sustplan : Messages : 2430-2459 of 3872

#2430

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 2, 2007 7:04 am
Subject: Feature; Plastic Bags A Growing Cause for Concern, for Some

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/nyregion/30towns.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Our Towns
Human Behavior, Global Warming, and the Ubiquitous Plastic Bag

Illustration Omitted:
Many supermarkets sell reusable bags for 99 cents, but few people use them. It is estimated that Americans consume 100 billion plastic bags a year. Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times

By PETER APPLEBOME
Published: September 30, 2007

YORKTOWN HEIGHTS, N.Y.

When she moved to the United States from Germany seven years ago, Angela Neigl brought with her the energy-conscious sensibilities of life in Europe. You drove small cars. You recycled every can, lid and stray bit of household waste. You brought your own reusable bags or crate to the market rather than adding to the billions of plastic bags clogging landfills, killing aquatic creatures on the bottoms of oceans and lakes, and blowing in the wind.

But, alas, there she was Friday morning, lugging her white plastic bags from the Turco's supermarket, like everyone else, figuring there was no fighting the American way of waste.

"When I was first here, I brought my own bags to the market, but they would stuff the groceries in the plastic bags anyway. Finally, I gave up," she said. "People are very nice here. It's more relaxed. But the environmental thing is a little scary."

You could have learned a lot, I guess, about the politics of global warming from the lukewarm response President Bush received last week from skeptical delegates at his conference on climate change and energy security. But in the most micro of ways, you can learn plenty any day of the week at the Turco's or the Food Emporium in Yorktown Heights, the Super Stop & Shop in North White Plains, the A.&P. or Mrs. Green's Natural Market in Mount Kisco or just about anywhere Americans shop in Westchester County and beyond.

And the lesson for now pretty much seems to be that no matter how piddly the effort, no matter how small the bother, well, it's too much bother.

"I know," said Vicki Strebel, another Turco's shopper, when asked about bringing a reusable bag rather than taking home the throwaway plastic. "I should, but I don't. I'm sorry. I'm too busy. Things are too crazy. If I got the bags, I'd probably forget to put them in the car."

Plastic bags are not the biggest single issue out there, and no expert on global warming would suggest solutions rest wholly with decisions made by individual consumers. On the other hand, it is estimated that the United States goes through 100 billion plastic bags a year, which take an estimated 12 million barrels of oil to produce and last almost forever. And if individual decisions can't solve the problem, the wrong ones can certainly compound it.

Once upon a time, the question was plastic or paper, which had its own somewhat uncertain calculus of virtue and waste. Now, it has begun to dawn on people that you don't need either. Most supermarkets these days sell sturdy, reusable bags for 99 cents that people can use instead of plastic ones.

Except almost no one does. For lots of different reasons. They buy them and forget to use them. (Truth in advertising: Count me among the serial offenders.) They figure they can reuse the plastic bags for garbage and dog-walking duties. They find them unhygienic; we fell in love with the throwaway culture for a reason. One reusable bag can hold the contents of several plastic ones, but that's too heavy for the elderly or the frail to carry. It's just not what we do.

Of course, there are exceptions. Trader Joe's, for example, offers a variety of reusable bags and has raffles for free food or gift certificates for people who bring their own bag, so people use them.

San Francisco banned petroleum-based plastic bags in large supermarkets and pharmacies, which, depending on your mind-set, was visionary leadership or the green nanny state in action.

After Ireland enacted a stiff tax on the bags in 2001, consumption fell by 90 percent.

Mrs. Neigl says when visitors come from Germany, they're baffled by the local customs, the tolerance of such stupendous, routine waste.

But having lived here for a while she gets it: all that open space, the lustrous green acres just 35 miles from Manhattan. "I guess people aren't so concerned about the environment because they have so much of it," she said.

Of course, people are aware it's not that simple. But all too often awareness changes before behavior does.

At most of the grocers I visited you can find a quite remarkable Time magazine special issue on global warming. On its cover is a heartbreaking picture of a polar bear on a lonely frozen peninsula surrounded by what was once ice and is now water.

It would be a downer for supermarket d�cor, but in the absence of political leaders from the White House on down hammering home the message that the free ride of endless excess is about to run off the cliff, maybe it takes that kind of image on giant posters next to the cornflakes to get people's attention.

Plastic bags are a small part of the picture. (Sport utility vehicles, McMansions, long commutes, anyone?) But you think, if we can't change our behavior to deal with this one, we can't change our behavior to deal with anything.

E-mail: peappl@...

* * *

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20070929/NEWS/109290073

Consumers worried about plastic bags' impact on the environment

BY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 29, 2007

LONGMONT - They're initially used for mere minutes, they cost only pennies to make and are rarely given much afterthought.

But more and more consumers and communities are thinking twice about the everlasting life of plastic bags.

They offer a convenient carry-all for everything from cereal to CDs to cosmetics.

But then what?

"Plastic bags are a ubiquitous part of everyday life, and consumers are becoming overwhelmed by it," said Lisa Wise, executive director of The Center for a New American Dream, a Maryland-based agency that promotes responsible consumerism.

"People are getting increasingly concerned with global warming and how our lifestyles contribute, and plastic bags are a true culprit in the problem."

Industry figures show 90 percent of all grocery bags are plastic. Plastic bags debuted at U.S. groceries in 1977.

Current estimates say 500 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags, which are petroleum-based, are used every year worldwide. Yet only 1 to 3 percent are recycled.

The rest end up in landfills, sewers, streams, tree branches and the bellies of hungry ocean life. These littered totes can take hundreds of years to decompose, Wise said, breaking down into smaller toxic bits that mix with the soil and water.

"There's no end life to plastic bags that is good," Wise said. "The commonality is that the plastic bag is endlessly damaging to our environment."

But manufacturers and retailers incur little cost to make and use them, and they advocate the bags' convenience, strength and protection to goods from outside contamination.

The Film and Bag Federation, a trade group within the Society of the Plastics Industry based in Washington, D.C., states on its website that the environmental choice at the checkout is plastic.

According to the trade group, plastic grocery bags, compared to their paper bag counterparts, take less energy to produce and transport, generate less air and water waste and take up less room in landfills.

The group also encourages the recycling and reuse of plastic bags.

Efforts to reduce, reuse and recycle plastic bags are increasing globally.

Locally, efforts are purely voluntary.

Plastic bags are the most popular material dropped off at Eco-Cycle's Center for Hard to Recycle Materials, which has accepted plastic bags at the Boulder site for more than two years, manager Dan Matsch said.

CHaRM receives 1,000 pounds of plastic bags per year. By Matsch's estimates, that's 25,000 to 30,000 bags.

"The time you use (a plastic bag) is literally seconds for the majority of people - from the cashier to the car and then from the car to the house. And then you're done with it. The actual time the bag is holding something is so short, it's painful," Matsch said.

Plastic bag recycling is painstaking and costly because "it's in its infancy and the restrictions are very tight," he said. "Otherwise, you're just giving us trash."

Plastic bags must be clean and dry, and sandwich baggies must have the sealing mechanism removed to prevent bubbles in the recycling process.

The leftover product is then used to make composite and alternative lumber for the decking company Trex.

Wise said another barrier to plastic bag recycling is that it's expensive to do.

"It costs $4,000 to recycle one ton of the bags. What's left over is valued at only $32," Wise said.

Some local retailers and grocers, such as Wal-Mart and Albertson's, also accept bags at their storefronts for recycling.

Some stores, such as Safeway, deduct a few pennies if a customer opts out of a bag, while other stores such as Ikea charge customers for using a bag.

Longmont resident Chuck Peterson, who owns the Boulder Sign Company, said he and his wife use leftover bags to haul donations to a local food bank. But the sheer volume of plastic bags in the house "always bothered me a little bit," he said.

So this summer, when two University of Colorado-Boulder students had Peterson make signs for their reusable bag business, Peterson purchased more than a dozen bags for his family.

Green Endeavors is the brainchild of CU grads Doreen Molk and Carly Gralak, who created the not-for-profit supplier of reusable non-woven polypropylene shopping bags earlier this year.

"We're not necessarily against everything that's plastic," said Gralak, "we just want to get people in to the reuse movement, as opposed to taking a bag. And taking a bag. And taking a bag."

So far, they've sold more than 250 bags, Gralak said, at $2.50 each. Soon the bags will be available at some stores in the Boulder and Denver areas, she said.

"People were catching onto the idea. They liked it, they went with it and it's still going," she said.

Peterson agreed, saying using reusable bags is simple.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2431

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 2, 2007 7:05 am
Subject: News: US Manufacturers Begin to Opt for Leaner Production

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.greenbiz.com/news/news_third.cfm?NewsID=35957

U.S. Manufacturers Taking Lean and Green to Heart, Census Finds
Source: From GreenBiz.com

CLEVELAND, Ohio, Sept. 24, 2007 -- An annual survey of manufacturers finds that nearly 70 percent of respondents have adopted lean manufacturing practices as a way to improve performance, a striking sign that a "lean revolution" has taken hold in the industry.

The survey, Industry Week's Census of U.S. Manufacturers is conducted every year to determine what kinds of improvement methodologies companies are using in their operations.

This year's survey found that lean manufacturing is more than twice as popular as the second-place practice, Total Quality Management, which comes in at just of 34 percent adoption.

In the Industry Week article, David Blanchard says that, although most companies believe the main benefit of lean manufacturing comes from reducing costs, that's not necessarily an accurate assumption. "Lean management is not a quick solution for cost reduction," James Womack, founder of the Lean Enterprise Institute, tells Blanchard. "It's a fundamentally different system than traditional management for organizing and managing employees, suppliers, customer relationships, product development, production and the overall enterprise."

Full details from the 2007 Census of Manufacturers is available at IndustryWeek.com

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2432

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 2, 2007 7:06 am
Subject: Feature: All About Solar Energy

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/10/01/solar.energy/index.html

Mon October 1, 2007

All About: Solar energy
    * The sun provides us with 10,000 times as much energy as we need
    * Solar power contributes 0.039 percent of the world's electricity needs
    * PV installations in 4 percent of the deserts would meet global energy needs
    * Solar currently too costly for widespread consumer take-up
    * Next Article in World �

By Rachel Oliver
For CNN

(CNN) -- The sun, we are frequently told, is the best source of energy there is -- so much so that in just one hour it can provide the earth with all the energy its inhabitants demand in a year. Not only can the sun provide us with all of our energy needs (10,000 times over in fact, according to Greenpeace) but it can also apparently do this without any of those unpleasant side effects that you get from fossil fuels such as air pollution or ozone depletion. And best of all, this resource will never run out -- or at least, not in the next 5 billion years or so.

Illustration Omitted:
A warehouse covered with solar panels in Germany, the world's biggest solar energy producer

As a resource, solar energy has many useful functions -- predominantly the generation of heat and light, but it can also fly our planes, drive our cars and desalinate our water. When doing a like-for-like comparison with the resources we usually draw on to fulfill these roles, the argument for solar energy becomes even more compelling. According to the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists, for instance, the energy we get from all of the world's reserves of coal, oil and natural gas can be matched by just 20 days' supply of sunshine.

But if you equate the level of seriousness with which world governments treat solar power with the actual amount of solar energy generated globally, the figures aren't that reassuring. According to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2007, solar, wind and geothermal combined only account for around 1 percent of the world's electricity generation, with the International Energy Agency (IEA) putting solar power's contribution to the global energy supply at just 0.039 percent. In the United States, solar power meets less than 0.01 percent of electricity needs, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Even Germany -- which, according to the Washington Post, supplied around 50 percent of the world's solar power-generated electricity last year -- doesn't use a whole lot of it at home. Solar makes up a relatively small proportion of the 7 percent that renewable energy contributes to the country's energy needs.

Solar power comes with many complex issues that suggest it may not necessarily be the panacea it seems at first glance.

The first obvious problem, some say, is that when it comes to power generation, photovoltaic (PV) cells (i.e., solar panels) can only work efficiently when the sun is shining. And that means certain parts of the world are supposedly more suitable for mass-scale PV plants than others. That being said, the world's leader in solar energy production is none other than Germany.

In order to tackle the problem of how to maintain a solar energy supply sun or no sun, there have been developments under way to store existing solar energy in a way which can get round the problem of unpredictable weather. According to PlanetArk.com, the Anglo-German utility company E.ON AG has, for example, has developed a battery with the power of 10 million standard AA batteries. The battery is capable of producing 1MW of electricity for four hours -- electricity that has been previously harnessed from the sun (or wind), and stored.
Don't Miss

    * Special Report: Eco Solutions

Another problem, some argue, is space. A recent study by the Rockefeller University in New York found that for solar energy to meet current U.S. electricity needs for just one year, it would require PV cells covering an area of 150,000 square kilometers.

Critics of the study retorted: In a country the size of the U.S. -- at 3.7 million square miles -- how big a deal is 150,000 sq km?

The issue concerns the amount of land which is actually available for such an endeavor -- without creating added harm to the environment (destroying forests to make way for solar plants, for example, wouldn't make much sense). Keeping in mind ongoing population growth with increasing urbanization and the increased adoption of land for farming (particularly with the growing interest in biofuels), the amount of space available for a large-scale project such as solar plants gets much smaller.

Making a comparison of solar and nuclear energy, the Rockefeller report says that to match the power-producing capabilities of one liter of fuel in the core of a nuclear reactor, for example, would take one hectare's worth of PV cells.

Sunshine and space is more of a problem to some countries than others, so many assume that only countries with an extensive land mass and guaranteed good weather are worthy bases for solar power generation. But according to Greenpeace, the small and often overcast United Kingdom could meet two-thirds of its electricity needs with solar panels -- on roofs of existing buildings, negating the need to find space for solar plants.

But there is one area of the world, some are saying, which does meet solar power's two basic needs of sunshine and lots of space: The Sahara Desert. According to the United Nations Environment Report, released in 2006, an area of 640,000 square kilometers could provide the world with all of its electricity needs (the Sahara is more than 9 million square kilometers in size).

The IEA has also said that if just 4 percent of the world's deserts were covered with PV installations, the world's main energy needs would be met. Opponents to such a centralized supply of energy, however, have one key objection: it would be too easy a target for terrorists.

There are also those who are even suggesting that solar energy could be more damaging to the environment than the end benefits it would provide. The Rockefeller report points out that installing such ambitious new energy infrastructure would require "a massive infrastructure, including steel, metal, pipes, cables, concrete, and access roads."

Building massive solar plants would also require large amounts of resources such as silicon and plastic. And this is where perhaps the biggest problem constraining the development of solar power lies. A strain on depleting resources -- such as silicon and plastic (ie oil) -- is pushing up costs, which is hindering growth, and ultimately putting them out of reach for the average consumer, even in rich countries.

Homeowners in the developed world have been reluctant to pay for solar panels to be installed on their buildings while costs remain so high. And according to a report by Greenpeace and the Chinese Renewable Energy Industry Association, China exports a staggering 90 percent of its PV cell solar output -- because its citizens can't afford to use it.

Ultimately businesses only invest in products that make economic sense, so while costs remain high, investment in solar energy will reflect that (as Exxon Mobil's head of public affairs told The Economist in an interview, "Exxon was a big investor in solar in the 1970s. We got out of it because we couldn't make any money out of it.").

However, according to Friends of the Earth, the solar Photovoltaic industry is now the fastest growing renewable energy technology on earth, showing a market growth of 60 percent between the years 2000-2004.

The future may still be bright. The World Bank believes the global market for solar electricity will be worth $4 trillion in 30 years. And a recent report by Greenpeace and the European Photovoltaic Industry Association (EPIA), believes that solar power will be able to power 2 billion people's lives by 2030. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

(Sources: The Guardian; Union of Concerned Scientists; Greenpeace; LiveScience.com; Reuters; New York Times; Los Angeles Times; Washington Post; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Znet; The Economist; BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2007)

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2433

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 2, 2007 7:12 am
Subject: Feature: Telling "Natural" In Foods Gets More Complicated

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-te.to.natural29sep29,0,7654129.story?coll=bal_tab01_layout

baltimoresun.com

Natural is no longer simple
Expo in Baltimore features products of health, eco slant

By Jill Rosen
Sun reporter
September 29, 2007

Not long ago, a granola bar was enough. A little oats, a little honey, enough fiber and virtue to get you through the day.

Once fat was all anyone wanted products free of.

Remember when ingredients you couldn't spell seemed suspicious?

It's a whole new natural world now.

As the nation's top dealers showed off the latest in guiltless cookies, cleanser and Kashi at Baltimore's convention center this week, one thing became abundantly clear: Natural is no longer simple.

To stand out at the Natural Products Expo these days, that granola bar had better boast outrageously nutritious additives or be able to prove a dangerous something-or-other has been removed from it or show that it's helping to save, if not the planet, at least a small tribe in the Amazonian jungle.

Organic, you see, is so yesterday.

Entrepreneurs, striving to appeal to the ever-expanding - and ever-lucrative - market of health-conscious and eco-aware consumers, have invented a mind-numbingly vast selection of products that promise to do everything from boost one's immune system to taste like cheese to reduce one's carbon footprint - ideally all three at once.

"It's not enough just to have a healthy drink," says David Karr, a vendor pushing Guayaki, a bottled energy drink made of yerba mate, a mysterious substance that's supposed to induce mental clarity, help with seasonal allergies and control weight - for starters.

The company says the yerba harvest helps preserve the South American rain forest and provides work for indigenous people.

"You want to feel good about what you're drinking,"

Natural products shops have come a long way in a short time. The out-of-the-way college-town shops that used to stock sprouts, reek of incense and attract mainly the Birkenstocked are now supermarkets unto themselves.

According to Natural Food Merchandiser, natural product sales grew nearly 10 percent last year, nearly hitting $60 billion.

Whole Foods Market alone is a Fortune 500 company with sales of almost $6 billion last year.

About 2,000 companies fought for attention at Baltimore's expo, a dizzying blur of elixirs, salves and heroic superfoods.

