Stop mailing your bills. Study says go green, go online.

Still mail bills? Study says go green, go online | Technology | Reuters
Think your family going green won't make a difference? Wrong , says a U.S. study released on Thursday that shows one household ditching paper statements for Web transactions would save 24 square feet of forest a year. The study found the average U.S. household receives about 19 bills and statements from credit card companies and banks every month and makes about seven payments by paper each month. By switching to electronic bills, statements and payments, the average American household would save 6.6 pounds of paper a year, save 0.08 trees, and not produce 171 pounds of greenhouse gases -- the equivalent of driving 169 miles. New York (Reuters)

I think this is a good idea and this will be the way of the future. As our younger computer savvy generation gets older, receiving bills and paying on line will be the norm. But the older generation, 45 and older, are afraid of the computer and don't use it much. Plus they don't trust paying their bills on line. They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

But by reading this story, I came up with an idea how more people can become green and saving more of the forest. They can become more green by canceling their daily newspaper. By canceling your daily newspaper , the average American household would save 365 pounds of paper a year, save 4.42 trees, and not produce 9,405 pounds of greenhouse gases -- the equivalent of driving 9,295 miles. If people would cancel their New York Times, Washington Post or Los Angeles Times papers, we might be able to save a forest.

After everyone cancels their daily newspaper, then they can get their news from their computer and the older generation can get their news from radio or television. If you can, go ahead and pay your bills on line and save a trickle. Cancel your daily paper and you save an ocean. You might even be able to save your mind.

U.S. diesel ships and trains, EPA tightens rules.

Diesel-powered ships and trains must cut soot emissions by 2030, under new regulations signed Friday by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Stephen Johnson. "Today EPA is fitting another important piece into the clean diesel puzzle by cleaning emissions from our trains and boats," Johnson said by telephone from the Port of Houston, where he made the announcement. The air pollution rules won rare, uniform praise from several national environmental and industry groups but did nothing to satisfy Southern California air regulators struggling with pollution from the nation's largest port complex. "It's too little, too late," said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of South Coast Air Quality Management District. Large, oceangoing vessels are linked to about 800 premature deaths in the region each year. By Janet Wilson, Los Angeles Times.

Here we go again, tightening the rules on U.S. ships and trains when most of the ships in our ports are foreign. I live here in New Orleans and when you look out on the Mississippi River you will see a lot ships, foreign ships. We are going to make the U.S. ship owners spent money fixing these old ships to burn less smog producing fuels. It is like putting a new engine in your old car, is it cost effective? They are just going to sell their ships to foreign countries or move their business to a foreign country, still emitting smog and pollution.

Our trains will be cleaner but don't think this will help much with global warming, if you believe in it, because the rest of the worlds trains will still emit their pollution. China and India is growing by leaps and bounds. Their pollution is growing by leaps and bounds. Trying to clean up pollution here in the U.S. is like making people rake the leaves in their yards even though you know the leave in the neighbors yard will blow back into their yards. Instead of making laws and forcing people not to pollute, why not educated and let them do it on there own. You don't trust them?


Technorati Tags: pollution