The Red, White, and Green

[Click here to watch video on YouTube]

The Crayola Crayon Maker is made from nearly 4 pounds of plastic, the crayons are petroleum-based, and my guess is that the toy is doomed to a short life cycle, but I’ve gotta admit, I like its spirit of creative waste transformation. No crayon bit is too small to be recycled — it’s a great, green lesson to be teaching our kids at an early age.

But before you shell out $59.95 for one of these puppies — which promises to be one of the hardest-to-snag, hottest toys of the 2009 holiday season — why not check out this cool article on how to recycle crayons the old-fashioned way? All it takes is some glass jars, a pot of boiling water, and a couple of candy molds (or ice cube trays). It’s the perfect art project/science experiment to do with your kids on a cold winter day, and it’s at least as exciting as staring at the Crayola Crayon Maker for 20 minutes while a 60-watt light bulb painstakingly works its magic.

While I certainly don’t want to deny any childhood the memory of Burnt Sienna, you could take the money you’ve saved and pick up a box or two of Prang soybean or Stockmar beeswax crayons.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Need more ideas for fun green art projects to do with your kids over the holiday weekend? Check out this post on how to make paint from blueberries and beets.

Related posts:
How to give gifts without giving ‘stuff’
Green wedding: Give up the gift wrap

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Global warming guru Al Gore has taken a lot of flack recently from the environmental community for his meat-eating ways, so I was thrilled to see the former vice president call out factory farming in his appearance this weekend on Saturday Night Live.

[Click here to watch clip on NBC.com]

Could the vice president’s slimmer physique be attributed to a less meat-intensive diet? While earlier this month, Gore said on Good Morning America that he has no plans to become a vegetarian, he did say that he now eats less meat than he used to. And that he pointedly mentioned factory farming on SNL means he’s at least cognizant of the reality that 51 percent of greenhouse gas emissions are attributed the meat and dairy industry. I’m sure he’s now thinking twice (and taking a good look around him to see who’s watching) before digging into that proverbial cheeseburger.

It may be an unpopular stance in the environmental community, but I don’t think Gore — or any environmentalist, for that matter — needs to become a vegetarian or vegan to prove his commitment to fighting climate change. Animals have an important role to play in sustainable agriculture, and I’d eat pasture-raised beef over a GMO soy–infused Boca Burger any day. (Before you take issue with this comment, pick up a copy of The Omnivore’s Dilemma.)

Unfortunately, examples of sustainable animal agriculture are few and far between in this country; until that changes, less meat, less often will be my mantra.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: This Meatless Monday, make a pledge to challenge yourself for the remainder of this week: The only meat you eat will be from pasture-based, sustainably raised livestock. Not sure what this means? Click here.

More Meatless Monday posts:
Meat lobby fighting Meatless Monday
Baltimore schools make national headlines for Meatless Monday effort

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

I guess I fail to see the connection between nudity and greenhouse gas emissions, but if a Greenpeace hottie named Dave wants to strip down while explaining the intricacies of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and the role they play in global warming, who am I to argue? He’s got my attention.

[Click here to watch video on YouTube]

Those of us who are old enough to remember spraying our hair with giant cans of Aqua Net in the ’80s (or at least remember our moms spraying their hair) probably recall the ensuing publicity about chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and their role in the depletion of the ozone layer of the atmosphere. When CFCs were banned in 1987, HFCs — or F-gases — were thought to be a better alternative. Oops.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: HFCs have an even greater impact on our climate than the much publicized CO2. Sign the Greenpeace petition to ensure that an HFC ban is included in the Copenhagen deal.

Related posts:
Why aren’t Angelenos using those green bins?
Germans say no to underground CO2 storage

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Paul Keleher

This week’s Eco Etiquette dealt with a lady who was a bit overzealous with her ‘green’ purchasing — picture frames made from reused bike chains, wind chimes pieced together from recycled wine bottles — basically, a lot of junk that would likely die a swift landfill death. The moral of the story is, it doesn’t matter if something says green or eco-friendly. The question is: Is it really useful? Is this something we really need?

According to Joshua Stolaroff, a former science and technology policy fellow with EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, these are the questions we should be asking ourselves if we really want to make a dent in global warming. Not, Should I unplug my toaster or Should I switch to biodiesel, but Should I buy this? Two reports he recently authored draw the same conclusion: The biggest contribution to global warming is all the stuff we buy (and the stuff used to package all the stuff we buy).

