Crunchy Greenolas: Organic and Natural Personal Care Products

Crunchy Greenolas is my own personal review of new green stuff I’ve found- I’ve tried everything and these are the goods!

• Kimberly Sayer of London - Kimberly Sayer is the daughter of organic farmer in England. Her family used fruits, vegetables, flowers and herbs to create their own skin, body and home care items.  Using this knowledge, she went on to study aesthetics, aromatherapy and chemistry and then launched her own organic product line.  All Kimberly Sayer products are USDA certified organic.  I have been using the Hydrating Antioxidant Facial Mask, Gentle Almond and Lavender Face Scrub, Restore Anti-Aging Cream and Cellular Extract Eye Lift Gel for the past month and my skin has never felt better. In addition, my family and I have been using the Organic Family Sunblock SPF 25 and it appears to work great.  My 5-year-old says it stings his skin but he has severe excema.  It has been great for my 2 year old. Kimberly Sayer's products can be purchased at select Whole Foods Markets and via her website. 

• suki  - suki produces two lines of products, suki pure skin and sukicolor.   suki pure skin is a 100% pure and 90% organic skin and body line (lotions, moisturizers, cleansers, toners, and hair products) and sukicolor is a pure and organic makeup line. The company sources all of their ingredients from fair trade, organic, biodynamic processing and local suppliers whenever possible. The company takes into consideration fuel emissions, as well as certification, and transport when making its purchasing decisions. The ingredients are 100% natural, food grade (not cosmetic grade) ingredients so that the products are non-toxic and edible (not that you want to eat it!). In addition, suki uses only biodegradable ingredients that do not hurt animals or damage the ecosystem and no toxic ingredients such as petrochemicals, chemical fragrances and preservatives. All suki products are packaged in eco-friendly materials like recycled stock, printed with vegetable ink and b0ttled in glass containers. The company's website not only explains all the ingredients but also lists ingredients to avoid. Now I have not tried everything in the both product lines but what I did try I really liked. Products can be purchase directly from the suki website or search on the site for a retail location in your area. Products are pretty price but are worth it.

• Artisan Naturals -- Started by Stephanie Barron, the mother of a child with allergies to synthetic fragrance and colorants, Artisan Naturals, is free of mineral oils, parabens and synthetic ingredients.  The product line includes cleaners, toners, moisturizers, mask and various skin treatments. In addition the company makes massage oils, candles and handcrafted soaps. The products are not certified organic but are made with organic ingredients and are all at least 99% natural. Artisan Naturals line can be purchase at a few speciality stories in the US and Europe in addition to the web via the company's site. Green Luvin' readers can receive 20% off the entire product line for the month of August by using the promotion code GRN08.

• Rare2b  - All vegan, all natural, organic, 100% botanical, vegetal, marine ingredients from non-gmo sources, Rare2b products do not contain parabens, alcohol, peg & tea, synthetic chemicals, petroleum by-products, formaldehyde or formaldehyde donors and no animal by-products. All the ingredients come from sustainable fair trade sources in the Amazon Rain Forest to the South Australian Rain Forest, which the USDA permits in certified organic food. The products are certified organic by Eco-Cert, the Forest Stewardship Council with USDA Organic Certification, and Kosher by the Federation of Synagogues and approved by the Fair Trade Foundation. The line includes day and night cream, facial mask and body lotion and can be purchased on the Rare2b website.

• The Grapeseed Company -- Based in the Santa Barbara, California wine region, The Grapeseed Company produces eco-friendly bath & body products using expeller-pressed grape seed oil, a natural byproduct of the wine making process. According to the company, grape seed oil is rich in antioxidants and vitamins and helps fight free radical damage and signs of aging. The grape seed oils are naturally expeller-pressed instead of solvent extracted. All colors come from the natural ingredients; there are no artificial additives or filler ingredients and ingredients are sourced from local sources whenever possible. The entire ingredient list can be found on the website and all ingredients are between 70% to 90%+ organic. My husband has been using the organic shave and skin care line for men line called Mojito Man and loves it! I keep having him try out different organic shaving products and this is the first one that he has liked and plans on only using this product line from now on. The company also makes body scrubs, bath & massage oils, lotions, lip balms and candles. All products can be purchase via The Grapeseed Company's website.  Green Luvin' readers can receive 10% off the total order by using the code 10AGAIN at checkout. 

