You may have heard that Laurie David and Sheryl Crow are touring the country, “educating” people about global warming. (Nothin’ says college education on climatology like a tour with a TV producer and a rock star!)

But Sheryl had a major brainstorm on how to reduce emissions. I’ll let her tell you.

Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of forest conservation which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required. When presenting this idea to my younger brother, who’s judgment I trust implicitly, he proposed taking it one step further. I believe his quote was, “how bout just washing the one square out.”

How about just using your hand? Or a rag you carry around? Remind me to give Sheryl a Jose Canseco forearm bash instead of shaking her hand.

UPDATE: Even KKKarl Rove doesn’t want anything to do with “Frugal Wiper” Sheryl Crow.

Of course, the irony of this kind of talk is thick. A rock concert is once big pollution arena. From all the buses/cars/trucks needed to set up the stage & arena, to shipping in the bottled water, pop, alcohol, food, t-shirts, programs, and the tons of litter left over by a partying rock crowd– it’s just not an arena of conservation. But Sheryl derives most of her income from tours just like this, and she’s busing around the country talking about “reducing emissions”.

A commenter on her post, timmyslagle, provides a great retort to the critical analysis of one Sheryl Crow:

Trees are part of Agriculture. Like corn and wheat, they are planted by paper and lumber companies, with the full intention of being harvested. Were it not for the demand for wood products, a lot of trees would never be replanted.

A tree absorbs carbon from the atmosphere, and turns it into cellulose. When a paper napkin is disposed of, it goes into a land fill, and that carbon never returns to the atmosphere. Throwing away paper napkins (and used toilet paper) into the trash can is a great way to sequester carbon from the atmosphere. The more you use, the more carbon gets taken out of the atmosphere.

And while he’s mistaken (bacteria will break down paper just as they will a fallen tree, just not as fast), he really explains that the forestry industry does quite well in repopulating old-growth clear-cutting with new tree populations.

And I just had to repost these “FACTS” by guitarsandmore:

FACT: In 1950 there were just over 2 billion people on the planet. Today there are over 10 billion.

FACT: Each person who grows up in a developing country will use electricity for light and many other needs. Think, each person will want to buy a car and that car will spew pollution into the air. Each person will become a consumer of precious resources such as clean water, clean air, and fertile soil. Each new person will eventually become a polluter by purchasing goods that are not biodegradable.

FACT: It is the population growth that makes it a requirement to provide additional power sources from somewhere.

The hockey stick graph that Al Gore points to when he talks about carbon dioxide in the air can be directly tied to an increase in population.

In that case, he should be all for war. Kill people steal their resources, so that way they can’t use the resources, and there’ll be less people to pollute using those resources. All 10 billion of them (the other 4 billion are thetans– just ask Tom Cruise).

But to seriously suggest that we use “one square” without regard to the public health repercussions of such an endeavor is beyond stupid. It’s insane. And that’s why I’m handing Ms. Crow a can of Aquanet and a Zippo. Light ‘em up, Dan!