I’m going to leave behind the background information today and respond to a question which was put before me by a family member. I want to say that this is one thing I really want this blog to be. If you have questions or inquiries about environmental ideas, I will happily research them for you and write about it in a concise way. So in other words, questions and comments are more than welcome!
This particular question asked me to compare environmentally sound cleaning products to each other and to other traditional cleaning products. This brings forward a very important point and one which I try and live by: Be a smart consumer. As consumers you and I decide what companies make or don’t make. I had a friend say to me once that she knew many people who work at a landfill and she said much of the recycling which comes into the landfill plant does not get recycled. I definitely believe this. Recycled material is either marketable or not. As consumers we can fuel more or less recycling. If more recycled products are bought, more trash will be recycled. But I digress, recycling is for another post.
Traditional cleaning products can be harmful to the environment and to your family. Most conventional cleaning products are petroleum-based and contain chemicals with dangerous effects. There are over 80,000 chemicals used in cleaning products, most of whose side effects are currently unknown. Among the known dangerous chemicals are carcinogens, neurotoxins, allergens, heavy metals, and other agents which cause respiratory problems, reproductive abnormalities, cancer, and allergies. When these chemicals are released into the environment they can contribute to the depletion of the ozone layer, pollute groundwater, contaminate soil, and harm animal and plant life.
Here are some examples:
• Phosphates are found in dishwasher and laundry detergents. They cause eutrophication in bodies of water causing large algae blooms which produce toxins harmful to animals, fish, aquatic plants, and people who use the water as a drinking source.
• Phthalates help distribute dyes and fragrances in a number of cleaning products. They have been found to have adverse hormonal effects.
• Chlorine bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is found in a number of detergents and other products. Chlorine kills things, we all know this, and so it is extremely harmful in the environment and toxic to organisms living in soil and water. Chlorine can bind with organic compounds in water to form organochlorines which are carcinogenic, breakdown very slowly in the environment, are very difficult to remove in water treatment trains, and accumulate in fatty tissue of wildlife and humans.
• Trisodium nitrilotriacetate is a possible carcinogen in laundry detergents which can also disrupt the removal of harmful metals in wastewater treatment trains.
In response to these issues, green cleaning companies take care to exclude chemicals with known or suspected toxicities. Brands, such as Method and Seventh Generation, have a “dirty list” of chemicals they refuse to use in their products. Generally environmentally sound cleaning products use ingredients which are not toxic or harmful to the user immediately or when used over time and that do not contribute to environmental problems.
So what’s the catch, right? Well in my eyes there isn’t one. The two main tradeoffs which are brought up the most are price and effectiveness. Price I will come back to. As far as effectiveness, there’s really no tradeoff. According to the National Environmental Trust, “chemicals do not make cleaning any better.” The problem is most Americans tend toward germaphobia, a trend which has been partly fueled by advertising that promotes disinfecting cleaners which eradicate all bacteria in sight as the best way to protect your family from germs. In reality, disinfectants and antibacterial soaps, sprays, and wipes can do more harm than good. Over use of antibacterial products and disinfectants helps to breed “superbugs” or stronger and stronger bacteria which are becoming totally immune to our means of killing them, this includes our body’s natural defenses against bacteria. Also, chemical disinfectant sprays have been found to damage reproductive systems in rats in recent laboratory experiments.
The main point is: You don’t need to kill the bacteria, you just need to remove them from you kitchen table, or counter, or toilet, or hands.
Now back to costs. According to the National Environment Trust, two of the most effective substances for the removal of bacterial from surfaces are ammonia and baking soda. That’s right, you can make your own CHEAP, high effective cleaning products and a few recipes are found below. Now if you don’t want to make your own cleaning products, you will pay more for green products, BUT I am telling you the difference is small, I’m talking cents. The best thing to do is to go to the aisle at you local grocery store where you usually buy your kitchen, bathroom, and window cleaner and look for the green products. They should be right next to your usual products. Check the price and amount in the bottle and try to find the best deal. Some of my favorite products are:
Clorox Green Works, all purpose cleaner for the kitchen and bathroom cleaner well for the bathroom.
