I don't know how many toasties you have to make before the carbon cost to build the device is offset by the energy savings from using it. The alternative is to eat the sandwich raw, but then you have to eat more to get same calories so more carbon from extra food grown. Honestly I think this needs a multimillion pound study run on it to determine what is most ecological.
I presume she'd bury us for eating white bread on said sandwiches and the cows that made the cheese are the devil incarnate. I think we should all just buy stuff, bring it to the land fill and chuck it straight in. In honour of gretta.
I was accused of that yesterday too.. but I can't be milk because he was banned so I must be someone else. My money is still on me being Luv
There's not much carbon footprint from a 20 year old sandwich toaster. Certainly a lot less than replacing it with a new George Foreman grill or a load of disposable plastic bags.
Clearly you need to follow the Clarkson caravanner methodology of consumption and just buy stuff and bring it straight to the dump
The plastics come from oil. The metals need to be extracted and melted. The product needs shipping. Overall as far as appliances go, they're pretty benign, no carbon-expensive microchips, low consumption,etc. Certainly emissions produced at several steps along the way to make them, but compared to many other things they're tame. I guess if you have dozen mini appliances, sandwich makers, waffle makers, cake pop makers, etc... Etc... The toll would build up. Pulling this number completely out of my arse, but I bet if you made a couple dozen sandwiches, you probably break even on the emissions to create the sandwich maker over the extra energy wasted using a less efficient tool. It's the cake pop makers that people use once and then stick in the closet that hurt the environment more.
companies can already assign carbon numbers to everything, they just don't want to advertise it. this is all about consumerism. Its high time people got back to hand me downs and making things last 20 years.
Why stop there. Let's start using candles for light, fires for cooking and go down to the river to wash your clothes.
whoa. candles = carbon, fires = carbon. washing in the river = pollution. all things gretta doesn't want you to do!
I hope those are beeswax candles, or you're being very pollutey! Sorry... Can't use beeswax, we're All supposed to be vegan now. Perhaps we just need to forget about artificial light, just sleep when it's dark, and wake when it's light.
Grow wood, burn wood. Carbon net neutral. What makes it bad is coal, fire starters, not replanting forests, costs involved in transport of wood and harvesting wood. (Did you use petrol saws and lories to move it?) Same with candles if beeswax, harvest wax, produce more wax. Carbon net neutral. If it's paraffin wax that's a different story. Washing clothes in the river... Use soap from goat milk or something. It's the vegans who make being sustainable impossible. We should eat them.
nope. Grow a tree = how many years. burn a tree = immediate carbon release. soap = processed material using energy, burning wood, boiling, reducing and whatever. don't you DARE wash yourself you planet killer! we have to realise that the gretta of this world would accuse ancient Egyptians of being polluters as well. lets not bring reason into this.
white bread, processed bacon, any lettuce flown in form wherever required critical question.. what sauce on the bacon butty you climate denier you!
Sure, you're going to travel the miles to collect it? Might want to pack a snack for the trip, maybe a sandwich.
