Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
What's Right with Eco Stunts: Interview with Rex Weyler on living fridge free in Amsterdam
Rex Weyler, Greenpeace co-founder, lifelong activist, and writer, who lives in British Columbia, spent a month and a half in Amsterdam, working on a photograph archive project, and living in a small flat. When he told us about living without a fridge during his say, we asked if he’d share this experience with us:
Why did you decide to go fridge free?
Well, it was the circumstance. I was in a small flat that had a shared fridge down below, but the fridge was full of other tenants’ things, and since I’ve been a fan of “Living Without a Fridge” for a few years, I just decided to try it. Of course, this was relatively easy because it was winter time, and I was on my own, so my little experiment is no great achievement compared to what others have done, living full time with no fridge, and so forth.
Nevertheless, I was inspired by the Ditch Your Fridge website, and I remembered reading about what people discovered by living without a fridge, so I decided to try it.
So what did you learn? Any innovations?
First, I had to create a system for keeping certain things – fruit, juice, cheese – cold. It so happened that I had a good-sized canvas bag that I had carried from home, so I fashioned a draw-string around the bag and hung it outside my window. Pretty simple. It was winter, after all, but I was so proud of myself for this little achievement, and it all worked so simply. That’s one thing I learned: Some solutions can be simple and very low-tech.
My bag hung out the window for the entire six weeks I was in Amsterdam. I also learned that it was quite handy, because everything was right there when I needed it. Open the window, grab the bag. Simple and convenient.
Did you find that living without a fridge changed your perception of nature or food in any way?
Oh, certainly. For one thing, I was much more conscious of the weather and temperature. When it rained, I hung the bag under a window with a little ledge above to protect it from rain. When there was a cold snap, I wondered if my food would freeze. No. Everything was fine.
By the way, during the cold spell, I went skating on the canals one day. Now, that was fun. All the families were out, and people were selling hot chocolate, hot rum, soup, mulled wine; people were playing hockey, skating hand-in-hand. It was a real cultural festival, and one could skate all over Amsterdam. That was a blast.
Then, when it warmed up, I wondered if it was too warm. No. Everything in the bag stayed plenty cold.
The little experiment definitely helped tune me into the weather.
Sounds like you had a heightened sense of nature as dynamic, what about your food? Was it still as nice as eating in Europe should be?
The main thing I had to do was keep my volume down to the size of the canvas bag, and have containers for things, so I saved jars and so forth.
I ate very well, and really enjoyed the local food. I shopped for fresh fruits and vegetables at the market regularly, so I didn’t store things for long, and I got to know some of the people at the farmers’ market, another benefit. Less technology, more social interaction! A double win.
Do you think the world would benefit if more people chose to go fridge free either all the time or in the winter?
Yes, certainly, but let’s remember that most of the world is fridge free. In North America and Europe, most homes have electric refrigerators, but not in the rest of the world. There are about 300-million fridges in North America and Europe, one for every three people. In the rest of the world, there is one fridge for every 20-30 people, and in the poorest regions there are very few fridges. About 50-60-million refrigerators are sold in the world each year, and almost this many thrown away. Eventually, of course all fridges are thrown away. It’s a massive resource-to-waste cycle. China is now the largest refrigerator market, but the first generations of Chinese fridges are extremely inefficient: about 2.5 kWh/year/liter, about twice the energy use of a typical western refrigerator. This may improve, but the rush to “modern” lifestyles in China led to cheap appliances, not necessarily smart or efficient appliances.
And remember, traditional refrigerators, besides being resource and energy sinks, also create chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), all of which destroy Earth’s atmospheric ozone layer. Greenpeace helped create the “GreenFreeze” technology that offers a solution to the ozone problem.
Rex Tells us about GreenFreeze.
In 1992 Greenpeace assembled a team of scientists, who worked with the East German company DKK Scharfenstein to create and test the Greenfreeze technology, using hydrocarbon refrigerants that are non-toxic, don't deplete the ozone layer, are more efficient, and much safer than CFCs and HCFCs.
The large refrigerant chemical producers – Du Pont, Atochem, and others – don’t want to switch because they have a monopoly and huge investments in CFCs and HCFCs. These chemical giants have resisted change to maximize their profits on investments in the wrong technology. They have conducted misinformation and lobbying campaigns in developing countries to avoid the Montreal Protocol on reducing CFCs and HCFCs and to promote their obsolete technologies.