Ecover Dishwashing liquid, for the kitchen sink not the dishwasher. It works great and you get a lot for the money. Ecover has other great products.
I also like Nature’s Place, the Hannaford brand, for various cleaners.
Really you have to do the leg work and figure out what you like, but be weary some green products are way over priced. But don’t let these few products discourage. By leg work I mean looking around the aisle for 5 minutes for a good deal, a small task when you look at the good you can do for you family and environment.
Natural Cleaning Products You Can Make
• Air freshener: Place shallow plates of vinegar in rooms to absorb odors; sprinkle ½ cup borax in the bottom of trash cans or diaper pails to prevent the growth of bacteria and mold that cause odors
• All-purpose cleaner: Place 4 tablespoons baking soda in 1 quart warm water and shake well.
• Disinfectant: Mix ½ cup borax into 1 gallon of hot water.
• Drain cleaner: Pour ½ cup baking soda down drain, add ½ cup white vinegar, and cover the drain. Wait 15 minutes and then pour 1 gallon of hot water down the drain.
• Metal cleaner and polish: For stainless steel, use undiluted white vinegar; for tarnished copper, boil the item in a pot of water with 1 tablespoon salt and 1 cup white vinegar.
• Oven cleaner: Moisten oven surfaces with water and sprinkle baking soda on them. Scrub with steel wool.
• Toilet bowl cleaner: Mix ¼ cup baking soda and 1 cup vinegar pour into toilet, let set for 5 minutes, then scrub with brush.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
Water
It’s easy to forget that millions of people around the world don’t have enough clean water. Here in the United States we enjoy one of the cleanest drinking water supplies in the world. The EPA regulates the quality of the nation’s drinking water by issuing and enforcing safe drinking water standards and protects the nation’s drinking water sources by safeguarding watersheds and regulating the release of pollutants into the environment.
Although we may have some of the cleanest water around, the U.S. could face serious water shortages in the future. The EPA projects that at least 36 states will face shortages within the next 3-5 years. These shortages will be due to a combination of rising temperatures, drought, population growth, urban sprawl, waste, and excessive use.
California faces a water crisis not only from increased demand, but also from rising temperatures. Higher temperatures mean more water is lost to evaporation and rising seas pushes saltwater into underground freshwater sources. In the Southwestern United States, the Colorado River (whose flow consists mostly of snowmelt from the Rocky Mountains) has seen extreme reductions in flow. This river provides water to 30 millions people over 7 states (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California). Florida doesn’t have nearly enough water for its expected population boom. The Great Lakes are shrinking. Upstate New York’s reservoirs have dropped to record lows, and the Southeastern states such as Georgia see increasingly epic droughts.
As we look beyond our borders to the global water shortage the problem begins to seem unmanageable. The United Nations estimates that 1.1 billion people do not have access to an adequate supply of drinking water and some 2.6 billion do not have access to basic sanitation. Poor water quality is a key cause of poor livelihood and health. Globally, diarrhoeral diseases and malaria killed about 3.1 million people in 2002. Ninety percent of these deaths were children under the age of five. An estimated 1.6 million lives could be saved annually by providing access to safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene.
So as you can see it’s a big problem, but there’s hope. Both the United Nations and the World Health Organization have aggressive programs to teach about water sanitation and treatment options in developing countries. The UN had set a goal to cut the amount of people without access to clean water in half by 2015, and they are on their way to achieving this goal.
Closer to home, the U.S. is pushing conservation, recycling, and technology (such as desalination). Conservation is the cheapest and easiest option, and many states, such as California, are strongly encouraging it to their residents. Wastewater reuse is an exciting and ever increasing option. Reusing wastewater for agricultural and industrial uses can greatly reduce a states demand on fresh water sources. The Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant in Florida is producing about 25 million gallons a day of fresh drinking water, about 10 percent of that area’s demand. The $158 million facility is North America’s largest plant of its kind. Miami-Dade County is working with the city of Hialeah to build a reverse osmosis plant to remove salt from water in deep brackish wells.
Citations: United Nation’s Water for Life, www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/ ; ‘Crisis Feared as U.S. Water Supplies Dry Up.’ MSNBC. www.msnbc.com/id/21494919// ; Gertner, Jon. “The Future is Drying Up.” The New York Times. October 21, 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/magazine/21water-t.html?_r=1&ei=5087&em=&en=adc25155e153a757&ex=1193284800&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1193929245-BI2ZpA99+bwQPH6+2RjuvQ ; “Water for Life, Making it Happen.” 2005. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/waterforlife.pdf
Although we may have some of the cleanest water around, the U.S. could face serious water shortages in the future. The EPA projects that at least 36 states will face shortages within the next 3-5 years. These shortages will be due to a combination of rising temperatures, drought, population growth, urban sprawl, waste, and excessive use.
California faces a water crisis not only from increased demand, but also from rising temperatures. Higher temperatures mean more water is lost to evaporation and rising seas pushes saltwater into underground freshwater sources. In the Southwestern United States, the Colorado River (whose flow consists mostly of snowmelt from the Rocky Mountains) has seen extreme reductions in flow. This river provides water to 30 millions people over 7 states (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California). Florida doesn’t have nearly enough water for its expected population boom. The Great Lakes are shrinking. Upstate New York’s reservoirs have dropped to record lows, and the Southeastern states such as Georgia see increasingly epic droughts.
As we look beyond our borders to the global water shortage the problem begins to seem unmanageable. The United Nations estimates that 1.1 billion people do not have access to an adequate supply of drinking water and some 2.6 billion do not have access to basic sanitation. Poor water quality is a key cause of poor livelihood and health. Globally, diarrhoeral diseases and malaria killed about 3.1 million people in 2002. Ninety percent of these deaths were children under the age of five. An estimated 1.6 million lives could be saved annually by providing access to safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene.
So as you can see it’s a big problem, but there’s hope. Both the United Nations and the World Health Organization have aggressive programs to teach about water sanitation and treatment options in developing countries. The UN had set a goal to cut the amount of people without access to clean water in half by 2015, and they are on their way to achieving this goal.
Closer to home, the U.S. is pushing conservation, recycling, and technology (such as desalination). Conservation is the cheapest and easiest option, and many states, such as California, are strongly encouraging it to their residents. Wastewater reuse is an exciting and ever increasing option. Reusing wastewater for agricultural and industrial uses can greatly reduce a states demand on fresh water sources. The Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant in Florida is producing about 25 million gallons a day of fresh drinking water, about 10 percent of that area’s demand. The $158 million facility is North America’s largest plant of its kind. Miami-Dade County is working with the city of Hialeah to build a reverse osmosis plant to remove salt from water in deep brackish wells.
Citations: United Nation’s Water for Life, www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/ ; ‘Crisis Feared as U.S. Water Supplies Dry Up.’ MSNBC. www.msnbc.com/id/21494919// ; Gertner, Jon. “The Future is Drying Up.” The New York Times. October 21, 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/magazine/21water-t.html?_r=1&ei=5087&em=&en=adc25155e153a757&ex=1193284800&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1193929245-BI2ZpA99+bwQPH6+2RjuvQ ; “Water for Life, Making it Happen.” 2005. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/waterforlife.pdf
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.”
(Source: Synthesis Report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007)
The basic breakdown of climate change is simple and it begins with the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect is the rise in temperature that the Earth experiences because certain gases in the atmosphere (water vapor, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane, for example) trap energy from the sun. These greenhouse gases in the atmosphere behave much like the glass panes in a greenhouse. Sunlight enters the Earth’s atmosphere passing through the blanket of greenhouse gases. As it reaches the Earth’s surface, land, water, and biosphere absorb the sunlight’s energy. Once absorbed, this energy is sent back into the atmosphere. Some of the energy passes back into space, but much of it remains trapped in the atmosphere by the layer of greenhouse gases, causing our world to heat up.
