A New Look at an Old Saw

We've all heard the phrase "reduce, reuse, recycle". It has been posted on billboards, recycling bins and bumper stickers. We instantly recognize the symbol of three bent arrows forming a triangle as indicating that a material is recyclable or that the designated container is a receptacle for recyclable materials. This symbol has become a ubiquitous tool of the recycling movement. But how often do we really think about the phrase, the entire phrase? It doesn't start with the word recycle and there is a very good reason for that. Because recycling, while it is good and helps to reduce the need for mining new feed stocks from the planet, is still an energy intensive process that does require additional inputs of finite resources. 

Reuse comes before recycle because by reusing and repurposing items we are keeping them out of the waste stream. We are conserving resources required at the front end of the production cycle by reducing the need for new goods and also putting off the need for using resources at the end of the item's useful life when it is recycled.  By repairing an item or passing it on to someone else, or by repurposing it into another useful or beautiful object we are reducing our impact on the planet. For some items this may be only a fractional amount, but add up all those fractions for all those items and you are starting to have a noticeable impact.

Reduce heads the list. I'm not just talking about packaging here folks, while that is important. I've heard stories of people going to the department store and buying a new TV, taking it out of the package, leaving the packaging at the store and telling the management that they are insulted by the excess packaging. But did they ever consider not buying the new TV? It's very likely that they have a perfectly functional TV at home, maybe even more than one. What is this one for? Perhaps the picture quality is marginally better? Perhaps it is a bit larger. Perhaps they are getting a new 32 inch TV for the family room so they can put the 27 inch in the kid's room. But did they stop to think that maybe the children don't need a TV in their room? That maybe if they had fewer TVs they could spend less time at work and more time with their family? In the 1950's the average American family lived in a house only 1/2 to 2/3rds the size of today's homes. They might have one television. They did not have cell phones and iPads and all the other things that we seem to think are necessary. Yet studies show that people where happier then than they are now. Do you wonder why? I think it's time we all stop to ask ourselves that question. 

An older phrase along the same line was "use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without". There was a different motivation behind this phrase, but they do share a similar goal. The goal of both is to teach us to conserve the finite resources of our planet and to do so first and foremost by reducing out level of consumption.