I am lucky as most of my ideas for this blog come from conversations with friends, and this is no different. A good friend of mine recently asked me the best way to dispose of old medication. I immediately said “don’t flush it!” It’s true none of us want to just throw old pill bottles into the garbage as it feels like we are gift wrapping them for a child, pet, or illegal use. But flushing medications is harmful to our waterways, and not the proper way of disposal. Now I give notice that these next few paragraphs may be a little scientific and wordy for some, but I don’t want to just say “don’t flush your medications because I said so!” I want everyone reading this post to know why you shouldn’t and what’s happening to your medications if they should get into the environment.
So bear with me, take your time, and learn. This is vital, we have a limited amount of water on our planet and learning how to keep it clean is important for all of us.
There are three major, related groups of potential contaminants from medications, endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs), pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs), and personal care products (PCPs). Endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) are chemicals which interfere with the synthesis, transport, and/or action of natural hormones responsible for the reproduction, development, and/or behavior of an organism. Some examples of EDCs include birth control pills and other synthetic hormone treatments. They can also be found in anthropogenic substances such as detergents, pesticides, and plasticizers.
Pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs) encompass some of the hormone-based compounds already noted as EDCs, and also include antibiotics, anti-epileptic medications, heart medications, pain medications, analgesics, anti-depressants, and cancer medications. This category also covers veterinarian drugs and feed additives used for livestock. Personal care products (PCPs) refer to common, anthropogenic products such as shampoos, fragrances, over-the-counter medications, and herbal remedies.
The regulation of these compounds is relatively new and most of the chemicals are still being researched to find their specific effect to human health. According to the USEPA, some 87,000 chemicals are in need of assessment. This large number of potentially harmful chemicals which fall into these categories of compounds is reflective of the potentially wide-ranging nature of this issue.
What we know for sure, through recent research, is that these compounds are in our water bodies, both natural and municipal. PhACs, EDCs, and PCPs can enter water bodies from residential or commercial discharges including hospital effluent, runoff from livestock facilities, and your toilet.
So we know these compounds are in our water bodies, but before I talk about why they are harmful I want to explain where the water goes when it leaves you house and how it is treated so you can understand why these compounds are not being removed.
Water flows into your house from either a public water system or a personal well. This water fills your toilet and when you flush, it (along with all your other household wastewater from sinks, shower, laundry, dishwasher, etc.) either goes into a septic system on your property or through a sewer system to a wastewater treatment plant. If you have a septic system your house’s wastewater goes into a septic tank (that thing you must get pumped occasionally). In this tank are good bacteria which break down a lot of the organic material in your water. These bacteria and other large pieces of material in the water settle to the bottom of the septic tank, the cleaner water at the top of the septic tank leeches out into your leech field where it is allowed to flow through layers of sand and soil until it either reaches ground water (water which flows underground) or a stream, lake, pond, etc. The act of the water flowing through these layers of ground also helps to clean the water before it reaches a surface water source.
If you’re on a city sewer system the water is pumped to a wastewater treatment facility where it is treated through a series of processes such a sedimentation tanks, and chlorination. It is then pumped into a body of water such as a lake, river, the ocean, etc. Both of these methods have varying abilities to remove PhACs, EDCs, or PCPs, so when the treated wastewater reaches the stream or lake etc., anything not removed during treatment is expelled into that body of water and influences whatever lives in or comes in contact with that water. This is not to say septic systems or treatment plants do not do a sufficient job cleaning your water, they do a very good job which is always being increased with increasing technology. The problem is the specific effects of PhACs, EDCs, and PCPs on humans is not proven, and so many are not regulated or removed in treatment processes. There are ways of treating these harmful compounds which are implemented in many treatment plants. So before you run out and buy gallons of bottled water, I assure you, as a person with a Master’s degree in environmental engineering and a thesis topic based on drinking water treatment, the water coming from your tap is safe for drinking!