If you know of any Crunchy Greenolas that you would like me to review or just think are great, please let me know.

ENDoutdoor: New sustainable trail shoes for the green outdoor enthusiast

Many people think that when you live in the suburbs you are only surrounded by tiny plots of land with mowed lawns and white picket fences. Well that is not so. I am very fortunate to live within a half mile of a forest reserve of more than 2,000 acres of undeveloped land. Twice a week my friend and I take an 1-1.5 hour hike -- no matter the weather, no matter the season, we hike. We take her dog and we go.

So I was really excited when I was offered the opportunity to test out a new brand of high-performance eco-friendly trail shoes.  Now I've seen ec0-friendly clothing and everyday footwear. Never before have I seen green footwear for athletic and fitness needs -- think Nau for the outdoor fitness enthusiast. 

Launching August 1st, ENDoutdoor (END) is a new sustainability company that is focused on designing outdoor gear that performs well without all the "bells & whistles"- no pumps or air cushions that don't really do anything.  By keeping it simple, END reduces components, material and manufacturing waste. END's stated goal is to reduce waste up to 59% in the first season compared to the top rate trail running shoes.  

Their trail shoes are made from renewable, sustainable or recycled (RSR) materials wherever possible. The company's goal is to reach 100% use of RSR in the next 3-5 yrs.  END shoes are being manufactured in China. China, I know what you are thinking, however, the company made a conscious decision by going to China. They believe that China was the best choice because they want to be part of the solution by working closely with its manufacturer to make the process as eco-friendly as possible.  END is teaching Chinese manufacturers how to produce environmentally, not just low-cost.  The company hopes this focus spreads beyond just the producing of END's shoes.

One of the most interesting features of END' manufacturing process is that all materials used to make the shoes are sourced within 1 hour of the production factory cutting down on transportation pollution. Additionally, all wastes are recycled back into the shoes, and the shoes are shipped in lightweight containers, cutting down on use of fuel for shipping. Importantly, END shoeboxes are made of recycled and recyclable material. 

So how do they actually perform in the field? I love them. I have been hiking in the END Stumptown 12 oz running shoes (pictured above) that I am told are 35-59% reduction of material, rubber, foam, resins and glues when compared to the top five trail shoe by Outside Magazine in 2007. From the feel, they sure seem like it. They are comfortable, light and stable. No fancy colors or logos. I even went hiking the other day with my husband and we took a new route. We had to cross a river that we both fell in. My END sneaks dried out in the the sun in about an hour and my husbands Adidas Sambas (not the best hiking shoes) were still wet that night!

END believes that they are taking a look at the entire lifecycle of the shoes, making each step as eco-friendly as possible. I asked if the company will have a recycling program for spent shoes. What they told me is they hope to implement one at some point, but there is no timeline in place yet.

ENDoutdoor's first product line includes seven lightweight trail-inspired running-training shoes for both men and women ranging in price from $60 -$90. The shoes are available online at both REI.com and Zappos.com in addition to more than 70 specialty footwear retailers nationwide and in Canada starting August 1.

If you are in the market for a new pair of trail/running shoes, I recommend checking them out. I plan on getting another pair for myself and think I may even get a pair for my husband so he does not have to hike in his Sambas!  

Gardening in the Suburbs: Keeping it Local

My family and I are strong believers in eating locally and organically.  In the late fall, winter and early spring, we get food deliveries from a services called Door-to-Door Organics and in the late spring, summer and fall we are members of a local CSA called Asbury Village Farm.  

However, the most local you can get is to grow in your own yard. One of the things my husband and I were excited about when we moved to the suburbs 5 years ago was to have our own vegetable garden.  However, as it happened, the house we bought has a backyard that is totally wooded -- almost 85% shade. Not very promising for tomatos and other veggies that need full sun. We could grow them in our front yard but these fruits and vegetables would be great eats for the plentiful deer, rabbits and groundhogs that inhabit our neighborhood (makes two liberals want to go out and get a gun!)