Here a guy's hawking dog food that's so fresh it must be refrigerated. Here someone's selling non-chlorine diapers. Every other vendor seems to have gotten the endorsement of Dr. Weil - the white-bearded guru's benevolent grin is second only to soy in ubiquity - no small feat.

At some booths, the earnestness is palpable - folks who really want to make the world a better place and hope that their candle or lip balm or spray and wipe will lead the way. But for every believer there seems to be a pitchman hoping to ride the organic gravy train all the way to the fair-trade bank.

There's emu oil to stave off aging. A beverage line made from grasses - "You won't believe you're drinking greens." A hemp seed nut butter that puddles on a slice of wheat bread like a thick, olive green ooze.

MyChelle's skin care line is rich with something called bioactives.

"Those are ingredients that are alive," MyChelle's Susan Mesko explains, adding that when people are going about the business of firming and hydrating their skin, they shouldn't settle for ordinary vitamin C when they could have ascorbic acid. And they shouldn't accept regular water when they could have "heavy water," like MyChelle's water from "a very deep lake" that keeps hydrating longer than the shallow, regular stuff.

"It works so harmoniously with the skin," Mesko coos.

Everyone seems to have discovered the acai (pronounced ah-sigh-ee) berry hiding with all its antioxidants in the Brazilian rain forest. Companies have hired people to climb 60-foot palm trees to shake down the purple gems whose seeds are pureed and then packaged into juices and smoothies and sorbets.

Those who aren't preaching the gospel of the acai have fallen under the spell of another berry, the goji. It is imported from China and dried - precious nutrients intact - into a raisin-esque tidbit. Companies are slipping little red goji into trail mix and squeezing them into juice.

Each product struggles to out-ingredient the next. Juice with aloe vera. Cat food with a "triple cranberry system." T-shirts that say "Buy Local," printed with only water-based ink (nontoxic, for the uninitiated) or 100 percent vegetable dyes on sustainable threads.

As hard as it is to imagine anything more important than what goes into the veggie burger, what the makers purposely leave out of the burger is the real selling point.

No corn, no gluten, no wheat, no artificial preservatives, colors or flavors.

No high-fructose corn syrup. No hydrogenated oils. No cholesterol. No sulfites.

Egg-free. Dairy-free. Lactose-free.

No testing on animals. Ever.

At the Sheese booth, where they're selling faux cheddar, gouda, mozzarella and blue, a woman is coaxing a reluctant sampler: "Be brave - you may be surprised."

The sampler tentatively bites an orange square from a toothpick.

"It's exactly like cheddar, right?"

"It's free of about everything," says Scott Myers, who imports Sheese from Scotland. "It's amazing."

At NKD Candle, they advertise "100 percent soy. Zero percent bad stuff." The candles, tucked into compact tins, are mixed to smell like purity itself - everything from "farmers' market" to "monsoon forest" to "promised land, a comforting medley of oatmeal, milk and honey."

"It's a cleaner burn, it's a longer burn too," says the company's Franco Cruz when asked about the soy. "We're so naked we lost our vowels."

Christina Chambreau, a homeopathic veterinarian from Sparks who was browsing the candle display, bought right into NKD's mantra. "For a store to carry petroleum candles is like awful," she says. "Petroleum candles is why we're fighting a war in Iraq.

"Burning soy candles is like supporting peace."

Interestingly enough, the pet food people are as down on soy as the food people are up. "Dogs prefer a meat-based protein," says Freshpet Select's Kent Hemphill. Soy, he says, basically just cheapens pet food.

If fit bodies, happy animals and a healthy planet are the clear goal, the means to that end seem ever murkier.

No hunkahydroxapolyflaks, one cookie vendor advertises, the made-up word seeming, at least at the expo, all too real.

And at Maine Root, they wink as they advertise "free-range root beer."

"Really?" an expo-goer asks the drink's founder, Matthew Seiler, "Free-range?"

"It's a joke," Seiler answers in a tone that suggests he already has had to explain this once or twice more than he'd have preferred.

Yet, he can't help but add, "It is the first fair-trade organic soda - the sugar comes from a small co-op in Paraguay."

If only it had a little yerba mate.

jill.rosen@...

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2434

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 3, 2007 9:07 am
Subject: Feature: Fair Trade begins to Catch On, Globally

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/business/worldbusiness/02trade.html

Fair Trade in Bloom

Illustration Omitted:
The fair-trade market is still small, but fast-growing, and it has been a boon in places like Varginha, Brazil, where coffee roasters like Caf� Bom Dia, above, work directly with small farmers. Lalo de Almeida for The New York Times

By ANDREW DOWNIE
Published: October 2, 2007

VARGINHA, Brazil - Rafael de Paiva was skeptical at first. If he wanted a "fair trade" certification for his coffee crop, the Brazilian farmer would have to adhere to a long list of rules on pesticides, farming techniques, recycling and other matters. He even had to show that his children were enrolled in school.

"I thought, 'This is difficult,'" recalled the humble farmer. But the 20 percent premium he recently received for his first fair trade harvest made the effort worthwhile, Mr. Paiva said, adding, it "helped us create a decent living."

More farmers are likely to receive such offers, as importers and retailers rush to meet a growing demand from consumers and activists to adhere to stricter environmental and social standards.

Mr. Paiva's beans will be in the store-brand coffee sold by Sam's Club, the warehouse chain of Wal-Mart Stores. Dunkin' Donuts, McDonald's and Starbucks already sell some fair trade coffee.

"We see a real momentum now with big companies and institutions switching to fair trade," said Paul Rice, president and chief executive of TransFair USA, the only independent fair trade certifier in the United States.

The International Fair Trade Association, an umbrella group of organizations in more than 70 countries, defines fair trade as reflecting "concern for the social, economic and environmental well-being of marginalized small producers" and does "not maximize profit at their expense."

According to Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International, a group of fair trade certifiers, consumers spent approximately $2.2 billion on certified products in 2006, a 42 percent increase over the previous year, benefiting over seven million people in developing countries.

Like consumer awareness of organic products a decade ago, fair trade awareness is growing. In 2006, 27 percent of Americans said they were aware of the certification, up from 12 percent in 2004, according to a study by the New-York based National Coffee Association.

Fair trade products that have experienced the biggest jump in demand include coffee, cocoa and cotton, according to the Fairtrade Labelling Organizations.

Dozens of other products, including tea, pineapples, wine and flowers, are certified by organizations that visit farmers to verify that they are meeting the many criteria that bar, among other things, the use of child labor and harmful chemicals.

There is no governmental standard for fair trade certification, the same situation as with "organic" until a few years ago. Some fair trade produce also carries the organic label, but most does not. One important difference is the focus of the labels: organic refers to how food is cultivated, while fair trade is primarily concerned with the condition of the farmer and his laborers.

Big chains are marketing fair trade coffee to varying degrees. All the espresso served at the 5,400 Dunkin' Donuts stores in the United States, for example, is fair trade. All McDonald's stores in New England sell only fair trade coffee. And in 2006, Starbucks bought 50 percent more fair trade coffee than in 2005.

Fair trade produce remains a minuscule percentage of world trade, but it is growing. Only 3.3 percent of coffee sold in the United States in 2006 was certified fair trade, but that was more than eight times the level in 2001, according to TransFair USA.

Although Sam's Club already sells seven fair trade imports, including coffee, this will be the first time it has put its Member's Mark label on a fair trade product, which Mr. Rice of TransFair called "a statement of their commitment to fair trade."

He added, "The impact in terms of volume and the impact in terms of the farmers and their families is quite dramatic."

Michael Ellgass, the director of house brands for Sam's Club, said the company could afford to pay fair trade's premium because it has reduced the number of middlemen.

Coffee usually passes from farmers through roasters, packers, traders, shippers and warehouses before arriving in stores. But Sam's Club will buy shelf-ready merchandise directly from Caf� Bom Dia, the roaster here in Brazil's lush coffee country.

"We are cutting a number of steps out of the process by working directly with the farmer," Mr. Ellgass said.

Some critics of fair trade say that working with thousands of small farmers makes strict adherence to fair trade rules difficult.

Others argue that fair trade coffee is as exploitive as the conventional kind, especially in countries that produce the highest-quality beans - like Colombia, Ethiopia and Guatemala. Fair trade farmers there are barely paid more than their counterparts in Brazil, though their crops become gourmet brands, selling for a hefty markup, said Geoff Watts, vice president for coffee at Chicago's Intelligentsia Coffee and Tea, a coffee importer.

But in Brazil, a nation with little top-grade coffee, the partnership between small producers and big retailers is a better blend, Mr. Watts said.

Fair trade coffee farmers in Brazil are paid at least $1.29 a pound, compared with the current market rate of roughly $1.05 per pound, said Sydney Marques de Paiva, president of Caf� Bom Dia.

Most coffee farmers are organized into cooperatives, and some of that premium finances community projects like schools or potable water.

Like most of his cooperative's 3,000-odd members - and three-quarters of coffee growers worldwide - Mr. Paiva, the coffee farmer (no relation to Mr. Marques de Paiva), farms less than 25 acres of land. He produces around 200 132-pound sacks for the co-op, with 70 percent of that sold as fair trade to Caf� Bom Dia.

The company would buy more if there were more of a market for fair trade coffee, it said.

The fair trade crop brought Mr. Paiva about 258 reais ($139) a sack, compared with about 230 reais for the sacks that were not fair trade. For the latest crop, that meant an additional 3,920 reais ($2,116) for him, a huge sum here in the impoverished mountains of Minas.

"It's been great for us," Mr. Paiva said with a huge, toothless grin. "I call the people from the co-op my family now."

Mr. Ellgass, the Sam's Club executive, said the chain hoped to expand its fair trade goods.

So do Brazil's farmers. "Everybody is doing their best to come up to standard so we can sell our coffee as fair trade," said Concei��o Peres da Costa, one of the co-op's growers. "Everybody wants to earn as much as he can."

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2435

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 3, 2007 9:12 am
Subject: News: Plastic Debris Reaches Into Remote Marine Environments

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14859155

Environment
Remote Waters Offer No Refuge from Plastic Trash

Listen to this story... by Elizabeth Shogren

Illustration Omitted:
Laysan albatross have an elaborate courtship dance that includes something biologists call a "sky moo." Many of the hundreds of thousands of Laysan albatross chicks that hatch each year on Midway Atoll don't make it, because their parents feed them plastic, thinking it is food. Elizabeth Shogren, NPR

Illustration Omitted:
Biologist John Klavitter sorts through the contents of the stomach of a Laysan albatross chick carcass. According to Klavitter, a healthy albatross chick has one ounce of plastic in its belly, while a dead chick may have twice that much. Elizabeth Shogren, NPR

All Things Considered, October 1, 2007 � Midway Atoll resident biologist John Klavitter is not surprised when he finds plastic in the bellies of dead Laysan albatross chicks.

Opening one chick's stomach with a bone, Klavitter finds lots of shiny black squid beaks and plenty of plastic.

"This looks like a little toy wheel from some children's toy there," Klavitter said.

It's difficult to find a place more remote than Midway Atoll, a cluster of islands in the middle of the Pacific. But many tons of plastic make their way here every year, and they put in peril the islands' exotic and endangered animals.

Even Midways' most abundant resident, the Laysan albatross, is at risk. These birds are about the size of turkeys, with elegant six-foot wing spans and a flamboyant courtship dance.

"They go up on their tippy toes, they clap their bills back and forth faster than I can snap my hands. They lift their bills up and give this amazing sky moo. It's just beautiful," Klavitter said.

But many of the hundreds of thousands of Laysan albatross chicks that hatch here each year don't make it - so many that it's someone's job to pick up the bodies.

Klavitter says he can't say how many birds die from ingesting plastic. But on average, an Albatross chick can have one ounce of plastic in its belly and still be healthy; a dead chick generally has twice that much.

"Two ounces might not seem a lot, but plastic is very light so if you look at the volume it's really significant. Perhaps about a third of their stomach is plastic," Klavitter said. "That's 30 percent less food that the chick can have in its stomach."

That can lead to dehydration, starvation and death.

How Plastic Gets There

Cigarette lighters, bottle caps and all kinds of other plastic trash scatter the island. But the plastic in the chicks' bellies comes from hundreds of miles away, according to Klavitter

"The chicks are totally dependent on being fed by their parents. So, the parents will fly quite a distance from Midway, land on the ocean, and they float on the ocean, much like a duck, and they wait for food to come to the surface," Klavitter said.

And what they often see is plastic bobbing on the water. They grab it and they fly as much as 1,000 miles back to Midway to feed what they think is food to their chicks.

Klavitter says the plastic comes from cities and towns all around the Pacific Ocean.

"Most likely, the majority of the plastic is thrown into streets. And eventually it will go down a storm drain, it will go down into a river and finally flow out into the ocean," Klavitter says.

Circular currents, known as the North Pacific Gyre, bring plastic to Midway Atoll from all over the vast ocean. And for coral researcher Jamie Barlow, not only is it common to spot plastic bobbing in the crystal clear waters, he and a team of researchers often pull out of the ocean tangled messes of plastic, fishing line and nets.

Marine biologist Wendy Cover says fishing nets and lines that are either discarded or accidentally fall off fishing boats all around the Pacific end up in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. The chain of tiny islands, which includes Midway Atoll, stretches for more than 1,000 miles northwest of the main Hawaiian Islands.

Whirling Debris

The scads of swirling trash get caught on the shallow reefs and coral of the Northwestern Hawaiian island chain. It breaks off chunks of coral, killing it.

"This is kind of typical marine debris, too," Barlow said. "It's a bunch of gobbledygook. And as you can imagine, floating around out there, it would be great habitat for little fish. So larger things come in to eat little fish and crabs."

Hawaiian monk seals are also vulnerable. They're one of the most endangered animals on Earth, with only about 1,000 left.

They're curious by nature, and they poke their heads into the snarls of plastic and get caught in the tangle. Whales, dolphins, turtles and countless seabirds also get trapped.

The federal government is concerned about the problem. President Bush named the whole chain of islands the Papanaumokuakea Marine National Monument. He even banned fishing here, but he can't keep the plastic out.

"In the last 10 years, we've taken almost 550 tons out of the Northwestern Hawaiian islands," said Michael Tosatto, deputy regional director for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Government divers recently pulled out of the Midway waters what amounted to a huge pile of ropes, netting, buckets, buoys and other assorted plastic trash.

"And this was all picked up, only from Midway, in a four-day period." Tosatto said.

The problem isn't going away. Fifty tons of plastic arrive in Midways' waters each year, according to the U.S. government.

Copyright 2007 NPR

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2436

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Thu Oct 4, 2007 10:35 am
Subject: News: Chronic Illnesses Costing US $1 Trillion

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/03/BUDKSGJLP.DTL

Chronic illness costs the economy more than $1 trillion a year

Victoria Colliver, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Americans who have common chronic health conditions cost the U.S. economy more than $1 trillion a year, a figure that could jump to nearly $6 trillion by 2050 unless people take steps to improve their health, a study released Tuesday found.

According to the report by the Milken Institute, a Santa Monica think tank, the economic impact of chronic illness goes far beyond the expense of treating disease. It takes an even greater toll on economic productivity in the form of extra sick days, reduced performance by ill workers and other losses not directly related to medical care.

But veering onto a path that emphasizes changing lifestyles along with prevention and early detection of disease could reduce the number of illnesses by 40 million cases and save $1.6 trillion by 2023, the report said.

"The public is telling us the No. 1 domestic issue is health," said Dr. Richard Carmona, former U.S. surgeon general and now chairman of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease, in a news conference in Washington on Tuesday releasing the report. "The disease burden is mounting, the economic burden is mounting and the trajectory we're on is unsustainable."

The study looked at seven of the most costly chronic illnesses: the most common forms of cancer, hypertension, mental disorders, heart disease, diabetes, pulmonary conditions such as asthma and stroke.

"More than half of Americans suffer from chronic disease. Every year, millions of people are diagnosed, and every year millions die of these diseases," said Ross DeVol, the Milken Institute's director of health and regional economics and principal author of the report.

Treatment for those diseases, based on 2003 data, cost $277 billion. But lost productivity cost far more: $1.1 trillion.

Combined, the economic impact of the diseases added up to more than $1.3 trillion. Cost calculations, which are based on various studies of companies, also included economic losses generated by caregivers.

The study found some conditions create a greater economic burden than others, regardless of the number of diagnoses or cost of treatment.

For example, far fewer people suffer from cancer than pulmonary conditions. But the overall economic impact of cancer is greater because, while treatment is expensive, cancer patients also tend to be more debilitated and lose more work time than those suffering from many other chronic conditions, researchers said.

If the country does nothing to address the problem, the number of cases diagnosed in those seven disease categories will increase by 42 percent by 2023 for a total economic impact of $4.2 trillion, the report said.

"The data to stay the course is not a particularly attractive option," said Ken Thorpe, executive director of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease and a professor at Emory University.

The country needs to shift its focus from trying to reduce health expenses to lower rates of illness, Thorpe said.

Lifestyle changes could have a major impact on our country's price tag for chronic disease, the report said.

Curbing obesity alone by close to 15 million cases could translate to a savings of $60 billion by 2023 and improve the country's productivity by $254 billion, the report said. Other changes include lowering smoking rates and increasing early detection and disease-management efforts.

The report looked at the impact of geographical differences on chronic illness, which varies by habits, age and other demographic issues.

California generally is healthier than much of the rest of the country, ranking sixth in a score of all states for percentage of chronic disease by population. The lowest levels of disease were found in Utah, followed by Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona. The sickest states in the survey were West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Kentucky and Mississippi.

Despite California's relative health ranking, the state's large population means it has both a lot to lose and a lot to gain in future costs.

"For many of the chronic diseases, California has a lower prevalence than other states, but we're such a large state - the largest state in the country - we have a lot to be gained in avoiding treatment of these disease as well as improving the quality of the workforce," said DeVol, the study's author.

California has the opportunity to prevent about 4.2 million cases of avoidable chronic disease by 2023, which would increase productivity by $98 billion and lower treatment costs by $18.9 billion, DeVol said.

"The cautionary tale, when I look at California, is looking at our children and obesity rates," DeVol said, adding that the rising obesity levels are especially dramatic among young Latinos. "If we don't address the rising obesity problem, we have a huge potential problem in the future."

The study was funded in part by a grant from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association of America, the drug industry's trade group. The Milken Institute declined to reveal the amount of the grant.
Online resources

To view the complete report:

www.milkeninstitute.org

To see an interactive Web site with national and state-level detail:

www.chronicdiseaseimpact.com

Chronic costs

The direct and indirect costs of the seven most common chronic conditions in the United States, as identified in a new report by Milken Institute researchers:
Disease   Reported cases* Treatment cost Value of lost productivity      Total economic expense
Cancer    10.6 million    $48.1 billion   $271.2 billion $319.3 billion
Hypertension      36.8 million    32.5 billion    279.5 billion   312 billion
Mental disorders     30.3 million    45.8 billion    170.9 billion   216.7 billion
Heart disease      19.1 million    64.7 billion    104.6 billion   169.3 billion
Pulmonary conditions       49.2 million    45.2 billion    93.7 billion    138.9 billion
Diabetes   13.7 million    27.1 billion    104.7 billion   131.8 billion
Stroke     2.4 million     13.6 billion    22.1 billion    35.7 billion

* Numbers exclude people in institutions such as nursing homes and prisons.

Source: The Milken Institute's "Unhealthy America: The Economic Burden of Chronic Disease" relied on data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2003), U.S. Census Bureau, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the National Health Interview Survey.
Unhealthy numbers

Key points from the Milken Institute's report, "Unhealthy America":

-- More than 109 million Americans have one or more common chronic condition, for a total of 162 million cases.

-- In 2003, productivity losses associated with chronic disease reached almost $1.1 trillion, and treatment cost $277 billion.

-- California is home to more than 16.3 million cases of chronic disease, for a total cost of $133 billion.

Source: Milken Institute

� 2007 Hearst Communications Inc.

***   NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only.   ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2437

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Fri Oct 5, 2007 9:28 am
Subject: News: Wal-Mart Greens Its Supply Chain

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3909

Wal-Mart's Even Greening Its Suppliers
October 3, 2007
Reporting by Roddy Scheer

Wal-Mart is looking at its carbon footprint across its entire supply chain.
As part of its larger push to green all of its operations, Wal-Mart has teamed up with the nonprofit Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) to measure the amount of energy used-and greenhouse gases emitted-throughout its entire supply chain, not just at its own facilities. The company will use the data it procures to spur its suppliers to look for ways to make their own manufacturing and distribution processes more energy-efficient and lower carbon dioxide emissions.

According to John Fleming, Wal-Mart's chief merchandising officer, suppliers will be encouraged to monitor and manage their greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to help the world's largest retailer reduce its overall carbon footprint. "This is an important first step toward reaching our goal of removing nonrenewable energy from products that Wal-Mart sells," Fleming told reporters.

Wal-Mart is launching the plan by working directly with manufacturers of seven commonly used products: DVDs, toothpaste, soap, milk, beer, vacuum cleaners and soda. And starting next year, the company will ask its electronics suppliers to fill out a scorecard evaluating their products based on environmental criteria including energy efficiency and durability. "This is an opportunity to spur innovation and efficiency throughout our supply chain that will not only help protect the environment but save people money at the same time," Fleming added.

While critics have been skeptical of Wal-Mart's overall environmental vision, dubbed Sustainability 360 earlier this year by company management, continued steps in the right direction are winning over some converts, as environmentalists realize what a large impact the company can have on consumers and manufacturers alike. But the service of Adam Werbach, the former youngest-ever president of the Sierra Club, as a Wal-Mart consultant has been controversial in the environmental community.

"This partnership between CDP and Wal-Mart is a very significant milestone in corporate action to mitigate climate change," says Paul Dickinson, CDP's chief executive. "We look forward to other global corporations following Wal-Mart's lead."

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2438

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Fri Oct 5, 2007 9:30 am
Subject: Feature: Nanotechnology Helps Make Green Buildings Greener

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://greenerbuildings.com/news_detail.cfm?NewsID=35947

Nanotechnology Can Make Green Buildings Even Greener, Report Finds

From GreenerBuildings.com

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind., Sept. 21, 2007 -- Taking advantage of some of the many uses of nanotechnologies, from solar energies to structural materials to insulation, help make green buildings more cost-effective, more energy-efficient and more in tune with their environments, according to a new report from the Green Technology Forum.

The report, "Nanotechnology for Green Building," finds that the convergence of two already-hot fields, nanotechnology and green building, is working to invigorate the markets of each, and expanding the potential of both technologies.

George Elvin, the director of the Green Technology Forum and the author of the report, said that the future is now for the two fields, and listed several ready-for-primetime examples of nanotech uses in buildings. Elvin cited the improvements that have already been made in solar insulation and generation, as well as thin-film insulation and coatings, including "healing" coatings that can remove and neutralize pollutants from a building's surrounding atmosphere.

Elvid said that in the near future, nanotech will also revolutionize water and air filtration in buildings, develop self-cleaning methods and provide lighter, stronger structural components.

Despite the economic and environmental benefits that nanotech and architects can offer each other, the two groups are only beginning to realize the full potential of working together. Elvin said that "the nanotech and building sectors have to get to know each other a lot better in order to realize the dramatic benefits awaiting each of them."

More information about the report, as well as a link to purchase "Nanotechnology for Green Building," is available at http://www.greentechforum.net/greenbuild.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2439

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Fri Oct 5, 2007 9:31 am
Subject: News: Green Chemistry Gains Corporate Converts

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

Green Chemistry Technique Gains Corporate Converts
Bob Sechler. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Oct 3, 2007. pg. B.3C

Full Text (547 words)
(c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

The best way for industrial manufacturers to deal with frequently toxic chemical waste is to avoid producing it.

That's the idea behind a new process with the potential to enable some types of complex molecules -- present in such things as certain drugs and perfumes -- to be formed without generating byproducts that might otherwise flow into wastewater or drift up smokestacks.

The technique was developed by University of Texas scientist Michael J. Krische, with backing from government grants and various pharmaceutical industry players. The process triggers bonds between carbon atoms using a twist on what is known as catalytic hydrogenation, a standard chemical reaction in industrial settings typically deployed to bond carbon atoms with hydrogen atoms.

Carbon-carbon bonds constitute the backbones of complex molecules, but most reactions that generate them cast off byproducts. Conversely, hydrogenation reactions result in molecules that incorporate all atoms in the starting materials, meaning none are cast off as waste.

Mr. Krische said his technique retains the benefits of standard hydrogenation reactions but generates the carbon-carbon bonds needed to build larger, more complex molecules. "You get carbon-carbon bond formations in completely byproduct-free transformations," Mr. Krische said.

The work, which has received funding from Merck & Co., Eli Lilly & Co. and Johnson & Johnson, is in the advanced research stage, and it recently won a prestigious "green chemistry" award from the Environmental Protection Agency.

Green chemistry encompasses myriad processes aimed at conserving resources or stemming the release of toxic materials. The concept has been around for more than a decade, but it has been winning an increasing number of corporate converts in recent years.

High energy prices, public concerns about global warming and the potential for green techniques to cut costs associated with waste cleanup or regulations have sparked the interest. Businesses spend more than $200 billion annually complying with environmental rules, according to federal estimates.

To be sure, "there's not any one technology that is going to reduce all your waste," said Ralph P. Volante, vice president and global head of process research at Merck. Mr. Volante said Merck has many initiatives under way in the broad area of green chemistry, with recent successes including Januvia, a new diabetes drug, which is being produced using a chemical process designed to lower water consumption and dissolved byproducts.

Still, he said, Mr. Krische's research has the potential to be particularly useful, because carbon-carbon bond formation is an essential tool of organic chemistry. "It's going to provide the basis for application, I think, on multiple products, not just for us," he said.

Mr. Volante thinks the technique could be scaled up for various industrial uses in five to 10 years, although he believes it is too early to speculate on how Merck might deploy it.

Paul Anastas, a pioneer in green chemistry and director of Yale University's Center for Green Chemistry & Green Engineering, also called Mr. Krische's work intriguing. He noted that numerous green techniques previously adopted by corporations -- such as processes to eliminate arsenic or lead from certain products -- have been playing a significant role in stemming hazardous waste production in the U.S.

Toxic chemical waste tracked by the EPA totaled an estimated 5.04 billion pounds in 2005, the most recent figures available, compared with 5.7 billion pounds in 2000.

Indexing (document details)
Author(s):   Bob Sechler
Publication title:   Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Oct 3, 2007. pg. B.3C
Source type:      Newspaper
ISSN: 00999660
ProQuest document ID:   1351606941
Text Word Count       547
Document URL:        http://libproxy.csun.edu:2048/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1351606941&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=17859&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Copyright � 2007 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved.

***   NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only.   ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2440

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Fri Oct 5, 2007 9:33 am
Subject: Feature: Green Marketing for Green Products

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3866

GREEN LIVING: MONEY MATTERS
Calling all Consumers
Green Marketing for Green Products

By Diane Marty

"Just like their conventional cousins, sustainable businesses must speak to basic consumer needs-efficiency, cost, health and safety, performance and status," says Patti Purcell, president of sustainable living media company Blue Egg. "The difference between the two lies in the makeup of their products."

Illustration Omitted:
Joshua Onysko, founder and CEO of Pangea Organics, says eco-businesses are held to different standards. "Green companies create, manufacture, sell and buy products promoting respect for life," he says. The Pangea Organics line of skincare products is the fastest growing in the world, and green marketing strategies highlight its Earth-centered focus. � Elizabeth Prager

A New Awareness

The growth of the green market has few parallels in the business world. According to Natural Foods Merchandiser, sales topped $56 billion in 2006, up 9.7 percent over 2005. "Every day, more consumers recognize the power of their dollars, and take responsibility for the products they purchase," says Jessica Root, a project manager at TreeHugger.com. "As the demand for organic foods and sustainable products increase, some larger companies have to reinvent their products in an attempt to capture a share of the growing green marketplace."

Still, consumers first want to know how products perform, says Purcell. If the item works well and has a minimal impact on the Earth, then people feel good about purchasing it, she says.

"All sustainable marketing strategies have to educate consumers," says Stacee Matheson, founder and president of Ecobranders, which sells an eco-friendly line of promotional merchandise. "People will change their behavior if they understand why it's important. "

Mic LeBel, an organic product consultant for Planet Friendly PR, says that businesses promoting respect for the Earth need to craft distinctive messages to be heard over competing voices.

Green marketers must speak with authority to their most stalwart supporters, while persuading potential purchasers to explore environmental alternatives. Company communicators are the middlemen.

A Murky Background

Unsnarling fact from fiction in the buyer's mind is a daunting task even for marketing gurus. "Because there is no watchdog group for [the beauty products] industry, people have been fed false promises," says Onysko.

Pangea lists all ingredients and their sources on its labels. "We also tell our customers if the product is not right for them," says Onysko.

The smaller companies that pioneered sustainable alternatives find themselves competing with mega-corporations that entered the field with a great deal of marketing and distribution clout, says LeBel. Communicating authenticity to possible buyers becomes a crucial component to sustainable marketing plans.

A Brave New (Commercial) World

Visionary green marketing has changed the landscape of the commercial world and taken industries by surprise. Purcell points to the advertising campaign for the hybrid Toyota Prius as a creative example of how to extend a product's appeal beyond "deep green" environmental borders. Strategists banned the word "green" from marketing media, she says. And they downplayed technical talk about emissions.

Instead, the company spokespeople concentrated on promoting fuel efficiency and lower gas costs. This pragmatic tactic may be part of the reason that Toyota leapfrogged over General Motors and Ford to become the largest automotive company in the world.

In another approach to greening a polluting industry, Root cites a partnership between Expedia.com, a top travel site, and TerraPass, the carbon offset agency. Expedia.com customers now have the option of purchasing "carbon offsets" (such as tree plantings) to diminish atmospheric damage caused by flying. "Other innovative green marketing promotions-like those used for fair trade coffee, recycled furniture, and organic cotton clothing-have simply explained the facts and placed decisions in buyers' hands," says Root.

Consumerism and marketing will always be intertwined-even in the eco-world. And "buyer beware" remains good counsel. "Making the right choices isn't complicated," adds Onysko. "We just have to think before consuming."

DIANE MARTY is a Colorado-based freelance writer.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2441

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Sun Oct 7, 2007 5:35 pm
Subject: News: Corn-based Cellulosic Ethanol Plant Construction Begins

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2007/2007-10-05-097.asp

Commercial Cellulosic Ethanol Plant Underway in Iowa

SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota, October 5, 2007 (ENS) - POET Energy and the U.S. Department of Energy, DOE, have signed a cooperative agreement for a commercial cellulosic ethanol project in Emmetsburg, Iowa that will produce ethanol from corn cobs. Cellulosic ethanol is produced from biomass with starches that are difficult to convert to fuel; sources including corn stover, grasses, wood chips, agricultural waste.

The company says its Emmetsburg facility will use "advanced corn fractionation" and "lignocellulosic conversion" technologies to produce cellulosic ethanol - the first facility in the world to do so commercially.

These are two proprietary, patent-pending biotechnologies that unlock more starch from corn than ever before possible and "yield ethanol above the industry standard output with considerably less energy," the company says.

POET's cellulosic ethanol project is nicknamed Project Liberty because it will reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

The company will convert an existing 50 million gallon per year dry-mill ethanol plant in Emmetsburg into an integrated corn-to-ethanol and cellulose-to-ethanol biorefinery. Once operational, the facility will produce 125 million gallons of ethanol per year, 25 percent of which will be from corn fiber and corn cobs.

By adding cellulosic production to an existing grain ethanol plant, POET says the company will be able to produce 11 percent more ethanol from a bushel of corn, 27 percent more from an acre of corn, while almost completely eliminating fossil fuel consumption and decreasing water usage by 24 percent.

The agreement between POET and the DOE finalizes the first phase of an $80 million federal government award that was announced in February. With the agreement in place, POET will move forward on project preliminary design and engineering, environmental engineering, biomass collection and other activities that will take two years overall.

Then a two year construction phase is scheduled, with facility operation expected in 2011.

In June, POET announced that Jim Sturdevant, a 22 year veteran of the U.S. Geological Survey, will serve as director of the project.

POET has purchased additional land adjacent to their Emmetsburg production facility in order to accommodate construction of the cellulosic facility.

With the opening of its 21st ethanol production facility in September in Portland, Indiana, POET becames the largest producer of ethanol in the world. Portland is the first POET plant in the state of Indiana, with two additional plants currently under construction.

"When we started our first facility in 1988 at one million gallons per year, we had no intentions of becoming the largest," said Jeff Broin, CEO of POET. "We simply realized that farmers needed additional uses for their crops and the country needed a clean-burning, domestic fuel."

"Now, with 10,000 farmer-owners and investors from all walks of life, we are developing the rural economy, improving the environment and reducing our nation's dependence on foreign oil," he said.

Formerly known as Broin, the 20 year old company currently operates 21 production facilities in the United States with six more in construction or under development.

The Portland facility will be equipped with technology that decreases its environmental footprint, including a POET patent-pending process that eliminates the need for heat in the cooking process of producing ethanol, reducing energy usage by eight to 15 percent in comparison with conventional plants.

It also will be outfitted with a "regenerative thermal oxidizer that eliminates up to 99.9 percent of air emissions," the company said.

POET's Portland facility will obtain 100 percent of its water supply from a nearby quarry which pumps out water in order to continue its excavation activities. To use this water, a 10 million gallon retention pond was constructed on site that lets the sediment settle out of the water before it is used in the ethanol plant. By using water that would have originally been discharged, the facility will leave more water resources available for other commercial and residential purposes.

The Portland facility will utilize 22 million bushels of corn from the area to produce 65 million gallons of ethanol and 178,000 tons of Dakota Gold Enhanced Nutrition Distillers Products� per year. These distillers grains are a nutritious livestock feed.

The other by-product of ethanol production is the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, which is emitted during fermentation. Many ethanol plants collect that carbon dioxide, CO2, clean it of any residual alcohol, compress it and sell it for use to carbonate beverages or in the flash freezing of meat.

POET says, "A select few of our plants collect, compress and market it for use in other industries. The carbon dioxide we produce is ultimately reabsorbed by future corn crops, which need CO2 to grow."

But too much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere, and only a portion of it is absorbed by plants. Instead, CO2 and other greenhouse gases form a layer that blankets the Earth, holding in heat from the Sun and raising the planet's temperature.

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2442

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Mon Oct 8, 2007 8:34 am
Subject: News: Potential for Tapping Tidal Power

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003931009_wavepower07m0.html

Sunday, October 7, 2007 - Page updated at 01:05 AM

Tapping tidal energy: the wave of the future

By Sandi Doughton
Seattle Times science reporter

Illustration Omitted:
Finavera Renewables' wave-energy converter is lowered into water at the Port of Newport in Oregon. The system uses the heaving motion of the ocean to drive a piston and force seawater through a turbine. FINAVERA RENEWABLES INC.

The future of clean power in the Northwest may look like the 75-foot-tall yellow buoy now bobbing like a cork in the waves off the Oregon coast.

Or maybe it will more closely resemble a gargantuan red snake, riding the swells and capturing their energy. It might even take the form of underwater sails rigged to tap the power of the tides.

Each design is a horse in the race to wring kilowatts from the restless motion of the sea - and make money doing it. Several of the contenders will be tested in the waters off Washington and Oregon in the coming months and years, as inventors and entrepreneurs jockey for dominance in a field so new some compare it to aviation in the era of the Wright brothers.

"It's the Kitty Hawk days for tidal energy," said Craig Collar, of the Snohomish County Public Utility District, which already has permits for trial runs in several Puget Sound straits famed for their rushing tides.

