It could be because I am a vegetarian that it is easy for me to look at articles like the one I am about to share and feel a rush of narcissicistic vindication. Or it could be because I am currently entrenched in Jonathan Safran Foer’s new book titled Eating Animals (which currently makes me feel like never eating anything ever again – only because I am reading a chapter about turkeys which makes me feel a little ill).  In any case, this article jumped out at me today and I felt inclined to share it.

The title of this L.A. Times article caught me first: “FDA urged to ban feeding of chicken feces to cattle”.  I thought, GROSS!  So I decided to read the article and see why chicken feces were being fed to cattle in the first place and what the two sides of this particular arguement were. 

Essentially, cows are being fed 1 to 2 million tons per year of something called “poulty litter” which the artcle describes as a compound consisting of “feces, spilled chicken feed, feathers and poultry farm detritus”.  One person in the article states that this is a tradition that goes way back in the feeding of farm animals.  That anything that hits the ground “was fair game”.  Okey dokey.  I think most toddlers feel the same way. 

Representatives from groups like Consumers Union and Food Animal Concerns Trust, and – surpise – McDonalds (!) are saying that feeding cattle this poultry litter can cause increased infections and lead to problems like mad cow disease.

Other groups like the National Cattleman’s Beef Assn. argue that science does not prove these charges and that a ban on poultry litter is not required.

Here is the current status of regulations as defined in the article:  “Generally, the FDA has left the decision on whether to feed cattle poultry litter up to state regulators. California allows the practice with one exception: Poultry litter is banned in feed for lactating dairy cows.”

So, here’s the article for your perusal.  If you are like me, you may feel a little creeped out, or you may feel like my omnivorous co-worker who informed me that she she just chooses not to think about it.

Here’s a little Halloween goodness from us here at Eco-Monkeys (and the intrepid basset hound, Chloe)! This little video was put together while one of us was supposed to be working (Shhhhhh!) We hope that everyone has a fun weekend and a safe holiday and we’ll continue posting again on Monday.

I heard this neat little story on NPR the other day and couldn’t help but wonder why somebody had not thought of this sooner!

In a nutshell, San Francisco has mandated that everyone start composting their waste. This is really remarkable because many city recycling programs only apply to people in houses. San Francisco’s new law, however, also applies to people who live in apartments, businesses, and restaraunts!

Residents have received food recycling bins into which they will put their food waste. The bins will then be sealed, collected by the city, and the food will be turned into compost and sold back to community members.

So it’s going to…

1. Cut down on waste being sent to the landfill

2. Motivate residents to become more active in protecting their environment

3. Create revenue for the city

4. And create jobs

What’s not to love? I am very excited to hear about this project and will be following it closely as I have no doubt that other cities will soon be adopting these practices should they prove successful.

Click here to read (or listen) to the article as it was presented on NPR

The International Day of Climate Action occured on October 24, 2009.  There were over 5,200 demonstrations in 181 countries.  Instead of writing anything about it, I thought I would post some of the pictures (out of 15,000 posted on their flickr site) that made the biggest impression on me.   For more information, please visit 350.org:

Ciudad de Mexico,

Rainbow Lake, NY, US

Poppy (11) and Jarrah (9) snorkel with a 350 sign at the Great Barrier Reef, Australia.

Youth in the Democratic Republic of the Congo form a 350.org sign in preparation for the October 24 International Day of Climate Action.

Students in the Dominican Republic form a 350 and circle.

The power of one at Ishtar Gate in Babylon, Iraq.

Women in Bangladesh

I recently moved to a new neighborhood were there are hordes of children running the streets. Little darlings each and every one(though I’m pretty sure one of them stole my “Vegetarians Taste Better” magnetic bumper sticker). I haven’t had to worry about giving out Halloween candy before and I want to be sure that the candy I give out sends a message! An Eco-Message! I’ve been searching for the perfect candies to give out this year and it is not easy. There are a ton of options out there, but I am a monkey on a budget and I also understand the need for individually-wrapped treats. So here are my top picks of the more affordable choices:

Natural Candy Store - This store has everything from gummi candies to fair trade milk chocolate balls decorated for Halloween. Items here can be more expensive, but there are some candies that aren’t so pricey. For example, you can get about 35 green apple organic lollipops for $6.49. More expensive than safety suckers, I know, but I believe that it’s worth it. They do also have a bulk candy section that may be more in your price range.

