I don’t think the article draws a fine enough distinction about consumer’s motivations for buying organic, non-toxic, etc. Some (not all) of those people who are tearing out their linoleum or buying the organic cotton baby blanket are primarily concerned about personal health and exposure to toxics in their home, rather than resource consumption that affects the environment as a whole.

That said, I agree that the current environmental discourse is lopsided in favor of green consumption rather than less consumption, neglecting the fact that both strategies must be part of the solution. Growth in consumption is the 800-lb elephant in the room. After all, if in 2008 Americans buy 1000 conventional widgets that require 1000 gallons of oil to produce, and next year we buy 2000 “green” widgets that require 1500 gallons of oil to produce, we are still losing ground!

GreenNetizen asks: “If a young person is going to buy a pair of jeans, why not make sure your purchase is made with eco-sustainable fabrics?” Well, why don’t the OTHER alternatives get as much air time? For example, the young person could buy their jeans from the trendy consignment store or the frugal thrift store…or they could just wear one of the other 16 pairs of jeans in their closet I can almost guarantee that any of those options will be less costly for the consumer AND the planet.

Lastly, conversations and strategies for reducing consumption don’t have to be dour and full of deprivation. Websites like simpleliving.net discuss the fun, creative, fulfilling ways that less can be more.

If a young person is going to buy a pair of jeans, why not make sure your purchase is made with eco-sustainable fabrics?

You are criticizing people for trying to do the right thing. This is not a “burn your bra baby” campaign. It’s a keep what you have, do with less and make sure that what your do purchase factors in the way the product was produced.