Now we know what PhACs, EDCs, and PCPs are and how they get into our waterways. The reason these compounds are thought to be harmful to humans is due to research findings of adverse affects on aquatic organisms. One adverse effect observed was caused by high levels of estrogenic hormones (from birth control pills) detected in trout and silvery minnows. These fish were found to become sexually mutated. Male fish were found producing eggs and fish were found with both male and female sexual organs. The other main effect found is the development of antibiotic resistance in organisms. The concern is that long-term exposure to low dose concentrations of antibiotics, such as those present in wastewater and surface water, could result in the development of antibiotic-resistant organisms. Sewers downstream from hospitals have displayed an increased prevalence of bacteria resistant to oxytetracycline (a commonly used antibiotic used to treat a wide variety of bacteria). Sewers downstream from pharmaceutical plants showed an increased prevalence of bacteria resistant to multiple drugs, including sulfamethoxazole, another widely used antibiotic. Bacteria and viruses are fighters and can easily mutate to ensure their survival. If harmful bacteria and viruses have too much exposure to our antibiotics, they will mutate and become immune to our methods of killing them which could prove dangerous for human health.
Unfortunately, this problem can not be stopped by proper medication disposal alone. Many of the PhACs, and EDCs found in waterways and wastewater streams come from human body waste. When we take medications, such as daily birth control pills or heart medications, they are intended to be used up completely by the body. In many instances, depending on the person and dosage as much as 50% to 90% of an administered drug may be excreted by the body in a biologically active form. I’m not telling you to go off your medication, but since our bodies are already excreting these medications into the environment through our body waste, we should do our best not to add to the problem with incorrect medication disposal.
Now you know why proper disposal of medications is important. I’m sure your dying to finally know the proper procedure for medication disposal. It’s actually extremely simple. According to the FDA the proper disposal steps are:
1. Take your prescription drugs out of their original containers.
2. Mix drugs with an undesirable substance, such as cat litter or used coffee grounds.
3. Put the mixture into a disposable container with a lid, such as an empty margarine tub, or into a sealable bag.
4. Conceal or remove any personal information, including Rx number, on the empty containers by covering it with black permanent marker or duct tape, or by scratching it off.
5. Place the sealed container with the mixture, and the empty drug containers, in the trash.
That’s it. An option is to smash the tablets in the sealed bag with the kitty litter or coffee grounds. There may also be drug take-back programs available in your community which will properly dispose of medications.
I appreciate your reading and learning with this post. This is an important subject, and I believe as more research is done, this problem will become an important regulatory issue. Overall, any drinking water issue is important as our water resources dwindle and we need to find ways of maintaining clean drinking water. Try to keep PhACs and EDCs levels low by proper disposal of your old medication, and PCPs level low by choosing environmentally friendly personal care products.
Work Cited:
Brown, K. Pharmaceutically Active Compounds in Residential and Hospital Effluent, Municipal Wastewater, and the Rio Grand in New Mexico. Water Resources Program The University of New Mexico. January 2004. http://www.unm.edu/~wrp/wrp-9.pdf
Proper Disposal of Prescription Drugs. Office of National Drug Control Policy. October 2009. http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/prescrip_disposal.pdf
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
“The idea of recycled toilet paper just freaks me out”
The title of this post is a quote someone said to me while we were having a discussion about buying recycled products. I was talking about how excited I was because I found a new recycled paper product for toilet paper and paper towels which is economical, effective and comfortable enough that those who use it in my place don’t complain with various remarks about cardboard or sand paper. Then my friend said the title quote. To which I laughed and asked what that person was talking about. They simply responded that they couldn’t make themselves use recycled toilet paper. To which I responded “you know it’s not used toilet paper recycled, it’s paper recycled and turned into toilet paper.” They didn’t respond, but regardless of what they thought I would like everyone reading this to know, toilet paper dissolves when you flush it down your toilet and becomes a part of the wastewater flowing from your house. It’s not recoverable.
The point is we should not be afraid of recycled paper products in our homes. The average American uses 3,000 tons of paper towels and about 20,000 sheets of toilet paper per year. 98% of toilet paper and paper towel brands use virgin paper, which is paper straight from trees. The reason for this huge amount of virgin paper usage is because that is what Americans buy. If you could recycle 1 short ton (0.91 ton) of paper it saves 17 mature trees, 7 thousand US gallons of water, 3 cubic yards of landfill space, 2 barrels of oil (84 US gal), and 4,100 kilowatt-hours of electricity — enough energy to power the average American home for six months. That’s recycling not even 1 full ton. And since, as I mention above, the average American uses 3,000 tons of just paper towels a year if 100% of those paper towels are recycled it could save up to 51,000 mature trees a year.
As I spoke of in my cleaning products post, being a smart consumer and buying recycled paper products will cause more companies to use recycled paper in their products. As consumers we have the power to change things through what we buy. Nowadays there are more and better choices than ever for recycled paper products and you can find them easily right in your normal grocery store.
My favorite products come from Marcal Small Steps. They have great products which are cheap (yes cheap!) and which feel just like virgin toilet paper. The two-ply, double roll four pack is actually cheaper than a Scott brand two-ply, double roll four pack. The Marcal paper towels are also great and comparable in price to other virgin paper towels. The only product from Marcal which I’m not super happy about is the facial tissues as I find them a little rough. Marcal Small Steps is made from 100% recycled paper and are hypoallergenic, virtually lint free, and whitened without chlorine bleaching. I’m not paid by this brand or anyone to advertise, I just want to show my readers there are good, economic products out there you can choose and I promise both you and your back side will feel good very comfortable with the choice.
Citations:
“Marcal Small Steps, Our Products.” http://www.marcalpaper.com/products.html
“Paper Recycling – Frequent Qusetions” US Environmental Protection Agency. September, 2008. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/paper/faqs.htm
Shapley, D. “15 Facts About the Paper Industry, Global Warming, and the Environment.” The Daily Green. November, 2007. http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/7447
"Wastes - Resource Conservation - Common Wastes & Materials - Paper Recycling". US Environmental Protection Agency. September, 2008. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/paper/basics/index.htm
The point is we should not be afraid of recycled paper products in our homes. The average American uses 3,000 tons of paper towels and about 20,000 sheets of toilet paper per year. 98% of toilet paper and paper towel brands use virgin paper, which is paper straight from trees. The reason for this huge amount of virgin paper usage is because that is what Americans buy. If you could recycle 1 short ton (0.91 ton) of paper it saves 17 mature trees, 7 thousand US gallons of water, 3 cubic yards of landfill space, 2 barrels of oil (84 US gal), and 4,100 kilowatt-hours of electricity — enough energy to power the average American home for six months. That’s recycling not even 1 full ton. And since, as I mention above, the average American uses 3,000 tons of just paper towels a year if 100% of those paper towels are recycled it could save up to 51,000 mature trees a year.
As I spoke of in my cleaning products post, being a smart consumer and buying recycled paper products will cause more companies to use recycled paper in their products. As consumers we have the power to change things through what we buy. Nowadays there are more and better choices than ever for recycled paper products and you can find them easily right in your normal grocery store.
My favorite products come from Marcal Small Steps. They have great products which are cheap (yes cheap!) and which feel just like virgin toilet paper. The two-ply, double roll four pack is actually cheaper than a Scott brand two-ply, double roll four pack. The Marcal paper towels are also great and comparable in price to other virgin paper towels. The only product from Marcal which I’m not super happy about is the facial tissues as I find them a little rough. Marcal Small Steps is made from 100% recycled paper and are hypoallergenic, virtually lint free, and whitened without chlorine bleaching. I’m not paid by this brand or anyone to advertise, I just want to show my readers there are good, economic products out there you can choose and I promise both you and your back side will feel good very comfortable with the choice.
