'Trayless Tuesdays' has insignificant effects
William Frazier
Issue date: 5/1/09 Section: Ed-Op
'Trayless Tuesdays" represent an unfortunate misconception about how we should go about environmental reform. In the April 25 Triangle article, "Trayless Tuesdays aim to aid planet, not to save money," Erica Hope noted: "Trayless Tuesdays have become a despised day in the Drexel dining hall. But I urge you to take a minute to think about this: is a soup stain or an inconvenient walk too large an obstacle when trying to save the Earth? Trees are falling, ice is melting and water is evaporating. The Earth hurts and it needs our helping, trayless hands."
Hope makes an excellent point - saving energy curtails the propagation of global climate change. Nonetheless, a college full of students, or even a country full of students not using trays for four days out of the year or even 365 days out of the year will not stop global warming. The sheer amount of energy saved in the practice simply cannot compare to the massive energy cuts that mankind needs to make in its use of energy in order to solve the problem.
What other changes can we make to our lifestyles to further help preserve the fragile environment? Historically, increased carpooling and use of public transportation hold a large degree of popularity. People try to save electricity by keeping lights off in unused rooms in their homes. These practices constitute fairly sensible ways that we can help save the planet. But what if something like carpooling or the use of public transportation became mandatory? Public transportation with all of its merits is not always the most efficient way to get from point A to point B. Mandatory carpooling in many ways removes a certain level of ownership between a person and his or her car. However, these sacrifices may very well be acceptable losses in order to prevent environmental crisis.
So, I ask - if Trayless Tuesdays isn't enough to stop global warming, is "Trayless April" or "Trayless 2010" enough? If going trayless makes appreciable savings in four days, then perhaps we should extend Trayless Tuesdays to the span of an entire month or a year. Further, if not having to wash a tray saves so much energy, what should prevent the Drexel dining hall from having days where it doesn't dispense bowls, plates or utensils? The idea at first is laughable because the reasoning against it is the same - it's inconvenient, and no one wants to have to carry around hot food with their bare hands. However, Drexel Dining Services could easily solve this problem by simply serving all of its food uncooked, which would subsequently lower energy use even further.
Hope makes an excellent point - saving energy curtails the propagation of global climate change. Nonetheless, a college full of students, or even a country full of students not using trays for four days out of the year or even 365 days out of the year will not stop global warming. The sheer amount of energy saved in the practice simply cannot compare to the massive energy cuts that mankind needs to make in its use of energy in order to solve the problem.
What other changes can we make to our lifestyles to further help preserve the fragile environment? Historically, increased carpooling and use of public transportation hold a large degree of popularity. People try to save electricity by keeping lights off in unused rooms in their homes. These practices constitute fairly sensible ways that we can help save the planet. But what if something like carpooling or the use of public transportation became mandatory? Public transportation with all of its merits is not always the most efficient way to get from point A to point B. Mandatory carpooling in many ways removes a certain level of ownership between a person and his or her car. However, these sacrifices may very well be acceptable losses in order to prevent environmental crisis.
So, I ask - if Trayless Tuesdays isn't enough to stop global warming, is "Trayless April" or "Trayless 2010" enough? If going trayless makes appreciable savings in four days, then perhaps we should extend Trayless Tuesdays to the span of an entire month or a year. Further, if not having to wash a tray saves so much energy, what should prevent the Drexel dining hall from having days where it doesn't dispense bowls, plates or utensils? The idea at first is laughable because the reasoning against it is the same - it's inconvenient, and no one wants to have to carry around hot food with their bare hands. However, Drexel Dining Services could easily solve this problem by simply serving all of its food uncooked, which would subsequently lower energy use even further.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Ed
posted 5/01/09 @ 10:50 AM EST
I completely agree. Quick suggestion, don't use the phrase 'begs the question' when you want to ask or raise a question. It makes somewhat educated people cringe. (Continued…)
Jim
posted 5/02/09 @ 12:40 AM EST
I would only like to add and point out the number of comment cards filled out in rebellion of trayless tuesdays. Didn't that waste a lot of paper? I think it's a great idea to conserve food, water, etc, blah blah blah. (Continued…)
Post a Comment