Read this from The Daily Green: Everything you know about going green is wrong

So with the holiday season almost upon us, what can you give that isn’t “stuff,” without being a Grinch and forswearing the holidays altogether? A few ideas (my thanks to the HuffPost comments board for their contributions):

Give an experience. A massage appointment, tickets to the theater or a concert, a gift certificate for a fabulous restaurant meal, even a series of guitar or voice lessons for the musically inclined. The key here is to choose something that the recipient wouldn’t normally splurge on.

Give to a charity in the person’s name. This isn’t for everyone (remember “The Strike” episode of Seinfeld?), but if you know someone who is particularly civic-minded, this can be a really meaningful gift. And you can be creative, too: One HuffPost reader had given a share in a tiger sanctuary, sets of farm tools and seeds for farmers in Africa who’d lost everything in assorted conflicts, and immunizations for kids in Asia.

Refurbish a family heirloom. Technically, this is “stuff,” but it’s making use of something that would otherwise go to waste. Everyone’s got treasures hidden in away in a storage closet or the attic, or maybe there’s something you cherish that you know someone you love will get tremendous joy from. So have the crack in that crystal vase fixed or take that antique bracelet to the jeweler to be repaired and give it to another family member. One year, my mom had an expensive vintage handbag of hers fixed up for me, and it was one of the best gifts I’ve ever received.

What gifts have you given/received that weren’t “stuff”? Post your suggestions below!

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Watch The Story of Stuff.

Related posts:
Green goods
The careful consumer

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Brandi666

Now that the dust has settled a bit on the Sigg bottle debacle and legislation to ban BPA from baby bottles and other food containers for children has either passed or is under consideration in cities and states across the country, it’s time to focus our attention on another equally potent source of the toxic chemical: canned food. A disturbing report now out by Consumer Reports, that time-trusted source of product advice and safety, says that BPA is present in nearly all of the 19 name-brand canned foods subjected to its testing — including in some products that were labeled “BPA-free”:

A 165-pound adult eating one serving of canned green beans from our sample, which averaged 123.5 ppb, could ingest about 0.2 micrograms of BPA per kilogram of body weight per day, about 80 times higher than our experts’ recommended daily upper limit. And children eating multiple servings per day of canned foods with BPA levels comparable to the ones we found in some tested products could get a dose of BPA approaching levels that have caused adverse effects in several animal studies.

Some of the other foods revealed to have similarly high levels in the study include Progresso Vegetable Soup and Campbell’s Condensed Chicken Noodle Soup. Not exactly the therapeutic effect you had in mind for someone fighting off a cold.

The FDA will be revealing its plans for BPA later this month, and I have a feeling that the news will be good for concerned consumers, thanks to the negative publicity surrounding the new study that links the chemical to erectile dysfunction and other sexual problems. Nothing moves men to act faster than the threat of ED.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Limit your exposure to BPA by choosing fresh foods (learn how to make soup the old-fashioned way, from dried beans) and purchasing prepared food in glass containers when possible. Click here for more tips from Environmental Working Group on how to avoid BPA exposure.

Related posts:
California Senate passes BPA ban
Lobbyists plan to target minorities, poor to protect use of BPA

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Steveandamron

Looks like Western Growers isn’t the only big ag group that’s miffed about sustainable farming cutting into its market share. It’s only been a month since Baltimore City Public Schools adopted Meatless Monday as part of its plan to introduce healthier eating to its largely overweight student population, but already lobbying groups for the meat industry are attempting to thwart other schools’ interest in doing the same.

From The Baltimore Sun:

The “Meatless Monday” program in Baltimore city school cafeterias has the meat industry madder than a factory-farmed hen. A spokeswoman for the American Meat Institute warned on CNN…that students aren’t getting enough protein. The Animal Agriculture Alliance urged people “shocked” by the once-weekly absence of meat on school menus to write schools chief Andrés Alonso “to ensure this effort does not spread.”

The cable news crazies have been jumping in on the veg-bashing effort, too, with Glenn Beck going all Nathan Hale about steak and Lou Dobbs proclaiming Meatless Mondays in schools “a political storm in the making.”

How transparent can these lobbyists’ efforts be? Don’t these people have children? Sure, let’s just keep stuffing kids’ faces with hamburgers and chicken nuggets; one in three of them may be overweight and on the way to developing diabetes, but at least they’ll be “getting enough protein.”

Since when did vegetarian lasagna become so controversial?

