I'm not looking to start a fight with users of either type of bar lube, saw (or ATV, snowmobile, lawnmower, etc.) users, Sonny in particular, or anyone else, but just want to point out a few observations. A spirited debate, though, I welcome.
Let's assume that indeed the exhaust emissions cause greater environmental damage than bar lube. I cannot cite studies that prove or disprove this, but we'll take it as given for the time being.
Additionally, let's assume that the total bar lube that is discharged into the environment by all saw users over time is greater than the ability of the environment to assimilate that waste, resulting in an environmental accumulation. Here, I find this somewhat difficult to swallow, as a balanced woodland environment is surprisingly resilient, and able to process waste materials, but it is certainly possible to exceed the assimilative abilities of a particular area.
However, both assumptions are indepent of one another. It does not matter which aspect causes a relatively greater environmental impact, since both the use of bar lube and the exhaust emissions do cause impacts. These combination of the impacts can then be looked at.
The point is, since both aspects cause impacts, and individuals with even a shred of environmental morality should seek to minimize environmental impacts where they can, a concientous person will try to minimize the use of materials or practices that are known to be harmful.
Note that I said, "where they can." There are times that because of constraints on money, time, or technology, we must all use products or utilize practices that we know to be harmful, or more harmful than another alternative, but cannot avoid. I do it myself.
I do applaud the individuals and firms that use vegetable-based oils, and mix their fuel to the recommended ratios. I know it's an overused catch-phrase, but "think globally, act locally."
Let's assume that indeed the exhaust emissions cause greater environmental damage than bar lube. I cannot cite studies that prove or disprove this, but we'll take it as given for the time being.
Additionally, let's assume that the total bar lube that is discharged into the environment by all saw users over time is greater than the ability of the environment to assimilate that waste, resulting in an environmental accumulation. Here, I find this somewhat difficult to swallow, as a balanced woodland environment is surprisingly resilient, and able to process waste materials, but it is certainly possible to exceed the assimilative abilities of a particular area.
However, both assumptions are indepent of one another. It does not matter which aspect causes a relatively greater environmental impact, since both the use of bar lube and the exhaust emissions do cause impacts. These combination of the impacts can then be looked at.
The point is, since both aspects cause impacts, and individuals with even a shred of environmental morality should seek to minimize environmental impacts where they can, a concientous person will try to minimize the use of materials or practices that are known to be harmful.
Note that I said, "where they can." There are times that because of constraints on money, time, or technology, we must all use products or utilize practices that we know to be harmful, or more harmful than another alternative, but cannot avoid. I do it myself.
I do applaud the individuals and firms that use vegetable-based oils, and mix their fuel to the recommended ratios. I know it's an overused catch-phrase, but "think globally, act locally."
