Top products from r/environment

We found 36 product mentions on r/environment. We ranked the 255 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/environment:

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/environment

Yes. Your overall cost of ownership will be less with Toyota, as well as resale value. Fuel savings in general are a societal cost, but you can offset your costs through investment in environmentally friendly channels, (donations, carbon offsets, etc.)

If you absolutely need a truck, you might as well get the best bang for your buck, and not piss away money through depreciation, mechanics bills, and loss of time due to future vehicle purchases or excessive trips to the mechanics.

Toyota trucks keep their value like no other vehicle I can think of.

Plus, here is a fun test. Go to a coffee or brewery with outside seating next to a busy road.

Look at the number of old vehicles that pass you. Then count the Japanese to US manufacturer ratio of old cars...

The book is the Toyota Way, there are others also.

The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer

Edit: This truck could potentially be the last vehicle you ever buy, if that interested you.

u/Xodarap · 1 pointr/environment

Yeah, it is difficult to write a comprehensive theory of ethics in a 100px high comment box; even harder to write one that people find interesting :-)

Singer has said (and I paraphrase): "The foundation of ethics is the theory that you are not above the rules, just because you are you." All my messages are variants on this theme: if you claim a rule, you must be consistent in its application.

I'm not certain intentionality is terribly important (I would like to be protected from an avalanche, even though an avalanche presumably has no "intent") so I would disagree with the last part of your statement, but that is essentially it. More formally:

  1. If I claim X for my self, I must allow others to claim it as well
  2. I claim a life free from suffering
  3. Therefore, I must allow others to claim the same

    This is somewhat simplistic (it doesn't tell us, for example, how to handle competing claims) but it is not too bad. I have basically attempted to summarize the first chapter of Writings on an Ethical Life, so if you would like to hear the same argument but by a better philosopher, I would encourage you to check that out :-)
u/JAFO_JAFO · 2 pointsr/environment

Also, introduce them to others of like mind who DON'T deny climate change. Farmers, scientists, researchers etc.

A good one is this conservative politician Bob Ingliss. Here is a great short video: Rep. Inglis attacks GOP on climate change

He also did an awesome TEDx talk a few years ago: Changing the dialogue on energy and climate: Bob Inglis at TEDxJacksonville

Also, if they will listen to financial arguments, Tony Seba may be another speaker who has interesting theories on cost curves of fossil fuels, versus solar and battery: Tony Seba: Clean Disruption - Energy & Transportation

edit: Tony also has a pretty interesting book Clean Disruption of Energy and Transportation: How Silicon Valley Will Make Oil, Nuclear, Natural Gas, Coal, Electric Utilities and Conventional Cars Obsolete by 2030 - it feels good to see that market forces are coming around, even if regulation is lagging terribly.

u/Nerobus · 6 pointsr/environment

Am I the only one that uses these?! I mean, I love it.

I have one of these in my office, because no one here ever finishes a stupid pot of coffee and it gets moldy and gross. For like a week we used the k-cups that came with the machine, but we are all poor and didn't want to have to go buy a ton of those supper expensive (and as you so mentioned non-recyclable) pieces of trash, so we all just use the reusable cup. It was pretty cheap, easy to use and once you get the proportion of coffee you want in it, works AWESOME! I highly suggest you go buy one now if you have one of these machines.

u/courteousreacharound · 1 pointr/environment

> We can't consume our way out of climate change.

I don't want to be completely dismissive of your statement (I know your heart is in the right place), but there is a strong argument that, paradoxically, consumption is exactly how we're going to solve climate change, because the more solar and wind are bought, the more the price goes down and the more lithium ion batteries are bought, the more the price goes down.

The fossil fuel and ICE car industries are being disrupted by cheaper renewables and electric vehicles, and it could be happening much more rapidly than anyone thinks. Please see this book if interested, by a Stanford professor who has researched this subject very deeply:

u/johnsweber · 33 pointsr/environment

People do realize they can use their own coffee grounds for the keurig, right?