Technologies to harness the up-and-down rhythm of waves are equally nascent.

Over Labor Day weekend, a Canadian company deployed the first wave-energy buoy on the West Coast, anchoring it about 2 1�2 miles off Newport, Ore. Researchers from Oregon State University plan to deploy a different type of buoy in the same part of the Pacific Ocean this week.

The Corvallis-based college, already the country's top academic center for wave-power research, also is building a national wave-energy research and demonstration facility off the coast and an indoor lab to simulate ocean conditions.

Companies that use the demonstration facility will be able to deploy their devices in ocean "berths" equipped with moorings and instruments to measure power output and collect other data, said OSU engineering professor Annette von Jouanne.

"We want to advance wave-energy technology, encourage companies to demonstrate their devices and ... promote Oregon as an optimal location," she said.

There's little doubt the Northwest is prime territory for hydrokinetics - the newest twist on hydropower. Snohomish County estimates tides in the seven Puget Sound sites the utility is studying could generate enough power for 70,000 homes.

Energy from the ocean could provide up to 10 percent of the nation's electricity, according to an analysis by the Electric Power Research Institute.

Winds that blow from the west and the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean create some of the world's best conditions for ocean power off the West Coast, said von Jouanne. Waves big enough to generate power occur 80 percent to 90 percent of the time. Most wind farms can crank out power less than half the time.

The Northwest also offers a potential market, with both Oregon and Washington requiring utilities to add clean, renewable power to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

But potential won't become reality until the technologies mature, von Jouanne said.

"Wave energy is starting off where wind energy started about 20 years ago," she said.

Early wind-turbine designs ranged from giant eggbeaters to blades that pointed straight up, before studies endorsed the three-blade versions most common now.

Similarly, ocean-power systems now come in a staggering array of shapes, sizes and configurations.

Collar, who just visited several European companies, estimates about 40 different systems are on the shelf or under development for tidal-energy conversion. Most are essentially underwater windmills, but one version has fins that flap like a tuna's. A Norwegian group is promoting the underwater-sail system.

"I've been wondering how the heck those things work," Collar said.

The wave-power buoy deployed last month off Newport by Finavera Renewables uses the heaving motion of the ocean to drive a piston and force seawater through a turbine, said Kevin Banister, vice president of development.

The test buoy will be in the water until the end of October, gathering data on the system's efficiency.

In cooperation with the Makah Nation, Finavera also hopes to put four buoys in a bay on Washington's northwest corner by 2009 - and begin generating power shortly thereafter.

"We think our design is simple and easy to maintain," Banister said. "But clearly people with other approaches think those are the right way to go."

A Scottish company plans to deploy an array of its snakelike Pelamis wave-energy converters off the coast of Portugal this year. Each 12-foot-in-diameter, 500-foot-long unit is made up of articulated pontoons that drive hydraulic motors as they move up and down.

The buoy that von Jouanne and her students will test this month takes a completely different approach. The outer shell of the buoy is equipped with magnets. A metal coil inside is held stationary by a tether to the bottom. As the magnets bob up and down with the waves, they induce an electrical current in the coil. It's a simple system with few parts to break or fix - which is key for buoys that would have to function in harsh ocean conditions.

"I'm constantly surprised by how many ideas there are," Banister said. "There will be some sorting over the next few years and the better ideas - this is a bad pun - will float to the surface."

In the meantime, competing companies are keeping the details of their designs under wraps. Collar, the Snohomish utility official, had to sign secrecy agreements at every stop on his European tour.

Whatever technology wins out, von Jouanne said the first "wave parks" will probably be located one to three miles offshore. Power would be delivered to shore via cables on the sea floor. Von Jouanne estimates it would take an array of buoys spread over a few square miles to generate 50 megawatts, enough to power about 30,000 homes.

Faced with a flood of interest and varied designs, regulators are scrambling to prepare rules for ocean-power pilot projects. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has received nearly 20 applications for test permits in Washington and Oregon. The agency hosted a conference in Portland last week on a plan to speed up reviews.

OSU also is convening a meeting this month to discuss the environmental impacts of wave parks - another area where many questions must be answered before any aquatic power plants go into operation, von Jouanne said.

"We have to make sure all the concerns are on the table, so we can move forward in a responsible way."

Information

Pelamis: www.oceanpd.com/default.html

Finavera Renewables: www.finavera.com

OSU wave-energy program: http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/wesrf

Tidal Sails: www.tidalsails.com/businessidea.html

Sandi Doughton: 206-464-2491 or sdoughton@...

Copyright � 2007 The Seattle Times Company

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2443

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Mon Oct 8, 2007 8:31 am
Subject: News: Mobile Phones May Be Cause for Significant Health Concerns

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

["Mobiles are the smoking of the 21st century; they need health warnings."]

* * *

http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article3036005.ece

Public health: The hidden menace of mobile phones
Research into the link between regular handset use and disease reveals the risks rise significantly after 10 years, despite official assurances that they are safe. Geoffrey Lean reports

Published: 07 October 2007

Using a mobile phone for more than 10 years increases the risk of getting brain cancer, according to the most comprehensive study of the risks yet published.

The study - which contradicts official pronouncements that there is no danger of getting the disease - found that people who have had the phones for a decade or more are twice as likely to get a malignant tumour on the side of the brain where they hold the handset.

The scientists who conducted the research say using a mobile for just an hour every working day during that period is enough to increase the risk - and that the international standard used to protect users from the radiation emitted is "not safe" and "needs to be revised".

They conclude that "caution is needed in the use of mobile phones" and believe children, who are especially vulnerable, should be discouraged from using them at all.

The study, published in the latest issue of the peer-reviewed journal Occupational Environmental Medicine, is important because it pulls together research on people who have used the phones for long enough to contract the disease.

Cancers take at least 10 years - and normally much longer - to develop but, as mobile phones have spread so recently and rapidly, relatively few people have been using them that long.

Official assurances that the phones are safe have been based on research that has, at best, included only a few people who have been exposed to the radiation for long enough to get the disease, and are therefore of little or no value in assessing the real risk.

Last month, Britain's largest investigation into the health risks of the technology, the �8.8m Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) programme - funded by "government and industry sources" - reported that "mobile phones have not been found to be associated with any biological or adverse health effects".

But its chairman, Professor Lawrie Challis, admitted that only a small proportion of the research had covered people who had used the phones for more than a decade. He warned: "We cannot rule out the possibility at this stage that cancer could appear in a few years' time."

He said the investigation had discovered "a very slight hint" of increased numbers of brain tumours among those exposed for more than 10 years, and called for more research.

The new study - headed by two Swedes, Professor Lennart Hardell of the University Hospital in Orebro and Professor Kjell Hansson Mild of Umea University, who also serves on the MTHR programme's management committee - goes some way to meeting the deficiency.

The scientists pulled together the results of the 11 studies that have so far investigated the occurrence of tumours in people who have used phones for more than a decade, drawing on research in Sweden, Denmark Finland, Japan, Germany, the United States and Britain. They found almost all had discovered an increased risk, especially on the side of the head where people listened to their handsets.

Five of the six studies of malignant gliomas, cancers of the glial cells that support and protect the nerve cells, found an increased risk. The only one that did not still found an increase in benign gliomas. Four of the five studies that looked at acoustic neuromas - benign but often disabling tumours on the auditory nerve, which usually cause deafness - found them. The exception was based on only two cases of the disease, but still found that long-term users had larger tumours than other people.

The scientists assembled the findings of all the studies to analyse them collectively. This revealed that people who have used their phones for a decade or more are 20 per cent more likely to contract acoustic neuromas, and 30 per cent more likely to get malignant gliomas.

The risk is even greater on the side of the head the handset is used: long-term users were twice as likely to get the gliomas, and two and a half times more likely to get the acoustic neuromas there than other people.

The scientists conclude: "Results from present studies on use of mobile phones for more than 10 years give a consistent pattern of an increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma." They add that "an increased risk for other types of brain tumours cannot be ruled out".

Professors Hardell and Mild have also themselves carried out some of the most extensive original work into tumours among long-term mobile phone users and have come up with even more alarming results. Their research suggests they are more than three times more likely to get malignant gliomas than other people, and nearly five times more likely to get them on the side of the head where they held the phone. For acoustic neuromas they found a threefold and three-and-a-half-fold increased risk respectively.

They have also carried out the only study into the effects of the long-term use of cordless phones, and found this also increased both kinds of tumours. Their research suggests that using a mobile or cordless phone for just 2,000 hours - less than an hour every working day for 10 years - is enough to augment the risk.

Professor Mild told The Independent on Sunday: "I find it quite strange to see so many official presentations saying that there is no risk. There are strong indications that something happens after 10 years." He stressed that brain cancers are rare: they account for less than 2 per cent of primary tumours in Britain, though they are disproportionately deadly, causing 7 per cent of the years of life lost to the disease. "Every cancer is one too many," he said.

He said he uses a mobile phone as little as possible, and urges others to use hands-free equipment and make only short calls, reserving longer ones for landlines. He also said that mobiles should not be given to children, whose thinner skulls and developing nervous systems make them particularly vulnerable.

The danger may be even greater than the new study suggests for, as Professor Mild says, 10 years is the "minimum" period needed by cancers to develop. As they normally take much longer, very many more would be likely to strike long-term users after 15, 20 or 30 years - which leads some to fear that an epidemic of the disease could develop in the coming decades, particularly among today's young people.

On the other hand, the professor points out that the amount of radiation emitted by phones has decreased greatly since the first ones came on the market more than a decade ago, which suggests that exposures and risks should also be falling. But he still recommended choosing phones that give out as little radiation as possible (see below), and pointed out that people are now also exposed to many other sources of radiation, such as masts and Wi-Fi systems, though these emit much less than mobile handsets.

Britain's official Health Protection Agency - which has taken a cautious view of claims that radiation from mobile phones, their masts and Wi-Fi installations can damage health - admits that the study "may be indicative" of a risk, but says that "such analyses cannot be conclusive".

The Mobile Operators Association said: "This is not new data for the World Health Organisation and the many independent expert scientific committees who state that there are no established health risks from using mobile phones that comply with international guidelines."

Both sides agree that there is need for more research. Professor Mild said a possible link between mobile phones and Alzheimer's disease should also be examined, since "we have indications that it might be a problem" as well as a possible link with Parkinson's disease, "which can't be ruled out".

In the meantime, the scientists want a revision of the emission standard for mobiles and other sources of radiation, which they describe as "inappropriate" and "not safe". The international standard is designed merely to prevent harmful heating of living tissue or induced electrical currents in the body - and does not take the risk of getting cancer into account.

Professors Hansen and Mild serve on the international BioInitiative Working Group of leading scientists and public health experts, which this summer produced a report warning that the standard was "thousands of times too lenient".

The BioInitiative report added: "It has been established beyond reasonable doubt that some adverse health effects occur at far lower levels of exposure... some at several thousand times below the existing safety limits." It also warned that unless this is corrected there could be "public health problems of a global nature".

Case study: 'Mobiles are the smoking of the 21st century; they need health warnings'

Neil Whitfield, a 49-year-old father of six, developed an acoustic neuroma in 2001 after years of heavy mobile phone use, on the left side of the head, to which he had held his handset. He says he had no family history of the disease and that when he asked a specialist what had caused it, the doctor had asked him if he used a mobile.

"I was on it four hours a day, easily" he says. "When I held it to my head, I could feel my ear getting warm."

He adds that he completely lost his hearing in his left ear and was off work for 12 months. Unable to go back to his old job in marketing, he became a teacher, suffering a �20,000 drop in income.

"It has had a devastating effect on my family," he says. "Mobile phones are the smoking of the 21st century; they should have health warnings on them. You would never buy a child a pack of cigarettes, but we give them mobiles which could cause them harm."

Warning: your model might be dangerous

Exposure to radiation, shown as Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) levels, varies widely in different models. Manufacturers and the Government have ignored the Stewart report that urges they be clearly marked on phones and boxes. They are thus hard to find, though the Carphone Warehouse catalogue includes them. An easily accessible list of phones and radiation exposures is published in Germany, where low-radiation models, defined as having SAR of 0.6 or under, are encouraged.

� 2007 Independent News and Media Limited

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2444

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 8:17 am
Subject: Book Blurb: The Case for Micro Generation of Electricity

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Locally_Generated_Electricity_Can_Pay_For_Itself_Within_Five_Years_999.html

Locally Generated Electricity Can Pay For Itself Within Five Years

Illustration Omitted:
As the energy from solar and wind micro generators is "green", there are no emissions to deplete the ozone layer.

by Staff Writers
Dublin, Ireland (SPX) Oct 09, 2007

Research and Markets has announced the addition of Micro Generation of Energy in the Home to their offering. This home energy book details how locally generated electricity pays for itself within five years and immediately helps to avoid global warming. The Online Return on Investment (ROI) analysis tool, included in the cost of the book, allows the personalization of energy inputs for every situation, enabling users to enter different electric bills, and different amounts of micro generator investment in different time frames to see how a particular situation will work out.

The thesis of the book is that ordinary people can work together achieve quality energy policy by utilizing a battery with DC current system within their homes.

The aim of this book is to encourage people to reduce global warming as a means of saving both money and the environment. As the energy from solar and wind micro generators is "green", there are no emissions to deplete the ozone layer. A prime example of the need to decrease emissions is the threat of flood as the polar ice caps melt.. As global warming increases, so too will sea levels. Imagine the impact on real estate values in Florida - underwater property would be inexpensive, but you can't build a house there.

"Go buy a micro generator windmill, go buy a solar panel, and go buy a thin film battery," says Susan Eustis, primary author. "Get started now. Wind and solar micro generators can be used now in combination with thin film solid state batteries to significantly supplement electricity provided on the regional grid."

The concept of generating on-site electricity for homes can be applied to gas/electric vehicles as well. With gasoline prices inching ever closer to the $8.00 gallon mark, hybrid cars are destined to become more popular and drivers are sure to look for alternatives to plugging the car into the electricity grid. The ability to store wind and solar generated power in thin film batteries in residential homes creates the charge that is needed.

Ordinary people can now take control of their own energy needs. "Local DC energy initially can be used to power hybrid car batteries, small appliances, electronics, and LED lights," according Dr. Susie Eustis, a nanotechnology specialist and co-author. "Wind generators and solar panels have reached maturity. The richest man in China sells solar panels. Home energy infrastructure is used to extract power from renewable sources efficiently, creating the chance for making home energy more efficient."

The book provides an example of a home system that has been running for eight years, paid for itself in five years, and provides DC current from a battery charged by a solar cell. It describes the solar panels, micro wind generators, thin film batteries, LED lights, and hybrid vehicles that can be utilized in a home energy system that is efficient and affordable.

Book Methodology

This is an commercial extension of 310 in depth analyst reports in a series of market research analyses that provide forecasts in communications, telecommunications, the internet, computer, software, and telephone equipment. The project leaders take direct responsibility for writing and preparing each report. They have significant experience preparing industry studies. Forecasts are based on primary research and proprietary data bases.

Forecasts reflect analysis of the market trends in the segment and related segments. Unit and dollar shipments are analyzed through consideration of dollar volume of each market participation in the segment. Market share analysis includes conversations with key customers of products, industry segment leaders, marketing directors, distributors, leading market participants, and companies seeking to develop measurable market share. Over 200 in-depth interviews are conducted for each report with a broad range of key participants and opinion leaders in the market segment.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2445

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 9, 2007 8:23 am
Subject: Feature: What Happens to All Those Lead-Recalled Toys?

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-toxic8oct08,0,802492.story

CONSUMER SAFETY
Disposal a murky issue in recall of lead-tainted items
State law holds sway, but there's no uniform procedure in place.

By Abigail Goldman and Marc Lifsher, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
October 8, 2007

What has happened to the millions of toys, lunchboxes and other products recalled recently because they contain hazardous levels of lead or lead paint?

No one is exactly sure. And that worries some consumer activists, environmentalists and others who caution about weak oversight of the disposal process.

Lead-laced products, they warn, could contaminate landfills or groundwater. Even worse, they say, is that some recalled toys and other goods get resold -- both in the U.S. and abroad.

"There are so many recalls right now and nobody is saying, 'What's next?' " said Charlie Pizarro, associate director for the Center for Environmental Health in Oakland. "There is no answer for how to dispose of them."

There is no single, nationally accepted procedure for dealing with such items from the time of recall to final, safe disposal.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission, the federal agency that oversees the recall of lead-tainted and other dangerous items, asks consumers to return the products to the company recalling them. Those companies are then bound by state laws regarding disposal of hazardous materials, an agency spokeswoman said.

"You can't just throw it in the kitchen garbage can; there are regulations on disposal," spokeswoman Julie Vallese said. "The companies are well aware of state laws and state guidelines they need to follow."

But Jamie Cameron-Harley, a spokeswoman for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, which overseas municipal garbage dumps and recycling programs, says she's mystified about the ultimate destination of the lead-laced products -- especially those returned to companies.

"Everyone says give them back to the manufacturer, but we don't know what the manufacturer does with it," she said.

In other cases, state agencies have urged consumers to bring lead-tainted items to local hazardous waste disposal sites or to state offices.

Two weeks ago, for instance, California had to initiate its own recall of lead-contaminated totes handed out by the state Department of Public Health.

Subsequently, the California Public Employees Retirement System found unsafe lead levels on some of the 600 similar lunch bags it gave away at orientation meetings.

Both agencies urged people who had the bags either to return them to the place they got them or dispose of them at local centers for household hazardous waste -- where items such as batteries, oil-based paints and computer monitors also are supposed to go.

But Pat Macht, a spokeswoman for the state pension system, said her agency hadn't been told what to do with any lunchboxes it gets back. "We're waiting for direction about how to dispose of them," she said.

Lead paint has been banned in the United States since 1978 because lead poisoning can cause brain and neurological problems, particularly in children.

According to experts, only a fraction of consumers actually return recalled products to manufacturers -- mostly big-ticket items that would be expensive to replace. Mattel, which has issued dozens of recalls of toys in recent years, said that, historically, about 6% of recalled products are returned.

Several toy manufacturers were contacted for this article, but only Mattel would comment on its plans for returned lead-tainted products. The El Segundo-based company said it was still evaluating how best to handle returned products from its recalls of 2.2 million toys possibly contaminated with lead paint.

RC2 Corp., the Illinois-based manufacturer that this year recalled more than 1.7 million Thomas & Friends wooden railway toys because of unsafe lead levels, said the company so far had gotten back about 70% of the 1.5 million toys it recalled in June. It wouldn't say what it was doing with them.

Likewise, Oriental Trading Co., a Nebraska company that this year recalled 132,000 children's "religious fish necklaces," declined to discuss its disposal plans.

Mattel said it planned to recycle as many components of its returned toys as possible, including selling or reusing zinc and some of the resins used to make the toys.

Leftover remnants, including any lead, will be handled by outside companies hired for their expertise in recycling and safe disposal of those materials, said Jeff Denchfield, the company's senior director of global sustainability.

Until then, because of pending litigation, returned products are being stored near some Mattel distribution centers in Southern California, Texas and New York, the company said.

So far, tests of the recalled products found lead content below the state's threshold for hazardous materials -- less than 1,000 parts per million, the company said.

That puts Mattel in a better position than the state.

Preliminary testing of the Department of Public Health's lunchboxes has found lead at 1,300 parts per million, which means that the containers must be classified as hazardous waste and that they are subject to special regulations for handling and disposal, said Maureen Gorse, director of the state Department of Toxic Substances Control.

The classification means that the products cannot be stored for more than 90 days without an extraordinary special permit, Gorse said. They also must be shipped by specially licensed haulers to state-regulated recycling or disposal sites.

In the meantime, the governor's office and the toxic substances control agency have ordered agencies to inventory items, such as lunchboxes, that have a high probability of containing lead, Gorse said. Under state and federal law, manufacturers, importers or owners of lead-tainted products are responsible for the items' disposal if they are determined to be hazardous waste.

Even when lead-tainted products aren't considered hazardous, that doesn't mean dumping them in regular landfills is the best option, environmentalists say.

"It's best to treat them for what they are, as a material that contains a toxic chemical and needs to be handled with care," said Tom Neltner, a lawyer and chemical engineer who serves as co-chairman of the Sierra Club's National Toxics Committee. "But the most important thing is to get them away from kids and to keep them away from kids."

Added Caroline Cox, research director for the Center for Environmental Health: "Lead doesn't go away, it's a metal -- it doesn't break down or transform into a nontoxic substance, it stays lead. We take lead from mines and disperse it across the environment. That's not a good thing for kids or anybody else."

abigail.goldman@...

marc.lifsher@...

   * * *

    Beware: Recalled products resurface

    Many recalled products stay in circulation long after recalls have been announced -- either because sellers don't know about the problems or some choose to profit from them.

    Federal regulators said that a product recalled in the United States could not be sold here or exported elsewhere for sale.

    If goods have been refused entry to this country, however, federal law doesn't bar manufacturers and importers from selling them elsewhere. The Consumer Product Safety Commission says it notifies the destination country about the problem.

    It's not just other countries that face the problem, however. In a study for the journal Injury Prevention, published in August, researchers found 190 auctions of recalled products on EBay in just a 30-day period.

    The study, which used a list of 150 randomly selected recalled children's products, found that most of those recalled items -- 70% -- ended up being sold.

    And a 1999 federal study found that 69% of 301 thrift stores surveyed were selling at least one hazardous product.

    EBay, which has policies prohibiting the sale of recalled goods, said last week it would send warnings to sellers who listed recalled products notifying them that they could be barred from using the site.

--Abigail Goldman

Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2446

From: Ashwani Vasishth <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:36 am
Subject: Commentary: Henderson, Looking Ahead to the Next Fifteen Years

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2007/2007-10-08-04.asp

The Next 15 Years

{Editor's Note: This is the ninth and final article in a weekly series by experts in sustainable business originally published in the "GreenMoney Journal."}

By Hazel Henderson

ST. AUGUSTINE, Florida, October 8, 2007 (ENS) - Futurists do not have crystal balls. The best of us seek to identify trends, ahead of conventional wisdom, economic forecasting and market research. The trick is to widen the focus and map all these longer-term trends identified as keys to the future and see how they may amplify or dampen each other. Of course, this depends on the values and goals of the futurists and their clients.

As with all research and scientific enquiry, the first step is normative: what to pay attention to in our diverse societies and our living planet.

Illustration Omitted:
        Dr. Hazel Henderson (Photo courtesy Hazel Henderson)

I believe that futurists need to be independent systems thinkers and like me, self-employed. When futurists are employed in-house, whether in business or government, or as contractors, too often they narrow their enquiry, e.g. the future of General Motors or of the U.S. Department of Energy. As the old joke has it: economists can't even get their hindsight right!

My focus has always been the human family's prospects on planet Earth. So what do I see from this multi-disciplinary perspective over the next 15 years?

    * Increasing multilateralism, as all countries come to realize that the planet's current problems - from global warming, widening gaps between haves and have-nots and new pandemics to terrorism, extinction of other species and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction - cannot be solved by any one nation or even groups of nations acting alone.

      National sovereignty will increasingly be pooled to address these new issues of globalization. Just as the European Union now painstakingly hammers out standards and harmonizes rules among its 27 member nations, we will see this model adapted elsewhere.

      Latin America is well along the path of integration and may well have its own currency, the mercosur, in the next decade.

      Asia with its groups including ASEAN, APEC and the SCO (the Shanghai Cooperation Organization) may also have a regional currency and certainly its own Asian version of the International Monetary Fund, IMF.

    * Today's resource-nationalism will grow, as more countries see that their own natural resources are more valuable than colored pieces of paper or blips on computer screens. Commodities prices will continue upward and will increasingly become the benchmark of other asset prices.

      Many developing countries have also realized that the old game of hoarding U.S. dollar reserves is foolish...it just over-values the U.S. currency and locks them in to Washington Consensus policies. This is one of the reasons behind their shedding U.S. dollar reserves in favor of euros, pounds, yens and other strong currencies and why the euro has now become a rival reserve currency, representing 35 percent of trade and investment in the world.

      Other reasons include tacit disapproval of U.S. foreign policy and the new currency risk in the U.S. dollar, which will continue its slide for this and other reasons - including our loss of prestige and increasingly obvious vulnerabilities.

      Along with major reserve currencies: the U.S. dollar, the euro, Asia's yuan/yen area and the mercosur in Latin America, we may see a new global currency issue of "paper gold" by the IMF, i.e. Special Drawing Rights, SDRs, for global development and public goods.

    * As countries exhaust the possibilities of collective action through the new regional blocs, the United Nations will increasingly be seen as the only forum for planetary concerns and global security. The UN is already accepted as such in most countries in the world, with only the USA dragging its heels or obstructing this world body with 191 member countries.

      The UN-bashers' "propaganda" in the USA about wasteful bureaucracy ignores the realities. The UN's administrative budget is about the size of the New York City Fire Department. Its special agencies: the UN Development Program, UNICEF for children, WHO for health, the ILO for workplace standards, UNEP for the environment and its protocols on climate change, ozone depletion, the use of outer space, the oceans, telecommunications, and many other international agreements forged over its 60 year history, are the vital infrastructure underpinning global travel, communications, markets and commerce.

      They also help level the playing field upward and reward the most ethical players.

      So I expect the UN will be re-invigorated, reformed and the Security Council expanded to include Brazil, India, South Africa, Japan and Malaysia becoming permanent members - and no longer stymied by the vetoes of the winners of World War Two. This should make peace-keeping more effective, especially if the proposed United Nations Security Insurance Agency, UNSIA, in partnership with the insurance industry is enacted, which would allow countries, like Costa Rica - which gave up its army in 1947 - to purchase peace-keeping insurance with their premiums going to fund a well-trained standing contingent of peace-keepers and peace-makers.

      Find more information on UNSIA at http://www.HazelHenderson.com.

      As nations are realizing, already, many conflicts can not be solved militarily, so it is logical to expect that weapons budgets will be reduced and the long-awaited "peace dividend" may materialize. Most countries now understand that in this 21st century, the weapons of choice are currencies.

    * Economic and technological globalization will increasingly be subject to binding agreements and global standards. Covering corporate accountability, these will include core labor standards, a global minimum wage (in purchasing power parity), transparency and the internalizing of social and environmental costs and impacts into prices, company balance sheets, and capital asset pricing models.

      ESG - environmental, social and governance - issues will be material to all asset evaluation, risk and securities analyses. Beyond micro-indicators of ethical performance at the corporate and municipal level, macro-indicators will also have been overhauled. A conference on new indicators of national wealth, progress, sustainability and quality of life, "BEYOND GDP" will be held in the European Parliament, November 2007. I am honored to serve on its advisory board.

    * Taxation will have shifted from incomes and payrolls to waste, pollution, resource depletion and planned obsolescence. Current subsidies to advertising will be removed to curb impulse buying, credit-card abuse and to boost personal savings rates - in recognition of new findings in brain research.

      Taxes will be progressively harmonized to reduce jurisdictional arbitrage, money-laundering and tax havens. For example, the European Commission's March 28, 2007 Green Paper on Market-Based Instruments endorses such tax shifts for EU countries. Find more information at http://www.EthicalMarkets.com.

      Taxation of global "bads:" arms sales, currency speculation, excessive exploitation of the global commons and pollution will be collected by national governments under international treaties and allocated to the provision of global public goods: health, education, environmental restoration and peace-keeping, as Inge Kaul outlines in Global Public Goods (1999) and Providing Public Goods (2005).

      Emissions trading of pollution allowances will have been reformed to prevent today's windfall profits, by allocating rights to everybody, since the air is a public resource and auctioning rights, rather than giving them only to polluters.

      The proposed International Bank for Environmental Settlements will manage global carbon trading to allow both rich and poor people and countries to participate in vastly expanded environmental finance markets. Find more information at http://www.undp.org.

    * The shift beyond fossil fuels and nuclear power toward renewable energy, efficiency, re-use, re-manufacturing, recycling and better process controls will continue its double digit growth of 2006-07.

      The drivers: institutional investors - including the UN Principles of Responsible Investing with $8 trillion of assets; the Carbon Disclosure Project with $31 trillion of assets, and CERES - and others including concerned shareholders, SRI mutual funds, labor unions, employees, citizens and consumers, as well as global civic groups such as those of the World Social Forum and socially-responsible business organizations from the UN Global Compact to Brasil's Instituto Ethos, on whose board I am honored to serve.

      In Europe and most countries, the shifts will be led by governments reducing the $235 billion of current subsidies to fossil fuels and the billions more subsidies to nuclear power.

      In the USA, the shifts will still be led by the private sector and by state and local governments. The last holdout in the world with its for-profit medical system, the U.S. will gradually have moved to a more efficient, tax-based, single-payer national health insurance system, such as used in every other major advanced democracy. Most of these countries enjoy similar or better outcomes at half the U.S. cost of 16 percent of GDP. Business leaders will continue to spearhead this change, so as to remain competitive with other global companies enjoying tax-supported medical insurance.

      As GDP national accounts are corrected to deduct social and environmental costs and add infrastructure, education and health into new asset accounts, voters will see the benefits of these tax-supported, public investments and the avoided costs (i.e. real, calculatable benefits) they deliver to both public and private sectors.

Of course, I also see plenty of worrying counter-trends, from those global problems already mentioned to the consequences of money corrupting politics and democracy, the dearth of visionary leadership, global mediocracy and monopoly over the public airwaves.

Yet we have all the tools we need to make the transition to global sustainability. The planet is holding up a mirror to humanity and we are slowly learning that our values must change to reflect planetary realities. Stress has always been evolution's tool. We humans have three main resources to develop ourselves and our societies: information, matter and energy.

As we move deeper into the Information Age, we know that information, knowledge and wisdom control how efficiently we use matter and energy. Globalization since the 1980s has ridden on the slogans of "market reforms:" privatization, open borders, free trade and $1.5 trillion of daily currency trading - overwhelming the efforts of even the democratically-elected governments to manage their domestic economies. This led to the race to the bottom that began to reverse itself in the ensuing decades.

The new mantra became "reform markets!" The new global financial architecture and prudential regulation called for in the meltdowns of the 1990s, was slowly enacted in the first two decades of our new century.

More ethical markets and cleaner, greener economies are already going mainstream. In a planetary perspective, all human self-interests are similar. Morality has become pragmatic!

{Hazel Henderson, independent futurist, creator of the "Ethical Markets" TV series and the Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators with the Calvert Group, has authored nine books including Ethical Markets: Growing the Green Economy (2007). More at http://www.EthicalMarkets.com; http://www.Calvert-Henderson.com; and her new global ITV Channel to raise the bar by showcasing higher standards and best practices, at http://ethicalmarkets.ourtoolbar.com. � 2007.}

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved.

***   NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only.   ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2447

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:59 am
Subject: News: Ethical Food Networks Connect Producers, Consumers

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Alternative_Food_Networks_Connect_Ethical_Producers_And_Consumers_Leads_To_Healthier_Eating_999.html

Alternative Food Networks Connect Ethical Producers And Consumers, Leads To Healthier Eating

Illustration Omitted:
People take part in alternative food networks for a range of economic, ethical and personal reasons and these vary over time and in relation to life events such as moving house or the birth of a baby. For many, a key motivation was a desire to care for people and places, both close and distant. This involved reducing food miles, sourcing Fairtrade whenever possible, or looking for products with reduced environmental impacts and high animal welfare standards.

by Staff Writers
London UK (SPX) Oct 12, 2007

In the light of growing concerns about the separation of producers and consumers in our food system and the power of big supermarkets, new research funded by Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) provides valuable insights into the motivations and practices of consumers and producers involved in 'alternative food' networks, which include schemes as varied as organic vegetable boxes, community gardens and farm animal adoption.

Through participation, consumers tended to increase their consumption of fruit and vegetables, and improve their cooking skills and knowledge about food. The research also found some evidence of a 'graduation effect', whereby involvement in an alternative food scheme encouraged consumers to change their consumption behaviours in relation to other goods, such as household products and clothes.

Although the majority of consumers use alternative food sources alongside supermarkets, they often did not trust them and felt that the quality of supermarket food was inferior. Many reported that they only shopped there out of necessity. Alternative food projects also challenge supermarket-led notions of food choice. Although they may provide less choice in terms of types of product, consumers in our research associated these projects with a greater variety of foods, many of which are unavailable on supermarket shelves.

People take part in alternative food networks for a range of economic, ethical and personal reasons and these vary over time and in relation to life events such as moving house or the birth of a baby. For many, a key motivation was a desire to care for people and places, both close and distant. This involved reducing food miles, sourcing Fairtrade whenever possible, or looking for products with reduced environmental impacts and high animal welfare standards.

Dr. Moya Kneafsey from Coventry University, who led the research, commented, "Consumers enjoyed being able to ask the producers about their products and felt reassured about the quality and safety of the food. Alternative food schemes enable consumers to make a direct connection with food producers, and can result in relationships of trust and loyalty."

The researchers also identified challenges for alternative food networks. There were concerns amongst producers as to how to maintain their connection with consumers in the face of possible future growth. Many alternative food projects do not necessarily want to get bigger, as they might lose the sense of 'connection' which has been established between producers and consumers.

On the other hand, small schemes are under threat from two directions. First, large retailers are trying to create a sense of 'connection' with producers through the use of marketing strategies - such as providing names and pictures of growers and farmers on packaging. Second, rapidly expanding semi-national box delivery schemes such as Abel and Cole and Riverford Organics are also tapping into the interest in sourcing organic foods.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2448

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:25 am
Subject: News: Vegetarianism Better than Carnivory, But Some Meat Better Than None

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Diet_With_Some_Meat_Uses_Less_Land_Than_Vegetarian_Diets_999.html

Diet With Some Meat Uses Less Land Than Vegetarian Diets

Illustration Omitted:
"Surprisingly, however, a vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use," said Christian Peters. The reason is that fruits, vegetables and grains must be grown on high-quality cropland, he explained. Meat and dairy products from ruminant animals are supported by lower quality, but more widely available, land that can support pasture and hay. A large pool of such land is available in New York state because for sustainable use, most farmland requires a crop rotation with such perennial crops as pasture and hay. Thus, although vegetarian diets in New York state may require less land per person, they use more high-valued land. "It appears that while meat increases land-use requirements, diets including modest amounts of meat can feed more people than some higher fat vegetarian diets," said Peters.

by Staff Writers
Ithaca NY (SPX) Oct 15, 2007

A low-fat vegetarian diet is very efficient in terms of how much land is needed to support it. But adding some dairy products and a limited amount of meat may actually increase this efficiency, Cornell researchers suggest. This deduction stems from the findings of their new study, which concludes that if everyone in New York state followed a low-fat vegetarian diet, the state could directly support almost 50 percent more people, or about 32 percent of its population, agriculturally. With today's high-meat, high-dairy diet, the state is able to support directly only 22 percent of its population, say the researchers.

The study, published in the journal Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, is the first to examine the land requirements of complete diets. The researchers compared 42 diets with the same number of calories and a core of grains, fruits, vegetables and dairy products (using only foods that can be produced in New York state), but with varying amounts of meat (from none to 13.4 ounces daily) and fat (from 20 to 45 percent of calories) to determine each diet's "agricultural land footprint."

They found a fivefold difference between the two extremes.

"A person following a low-fat vegetarian diet, for example, will need less than half (0.44) an acre per person per year to produce their food," said Christian Peters, M.S. '02, Ph.D. '07, a Cornell postdoctoral associate in crop and soil sciences and lead author of the research. "A high-fat diet with a lot of meat, on the other hand, needs 2.11 acres."

"Surprisingly, however, a vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use," said Peters.

The reason is that fruits, vegetables and grains must be grown on high-quality cropland, he explained. Meat and dairy products from ruminant animals are supported by lower quality, but more widely available, land that can support pasture and hay. A large pool of such land is available in New York state because for sustainable use, most farmland requires a crop rotation with such perennial crops as pasture and hay.

Thus, although vegetarian diets in New York state may require less land per person, they use more high-valued land. "It appears that while meat increases land-use requirements, diets including modest amounts of meat can feed more people than some higher fat vegetarian diets," said Peters.

"The key to conserving land and other resources with our diets is to limit the amount of meat we eat and for farmers to rely more on grazing and forages to feed their livestock," said Jennifer Wilkins, senior extension associate in nutritional sciences who specializes in the connection between local food systems and health and co-authored the study with Gary Fick, Cornell professor of crop and soil sciences. "Consumers need to be aware that foods differ not only in their nutrient content but in the amount of resources required to produce, process, package and transport them."

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average American ate approximately 5.8 ounces of meat and eggs a day in 2005.

"In order to reach the efficiency in land use of moderate-fat, vegetarian diets, our study suggests that New Yorkers would need to limit their annual meat and egg intake to about 2 cooked ounces a day," Peters said.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2449

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:03 am
Subject: Interview: Food Activist Diana Hatz

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/15/hatz/?source=weekly

Snack and Diane
An interview with sustainable-food advocate Diane Hatz

By Katharine Wroth
15 Oct 2007

Ever dreamed of eating your way across the country? This summer, Diane Hatz did just that on the Eat Well Guided Tour of America. Convinced there was more to the sustainable-food movement than met the eye (i.e., it ain't just happening on the coasts), Hatz and her colleagues from Sustainable Table partnered with several other organizations to organize a 25-city tour that stretched from West Hollywood, Calif., to New York's Hudson Valley. Hopping aboard a biofueled bus, the group set out to discover the true tastes of American eaters.

Ambitious, yes, but that's hardly a surprise. This is the same group behind both the popular Meatrix series and the Eat Well Guide, a national online directory of farms and restaurants providing fresh, local food. They know from big.

Now that she's back at her desk in the Big Apple, we checked in with Hatz, a former music industry exec, to find out how she made the switch to food, what advice she has for getting through the grocery store, and what other projects she's got up her sleeve. Send her a question of your own by midnight PDT on Tuesday -- she'll answer the best burning queries later this week.

question Tell us a little about yourself -- your background, how you came to Sustainable Table, what excites you about these issues.

answer I'm originally from the suburbs in northern Delaware, where I grew up always having a garden in the back yard and fruit trees around the house, and my parents would buy half a cow from the local butcher and freeze the cuts. My family would also go down to the Delaware beach every weekend in the summer, where we'd catch our own fish, crabs, and clams. When I was young, I never thought about where my food came from because even though I didn't grow up on a farm, a lot of the food I ate was grown or caught by someone in the family. I remember even going down to the local park to pick berries.

I actually came to the sustainable food movement by accident. I had worked for about 10 years in the music industry, much of it in a corporate music company, and in my early 30s I knew I had to get out. I'd lost my passion for music, mainly because of how corporate the business was and how little passion and actual creativity I saw in it. I brushed up my resume and sent it out to a little blind ad in The New York Times ... my first resume went to GRACE [now the parent organization of Sustainable Table], and when I was offered the job, I thought working in a nonprofit might be interesting. Around that time, I'd also discovered an organic mango, which tasted so unbelievably good that I started becoming interested in organic food.

One day in about 2001, I got an email from a consumer asking me about genetic engineering. I searched around other sites to try to find the answer, and I realized that every website assumed the visitor already knew what genetic engineering was, and it really frustrated me. I figured if I was frustrated, there were probably a lot of consumers out there equally as frustrated because they weren't able to get information about how their food was being produced and where it came from. So, I had the privilege of founding Sustainable Table.

You asked what excites me about these issues -- I was so excited and pleased [on the Eat Well tour] to see that there's more going on than even I realized! We all know that wonderful things are being done on the West Coast and in the Northeast, but do you know what's happening in Wyoming? Montana? Missouri? Everywhere we went, we found people excited, passionate, and enthusiastic about local, sustainable food, and it has reenergized me and given me so much hope for us and our food system ... I'd challenge everyone reading this to look around in their area. I'd be surprised if you couldn't find an organic, sustainable, or biodynamic farm, restaurant, or store near you. They're popping up everywhere.

question From your perspective, what's the one thing people should be aware of when they shop for food?

answer The main thing I think people should be aware of is how the food was raised or grown. Find out if added hormones or constant daily doses of antibiotics were used. Ask about what animals were fed. Find out if chemical fertilizers or pesticides were used. Sustainable Table has a series of handouts called Questions to Ask -- you can print these out or download them onto your iPod or PDA.

Find out where the food comes from -- and if you want something you don't see, ask for it! Consumers need to understand that we have all the power. We're the ones who are going to change the food system, but we need to speak up.

question When it comes to agribiz, are there big companies that are trying to improve their practices? Are there others you'd recommend avoiding?

answer I've read that all the big companies know that consumers want more local, sustainable food, and they are reacting to the demand. Most of the smaller health-food-type companies have already been bought out by large conglomerations, and these large companies are sitting in their boardrooms trying to figure out how they can continue to make huge profits while becoming more "green" (which is not necessarily sustainable).

It's not really for me to pick out any particular companies to avoid, but one thing I would suggest is that people try to buy food as unprocessed as possible. The more processed a food, the less nutrients it's going to have. If you really want to avoid something, try staying away from high-fructose corn syrup or some derivative of corn syrup. (If you want to learn about the problems with corn, check out the movie King Corn.)

Consumers should look for whole foods like fruits, vegetables, and meat, and relearn the joy of cooking. You're going to get more nutrients that way, and you're going to get a better product. And once you start looking for unprocessed foods, go a step further and look for local, sustainable unprocessed foods -- it really will taste better!

question What about restaurants -- any chains you'd hold up as role models?

answer With regard to restaurants to hold up as a model, I don't know of any national chains, but while we were on the tour, we stopped in at Grilla Bites in Northern California. It's a franchise operation that's looking to go national -- they source local, organic, sustainable food. Not only did they have an organic salad bar, they had sandwiches like a local bison burger and even products like local wine. Even though this is a fast-food-type restaurant, where you order at the counter and get your food quickly, it was the best fast food I've ever had! I also like that it's a franchise so owners can actually own their business. I haven't been to Vermont's Farmer's Diner yet, but they source as locally as possible, and I know they're also looking to go national, so they're another restaurant to look out for.

question What can consumers do to support small farms more actively? And what resources do you recommend if the Eat Well Guide doesn't turn up much in an area?

answer The best way to support a small farm actively is to join a community-supported agriculture program. With CSA, you purchase a share of a farmer's crop at the beginning of the growing season. This gives them the resources to purchase seed and equipment. Each CSA member gets a share of the harvest, which is either picked up at the farm or dropped off at particular points, like a local church or community centers. CSAs have become extremely popular, and some now offer meat, fish, dairy products, and even flowers.

Another way to support small farms is to join a local sustainable agriculture or food group -- if you go into the advance search feature on the Eat Well Guide, you can find local organizations to join. Two excellent programs are Slow Food and Food Routes' Buy Fresh Buy Local campaign ... And if none of that helps, I'd suggest looking in your phone book for a health-food store and giving them a call to see if they know of any CSA programs or farmers' markets in the area. Local stores tend to be a wealth of information on sustainable food.

question Do you see regional patterns in the sustainable-food movement? In this series, we looked at a county in Iowa that's gone whole hog, so to speak, on the buy-local movement. Anomaly, or indication of a growing trend?

answer The buy local, sustainable movement is growing exponentially all across the country! I believe this is no longer a movement, trend, or fad. Sustainable food is here, and here to stay. The local aspect of sustainable food might be a little newer, but everywhere we went, in every part of the country, people were talking about how to source more local sustainable food and were asking the same questions: What do I do in the winter? How do I define local? What exactly is sustainable? What can I do to be more a part of this? I've only been off tour for just over a month, so I'm still trying to digest and pull together all the information we learned, and, hopefully, we can help answer some of these questions based on our experiences on the road.

Another pattern we saw ... is that it's not an "us and them" mentality. Organic food suffered (and to some degree still suffers) from an elitist image, but local, sustainable food is different. We went to PEAS Farm in Missoula, Mont., where they have a CSA program, but they also provide food to the local food bank ... City Farm in Chicago employs residents in a low-income area and provides them a living wage -- among the food they grow are heirloom tomatoes, which are sold to high-end restaurants around the city. The rest are given to food banks and food kitchens. City Slicker Farms in Oakland, Calif., is an urban farm where residents can buy the produce raised on a sliding scale -- if you have no money, you don't have to pay anything, no questions asked.

After seeing this across the country, I realized that my definition of sustainability, which includes building and maintaining community, also includes helping to provide food access for all. Sustainable food is not about just giving back to the planet but about giving to each other as well ... And what I find so heartening is that not only are groups working together, but consumers are working with and supporting farms, restaurants, and farmers' markets. There's this sense of community that's reinvigorating areas all over the country.

question Our readers love to debate the merits of vegetarianism -- do you or Sustainable Table have a stance on that?

answer Sustainable Table does not have a stance on vegetarianism. We're specifically trying to reach consumers who eat meat, to educate them on problems with our food supply and offer them healthier options so they can choose what's best for them. Personally, I've been a vegetarian for almost 20 years, but I promote local, sustainable meat for a living, and I don't see any contradictions in that.

Sustainable Table was created to offer people information and choices, and to leave the decisions up to each individual. People are at different levels: some might be comfortable with being vegan, while others might eat meat every day, three times a day. We can only do what we can do, and I don't believe we have the right to tell anyone what to do -- we can only provide information and perhaps encourage them to eat/live healthier (and if they're going to eat meat, to try to eat sustainable, pasture-raised meat), but it's really up to each one of us. Obviously, having said that, I absolutely do not agree with our industrial food system so I do have some limits!

question You guys created The Meatrix -- were you surprised at its success? Any plans for more fun along those lines?

From The Meatrix
Moopheus exposes the Meatrix.
Image: themeatrix.com

answer Sustainable Table created The Meatrix with Free Range Studios. For anyone who might not have heard of The Meatrix, they're online flash animations that educate consumers about factory farming and our food supply. We used humor and entertainment to teach people about serious food issues. And, yes, we were pleasantly shocked by the movie's success!

When the first one came out, we were told that if 10,000 people watched the film over three months, it would be considered a success. We had 10,000 people in the first few hours! And as the days went by, we went into the millions -- our server crashed twice from all the traffic. We can't count the amount of people who've seen the movie anymore, but we know it's way over 20 million. We've translated it into 30 languages and have sent out thousands of DVDs to students and teachers all around the world (we still get dozens of requests each week for the film). And we've received thousands of emails since the launch of the original Meatrix in November 2003, and we're always excited when we get an email that says the person or family has changed their eating habits because of the film.

With regard to a Meatrix III ... we don't have anything scheduled yet. I'm not ruling it out, but if we do create something, it won't be an online viral film -- it will be more of an interactive web experience. What exactly that will be, I'm not sure yet -- we're so busy right now with the other Meatrix films and the success of Sustainable Table and the Eat Well Guide that it might be a little while before anything happens. But we'll definitely let you know if it does!

question What's your favorite meal?

answer Wow -- that's actually impossible to answer because I like so many different types of food. So I can't say that I have a favorite meal, but I can say that food made from local, sustainable farms has a taste that industrial food doesn't. Local, sustainable food even tastes better than industrial organic food shipped thousands of miles.

On our cross-country tour, we were hosted by groups in various cities who often put on events for us -- our theme for the tour was "Pie Across America," so most of our events revolved around pies (sweet, savory, and even pizza). I figure I sampled well over 200 pies on the tour ... I've never eaten so well in my life, and I still love pie. So, if I had to answer you, right now I would say pie in any form from local, sustainable ingredients is my favorite meal, whether for breakfast, lunch, or dinner!

Katharine Wroth is Grist's story editor.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2450

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:06 am
Subject: Interview: Conversation with Michael Pollan, On Food

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/12/pollan/?source=weekly

Table Talk
A conversation with Michael Pollan

By Tom Philpott
12 Oct 2007

In his 1996 book Tasting Food, Tasting Freedom, the great food anthropologist Sidney Mintz concluded that the United States had no cuisine. Interestingly, Mintz's definition of cuisine came down to conversation. For Mintz, Americans just didn't engage in passionate talk about food. Unlike the southwest French and their cassoulet, most Americans don't obsess and quarrel about what comprises, say, an authentic veggie burger.

But if cuisine comes down to talk, things are looking up a decade after Mintz cast his judgment. Now, more and more people are buzzing about food: not only about what's good to eat, but also -- appropriately for the land that invented McDonald's and Cheetos -- about what's in our food, where it came from, how it was grown.

No writer has galvanized this new national conversation on food more than Michael Pollan, from his muckraking articles on the meat industry for The New York Times Magazine earlier this decade to the publication last year of The Omnivore's Dilemma. On a recent day when he was reviewing the galleys of his latest book, due out in January, I rang up Pollan at his Berkeley, Calif., home to talk ... about food.

question So tell me a little bit about what you've been working on recently.

answer The new book is called In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto. It's a book that really grew out of questions I heard from readers after Omnivore's Dilemma, which was basically so how do you apply all this? Now that you've looked into the heart of the food system and been into the belly of the beast, how should I eat, and what should I buy, and if I'm concerned about health, what should I be eating? I decided I would see what kind of very practical answers I could give people.

I spent a lot of time looking at the science of nutrition, and learned pretty quickly there's less there than meets the eye, and that the scientists really haven't figured out that much about food. Letting them tell us how to eat is probably not a very good idea, and indeed the culture -- which is to say tradition and our ancestors -- has more to teach us about how to eat well than science does. That was kind of surprising to me.

It really comes down to seven words: "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants." What is food? How do you know whether you're getting food or a food-like product? The interesting thing that I learned was that if you're really concerned about your health, the best decisions for your health turn out to be the best decisions for the farmer and the best decisions for the environment -- and that there is no contradiction there.

question The other thing that's interesting, along the same lines, is this idea in American culture that what is good for you tastes bad, and what tastes bad is good for you.

answer Yes, exactly right. There's no sacrifice in eating well, there is no sacrifice in pleasure. To the contrary, the best-grown food is actually the tastiest. Now, it wasn't always true. I mean, you know, in the first generation of organic farmers, they weren't that good at it. But the quality has dramatically improved and is superb right now.

question Then there's this idea that food is something you can endlessly fragment: if you find something in a food that's beneficial, you can isolate it, and concentrate it, and put it in a pill.

answer It's the reductionist's logic of food science, basically. And the interesting thing is that whenever that has been tried, it has failed. Foods are much more than the sum of their nutrient parts, and you cannot expect to get the same effect. Now there are things like vitamins that have been isolated, and in their isolated form they can cure deficiency diseases. But when they've tried to take out the antioxidants, things like beta-carotene and vitamin E, they don't seem to work.

question There's an analogy there with agriculture: the macronutrients in food and the macronutrients in soil. A, B, C, and D vs. N, P, and K. Turns out that soil needs more than just isolated N, P, and K to produce fully nutritious food.

answer There's a mystery at both ends of the food chain. There's the mystery about what makes a healthy soil, which you cannot yet fake or simulate, and there's the mystery of what makes a healthy food, which you cannot yet simulate or fake.

question The advice to "eat food, not much, mostly plants" is deceptively simple -- how do you apply that in a society that's become addicted to convenience food?

answer I think that there's some brainwashing going on with this idea that we don't have time to cook anymore. We have made cooking seem much more complicated than it is, and part of that comes from watching cooking shows on television -- we've turned cooking into a spectator sport. We're terrified to play tackle football too when we watch how it's played on TV -- we'd get killed. But cooking's a whole lot easier than it appears on Iron Chef.

We cook every night here. My wife and I both work, and we can get a very nice dinner on the table in a half hour. It would not take any less time for us to drive to a fast-food outlet and order, sit down, and bus our table. [But] when you create this image of people as being hurried, and harried, and of course you need TV dinners, that kind of sinks in. They kind of flatter us by telling us we're too busy and that we have such rushed lives, but in the end we find time for what matters. In just the last 10 years we've found, what, two or three hours a day to deal with the internet? It's a matter of priority, it's not really about ability. Some people are very intimidated about cooking and I think that's a shame, and I think we have to help people get over that by teaching them how to cook, teaching kids how to cook in school.

question How did you learn to cook?

answer I learned to some extent from my mother, who was a really good cook, just hanging out in the kitchen watching her do it. I [had] a classic suburban childhood on Long Island. My mom cooked dinner four or five nights a week, and always your classic -- there was some kind of protein, and two vegetables, and dessert, the whole bit. And it was a really important part of our family life. When I was living alone in my 20s, when I got my first apartment, I cooked partly because I couldn't afford to go out -- you know, it's kind of a myth that it's more expensive to cook. So I've always been kind of interested in it.

There are times where you fall out of the habit and you get seduced by alternatives and it seems harder than it really is. But you know, as I started shopping at farmers' markets and joined a CSA -- that pushes you back to the kitchen. That's one of the unintended consequences of buying food that way: you can't find anything microwaveable at the farmers' market, so you begin cooking again.

question I've lived in places where I could walk five minutes to an incredible farmers' market. There are a lot of people who don't have that privilege in other parts of the country. But I think that is changing, and there's a lot of great programs going on.

answer I spent a lot of time on the road last year, and I was surprised at where the local food movement was taking root. It was a lot of places that you wouldn't expect it. And I know that there are still food deserts -- ironically they tend to be in the farm belt, a lot of them.

One of the things I always have to be aware of is I live in a place where it's very easy to eat off the supermarket grid, if you will. My farmers' market is open 50 weeks a year, and the CSA runs, I think, 48 weeks a year -- and that's only because they need a break. But I do think that to the extent there are alternatives and people support them, even if they're small now, they will very quickly get much bigger.

question Omnivore's Dilemma clearly struck a nerve. Were you surprised by the reaction, and did it start the conversation you were hoping it would?

answer I was completely flabbergasted by the reaction. I had no idea it would start a conversation to the extent it has. You work on a book for years, and you don't know where the culture's going to be when you finish. And sometimes the message you're bringing happens to coincide with other things going on in the culture, and I think that that's what happened. There were several other very good food books out, and they all did quite well. So I think there was something in the air, and people were receptive to the message.

I was very struck by the energy I felt in audiences and still feel in audiences, which is very much a political energy. At a time when people feel really frustrated about electoral politics, very frustrated about the war, this administration in lots of ways, I think that that's part of what is creating this center of gravity around food. Because it's really fundamental politics, because -- and I think that you've heard me say this -- you have a power here that you don't have elsewhere. You've got three votes a day, and how you cast those votes, we have seen over the last few years, has a tremendous effect.

The most gratifying thing I hear is farmers, ranchers, who say they're having a great year this year and more people are coming in and asking for pastured livestock, more people are joining CSAs ... consumers are starting to reconceive what it means to be a consumer, and [see] that citizenship is part of consumption. ... People are getting something besides food when they go to the farmers' market, they're getting a sense of community.

question When you really get into local food, it's suddenly about community, coming together -- at the farmers' market, meeting a farmer at the CSA, cooking with your friends and family. Seems like there's a hunger for these things in a post-modern society that's built on suburbia, and the car, and atomization.

answer You know, people have looked to food for all these values for thousands of years -- food was a way to come together, it was a way to express your identity, it was a way to engage with nature -- food has always had this power. And I think we've had a kind of temporary forgetting of that, and this idea that food is just fuel, food is about health or illness, these very simplistic, reductive ideas have kind of thinned out the whole experience. But there's a desire to thicken it again, and lo and behold food is providing all these satisfactions that people were missing.

question Both of us have been active in the effort to demystify the farm bill and convince people to care about it. What are your hopes for the farm bill at this point?

answer I was just on the phone this morning with a congressman (and by the way, they're calling me, I'm not calling them at this point, and I think that's interesting). There's more politics around the farm bill -- more grassroots politics, more reform politics -- than there has been in a generation. At the same time, and as a result of that, there has been a defensive reaction that has been fierce. And there is a resentment that anyone from the outside -- which is to say outside of these commodity crops, outside of the memberships of these committees -- is trying to get in on the issue and get in on the debate. There was a very telling quote in the San Francisco Chronicle by [Rep.] Collin Peterson [D-Minn.] ... where he says, "These city people don't know what they're talking about, they should stay out of it."

I think they understand as soon as they start negotiating these large questions then everyone's going to pile in and we're going to get a very different kind of farm bill, and they just don't want this to happen. And when I say "they," I'm talking about the Midwestern congressmen and senators on both agriculture committees.

Now it may be that the reformers have not done a good enough job of framing proposals in a way that doesn't look threatening. I think the basic tack has been a very simple anti-subsidy tack: "Subsidies are welfare, farmers should fend for themselves when prices are good." So it looks like you're simply trying to take something away from farmers, and I think politically perhaps that has contributed to the powerful reaction we've seen ... I don't know how to craft those proposals, I'm not a policymaker, but I think we've made a mistake by equating reform with the destruction of farm support.

We'll have to see what happens, but it's not time to give up on this. I detect an enormous amount of anxiety about the politics on the part of the committees, and a sense that other people in Congress are looking now over the shoulder of the ag committee in a way they haven't before. So defensiveness -- you know, this is defensiveness, this isn't just power, and people should realize that.

question I was wondering if you'd been back to Iowa since you did your research on Omnivore's Dilemma. When you were there corn was $1.50 a bushel, and now it's $4 a bushel.

answer I know, the good times are rolling right now. I have not. I'm going to go back this winter, though. The book tour is going to take me to Iowa City, which I'm really looking forward to. Not that that's exactly corn country, but it's close.

I've done a lot of radio in the Corn Belt, and it's clear that I've pissed off some people there. And I spoke at Iowa State and a group of people got up and walked out because I was taking the name of corn in vain.

question Since Omnivore's Dilemma came out, John Mackey publicly criticized you, and at the same time he started rolling out these local foods measures, and now when you walk into a Whole Foods you see "Buy Local" signs everywhere. What is your take on Whole Foods' Buy Local effort so far?

Pollan and Mackey
The Berkeley face-off.

answer It was a very interesting exchange with him. It unfolded over the course of several months in these letters, and then he came to Berkeley to have an onstage conversation with me, which was surprising and somewhat courageous of him, given Berkeley's attitude toward Whole Foods. And in many ways it was a very productive exchange: I learned something about how that company works, and he made some very promising initiatives.

I have seen what you've seen when I go around the country visiting Whole Foods. There's a much greater emphasis on local food in the signage and on the shelf. But I haven't done the kind of systematic look -- and it needs to be done about now -- to see how far they have come. It's not for me to do; I would feel a little awkward doing it myself. But I'm hoping that other journalists will do it.

question Well, I know you've got to wrap up. I've had a great time talking to you.

answer Yeah, me too. It's always great to talk about this stuff -- it's just great that you're out there doing this, and that you bring this perspective as a farmer is very powerful. I've really enjoyed your stuff, and it's been wonderful to see the publicity you've gotten this year. I saw that terrific piece in Gourmet.

question Oh, speaking of that, that article in Gourmet exposed my predilection for chips. And my editor wanted me to ask you: What is your junk-food weakness?

answer Oh, god, let me think ... My favorite packaged junk food has always been Cracker Jacks. Which is, of course, a corn product of a kind. Of several kinds. It's popcorn coated in corn syrup.

question I haven't had those in years, but I loved them as a kid.

answer Cracker Jacks are great. Although the prizes have gone way downhill.

Grist contributing writer Tom Philpott farms and cooks at Maverick Farms, a sustainable-agriculture nonprofit and small farm in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2451

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:05 am
Subject: News: Increased Use of Biofuels Upsets Commodities Markets

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Biofuels_use_transforming_commodity_markets_CME_chief_999.html

Biofuels use transforming commodity markets: CME chief

by Staff Writers
Tokyo (AFP) Oct 18, 2007

The increasing use of biofuels to tackle global warming is having a dramatic impact on global commodity markets, the head of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange said Thursday.

The recent surge in crude oil and wheat prices to record highs pointed to a transformation of commodity markets, said Craig Donohue, chief executive of the world's largest financial exchange.

"This is an entirely new market in commodities. We see a tremendous convergence now between (soft) commodities and energy with many economies becoming very ethanol based," he told reporters during a visit to Tokyo.

The International Monetary Fund warned this week that an increasing global reliance on grain as a source of fuel could drive up food prices in poor countries with "serious implications."

The United States overtook Brazil in 2005 to become the world's largest producer of ethanol while the European Union is the largest biodiesel producer, it noted.

China and India, thirsty for energy to fuel their rapid economic expansion, also plan to ramp up biofuel production, which experts say could aggravate water and food shortages.

Donohue said that the rise of the two Asian economic powerhouses was having a marked impact on global commodity markets.

"We're seeing very dramatic shifts in production, exportation and importation as a result of growth in economies like China and India, which are having a huge impact" on commodities supply and demand, he said.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2452

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:20 am
Subject: Feature: Sweden's Pioneering "Clean" City

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-ft-cleancity22oct22,0,7350724.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-business

A pioneering 'clean' city
Vaxjo, Sweden, cut its carbon dioxide output 30%. Its success is getting global attention.

By Karl Ritter, The Associated Press
October 22, 2007

VAXJO, SWEDEN -- When this quiet city in southern Sweden decided in 1996 to wean itself off fossil fuels, most people doubted the ambitious goal would have any effect beyond the town limits.

A few melting glaciers later, Vaxjo is attracting a green pilgrimage of politicians, scientists and business leaders from as far afield as the U.S. and North Korea seeking inspiration from a city program that has enabled it to cut carbon dioxide emissions 30% since 1993.

Vaxjo (pronounced VECK-shur), a city of 78,000 on the shores of Lake Helga, surrounded by thick pine forest in the heart of Smaland province, is a pioneer in a growing movement in dozens of European cities, large and small, that aren't waiting for national or international measures to curb global warming.

Initiatives taken at the local level -- including London's congestion charge, Paris' city bike program and the solar power campaign in Barcelona, Spain -- are being introduced across the continent, often influencing national policies instead of the other way around.

"People used to ask: Isn't it better to do this at a national or international level?" said Henrik Johansson, Vaxjo's environmental controller. "We want to show everyone else that you can accomplish a lot at the local level."

The European Union, mindful that many member states are failing to meet mandated emissions cuts under the Kyoto Protocol climate-change treaty, has taken notice of the trend and is encouraging cities to adopt their own emissions targets.

The bloc awarded one of its inaugural Sustainable Energy Europe awards this year to Vaxjo, which aims to cut emissions by 50% by 2010 and 70% by 2025.

"We are convinced that the cities are a key element to change behavior and get results," said Pedro Ballesteros Torres, manager of the Sustainable Energy Europe campaign. "Climate change is a global problem, but the origin of the problem is very local."

Only a handful of European capitals have set emissions targets, including Stockholm, Copenhagen and London. Torres said he hoped to persuade about 30 European cities to commit to targets next year.

Although such goals are welcome, they might not always be the best way forward, said Simon Reddy, who manages the C40 project, a global network of major cities exchanging ideas on tackling climate change.

"At the moment a lot of cities don't know what they're emitting, so it's very difficult to set targets," Reddy said.

More important than emissions targets, he said, is that cities draft action plans outlining specific goals to reduce emissions, such as switching a certain percentage of the public transit system to alternative fuels.

London Mayor Ken Livingstone's Climate Action Plan calls for cutting the city's CO2 emissions 60% by 2025, compared with 1990 levels. But planners acknowledge the cuts are not realistic unless the government introduces a system of carbon pricing.

Barcelona, Spain's second-biggest city, has since last year required all new and renovated buildings to install solar panels to supply at least 60% of the energy needed to heat water.

The project has been emulated by dozens of Spanish cities and inspired national legislation with similar though less stringent requirements, said Angels Codina Relat of the Barcelona Energy Agency.

It's not only in Europe that cities are taking action on climate change.

Several U.S. cities including Seattle; Austin, Texas; and Portland, Ore., have launched programs to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Bogota, the capital of Colombia, has reduced emissions with its TransMilenio municipal bus system and an extensive network of bicycle paths.

In Vaxjo, the vast majority of emissions cuts have been achieved at the heating and power plant, which replaced oil with wood chips from local sawmills as its main source of fuel. Ashes from the furnace are returned to the forest as fertilizer.

"This is the best fir in Sweden," said plant manager Ulf Johnsson, scooping up a fistful of wood chips from a giant heap outside the factory.

He had just led Michael Wood, the U.S. ambassador to Sweden, on a guided tour of the facility, which is considered state of the art. Not only does it generate electricity, but the water that warms up as it cools the plant is used to heat homes and offices in Vaxjo.

Every week, foreign visitors arrive to see Vaxjo's environmental campaign. Last year, a delegation of 10 energy officials from reclusive North Korea got a tour.

Though Vaxjo is tiny by comparison with cities in C40, including New York, Mexico City and Tokyo, the group has been impressed by the city's progress and uses it as an example of "best practices."

"They're a small town," C40's Reddy said. "Apply that to 7 million? It's doable but it's going to take a lot longer."

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2453

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:22 am
Subject: News: Oil Production Declines Sharply

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2196436,00.html

Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says new study
� Output peaked in 2006 and will fall 7% a year
� Decline in gas, coal and uranium also predicted

Ashley Seager
Monday October 22, 2007
The Guardian

Illustration Omitted:
Oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico at sunset. Photo: Larry Lee/Corbis

World oil production has already peaked and will fall by half as soon as 2030, according to a report which also warns that extreme shortages of fossil fuels will lead to wars and social breakdown.

The German-based Energy Watch Group will release its study in London today saying that global oil production peaked in 2006 - much earlier than most experts had expected. The report, which predicts that production will now fall by 7% a year, comes after oil prices set new records almost every day last week, on Friday hitting more than $90 (�44) a barrel.

"The world soon will not be able to produce all the oil it needs as demand is rising while supply is falling. This is a huge problem for the world economy," said Hans-Josef Fell, EWG's founder and the German MP behind the country's successful support system for renewable energy.

The report's author, Joerg Schindler, said its most alarming finding was the steep decline in oil production after its peak, which he says is now behind us.

The results are in contrast to projections from the International Energy Agency, which says there is little reason to worry about oil supplies at the moment.

However, the EWG study relies more on actual oil production data which, it says, are more reliable than estimates of reserves still in the ground. The group says official industry estimates put global reserves at about 1.255 gigabarrels - equivalent to 42 years' supply at current consumption rates. But it thinks the figure is only about two thirds of that.

Global oil production is currently about 81m barrels a day - EWG expects that to fall to 39m by 2030. It also predicts significant falls in gas, coal and uranium production as those energy sources are used up.

Britain's oil production peaked in 1999 and has already dropped by half to about 1.6 million barrels a day.

The report presents a bleak view of the future unless a radically different approach is adopted. It quotes the British energy economist David Fleming as saying: "Anticipated supply shortages could lead easily to disturbing scenes of mass unrest as witnessed in Burma this month. For government, industry and the wider public, just muddling through is not an option any more as this situation could spin out of control and turn into a complete meltdown of society."

Mr Schindler comes to a similar conclusion. "The world is at the beginning of a structural change of its economic system. This change will be triggered by declining fossil fuel supplies and will influence almost all aspects of our daily life."

Jeremy Leggett, one of Britain's leading environmentalists and the author of Half Gone, a book about "peak oil" - defined as the moment when maximum production is reached, said that both the UK government and the energy industry were in "institutionalised denial" and that action should have been taken sooner.

"When I was an adviser to government, I proposed that we set up a taskforce to look at how fast the UK could mobilise alternative energy technologies in extremis, come the peak," he said. "Other industry advisers supported that. But the government prefers to sleep on without even doing a contingency study. For those of us who know that premature peak oil is a clear and present danger, it is impossible to understand such complacency."

Mr Fell said that the world had to move quickly towards the massive deployment of renewable energy and to a dramatic increase in energy efficiency, both as a way to combat climate change and to ensure that the lights stayed on. "If we did all this we may not have an energy crisis."

He accused the British government of hypocrisy. "Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have talked a lot about climate change but have not brought in proper policies to drive up the use of renewables," he said. "This is why they are left talking about nuclear and carbon capture and storage. "

Yesterday, a spokesman for the Department of Business and Enterprise said: "Over the next few years global oil production and refining capacity is expected to increase faster than demand. The world's oil resources are sufficient to sustain economic growth for the foreseeable future. The challenge will be to bring these resources to market in a way that ensures sustainable, timely, reliable and affordable supplies of energy."

The German policy, which guarantees above-market payments to producers of renewable power, is being adopted in many countries - but not Britain, where renewables generate about 4% of the country's electricity and 2% of its overall energy needs.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2454

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:23 am
Subject: Feature: Energy Efficiency A Good First Step In Climate Change Mitigation

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.greenbiz.com/news/news_third.cfm?NewsID=36097

Energy Efficiency Good First Step for Businesses to Fight Climate Change: Survey
Source: ClimateBiz.com

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 17, 2007 - - Energy efficiency is the most effective company-wide first steps CEOs can take to launch a climate change program, according to a team of environmental scientists and climate researchers.

The panel, which includes 54 fellows of the Switzer Foundation, an environmental non-profit, participated in a survey titled, "What the Scientists Know: How Business Leadership can Help Solve Climate Change." <http://www.bluepractice.com/files/SSES%20FINAL.pdf> The survey was inspired by members of the Committee of 200, a group of women business leaders.

"The survey is designed to spark a dialogue between scientists and business leaders," said Jessica Switzer, Partner of Blue Practice Inc., which performed the survey. "We hoped to give a voice to leading U.S. scientists' concerns and create something useful that business leaders can use to develop solutions to a very large problem facing our world economy and social situation. We couldn't have a better audience to preview this than the Committee of 200."

To best leverage a CEOs leadership, the scientists top rankings included: improving energy efficiency of existing operations, converting to clean and renewable energy, engaging in climate change policy discussions, consideration of climate risk in asset management and buying carbon offsets.

Carbon offsets wasn't listed as a top priority for companies. The panel also pegged the purchase of renewable energy credits as the last corporate priority; the most popular write-in suggestion for top priority was reducing energy consumption.

Interface Inc., a modular carpet and upholstery fabric manufacturer was named as a company doing a good job of addressing greenhouse gas emissions.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2455

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:24 am
Subject: News: Japanese Car Makers Vie to Be Greenest

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hqxO896URfDk6ZHZbF7ZMCp8yLhA

Japanese carmakers vie to be greenest

TOKYO (AFP) - From a nightclub on wheels to a car shaped like a hat, many of the whacky vehicles unveiled at the Tokyo Motor Show over the years have been consigned to the annals of auto history.

When Toyota wheeled out a futuristic Prius prototype in 1995 powered by a combination of petrol and electricity, many believed it would go the same way.

Twelve years later, its rivals are still trying to catch up and the hybrid will remain centre stage when the show gets under way again this week.

But the hybrid is not the only contender in the fuel efficiency race, with a host of environmentally-friendly technologies snapping at its heels.

Despite the success of the Prius, automakers are still hedging their bets on green technologies, with electricity, biofuels, clean diesel and fuel cells also seen as potential alternative power sources.

"The future is not just about hybrids," said Christopher Richter, an auto analyst at the investment bank CLSA.

"When I talk to automakers I sense a lot of uncertainty about what is going to be the dominant technology going forward," he said.

"Toyota has made a big push into hybrids, but other makers are looking at clean diesel. We're looking at a cocktail of different (technologies) that are going to be present, probably for the next few decades."