The greenhouse effect is important. Without it the Earth would be about 60 degrees Fahrenheit cooler which is too cold for humans to live. When the layer of greenhouse gases becomes too thick making the greenhouse effect too strong, too much of the suns energy is trapped by the atmosphere causing the Earth’s temperature to warm more than usual.
According to the European Environment Agency, the main sources of man-made greenhouse gases are:
• burning of fossil fuels in electricity generation, transport, industry and households;
• agriculture and land use changes like deforestation;
• land filling of waste; and
• use of industrial fluorinated gases
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an organization set up by the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). It brings together thousands of scientists from all over the world.
In November 2007 the IPCC released its Fourth Assessment Report, comprising four sections: The Physical Science Basis, by Working Group I; Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, by Working Group II; Mitigation of Climate Change, by Working Group III; and an overall Synthesis Report. It took six years to complete the report, which runs to several thousand pages. For this and its other work over the last 20 years, the IPCC was the joint winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
The main idea of the report is that over the past 150 years, mean temperature has increased by almost 0.8 ºC globally and by about 1 ºC in Europe. Eleven of the last twelve years (1995–2006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850). Without global action to limit emissions, the IPCC expects that global temperatures may increase further by 1.8 to 4.0 ºC by 2100. This means that temperature increase since pre-industrial times would exceed 2 °C. Beyond this threshold irreversible and possibly catastrophic changes become far more likely.
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report highlights:
• Around 20-30 per cent of the plant and animal species assessed are likely to be at increased risk of extinction if global average temperatures exceed 1.5 degrees C to 2.5 degrees C over late 20th century levels.
• There is a likelihood of "irreversible" impacts. For example if temperature increases exceed about 3.5 degrees C, between 40 per cent and 70 per cent of the species assessed might be at increased risk of extinction.
• Increases in sea surface temperatures of about one to three degrees C are projected to result in more "frequent coral bleaching events and widespread mortality".
• There is growing concern over the oceans and seas becoming more acidic as they absorb rising levels of CO2 and the impacts on "marine shell-forming organisms" like coral reefs.
• There is a higher confidence in the risks of extreme weather events and the projected increases in droughts, heatwaves and floods as well as their adverse impacts.
• Concern is growing that the poor and elderly in low-latitude and less-developed areas (including those in dry areas and living on mega-deltas) are likely to suffer most.
• There is high confidence that by mid-century "many semi-arid areas, for example the Mediterranean basin, western United States, southern Africa and northeast Brazil, will suffer a decrease in water resources due to climate change".
• New observations linked with the Greenland and possibly Antarctic ice sheets may mean that the rate of ice loss will increase above previous forecasts.
• There is growing concern that any benefits linked with climate change will be gone after more modest temperature rises.
Citations:
United Nation Environment Programme, http://www.unep.org/; The IPCC Assessment Reports, http://www.ipcc.ch/; European Environmental Agency, http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes; United Status Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange
(Source: Synthesis Report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007)
The basic breakdown of climate change is simple and it begins with the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect is the rise in temperature that the Earth experiences because certain gases in the atmosphere (water vapor, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane, for example) trap energy from the sun. These greenhouse gases in the atmosphere behave much like the glass panes in a greenhouse. Sunlight enters the Earth’s atmosphere passing through the blanket of greenhouse gases. As it reaches the Earth’s surface, land, water, and biosphere absorb the sunlight’s energy. Once absorbed, this energy is sent back into the atmosphere. Some of the energy passes back into space, but much of it remains trapped in the atmosphere by the layer of greenhouse gases, causing our world to heat up.
The greenhouse effect is important. Without it the Earth would be about 60 degrees Fahrenheit cooler which is too cold for humans to live. When the layer of greenhouse gases becomes too thick making the greenhouse effect too strong, too much of the suns energy is trapped by the atmosphere causing the Earth’s temperature to warm more than usual.
According to the European Environment Agency, the main sources of man-made greenhouse gases are:
• burning of fossil fuels in electricity generation, transport, industry and households;
• agriculture and land use changes like deforestation;
• land filling of waste; and
• use of industrial fluorinated gases
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an organization set up by the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). It brings together thousands of scientists from all over the world.
