R Ranson wrote:The inoculation idea doesn't do it for me. I love keeping letters and re-reading them at later years.
Actually, it's the whole tactile experience that makes me enjoy letters so much. I love going to the post office and getting colourful stamps to put on them. Writing the letter by hand using a fountain pen or typing it on a typewriter. Choosing the paper careful to reflect my mood. All the bad spelling mistakes. It's personal and permanent at the same time. A bit like how I envision permaculture.
I wonder, if we did the math right, I bet a hand written letter would come out with a lower carbon footprint than an email. Especially if we take into account the end use of the product (computers and toxic waste vs a letter in the compost bin).
Thekla McDaniels wrote:Jesse, how are we doing? Are these the kinds of suggestions that will help you prepare your presentation?
I had another idea. I prefer the USPS because the trucks come to my house every day, and if someone sends me something by the white purple orange trucks or the brown trucks, it is a special trip. If we could get some small amount added to the cost of the flat rate boxes (which I love, especially when I am shipping soap and other heavy things) to do the carbon offset and there could be an educational campaign so people realize there is a difference carbon footprint wise between the three carriers, maybe more people would ship USPS. Which would be a good thing, wouldn't it? Does the USPS break even on packages or is it only first class letters that will help the budget shortfall the USPS faces.
Please educate me if you have the time.
Gail Saito wrote: I really like this idea. I can visualize a stamp containing a tree and blue sky. Perhaps I missed this, but what exactly is your plan, in terms of the revenue generated from selling this stamp? USPS most likely will want to know!
Roberto pokachinni wrote:Another possibility would be to suggest that the stamps pay for the greening of the USPS fleet, as well as planting trees, or organic community gardens, or other carbon sequestration projects.
In the case of the fleet reducing or eliminating their emissions, that is half of the battle, with planting trees or other carbon farming strategies being the other half, right?
So, it could be pointed out that an urban community garden produces food in a local neighborhood so that the tractors in the fields and trucking of food is reduced at the same time that soil building is taking place.
Lots of initiatives like this could stack functions. For instance: The fleet could be powered by wood gas (something that was done during the depression and second world war in the U.S. with many farm machines and utility trucks), which has a by-product of activated charcoal which can be made into water or air filters, or bio-char (char activated with nutrients)-the latter added to soil increases fertility and soil carbon for long term sequestration.
Jesse Fister wrote: I agree. USPS has even discussed adding refrigerators to mail delivery trucks and transporting groceries to people's houses locally. My thought was to start connecting farmers to consumers at a local level with affordable local delivery. The infrastructure's already there. But that's a project for another time.
Our mail carrier...would sit on corners, read magazines he was supposed to be delivering and would spend 8:30-4:30 on that route...Someone like him delivering groceries wouldn't work!
Erica Wisner wrote:
I'm OK with the unsympathetic postal workers joking about 'a tax on people who believe that carbon hoopla,' after all, it's less ironic than using the lottery to fund education.
Erica Wisner wrote:
(I assume they make some small amount of money on each stamp, so donating the entire surcharge to the cause would not leave them out of pocket.)