English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

a good rule of thumb is 10 percent of your annual income..GO GREEN!!!! let's go folks, get on the green bandwagon!!! everyone is doing it!! pay no attention to the naysayers...

2007-08-24 23:37:11 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment Other - Environment

perhaps 5%?? how bout a shiney new nickel?

2007-08-24 23:45:08 · update #1

cooldaddy...you don't consider the money you are taxed as your money? wow.

2007-08-24 23:57:21 · update #2

12 answers

This year might be a bit of an exception as, subject to planning permission, we're hoping to erect a wind turbine to power our house and the other five nearby houses so there'll be a large capital outlay.

Living on a windy hill means we should generate more electricity than we need and can sell the surplus. Although expensive in the short term the long term benefits are free electricity and in time a profit.

Turbines aside, we're saving about $2000 a year through having reduced energy consumption and are paying perhaps $1000 more for environmentally friendly products and services, on that basis we're not spending anything but making $1000 per year.

Did you know that for a one off payment of 1% of income and an annual payment of 0.1% of income, climate change could be reversed, it's not a lot is it?

2007-08-25 00:03:38 · answer #1 · answered by Trevor 7 · 2 2

I guess the extra money our family spend when choosing food produced ecological and/or local adds about 5 percent extra to the food budget. Then we have signed up for green electricity and I think that was a few percent extra cost as well.

Next year we will probably exchange our car for a more environmental friendly one so that will probably be a larger cost that year. Though I think it's wrong when products being produced in sustainable ways ar more expensive, I have no problem with paying some extra money if it helps the environment.

Also, I find it interesting when Trevor gets thumbs down for his great initiative in investing in wind power. I guess I'll receive thumbs down on this answer too. Can anyone explain why to me?

2007-08-25 00:48:29 · answer #2 · answered by Ingela 3 · 0 0

Have you heard about the Carbon Cycle? The Carbon cycle tends to keep things in balance. For example when carbon dioxide increase in the air the green plants increase in growth and rate of growth. This results in more carbon dioxide uptake which in time tends to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Temperature increases also increase growth as long as it does not get too hot, and this increase in growth and rate of growth due to temperature increases, results in more uptake of carbon dioxide. Greenhouse gases, of which carbon dioxide is only one, trap heat that is formed when the sunshine strikes the earth. The amount of and intensity of the Sun is obviously a factor. It normally varies only + or - 3% during the almost 11 year solar cycle. Occasionally there is a lot of solar flare activity and is know as a solar storm. These storms put out increased energy from the Sun. It is interesting that this report came from NOAA. In 2003, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration discovered hot springs in the Arctic Ocean. Do you think this might have anything to do with the ice melting? Water expands when temperature increases. This could account for at least part of the rising sea levels. As far as the ocean temperatures increasing do not forget that everyday there are nuclear plants discharging hot water into the ocean. This water becomes heated when it cools the nuclear reactor, and then it is discharged into the ocean.

2016-05-17 10:04:44 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

For me, the financial benefits of the conservation measures I was taught my by my parents so overshadow the remaining costs I don't track them in any great detail. Due to America's low tax rates, the government does very little that directly benefit me, but that's the way most citizen's prefer it. At least the frankly fatal forms of pollution have some restrictions on the, although it's pretty hit and miss.

2007-08-25 04:55:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

None.

It's the job of the government to replace fossil fuelled power plants with nuclear power plants and to get around to replacing oil dug up from the ground with a synthetic fuel.

There's also very little point to increasing energy efficiency when switching to nuclear power would be even more effective at stopping global warming from getting worse.

2007-08-25 01:02:51 · answer #5 · answered by bestonnet_00 7 · 0 0

0%. I pay taxes. Let the government fix it.

Yeah, but I dont consider it mine when I cant touch it. So I guess with SS, state taxes, and federal taxes I spend more than 10%, if you look at it that way. But I wasnt aware that my tax money was being spent on reversing climate change.

2007-08-24 23:51:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

While I applaud your support of environmentalism, your advice stinks (sorry, but htat's the truth).

You are playing into the hands of the special interests who keep circulating propaganda that people have to "spend, sacrifice, and do without" to clean up the environment. And the fact is tha tthe opposite is true--and you need to make people aware of that.

What do I ean? Simple--the average person can do the most good--and SAVE, not spend, money, if they jsut use some common sense. For example:

>Investing in energy efficient light bulbs can not only pay for themselves, but the enrgy savings will put about $100/yr in their pocket besides.
>planning ahead and replacing appliences with efficient models as the old ones wear out costs very little extra--and will usually pay for themseles in energy savings.
>by the same reasoning, when it comes time to trade in a car, buying a fuel-efficient model cuts costs considerably. And their are inexpensive cars around that get better mileage than the gas hogs if you don't want to spend the extra money for a hybrid.
>Proper insulation,e tc. for homes not only pays for itself in lower utility costs, it adds to a home's value.

So PLEASE--quit alienating people by telling them they have to spend and sacrifice--when the reality is that they can INVEST in "going green" and benefit financially while helping the environment.

2007-08-25 02:32:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

I think I will spend probably $1,500.00 this year. However that dosent include the money I have already spent which is probably about 900.00. Next year I am getting married and my future husband and I have decided to have a somewhat green wedding. We are also going to give out tiny baby trees as a wedding favor to all of our guests.

2007-08-25 01:20:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

About £500. I want to make small improvements to my property which will contribute to helping the environment greatly. And over time i intend to buy solar panels to go on the roof to lower my reliance on power stations.

2007-08-25 01:13:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

nothing it would be a waste of money, it's not possible to reverse climate change, don't underestimate the power of mother nature. However, going green isn't a bad thing.

2007-08-24 23:57:36 · answer #10 · answered by willow 6 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers