0
News Picks:
7 Companies You Can Trust to Use BPA-free Cans: Even though BPA-free cans cost more for these companies, they promise not to use the dangerous endocrine disrupter.
Eco-Friendly Building Blocks for Kids:
Inhabitots tells us their favorite environmentally friendly building block brands for kids.
6 Ways to Reuse Aluminum Foil: Before recycling aluminum foil put it to some more good use with these creative ideas.
Multimedia Link:
Homemade Beauty Treatments:
Some great homemade ways to avoid all the parabens.
New and Cool Pick:
New Cell Phone Charger Uses Water for Power:
No outlet? No problem! In 2011, a water powered cell phone charger will be introduced. Intended for outdoor enthuiasts and developing countries, we see tremendous potential for sporting events, public transportation, and grocery stores (at least that’s when my phone tends to run out…)
Photo Credits: http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturalmom/3708318060/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/17541857@N05/3517757322/
News Picks:
Is Organic Food Worth It?: Real Food author Nina Planck explains why it is worth it to buy organic food.
“Pre-washed” Salad Precaution: A Consumer Reports test found bagged salads may not be as clean as you think.
Tax Rewards for Going Green: Good NYTimes summary of the expanded tax credits that make energy-saving purchases more affordable right now.
Multimedia Link:
Because it’s Friday and I want to pretend that my wardrobe consists of more than work clothes and yoga pants. The best moments of New York Fashion week’s Green Shows.
Prepeat Printer can erase and reprint on the same paper.
OK–this is by the far the coolest concept we saw this week. The paper is made of plastic (bummer), but if you only need a few pieces, it will save lots and lots of trees (yeah!).
News Picks:
5 Surprising Things You Can Recycle: You know about bottles and cans, but this article has some other good recycling ideas for less obvious items like phone books, hangars, and tin foil.
Tried and True Eco-paints: NY Times writer tests 10 environmentally friendly indoor paints and shares his favorites.
4 Secrets About Fast Food: Men’s Health editor-in-chief reveals list of shocking ingredients in common fast food items, including chicken nuggets, filet-o-fish, and a Frosty.
Multimedia Link:
Note from Susan: The first time I visited the Healthy Child Healthy World site, it scared the bejeezes out of me. I had no idea that so many things we did every day were negatively impacting the health of our child. It definitely was a wake-up call. This beautifully produced video “A Wake-Up Story” summarizes the key issues, but also encourages parents to take action—in their own homes and in their communities. Hope you enjoy it!
New and Cool Pick:
The first Green Map iPhone App helps users find green things in their communities.
News Picks:
- ‘Desertification Danger’: A new report suggests 38% of the world’s land is at risk of ‘extreme deterioration’ due to human activities.
- Weather Chaos for Winter Olympics: Warmest temperatures on record in Vancouver threaten winter games due to lack of snow.
- NY Fashion Week Goes Green: For the first time ever, New York Fashion Week will have net-zero emissions levels.
Multimedia Pick:
HGTV’s Green Home 2010 recently posted an Outstanding Features Slideshow that has great ideas for green home design.
New and Cool Pick:
Swedish and American researchers are working together to create affordable energy-efficient glowing wallpaper using plastic panels and electrode technology.
The St. Louis Dispatch reports that Target has pulled this Valentines Day bear after the California Attorney General and the Center for Environmental Health raised concerns about the quantity of lead in the toy.
The group tested the neon pink stuffed bear and found that it contained eight times more lead than the federal limit for products intended for children 12 and under. (The toy warns “not for children 3 and under.”)
Target claims the product was compliant upon arrival.
I keep thinking lead is something we parents no longer have to worry that much about after Congress banned lead in children’s toys in July of 2009. But products continue to crop up with unsafe levels of lead and I personally find it’s impossible to stay in the loop on all the recalls.
Fortunately, there is a useful website that categorizes every toy hazard recall, including lead paint, from the Consumer Product Safety Commission. When I checked the list today, one of the first toys I saw was one we got as a gift in Vietnam—a balancing dragonfly—recalled in October. It’s not clear that voluntary recalls, like the one Target took today, would make the list. However, it’s still a much easier way to check toy safety than my current strategy of hoping I hear about anything bad and then being indignant when I don’t and as a result, my son has been playing with a lead butterfly for months. To quote someone I like very much, “Hope is not a strategy.” At least for keeping the lead out.
The Financial Times had a story today suggesting that companies may start to fill the void for climate reduction after stalemates in Congress and a lack of major progress at Copenhagen.
Two big US companies have decided to avoid suppliers that source fuel from Canada’s oil sands to curb their carbon footprints.
The decisions by Whole Foods Market, an organic grocery chain, and Bed Bath & Beyond, a household goods company, underline how industry is moving to fill the void left by inaction at Copenhagen and the failure of the US Congress to limit carbon emissions.
Whole Foods Market doesn’t surprise me–it’s core to their brand and their customer base. Bed Bath & Beyond did. I haven’t really considered them a leader in green. A quick check of their green ranking in Newsweek shows they were in the middle of the pack at #224.
It suggests that companies are responding to pressure from well-organized industry groups, in this case, ForestEthics. But also that they must realize this whole green thing increasingly matters to the most important person for their success—the shopper. And folks, that’s people like you and me. Granted, most of us have probably not thought about oil from sand being better or worse from an environmental standpoint than regular oil. But I do care that Bed Bath & Beyond is thinking green–and the more they show me what they do to be green, the more I will choose them over other places for similar stuff.
I tend to believe it is going to take everyone contributing–people, businesses, and government–to make progress towards a greener, more sustainable path. But if government is going to go slow or bicker, I’m glad to have Bed, Bath & Beyond step in. Now I know my job is to reward that decision with my wallet. I see organic sheets in my future….
Which companies are you impressed with on the green front? Which companies do you think are the worst?
If you missed this commercial because you fell asleep or had to bring up the 3rd glass of water to your young one for the night, here it is:
And not suprisingly, it is sparking all sorts of controversy. The NY Times said, “This misguided spot put the “mental” in “environmental.” The plastics council is upset that it unfairly demonizes plastic bags and bottles. The Daily Green thinks it’s funny. USA today summarized the multiple points of view nicely here.
I thought one of the most thoughtful posts was David Roberts on Huffington Post, who said,
Anyway, not to overthink it (ahem), but the ad is not just another pot shot at greens. It’s an appeal to a new and growing demographic that isn’t hard-core environmentalist — and doesn’t particularly like hard-core environmentalists — but that basically wants to do the right thing. Audi’s effort to reach them, however clumsy, is actually a bit ahead of the curve.
What did I think? Honestly, I laughed out loud the first time I saw it. Because at some level, most of us trying to live green can relate. We have experienced a time when we felt really guilty for acting–well, like we used to. I remember the surprised look from a neighbor when she saw my grocery cart filled with paper bags (Reusable is now the green norm in 02459). And I’m feeling guilty and thinking, “Why did I have to run into someone the same day that I switched cars and forgot to switch the bags?!” Like any good commercial, it takes something people can relate to and creates a extreme version of it to provoke response. The spot created buzz—whether it sells more clean diesel cars remains to be seen.
I totally understand that climate change, droughts, depleted resources, and toxins in our food/water/air aren’t funny. But I agree with David Roberts’ perspective that there is a large group of people out there who want to do the right thing, but also find the tone and perspective of some environmentalists judgmental, confusing, condescending, and yes–Green Police-esque. I know that’s how I felt initially—and sometimes still do!
That sentiment was part of the motivation for Practically Green. I just didn’t feel like something existed to make it simple to understand my options and the possible trade-offs based on where I was and what mattered to me. Something that gave me permission to be super green in one area and not so green in another and acknowledges that doing something is better than doing nothing.
At the core of Practically Green is a philosophy that acknowledges we’re all busy, that change is hard, that green can be confusing, and that eco-perfection may be the enemy of the good. We keep a sign on the office wall to remind us daily to be smart, practical, helpful, fun–and passionate, but never preachy.
And after yesterday’s commercial, never, ever Police-y.
So–what do you think? Could you see the humor in it? Or do you think it’s idiotic or downright offensive?
Clorox has launched an improved consumer website that lists product ingredients and provides access to Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS). You just click on the logo of your favorite brand and it lists the ingredients, along with a description of what that ingredient does from a “usefulness” point of view. From a transparency point of view, it’s very helpful and a great step forward. My only major complaint is that the site does not tell you easily what each ingredient is like from a “hazardous” point of view. That’s where the MSDS’s are interesting.
For example, if you look up Formula 409, you will find 3 hazardous ingredients listed including n-Alkyl (C12-16) Dimethylbenzyl Ammonium Chloride, n-Propoxypropanol, and Monoethanolamine. You can then check out those hazards on The Environmental Working Group site as well as The US Occupational Safety & Health Administration and US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. What you find out about the ingredients for Formula 409 is:
- N, N-Alkyl(C12-16) Dimethylbenzyl Ammonium Chloride: listed as a moderate hazard by the Environmental Working Group and has been linked to cancer, immune and respiratory problems, skin and eye irritations, and is a suspected mutagen.
- N-Propoxypropanol: an alcohol that can cause skin and eye irritation and can affect the central nervous system. When involved in fire, it can create irritating vapors and toxic gases, such as carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.
- Monoethanolamine: a flammable, corrosive metal that is known to cause skin and eye irritation, affect the central nervous system (creating lethargy), can be toxic to humans if swallowed and can harm aquatic life when exposed in large amounts.
No shocker—pretty nasty stuff. It was also interesting to check out their Greenworks line, which I didn’t know much about. I was surprised to see pretty typical natural cleaning ingredients and nothing hiding that was a big green no-no. A few checks of other sources to confirm what I thought–and yes, Clorox Greenworks is pretty green from a health standpoint.
But let’s be practical, who the heck has time to be checking out MSDS’s on products or doing the random google walk through scientific journals to figure out whether a chemical is good or not. That’s one of the reasons I am loving the Good Guide–which ranks products on health, environment, and corporate responsibility using a simple numerical scale. Greenworks, for example, gets a good grade (7) on health, but does not do as well in the other categories. The “best” all purpose cleaner, in terms of health, environment, and social responsibility was Method.
I am a big believer that improvement is what matters when embracing green and in that sense, it is GREAT that Clorox is putting more information out there for people like you and me. But unless that information is accompanied by something to translate ingredient mumbo-jumbo into easy to understand connections between ingredients and health and environmental risk, it stops short of being truly transformative. Maybe that’s coming in version 3.0?
Boston.com reported today some great news for Massachusetts consumers that will hopefully inspire some standard-setting for other states.
After a year’s worth of haggling with the state’s utility companies, Massachusetts officials today unveiled a set of ambitious energy efficiency standards that some say are unequaled in the nation.
To meet the new standards – a 2.4 percent reduction in electricity use across the state, and a 1.15 percent reduction in natural gas use – the state’s utilities will invest approximately $2.2 billion in expanding efficiency measures like home energy audits, weatherization, and rebates for home appliances, over three years.
It’s an emerging theme. A few weeks ago, The New York Times reported on couples seeking therapy for green conflicts. There was a story today on the Oregon Live website highlighting the friction that can emerge between couples where one person is more into green than the other.
Let’s call it green friction, that force in a household when one person is more green-minded than another. It’s often characterized by comments like: “Why did you throw this away, Love? Did you realize it could be recycled?” (Love probably did); “Are you going to drive to the store for milk? Seriously, feel free to borrow my rain pants — it’s only a light drizzle.” “I’m about to put on a third sweater since the thermostat is set low enough to freeze an ice cube.”
While most couples probably have one person more green than the other, I have personally found it also depends on which aspect of green—energy, water, health or stuff–each person cares about and if they are different, watch out! My better half is all about energy, recycling, carbon— and ROI. He is an accountant by trade after all. And he was WAY greener than I when we first met.
My on-ramp to living green was health. Particularly kid’s health. And since he thinks some of my greenness stems from mild hypochondria, he’ll often roll his eyes when I insist that whatever we buy for the kids has to be free of preservatives, antibiotics, hormones, artificial colors, sweeteners and flavors, and high fructose corn syrup. He reluctantly agrees to forego the Apple Jacks and Trix for healthier choices. He throws the $6.99 tiny package of “healthy” chicken fingers in the cart, but points out that he ate Weaver and is just fine, thank you.
He knows not to ask how much the kid’s all natural lotion cost or it will ruin his day. I’ve had to learn to breathe deep, and shut up, when he slathers products on himself that garner moderate and high hazard scores from the SafeCosmetics Database. He talks me out of green projects with 10 year + paybacks. I remind him that our son being able to breathe at night is priceless.
I’m sure some couples have serious green battles, particularly if one person is just starting to think green and the other isn’t there yet . I feel pretty lucky that our green differences seem to lead only to a few eye rolls and snarky comments. But I would also say this is where being practically green helps. It’s easier to find detentes and compromises. For me last week that meant bringing home a box of Apple Jacks…just to say I cared.
In 2008, the French designer Philippe Starck turned his attention to designing for good, and launched his first very stylish home wind-turbines. Today, he announced two new models that are, in a word, visually stunning.
However, it leads me to wonder how practical a home wind turbine really is. Sure I want that gorgeous thing on my house. Other than driving an electric car or putting up solar panels, it might be one of the most visible ways to market new green tech to the neighbors and perhaps convince a few of them that wind power can mean more than an ocean full of bird killing devices (can you tell I live near the Cape Wind controversy?). My co-gen system is cool too, but not that many people are wandering around my basement.
But what’s the benefit? What’s the cost? How do I figure out whether I can get enough wind? The cost for Starck’s model, according to the announcement, is approximately $3,500 USD for one of the models and $5,000 USD for the other. The benefit: one of them produces about 400W and the (more expensive one) 1 Kilowatts at max capacity, but “capacity factor” (how much time is spent producing at capacity) varies dramatically–in many regions it’s only between 20-35%.
There is a decent frequently asked questions section of the American Wind Energy Association about residential wind that suggests a 1 Kilowatt system is probably undersized for a typical US household’s needs. They recommend a 5 to 15 Kilowatt system to offset the majority of energy usage. You can also look at a map of wind in your region on the Wind Energy Resource Atlas to determine whether you have average wind of at least 10 MPH. (On that basis alone, I think I’m out here in on a hillside in 02459. If you are in the Great Plains, Texas or California or on a hilltop, you may be in luck). And no one seems to provide great advice for dealing with those finicky historical commissions.
That said, even a 20% energy usage reduction would garner decent savings and Stark’s price points seem correspondingly lower than the costs quoted by the AWEA ($6K-$22K) for home systems. So while the Philippe Starck home turbine does feel like a little bit like eco-bling, if great design helps increase interest in renewable energy, a little bling is not necessarily a bad thing.
The Federal/State stimulus program ”Cash for Appliances” is ramping up across the country this quarter, providing incentives to upgrade that energy hog of an appliance for a new energy-efficient one. But because every state program is different, figuring out how much you save and on what can be daunting. Fortunately, you take a problem, the Internet, and a few innovative people and you get a solution. In this case, it’s Eco Rebates, which launched this week.
Ecorebates most useful feature is a map where you can search by state and see when the program starts and in some cases, exactly how much you will save by appliance. A perusal of Massachusetts says the program will start in March, over $6MM in rebates will be given out, and it covers EnergyStar refrigerators, freezers, clothes washers, and dishwashers. California’s goes further and says the program will start on March 17th, end of April 22nd, and gives the exact rebate amount for Clotheswasher (Tier 2 or greater, $100) , Room A/C, and Refrigerator. They also have a list of useful resources and websites for additional rebate information and links to major retailer’s appliance pages.
Like Cash for Clunkers, the funds may run out fast. So if you are in the market for a more efficient appliance, you won’t want to wait. And if you aren’t sure, check out your state’s rebates. It might just be the little kicker you need to finally brave the lines at Best Buy, and hey–you can always say you were just doing your part for the economic recovery.
It’s hard enough to figure out what’s in a product that’s good for you and what’s not. But evidently, companies can find out something was bad for health safety—and then claim “confidential business information” and not divulge that it was in their product. And the number of chemicals tested for health safety is actually really low. According to a report released by the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families late last week:
Of the 80,000 chemicals used in the U.S., EPA has required safety testing on only 200 under TSCA, says the coalition. And 60,000 chemicals — including bisphenol A — were grandfathered in for use without testing for health safety. Recent studies show that Bisphenol-A, a chemical compound commonly used in plastic packaging for food and beverages, has been linked to cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and liver-enzyme abnormalities.
The EPA announced late last year that they will be reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act and require more testing and disclosure. The benefits of reforming the act? According to the Safer Chemicals, Healthier Families report, nearly $5BB a year in health related costs.
But cost isn’t the only reason consumers need better ways to avoid these chemicals. Just watch me trying to nebulize our two year old twice a day with her steroids for asthma—it’s like chasing a gazelle and often miserable for both of us.
The emotional toll on families ranges from highly annoying to devastating and affects nearly everything else: workplace productivity, divorce rates, education outcomes, financial well-being, and overall happiness. So yes, the cost information is very compelling. But when you add in the other benefits, the value of reforming this act feels priceless.
One of my biggest pet peeves around home energy management is that I can set and monitor the temperature and if I try hard enough— kilowatt hours—but I can’t tell how much I’m spending as I’m spending it. So every month, when the electric and gas bill show up, it’s a surprise. Sometimes surprisingly low. Sometimes, like this month, surprisingly, and ridiculously, high. Had I known how much we were on track to spend, I can guarantee we would have cut back.
Fortunately, Earth2Tech reports that help is on the way.
In early January, the Consumer Electronics Show, the harbinger of next-generation gadgets and gizmos, featured its biggest showing of consumer-facing home energy management in my recollection, and at least five different home energy management devices launched, from heavyweights like General Electric, Control4 and Best Buy. A couple weeks later news broke that Apple has filed for a patent that focuses on managing the energy of its computing devices, suggesting that the firm has been eyeing the home energy management space. And this week Blue Line Innovations announced that it has started selling the PowerCost Monitor, a $99 energy management tool, to consumers via Fry’s Electronics.
This is all very good news, but like any new technology, it may be challenging to get it installed. I’m sure there will be limitations on who can use it, bugs, and other things that make you crazy. But it does suggest that homeowners may finally get an opportunity to easily monitor their energy spending and there is probably no greater incentive than knowing what you spend to change behavior. Blue Innovations claims that trial users cut back by up to 18%!
And I, for one, will be happy for a world without January energy bill surprises.
Back to top