Thought Lateral » Environment

#46 Shave 100% of time off of the daily shave – shave every other day

Denver — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:00:29 +0000

Wet shaving with a razor every day can be a chore for men. Epilating is an option, though not many would take it.
Rather than scraping your skin as well as the intended hair, shaving every other day is another option to keeping your face scar free.
In addition to the direct benefits of being scar free, and saving time, the facial skin would obviously benefit from not bathing in a multitude of chemicals. Aqua, Palmitic Acid, Triethanolamine, Isopentane, Glyceryl Oleate, Stearic Acid, Isobutane, Sorbitol, Hydroxyethylcellulose, Parfum (??), PEG-90M, Glycerin, Linalool, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Nitrate, Butylphenyl Methylpropional, Glyoxal, Silica, Polysorbate 60, Disodium Phosphate, CI 45350, CI 42090 are the listed ingredients on a can of [famous brand] shaving gel I’ve just looked at. Well I did say “multitude” didn’t I?
Apparently shaving foam should not be used to clean rocks (gravestones in particular) as it can damage them, and is also more acidic than acid rain.

Hmmmm. Shaving every other day is sounds healthier as well as quicker the more I read about shaving foam.

Electric razor anyone?

#30 Stack possessions in your digital house neatly with 7-zip

Denver — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 09:00:43 +0000

Digital information should be packed away neatly when not in regular use, I feel. Not only does it mean the disk space is better utiliised the contents are easier to navigate.

A method for doing this is to use software to compress files. The one I use, and recommend as part of the Life hack series, is 7-Zip.

It is open source (for the most part) and entirely free to use. It has great compression ratios compared to other similar software, and is one of the first programs I install on a personal computer (PC).

As well as saving space on the hard disk, it also greatly saves bandwidth when transferring files, so indirectly lowering the users carbon footprint.

#19 Shrink your shoe size with energy saving bulbs

Denver — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:40:57 +0000

OK, so I don’t strictly mean your physical shoe size, but something similar. Your carbon footprint.

It is surprising energy saving bulbs are not used more widely than they are currently. To not use them is a false economy. Here’s why…

Buying one moderately more expensive bulb with lower running costs, works out cheaper than buying many cheaper bulbs with higher running costs. Apart from saving economically, there are much more important ecological savings to the world we live in.

By reducing our negative impact on the environment, we can also save money. That’s a win-win scenario!

Hayfever? Where’s the hay?

Denver — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:03:37 +0000

Increasingly people in cities are succumbing to the symptoms of hayfever. My question is “Where is the hay?” There is less and less greenery in the city with each passing year as front gardens turn into driveways and rear gardens are decked. Granted, hayfever is not caused by hay and is attributed to the effects of pollen, but the point remains. The number of hayfever sufferers appears to be inversely proportional to the amount of greenery, which suggests to me that hayfever would be better called “pollution fever”.

I hypothesize that increased pollution is either directly causing the symptoms of hayfever, or accentuating the sensitivity to pollen.

Hayfever? Pollution fever more likely!

What size is the litter problem?

Denver — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:06:16 +0000

At what size does stuff become litter?

Litter, junk, waste, refuse, trash, you know, the stuff that is a waste of your cash? That’s right, I’m talking about litter.

What is the size of the litter problem?

I don’t ask that in a “Save the Earth and free the whales”-kind-of-way (though that can be good too) or in way that means lots of furry Christmas presents because someone forgot to get Tabby neutered.

What I mean is, just what size exactly does a refuse item need to be in order to be classified as litter?

Think about it, if the soggy cardboard that was holding the last leg of greasy chicken is tossed to ground in a carefree manner, few* would argue against the item being classified as litter. (*-Well, few people I’ve met anyhow. Obviously you’re mileage may vary)

After all, it is an unwanted item that has been improperly discarded, i.e. not in a bin – so is called litter.

Hang on though! What if we were to shrink the problem? Let’s shrink that cardboard down…

Now if our post-pub-2:00am-haute-cuisine container shrinks to become a cigarette butt is it still litter?

Yes. Wherever you dump that fag stub, if it’s not in a bin it is litter.

Hmm. Maybe we didn’t shrink it enough. OK, let’s shrink it some more…

Now it becomes a spot of dust on your glad-rags as you are on your way out for the evening. Without hesitation you flick the offending dust off your garment and continue on your way. You litterbug! No? You mean it wasn’t litter? Why? It was “too small” you say? Now you see my point.

Smaller than what? What is the comparative size that says “This is litter”, or “This is not litter”?

All I can say is it’s larger than an eyelash, but smaller than a chewing gum. As far as I can tell, that’s about the size of the litter problem.