Yummy Earth Organic Lollipops – Straight from the website: “Everything YummyEarth makes is USDA and EU certified organic, gluten-free, peanut-free and tree nut-free, and has no type of corn syrup, just fabulous award winning taste!” They are pretty affordable too. You can get a family pack of 60 lollipops for about $8. (*On a side note, I found these at Whole Foods the other day. You can buy them in bulk for $6.99 a pound or for $4.99 for a family pack – the pomegranate pucker is my current favorite!)

Green Halloween – This site has some great ideas of what to give out INSTEAD of candy. If you really want to give out candy, however, they also have some neat suggestions(some are expensive though!).

Fruitabu – I couldn’t help listing these guys. I love this stuff. Where I buy it, it can be fairly expensive, so I went looking to see if I could discover a cheaper way of getting this organic “Smooshed” fruit. Think fruit roll-up, but awesomer. They have fruit flats, fruit rolls, and fruit leathers. Some stores sell them for as much as $.75 a piece, but on their website, you can buy the fruit flats for $15.00 for 30, so there’s a little savings there. I hear that you can also get them cheaper at places like Costco if you have a membership.

Equal Exchange Mini Chocolates – This can also be a little pricey, but you get quite a bit for your money. This Co-op offers fair trade dark chocolate mini bars at $30 for 150 bars. If you search around the web a bit, you might be able to find them cheaper, but this price was taken directly from their site.

There are lots of other choices out there, but most I’ve found are either too expensive for my budget, or they don’t come in packaging that lends itself to handing out the treat to trick-or-treaters. I think one of the best options is to go to whatever store in your town sells the most eco-friendly stuff and see if they have a good offering for Halloween. You will probably be able to find some cheaper choices that way, but these websites will at least get you headed in the right direction!

Looking for ways to save energy in your home and get a little workout at the same time?  I give you the Pedal-A-Watt Stationary Bike Power Generator.  According to this company’s website, this little gadget hooks up to your existing bike and as you begin to pedal, it can either power a device or store energy in a battery to be used later.  You can also use it with whatever type of bike you own – either street bikes or mountain bikes will work – and it doesn’t have to stay permanently hooked up.  You can remove the bike at any time and take it out on the road or trail.  The website claims that the average pedaler will create between 125 – 200 watts of energy and here is the list of Power Consumption of Typical Appliances from the EcoConvergence website:

Small TV                             100 watts
Large TV                             200 watts
Laptop PC                             10 watts
Desktop PC                           75 watts
Stereo                                    20 watts
Charging a cellphone            5 watts
Hi Effic Desk lamp                15 watts

Even though you will only be able to create enough energy to power small objects (unless you are really hardcore!) it’s nice to know that all this energy is clean energy and that there will have been no pollution created in the process.  For a lot more information and a good FAQs page, check out the website and see what you think!

Convergence Tech, Inc.

Global Warming is a phenomenon that is occurring as a result of an excess certain gases being present in the earth’s atmosphere.  These gases, known as greenhouse gases, trap the sun’s heat on the earth’s surface.  Normally, this is a good thing – it is called the greenhouse effect.  However with humans releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a much faster rate than would occur naturally, the earth’s atmosphere is becoming overloaded.  This is resulting in a warmer planet with much less stable climate.

Here is a little illumination from a well-written greenhouse effect/global warming lesson plan from Teacher’s Domain:

“To put this into perspective, consider the temperature difference between now and the last ice age (about twenty thousand years ago): nine degrees Fahrenheit. If the IPCC’s [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] predictions hold, that same temperature change will happen within the next one hundred to three hundred years. Natural cycles of warming and cooling usually take tens of thousands of years, not hundreds. So what’s going on?”

