NEWS: No Impact Man Doesn't Use Toilet Paper

CULTURE: No Impact Man Doesn't Use Toilet Paper

I don't know whether to consider these two people heroes, or crazies. Colin Beavan and Michelle Conlin two Manhattanites have given up modern conveniences in order to achieve total carbon neutrality, or "No Impact" as Beavan prefers.

Essentially the family, with two year old daughter Isabella, are living a 19th century lifestyle. But learning the motivation and inspiration behind the move cancels out calling the duo crazy. Sadly, it also voids "hero" potential.

Still, making a living doing this makes it no easy task, and not a job I would want. I wonder about the documentary which might be enlightening in terms of what kinds of compromises are available that I am willing to make. The worst part must be that like most Manhattanites, these two live in an apartment, but they are so committed to the experiment that they have begun composting... indoors with a home composter. That, or not being able to use toilet paper.



The couple rinse, and then air dry.



Ew.



No Impact Man will appear on Comedy Central's Colbert Report tomorrow, Monday, April 9th, for all to judge.

So, they must have (or should have) installed a degenerate terrorist-loving French bidet

Probably not as useful in Manhattan, but still a good book for those skipping toilet paper: How to Shit in the Woods.

Wow! I can't believe their are only two comments and some one beat me to the punch. Well done!

you want to do something good for the planet? do you really? STOP MAKING BABIES!

attention fellow human beings...toilet paper is the devil...it is pure evil.

i cant stop laughing.

they've stopped using toilet paper in an attempt to minimize their impact on the earth, yet the guy has a book deal which he hopefully plans to sell millions of copies of. books use trees. see where i'm going with this?

+6,587,650,779

oh my god, someone said something mildly rational...i may fart...may i fart terence...yes phillip, you may fart.

The actual article is great - 'cause it has *pictures.* The best one is his wife, on a scooter, in a snowstorm. Priceless.

Also - composting in your apartment is nasty.

While the idea of "less impact" is one I can get behind, I also can't get behind doing it 19th century style. It seems like reasonable accommodations (say, public transport vs. cabs and driving, or using *less* consumer products, eating *more* local foods) is a better way to go about this. But I'm not trying to sell a book I suppose.

Beware the evils of *gasp!* biodegradable toilet paper!

I'm all for saving nature and all, but i hope to see these guys at the head of a darwin award in the next few years. Have fun, lah!

I don't think it should be called "no impact" because they are not living in a forest and growing their own food, they have not incorporated themselves into an ecosystem.

For what it's worth:
Most of the world doesn't use toilet paper; it's impossibly expensive, and it tends to clog or destroy less advanced plumbing systems. I use it, as a matter of local convention, but I often wonder why.

There's something to be said for using water instead:
it actually makes you cleaner.

Much of the world regards toilet paper as a joke. An analogy relayed to me by someone when I was in India was this:

Suppose you got dog shit on your arm. What's your first instinct? Is it to grab a piece of dry paper and rub it repeatedly until it's clean? Or is it to get some water (and soap) and rub it down?

I've traveled extensively, and let me say -- when I'm walking for long distances in high-humidity climates, I'd much rather go with the water/rubbing method than the toilet paper method. It's guaranteed to be cleaner, and it's less stress on your delicate bits.

Toilet paper is only a (no pun intended) stop-gap method until you get to a shower. Using water is better.

i commend them for their efforts, i really do, but what they're doing really isn't so radical as they make it out to be. in the version of that article that i saw, i was reading along, and came across something like "they still let their maid that comes twice weekly use paper towels" yet they send back a paper napkins at a restaurant (restaurants, by the way, were supposed to be against the rules). they make a big deal about not using their washer and dryer, but then say that they use the one in the basement of the building, like it makes a difference if the washer they use is in their apartment or not really, truly, air-drying your clothes is not hard at all. and there are manual clothes-washers that don't use much water at all now.

it's awesome that they think about minimizing waste at all, but i was just disappointed. maybe the project will suprise me as it progresses. i hope so. i also think it would be a lot more interesting if they acknowledged the project's shortcomings and examined them instead of just minimizing waste and claiming to be no-impact.

it's far from no-impact, but that just goes to show you how many resources we take for granted.

Yeah, that's what I originally thought, too. This has all been done before, and done better.

You'll probably find more radical eco-sustainability in the daily lives of 1 in 10 squatter punk kids. (This excludes the ones who are hooked on junk or alcohol or who live off their parents' trust funds.)

And of course, there are several sustainability practices to be found in cultures who don't have some of our modern conveniences.

(Although, incidentally -- modern dishwashers [albeit surprisingly] actually use less energy than washing by hand).

I was just thinking, if this guy wanted to live a life without modern conveniences, why not go live with some Amish community for a year?

good point.

What can I say? I guess I know my shit.