Celebrity Oops - Sheryl Crow?

Sheryl Crow’s infamous remark that limitations should be placed on the amount of toilet paper we can use has generated a circus of well deserved criticism, sarcasm, and …well, this:

“Global Warming Wipeout…” — USA Today

“Crow’s toilet paper fix to be butt of jokes!” — Gristmill

“Toilet Paper Law - A Wipe Out?” — The Spoof

“Crow flies one sheet to the wind” — The Chicago Sun-Times

Another Celebrity Oops? Well, maybe something worse. Sheryl Crow now claims the ridiculous statement was a joke designed to raise awareness. Ok, fine. But here’s where I still think this is another really stupid celebrity blunder:

Celebrities (and politicians) are among the worst polluters on planet earth. These rich and famous people often travel by personal or charted private jet. One crossing of the U.S. can burn the fuel a normal person uses to travel for 10 years… and that’s just going one way. When celebrities and politicians take U.S. and world tours they can burn more than a lifetime of fuel for you and I. So where do they get off telling us what environmentalism is?

The big oops here is in the very notion of what she is trying to project. Conserving toilet paper is silly. You might as well conserve tomato juice. Both are products of renewable resources, usually grown on farms. Ok, so minor celebrity oops right? ..not so fast.

We had other misguided do-gooders screw up our way of life. Recycling anyone? Ok, so most of you think recycling is a good idea right? Well it’s not. AND if you are setting your plastic bottles and paper products out at the curb, you are HARMING the environment (and wasting tax dollars).

Recycling paper and plastic products costs more than making them from scratch. Costing more should be our first clue — the cost is a reflection of the resources needed to complete a product. First, someone has to come to your house to collect this extra garbage. If you had thrown it out, then only one trip was needed. Then, this garbage ends up at a recycling plant. These plants are subsidized with your tax dollars. There’s another clue: these guys can’t economically recycle your stuff and earn a profit. They need more resources (and your money) than the guys that make plastic and paper from scratch! Ok… so I am not gonna continue ranting about stupid celebrity and politician created messes right now. The point is, this is another celebrity oops even if she was joking.

If you REALLY want to save the environment, then invent or invest. Invent a new process of doing something more efficiently, invent a new renewable fuel source, or invest in companies already doing these things. And for god’s sake, keep government and celebrities away from regulating us into the stone ages. The environment is a problem, but if we get these jackasses involved with it, it will make the failed drug war, the failed war on poverty, the failing war for education, and gun-free zones like VT seem like government’s best conceptions.

Tags: oops

9 Responses to “Celebrity Oops - Sheryl Crow?”

1. Mia says:

   August 16, 2007 at 2:46 pm

   About your comment on recycling –

   Cost is no longer the end-all of recycling. Sure, you are right — recycling paper and plastic costs more than making them. The relevant point here is that, WE ARE RUNNING OUT of both TREES ~and~ PETROLEUM TO MAKE PAPER AND PLASTIC.

   50% of what fills landfills is paper. Half of all trash doesn’t have to be there taking up space. We need more trees to soak up the CO2 we’re dumping into the air. Everyone is aware of the sociological and political consequences of running out of oil, smthg predicted to happen w/in 25 yrs or so.

   Glass can be recycled INDEFINITELY. Recycling metal is the most important of all — recycling aluminum saves 90% of the energy needed to make it from scratch.

   So, whatever it is Sheryl Crow tried to communicate tactlessly, maybe she did have a point.

   Sincerely,
   A student of epidemiology & environmental public health
2. Mia says:

   August 16, 2007 at 2:51 pm

   About your comment on recycling –

   Cost is no longer the end-all of recycling. Sure, you are right — recycling paper and plastic costs more than making them. The relevant point here is that, WE ARE RUNNING OUT of both TREES ~and~ PETROLEUM TO MAKE PAPER AND PLASTIC.

   50% of what fills landfills is paper. Half of all trash doesn’t have to be there taking up space. We need more trees to soak up the CO2 we’re dumping into the air. The problem is that the loop of recycling often remains open: the consumer fails to BUY recycled paper. If we did buy recycled paper, the cost of recycling it would go down.

   Everyone is aware of the sociological and political consequences of running out of oil, smthg predicted to happen w/in 25 yrs or so.

   Glass can be recycled INDEFINITELY. Recycling metal is the most important of all — recycling aluminum saves 90% of the energy needed to make it from scratch.

   So, whatever it is Sheryl Crow tried to communicate tactlessly, maybe she did have a point.

   Sincerely,
   A student of epidemiology & environmental public health
3. Al Potter says:

   September 20, 2007 at 2:59 am

   She was making a joke. Everyone knows three squares is the magic number.
4. angie d. says:

   February 7, 2008 at 11:47 pm

   sheryl crow is amazing. that’s final.
5. PJ says:

   February 8, 2008 at 3:52 pm

   I would love for Sheryl Crow herself to send me an e-mail…I think that she is the best of the best and the most talent and beautiful woman in the face of the earth!
6. Anonymous says:

   May 18, 2008 at 4:14 pm

   you can wipe it now or later.you are,a prophet,they come toyou,for that reason you are smart iwill leave you alone,better off ,if you getold,try it . you lost your mind iswa what is wrong.
7. BEVERLY says:

   August 4, 2008 at 4:32 pm

   no Mia, we are not running out of trees. Do your homework before you go spouting off. Check the acreage of planted pines in the south, particularly south ala, ga and miss! Where do you live? In a cement city or some swanky subdivision that was clear cut for you to have the good life? We are stewards of the land….are you?
8. natalie says:

   February 17, 2009 at 9:14 pm

   She should be sentenced to a commune in Oregon with 300 stinky hippies , no running water, toilets, and granola. Then maybe just maybe she will learn not to mess with the greeny’s
9. theamanda haemophilia says:

   May 1, 2009 at 11:55 pm

   pardon my opinion & choice of words, but bluntly, this blog is plainly laughable & vapid. first of all, recycling is about protecting the environment, not saving some billionaire’s thick bank account. and as to not being so extravagant on toilet papers — why the hell not?