Environmental Protection Agency

Activities that contribute to the more rapid accumulation of these gases in the atmosphere include the burning of fossil fuels, the use of man-made compounds such as sulfur hydroxide and hydrofluorocarbons in industrial processes, and agressive livestock production.

Earth has a natural check and balance system to deal with greenhouse gases; plants and oceans can act as sinks to absorb many greenhouse gases.  However, these systems are not able to absorb all of the excess gases and the situation is getting worse.  Trees are being cut down at an incredible rate and due to the melting of places like the Artic tundra, greenhouse gases that have long been sequestered are now being released into the atmosphere.

Here is a nifty little video that explains everything much better than myself from the folks at National Geographic:

If you want even more information, here is a video of a lecture from the University of California. It is an hour long, but good:

David de Rothschild (yes he is a real Rothschild whom 7X7 magazine has termed an “Eco-Hunk”) is the founder of a group called Adventure Ecology. His latest venture is to create a boat using 12,000 plastic bottles. He even gave it its own interactive website where you can click on different parts of the boat to learn more about it!

The goal of the Plastiki Expedeition as stated on their website: “A handpicked crew of adventurers, scientists and creatives are to sail across the Pacific on the ‘Plastiki’ – a 60-foot catamaran mad from reclaimed plastic bottles. Their mission is to beat waste by inspiring sustainable solutions and to highlight the ecological damage being done to the world’s oceans.”

Very cool! And I will admit, he is pretty cute in an ‘eco-hunk’ kind of way. Here is a video:

I recently read plans for an “Eco Hotel” that is to be built in my area and I decided to do some research.  The term “Eco Hotel” seems pretty vague to me.  It turns out that it is!  There do not appear to be any standards in place for that a hotel needs to follow in order to be able to declare itself an “Eco Hotel”.  However, there are some standards you can use to judge if a hotel that advertises itself as “green” or “eco” really is.

U.S. Green Building Council has a certification process called The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System.  This is a very complicated system, but lets just say that it mainly consists of a checklist that developers and builders have to follow while they are building and requirments that the building has to meet once it is finished.  I waded through some of it and it includes categories for alternative transportation, erosion and sediment control, reduced site disturbance, water-efficient landscaping, and the use of rapidly renewable materials.  If you’d like to delve into it all, check out the LEEDS website.  Although this system is not only used for hotels, knowing that your hotel has been certified through this process is a great piece of information to have when researching the hotel you’d like to stay in.

Be careful to do your own research!  There is also a group called the Green Hotels Association.  As far as I can tell from reading their membership application, you don’t actually have to prove anything to be a member of this group.  So just because a hotel claims to be a member of this association, doesn’t mean that they actually do anything special to be “green”, although membership does give them access to special prices on green building materials and hotel supplies.

In short, my recommendation is to do your own research.  It’s easy to be attracted by the terms “green” and “eco-friendly” and business like hotels know that!  Somewhere in the back of your mind also remember the term “greenwash”.  Hotels that are setting standards for sustainability and recycling are going to want to brag about it, so check out the website for the hotel you want to visit.  If they say they are a member of an organization or certified by a certain group, be sure to visit that organization’s website and see what their criteria are.  The hotel you stay in can be an important part of any trip or vacation so if you can, take it one step farther and find a place to stay that promotes sustainability and a cleaner environment.

“Greenhouse gas” is a term for gases in Earth’s atmosphere that trap energy from the sun.  Greenhouse gases can  be divided into two categories: those that occur naturally, and those that humans have introduced into the atmosphere.

Naturally Occurring Greenhouse Gases:

• Carbon Dioxide(CO2) – produced naturally by any organism or microorganism that utilizes plant matter as part of their diet.  It is also consumed by plants during respiration.  It can also be released into the atmosphere during several chemical processes such as the combustion of coal and other fossil fuels.