Citations:
“Marcal Small Steps, Our Products.” http://www.marcalpaper.com/products.html
“Paper Recycling – Frequent Qusetions” US Environmental Protection Agency. September, 2008. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/paper/faqs.htm
Shapley, D. “15 Facts About the Paper Industry, Global Warming, and the Environment.” The Daily Green. November, 2007. http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/7447
"Wastes - Resource Conservation - Common Wastes & Materials - Paper Recycling". US Environmental Protection Agency. September, 2008. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/paper/basics/index.htm
Monday, February 15, 2010
Carbon Dioxide and the Oceans (A post for those tired of hearing about global warming)
I am writing this blog for a friend who showed concern for the topic and asked if I could write about it. It’s an important topic, and a little less politically heated than the other problem with carbon dioxide. Please read on, I promise its good stuff.
In my first post about climate change I wanted to, simply put, explain the phenomenon, which I think I accomplished. Unfortunately, the idea of global warming has become more of a political issue than a science issue. There are many reasons for this. Two are put forth by Joseph Romm, a physicist who was an acting assistant secretary in the Department of Energy during the Clinton administration and currently edits the blog climateprogress.org. Romm sites first the faceless nature of scientists when compared to politicians, and second the tendency of the American media to adopt the view of the climate change deniers “that climate change was a political issue, not science, and therefore it has two sides.”
Whatever the reason, global warming has become a buzz word. It has the ability to evoke serious emotion, and make the closest friends bicker like sworn enemies. I believe global warming should evoke emotion because it is a serious issue, but I would like to make an argument for reducing our carbon dioxide emissions which has nothing to do with global warming. I want to step away from global warming and all the emotion surrounding it and simply talk about carbon dioxide. Now, forget what anyone has ever said to you or you’ve read or you’ve seen on TV about the global temperature rise. Just forget it.
Carbon Dioxide ratios in the atmosphere are higher now than in the last 800,000 years. Now I know what you’re asking, how the heck do they know what the carbon dioxide levels were 800,000 years ago? The answer lies in ice. Ice cores, 3.2 km and longer, are taken in Antarctica. Over millennia the ice has trapped tiny pockets of ancient air which becomes locked in the ice with the falling snow flakes.
Like tiny time capsules, bubbles trap
ancient samples of atmosphere(Amos, 2006)
Just as a side note, this is also how scientists gauge past temperatures. They look within the caught air samples for different types, or isotopes, of hydrogen atoms which are found preferentially in precipitating water (snow) when temperatures are relatively warm.
But forget all about that, I promised to not talk temperatures, I apologize.
In these ice cores studies, scientists found that for the past 800,000 years there has been a natural rhythm in the carbon dioxide levels with increases and decreases. The highest level they found in the last 799,800 years was 280 parts per million. In the last 200 years carbon dioxide levels have increased to about 380 parts per million in 2006, with an increasing rate of 2 parts per million each year.
So, we have lots of carbon dioxide….where does it all go? Well about two-thirds go into the atmosphere, but this is not about that CO2. This blog is about the other one-third, or about 500 billion tons. This CO2 has been absorbed into the seas.
When carbon dioxide enters the ocean, it reacts with sea water to form carbonic acid. The reaction is seen here:
CaCO3 (s) + CO2 (g) + 2H2O (l) -> Ca2+ (aq) + 2 HCO3- (aq)
Carbon dioxide (CO2 (g)) in gaseous form reacts with water (H2O (l)) and calcium carbonate (CaCO3 (s)) in solid form dissolved in the water. The reaction breaks the calcium bond and carbonic acid is formed (HCO3- (aq)) in aqueous form. This large increase in carbonic acid has caused the average acidity of the oceans to be increased by 30%.
The primary concern with the acidification of the ocean is the reduction of available calcium carbonate. Carbonate is a substance used by thousands of marine species to form shells and skeletons. Acidification means slower growth and weaker shells. The result is a drop in not only commercially important shellfish, but also key species in the marine food webs, including plankton the base of most marine food webs. The ripple up the food chain would affect fish, birds, and mammals.
The hardest and fastest hit by ocean acidification will be coral reefs. As ocean acidity rises, corals will begin to erode faster than they can grow, and long admired reef structures will be lost worldwide. Scientists predict that by the time atmospheric CO2 reaches 560 parts per million (a level which could be reached by mid-century), coral reefs will cease to grow and even begin to dissolve. Areas that depend on healthy coral reefs for food, shoreline protection, and tourism industries will be profoundly impacted by their loss.
The point I want to make with this blog is that even if you do not believe our planet is warming, carbon dioxide levels are huge. They are significantly larger than they have ever been in the past 800,000 years, and this large outpouring of carbon dioxide is affecting our planet, negatively. The problem in the oceans is chemistry, pure, simple, and proven. Already coral reefs are growing at a stunted rate. If we continue to refuse to do nothing, our oceans could become sterilized, and I think we can all make the connection that if everything in the ocean is dead; everything on land is not far behind.
I hate to become negative and I don’t want that to be the tone of this blog, but I wanted to make sure everyone understands there’s more to this carbon dioxide thing than global warming. So if global warming has become a political issue for you, remember there are other reasons, which are just as dire, to take the steps needed to reduce our out pouring of carbon dioxide.
Citations:
Amos, J. “Deep Ice Tells Climate Story.” Sept. 2006. BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm
Doney, S. et al. “Ocean Acidification: The Other CO2 Problem.” Annual Review of Marine Science. January 2009. Vol. 1, Pages 169-192.
Reay, D. “Carbon Dioxide.” The Encyclopedia of Earth. January 2009. http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon_dioxide
In my first post about climate change I wanted to, simply put, explain the phenomenon, which I think I accomplished. Unfortunately, the idea of global warming has become more of a political issue than a science issue. There are many reasons for this. Two are put forth by Joseph Romm, a physicist who was an acting assistant secretary in the Department of Energy during the Clinton administration and currently edits the blog climateprogress.org. Romm sites first the faceless nature of scientists when compared to politicians, and second the tendency of the American media to adopt the view of the climate change deniers “that climate change was a political issue, not science, and therefore it has two sides.”
Whatever the reason, global warming has become a buzz word. It has the ability to evoke serious emotion, and make the closest friends bicker like sworn enemies. I believe global warming should evoke emotion because it is a serious issue, but I would like to make an argument for reducing our carbon dioxide emissions which has nothing to do with global warming. I want to step away from global warming and all the emotion surrounding it and simply talk about carbon dioxide. Now, forget what anyone has ever said to you or you’ve read or you’ve seen on TV about the global temperature rise. Just forget it.
Carbon Dioxide ratios in the atmosphere are higher now than in the last 800,000 years. Now I know what you’re asking, how the heck do they know what the carbon dioxide levels were 800,000 years ago? The answer lies in ice. Ice cores, 3.2 km and longer, are taken in Antarctica. Over millennia the ice has trapped tiny pockets of ancient air which becomes locked in the ice with the falling snow flakes.
Like tiny time capsules, bubbles trap
ancient samples of atmosphere(Amos, 2006)
Just as a side note, this is also how scientists gauge past temperatures. They look within the caught air samples for different types, or isotopes, of hydrogen atoms which are found preferentially in precipitating water (snow) when temperatures are relatively warm.
But forget all about that, I promised to not talk temperatures, I apologize.
In these ice cores studies, scientists found that for the past 800,000 years there has been a natural rhythm in the carbon dioxide levels with increases and decreases. The highest level they found in the last 799,800 years was 280 parts per million. In the last 200 years carbon dioxide levels have increased to about 380 parts per million in 2006, with an increasing rate of 2 parts per million each year.
So, we have lots of carbon dioxide….where does it all go? Well about two-thirds go into the atmosphere, but this is not about that CO2. This blog is about the other one-third, or about 500 billion tons. This CO2 has been absorbed into the seas.
When carbon dioxide enters the ocean, it reacts with sea water to form carbonic acid. The reaction is seen here:
CaCO3 (s) + CO2 (g) + 2H2O (l) -> Ca2+ (aq) + 2 HCO3- (aq)
Carbon dioxide (CO2 (g)) in gaseous form reacts with water (H2O (l)) and calcium carbonate (CaCO3 (s)) in solid form dissolved in the water. The reaction breaks the calcium bond and carbonic acid is formed (HCO3- (aq)) in aqueous form. This large increase in carbonic acid has caused the average acidity of the oceans to be increased by 30%.
The primary concern with the acidification of the ocean is the reduction of available calcium carbonate. Carbonate is a substance used by thousands of marine species to form shells and skeletons. Acidification means slower growth and weaker shells. The result is a drop in not only commercially important shellfish, but also key species in the marine food webs, including plankton the base of most marine food webs. The ripple up the food chain would affect fish, birds, and mammals.
The hardest and fastest hit by ocean acidification will be coral reefs. As ocean acidity rises, corals will begin to erode faster than they can grow, and long admired reef structures will be lost worldwide. Scientists predict that by the time atmospheric CO2 reaches 560 parts per million (a level which could be reached by mid-century), coral reefs will cease to grow and even begin to dissolve. Areas that depend on healthy coral reefs for food, shoreline protection, and tourism industries will be profoundly impacted by their loss.
The point I want to make with this blog is that even if you do not believe our planet is warming, carbon dioxide levels are huge. They are significantly larger than they have ever been in the past 800,000 years, and this large outpouring of carbon dioxide is affecting our planet, negatively. The problem in the oceans is chemistry, pure, simple, and proven. Already coral reefs are growing at a stunted rate. If we continue to refuse to do nothing, our oceans could become sterilized, and I think we can all make the connection that if everything in the ocean is dead; everything on land is not far behind.
I hate to become negative and I don’t want that to be the tone of this blog, but I wanted to make sure everyone understands there’s more to this carbon dioxide thing than global warming. So if global warming has become a political issue for you, remember there are other reasons, which are just as dire, to take the steps needed to reduce our out pouring of carbon dioxide.
Citations:
Amos, J. “Deep Ice Tells Climate Story.” Sept. 2006. BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm
Doney, S. et al. “Ocean Acidification: The Other CO2 Problem.” Annual Review of Marine Science. January 2009. Vol. 1, Pages 169-192.
Reay, D. “Carbon Dioxide.” The Encyclopedia of Earth. January 2009. http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon_dioxide
Monday, February 8, 2010
Recycling Electronics
I have recently had a few people ask me about recycling electronics such as computers and cell phones. There are many opportunities to reuse or recycle electronics. So why should we recycle electronics? Donating used (but still operating) electronics for reuse extends the lives of valuable products and keeps them out of the waste stream for a longer period of time. Reuse, in addition to being an environmentally preferable alternative, also benefits society. By donating your used electronics, you allow schools, nonprofit organizations, and lower-income families to obtain equipment that they otherwise could not afford. If your electronics can’t be reused, recycling electronics helps reduce pollution that would be generated while manufacturing a new product and the need to extract valuable and limited virgin resources. It also reduces the energy used in new product manufacturing. Electronic equipment can be recycled for recovery of metals, plastics, glass and other materials.
Find a Local Program
• Earth 911
Earth 911 is a comprehensive communication medium for the environment. Earth 911 has taken environmental hotlines, web sites and other information sources nationwide, and consolidated them into one network. Once you contact the Earth 911 network, you will find community-specific information on eCycling and much more.
• My Green Electronics
Provided by the Consumer Electronics Association, this site is a resource for consumers wishing to purchase green products and/or searching for local opportunities to recycle or donate used electronics.
• Electronic Industries Alliance's Consumer Education Initiative
The Electronic Industries Alliance's eCycling Central Web site helps you find reuse, recycling and donation programs for electronics products in your state.