Japanese automakers are competing to be the first to launch low pollution diesel engines, which some analysts predict could eventually become more popular than petrol-electric hybrids due to their lower production cost.

And one day hybrids and clean diesel vehicles may come together.

"My guess is that in future actually many of the gasoline and diesel engines are going to be equipped with hybrid (technology). It's not really diesel against hybrid," said Credit Suisse auto analyst Koji Endo.

Nissan, which was slower than Toyota and Honda to embrace hybrids, plans to launch its first clean diesel engine vehicle in Japan in the second half of next year and will try to drum up interest in the technology at the motor show.

Richter at CLSA said diesel hybrid was "a very interesting possibility but still very costly."

Unsurprisingly, hybrids will dominate Toyota's stand at the show, which gets under way on Wednesday and opens to the public from Saturday.

Among them is the 1/X (pronounced one-Xth) plug-in hybrid, which Toyota says is two-thirds lighter than the Prius and twice as fuel efficient.

It can run on a mixture of gasoline and ethanol and uses rigid but lightweight carbon-fibre-reinforced plastic throughout the body frame.

Toyota will also show off a luxury hybrid sedan, a hybrid sports car and a new version of its one-seater, three-wheel i-swing "personal mobility machine," which caused a stir when it was unveiled two years ago.

Honda, which was the first automaker to introduce a hybrid in the US, will try to grab attention with its CR-Z lightweight hybrid sports car.

Nissan meanwhile will show off the latest version of its Pivo egg-shaped electric concept car with a cabin that can rotate 360 degrees.

The Pivo 2 can also drive sideways thanks to wheels that can turn 90 degrees for easy parallel parking and has a small "robot assistant" that can talk in English or Japanese to help with navigation or calm down angry drivers.

The dream of an electric car, which has been around since the time of Thomas Edison, has so far failed to break into the mainstream because of the high development cost and difficulties developing a suitable battery.

Automakers are also competing to develop lithium-ion rechargeable batteries suitable for long distance hybrids, but there are safety concerns after massive recalls by laptop computer manufacturers.

"Lithium-ion batteries can drive longer and are lighter. Nonetheless they have been tarnished because they do have a tendency to blow up," said Richter.

He said automakers were making intense efforts to perfect them.

Toyota in particular "has made a huge investment in hybrids and is going to want to have (a suitable lithium-ion battery) when these clean diesels start appearing in the market and posing a competitive threat to hybrids," he said.

Fuel cells, which run on hydrogen and emit only water, will also make an appearance at the event as Honda shows off the "PUYO" concept car, said to have a soft "gel body" to improve safety and "the feel of an adorable pet."

But it's not all about saving the planet: Nissan is building up the hype for the official launch of its all-new GT-R supercar, although pictures have already leaked onto the Internet despite its efforts to keep it under wraps.

Copyright � 2007 AFP. All rights reserved.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2456

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:26 am
Subject: Book Blurb: The Sustainability Handbook

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.smartgrowth.org/library/articles.asp?art=3079&res=1024

The Sustainability Handbook

The Sustainability Handbook: The Complete Management Guide to Achieving Social, Economic, and Environmental Responsibility from the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) covers the complexities, challenges, and benefits of sustainability as it is pursued by corporate, academic, government and non-profit organizations. It provides a blueprint on how organizations of all sizes can reach or exceed economic, social and environmental excellence. The handbook offers a wide variety of practical approaches and tools, including:

    * A model sustainability policy for organizations;
    * Summaries of sustainability codes and tips on how to select them;
    * Practical guidance on structuring the organization for sustainability and gaining support from management;
    * Overview of key sustainability trends and suggestions on how to use them in strategic planning; and
    * Extensive collection of sample metrics.

William Blackburn has worked in the area of corporate sustainability for several decades and is a popular lecturer on the topic. He successfully led sustainability initiatives within a major global corporation and continues to provide guidance on the topic to companies, universities, governments, standards bodies and non-profit firms around the world.

Read more or order online at the resource link below.

Resource: http://www.elistore.org/books_detail.asp?ID=11143

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2457

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:02 am
Subject: News: Global Shift In Energy Sources Needed

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/23/business/worldbusiness/23energy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Panel Urges Global Shift on Sources of Energy

By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Published: October 23, 2007

Energy experts convened by the world's scientific academies yesterday urged nations to shift swiftly away from coal and other fuels that are the main source of climate-warming greenhouse gases and to provide new energy options for the two billion people who still mostly cook in the dark on wood or dung fires.

In a report commissioned by the governments of China and Brazil, the 15 experts called for, at a minimum, a doubling of both public and private energy research budgets and a firm - and rising - price on emissions of greenhouse gases to encourage a shift in investments toward cleaner or more efficient technologies.

The report, "Lighting the Way - Toward a Sustainable Energy Future," was posted online at www.interacademycouncil.net by the InterAcademy Council, a group representing the world's 150 scientific and engineering academies.

Bruce M. Alberts, a former president of the United States National Academy of Sciences and a co-chairman of the InterAcademy Council, said the independent academies would now press the case for their proposals with their respective governments.

The 200-page report includes a host of recommendations for long-term research efforts, economic policies and initiatives in the private sector. Three points that it stressed as needing immediate attention from the world's major countries were:

�Increase the efficiency of fossil fuel use, in part by charging for carbon dioxide and other smokestack and tailpipe emissions that contribute to warming. Such fees would promote shifts away from heavily polluting energy options like inefficient power plants, the report said.

�Accelerate the development and testing of techniques to cheaply capture and store the billions of tons of carbon dioxide generated by burning coal and other fossil fuels. The panel said this was particularly important given that coal is expected to remain a dominant energy source for decades to come.

�Do more to refine and deploy systems to get energy from the sun and other renewable sources.

The report also called on the United Nations to undertake an objective and open examination of the issues surrounding nuclear power, from questions about security to waste disposal.

The report stressed the "moral, social and economic imperative" of providing power to the world's poorest people.

At all levels, the current path of energy development around the world is not sustainable, said Steven Chu, the co-chairman of the committee that produced the report and the Nobel laureate in physics who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Dr. Chu said that big gains in the efficiency of energy use were possible right now, but he also stressed the need for a sustained, ambitious research effort.

"Sustainable energy is the equivalent of the U.S. moon shot," Dr. Chu said. "If you look at the funding in the United States during Kennedy's era and followed by Lyndon Johnson, what the United States invested in the Apollo program, money of that magnitude, I am confident, would reveal a lot of breakthroughs in energy technologies, efficiency technologies and new forms of energy."

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

* * *

http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Energy_poses_major_21st_century_crisis_scientists_999.html

Energy poses major 21st century crisis: scientists

by Staff Writers
Paris (AFP) Oct 22, 2007

Energy poses one of the greatest threats facing humanity this century, the world's leading academies of science warned Monday, highlighting the peril of oil wars and climate change driven by addiction to fossil fuels.

Nations must provide power for the 1.6 billion people who live without electricity and wean themselves off energy sources that stoke global warming and geopolitical conflict, the scientists demanded.

"Making the transition to a sustainable energy future is one of the central challenges humankind faces in this century," they said.

Their report, "Lighting the Way: Toward A Sustainable Energy Future," is published by the InterAcademy Council, whose 15 members include the national science academies of the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Brazil, China and India.

It was authored by a 15-member panel whose co-chaired was 1997 Nobel Physics laureate Steven Chu of the United States.

"Overwhelming scientific evidence shows that current energy trends are unsustainable," the report said bluntly.

Its authors sounded a special alarm over the surge in the building of conventional coal-fired power plants in China and other developing countries, as such infrastructure will doubtless be entrenched for decades to come.

"The substantial expansion of coal capacity that is now under way around the world may pose the single greatest challenge to future efforts aimed at stabilising carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere," the report warned.

Managing the greenhouse-gas "footprint" of these plants while encouraging a conversion to carbon capture and storage (CCS) will be a mighty technological and economic challenge, it said.

CCS means piping off CO2 at a plant and then pumping it into geological chambers deep underground, such as disused oilfields, rather than releasing it into the atmosphere.

Many scientists view this pilot technology warily, waiting to be convinced that CCS is safe, for a chamber breach could have potentially catastrophic consequences for the climate system.

The report also appealed for a planet-wide drive in favour of energy efficiency to reduce carbon emissions.

And it spoke loudly in favour of renewable energy, describing its potential as "untapped" and offering "immense opportunities" for poor countries that are rich in sunlight and wind but poor in cash to buy oil and gas.

Nuclear power, as a low-carbon resource, "can continue to make a significant contribution to the world's energy portfolio in the future, but only if major concerns related to capital cost, safety and weapons proliferation are addressed," it cautioned.

Turning to biofuels, the scientist said that these sources hold "great promise", but only through a switch to second-generation sources.

At present, feedstocks such as sugar cane and corn are the main source for biofuels, which is having an effect on global food prices. A more promising, but as yet uncommercialised, goal is using lignocellulose stocks from timber chips and agricultural residues, which microbes digest into fuel.

Other dawning technologies, such as plug-in hybrid cars and hydrogen fuel cells for energy storage, can make an important niche contribution, the scientists said.

But they cautioned that the move to sustainable energy could only happen if nations work together to free up the necessary financial resources and expertise -- and setting a price for carbon to punish pollution and waste and reward clean energy was a key part of the mix.

A 2006 report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) suggested world oil consumption would rise by nearly 40 percent by 2030 as compared with 2005 levels, and CO2 emissions would increase by 50 percent over 2004 levels, under a "business-as-usual" scenario.

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2458

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:05 am
Subject: Feature: Greening of Manufacturing Seen to Boost Revenues

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ciscobiz23oct23,0,4532335.story

Leaning on green to bolster revenue
Many companies are turning to eco-friendlier production methods to attract customers.

Illustration Omitted:
FINDING A FIT: Lico Villalobos assembles a furniture piece at Cisco Bros. in L.A.(Ann Johansson/For The Times)

By David Colker, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 23, 2007

Francisco Pinedo started making furniture as a teenager in the 1970s to make a little green.

He succeeded far beyond his expectations: By 2002 his Cisco Bros. Corp. furniture company was making $18 million a year in sales and he was celebrated as a local success story. But sales have slid since then as far-less expensive furniture made in China has made major inroads.

So to hold on to his business and hopefully keep it in Los Angeles, Pinedo took a new tack. He went green.

In 2005 Cisco Bros. began producing a line of furniture that used only reclaimed or sustainable woods, organic textiles and natural padding materials. Even the detergent used to wash the fabrics is environmentally friendly.

He's not alone in looking to the environment to help out his business. Several local manufacturers have done the same as they searched for a way to stay in business -- and stay local -- in an increasingly competitive global market. The vast increase in attention to global warming and other environmental issues has given them a strong boost, especially in a region where it's hip to be green.

"I was always close to the environment," said Pinedo, 45, who grew up in a Mexican village so remote that there was no electricity. "It was out of a conviction that I wanted to do this. And then I realized it was also a great niche."

It certainly helps companies get noticed.

"The environment is in the news every day," said Frederic Scheer, chief executive of Cereplast Inc., a Hawthorne business that makes plastic resin from agricultural products instead of the usual fossil fuels.

"We are less than a drop in the bucket compared to companies like DuPont. But whenever something happens like Al Gore winning the Nobel Prize, it disturbs them and helps us. And that's happening more and more," Scheer said.

Some of these companies report that in just the last six months, they've seen consumer interest in their goods jump.

"The green people were always going to buy our products," said Steve Carwile, chief executive of Vivetique Sleep Systems in Arcadia, which makes mattresses, comforters and other bedding products from natural materials. "But now we are getting to the people on the edge."

Carwile, like Pinedo, first used conventional resources and techniques. His father began the mattress business in 1976 in their home's garage in Temple City, using petroleum-based foam. But industry veterans hired as the business expanded taught them how to make the cotton-filled mattresses that were popular in the pre-foam era.

Slowly, the nonfoam products were introduced into the product line, and by the time Steve and his brother assumed ownership of the company in 1998, the majority of their mattresses were made of natural materials.

Since then they've gone all green. And although the price of Vivetique's queen mattresses start at $1,200 and top out at $10,000 -- putting them solidly in the premium price range -- the business is steadily growing.

"The mattress industry is down across the nation because of the lapse in the housing market and the economy being a bit iffy," Carwile said. "But we keep growing about 20% a year."

In 2006, the company, which has 33 employees, had sales of about $4 million.

Scheer was green from the beginning. He founded Cereplast in 2001 and brought on board a group of scientists who developed a process that used starches made from corn, wheat, potatoes and other agricultural products to produce plastic resin. Normally, the resin is made from fossil fuels and is cheaper to produce.

But the surge in oil prices gave Cereplast a break.

"We were lucky," Scheer said.

Suddenly, the company's process made economic as well as environmental sense for some products. Its 2007 sales are expected to hit $1.5 million, more than double what it did in 2006.

Among Cereplast's biggest customers are companies such as Solo Cup, which uses the all-natural resin in making disposable plates, cups and cutlery.

The company also has developed a hybrid resin that is only about 50% from natural sources. It can be used to make sturdier and longer-lasting products such as cellphone cases or even automobile parts.

"An automobile is not something that is going to be driven into a compost heap when it is finished, anyway," Scheer said.

Cereplast plans to start building a second plant next year that will be outside California but still in the U.S. (Scheer declined to name the state.)

The company is only a tiny entity in the plastic world.

"We make about 45 million pounds of our resin product a year," he said. "That's compared to 250 billion pounds total made in the U.S., and worldwide, a trillion.

"But there are companies calling on us because they are trying to bring their image around to green."

Scott Brown's Anaheim company, Southern California BioFuel Inc., makes biodiesel fuel that can run in any vehicle equipped for diesel.

His source material is leftover oil from fast-food chains and other restaurants that he filters and refines.

Last year he produced a million gallons; this year it will be more than 3 million.

"I can't keep it in stock," said Brown, who sells about half the production to distributors and the other half to consumers who come to the pump at his plant. His fuel price is competitive with the typical cost of diesel in Southern California.

For some of these businesses, it's a race against time. They must survive until environmentalism is a big enough draw to fuel growth. And there is always the chance they could be pushed aside by larger companies getting into the green game, even if located an ocean away.

One thing the local companies have going for them is that they're local.

"People are becoming more aware that if they buy a green product, the benefits of that to the environment is diminished if it was made thousands and thousands of miles away," said Carolyn Allen, publisher of the online trade journal California Green Solutions. "Then the air is polluted by the transportation of it."

Still, Pinedo is in a particularly precarious position. A sofa that costs him $1,000 to make in L.A. could be produced in China for only about $250, he said, mostly because of labor costs.

"There is no way you can compete with that," he said. His wholesale business fell off as much as 50% from its peak years.

"If I had moved the business overseas right then, we would be a much bigger company today," he said.

The transition to green production was made on several levels. He switched to sustainable woods and natural fabrics for all his products.

Some pieces were made with only environmentally friendly materials, and Cisco Bros. customers were told that any item could be made all green on order.

But the majority of upholstered goods were still made with some man-made products. At the 80,000-square-foot factory in South Los Angeles, workers making cushions with undyed, natural wool were only a few feet way from those using foam.

Pinedo also moved into retail. He opened two stores -- one in Los Angeles on La Brea Avenue near other furniture and design shops and the other in Pasadena.

This was done in part to push his all-green products, which now make up about 30% of Cisco Bros. stores' sales.

"A year ago, people probably didn't know green furniture existed," he said. "Six months ago, it was still rare to get an order. Then people started to come into the stores very curious. Some of them come with the determination to buy these items."

Of course, there was a cost to opening the stores. And revenue, although not in free fall, is soft. Pinedo predicts that sales this year will be about $15 million, with about 15% of that attributable to all-green products. The current workforce is at 160, down from a high of 220.

"I just don't see how this can't work," Pinedo said. "We are making a well-designed product that is good for people. And we are letting people know we exist, selling our products directly."

david.colker@...

Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2459

From: Yahoo Group <vasishth@...>
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:09 am
Subject: News: Genetically Modified Organisms Benefit Toxic Cleanup Efforts

ashwanivasishth

Send Email

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3934

Genetically Modified Plants Aid Toxic Clean Ups

October 22, 2007
Reporting by Roddy Scheer

Scientists have altered the genetic makeup of poplar trees to better absorb toxins.
An article that appeared last week in the scientific journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences detailing how researchers have developed genetically modified plants that can absorb large amounts of man-made toxic pollutants, could have a profound impact on the way land managers deal with contaminated industrial sites in the U.S. and beyond.

At the University of Washington in Seattle, researchers successfully modified the genetic constitution of poplar trees so that stands of the trees were able to absorb 91 percent of the toxin trichloroethylene from a liquid solution and break it down into harmless byproducts. Natural poplar trees and other plants can only absorb as much as three percent of the toxin, the most common groundwater contaminant in the U.S. Besides taking on more of the pollutants, the genetically modified plants were able to process them 100 times faster than their natural counterparts.

"Our work is in the beginning stages, but it holds great promise," says Sharon Doty, lead researcher on the project for the University of Washington's forestry school. She adds that phytoremediation-the name scientists have given to the practice of using trees, grasses and other plants to remove hazardous materials-is "basically a solar-powered pollutant-removal system" that is 10 times cheaper than other technologies while being less intrusive and more aesthetically pleasing.

But despite the promise of faster and more complete toxic remediation, most environmentalists remain unconvinced that the benefits of genetic modification outweigh the risks. Introducing genetically modified species into the wild could lead to unintended consequences, with ripple effects throughout entire ecosystems and regions. Doty says her lab's research will probably be applied sparingly on carefully monitored government clean-up sites subject to regulation under 1980's omnibus Superfund law, which calls for the remediation of intensively polluted industrial sites across the U.S. She is pleased to have played a part in developing "a faster, less-expensive method to remove carcinogenic pollutants from the environment so they will no longer be ignored."

*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

Yahoo! Groups

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...

Messages