So after living in our town for about a year, we were going to the local playground with our son. We parked right in front of a community garden. The gate was opened and we walked in to see approximately 70 or so -- 10 feet x 15 foot plots--  filled with gorgeous vegetables, berries and flowers.  Wow, so cool -- we had find out how we could get a plot of our own. A small sign at the gate gave the address of the garden club that ran this community garden. My husband wrote a letter telling our story and requesting a plot to tend. While we waited to hear back we talked to everyone and anyone to find out who we could call t0 speed and influence the decision making process. I tracked down the woman who ran the club and we called her. We were told that there was a long waitlist for the garden and that someone had to give up their plot to for us to get one -- but once you get one you can keep it for life!  So,  disappointed, we waited.

Then one spring the phone call came. There was a plot opening up and it was ours if we wanted it. The garden organizer warned us that it was next to a tree and was shaded, but the last person who tended it had pretty good success growing tomatoes and other veggies. We jumped at the chance to grow our own food. That was three years ago and this summer we were given a second plot, this one in full sun.  

Our growing season this year has been awesome and our gardens include tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchinis, peppers (a few variety), bok choy, broccoli, raspberries, beans, eggplant, asparagus, pumpkin, herbs, grapes and sunflowers.

What I think we like best about the entire experience, besides getting great tasting food, is how our children love it. They come to the garden and delight in how things are growing and graze on tomatoes, beans, raspberries and more. We believe that it is very important that our kids learn where their food comes from and how it gets to the table. We even took our 5 -year-old to our CSA farm to help weed, and he had a ball. He got meet the farmer and see the animals and taste the first heirloom tomato of the season. Bigger then a baseball, he ate the entire tomato like an apple (see photo above). Our kids will grow up knowing that food does not just come from the supermarket. They will understand from "farm to plate" not "store to plate." Hopefully this will encourage them to be both better eaters, and more adventurous ones too.

There was an article in the New York Times on July 22nd entitled "A Locally Grown Diet With Fuss but No Muss." It talked about how people are paying someone to come to their house to plant, take care of and harvest an organic garden or they have their personal chefs buy local. Now that is great that they are eating this way but isn't that just keeping them removed from their food? They are "locavores" in action but not emotion.  

We grow it ourselves, and hopefully you'll find a small plot to try this out yourself.  Our next step is to try and store what we grow to enjoy the "fruit of our labor" throughout the winter.  I have been reading How to Store Your Garden Produce by Piers Warren to learn all about it. 

What's your experience with growing your own food?  Any good suggestions for storing for the winter?

Crunchy Greenolas: Organic and Sustainable Clothing

• Tees For Change - "Sustainable tee on a mission, " this fun and inspiring t-shirt line is made from organic cotton and bamboo. Shirts are adorned with positive messages and affirmations such as "Today Matters" and "Live Mindfuly." The bamboo tees are so soft you will not want to take them off. The organic shirts are made in the USA and sustainable bamboo tees are made in Turkey without pesticides and are 100% biodegradable.  Tees for Change has partnered with American Forests' Global Releaf to plant a tree for every shirt purchase. Tees are $32.00 for men and women and tanks for women are $28.00 and can be purchased both online and in retail stores.

• Greenici by Gramicci -- Gramicci, the outdoor lifestyle apparel manufacturer based in California, has an environmentally friendly clothing line called Greenici. The sustainable products are made from hemp, certified organic cotton or recycled materials – or blends of each – and includes items for men and women such as polos, shorts, t-shirts, skirts and pants. The clothes are casual and fun. (See image on right of a Greenici short sleeve button down organic shirt.)  Gramicci believes (and so should all of us) that we need to "Start Somewhere" meaning taking that first step to becoming more aware of our impact on the earth and another step towards making change. The Greenici line is the company's step towards making a change in providing consumers with a choice for purchase sustainable clothing. Prices range from $22.50 to $80 and can be purchased on their website, other online outlets including The Hempest and via retail locations.   

• Oxygen Required  -- Oxygen Required is an eco-friendly lifestyle line for women.  The collections boast pieces made from bamboo and cotton. Bamboo fibers contain an agent that keeps bacteria from cultivating resulting in odor free clothing. The fabric is thermal regulating - keeping you warm in winter and cool in summer. The fibers are porous in nature - bamboo absorbs, evaporates, and wicks away moisture. Derived from tropical grass grown on family owned farms, none of the fiber comes from forests, and the resulting material is biodegradable.  Of equal importance, the clothes feel great and look great. To purchase check out their site for retail and online stores.  