• Methane(CH4) – a gas that exists, among other places, in deposits in the ocean floors and under the earth’s crust.  It also is produced in the metabolism process during the decay of organic matter.

• Nitrous Oxide(N2O) – a chemical compound also know as happy gas(!).  According to the EPA, it is produced naturally “from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests”.  It is also introduced unnaturally through fertilizers and sewage treatment.
  

  An Alder leaf showing ozone discoloration

• Ozone(O3) – Ozone exists naturally in the ozone layer in Earth’s atmosphere.  It helps filters ultraviolet light from reaching the surface.  However, at ground level it can be a harmful pollutant and affect respiratory function.  It is often used as an oxidizing agent in chemical reactions.

• Water Vapor – Water vapor is simply the gas phase of water.

Introduced Greenhouse Gases

• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) – chemical compounds known as haloalkanes often used as a refrigerant.  According to this article from the Environmental Investigation Agency: “HFCs are “super” greenhouse gases, with global warming impacts hundreds to thousands of times higher than CO2″

• Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) – A manmade gas that is used mostly in the electrical industry.

Other sources:

National Polutant Inventory – Fluoride and compounds fact sheet

EPA – Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Greenhouse Gas Online

In keeping with the recent posts on the International Day of Climate Action, I thought it was important to talk about what attention this issue is receiving in the media apart from the actions of the activists.  On October 6, 2009, and article was posted in the Washington Post called New Report Details Costs of Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions which discusses a report put out by a group called Economics for Equity and the Environment (E3).

This group of scientists is saying that the world’s carbon emissions are currently at 387 parts per million and that we need to go back down to 350 in order to avoid global disaster (i.e. – floods, droughts…oh wait, aren’t we already experiencing those at record levels?!).  I’m certainly no climatologist, but I’m in agreement that change needs to happen, and that it needs to happen sooner than later.  Here are some highlights selected by yours truly from the report:

“This report demonstrates that the ‘go slow’ recommendations are unjustified. A number of economic analyses, informed by recent scientific findings and using reasonable assumptions, suggest that more ambitious targets and quicker action make good economic sense.”

“In an important recent paper, Hansen and numerous co-authors reach two key conclusions: first, the global average temperature may be much more sensitive to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than is commonly believed; second, to avoid dangerous climate change, we may need to reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere from today’s 385 ppm to 350 ppm CO2 by 2100, if not sooner.”

“Hansen and his co-authors describe a detailed scenario for reducing greenhouse gas emissions with the goal of
reaching 350 ppm CO2 by 2100:
• Coal burning is phased out or achieves 100 percent carbon capture by 2030.
• Oil and gas prices rise steadily as these finite resources approach exhaustion.
• A combination of ending deforestation and initiating large-scale reforestation causes significant
negative emissions (that is, a withdrawal of CO2 from the atmosphere).”

“The most important conclusion involves what we did not find. There are no reasonable studies that say that a 350 ppm stabilization target will destroy the economy; there are no studies that claim that it is desirable to wait before taking action on climate protection. On the contrary, there is strong, widespread endorsement for policies
to promote energy conservation, development of new energy technologies, and price incentives and other economic measures that will redirect the world economy onto a low-carbon path to sustainability.”

If you’d like to read the full text of the report, visit Economics for Equity and the Environment

One disturbing thing was this statement put out by Robert J. Shapiro, chairman of the U.S. Climate Task Force(I took this from the Washington Post article, by the way-see link above):

“The only prospect of reaching 350 is if we came to develop a technology that would pull greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere — that is, pull the concentrations out of the atmosphere,” Shapiro said. “That is probably impossible without a technology that we can only conceive of today.”

Such negativity!  You know if we were under direct threat from a foreign country with better technology we wouldn’t sit around whining about how we can’t conceive of the technology to beat them.   We’d get off our butts and figure it out!  It’s just a matter of throwing the money at the right people.  And besides, what he said isn’t exactly true.  There are several technologies in the works to pull greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere – technologies beyond the mere realm of comprehension: read about biochar, carbon-negative cement, and oh, let’s see….we could plant some trees!  I know these answers aren’t definitive, but let’s not pretend like this is a hopeless case!

