Did you know that your version of Internet Explorer is out of date?
To get the best possible experience using our website we recommend downloading one of the browsers below.

Internet Explorer 10, Firefox, Chrome, or Safari.

Lance Armstrong: Champion Cyclist and Water Waster?

Like us on Facebook:
The current article you are reading does not reflect the views of the current editors and contributors of the new Ecorazzi

Apparently winning the Tour de France seven times isn’t quite enough of an accomplishment for some people. It’s been revealed that in July, Lance Armstrong used 330,000 gallons of water at his home in Texas. That, according to The New York Times, is a shocking 38 times the amount a single household consumes during one summer.

Couple that with the dry spell Texas has been experiencing this season, and the amount is more than cringe worthy.

But as with every story, there’s always another side of the tale. Lance has been spending the majority of the summer between Colorado and California, and was reportedly unaware of his water usage. He’s been quoted as saying, “I’m a little shocked … There’s no justification for that much water.” Also adding, “I need to fix this.”

Yes, Lance, you most certainly do. Especially with more information being brought forward showing that since January of 2007, his home has used 158,000 gallons a month on average, having only recently shot up to take him to the head of the pack. But this time, the race he’s winning is for the title of “water-glutton”. Hopefully all this public attention on his high water usage will encourage Lance to cut back, and perhaps he can even inspire other celebs to do the same.

via: Green Daily

Like us on Facebook:
0 Comments

Protesting Kylie Jenner’s Use of Fur Doesn’t Help Animals

Campaigns against fur, whether that’s at the PETA level or a small mobbing like this, don’t work because they promote the use of other animal products.

Collaborating with animal exploiters won’t help animals

The two sides claim to both have the “health and well-being of animals” in mind in this partnership, but one likely said “after profitability” under their breath.

Exploitation for art is no worse than exploitation for dinner

It always seems to come back to a confused juror deciding when animal use is justified.