If you know of any Crunchy Greenolas that you would like me to review or just think are great, please let me know.  

Sustainable wine: Wolffer Estates

This week my husband wanted to take a crack a writing.  It is a subject that he is very fond of so I have taken the editor role and he is the writer.  Hope you all enjoy.  

Ok, I love wine. There I said it. I love it, and have a glass just about every night of the week -- partially because one or two glasses of red is good for lowering my cholesterol and partially because I just love the taste, the warming feel it gives in my belly. I don’t know all that much about wine, but know what I like and what I don’t.

Now you may not know who I am, but I’m Melissa’s husband (and editor) so I’m just about as much a nut when it comes to environmental issues as she is. Just about, but I do leave the occasional light on, and I do let the shower run to long in the morning before I get in so I’m not perfect.

I was really excited when Melissa told me that we had been invited to Wolffer Estates in Sagaponack, NY (The Hamptons) for a private tour and interview with the head winemaker and general manager, Roman Roth. Long Island wines have had a pretty spotty reputation, but a few vineyards are known for a consistent and quality product, and Wolffer is one of them. So needless to say I was psyched; I’d get to taste some really nice wines, and talk with someone who is VERY knowledgeable about winemaking.

Until now, I thought my nightly wine drinking necessitated me breaking my environmental vows. But I discovered from our visit to Wolffer, the vineyard is not only known for their reputation for good wine but for their sustainable wine growing/making practices.

Wine making on Long Island has a relatively short history. On Long Island alone there are more than 43 vineyards (according to the Long Island Wine Council). These winemakers cover nearly 3,000 acres and produce upwards of 4,000 tons of grapes a year. So for a small area, Long Island produces a lot of wine, employs a lot of people, and generates a lot of revenue. The first commercial vineyard was planted in 1973, and Wolffer’s first vines were planted in 1987. Wolffer has two area’s planted, one covering 50 acres (which we visited) and another 20 planted on the North Fork of the island. The vineyard produces around 15,000 cases of wine a year. Wolffer is not the only sustainable vineyard on Long Island, there are 7 others, but it’s among the most vocal in touting its farming practices.

Now before I get to the wine, let me take a moment to explain what sustainable growing practices are or “Sustainable Agriculture”.  According to the University of California, Davis: “Sustainable agriculture integrates three main goals--environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity. Sustainability rests on the principle that we must meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Therefore, stewardship of both natural and human resources is of prime importance. Stewardship of human resources includes consideration of social responsibilities such as working and living conditions of laborers, the needs of rural communities, and consumer health and safety both in the present and the future. Stewardship of land and natural resources involves maintaining or enhancing this vital resource base for the long term.”

Why should you or I care if the wine we are drinking is grown sustainably? As a consumer, and someone who cares about environmental and health issues, we can make purchasing decisions that encourage the type of practices we all want to see used.

While the definition of sustainable agriculture is constant, the method varies from region to region, reflecting differences in soil and crop, climate and management styles. For the grape growers of New York State, it’s a process by which growers choose practices that are environmentally responsible while still maintaining the economic viability of the business. Some methods include efficient use of equipment, maintaining soil health and vine nutrition and managing vines for improved pest control.

Roman told us that Wolffer had not used any insecticides in eight years. This was both due to the fact that there hadn’t been any major outbreaks of bugs in the region and that the vineyard has made a decision to farm sustainably. Pests can kill a crop. Fungus can destroy both a crop and the vines themselves. To protect against fungus, Wolffer doesn’t use industrial fungicides, rather Roman sprays his vines with Stylet-Oil. “Stylet-Oil is a food grade, high purity mineral oil. It has had impurities removed through additional distillation steps involving high pressure and steam, leaving a tech white mineral oil-similar to Johnson's Baby Oil. Additional ingredients include emulsifying materials blended into the oil allowing it to mix with water,” according to Jeff Symons President of JMS Flower Farms (makers of Stylet-Oil).