Yesterday I wrote a post regarding the efforts of 350.org, a group dedicated to promoting awareness of the climate change that is occurring globally as a result of carbon emissions exceeding 350 parts per million.

The International Day of Climate Action is intended as a grassroots movement to bring awareness to this issue because there is a big conference in Copenhagen in December.  The has been talk that the participants will consider setting the accepted limit at 450 parts per million rather than trying to contain the damage that has already been done.

Austin is part of this movement – how could it not be? – and the local group, austin350.org, is planning their event for October 24.  According to their website, the austin350 members will be participating in an “unconference” on sustainability.  Location is yet to be announced.  The week before the International Day of Climate Action, they are asking for people to participate in some form of alternative transportation at least once.

So take a moment and see what you can do to be involved!

And just because I like the videos…

“If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that.” ~ James Hansen

I came across this in my internet perusing and I don’t think I can really summarize it in a way that does it justice, so instead I am going to post the opening letter directly from 350.org and encourage you to visit their website.

Dear World—This is an invitation to build a movement—to take one day and use it to stop the climate crisis.

We are a group of people from around the planet—young and old, scientists and writers and activists—who have one thing in common. We know the most important number on earth: 350. And we know how to use that number to finally get global action on the worst crisis humans have ever faced. But we can only do it if you help.

A year ago, our greatest climatologist—NASA’s James Hansen—and his team produced a landmark series of studies. They showed that if we let the amount of carbon in the atmosphere top 350 parts per million, we can’t have a planet “similar to the one on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted.”

The bad news is we’re already past that number—we’re at 390 parts per million, which is why the Arctic is melting, why drought is spreading across the planet, why people are already dying from diseases like dengue fever and malaria occurring in places where they’ve never been seen before.

The good news: that number gives us a target to aim for. When the world’s leaders meet in Copenhagen in December to reach agreement on a new climate treaty, we need them to go farther than they’ve planned to go: we need to make sure they’ll pay attention to the latest science and put forward a plan that gets us back to safety.

So here’s the plan. On October 24, we need you to organize an action in the place where you live, something that will make that most important number visible to everyone. People in more than 1000 communities around the globe have already announced plans—they’ll be school children planting 350 trees in Bangledesh, scientists hanging banners saying 350 on the statues on Easter Island, 350 scuba divers diving underwater at the Great Barrier Reef, and a thousand more creative actions like these. At each event, people will gather for a big group photo that somehow depicts 350–and upload that photo to the web 350.org. As actions take place around the world, we’ll link all the pictures together electronically via the web–by the end of the day, we’ll have a powerful visual petition linking together the entire planet that we can deliver to the media and world leaders.

So far more than 100 nations are taking part—it’s shaping up to be to be the biggest day of grassroots action on global warming ever. But we need it to be much larger—we need you, in your village or town or city, to take part. It’s not hard—we can help you with materials and ideas. But you need to take the first step, by registering an action and starting to let your friends and neighbors know about it.

Involve groups that you’re in—everything from your church, mosque or synagogue to your local bicycle group. People want to help, especially if they see the chance for something that might actually matter. This is even more important than changing your lightbulb—this is your chance to help change the way the whole world operates. October 24 comes six weeks before those crucial UN meetings in Copenhagen. It’s a great chance to take a stand—maybe the last great chance, given what the scientists tell us about the momentum of global warming.

But it can only happen with the help of a global movement—and it’s starting to bubble up everywhere. Farmers in Cameroon, students in China, even World Cup skiers have already helped spread the word about 350. Churches have rung their bells 350 times; Buddhist monks have formed a huge 350 with their bodies against the backdrop of Himalayas. 350 translates across every boundary of language and culture. It’s clear and direct, cutting through the static and laying down a firm scientific line.

