Letter to the Editor

Cyril writes in response t0 Peter Bodle's letter

Dear Ray,

In response to Peter Bodle's October letter, may I correct an erroneous statement in his rather ill-defined opening sentence. This seemed to accuse me of saying that: if we eliminate one form of waste, then this entitles us to ignore waste in other areas. I suggested nothing of the kind of course.

My argument, as I thought I had made clear, was that the "horrendous waste" seen by Peter in the production of the garden tools under discussion, would be nothing of the sort. In order to produce food, in farming or in gardening, tools are needed. Unlike many other gadgets that get used for 'five minutes' before being replaced, basic gardening tools can with normal care give good service for half a century and more. Therefore, the energy used in making such long lasting tools, for producing mankind's essential needs is, in my opinion, wholly justified.

On a related issue to these discussions, let me say that I am convinced that the ideas of the 'Towns and Villages in Transition' movement, are on the right track. Society is going to need much more local, as opposed to global, production in the coming decades, using far less non-renewable energy inputs. This will include the need to help families to grow some of their own food. Back in April Peter gave his opinion that conventional farming methods, on a large scale, are more efficient in terms of land, energy, carbon footprint, etc. I challenge the correctness of this belief!

Cyril Marsters