Typically, the chemical companies and some US appliance manufacturers claimed the GreenFreeze system did not work, but in Europe the four biggest producers – Bosch, Siemens, Liebherr and Miele – began producing Greenfreeze models in 1993. People can get Greenfreeze refrigerators now in Germany, Austria, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland, Britain, Argentina, and soon in India, Pakistan, and China
Even so, let’s remember, this still does not resolve the questions of resource use, energy use, and waste products. Living without a fridge is the solution that answers these other questions.
As an ecologist, is there a way that you describe making this small change to yourself or others? Elizabeth Kolbert from New Yorker magazine wrote an interesting article a few years back called "What's Wrong with Ecostunts" dismissing low-tech experiments such as No Impact man or living without a fridge as giving people illusions about how we are going to stop climate change.
Well, as an ecologist, I’m concerned that it is too late for small changes in the high-consumption rich nations. We have to make huge changes in our consumer habits to restore ecological balance. And yet, sometimes we have an opportunity to make a small personal change that will help – trade in our car for a bicycle, practice natural refrigeration, use second-hand tools and clothes, and so forth. All these things help. To restore our damaged ecosystems, we need to change the consumer culture and learn to live more modest lifestyles with less stuff. So yes, every little thing we do helps and these actions add up. For me, living without a fridge for six weeks was not a huge contribution to saving Earth’s ecosystems, but it was a useful experience to learn another way to use less stuff.
Yes, I think that those of us who experiment with unplugging are also getting involved at the political, cultural, and community levels on ecological issues and recommend that others do so as well. Its good to do whatever we can. Its not an either/or proposition. How do fridges, from your perspective, relate to larger issues of energy consumption, electricity production, and peak everything?
The refrigerator is one of many superficial conveniences. It seems convenient for the user, but it only exists because we have access to massive flows of energy, primarily from ancient biomass in the form of oil, coal, and gas. When considering the ecological impact of a technology, we have to look not only at the energy consumed as we use it, but the energy cost embedded in the thing itself – the car, the fridge, the computer. This embedded energy – mostly from oil – is the energy required to mine the resources, ship resources around the world, manufacture steel alloys and plastics, assemble the appliance, ship the appliance, repair and maintain the appliance. And then, at the end of its life cycle, dispose of the appliance. As we know, many manufacturers plan for obsolescence, design products that wear out more quickly or go out of fashion, so customers will buy new ones.
This sort of reckless, runaway consumption is the root cause of ecological overshoot, a society living beyond the genuine capacity of its habitat. In our case, humanity as a whole is living beyond the means of the entire Earth. As a result, we chop down, burn, and destroy the ecological assets of our Earth habitat, trying to live beyond our real, natural means. The wealthy nations do this as a billion people live on the edge of starvation. This is not sustainable.
We’ve made so many terrible mistakes – many that have irreversibly damaged nature – because we adopted an economic system – industrial consumer capitalism – that believes and acts as if Earth’s resources and waste sinks are infinite. They are not. We live – as does every natural being – in a finite habitat on a finite planet.
Is it possible that living more simply in new radical ways could contribute to a shift in our consciousness towards a new sustainable world? I find personally that if I'm using all of the old tools and ways that are part of the problem, I don't feel as sure that we can make a change, living in a new way helps me to see a new way and that gives me hope and insight.
Yes. I’m under no illusion that I’m going to seriously reverse this trend by hanging my food out the window rather than use a fridge, but it’s the sort of thing we need to start doing.
If millions of people reduced their need for fridges and cars and so forth, we could begin to reverse the destructive trend.
Another thing I did in Amsterdam and which I do at home in Canada, is buy things that are not packaged. Take containers to the market and buy things without plastic and paper packaging.
The one solution we almost never hear from the “green economy” promoters and the “sustainable development” cheerleaders is this: Buy less stuff!
Here's to learning how to share again...if you have a fridge: make some room and help someone else unplug! Thinking of unplugging? Go for it! Thanks very much Rex.
========
This photo of Rex Weyler and a fellow activist Noemi Cruz, Guarani indigenous nation, who works with Greenpeace in Argentina. Together, they helped protect a large area of rainforest/indigenous territory. Rex Weyler has written a number of excellent books such as Greenpeace and The Jesus Sayings and currently has a regular blog with Greenpeace International called Deep Green, which can be found here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/deep-green/
Elizabeth Kolbert's New Yorker article can be found here:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2009/08/31/090831crat_atlarge_kolbert
Why did you decide to go fridge free?
Well, it was the circumstance. I was in a small flat that had a shared fridge down below, but the fridge was full of other tenants’ things, and since I’ve been a fan of “Living Without a Fridge” for a few years, I just decided to try it. Of course, this was relatively easy because it was winter time, and I was on my own, so my little experiment is no great achievement compared to what others have done, living full time with no fridge, and so forth.