While walking between the rows of Chardonnay grapes, Roman showed us the way the vines had been planted. Amazingly Wolffer had been designed to focus not on increasing yield, but rather increasing the viability of the overall vineyard. Every other season, Wolffer field-hands plant mustard and clover plants in between ever other row of vines to help mitigate pest. There are four acres of wildflowers planted to encourage bees to visit the vineyard to assist in pollination.

Well over the course of an hour talking with Roman we discussed Wolffer’s commitment to sustainable farming while sipping some truly nice and memorable wines.

We started off with the Wolffer Rosé from 2007. As we sat outside, on their covered patio, overlooking the vineyard, Melissa and I were treated to a very nice, crisp Rosé with just enough fruit to keep it honest. Neither of us expected to like this refreshing wine, as we both tend to like full-bodied reds to blended, chilled whites. But, it was hot, it had taken us nearly 2 hours (in Hamptons traffic) to get to Wolffer and this Rosé really took the bite off the heat.

I asked Roman if Wolffer had chosen to farm sustainably for economic or marketing reasons. Roman stated quickly that for Wollfer “…this is a decision made from a healthy vineyard perspective. This is the right approach to keeping a healthy vineyard, to keeping it alive with its own bio dynamic.” Roman explained that while it might cost a bit more to farm in this fashion, with a tunnel sprayer to collect the drippings from any sprayed fertilizer or stylet oil to keep fungus outbreaks down, that long-term it made better economic and environmental sense for Wolffer.

As Roman poured us our second glass of wine, a sparkling Brut Cuvee from 2004 the talk turned to whether or not Wolffer was an organic vineyard. Turns out it is not, but this might not be such a bad thing according to Roman, “By keeping very neat rows and open canopies we have less fungus pressure. We are not organic but, we try to do as much as possible. You have to work your way towards organic and sustainable farming. You can’t just do it over night…well you can, but you’ll make horrible wine, and that’s not in anyone’s best interest.” And in this instance the proof of this fact was in the tasting. This champagne-style wine was excellent – sharp, but not bitter, crisp with a bit of apple taste to it, and very drinkable. Continuing on the discussion of Wolffer’s organic goals, Roman told us it was a possibility but not a guarantee.

After a walk through the rows of vines we went back to the patio for our final glass of wine of the afternoon, a truly impressive Merlot from 2004. Now this was more to our tastes. The wine was bold for a Merlot, with a strong flavor of berries and a smoky, coffee flavor. As the final taste of the afternoon, we settled in to enjoy the sun, the view (Wolffer’s tasting room/patio is one of the most beautiful I’ve been in) and finish our conversation about the value of sustainable viticulture. Roth summarized the entire sustainable winemaking philosophy perfectly, “You have you to be a steward for all of this (the environment), this has to last for hundreds of years, and this sustainable movement is helping us both today, and tomorrow.”

If you are every in the Hamptons, I suggest stopping at Wolffer Estates tasting room. Sit on the patio looking at the beautiful vineyard while drinking some really good wine that has been produced in manner that is not only good for you but the environment.

Recycling Does A Milk Carton Good

I was reading a recent issue of National Geographic's The Green Guide (Spring 2008) and on the last page of the magazine was an image hundreds of milk cartons lining a street to demonstrate how much milk American's consume. The image was taken from National Geographic Channel documentary Human Footprint.  

According to the movie, America consumes 989,985,594,240 half gallons of milk over the course of a lifetime and it takes more than one trillion kilowatt-hours of energy to produce, ship and landfill the milk cartons.  That amount of energy emits 740,674,244 tons of greenhouse gases.  Amazingly, only a tiny fraction of the cartons are recycled.   

That got me thinking.  How many milk cartons does my household go through over a short period of time, say a week? More importantly, why are milk cartons not recycled? They are made of paper aren't they? Even more puzzling is the fact that on the side of some of the cartons I buy, it says "please recycle".  I want to, but my town will not take them. So I decided to do some research on how to recycle a milk carton, and why my town won't do it.  I thought the information would be readily available.  I was wrong.

Initially I was going to save my cartons for one week, assuming this would be plenty of time to get enough information to write on the subject. Well, do a "Google" search on "milk carton recycling" and you will basically come up with... nothing. Four weeks and 30 cartons later, I am finally writing about it. 

This is what I discovered...

Milk cartons ARE recyclable, however, according to an EPA report of MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) provided to me by the National Recycling Coalition, in 2006, 510,000 tons of milk cartons were generated in the United States and less than 0.05% (5,000 tons) were recycled.

In 2006, only a little more than 550 towns across the country recycled milk cartons (source: Organic Valley).  To put this into perspective, there are 556 municipalities in New Jersey. Doing a non-scientific search on the internet of various towns across the country, I discovered you cannot recycle milk cartons in San Diego, DC, the entire state of Pennslyvania, Los Angeles and Austin but you can in New York City and Boulder, CO.

But why?

According to Ed Skernolis, Policy and Program Director for the National Recycling Coalition, "Milk cartons, because of the wax lining, are not universally recycled. Each locality is different, depending on their recycling processing capability. Some communities may allow milk cartons to go into composting/food waste bins if offered."

Boulder, Colorado's Eco-Cycle is the most progressive recycling program in the country. They do recycle milk and juice cartons. Dan Matsch, Manager for the Center for Hard Recycle Materials, Eco-Cycle, said that milk cartons are very good source for recycled paper because the fiber are long, however, they have a plastic coating which sometimes makes it difficult to recycle.  According to Matsch, the main reason that many municipalities do not recycle milk/juice cartons is that they need to be rinsed out which rarely happens.  Once the cartons get to the recycling center they get bailed and shipped (usually by truck, then boat) and by the time they reach their destination for recycling they are "ripe" or partially composted.  

Boulder has dedicated significant resources towards education to teach the community and kids in school the importance of recycling.  The city has been involved in recycling education in the school system for 21 years!  Students are involved...they even have milk carton monitors to make sure that the leftover is poured out prior to placing in the recycling bin.  

Most milk cartons, such as those sold by Organic Valley, are made by Tetra Pak. Tetra Pak manufactures two types of cartons: gable-top and aseptic cartons. The first ones are the chilled cartons, mainly for milk and orange juice. The aseptic ones are used for a variety of food products and have shelf life of up to 12 months without the need of refrigeration or preservatives. They rely on three things: packaging material (six layers of protection), UHT (ultra high temperature) food processing and aseptic filling machines. UHT, or Ultra High Temperature treatment takes place in optimised heat exchangers before packaging. This process minimizes heat penetration problems and allows very short heating and cooling times, at the same time minimizing unwanted changes in the taste and nutritional properties of the product.

One of the biggest challenges with carton recycling is generating volume enough for the recycling chain to make a profit out of recycling cartons. According to Tetra Pak, as recycling is a business, all players are looking for sustainable business: from the recycling facilities to the tissue mills. Tetra Pak has been working with cities and schools across the country to increase milk and juice carton recycling.

Ok, all of this is good and well right?  But, it begs an important question, which is better, milk cartons or plastic ones?  According to Organic Valley, "Plastic is easier to recycle, but is oil based. Paperboard is made mostly of a renewable material paper." Matsch of Boulder's Eco-Cycle believes that "Tetra Pak beats the pants off anything in terms of carbon foodprint. Tetra Paks are very space efficient, using less square feet for shipping, however, they do need to be refrigerated."

Where does the recycled paper go?  To one of the biggest paper companies in the world, Weyerhaeuser. Weyerhaeuser is one of the largest pulp an paper company in the world. In addition, the company collects and recycles wastepaper, boxes, and newsprint to make new products. According to Pete Grogan, Manager of Market Development for Weyerhaeuser Recycling, "We [Weyerhaeuser] accept Tetra Pak and gable top containers (milk) for recycling. In our case, we produce recycled content newsprint from these materials in addition to using old newspapers and magazines as a feedstock."

Ok.  This is a ton of information to swallow. So lets take a quick moment to put it all into perspective. We all consume a ton of milk.  If you're a mom like me, you're practically swimming in the white stuff. If you're reading this you care deeply about both the environment and a healthy, sustainable lifestyle. And, after reading all this you're probably a bit confused on what to do.

Here's my conclusions:

(1) Paper cartons are WAY better than plastic.  They are healthier for your you and kids, and have a much smaller carbon footprint to produce and ship than plastic ones.

