Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Do serious enviros shop online or in person?

Posted by Guest Blogger at 9:24 AM on May 8, 2007.


Umbra Fisk: The jury is out...

From Grist's popular online advice column with Umbra Fisk:

Hi Umbra,

A friend and I were recently discussing a conundrum about purchasing products from companies that have physical retail outlets and online purchasing, like The Body Shop. Which is the most ecologically sound option? Local store: most likely drive there, the products had to be shipped there, your purchase probably generates a need to ship more products there ... but you are supporting a local business that pays taxes, etc. Buy online, maybe your items are coming from the same place that ships to stores, so you are essentially cutting out the middle person, but it does take resources to get the product to your house. See what I'm getting at? Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Catherine

Pacific Grove, Calif.

Umbra Fisk responds:

Please endure my obligatory gentle reminders to reduce consumption of unnecessary objects and bundle your errands when you do drive. Choosing the better way to shop is not better than not shopping.

That said, the minds-that-be have not decided quite yet whether online shopping is better than in-person shopping. To the layperson, online seems to have a bit of an intuitive advantage -- but intuition means little, as we have learned via the related paper vs. plastic situation.

You would barely credit all the variables involved in this one. Online "stores" have a major advantage in their -- can one say -- ecology of scale. They have fewer built and conditioned spaces. The online Body Shop, to use your example, is (we imagine) one large warehouse, whereas the in-person shop is many small stores, each with its own heating, cooling, lighting, and decorative bric-a-brac. But "which is better" gets trickier once an online item is ordered. In-person stores have a little ecology of scale in packaging and shipping, as (we imagine) if you order one unguent online it comes in its own package, whereas at the store you buy an unguent that shared its shipping package with its clones. And the e-item is a big packaging hog, causing two and a half times the impact of in-person items.

That's the intuitive deal breaker, right? But wait: one of the groups that studied the issue found that a 40-mile car trip to buy something was worse, climate-wise, than shipping two five-pound packages by overnight mail.

I'm dizzy, dizzy with this pseudo-dilemma. So far we have underlined what we already kind of guessed: driving alone to a faraway place to buy very little is worse than having a few things shipped. My trips to the mall as a teen to buy a few cassettes (round trip: three hours) were worse than online shopping, and Netflix (reusable packaging!) is far better than my pater's 30-mile drive to the video store. But what if we go with friends, or don't drive so very far? How about if we take a bus? What about a few miles to buy a gift for someone else, which we then ship from the post office, versus online and par avion direct to the recipient? What if you turned off all your appliances and your heat and spent the day at the mall using their heat and toilets and sponge bathing in their sinks? Would that be better?

Even if local shopping isn't always the best ecological choice, it might benefit your own other priorities. Your Body Shop example gives us a bit of trouble, since it's a franchise. There is a local owner, and local employees, and local taxes, which all sounds good until we remember the same could be said of McDonald's. What we want in "local" will need to be defined a little more tightly, and perhaps differently for each of us. Amazon is a local company to me (since I live in Seattle), and so is Starbucks. My friends work in those places, but this does not trump my personal preference for individual, in-person, small businesses in the living landscape of my city.

Hence, in sum: the jury is out. Follow your common sense until the jury comes back in. Don't take long, single-occupancy, single-purpose car trips for lightweight consumer items. (I leave you an out for picking up a potter's wheel or an anvil.) Avoid shipping by air -- plan ahead and don't be impatient when online shopping. And bundle shopping, shipping, and driving with others when possible.


Labor Leader Argues for Workers' Interests Over Racism in Explosive Speech
Richard Trumka is taking on the issue of race to support the presidential candidate he thinks will do the most for the American worker.
Post by Tula Connell. August 21, 2008.
McCain's Money History and Why it Matters
McCain has led an aristocratic lifestyle as a consort to a liquor heiress, and it shows.
Post by Digby. August 21, 2008.
Poll-watch: Gallup Finds Wedding-Cake Sized Marriage Gap in Pres Race
Apparently, the married and unmarried have very different concerns.
Post by AlterNet Staff. August 21, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Distribution centers
Posted by: CriminallySane on May 8, 2007 10:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many online sellers have multiple distribution centers, either regionally or by state. And in many cases, the good they ship come from the same center/warehouse as do the bricks-and-mortar sellers' products.

I'd go with supporting a local business as far as economically possible, and plan the shopping trips with care. Sometimes it's not practical. Often it is.

These are decisions best made on a case by case basis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Retail, retail, everywhere...
Posted by: channing on May 8, 2007 12:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is one of the fundamental inefficiencies of modern American consumerism that we have all become so accustomed to middle-men, retailers, in every area of commerce. Back in the good-old "ecological" day, you sold what you made, and what no one was making locally, you either did without, (god forbid we do without), you mailed your request and waited, or you took a journey.

Today's heavy-technology dependency, however, precludes local "makers" in the sheer sophistication of the manufacturing process, related infrastructure and exotic resources required for "ordinary" products. While there is no doubt as to the utility of many of these technologies, Americans have assumed an unspoken "right" to anything/everything under the sun, but not because we "need" these things. What is underlying the enviro-consumer problem is this inordinate addiction to sophistication/ everythingism, the culturally-assumed right to material abundance, even when that means having many things we never use.

To graduate from this flawed cultural bias, it will become increasingly necessary for ordinary Americans to begin making most essentials locally and simultaneously supporting those who do the same. By this, I mean, that Chinese lawn furniture you bought at any number of corporate-retailers was really cheap, so cheap, in fact, that it barely cost anyone anything. You've got a yard full of furniture, and you didn't have to support a craftsman... duh, does anyone else wonder why there are so few craftsmen in our communities?

You can replace every skill in America with a Henry Ford style process and related hands-free delivery system. This is exactly what Americans are in fact doing every time they shop monolithic retailers and the products they promote and deliver. If you don't want this reality, stop paying for bad socio-economic models, do without if you can, shop used, and delay purchases until you can afford to reward that special company or craftsman for the conscientious service and product they work to provide.

Like the tide of "industrialization" last century, a new tide of sustainable living will sweep the people of Earth, or we will find the Earth sweeping us under her tide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Huh?
Posted by: CounterCorp on May 9, 2007 4:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amazon is a local company to me (since I live in Seattle), and so is Starbucks. My friends work in those places, but this does not trump my personal preference for individual, in-person, small businesses in the living landscape of my city.

... to say nothing of the utter devestation wrought by these and other huge, hegemonic corporate chains the world over.

Just 'cause one of these corporate godzillas originated and/or is still based in your town doesn't make it a "local" company in the true sense of the word, because it's now a global empire that is literally clear-cutting small businesses, culture, and human diversity everywhere else. By your definition, Microsoft is also a "local" business -- that controls 90% of the global computer operating system market.

Your friends may be thrilled to have jobs on the corporate plantation, but few other workers will soon have the choice to work anywhere else if the corporate carpet-bombers have their way.

Please.

A key consideration you didn't even touch on is where the profits from these respective enterprises go. Real local businesses are locally owned, and thus the money gets spent in the community, not shipped off to corporate headquarters somewhere and divvied up among a bunch of non-productive aristocratic rich-getting-richeer shareholders.

When one factors in the effects of Chain Street vs. Main Street, the concentration of wealth and power that corporate chains promote, the exercise/health benefits of getting off of one's posterior and actually walking (or riding a bike) to a local store, the opportunites they provide to actually meet and interact with real human beings instead of cyber-avatars, etc, etc, the jury's not only not "still out", it deliberated briefly, arrived at a unanimous decision, and is already out having a beer at a locally owned bar.

In other words, it is what the CIA might call a slam-dunk case, and makes your whole self-described "psuedo-dilemma" seems like just so much dithering, neo-yuppie consumerist angst ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Huh? Posted by: jmp3954
pseudo debate cum rubbish
Posted by: DaBear on May 9, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, none of this impact debate matters if you're overweight, what I call "fat"... which is what I am at the moment. I have 58 pounds to lose. That means I walk or bike for everything. For those items I can't get by burning the damned fat off my gut and haunches, I'll order online. The planet is so very fracked anyway and I can't afford gas at $3.61/gal. anymore.

Ms. Bear, who is a math teacher, had her seniors do a math project based on this very scenario. They used calculus ultimately to determine that for every act there is an impact and the only "clean" or "ethical" choice that can be made for the lowest impact changes item by item, occasion by occasion, location by location. There is NO simple answer because mathematically every decision is dependent on a wide range of variables. One brainiac used chaos math and a computer... it made neato looking graphics I didn't understand.

Don't bother waiting 'till the jury comes back. It's up to you to do the best you can with what you've got. Chances are, when you're fat like me and huffing through nearby brush fire smoke on a 40˚C morning to get milk because you're FAT and MUST lose the damned weight, even at the risk of an asthma attack, that's the best choice you can make anyway. Besides I can't even understand the math these kids were doing... I prefer to use words. Numbers make me nauseous and want to eat ice cream.... which is why I'm FAT. Back to the bike.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shop Online Or In Person @ Bricks & Mortar Store
Posted by: colleenwhalen on May 9, 2007 8:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No question on this - buy your stuff in person at a local store. It takes huge amounts of energy to ship parcels to your home - plus you are wasting money on POSTAGE. UPS, FEDEX, Post Office has to waste gas on trucks to deliver shipments to your house.....this creates global warming gases.

Make a BIG effort NOT to use your car to do errands and shopping. I got rid of my car 3 months before illegal invasion of Iraq. I drove LOW mileage - less than 10,000 a miles per year - but even that created 6 MILLION TONS of global warming carbon dioxide gases.

Getting rid of my car saves me $600.00 a month! Even though I bought a modest six year old car with 25,000 miles on it - it still cost me $7,000! Eliminated monthly car payment, insurance, expense of gasoline, oil, mechanics maintenance, parking tickets and parking expense at meter, lot, etc.

I lost 30 pounds walking, riding my bike, taking public transit. No longer paying insurance to corporate mafia insurance firm, nor to petrochemical corporations!

Try to assiduously avoid shopping in the mall and instead patronize small, local family owned business.

Join or START a natural foods cooperative which sells certified organically grown food. I live in Sacramento - our coop was founded about 35 years ago with a few families who joined a "buying club" in a friends basement. Now we have 11,000 members, a huge supermarket sized store - one of North America's largest natural foods coop.

Avoid shopping in chain stores and frequent thrift shops, garage sales, consignment stores for "gently used" items. This is the coolest kind of recycling and you will save money and re-use a perfectly good item instead of getting tossed into toxic waste dump!

I only go to the big mall in my town about twice a year. It is almost unavoidable - so I joined COSTCO which is UNIONIZED, pays far above the going rate in wages, full union benefits, a democratic workplace and nearly nobody ever quits working @ COSTCO. If you must shop at a "Big Box" store - shop at Costco. Corporate Costco donates tons of money to progressive, environmental and social justice charities.

Keep Hope Alive

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

credit cards
Posted by: zorro on May 13, 2007 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In order to buy on-line one must use a corporate credit card from a mega-corporate bank (with infinite franchises) and that uses unsustainable practices in infinite ways--violating the Earth, the consumer, and religiously promoting war and genocide, either directly or indirectly. You shop online and u support war. You're buying into the system, into the war machine, the freedom machine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]