The New York Times wrote a piece “Ozempic Could Crush the Junk Food Industry. But It Is Fighting Back” that reported people happy with results that I’ve found from living more sustainably. Except my way didn’t cost me anything, trade one dependence for another, or risk any side effects. It didn’t require willpower either. People think it did, but I think they just don’t know how to change habits without[…] Keep reading →

“How long does it take to charge your battery?” asks nearly everyone who sees me charging my solar panels, such as the guy in this picture: After a few times answering what they asked, I realized people have no idea what the numbers mean. If I tell them in full sunlight the battery charges in four hours, they don’t know what the battery can then charge. I didn’t know before[…] Keep reading →

My book, Sustainability Simplified, approaches our environmental problems in several ways. One is from the view that government should stick to a few specific roles, one of which is to protect your life, liberty, and property from me taking or destroying it without your consent. A government that doesn’t protect life, liberty, and property leads to a nation without hope for a better future, which leads to people retreating to[…] Keep reading →

[EDIT: I had no idea the New York Times would post its profile of me the day after this piece] Sorry for the in-your-face title and I don’t mean any time soon, but I think it’s a fair question. Other people have asked me the question when I describe my mission. Maybe you think I’m kidding myself that I could be so successful as to create enough animosity in others[…] Keep reading →

The paperback has been up about a day, and the reviews are coming in. It’s not Malcolm Gladwell level numbers yet, but a couple dozen reviews and all 5 stars so far. Making the book available feels great, as do the reviews so far. I wrote this book to help my mission, which is big, so putting the book up for sale is just the start. As much time and[…] Keep reading →

I’ve been remarking lately that every message I’ve heard on our environmental problems says that acting more sustainably means making my life worse for little chance of gain. I ask people if they know of counterexamples. If you do, please tell me, because no one has so far. Context Even ardent environmentalists suggest living more sustainably means giving up things I value for the possible benefit of someone else somewhere[…] Keep reading →

I experiment on how more effectively to describe changing culture from mainstream American to more sustainably. I’m not talking about some abstract “environment.” I’m talking about restoring living by doing unto others as I would have them do unto me and of loving my neighbor as myself, the opposite of polluting. I found a better way of describing the shift than just saying I’ve changed culture, I’ve passed a cusp,[…] Keep reading →

People who agree with me that to achieve sustainability, we have to change our culture, still struggle to see why making things more efficient not only doesn’t change our culture, it accelerates it. That is, it will lead us to create more of the results we get now. Imagine going back to 1942. We are fighting the Nazis and imperialist Japanese. We know every German isn’t a Nazi nor does[…] Keep reading →

The opposite of pollution is loving your neighbor as yourself. After all, do you keep your garbage in your house forever? No, you get rid of it. That means you have your neighbors deal with it, as you would not deal with it yourself. Does it matter that those neighbors aren’t your next door neighbors but are poor and distant? How can you love your neighbor as yourself except not[…] Keep reading →