Edit: I'm not trying to discredit you or the article, but there is a perfectly fine green solution already available and not mentioned by either you or the article.

u/ollokot · 1 pointr/environment

The PBS documentary of Cadillac Desert was very good. But the book on which it was based is fantastic. One of the most interesting, eye-opening, and educational books on any subject I have ever read.

u/kiki_strumm3r · 1 pointr/environment

It's not Tassimo, but I use Keurig's refillable k-cup at home. I looked up "refillable tassimo" on Amazon and they had a few options, but I have no idea if they'll fit your pod. Most of them work great.

u/sonar_un · 15 pointsr/environment

They reference Michael Pollan "In Defense of Food" in the article. I am currently reading another book by Michael Pollan called "Omnivore's Dilema" which is an incredible book on the history and techniques used by modern farmers, both industrial and organic.

This guy knows what he is talking about. I really recommend the read if you are interested in where your food comes from, which I believe everyone should know.

u/berticus · 2 pointsr/environment

If plant breeding really geeks you out, I'd suggest reading The Garden of Invention, a book about Luther Burbank and the insane amount of plants he improved that are still in use today (McDonalds uses Burbank potatoes). If you want to breed things in your own garden, I really enjoyed the book Breed Your Own Vegetable Varieties. It had a nice mix of non-technical techniques and more in depth genetics and such. She doesn't mention breeding perennials though. Anybody have recommendations about that? I've been reading up on perennial barley, because I'm a beer nerd and a permaculture nerd.

Also, one more Amazon link (sorry)... the Land Institute is featured in part of the book Biomimicry. The science in the book is probably a little out of date (one of the chapters is on photosynthesis and I think we've gotten closer to figuring that out since the book was published) but it was a real eye-opener and I totally geeked out over it.

(Is there a reddit associate account for amazon, so they can collect referral commissions on book links?)

u/SRkev · 1 pointr/environment

I haven’t looked into specifically starting a business, but I have been reading Eric Toensmeier’s book “The Carbon Farming Solution” link and it has tons of good resources and information. I’d also look at the book “Drawdown” edited by Paul Hawken link

u/killroy200 · 41 pointsr/environment

For those who haven't read it Naomi Oreskes et. al.'s Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming does a fantastic job of laying all of these tactics and campaigns out.

u/paternoster · 1 pointr/environment

The book My Year of Meats is also enlightening, interesting and shocking.

u/mylescloutier · 1 pointr/environment

Everyone just read Food Rules by Michael Pollan. You will be healthier and the planet will be better off if you take his suggestions and spread them.

u/sympathico · 3 pointsr/environment

Have a gander at The People's History of the United States to learn more about it, and why we were never really a democracy.

u/mackstann · 2 pointsr/environment

A very cool book that is similar in style to this article is The World Without Us.

u/mikepurvis · 2 pointsr/environment

I recently read Cadillac Desert, which talks a lot about the first Dust Bowl and the past century of mostly irresponsible water development.

Definitely good reading, even if you didn't think you cared about the topic.

u/imVINCE · 12 pointsr/environment

I think it comes down to a general erosion of the concept of objective truth arising from decades of conservative bashing of science which discredits their stances.

It began with Carl Sagan and others discrediting the Global Defense Initiative as being onerously costly, ineffective, impossible to test, and a first step towards the total militarization of space. Hawkish Republicans high on McCarthyism found a retired doctor (who didn’t even study physics, but medicine IIRC) to provide “alternative facts” on the plan and to try to undermine the mainstream scientific community. Thus was born an attitude of skepticism towards mainstream science among Republicans.

Since then, the strategy has been applied to tobacco smoke, secondhand smoke, acid rain, DDT, and climate change.

Merchants of Doubt is a well-sourced, thorough review of this deplorable pattern of behavior among American politicians to discredit science for corporate and political gain.

e: word

u/oddmanout · 1 pointr/environment

no, there's lots of reusable k-cups out there made by third parties. don't see them getting sued back to the stone age.

u/MrMushyagi · 3 pointsr/environment

Also, have been misled by industry funded scientists, that used the same tactics as tobacco and pesticide (DDT) lobbyists

u/GetOffMyInternetLawn · 1 pointr/environment

Reusable K Cup

There's a few styles out there. I use mine for tea, too.

u/27182818284 · 6 pointsr/environment

seconding this but also pointing out the book that came out before King Corn called The Omnivore's Dilemma

Which also gets into our heavy dependence on corn and corn-fed beef.

u/matts2 · 1 pointr/environment

This is part of his book Collapse: How Societies choose to Fail or Succeed. Interesting, but oh so depressing.

u/srmatto · 4 pointsr/environment

Eh, I think a lack of scarcity and overwhelming benefits from egalitarianism would have tipped our ancestors towards kindness rather than cruelty. But you don't have to take my word for it.

u/BoomptyMcBloog · 17 pointsr/environment

This subject is discussed extensively in the book The World Without Us:

>“Any idea what these are?” Thompson is guiding a visitor along the shore of the Plym River estuary, near where it joins the sea...Amid twigs and seaweed fibers in his fistful of sand are a couple of dozen blue and green plastic cylinders about two millimeters high.

>“They’re called nurdles. They’re the raw materials of plastic production. They melt these down to make all kinds of things.” He walks a little farther, then scoops up another handful. It contains more of the same plastic bits: pale blue ones, greens, reds, and tans. Each handful, he calculates, is about 20 percent plastic, and each holds at least 30 pellets.

>“You find these things on virtually every beach these days. Obviously they are from some factory.”

>However, there is no plastic manufacturing anywhere nearby. The pellets have ridden some current over a great distance until they were deposited here—collected and sized by the wind and tide.


>[Thompson] devised an aquarium experiment, using bottom-feeding lugworms that live on organic sediments, barnacles that filter organic matter suspended in water, and sand fleas that eat beach detritus. In the experiment, plastic particles and fibers were provided in proportionately bite-size quantities. Each creature promptly ingested them.

>When the particles lodged in their intestines, the resulting constipation was terminal. If they were small enough, they passed through the invertebrates’ digestive tracts and emerged, seemingly harmlessly, out the other end. Did that mean that plastics were so stable that they weren’t toxic? At what point would they start to naturally break down—and when they did, would they release some fearful chemicals that would endanger organisms sometime far in the future?

>Richard Thompson didn’t know. Nobody did, because plastics haven’t been around long enough for us to know how long they’ll last or what happens to them. His team had identified nine different kinds in the sea so far, varieties of acrylic, nylon, polyester, polyethylene, polypropylene, and polyvinyl chloride. All he knew was that soon everything alive would be eating them.

>“When they get as small as powder, even zooplankton will swallow them.”

I have to wonder why an article like this would get so many downvotes...are there that many users subscribed to Environment just so they can downvote any article that actually points out how bad the situation really is?

u/akornblatt · 1 pointr/environment

Who went to jail from the Tobacco fraud case?
My point here, what the Koch brothers and companies like Exxon have been doing since the 80s is THE EXACT SAME THING. They even used some of the same "Scientists" to write their "scientific papers."

Check out [Merchants of Doubt](

u/bobcat · 1 pointr/environment

The fact it is 'loosely based on' appears to be this letter

Check this out:

>Do you think it's good or bad to cut down trees? Why?

I happen to agree with his ideas on forestry management, but selling it to kids this way, and inflicting an erroneous meme on America is not kosher.

Did you know John Nance Garner actually said the vice presidency was "not worth a bucket of warm piss."?

u/Tangurena · 5 pointsr/environment

There are a lot of water rights disputes going on in court all the time. When it is one state suing another state, they have to start at the US Supreme Court, like Montana v. Wyoming (pdf). If you are ever in a law class and they ask you if the US Supreme Court could be the first court a case is held in, state vs state is it.

In this case, farmers in Wyoming switched from flood irrigation to sprinkler irrigation, and this resulted in less water running back into the river (and thus less water flowing to Montana). Wyoming still only took the same amount of water they always took, which was what the 1950 treaty/compact allowed. Montana claimed that the water treaty didn't allow this sort of behavior, but the Supremes ruled that if the treaty was going to work the way Montana wanted, it would have been written that way (and they gave examples of other state treaties that were written that way).

One older book that discusses how badly we've screwed our water up in the Western US is Cadillac Desert.

u/matt2001 · 2 pointsr/environment

>This seems to be a meaningless gesture by the Cheeto.

Oil companies prefer dictatorships. It is one stop shopping: no government bureaucracy, no litigation, no environmental cleanups.

I'm half way through this book - recommend highly:

Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia's influence, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth by Rachel Maddow