used for more than one job, if you've got the space to do it, without having so much stuff about it's distressing. If not, I don't think it's unethical to get rid of stuff responsibly and then buy what you need when you need it.
I'm hopeless at getting rid of stuff. I'm getting better at 'archiving' stuff - like clothes into vacuum packed bags so that I can say 'well it's been in that bag for x length of time and I haven't wanted any of it/it doesn't fit' so it's time to get rid of it.
I feel guilty about getting rid of useful things - I have a pile of tea lights and matches lying about - a certain number of these I might use in a power-cut, but they're basically intended as a teaching Guides how to light a candle tool. I look at empty coffee jars and think 'there must be something useful I can do with this' then come up with nothing and throw them out anyway [can't recycle glass in our recycling bins]. I have a particularly difficult time getting rid of things that were given to me as gifts.