Nevertheless, I was inspired by the Ditch Your Fridge website, and I remembered reading about what people discovered by living without a fridge, so I decided to try it.
So what did you learn? Any innovations?
First, I had to create a system for keeping certain things – fruit, juice, cheese – cold. It so happened that I had a good-sized canvas bag that I had carried from home, so I fashioned a draw-string around the bag and hung it outside my window. Pretty simple. It was winter, after all, but I was so proud of myself for this little achievement, and it all worked so simply. That’s one thing I learned: Some solutions can be simple and very low-tech.
My bag hung out the window for the entire six weeks I was in Amsterdam. I also learned that it was quite handy, because everything was right there when I needed it. Open the window, grab the bag. Simple and convenient.
Did you find that living without a fridge changed your perception of nature or food in any way?
Oh, certainly. For one thing, I was much more conscious of the weather and temperature. When it rained, I hung the bag under a window with a little ledge above to protect it from rain. When there was a cold snap, I wondered if my food would freeze. No. Everything was fine.
By the way, during the cold spell, I went skating on the canals one day. Now, that was fun. All the families were out, and people were selling hot chocolate, hot rum, soup, mulled wine; people were playing hockey, skating hand-in-hand. It was a real cultural festival, and one could skate all over Amsterdam. That was a blast.
Then, when it warmed up, I wondered if it was too warm. No. Everything in the bag stayed plenty cold.
The little experiment definitely helped tune me into the weather.
Sounds like you had a heightened sense of nature as dynamic, what about your food? Was it still as nice as eating in Europe should be?
The main thing I had to do was keep my volume down to the size of the canvas bag, and have containers for things, so I saved jars and so forth.
I ate very well, and really enjoyed the local food. I shopped for fresh fruits and vegetables at the market regularly, so I didn’t store things for long, and I got to know some of the people at the farmers’ market, another benefit. Less technology, more social interaction! A double win.
Do you think the world would benefit if more people chose to go fridge free either all the time or in the winter?
Yes, certainly, but let’s remember that most of the world is fridge free. In North America and Europe, most homes have electric refrigerators, but not in the rest of the world. There are about 300-million fridges in North America and Europe, one for every three people. In the rest of the world, there is one fridge for every 20-30 people, and in the poorest regions there are very few fridges. About 50-60-million refrigerators are sold in the world each year, and almost this many thrown away. Eventually, of course all fridges are thrown away. It’s a massive resource-to-waste cycle. China is now the largest refrigerator market, but the first generations of Chinese fridges are extremely inefficient: about 2.5 kWh/year/liter, about twice the energy use of a typical western refrigerator. This may improve, but the rush to “modern” lifestyles in China led to cheap appliances, not necessarily smart or efficient appliances.
And remember, traditional refrigerators, besides being resource and energy sinks, also create chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), all of which destroy Earth’s atmospheric ozone layer. Greenpeace helped create the “GreenFreeze” technology that offers a solution to the ozone problem.
Rex Tells us about GreenFreeze.
In 1992 Greenpeace assembled a team of scientists, who worked with the East German company DKK Scharfenstein to create and test the Greenfreeze technology, using hydrocarbon refrigerants that are non-toxic, don't deplete the ozone layer, are more efficient, and much safer than CFCs and HCFCs.
The large refrigerant chemical producers – Du Pont, Atochem, and others – don’t want to switch because they have a monopoly and huge investments in CFCs and HCFCs. These chemical giants have resisted change to maximize their profits on investments in the wrong technology. They have conducted misinformation and lobbying campaigns in developing countries to avoid the Montreal Protocol on reducing CFCs and HCFCs and to promote their obsolete technologies.
Typically, the chemical companies and some US appliance manufacturers claimed the GreenFreeze system did not work, but in Europe the four biggest producers – Bosch, Siemens, Liebherr and Miele – began producing Greenfreeze models in 1993. People can get Greenfreeze refrigerators now in Germany, Austria, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland, Britain, Argentina, and soon in India, Pakistan, and China
Even so, let’s remember, this still does not resolve the questions of resource use, energy use, and waste products. Living without a fridge is the solution that answers these other questions.
As an ecologist, is there a way that you describe making this small change to yourself or others? Elizabeth Kolbert from New Yorker magazine wrote an interesting article a few years back called "What's Wrong with Ecostunts" dismissing low-tech experiments such as No Impact man or living without a fridge as giving people illusions about how we are going to stop climate change.
Well, as an ecologist, I’m concerned that it is too late for small changes in the high-consumption rich nations. We have to make huge changes in our consumer habits to restore ecological balance. And yet, sometimes we have an opportunity to make a small personal change that will help – trade in our car for a bicycle, practice natural refrigeration, use second-hand tools and clothes, and so forth. All these things help. To restore our damaged ecosystems, we need to change the consumer culture and learn to live more modest lifestyles with less stuff. So yes, every little thing we do helps and these actions add up. For me, living without a fridge for six weeks was not a huge contribution to saving Earth’s ecosystems, but it was a useful experience to learn another way to use less stuff.
Yes, I think that those of us who experiment with unplugging are also getting involved at the political, cultural, and community levels on ecological issues and recommend that others do so as well. Its good to do whatever we can. Its not an either/or proposition. How do fridges, from your perspective, relate to larger issues of energy consumption, electricity production, and peak everything?
The refrigerator is one of many superficial conveniences. It seems convenient for the user, but it only exists because we have access to massive flows of energy, primarily from ancient biomass in the form of oil, coal, and gas. When considering the ecological impact of a technology, we have to look not only at the energy consumed as we use it, but the energy cost embedded in the thing itself – the car, the fridge, the computer. This embedded energy – mostly from oil – is the energy required to mine the resources, ship resources around the world, manufacture steel alloys and plastics, assemble the appliance, ship the appliance, repair and maintain the appliance. And then, at the end of its life cycle, dispose of the appliance. As we know, many manufacturers plan for obsolescence, design products that wear out more quickly or go out of fashion, so customers will buy new ones.
This sort of reckless, runaway consumption is the root cause of ecological overshoot, a society living beyond the genuine capacity of its habitat. In our case, humanity as a whole is living beyond the means of the entire Earth. As a result, we chop down, burn, and destroy the ecological assets of our Earth habitat, trying to live beyond our real, natural means. The wealthy nations do this as a billion people live on the edge of starvation. This is not sustainable.
We’ve made so many terrible mistakes – many that have irreversibly damaged nature – because we adopted an economic system – industrial consumer capitalism – that believes and acts as if Earth’s resources and waste sinks are infinite. They are not. We live – as does every natural being – in a finite habitat on a finite planet.
Is it possible that living more simply in new radical ways could contribute to a shift in our consciousness towards a new sustainable world? I find personally that if I'm using all of the old tools and ways that are part of the problem, I don't feel as sure that we can make a change, living in a new way helps me to see a new way and that gives me hope and insight.
Yes. I’m under no illusion that I’m going to seriously reverse this trend by hanging my food out the window rather than use a fridge, but it’s the sort of thing we need to start doing.
We need to experiment at every level with what it means to use fewer resources, less energy, and create less waste.
If millions of people reduced their need for fridges and cars and so forth, we could begin to reverse the destructive trend.
It occurred to me in Amsterdam that a fridge could perhaps be a shared, community resource for those times when it is necessary.Sharing is difficult, but it is the sort of action we need to relearn if we are serious about sustainability. I wear almost entirely second-hand clothes. Our entire family does. Pop fashion is just another form of reckless consumption. The fashion industry is “planned obsolescence” gone insane. The fashion industry is brainwashing to make us consume more stuff, and it is killing the natural systems that actually support life.
Another thing I did in Amsterdam and which I do at home in Canada, is buy things that are not packaged. Take containers to the market and buy things without plastic and paper packaging.
As I said, I don’t think these “small steps” are enough to save us, without some very large steps, but these personal actions prepare us for what is coming.The skills we learn – mending clothes, growing food, making soil, healing each other – are skills that we, our children, and future generations are going to need to survive in a world of scarcity, in ecosystems damaged by industrial, consumer culture.
The one solution we almost never hear from the “green economy” promoters and the “sustainable development” cheerleaders is this: Buy less stuff!
Here's to learning how to share again...if you have a fridge: make some room and help someone else unplug! Thinking of unplugging? Go for it! Thanks very much Rex.
========
This photo of Rex Weyler and a fellow activist Noemi Cruz, Guarani indigenous nation, who works with Greenpeace in Argentina. Together, they helped protect a large area of rainforest/indigenous territory. Rex Weyler has written a number of excellent books such as Greenpeace and The Jesus Sayings and currently has a regular blog with Greenpeace International called Deep Green, which can be found here:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/deep-green/
Elizabeth Kolbert's New Yorker article can be found here:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2009/08/31/090831crat_atlarge_kolbert
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
