More crap journalism from the IHT.
"There is this idea that if we just buy more products that are green, we'll be fine and everything will just go on," [Colin Beavan, the so-called "no impact man," who - as an experiment - lived a completely carbon-neutral life in a New York apartment with his wife, daughter and dog for a year] said. "But the fact of the matter is, to control emissions we have to look at lifestyle change. And that doesn't mean just using differently, it means using less." Looked at from the perspective of carbon emissions, the fashionista version of green has its limits. <...> Ultimately green is not an aesthetic. Indeed the best way to lower the carbon footprint of your home, Allwood says, it to turn down the heat. "If you're not wearing a woollen sweater indoors in winter, your heating is set too high," he said. <...> Said Beavan, the no-impact man: "Some companies are really trying to make greener products: They'll make a lamp made with LED bulb, but the whole ethos is that you'll buy it cause it's au courant and fashionable, and then get a new one when it's out of style."
Looked at from the perspective of carbon emissions, the fashionista version of green has its limits. <...>
Ultimately green is not an aesthetic. Indeed the best way to lower the carbon footprint of your home, Allwood says, it to turn down the heat.
"If you're not wearing a woollen sweater indoors in winter, your heating is set too high," he said. <...>
Said Beavan, the no-impact man: "Some companies are really trying to make greener products: They'll make a lamp made with LED bulb, but the whole ethos is that you'll buy it cause it's au courant and fashionable, and then get a new one when it's out of style."
