plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Bushwalking gear and paraphernalia. Electronic gadget topics (inc. GPS, PLB, chargers) belong in the 'Techno Babble' sub-forum.
Forum rules
TIP: The online Bushwalk Inventory System can help bushwalkers with a variety of bushwalk planning tasks, including: Manage which items they take bushwalking so that they do not forget anything they might need, plan meals for their walks, and automatically compile food/fuel shopping lists (lists of consumables) required to make and cook the meals for each walk. It is particularly useful for planning for groups who share food or other items, but is also useful for individual walkers.

plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Gadgetgeek » Tue 10 Oct, 2017 9:10 pm

First off, this is going to be a blatant s**t stirring question, and so lets keep that in mind, personal views are welcomed as that's all we really have, but lets also make sure we don't read anything as a personal attack, because that's pretty easy given the nature of the question.

the impetus for the question came from an ad I just saw for a new marmot synthetic insulation, being as compressible (or nearly) as down, but obviously not with the concerns some have regarding feathers.

So! here we go.

Which is the better option, Feathers/down sourced by unknown methods (lets all be honest, folks can ethic-wash all they want, but we have no idea who's pulling the butt feathers from a goose unless its us, and I can't be bothered to raise geese on my balcony)
Or synthetics, no goose-butts harmed, but knowing what we know about micro-plastics....

Yep, opening a can-o-worms(tm) And I'm sure its been talked about in the past, but just wanting to spark some conversation.

And for round two, no dry treatment on those feathers, because we know that DWR is not exactly great stuff, so lets just say no middle ground, (unless you want to pull a Doc Holiday) in which case be my guest. I can't stop ya because as the man (or rather Val Kilmer) said "My hypocrisy knows no bounds'


From my perspective, yes, I would love to use non-synthetic products. But its not practical to my location or uses, and while I understand that I'm just as culpable as the rest of us when it comes to plastic waste, I just have to do what I can when it comes to harm mitigation, and maybe the karmic balance won't tilt in my favor, but maybe what I do gets enough kids interested in saving the planet that by the time they are able to make decisions, they will have good choices available. (Oh yeah, justify the pants off of that bit of double-think!) so yeah, I'll accept my double standard.

any takers? Where does the balance fall for you?
Gadgetgeek
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1214
Joined: Sun 23 Sep, 2012 4:10 pm
Region: Queensland
Gender: Male

plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby GPSGuided » Tue 10 Oct, 2017 10:45 pm

Good topic!

Personally I see that modern technologies and products are just a part of life in our early 21st century. I would do what’s reasonable to minimise my footprint on that front, in particularly not waste what I buy and not consume what I don’t need. If that can be managed, then it’s sufficient in the right direction. As the fact remains, even down gears need synthetic lining and shell, so there’s no escape. I pay my respect to those Dunlop Volley wearers and the matrix is too hard to calculate and impose on others unless we want to be dictatorial.
Just move it!
User avatar
GPSGuided
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 6968
Joined: Mon 13 May, 2013 2:37 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Hallu » Tue 10 Oct, 2017 11:05 pm

Let's be honest, you buy what, maybe 4 or 5 down jackets in your life ? And that's if you're a really enthusiastic outdoorsman. So clearly the issue is with sleeping bags, quilts (duvet ? doona ?), and bedroom pillows. Ultimately it depends on whether or not you're raising poultry just for this, or if they're a byproduct of poultry farming for their meat. And since I don't know, I can't really judge. Because if no extra ducks or geese are killed and their feathers would just be thrown away if we all used plastic, then it's a no-brainer.
Hallu
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri 28 Sep, 2012 11:19 am
Location: Grenoble
Region: Other Country

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby slparker » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 11:04 am

I will take an 'ethical' bushwalker seriously when he/she shows me their wool tent that they have knitted from home grown sheep.

Modern outdoor equipment is based on plastics, which is based on oil. fair enough, don't buy down ripped from live screaming geese but any discussion on ethical equipment has the danger of appearing sanctimonious because at the end of all purchasing decisions comes an oil-based product that may have been made in a factory where OH&S is the least concern.

If I thought about it in at least utilitarian terms I'd prefer to know that my down jacket is made in a factory where workers are not exploited, rather than worry about the odd traumatised goose, but to be honest I don't care enough to have ever found out, like anyone else who has bought a down jacket, I expect.
slparker
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2008 10:59 pm

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Nuts » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 11:28 am

slparker wrote:
If I thought about it in at least utilitarian terms I'd prefer to know that my down jacket is made in a factory where workers are not exploited, rather than worry about the odd traumatised goose, but to be honest I don't care enough to have ever found out, like anyone else who has bought a down jacket, I expect.


Agreed, but there's not any great effort needed to also find out if there's been any attempt to source an 'ethical' product. Much of our gear isn't from the squeakiest green suppliers but they at least have a policy in place. Whether the country's standards support more than a green-wash is questionable but these are industries in transition, with governments to follow.

There is so much power in consumption to sway manufactures to put so many of the world's wrongs right. In this case, why not some natural-pluck down from a happy free range goose rather than an animal treated like a machine? For what, a few seconds on google and the cost of any number of not-really-necessary discretionary spends?


https://qz.com/296435/a-shoppers-guide- ... n-jackets/

(vegans :roll: how devastating is an oil spil).
User avatar
Nuts
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 8632
Joined: Sat 05 Apr, 2008 12:22 pm
Region: Tasmania

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby slparker » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 11:40 am

Nuts wrote:
slparker wrote:
If I thought about it in at least utilitarian terms I'd prefer to know that my down jacket is made in a factory where workers are not exploited, rather than worry about the odd traumatised goose, but to be honest I don't care enough to have ever found out, like anyone else who has bought a down jacket, I expect.


Agreed, but there's not any great effort needed to also find out if there's been any attempt to source an 'ethical' product. Much of our gear isn't from the squeakiest green suppliers but they at least have a policy in place. Whether the country's standards support more than a green-wash is questionable but these are industries in transition, with governments to follow.

There is so much power in consumption to sway manufactures to put so many of the world's wrongs right. In this case, why not some natural-pluck down from a happy free range goose rather than an animal treated like a machine? For what, a few seconds on google and the cost of any number of not-really-necessary discretionary spends?


https://qz.com/296435/a-shoppers-guide- ... n-jackets/

(vegans :roll: how devastating is an oil spil).


true, but my point was that more misery might be inherent for the workers making the jacket than in the treatment of geese. is there an ethical standard for the treatment of factory workers making these jackets?

Why concentrate on the geese? I don't concern myself with the lived experience of wild geese so captive geese don't concern me unless they are being actively cruelly treated(i.e. inflicting pain for the purposes of inflicting pain). I would hope that those worried about the experience of captive geese are also in the wild ensuring that no goose starves or is mishandled by predators.
slparker
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2008 10:59 pm

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby GPSGuided » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 12:32 pm

slparker wrote:If I thought about it in at least utilitarian terms I'd prefer to know that my down jacket is made in a factory where workers are not exploited...

This brings up another dilemma. Without the factories jobs, however poorly paid and work conditions in some parts of the 3rd world countries where much of our consumer goods are made, there’s no other opportunities for the rural poor to lift themselves and their family out of poverty. Some have considered such industrialisation process to be an unavoidable (to an extent) evil of the process. Of course, extremes are to be condoned but where’s the line? If their condition and earnings equal or are close to an industrialised Western country, then there wouldn’t be any reasons for businesses to invest and deal there ie. No economic improvement.
Just move it!
User avatar
GPSGuided
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 6968
Joined: Mon 13 May, 2013 2:37 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby slparker » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 8:51 pm

It is a dilemma but I am not sure that the economic gain ( that the exploited never see) is sufficient justification to knowingly or unknowingly exploit.
It doesn't absolve the buyer of their complicity. If the buyer genuinely had the economic future of poor populations in mind there are non-exploitative methods of injecting investment into an economy. We just don't choose to do it.
slparker
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2008 10:59 pm

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby GPSGuided » Wed 11 Oct, 2017 9:05 pm

slparker wrote:It is a dilemma but I am not sure that the economic gain ( that the exploited never see) is sufficient justification to knowingly or unknowingly exploit.
It doesn't absolve the buyer of their complicity. If the buyer genuinely had the economic future of poor populations in mind there are non-exploitative methods of injecting investment into an economy. We just don't choose to do it.

You'd be surprised how some of them perceive these factory opportunities vs how us in the West perceive how they perceive those circumstances. Western media often have its own kind of bias. Based on my experiences and have seen, there'll always be those who'll fall through the cracks (even here in Australia) but the great majority welcome the opportunities and have made differences to their lives. Applying our Western standard and priorities are often unrealistic given their stage of economic and social development, ending up hampering the development. Not an easy one and an area of great give and take.
Just move it!
User avatar
GPSGuided
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 6968
Joined: Mon 13 May, 2013 2:37 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Neo » Thu 12 Oct, 2017 7:09 pm

I'd like to camp or at least walk where there isn't toilet tissue everywhere! The main offense seems to be small portions (girl peeing?).

Litter is the one thing that boils up until I evetually pick some up and swear about them.

I do understand that accidents happen, unintentional littering.
Last edited by Neo on Fri 13 Oct, 2017 7:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Neo
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1887
Joined: Wed 31 Aug, 2016 4:53 pm
Location: Port Macquarie NSW
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby ribuck » Thu 12 Oct, 2017 10:50 pm

Neo wrote:I do understand that accidents happen, unintentional littering.

The appropriate response to unintentional littering is to remove at least as much of someone else's litter.

So, if I get back from a trip and realize that I must have left a pair of socks drying on a rock somewhere, I will make a point of collecting some disgusting litter left by someone else in the wilderness.

That way, the bush does not get more and more littered as a result of cumulative unintentional littering.
User avatar
ribuck
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1883
Joined: Wed 15 May, 2013 3:47 am
Region: Other Country
Gender: Male

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Neo » Fri 13 Oct, 2017 10:40 pm

Hmm my new and calmer response is to collect and burn the loo paper if I'm having a fire and to sometimes pack out the excessive rubbish left behind by others.

I already collect the tid bits when I'm pottering around at a car camp spot.
Neo
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1887
Joined: Wed 31 Aug, 2016 4:53 pm
Location: Port Macquarie NSW
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: plastics and enviroment, theoretical discussion

Postby Neo » Thu 19 Oct, 2017 6:05 pm

Finally gave me the shiits so burning some toilet paper and non-biodegradeable wet wipes from the spot near me :)

Edit, when pottering around I collect the random small bits lost/littered and make a pile. Then later put it with my rubbish.
Yesterday found a guitar pick, today a spoon!
Neo
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1887
Joined: Wed 31 Aug, 2016 4:53 pm
Location: Port Macquarie NSW
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male


Return to Equipment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests