So I have this dear friend who just won’t give up the bottled water habit. I have told her about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, about the fact that it takes 700 years for a plastic bottle to begin to decompose, and yet, when I was visiting with her recently, she and her family went through bottle after plastic bottle of water. Since I was a guest in her house, I felt it was not my place to question her or lecture her for the millionth time. I know she cares deeply about the planet’s future, so why the disconnect? We were sitting outside in the hot sun, and my friend mentioned she was thirsty. I asked her if she wanted some water and she said she did. I pulled out my reusable stainless steel water bottle filled with ice cold tap water and she looked at it and politely declined. Another friend pulled out a store bought bottled water and she immediately accepted that offer and rushed to quench her thirst. I’m pretty sure she thought my water bottle was not clean – not to mention what she thought of the tap water inside. I’m wondering how many people have not given up some of their most wasteful habits not because of the small inconveniences involved, but because they like things nice and new and clean. I know I had to suppress many of my obsessive compulsive tendencies when I began my journey to go green. So I’ve put together a Green vs. Clean list with some myth busters:
1) Bottled Water vs. Tap Water. Myth: Bottled water is better for you. Fact: Bottled water is less regulated than tap water, and in a 2008 study by the Environmental Working Group, 38 contaminants were found in 10 of the top brands of bottled water. Also, plastic bottles leach harmful chemicals into the water. Finally, if you like things clean, then why add to the huge amount of plastic that exists in our oceans and landfills? That stuff is not going anywhere, and eventually it will show up on your beach and in your backyard. That’s pretty gross.
2) The Disinfection Obsession. Myth: Green cleaning products aren’t as effective as antibacterials. Fact: Unless you are a surgeon requiring a sterile environment, good old soap and water or even home made concoctions like vinegar and baking soda are just as effective cleaning agents as antibacterials – sans the side effects of toxic chemicals, indoor air pollution, and water pollution. These don’t sound so very clean to me.
3) Use and Toss. Myth: Single use products are more hygienic than reusable ones. Actually, you can get a better clean from cloth towel than a paper towel, without the paper waste and mess. Cloth towels are more absorbent and stronger and therefore are more effective at getting the grime out of your kitchen. Use and wash is still better than use and toss, and if your mess is not a wet one, you can even reuse your cloth towel a few times before washing it, making it even more environmentally preferable to paper.
4) Kleenex vs. Handkerchief – I got nothin’ here – sorry, you won’t catch me blowing my nose over and over in the same hanky. Even I have my limits….but I am open to suggestions!
5) The Hippie Stigma. Myth: People who are passionate about the environment are tree-hugging hippies who don’t shave, wear deodorant, or shower regularly. Fact: while I may be known to let my razor stubble get a little visible on my legs in between shavings, I am a far cry from crunchy. Actually, prior to becoming informed about environmental issues, I was your typical over-consuming (Italian/Jewish) American Princess. Still pretty concerned about my looks and my style, but I have changed my waste producing habits to do my part in helping to preserve our earth’s natural beauty.
Do you have examples of Green vs. Clean myths that can help us eliminate the “yuck” factor as an excuse for not going green?
Blog written by Eco Plum, a GenGreen Certified Business

(January 26, 2010) Santa Cruz, CA - On January 19th, after more than a year of continuous controversy, the FDA has released a statement naming the chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) as a safety risk, allocating $30 million for independent research for a first-time, non-industry-funded study  in an effort to learn more about the health risks associated with BPA.  Bisphenol A is especially prevalent in baby bottles, and while consumer pressure and declining sales of BPA plastics have spurred the six largest, plastic baby bottle manufacturers to voluntarily remove BPA from baby bottles sold in the U.S., the chemical is still widely prevalent in consumer food and beverage containers sold around the world.

Bisphenol A, or BPA, is one of the world’s highest production-volume chemicals, and has been used for 40 years in plastic items such as baby bottles, food and beverage containers, and dental sealants. Independent studies have shown adverse health effects of BPA occur on the brain and reproductive system, as well as create metabolic diseases in laboratory animals.

In the human body, BPA mimics the estrogen hormone, and studies have tied the BPA compound to reproductive abnormalities and the increased risk of both cancer and diabetes. Infants and children are thought to be particularly vulnerable to the BPA compound because their reproductive organs and ability to metabolize chemicals are not fully formed.  In a statement in 2008, the FDA said BPA was safe in materials that come into contact with food, to which  critics accused the agency of using outdated studies that had been sponsored by the chemical industry, so the new cautionary statement by the FDA is a huge step in the right direction of consumer safety over corporate pressure.

There was considerable media coverage of the BPA baby bottle controversy last year. Scientist and expert Frederick vom Saal explains the situation like this: “The Japanese industry voluntarily removed BPA from can linings 10 years ago and thus, were able to reduce exposure to BPA by 50 percent.  Last year, Congress asked companies in the United States to take similar actions; however, companies have made no move toward compliance.”  In spite of this and tarried by pressure from chemical corporation lobbyists, the FDA still has no official plan to ban BPA from consumer goods.

The new FDA position is consistent with that of the National Toxicology Program made two years ago.  To avoid this health risk all together, choose BPA-free plastics, and avoid putting all plastics into the microwave and dishwasher, where they can release dangerous chemicals when heated, or degrade in the heat and excessive moisture.

Safe plastics that use polyethylene (#1, #2, and #4) and polypropylene (#5) require the use of less toxic additives. They also are non-chlorinated. Avoid choosing products that use polyvinyl chloride (#3), polystyrene (#6), and polycarbonate (#7) which typically contains bisphenol A (BPA) and is found in baby bottles and/or sippy cups.

About the author: Elizabeth Borelli is the Founder of Nubius Organics, an eco-conscious mom, and an environmental activist. She began www.nubiusorganics.com to bring her knowledge of safe, healthy alternatives to a greater audience, and to share valuable  information, resources, and green solutions with the public, the media, and parents to be.

#    #    #

While teams of scientists are in the midst of searching for the best, lowest impact alternative fuel resources, some scientists are just having fun – meaning they are spending their time discovering ways to apply green technology for fun, everyday uses.

Researchers Klaus Sedlbauer and Herbert Sinnesbichler from the Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics have created the temperature-regulating mug using a phase change material (PCM). PCM is capable of storing and releasing large amounts of heat by changing its phase,  for example, changing from a solid to a liquid as needed, to maintain an optimal temperature for your beverage.

The mug was created using a hollow porcelain shell filled with ribbons of highly conductive aluminum. The aluminum formed a honeycomb structure, which the researchers filled with solid PCM. When the mug is filled with a hot beverage, the PCM absorbs the heat and melts like wax into a liquid. This process cools the beverage down to the optimal temperature. As the beverage cools over time, the PCM slowly releases the stored heat back into the drink, maintaining the optimal temperature for up to 30 minutes.

Researchers note that different drinks have different optimal temperatures. Warm drinks such as coffee and tea are best enjoyed at 58° C (136.4° F), beer tastes best at 7° C (44.6° F), and ice-cold drinks are best at -12° C (10.4° F). Since different types of PCM have different chemical properties and melting temperatures, the scientists can make different mugs for different beverages. Unfortunately, consumers need a mug for hot and cold, as there is not a single mug that can manage both types of drinks.

Other Applications

Besides this practical application in the construction of mugs, scientists believe PCM has a variety of other interesting uses. Researchers are currently investigating the possibility of using it to keep perishable foods from spoiling. Another suggestion is to put it on museum walls to protect paintings in the case of a fire (PCM is non-flammable). PCM also has long-term memory capabilities, and would be a good alternative for storing computer data without the need for an electric current.

PCM is currently being used in construction materials, where its embedded in walls and ceilings to maintain a comfortable room temperature. Its also being included in the fabric liner of some winter jackets for greater, more consistent warmth.

Now if they could only find a way to use it in a Snuggie(TM)…

Katrina Pfannkuch
Buzzword Communications, LLC

About the author: Katrina Pfannkuch is a writer, Reiki Master and entrepreneur who lives to write and create. She started Buzzword Communications to pursue her passion for excellence in communication and satisfy her entrepreneurial spirit.

by Beth Doane,

As I write this I think “dare I touch this subject being so directly involved in the manufacturing industry and with countless colleagues and clients producing in China?”  I quickly remind myself that the real question is dare I not confront this topic seeing as I am in a unique position to support or not support what has been the most massive manufacturing nation on the planet for years.

About the author: Beth Doane is a fashion designer and consultant focusing on eco-conscious product development and marketing. She founded and designed the internationally acclaimed Rain Tee collection and Andira International.

by Kathi King

Last month, Santa Barbara kicked off a new comprehensive, voluntary reusable bag program called “Where’s Your Bag.” The program aims to educate the public about the negative environmental effects of plastic and paper single-use bags and to promote the use of reusable shopping bags. “Where’s Your Bag” is part of a community-wide effort to provide a solutions-based approach to serious environmental and pollution issues.

by Katrina Pfannkuch

Water recycling efforts can go way beyond the basic methods used today, according to a team of eco-thinkers and scientists who have derived a way to create fresh drinking water from shower water using a variety of plants.

Designers Jun Yasumoto, Vincent Vanderbrouk, Oliver Pigasse and Alban Le Henry settled on the shower basin concept when searching for creative and practical ways to recycle water. The eco-conscious team graduated from French national design school Ecole Nationale Supirieure de Creation Industrielle, and were especially interested in finding a way to make practical use of shower water, something normally filtered outside the home.

How does it work?

The concept/design for this eco-shower is based on a natural filtration process called phyto-purification, and helps to turn a bathroom into a mini-ecosystem. As you shower, the wastewater passes down into a chamber below the shower floor, and travels through a maze of filters including; sand, reeds, rushes, a mesh filter, water hyacinths, lemnas and a final carbon filter. The plants grow up and around the edge of the shower floor, and the filtration takes place at the root of the plants. Chemicals from soaps, shampoos and other debris are removed, and then the water is recycled back up for use in your next shower, or for brushing your teeth, washing your face or drinking.

‘With this project, we tried to combine the pleasure of taking a shower with the satisfaction of recycling water. We wanted the recycling process to actually interact with the use of the shower,” said Yasumoto.

The team hopes the impact of their concept doesn’t just alter the way we bathe. ‘We thought that by conceiving this very intricate relation between the recycling of water and the user experience, we could get the users to also re-think the way they use water,’ said Yasumoto.

The concept of a self-contained water filtration system is stirring up a lot of interest now that the images have been made public. As a result, the team is continuing to fine tune the idea and currently working on ways to bring it to market.

Now the question remains, how many people will actually want to use it?

. . .

About the author: Katrina Pfannkuch is a writer, Reiki Master and entrepreneur who lives to write and create. She started Buzzword Communications to pursue her passion for excellence in communication and satisfy her entrepreneurial spirit.

by Scott Milinder

Bamboo has been widely touted as “green.” It’s a fast-growing, carbon-sequestering plant and a sturdy, multipurpose industrial material. In recent years, sales of clothing, linens and other textile products advertised as made from bamboo have shot up like so many woody shoots. We have been told that bamboo clothing is manufactured in an environmentally friendly way and that the fabric is naturally anti-microbial and bio-degradable.

Sadly, the claims about bamboo fabric have pretty much been B.S. So said the Federal Trade Commission last week when it settled complaints with three bamboo textile suppliers in the U.S.

In fact, the supposed “bamboo” fabric is not really even made of bamboo fiber. It’s Rayon. Yes, the original fibers might be from bamboo but, in most cases, the fibers are subjected to a conventional manufacturing process that uses harsh chemicals and whose end product is rayon. The resulting textile retains no special properties related to bamboo—no special “anti-microbial” magic, no special ability to bio-degrade.

A lot of consumers have been fooled by this blatant case of green washing. Let’s heap scorn on these irresponsible bamboo suppliers. Equally important, let’s applaud other firms that have stood firmly on the side of social responsibility. The most prominent example is the retailer Patagonia, who analyzed the origins of “bamboo” fabric and decided against selling it because of the dirty production process used by most manufacturers. Patagonia, who urges its customers to “lead the examined life,” is celebrated for its high level of social consciousness and environmental leadership. Its size and success empowers the company to resist the temptation of fast profits at the expense of its values.

Smaller firms have taken a principled approach as well. A good example is the central Florida retailer It’s Our Nature, which markets sustainable organic cotton and hemp clothing and accessories. The 13-year-old firm’s motto is “Healthy wear for people who care.”

Owner, Linda Taylor, evaluated bamboo clothing years ago and decided not to carry the products because they did not embody the values that she upholds in her business and that are expected by her core customers.

Her position was confirmed when one of her chemically sensitive customers bought a bamboo shirt, wore it once and “had to practically tear the shirt off his body,” she said.

Taylor said the FTC ruling further validates her decision. But, in the past few years, there were always temptations to back down from her principles. Selling at many Tampa area green and outdoor markets, customers would periodically stop at her booth looking for bamboo clothing. She would patiently explain the sustainability problem with bamboo fabric. Many would agree with her evaluation, but others would just leave her booth and go to a nearby competitor who did sell bamboo clothing.

Fortunately, the marketplace has also seemed to vindicate Taylor. A major seller of bamboo textiles in the Tampa area—who often competed against Taylor in a nearby booth—recently went out of business.

Taylor says people who care about buying sustainable and green products should consciously work through what values are important to them and then choose vendors who strongly reflect those values. Her evaluations filter products and suppliers through “layers” of values: “Are they produced in an eco-friendly way?”, “Are they healthy and safe?”, “Are the workers who produce the product not exploited in terms of health or wages?”, and so on.

Taylor admits that avoiding green washing can be tough. It takes a commitment to ongoing education and analysis. “Things are not always as they seem,” she says. “ Question, question, question.”

Taylor, who authored the book Great Women Exploring Nature, says hemp is a good example of how complex the issues can get. Because hemp is renewable and can grow with less water, fertilizers and pesticides, it can be an excellent sustainable fabric. Problem is, China is a major supplier of hemp, and as Taylor points out, many suppliers there provide little transparency. There is also a history of labor abuse and human rights violations. “I need to trust who I am buying from,” she says.

In addition to carefully selecting socially-conscious vendors, Taylor also recommends that consumers consult trusted information sources, like Consumer Reports or GreenGenLife.com, and look for certifications like those offered by Green America. (Editor’s note: GenGreenLife.com also offers green business certification.)

. . .

About the Author: Scott Milinder is the founder of Sustainetics Institute, LLC, a company in Tampa, FL that helps organizations improve their bottom line performance by becoming more green and sustainable. Scott may be reached at scott.milinder@sustainetics.com or (727) 421-2818.

by Lynn Hasselberger

No matter what time of year it is, I love burning candles. But did you know many candles may be unsafe? And, no, I’m not talking about the potential fire hazard…

What’s in your candle?
Paraffin is the predominant wax used in the candle industry. Why? Simple. Paraffin is very inexpensive. It is basically the “bottom of the barrel” final byproduct in the petroleum refining chain…even after asphalt is extracted. Petroleum sludge, if you will. Mmmmm. Love the idea of breathing that in.

Beeswax candles, on the other hand, are natural and renewable.

Why does it matter?
Bottom line: paraffin creates indoor air pollution. The soot given off from the burning of paraffin candles is the same as that given off by burning diesel fuel.

Some of the air contaminants in paraffin fumes include toluene, benzene, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) and naphthalene—substances found in paint, lacquer and varnish removers. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that benzene and toluene are probably human carcinogens.

These “emissions” can also leave dark shadows (ghosting) or soot on the walls, furniture and in the heating and cooling system.

What about scented candles?
Most oils used in scented candles are petroleum-based synthetics and not the natural plant-derived essential oils. The American Lung Association says, “refrain from burning scented or slow burning candles that have additives.”

What’s so great about beeswax candles?

1. More economical. While more expensive, beeswax candles burn up to five times longer than paraffin! And they’re dripless, as long as you maintain them properly.
2. Better for your health. Beeswax is the only wax that emits negative ions when it burns. Negative ions help to clean the air of dust, smoke and pollens and can help reduce fatigue. Beeswax has its own wonderful fragrance.
3. Better for the environment. Because they’re smokeless and natural.

Make sure to select 100% non-imported beeswax with no lead/metal in the wick!
Labeling laws allow candles that have as little as 10% beeswax to be sold as beeswax candles. Most of these so-called beeswax candles are blended with cheap paraffin to cut costs! AND, many candle wicks contain metal cores and lead! I also recommend you select beeswax that has no additives.

Tips for burning beeswax candles:

• Keep wick trimmed ¼” for tapers and figures; 3/8” for pillars
• It is best to burn beeswax pillars about one hour for each inch in diameter. For example, a 3” diameter candle needs a continuous burn of approximately three hours. After extinguishing the flame and the candle has cooled to warm, gently mold the edges inward with damp fingers.
• For votives and tea lights, it is best to have a continuous burn. Burn both candles in fireproof containers.

Find beeswax candles in all shapes and sizes at myEARTH360.com.
Find manufacturers and other retailers at GenGreenLife.com.

. . .

About the author: Lynn Hasselberger is the founder of myEARTH 360.com, a company that offers eco-friendly products and whose mission is to raise environmental awareness and help families transition to an earth-friendlier lifestyle. She is also the founder of the I Count For My Earth campaign and the author of the ICountForMyEarth blog

by Beth Doane

Many people have asked me why I have personally stopped buying and wearing leather products and I really think the reasoning is so simple once the facts are known. So, to help us all get up to speed on the issues we have laid out the basics here.

Saying no to leather products is not just a statement against animal cruelty, its a statement about our need to be conscious of what we consume for the sake of our planet. Here are eight reasons why:

1. The process of leather production has devastating results.  Not only does it inflict unnecessary and often cruel suffering upon millions of innocent animals but the chemicals used to treat leather are often toxic and can leach into our water-systems and even onto our skin.

2. Most animals slaughtered for their skins endure the horrors of factory farming. Factory farms are mass production facilities for animal products, and like any product it’s all about how much, how fast and how cheap. These facilities are notorious for animal overcrowding, un-anaesthetised castration, branding and tail-docking as well as dehorning.  Ironically many of these animals are used solely for their skin, wasting the rest of the animal.

3. Not only does the leather process cause intense animal suffering, it also causes mass damage to the environment. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), factory farms are the biggest sources of river, lake and stream pollution.  The farms are also the biggest users of water and almost half of the water consumed in the U.S. is used to raise livestock for food and leather.

4. Another major concern with leather production is the output of waste and chemicals that result from the process. A report by the U.S. Senate Agricultural Committee, released in 1997, revealed that livestock raised for food and leather produce 130 times as much excrement waste as the entire human population in the U.S. That’s a lot of crap!

5. Unlike the human population, there are no waste-treatment systems used for our nations livestock. This means that because of the concentration of this “poo” we get ridiculous cases of pollution, human illness and even death in areas where livestock operations are concentrated.

6. Tanneries (leather making factories) treat animal skins with a number of minerals and chemicals that can have dangerous and even carcinogenic results.  For example, the EPA has stated that all waste containing chromium is hazardous. Chromium is just one of many mineral salts used on leather to keep them from biodegrading. So, when we buy a pair of leather shoes or a handbag, these chemicals are in contact with our skin and we have no way of knowing just what levels of chromium were used.

7. It’s obvious that livestock production within the U.S. poses an array of complicated issues but the cattle industry abroad is just as terrifying. Overseas there is often less regulation of animal safety or humane treatment than here in the USA and a report recently released by Greenpeace explores how the cattle industry in Brazil is slaughtering not just cows but also the Amazon in order to meet the high demands for leather and livestock.

8. As the demand for leather continues to rise, more of our world’s most delicate ecosystems will be cleared to create grazing space for the cattle. (See “How Cows kill Rain Forests.”) Brazil has also become the fourth largest emitter of greenhouse gasses as a result of the deforestation process-and of course cows. Coincidence? We don’t think so.

To make matters worse, the Brazilian government is financing further expansion of the cattle industry, which will likely result in the continued deforestation of the Amazon.

These are just some of the reasons it is vital for consumers to be aware of what we are really supporting when we purchase leather.  If consumers continue to accept the status quo, the destruction of our Earth’s most important source of climate control, the Amazon, will continue; the inhumane and heavily under regulated treatment of animals will continue; and the massive consumption of vital resources by livestock farms will continue.

What Can We Do?

As we always want to stay focus on the positive and be pro-active, there is plenty we can each do to help.
Take action now!

1. Remember to purchase the faux leather and vegan products that are available because true fashion should never be cruel.

2. Visit the Greenpeace Web site and demand change from the companies using leather from the Amazon to create their products.

Here in the U.S., four states – Arizona, Oregon, California, and Colorado – have already enacted farm animal cruelty legislation. Write to your legislators and demand action in your state!

Without the support of us as consumers, companies will never be inspired or forced to change their practices. The power is truly in the hands of the people–so wear what you believe in!

. . .

About the author: Beth Doane is a fashion designer and consultant focusing on eco-conscious product development and marketing. She founded and designed the internationally acclaimed Rain Tee collection and Andira International.

by Katrina Pfannkuch

Cars that run on hydrogen are not necessarily news, but technology in development to better manage hydrogen storage and resources has gotten pretty creative. In fact, it’s one of the biggest challenges for scientists today, and they have come up with some “out-of-the-box” ideas that are not only effective, but cheap and eco-friendly.

Let’s start with hydrogen storage. According to CleanTechnica.com, a car with a 20-gallon hydrogen storage tank made from carbon nanotubes or metal hydrides– two of the best solutions so far, but very expensive — adds $30k respectively to the price of the vehicle. Not only is that cost prohibitive in terms of development, but its not practical for the consumer. In addition, its difficult to store enough of the fuel on-board to give the car a cruising range similar to that of gasoline or diesel fuel. The current storage options also require placing the hydrogen under extreme pressure, which adds significant weight to the vehicle and increases the potential for explosions.

Presenting the solution…chicken feathers?

Scientists at the University of Delaware were researching the potential of keratin derived from chicken feathers to improve the performance of the microcircuits required for hydrogen fuel use. Instead, they unexpectedly discovered that by heating the keratin fibers in the feathers they could strengthen the structure of the storage tank enough so that it’s comparable to the strength of nanotubes needed for hydrogen fuel storage. The best part — ALL the tank requires is chicken feathers as raw material, and costs only $200.

This solution also provides a great (and only) way to dispose of the 2.7 billion kilograms of chicken feathers generated each year by commercial poultry operations. The new method can also help turn chicken feather fibers into a number of other eco-products like hurricane resistant roofing and lightweight car parts, as well as bio-based computer circuit boards. Talk about recycling at its best!

Introducing pee-power

With a new and eco-effective way to store and transport the hydrogen fuel, scientists are also exploring other sources of hydrogen-based fuel. According to Discover.com, using a nickel-based electrode, scientists can create large amounts of cheap hydrogen from urine that could be burned or used in fuel cells.

They discovered that one molecule of urea, a major component of urine, contains four atoms of hydrogen bonded to two atoms of nitrogen. Stick a special nickel electrode into a pool of urine, apply an electrical current, and hydrogen gas is released. “A fuel cell, urine-powered vehicle could theoretically travel 90 miles per gallon,” said Gerardine Botte, a professor at Ohio University developing the technology.

Botte’s current prototype measures 3×3x1 inch and can produce up to 500 milliwatts of power. However, Botte and her colleagues are actively trying to commercialize several larger versions of the technology.
This is the first time anyone has ever considered ways to produce, store, transport and use urine economically. “The waste products from a chicken farm for example could be used to produce the energy needed to run the farm,” said John Stickney, a chemist and professor at the University of Georgia.

For livestock farmers who are required by law to pool their animals’ waste, large scale prototypes could turn that urine into power within six months. Smaller versions likely won’t be available until after that, so the average consumer probably shouldn’t start saving their pee just yet.

. . .

About the author: Katrina Pfannkuch is a writer, Reiki Master and entrepreneur who lives to write and create. She started Buzzword Communications to pursue her passion for excellence in communication and satisfy her entrepreneurial spirit.