In November 2007 the IPCC released its Fourth Assessment Report, comprising four sections: The Physical Science Basis, by Working Group I; Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, by Working Group II; Mitigation of Climate Change, by Working Group III; and an overall Synthesis Report. It took six years to complete the report, which runs to several thousand pages. For this and its other work over the last 20 years, the IPCC was the joint winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
The main idea of the report is that over the past 150 years, mean temperature has increased by almost 0.8 ºC globally and by about 1 ºC in Europe. Eleven of the last twelve years (1995–2006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850). Without global action to limit emissions, the IPCC expects that global temperatures may increase further by 1.8 to 4.0 ºC by 2100. This means that temperature increase since pre-industrial times would exceed 2 °C. Beyond this threshold irreversible and possibly catastrophic changes become far more likely.
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report highlights:
• Around 20-30 per cent of the plant and animal species assessed are likely to be at increased risk of extinction if global average temperatures exceed 1.5 degrees C to 2.5 degrees C over late 20th century levels.
• There is a likelihood of "irreversible" impacts. For example if temperature increases exceed about 3.5 degrees C, between 40 per cent and 70 per cent of the species assessed might be at increased risk of extinction.
• Increases in sea surface temperatures of about one to three degrees C are projected to result in more "frequent coral bleaching events and widespread mortality".
• There is growing concern over the oceans and seas becoming more acidic as they absorb rising levels of CO2 and the impacts on "marine shell-forming organisms" like coral reefs.
• There is a higher confidence in the risks of extreme weather events and the projected increases in droughts, heatwaves and floods as well as their adverse impacts.
• Concern is growing that the poor and elderly in low-latitude and less-developed areas (including those in dry areas and living on mega-deltas) are likely to suffer most.
• There is high confidence that by mid-century "many semi-arid areas, for example the Mediterranean basin, western United States, southern Africa and northeast Brazil, will suffer a decrease in water resources due to climate change".
• New observations linked with the Greenland and possibly Antarctic ice sheets may mean that the rate of ice loss will increase above previous forecasts.
• There is growing concern that any benefits linked with climate change will be gone after more modest temperature rises.
Citations:
United Nation Environment Programme, http://www.unep.org/; The IPCC Assessment Reports, http://www.ipcc.ch/; European Environmental Agency, http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes; United Status Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange
Welcome to Everyday Environmentalist
The point of this blog is to show that with little changes made in everyday life the state of our environment can improve. I am going to begin with a bit of information about the state of our planet, but will not try and motivate with doom and gloom statistics about how the state of the planet is horrible. And don’t get me wrong, we aren’t exactly in a great place, but I believe it is important to find the things which are possible for each of us to change. By possible I mean things which you will actually do. If you hate recycling and can’t possibly think of doing it, but compositing sounds doable and interesting then forget about recycling and concentrate on making a great compositing pile. Maybe you live in a downtown apartment and recycling and compositing are unlikely for you, but you make an effort to take public transportation and buy local foods. What I am saying is it’s better to make the small changes you know you can make yourself do, rather than to get overwhelmed with big changes you know you’ll never do.
Now do I want you to make the big changes, well of course…but I’d rather you do the small things than nothing at all. It’s easy to get very negative when hearing about all the problems we have to deal with, but it’s so important to think positively. YOU in a few small ways can make a difference. First let’s look at the state of our planet.
It is difficult to summarize the planets environmental problems in a few paragraphs, but I’m going to try to hit on the main points in these next few posts and leave you with some references to find more information. These are being written in no particular order, they are all equally important.
Now do I want you to make the big changes, well of course…but I’d rather you do the small things than nothing at all. It’s easy to get very negative when hearing about all the problems we have to deal with, but it’s so important to think positively. YOU in a few small ways can make a difference. First let’s look at the state of our planet.
It is difficult to summarize the planets environmental problems in a few paragraphs, but I’m going to try to hit on the main points in these next few posts and leave you with some references to find more information. These are being written in no particular order, they are all equally important.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)