(2) Paper can be recycled, so each one of us needs to petition, lobby and work to get out towns and cities to recycle these cartons.  If we each do a little, we'll all add up to a lot of impact.

(3) Read more, learn more and educate more.  Every little bit helps, and my month-long odyssey to learn about this issue has taught me a great deal.  But I have a lot more to learn.  As I do, I'll let you all know.

WIRED Environmentalism

"Attention Environmentalists: Keep your SUVs. Forget organics. Go nuclear. Screw the spotted owl." Wow, if that is not an attention getting headline I don't know what is. Well that is what is stated on the cover of the June issue of WIRED magazine.  The headline continues "If you're serious about global warming only one thing matters: Cutting Carbon. That means facing some inconvenient truths."

So what is this all about? Yes our climate crisis is important but forget organics, drive an SUV... huh? According to WIRED magazine, "The war on greenhouse gasses is too important to be left to the environmentalist" and we need to push everything aside and just focus on our reducing our CO2 emission. Forget about everything else? Our health, cleaning up toxic areas, erosion, our culture and work only on global warming? 

This single minded way of looking at the environment is split up into "10 tenets" of what WIRED magazine calls "the new environmental apostasy."

Here's what WIRED says:

(1) Live in Cities.  WIRED posits that urban dwellers emit less greenhouse gases than those living in suburban sprawl.  Well this is true.  As reported by Reuters on May 30th in a story entitled Big US Carbon Footprint Lie East of the Mississippi,  "metropolitan areas, where people drive shorter distances and use less electricity in their homes, are greener. On average, an urban dweller's carbon footprint was 86 percent of a suburban or rural resident's." So we should all move to cities? Is this realistic? Cram everyone into NY, LA, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, and Denver? LA where you can only see the surrounding mountains when it rains and the smog settles? What about health issues? Also, "green" goes beyond just CO2 emissions. Cities can't sustain themselves. Central Park isn't a farm, and Staten Island isn't used as a giant diary. So yes, urban areas may emit less greenhouse gasses per person, but they are still massive heat islands, net consumers of food, oil and other things that are generated by the generation of CO2, NO2 and SO2.  

(2) A/C is OK.  According to WIRED it takes more energy to raise the thermostat in New England to 70 degrees when it is zero outside then it takes to lower the temperature in Phoenix to 70 degrees when it is 110 degrees outside. Therefore using the A/C emits less greenhouse gases in heating a house in winter. Well how about all the greenhouse gases emitted from shipping all the food that does not growing 110 degree weather to feed those people using the A/C or all the water that needs to be pumped into the swimming pools to cool down those sweating people in Arizona.  

(3) Organics are not the answer. WIRED magazine's argument here is organic dairies do not produce as much milk as industrial dailies.  Organically fed animals take longer to fatten up before going to market.  More time breathing means more time to burp, fart and poop emitting more greenhouse gases e.g. methane. Organic farmers do not produce as much produce per acre as industrial farmers.  Even so, organic farming has become big business delivering "wholesome" food to moms like me across many thousands of miles; think grapes from Chile or Strawberries from California. Well this is one that rips my heart out. Don't eat organic? Are they kidding? First, don't we need to be healthy and alive to save the environment? Organic produce and meats are significantly more nutritious than industrial foods. (To read more about the nutritional difference of organic over industrial produce read my past post "Another Point of the Organic Industry!") The pesticides and fertilizers that are used on industrial farms are ALL made out of fossil fuels, degrading the land and polluting the water from runoff. And the same trucks and planes that are hauling the organic foods are also hauling their industrial counterparts.  So organic or industrial? Go organic. Now I will agree with WIRED on one point.  Buy local.  But local industrial is worse than shipped organic. WIRED's reporters would have us eat the pesticide laden lettuces grown locally. Yuck! Not for me and my family.

(4) Farm the Forest. WIRED reports that 55 years is the age at which a tree's ability to absorb carbon begins to decline. Their solution -- cut down trees and plant new ones -- clear old trees and landfill the scraps. So now we need landfills for trees? Then they suggest planting seedlings and cut them down as soon as their CO2 absorption declines and make furniture. According to Alex Steffen of Editor of WorldChanging.com in his rebuttal article in WIRED, "Older trees can absorb CO2 for centuries after reaching maturity, while replanted forests can emit more CO2 than they sequester until the new trees are as much as 20 years old." He continues to say "Chopping down forest causes massive soil erosion and leads to desertification, making repeated plantings a dodgy prospect." Gosh, clear cutting just doesn't make that much sense does it? Old growth is still better than no growth.