This is like a final exam for human beings. Can we muster the courage, the commitment, and the creativity to set this earth on a steady course before it’s too late? October 24 will be the joyful, powerful day when we prove it’s possible.

Please join us and register your local action today.

Onwards,
Bill McKibben – Author and Activist- USA Vandana Shiva – Physicist, Activist, Author – India David Suzuki – Scientist, Author, Activist – Canada Bianca Jagger – Chair of the World Future Council – UK Tim Flannery – Scientist, Author, Explorer -Australia Bittu Sahgal – Editor of Sanctuary magazine – India Andrew Simmons – Environmental Advocate, St. Vincent & The Grenadines Christine Loh – Environmental Advocate and Legislator – Hong Kong

P.S.—We need you to do something else, right away, that’s pretty easy. Please forward this message to anyone you know who is even remotely appropriate.

This website has everything from factsheets to stencils and art projects.  They are asking for people to take a picture of whatever they decide to do and share it with the global community.  Eco-Monkeys will be sure to take part in this event and take our picture.  I’m not quite sure what we will do yet – it may be something as simple as riding our bikes or taking a hike and spending the day appreciating nature and contemplating our role in protecting the environment.

Here is a 350 slideshow:

Even if you are not an activist with an army of followers, please take some time to think about the peril our planet is in and what you can do to make your world a better place.

What is a Conflict Diamond?

Conflict diamonds, also known as Blood Diamonds, result when a gemstone is mined and sold in order to fund a war or insurgency.  The United Nations defines it thusly:  “Conflict diamonds are diamonds that originate from areas controlled by forces or factions opposed to legitimate and internationally recognized governments, and are used to fund military action in opposition to those governments, or in contravention of the decisions of the Security Council.

Where do Conflict Diamonds Come From?

Conflict diamonds have been sold from the following countries: Angola, Democratic Republic of congo, Liberia, Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, and the Ivory Coast.  Each of these countries experience some type of civil war – almost all of which occured during the 90s – and some group involved in the conflict used conflict diamonds to fund their actions.  You can read the details about each of these countries wars, how it involved diamonds, and what is going on today at DiamondFacts.org.

Workers in Sierra Leone

How Can I Make Sure that My Diamond is Conflict Free?

The Kimberley Process is an initiative that countries can join to get their diamonds certified as conflict free.  Countries that join the Kimberley Process have to prove that their diamonds are conflict free, and they also have to promise not to purchase and distribute conflict diamonds.  According to the Kimberley Process website, as of November 2008, there were 49 members of this group representing 75 countries.  This process has drastically reduced the amount of conflict diamonds being sold.  Their website claims: “KP members account for approximately 99.8% of the global production of rough diamonds”.

There is also a process called the System of Warranties (which is endorsed by the Kimberley Process) under which all buyers and sellers of rough diamonds have to make the following statement on their invoices:

“The diamonds herein invoiced have been purchased from legitimate sources not involved in funding conflict and in compliance with United Nations Resolutions. The undersigned hereby guarantees that these diamonds are conflict free, based on personal knowledge and/or written guarantees provided by the supplier of these diamonds.”

Because the Kimberley Process works with countries and not individual jewelers,  it is important to ask the business from which you intend to purchase diamond jewlery about their stance regarding conflict free diamonds.  Also be sure to ask about the System of Warranties.

Websites with More Information:

Kimberley Process

DiamondFacts.Org

United Nations – Conflict Diamonds

ConflictDiamonds.com

Picture from http://www.simondale.net/house/index.htm

Josh sent this website to me the other day and I am shamelessly posting it because it is cool.

Here is a fellow in Wales who wanted to build a low-impact house for his family to live in.  According to his website, he built it in about four months for a cost of 3000 pounds.  His house is extremely eco-friendly with everything from a fridge cooled by air coming from the underground foundations to a compost toilet.  There are pictures of how he did it as well as tips for people who just want to reduce their impact but can’t build their own house.  Check it out!

Interview with Simon Dale(the builder) on Future Ethics:

Many people are now familiar with the term conflict-free when purchasing gemstones.  A conflict diamond is one that is mined and sold in order to finance rebellions and wars.  Seeking out gemstones that are certified as conflict-free is a good step, but we very rarely see jewelry incorporating gemstones and metals that are eco-friendly.  Until now!

I came across this site randomly – quite randomly as I do not often wear jewelry, and the only ‘quality’ pieces I own have either been bought for me by grandparents or handed down through the generations.  However if I were in the market for the fancy stuff, I would check out a store like Brilliant Earth.

Not only do they certify that all of their gemstones are conflict free, they also employ fair trade practices to compensate the diggers of the gemstones that they purchase and they donate 5% of their profits to help communities that have suffered from unethical practices in the jewelry industry.

Brilliant Earth is also eco-friendly in the sense that they use recycled metals in their jewelry.  I had never heard of a jewelry store using recycled metals but luckily this company believes in educating the public about the hazards of ore mining and had plenty of information on their website for me to read.  According to their website, they give store credit for people’s old jewelry and they also get their metals from “industrial-use metals and electronics components”.  They claim that their re-refinement process puts these metals in the same state as those that are newly mined, and thusly there is no degredation.

So far so good.  But wait, it gets better!  They also employ practices in their production process to prevent contaminants from being released into the atmosphere and have relationships with companies that use environmentally responsible practices.

I have never personally seen their jewelry and I don’t have any sort of contact with the people who run this site.  It’s just nice to see a company that  is respectful not only of the environment but also of the people who help gather the materials for their product.  I encourage anyone to check out this website and least read about the damage that can be caused to the environment through jewelry production.  Hopefully, we can try to make eco-friendly decisions concerning ALL our purchases and companies like Brilliant Earth make it just a little bit easier.

Here are a few other sites you might want to check out:

greenKarat – Jewelry company located in Houston, Texas

Sustainable Jewelry – A sustainable jewelry blog with LOTS of information

Green Jewelry – A guide to buying environmentally friendly and eco-friendly jewelry

Here is an educational video on Africa’s Conflict Diamonds:

Several friends have asked me how Project Plarn is going, so I thought I would do a quick update even though it is not finished.

Currently, I only have the bottom of the bag done as well as one row that will eventually be part of the sides.  Josh asked me to keep track of how long it has taken me to get this far so here is the count:

Folding and cutting up the plastic bags: 2 hours

Creating the Ball of Plarn: 2 hours

Crocheting the bottom of the bag: 3 hours (this is because I restarted several times until I got the hang of working with plastic)

TOTAL: 7 hours

I think that this time would be reduced on future bags.  It took me a little while to develop an efficient method of cutting the plastic bags as well as a method of putting the plastic loops together to form the actual Plarn.  I also had trouble working with the plastic at first.  Regular yarn does not have too much give, but if you pull too hard on the plastic strips, they stretch and become thinner.  So, it took quite a while to discern the right amount of pressure to use while working with the plarn.

Job, scuba lessons, and moutain bike scouting withstanding, I should be able to find some time this week to continue working on this project and will hopefully be able to finish soon so that I can take it to the grocery store and see what happens!

If you want to see my original post, check it out

Currently Austin is undergoing one of the worst droughts in over 100 years!  We are under water restrictions at the moment that are designed to reduce the city’s water usage by 25%, but the Lower Colorado River Authority is considering implementing even stricter regulations.  Besides following the city’s guidelines, there are many ways that people can reduce their water use without much effort.  These may seem like common sense,  but it never hurts to hear them again.  Here are a few ideas:

1.  Only run the dishwasher when it is full.  Scraping food off dishes is okay, but it is not necessary to use extra water to rinse your dishes off before putting them in the washer.

2.  If you would rather wash your dishes by hand, then don’t leave the water on during this process.  Instead, fill one side of the sink up with wash water, and the other with rinse water.

3.  Use mulch around your plants.  This is especially needed in Texas where the high heat can leave our plants dry and thirsty!  Covering the area around them with some form of mulch will help lesson evaporation and lead to less frequent watering.

4.  Don’t wash clothes unless they need it.  It may simply be habit to throw clothes in the washer after one wearing.  Use your judgement to determine if you can wear those jeans a second time, or hang your towel up in the bathroom and use it again before washing.

5.  Put a bucket or a tub in the shower to catch water if you let it run while you wait for it to warm up.  You can then use this water for your plants or to wash your dishes.

6.  You can also install a water-efficient shower head in your bathroom to reduce the amount of water used while bathing.  This one is hard for me to accept, but the sacrifice is well worth it and it’s not too expensive.  You can usually find them for $20-$30.

7.  If you do not have a low flow toilet, consider putting something in the tank to take up space and reduce the amount of water used for each flush.  This could be something like a small milk jug or other container filled with water.

8.  Don’t let the water in your sink run while washing your face, shaving, or brushing your teeth.

9.  Use a broom instead of a hose to clear debris off your driveway or sidewalk.

10.  Use a bottle or keep one glass out for drinking water to reduce the number of dishes that need washing.

Happy Saving!

Was roaming around the internet today and found an article put out by the U.S. Department of Energy with all the information (and more) you need in order to determine when to turn the lights off and when it’s more energy cost-effective to keep them on. The general rule seems to be to turn the lights off every time you leave a room if your light bulbs are incandescent. However, if you are using flourescent bulbs, they suggest to only turn the lights off if you will be gone for more than fifteen minutes.

The website has many tools for calculating energy savings and as much information on how light bulbs use energy as anyone could possibly want. Here is the link: When to Turn Off Your Lights

And because I seem to be in a video mood this week, here is a bizarre but amusing commercial from Thailand done by Sylvania lightbulbs:

On September 17, the Obama Administration released a document detailing new fuel economy and emissions standards for auto manufacturers. Some of the proposed regulations include:

• An gradual increase in fuel economy. It’s kind of like No Child Left Behind, but for cars. Between the years 2011 and 2016, the white house is calling for a 5% increase in fuel economy per year. This starts with 23.7 miles per gallon and ends with 35.5 miles per gallon.

• In terms of fuel emissions, the document states that starting in 2016, cars sold in the U.S. would now also have to meet greenhouse gas emissions standards. The limit is put at 250 grams of carbon per mile. This has never been done before, so if it passes, it would be a first for auto manufacturers.

None of these regulations are final, however. According to an article in the New York Times: “The vehicle emissions rules can go into effect only after EPA has finalized its proposed “endangerment finding,” released in April, that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health and welfare. Today’s announcement does not finalize that finding, according to a senior EPA official. That decision is expected by next spring but could come much sooner as the Senate dives deeper into legislation that caps emissions.”

The date that has been released for the finalized rule publication is set for March, 2010.

According to the policies as outlined by the Environmental Protection Agency, these regulations would “Increase fuel economy by approximately five percent every year, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 950 million metric tons, save the average car buyer more than $3,000 in fuel costs, [and] Conserve 1.8 billion barrels of oil.”

I am pretty glad to hear this. I’m glad that automakers will be held to a higher standard and I hope that since all automakers will be required to comply with these policies, it will create competition and thus keep the prices of these vehicles down.

If you are interested in reading more, here is the plan as outlined by the EPA:

DOT Secretary Ray LaHood and EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson Propose National Program to Improve Fuel Economy and Reduce Greenhouse Gases/New Interagency Program to Address Climate Change and Energy Security

The policies have to be up for public comment for 60 days. If you would like to make a comment, here is the link you can follow for information on that procedure. It also has information on the proposal and commitment letters from several automakers:

Regulations and Standards

In case you are video-oriented, here is a video of President Obama making the original announcement back on May 19, 2009. FYI, he spends 3:30 just introducing people and, in typical fashion, he doesn’t get to his point for a while. The actual policy starts about 9:00 into it.