Thanks to loyal reader RG for sending us the Sun article.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Lou Dobbs is half right about Meatless Monday: It is a political issue. Giving up meat just one day a week is the single most effective thing you can do to improve our country’s environmental future and your own personal health. Take the pledge today.

More Meatless Monday posts:
Baltimore schools make national headlines for Meatless Monday effort
Baltimore City Public Schools first district in nation to adopt Meatless Monday

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Thebittenword.com

Who could argue with local, sustainably produced food, right? Well evidently, Western Growers isn’t too thrilled about community supported agriculture (CSA) cutting into their market share. To wit, the email I received regarding my regarding my Eco Etiquette post this week, in which I recommend winter CSAs as a source for local food after farmers markets have closed for the season:

Are you recommending that readers drive many miles to these hot houses and farms in the country to buy locally-grown food in the winter? Did you know that most food miles are compiled by consumers driving to purchase food rather than food producers shipping food to retail stores?  It might be worthwhile to crunch some numbers before you recommend an action that actually increases the carbon footprint.

My response:

Most CSAs offer convenient pick-up locations for their subscribers, so people aren’t really driving much farther than they would to the supermarket. Cedar Valley Sustainable Farm in Illinois offers a pick-up in the city of Chicago; Garden of Eve on Long Island has a location on NYC’s Upper West Side; Hog’s Back Farm in Wisconsin has a drop-off in nearby Minneapolis.

But when it comes to the environment, final delivery of food from producer to retailer is only half the picture. Much of the environmental damage (and associated carbon footprint) of large, conventional farms is a direct result of their agricultural practices: the pesticides polluting our drinking water; fertilizer runoff creating vast aquatic dead zones; and the large amounts of petroleum required to produce these pesticides and fertilizers to begin with (and to fuel the machinery to grow these large-scale crops). And carbon footprint alone isn’t enough to paint the whole picture; there’s the nitrogen footprint to consider, as well.

And let’s not forget the public health threat that has arisen as a direct result of industrial animal farming — excessive growth hormones in our food supply, antibiotic-resistant superbugs like E. Coli, and rapidly mutating viruses like H1N1. CSAs aren’t just about produce; Cedar Valley, for instance, provides a sustainably raised source of meat for its subscribers.

Eighty percent of the farms in the US are small farms, and if some of those farmers want to sell their sustainably produced fruit/vegetables/meat directly to the public — especially considering the dire economy — why would anyone be opposed to that?

Happy to look at any number-crunching studies you want to send my way –

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Find a winter CSA to join in your area.

Related posts:
Small steps to sustainability
No time for the farmers market? Try an organic food delivery service

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Divemasterking

It was great to see First Lady Michelle Obama on Sesame Street this week, encouraging kids to plant gardens and eat their veggies, but I’ve got to be honest: I’m a bit confused as to where the president really stands when it comes to agricultural policy. A lot of wonderful changes are happening on the surface — the first White House vegetable garden since World War II, a farmers market just north of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue — but the green community was left scratching their heads last month after the president’s nominations of Islam Siddiqui, a former lobbyist for the chemical pesticide industry, and Roger Beachy, former head of the Danforth Plant Science Center (a nonprofit with some serious ties to Monsatan), to two high-level agricultural posts.

Beachy may already be installed at his job as director of the new National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), but Siddiqui, CropLife’s current vice president of science and regulatory affairs, isn’t sliding through his Senate confirmation as smoothly as first anticipated. (CropLife is the company that sent letters to Michelle Obama urging her to use pesticides in the White House vegetable garden.)

Writes consumer watchdog group Food & Water Watch in an email to its supporters:

These are two textbook cases of the “revolving door” between industry and the agencies meant to keep watch; Siddiqui’s and Beachy’s industry ties demonstrate that both men are too beholden to corporate agriculture to serve the public interest.

The group is calling for the replacement of both nominees; and while I think it’s a long shot for Obama to pull Beachy now that he’s already at work, there may be a real chance to derail Siddiqui — the Senate is planning a full floor vote sometime in the next couple weeks.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Click here to sign the Food & Water Watch petition asking President Obama to withdraw Siddiqui’s nomination.

Related posts:
Distilled white vinegar and GMO
Obama administration approves logging in national forest; environmental community outraged

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

I vowed to take a complete work and technology break on my 11-day road trip up the West Coast, but there were a few green sightings so wonderful that I couldn’t resist the urge to snap a few quick pics.

One (of many) eco encounters in Portland was the Urban Farm Store, which specializes in edible gardening and city chickens. The red clapboard mini-barn of a shop was so adorable that I wanted to buy five flannel shirts, snap up a few chicks (as well as a house in the super cool surrounding Belmont neighborhood), set up my very own urban homestead, and never look back.

There are chickens back there!

Alright, I’m sure there’s a bit of work (and poop-shoveling) involved in planting a bountiful garden and raising egg-laying hens, but Urban Farm Store proprietors Robert and Hannah Litt make it seem so darn easy — even for a city slicker like me — thanks to their free bimonthly chicken-keeping classes and the tips they regularly Tweet (cheep). Looks like their stellar customer service is paying off, too: The Urban Farmers are moving to a new, larger store today, just a couple blocks from the old location.

I’ve been pretty obsessed with all things DIY since attending a workshop by Homegrown Evolution founders Erik Knutzen and Kelly Coyne a few months back. As they said in their opening remarks, when it comes to doing your part for the environment, what sounds like more fun: screwing in a compact fluorescent bulb or brewing your own beer and raising chickens? (Change your light bulbs too, though.)

Stay tuned for my vblog about the urban chicken movement in Los Angeles.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Turning your backyard into an edible garden/chicken coop sound too overwhelming? Just start by planting a few herbs in your kitchen. Click here to watch an easy how-to video.

Related posts:
How to prepare for global warming
Small steps to sustainability

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Photo via Flickr: Stewart

When I recently wrote about recycling wine corks for my Eco Etiquette column — in which I expressed my disdain for the plastic, landfill-bound variety, as well as aluminum screw caps — I was not prepared for the slew of angry emails from the grape nut gallery.

I had your recycling corks article sent to me and, as someone who enjoys wine, it troubles me…. Some of the world’s best wines are now bottled under screw caps. Why? Because, by and large, they treat the wine better than cork does. And, as a side benefit, they are easier to open. A small fraction of wines bottled under cork can be tainted by the cork.

And another:

[Synthetic corks] are perfectly fine for wines you are going to bring home and drink within even a few months. They are, in large part, due to a worldwide shortage of natural cork…. unfortunately in your post you came across as completely pretentious, which I trust was not the intent, and is entirely the wrong approach to enjoying good wine and offering sage advice.

Now, I’m certainly not going to argue with a oenophile as to what method of closure ensures the best tasting wine, considering that most weeks I’m content with a bottle of Two Buck Chuck. There is no doubt that some very fine wines employ an aluminum screw cap; my main beef is with the environmental damage associated with synthetic corks (screw caps included). There’s a lot of misinformation out there when it comes to natural cork, so let me dispel a few myths:

Myth #1: Trees are cut down to make natural corks. Cork trees are not felled to harvest the cork; the renewable bark is stripped by hand off the tree. By using natural cork, you’re actually ensuring the survival of Mediterranean cork forests, which, like the rainforests of the Amazon, are crucial to the world’s biosphere.

Myth #2: There is a worldwide shortage of natural cork. Plain and simple, this is PR spin from the plastic cork/aluminum screw cap industry. “By all statistical standards, the cork forests have enough cork to close every bottle of wine produced, in the world, for the next 100 years, without planting new trees,” says Patrick Spencer, director of nonprofit cork recycler Cork ReHarvest.

Myth #3: You can recycle aluminum screw caps — natural corks aren’t recyclable. Actually, the plastic seal and adhesive in most screw caps contaminate the aluminum; the only choice is to send them to the landfill. And let’s not forget that harvesting aluminum is incredibly destructive to the environment. Natural cork, however, can be re-purposed into flooring tiles, building insulation, and packaging materials (and at the very least, can be cut up into compost).

Myth #4: Wines with natural corks are prone to spoilage. There’s been a rumor circulating for some time (perpetuated by alternative stopper manufacturers?) that with natural closures, one in 10 bottles of wine ends up corked. But a study by the UK’s Wine and Spirit Trade Association puts that figure between .7 and 1.2 percent; a prominent wine expert even announced earlier this year that TCA contamination is no longer a major problem for the US wine industry.

So go ahead, be a pretentious snob and insist on old-fashioned corks (just don’t forget to recycle them!): You’ll help save the cork forests, reduce destructive aluminum mining, and keep billions of screw caps and petroleum-based stoppers out of our landfills.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Stick to bottles with natural cork closures — and make sure they don’t die a landfill death. A few recycling options: Cork ReHarvest, Yemm & Hart, and ReCork America.

Related posts:
5 ways to choose local wine
Neato! Reusable wine totes

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed