R-R- Redundancy – a New “R” to Heed

Evidently “resilience” is not an alternative for “sustainability.” Resilience in the current vocabulary has become associated with the post hurricane Sandy awareness that we are living in systems that are so interdependent that we have no resilience if disaster strikes. With the new FEMA flood maps, now 70 million live in flood zones, and resilience of the infrastructure necessarily means they need some redundancy to be able to survive floods. If a building is over 50% energy independent, it can likely at least survive for days off the grid. Plus in serious flood zones alternative, resilient, solutions for sewage need to be found. So resilience comprises the total of measures that helps survivability. In this context, well designed redundance is a positive. Accordingly, I think that redundance as used in the above article really means dysfunctional duplication. But we have to be careful there also. For example, in the era of bedbug infestations, sharing vacuum cleaners may not be a great idea, even more so when they are bagless vacuums, which are known to become breeding grounds for bugs. Even worse, Dyson has told me that their mechanisms could be damaged by the bedbug shells, and/or the diatomaceous powder, which is one of the best protections against bedbugs. So the advice throughout is bagged vacuums, and if there is an infestation to dispose of the bags as soon as you vacuum. Another example where a seemingly wasteful practice is extremely useful. Obviously, I have dealt with a bedbug infestation in my building.

I think the idea of ‘personal property’ has, in many ways, shaped the landscape of American life. Land ownership and material possessions signify not only monetary success, but also a sense of individualism and self-sufficiency that inspires others to try to achieve the same. The American Dream is, after all, a white picket fence – surrounding one’s land.
The concept of ‘sharing’ challenges this sense of individualism and self-sufficiency. While pockets of co-operative-like housing operations have existed for many years, the transition to ‘sharing’, not only as a way to build community, but as a necessary solution to reducing resource use, is very new. This is especially true as we grow to realize that we ‘share’ the environmental impacts that our combined resource use is contributing to.

Sharing closets and other neighborhood sharing programs seem like very effective ways to encourage, while not forcing, people to share. Many people are cautious of sharing with people they do not personally know, let alone people with whom they are not acquainted, so neighborhood programs would probably get more support and engagement. This is especially true with the ‘vacuum cleaner’ issue mentioned above, but less true with things like lawn mowers, irons, and so on.

There is also a great ‘sharing’ movement going on in many European cities. Library-like stores offer everything from kitchen appliances to the occasionally used board games, that can be rented out by members who pay a small fee. This is great for things that people only use a few times a year or for special occasions.

Virtual sharing and the sharing of ‘opportunities’ are also important to consider. For example, Netflix is a great example of virtual sharing, as people can virtually access a database of movies that are technically being shared with thousands of other people. Sharing ‘opportunities’ could be car sharing programs, or carpooling, which prevents wasted opportunities to use products to their maximum.

Really great post! and thank you for getting me thinking more about SHARING.

Very important points, Jacquie. I think this idea of redundancy applies the most to our culture’s adoption of consumer electronics. It also happens to be one of the fastest growing problems when it comes to both energy use and waste streams. There are very material repercussions for the digital ether that we have a tendency to think of as this limitless black hole of information. Data centers alone are adding huge loads to the world’s energy footprint.

But e-waste (what all of this redundant equipment will eventually become) will be one of our country’s most important environmental tasks. E-waste represents the fastest growing waste stream in the U.S. The EPA estimates that up to 80% of this waste currents gets exported to the developing world where its disposal is not only back for the environment, but damaging to the populations as well. Like you said, Americans conveniently avoid thinking about these repercussions as electronics dumps in Cambodia or India don’t seem to make it on to warning labels on the side of the box.

Hopefully we can move to pair down these kinds of redundancies and couple that with companies that make products more easily dismantled, last longer and are more easily upgraded.

I was taught that cities are the greenest places to live, a notion that surprises a lot of people. However the idea is a lot like what this article preaches; the more people share, the less waste we create. The best example is how well we have made public transportation work in cities! So, I think if nothing else, that is a great starting point, show people how much they are already sharing and then suggest little things after that. I also wholly agree with the commenter earlier who talked about the systemic nature of this problem. There is a great documentary called “Affluenza” which along with The Story of Stuff is a must-watch for anyone who cares about the waste in our society.

I love the idea of reducing R-R-Redundancy through sharing. I thought this article about the economics of sharing was relevant: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/how-green-is-the-sharing-economy/. It points out that this idea of sharing in indeed being turned into a business by the likes of Zipcar and Citi Bike, but the exact economic and environmental impacts of these businesses are difficult to pin down. Of course, that shouldn’t discourage us from using these services or from starting our own! But it does mean that we should be thinking more about metrics to track what we are doing so we can live even more efficiently!

On a different note, I love the idea of a communal closet, but the issue of accountability for loss or damage is certainly an issue. I think a common message board is definitely the way to go for this! Having something as simple as a Facebook group for the building where those looking to borrow something can post, and anyone with the item can reply might work well! Furthermore, meeting the person you are borrowing something from would introduce accountability for the borrower.

This is so important. As effective as Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle are, Redundancy is such an important thing to consider BEFORE you buy. By both sharing and trying to find ways to use more essential appliances in multiple ways, waste can be reduced not only when it come to discarding, but also being consumption. Trying to avoid buying thing we don’t need is a pretty common sense consumer behavior. More sharing and creativity with applianced we already have might really change the way we feel about what we really do “need.”

I never really think about how many of the items and products I own are used only once or twice in a few month period. So many of these items I could easily be renting when I need them or share among others that live near me. I also think it is extremely true how many of the same products people own. In my house in New Jersey, My family owns 5 TVs. I am sure we could survive with 2 or 3. Many of them are not even used on any given day. I know that my mom has about five different gadgets that all mix things which again maybe you could buy a product that does the mixing for all different types of items.

“Not because they are selfish or mean. Not because they believe they ‘worked hard’ for them. But because owning a full complement of possessions behind one door (or under one roof) is part of our consumerist society. We value independence from tyrants and zealots as well as from neighbors bearing empty sugar bowls.”
– I loved this quote. It appeals to people who would say “I worked hard for these items. I deserved them.” It also appeals to the other end of the spectrum, (“I am selfish by having so much”). You’re right; it’s less personal than that. It’s simply a part of America’s consumerist society.
The ideas put in here are more likely for college students who save money by sharing subscriptions and textbooks and pencils and food storage, etc… to understand. But the fact that you make it anecdotal also helps appeal to an older generation, and I find that it is a very informative article. I wonder if there’s a way to apply these ideas to people who live in the suburbs or in different parts of the country, In more spaced out houses.

I really enjoyed this article because I had actually never thought about “redundancy” in regard to consumption. I have thought for a while now that people definitely have more gadgets and appliances than they actually need or even use, but I never thought about how even things that are pretty useful have become quite redundant, especially in apartment buildings. I think if people could become less attached to the items they own and gain a better understanding of how destructive consumer culture is, then sharing items could really be an easy change for people to make.