(5) China is the solution. WIRED says it is the solution because China is producing 35% of the worlds photovoltaic factories (solar panels) and soon will produce inexpensive wind turbines--though there is currently more than a 3 year backlog of orders for wind turbines globally.  I would not say that this makes China the solution. With China's population at more than 1.3 billion and rising, they are more of the problem than the solution. China heats itself with coal, can't feed itself, and has become the fastest consumer of oil and other petroleum-based products in the world. Additionally, China (like the US) has not signed the Kyoto treaty, so they will pump the greenhouse gasses out as fast as they can. So they are the solution? Also, just between you and me, while I love solar and wind, neither are base-load solutions, and can only supplement coal, gas or nuclear plants (and yes I know all about geothermal, but there aren't enough resources to really make a difference.)

(6) Accept genetic engineering. WIRED believes that we need to look at Mosanto, Dupont and Syngenta as saviors who will feed the world- where's Bob Geldoff when you need him? They gleefully report that genetically engineered crops creates higher yields, and that they are the only hope for biofuels. WIRED's reporters even discuss genetically created meat -- lab-grown animal flesh--think Soylent Green--its people. (To read some of my rants on Monsanto  check my past post on milk labeling.) Are they kidding?  

(7) Carbon trading does not work. Now I cannot dispute or agree with this position. I have limited knowledge on this issue. According to WIRED magazine, the trading system put forth by the Kyoto Protocol will slow rising emissions by 6.5 days. That does not sound so good. They feel that a carbon tax would do a better job. To understand the difference between carbon trading and tax read "Carbon Taxes vs. Emissions Trading: What's the Difference, and Which is Better?" by Kevin Baumert posted on the Global Policy Forum. Also, check out Gar Lipow pieces on Grist called "Emission trading: A mixed record with plenty of failures, regulations work better."

(8) Embrace nuclear power. Well I am not sure I can embrace something that leaves us with a lot of radioactive waste. However,  nuclear power does emit a lot less carbon than coal as it is currently used but it is not zero--there is no zero carbon electricity generation. Uranium needs to be mined, refined and enriched; the power plant needs to be built and operated; each step uses fossil fuels, emitting greenhouse gases. The biggest issue for me is safety. A nuclear accident could do extreme harm to people and the environment -- killing thousands of people, injuring hundreds of thousand and contaminating a very larger area of land. Is that worth it? I say no, my husband says yes. 

(9) Used cars not hybrids. A company called CNW Marketing Research Inc. released a study titled Dust to Dust Energy Report which analyzed data on the "energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrap." Based on the results of this report, which used data points from 2005 and earlier including setting oil at a maximum of $80 per barrel and gas at $3.00 per gallon (a worse case scenario they say), WIRED suggests that we purchased a used car and that a hybrid such as a Prius has a larger carbon footprint than a Hummer.  From concept to road, CNW discovered that because of the nickel hybrid battery of hybrids the complete carbon footprint is higher than a Hummer. To get the full gist of the study you have to read it but what WIRED is suggesting is purchase a used car that the first owner already paid off the carbon debt such as a 1994 GeoMetro XFi -- what they say is the most fuel efficient car there is. However, I do not think I would put my kids in a car that has no airbags with all those "green" Hummers on the road.  By the way, I not sure how this all applies in 2008 when oil is at $140 a barrel and gas is as high as $4.40 in some places.  

(10) Prepare for the worst. So WIRED says some type of climate change is going to happen and I agree with them. We are already seeing it around the world.  But this just means we have to get with the program and stop delaying the necessary steps needed. We have been talking about this for years and we still see delays. The auto industry should be forced to build more fuel efficient cars. Heavy manufacturing industries need to be forced to reduce carbon. Utilities need to invest in new energy sources. Ethanol subsidies need to end. There is so much that must be done.  

Does that mean I need to buy more bikini's to prepare? Not sure what WIRED wants us to do.

What do you think? What are you doing?