According to the Book of Acts (Acts 2:42-47), one of the features that attracted people to the first Christians was their willingness to share what they had with each other, to hold their belongings in common.
Living simply, sustainably, and joyfully within the limits enough, would logically involve sharing and holding possessions in common. This enables things to be shared. It also means that fewer possessions are needed overall which makes for better use of limited resources.
Some people share the use of a communal car or subscribe to a car sharing scheme. (1)
Libraries provide a collection of books (as well as dvds, audio tapes etc) which are held in common for everyone to use. And there are also toy libraries and Libraries of Things as well as street sharing schemes, that allow a community to own things such as electric drills, lawn mowers, wallpaper strippers, that the whole community can use.
Churches are places kept open for the use by anyone in the community. Church/village/community halls are large gathering spaces that anyone can use (for a fee and terms and conditions will apply).
Roads are communal spaces where anyone can drive, cycle or walk (again terms and conditions apply).
Green spaces and parks are publicly (or sometimes privately) owned which are kept open for the whole community to enjoy. Ditto public sports centres and swimming pools (fees and conditions may apply) – few of us could afford, either in terms of finance or space, to build and own a swimming pool for our own use, but having a public one kept for common use makes real sense.
In Cambridgeshire there is a village owned heat pump to which householders can opt to connect! (2)
The more we can hold and use in common the better.
The principles of the Franciscan Third Order says with regard to living simply that we ‘avoid luxury and waste, and regard our possessions as being held in trust for God’ and be ‘concerned more for the generosity that gives all, rather than for the value of poverty in itself.’
Being willing to cheerfully let go of possessions rather then clinging onto them and being gladly generous, is a positive way of living more sustainably within the limits of the Earth’s resources. It would also develop characteristics that would be attractive to others, encouraging others to want to live a life of simplicity rather than one that accumulates more and more possessions.
It is an old slogan but still pertinent: “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle”. If we are to live sustainably within the Earth’s finite resources, if we are to live simply – with joy in enough – then reducing what we consume is a good starting point. Ditto reusing what we have.
And recycling as the last resort.
That said, I do recycle cardboard boxes rather then hoarding them for future use. During Covid whilst so many things were being bought on line, people were hanging onto the boxes, which led to a shortage of recycled card with which to make new boxes. I guess there would be logic in having. Reusable boxes – as for example, with Riverford vegetables boxes.
Leviticus 25 explains that the land should have a sabbath rest every seventh year. In that year no crops would be sown and the people would live off the surplus of previous years. Farmers over the millennia have learnt that you cannot constantly expect the land to keep on producing crops year on year without fail. The land either needs to lay fallow (rest), or it needs to be sown with a restorative crop such as nitrogen fixing beans or clover, or it needs the input of artificial fertilisers (although we are now becoming aware that relying on artificial fertilisers may be a quick fix and not a long term solution), so that it may recuperate its productivity. It is a lesson we are sometimes reluctant to heed. The Dust Bowl disaster of 1930s in the USA destroyed vast acres of farm land because farming practices did not maintain the fertility of the soil.
It is not just soil that has to be maintained. Water systems too. If we drain more water out than is replenished by precipitation or the melting of glaciers (themselves replenished by winter snow) water supplies will diminish. The Aral Sea – an inland lake – was once the fourth largest area of fresh water in the world, but has now been reduced to nothing because more water has been extracted year on year – to irrigate local cotton crops – than the rate at which water flows were refilling the lake.
It’s hard to imagine, but we also need to maintain the atmosphere. The Earth’s atmosphere is a delicate mix of various gases, which in the right proportions maintain our climate at one with which we are comfortable. If we put too much of certain gases into the atmosphere it can upset that balance. Too much carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases, and the atmosphere traps more of heat within the Earth’s atmospheric envelope; global temperatures rise and the climate becomes more extreme and uncomfortable. We are experiencing this every year with floods, heat waves, wildfires and intense storms.
Ideally what we consume from the natural world – crops, timber, drinking water, clean air, energy – is balanced by the earth’s ability to regenerate. Prior to 1970 that was the case. Since then we have been using up the earth’s renewable resources at a rate faster than they are replenished. Scientists each year calculate that point when we pass from credit to deficit. This is called Earth Overshoot Day. This year the predicted date is 24th July. Seven months into the year and we have already – globally – consumed as much as the earth can replenish in one year!
Surely this state of affairs can not continue? What can we do about it and why aren’t we doing it?
Since 1970, Earth Overshoot Day has been falling earlier and earlier each year. Only in 2020 did it reverse: the reduction in world wide consumption came about because Covid gave the earth a three week reprieve. Consuming less has to be the answer which means consuming more carefully and more sustainably.
If we could do that in 2020 whilst coping with a pandemic, surely we could do it every year? What we must do is make sure that it is not the poor – who already lack a sufficiency – who are the ones who get to consume less; rather it must be the richer over consumers who need to change their lifestyles. And here is another caveat, to live more sustainably and fairly, will need a fundamental change in economic and political systems.
The Earth Overshoot website has details of various ways in which the global community could do this. https://www.overshootday.org/ Meantime we as individuals can make changes to our own lives and patterns of consumption. And we can ask or push for our churches, places of work, sports clubs, local authorities, museums, retailers, and government, to make similar reductions in consumption. We need change to happen at all levels.
24th July is 2025’s Earth Overshoot Day at the global level. That date is the average of each nation’s own Overshoot Day. The overshoot dates for individual nations in the diagram below range from 17th December for Uruguay (ie Uruguay pretty much balances its books, consuming only slightly more than it can regenerate in a year) to 6th February for Qatar. What this diagram does not show are the many poorer nations who do not even use up their equivalent of one year’s resources each year – The UK’s Overshoot Day was 20th May. We would need three United Kingdom’s to satisfy our current consumption levels; in reality we consume resources of other countries to make up the shortfall. Reducing the Earth Overshoot problem requires cooperation and understanding at a global as a well as at local levels. The Earth is a shared life-support system.
Joy in Enough is the name of one of the Green Christian groups, and it strikes me as a beautiful description of how it would be to live well. And so how to live in a world where waste is valued.
Their aim is to seek out, develop and pursue a new form of economics that would ensure joy in enough for all.
‘…the purpose is clear. We want to build a society where there is delight in enough, taking from the earth only enough to meet our needs rather than satisfying our greed. We want to allow time for earth’s resources to be replenished, safeguarding them for future generations. We joyfully seek a just and ecologically sustaining economy where there is enough for everyone, locally and globally.’ (1)
Using waste water. Is rain water from the roof waste water or a valuable resource? Collected in a rainwater butt it is ideal for watering plants. Rainwater butts are also useful in terms of preventing flood because the flow of storm water is delayed before it enters the drainage system and therefore helps the system cope with peaks.
Mains water coming into our homes is drinking water quality. We don’t need that same quality of water with which to flush toilets. ‘Grey water’ – ie water that has been used to wash hands or shower, launder clothes, etc – is perfectly adequate for flushing toilets. Grey water is waste water that can be reused. We have a small bowl under the taps in the wash basins to collect hand wash water and a jug to empty it into. This jug of grey water is used for flushing the toilet (unless a bigger flush is needed). We also collect water in a larger bowl from the shower when waiting for the hot water.
A jug by the kitchen sink collects water from cleaning or boiling vegetables, rinsing plates etc and goes to water the garden.
Households are asked to keep a 2-3 day supply of drinking water on hand in case of emergencies. Not wanting to stock up on bottled water – which will in time have to be replaced – I keep two demijohn jars full of drinking water. I empty one (into the pond) and refill it each day so that that our emergency stock of water is constantly fresh without wasting the water.
Fast fashion is as destructive of our environment as fast tech and is fuelled by many of the same features. Fast fashion is cheap (in terms of purchase price only – its lifetime cost is considerably more when factoring in disposal); its new and trendy and it – and its advertising – is designed to attract our attention; it’s intended to have a short life.
Yet just like fast tech, fast fashion produced vast amounts of waste that cannot easily be recycled. And like fast tech, a lot of the materials used in production are plastic based (ie synthetic fibres, plastic zips etc). Instead discarded clothing ends in landfill sites, in incinerators, clogging up oceans, and strewn across deserts.
Again we need to ask ourselves: Do I need this item of clothing? Should I buy the cheapest, or should I look for the durable, repairable option? Will I value it?
And we also need to ask questions about the system that allows so many cheap (and not so cheap) items of clothing to be produced and as quickly discarded. Does the fashion industry need to be held to accountable? Should manufacturers also be responsible for end of life disposal or recycling of garments? Should manufacturers be reviewing how much plastic goes into their garments? And on a related issue, should manufacturers be reviewing how much they pay those who actually do the making? Cheap products are often cheap because wages are cheap.
Plastic recycling is now much more common place, with local authorities making collections of certain frequently used items such as plastic bottles, margerine and other food tubs, shampoo bottles etc. Soft plastics can be recycled if they are kept separate from more rigid plastics – and some supermarkets have collection points for these. However there is, apparently, no guarantee that plastics going into a recycling bin will be recycled (sometimes it is cheaper and easier to incinerate the waste which causes air pollution). Nor are there many effective closed loop recycling programmes – each a system where a plastic bottle, for example, is recycled and returns as a ready to use plastic bottle. It is often cheaper to make a plastic bottle from virgin oil based polymers than from recycled plastic.
These problems are a further incentive for us to reduce the plastic we use so rescuing the problem at source. If we don’t buy things that come in plastic bottles, plastic tubs and tubes, in plastic wrappers etc then we reduce the amount of plastic that is in circulation before it becomes a problem.
Expanding access to clean, affordable and sustainable electricity to everyone is one of the UN’s development goals.
The following comes from a report by the Prometheus Institute
“Delivering universal access to “affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” by 2030 has become a prominent global target under goal 7 of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Great progress has been made in recent years according to the 2024 State of the Global Mini-Grids Market (SOTM) Report, which found the number of people without electricity fell by 466 million between 2010 and 2021. Mini-grids have been a key driver towards greater energy access, with installations in 2024 set to be over six times higher than in 2018.
“The UN has nonetheless predicted that 660 million people around the world will still lack access to electricity by 2030, with Sub-Saharan Africa particularly in need of accelerated efforts.” (1)
Projects to meet these goals need to be financed.
This month the United Nations Development Programme noted that:-“As the global community prepares to convene in Sevilla for the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) later this month, one question looms large: how can we mobilize the capital needed to deliver sustainable development in a world of constrained public finance?
“Africa offers a critical part of the answer.
“This week, UNDP launched the Fourth Africa Investment Insights Report—a data-rich guide to 250 real, investable opportunities across 20 countries. These projects span sectors such as renewable energy, health care, agriculture and inclusive infrastructure. Each one combines strong commercial potential with measurable development impact.
“This is not charity. It is strategic investment aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).” (2)
Whilst Climate Home News reported:-
“Climate negotiators in Bonn have been tasked with taking a “deep dive” into how a roadmap to boost climate finance for developing countries should look, so that it can be finalised at COP30 in Brazil –
“… At the start of the mid-year talks, UN climate chief Simon Stiell advised governments that the roadmap for mobilising $1.3 trillion a year by 2035 should not be “just a report, but a how-to guide with clear next steps on dramatically scaling up climate finance and investment”.
“That will mean reconciling widely divergent views among countries about what sources of finance the roadmap should draw on – and what form the money should come in…The “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T” was launched as part of the new climate finance goal (the NCQG) agreed at COP29, with a commitment for donors to raise $300 million annually – largely from the public purse – at its core.
“One main unresolved rift is that developing countries wanted the $1.3 trillion to consist of public money from rich nations – In general, developing countries have requested that the $1.3 trillion should consist of new money that is not re-labelled from other budgets, with public grant money as the bulk of it, excluding loans and other forms of debt.” (3)
Knowing what needs to be done – and knowing how it can be done – is not the same as being willing to pay for what needs to be done.
Solar Aid is a charity that aims to provide people in developing countries with access to lighting (using LEDs) to communities that a) do not have access to the grid and b) cannot afford household sized solar panels. They describe their project as follows:-
“Just as mobile phones have revolutionised communications across Africa, leapfrogging the need for landlines, picosolar lights (aka small solar lights) are now helping to bring light and power to millions of people across the continent.
“While grid electrification is not going to reach most of rural sub-Saharan Africa in our lifetimes, the solar light revolution is taking place right now, helping light up millions of homes, which would otherwise be kept in the dark.
“The concept is simple: Small solar panels, which can be as small as the palm of your hand, convert sunlight into electricity. This in turn charges small batteries, which are used to power efficient LED lights…For the first time, families can stop using dangerous, polluting kerosene lamps and candles.” (1)
That many communities cannot even afford this form of lighting, is the reason that this charity looks to people like us to provide the money.
The Green Tau 