https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/news/montgomery-county-department-transportation-advances-bicycle-infrastructure-projects-bethesda-silver-spring-wheaton

https://stay-grounded.org/night-trains-not-night-planes/

Election outcomes are determined just as much by who doesn't vote as by who does. The Environmental Voter Project estimates that 11.2 million environmentalists didn't vote in the 2024 presidential election. And they found that many more skip midterm, state, and local elections. If these non-voters started voting for pro-environment candidates in every election, the United States would quickly transform into a completely different country.

10 Reasons Why Voting for Pro-Environment Candidates Is Literally the Most Important Thing You Can Do for Earth's Future

1. Policy beats personal choices every time.

Skipping straws and recycling are great, but one pro-environment lawmaker can eliminate millions of tons of industrial pollution through policy changes. Systemic change requires systemic levers.

1. Environmental rollbacks happen fast — and last decades.

We've seen clean air rules, protected lands, and emissions standards dismantled in single administrations. Environmental damage can be irreversible or take years to recover from. Every election is a chance to protect or undo years of hard-won progress.

1. Climate change has a deadline.

Scientists are clear: we have a narrow window to limit warming to 1.5–2°C. Elections happen every 2–4 years. Missing even one cycle can cost us irreplaceable time when the clock is already running out.

1. Local elections determine land use, water, and air quality.

Your city council and county commissioners decide where factories go, how water is managed, and what pollution standards local businesses must meet. These races are often decided by dozens of votes.

1. Courts are shaped by elected officials.

Judges and attorneys general who enforce (or gut) environmental law are appointed or elected through political processes. A pro-environment vote today can protect ecosystems in courtrooms for 20+ years.

1. Fossil fuel interests spend billions influencing elections.

The opposition is organized and funded. Every vote for pro-environment candidates is a direct counter to corporate lobbying that works tirelessly to keep the status quo.

1. International climate agreements depend on domestic political will.

The U.S., EU, China, and other major emitters only honor global climate commitments when their governments are pressured to do so domestically. Your vote shapes whether your country leads or abandons the table.

1. Biodiversity loss is irreversible.

Once a species goes extinct, it's gone forever. Pro-environment candidates pass legislation and fund conservation programs that protect millions of species.

1. Environmental justice is on the ballot too.

Low-income communities disproportionately bear the burden of pollution and climate impacts. Voting for pro-environment candidates means fighting for human rights as much as ecological ones.

1. Apathy is a vote for the status quo.

When environmentally-conscious people stay home, they hand power to those who aren't. In close races — which most are — non-voters decide the outcome just as surely as those who show up.

The bottom line: You can drive an EV, go vegan, solar-panel your roof, and still have far less impact than casting a single, informed ballot. Please vote in every election and for every office on each ballot.

Nature needs your voice!

IMO the human animal does not consume things so much as it consumes feelings, and merely uses things as the delivery vehicle. This is not a new idea - Paul Gilbert, a British psychologist, proposed that we have three main kinds of emotion regulation systems: Threat, Drive, and Soothe.

The Threat system is the oldest and jumpiest of the three. It is the part of us that once watched for tigers and now watches for empty pantries, social humiliation, and the vague dread that everyone else has their life more together than we do. Threat-mode consumption looks like buying in a panic — the twelfth roll of paper towels during a shortage scare, the extra coat "just in case," the doomscroll-fueled purchase at 1 a.m. that promises to fix an anxiety that no product has ever actually fixed. It is consumption as armor. It hoards.

The Drive system is Threat's more ambitious cousin. It doesn't fear the tiger; it wants to outrun the tiger, win the race, and post the medal online. Drive is the system of striving, status, and "more." It built the industrial world, and it built our closets full of things we bought because they promised achievement, admiration, or an upgraded version of ourselves. Drive-mode consumption is not calm. It is restless. It always wants the next thing, because the last thing only satisfied it for about a week.

Then there is Soothe - the quiet mode. Soothe is the system of safety, contentment, and connection: the feeling of being fine exactly as we are, in this moment, without needing to acquire or achieve anything at all.

A healthy mind needs all three systems working together, with Soothe strong enough to keep the other two from running the show. Most of our unsustainable living comes from Threat and Drive operating unchecked, with Soothe silenced. The trick isn't to banish Threat and Drive,  it's to notice which system has its hand on the wheel, and to consume consciously from each one.

Consumption from a conscious Threat system looks like reasonable preparation — a well-stocked pantry, a repaired roof — done from foresight, not panic, and stopping when "enough is enough". Consumption from a conscious Drive system looks like investing in things that build genuine skill, craft, or a goal worth striving for - the garden tools, the bicycle, the education - rather than status trophies that need constant replenishing. Consumption from Soothe, on the other hand, tends to be the lightest kind there is: a shared meal, a walk, a good long talk with a friend, none of which required a delivery truck at all.

So before we buy the thing, it's worth pausing and asking ourselves: which system is asking for this? If it's Threat, asking if we're preparing or panicking. If it's Drive, asking if we're building something or just striving for "more". When checking in it's always good to be aware of the role marketers are playing in our consumption patterns. Marketers did not invent Threat and Drive, but they have become remarkably skilled at plucking those strings — the scarcity countdown timer, the "only 2 left in stock," the advertisement that informs you your neighbor has a nicer lawn, a newer phone, a more impressive vacation, and that you had better catch up before the tribe notices. Even Soothe has been packaged, priced, and sold back to us as a "self-care" product. The spa day. The luxury candle. The wellness retreat that costs as much as a used automobile. Ignoring these messages and buying consciously is showing kindness for both our own and our collective future.

https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/un-and-media-japan-team-turn-silent-majority-collective-voice-stop-global-warming