• TechSoup
TechSoup has compiled a comprehensive body of information to promote computer recycling and reuse. This site provides resources for those who would like to donate hardware, those who would like to acquire recycled hardware, and refurbishers.
• Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation (RBRC)
RBRC can help you recycle portable rechargeable batteries commonly found in cordless power tools, cellular and cordless phones, laptop computers, camcorders, digital cameras, and remote control toys. Search for collection sites by zip code.
Manufacturer and Retailer Programs
Manufacturers and retailers take different approaches to give you several options to donate or recycle your electronics.
AT&T Reuse and Recycle
• Reuse & Recycle Program offers you the option to bring unwanted cell phones, Personal Data Assistants (PDAs) and other accessories (regardless of the manufacturer or carrier) to an AT&T operated store or participating authorized dealer store near you. Use the store locator to find a participating store near you.
• For information on holding a cell phone recycling collection at your business or in your community, please visit AT&T's online starter kit for donations.
Best Buy
• Best Buy offers consumer electronics recycling programs in all Best Buy U.S. stores. Best Buy will accept most electronics, including TVs, DVD players, computer monitors, cell phones and more. Consumers can bring in up to two items a day per household. See Best Buy Recycling for details.
• Drop off old cell phones, rechargeable batteries, and ink-jet cartridges at the free recycling kiosks located just inside the door of every US Best Buy store.
• Trade in unwanted electronic products for Best Buy gift cards or just recycle it for free. See Best Buy Trade-In for a step-by-step process for Tech Trade-In.
Dell
• RECONNECT (specific cities within California, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas only) is a comprehensive electronics recovery, reuse and environmentally responsible recycling partnership between Goodwill Industries and Dell, Inc. for consumers in participating communities.
• Recycling and Donation
• Asset Recovery Services
eBay
• Rethink Initiative provides information, tools and solutions that make it easy to find new users for idle computers and electronics, and responsibly recycle unwanted products.
Hewlett-Packard
• Product Recycling (including hardware, LaserJet supplies, and Inkjet supplies)
• Trade-In Program
• Hewlett-Packard/Compaq Asset Recovery Services
Intel
• Students Recycling Used Technology (StRUT) provides technology-based education for K-16 students through the process of refurbishing donated equipment for schools.
o Silicon Valley StRUT
o Arizona StRUT
o Oregon StRUT
LG Electronics
• Offers consumers a free mail-in recycling program for old cell phones and their accessories (any make or model). Simply box up your old phone and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label from their Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
• Offers consumers free take back and recycling of any product such as televisions, monitors, audio equipment, video cassette players and recorders, DVD players and recorders, combination TV/VCR and TV/DVD units, set top boxes and accessories associated with those products that have the LG, ZENITH or GOLDSTAR brands. Consumers can drop off up to 5 items at any one time for free at any of these locations.
Motorola
• Consumers can visit Motorola's Web site to print out postage paid mailing labels (PDF) (1 pg, 112K, about PDF) and send in any unused phones or accessories.
• Motorola also created the Race to Recycle program, an innovative fundraising opportunity for K-12 schools, that allows them to earn extra money by recycling old mobile phones.
NEC Display Solutions
• Total Trade Program
Nokia
• Offers a free mail-in recycling program for old cell phones. Simply print a prepaid shipping label and send in your unwanted phones. Additionally, consumers can pick up a prepaid shipping envelope at any of the Nokia flagship stores in Chicago and New York.
Office Depot
• Tech Recycling Boxes ($5-$15 depending on size) are available at participating stores. You can fill the boxes with as many used consumer electronics (cell phones/PDAs, computers, televisions, etc) as will fit and drop the unsealed boxes off at any Office Depot store to be recycled.
• Every store has kiosks where consumers can drop off used cell phones, batteries and accessories.
Samsung
• Offers a mail-in recycling program to customers who want to recycle Samsung cell phones and accessories. Simply box up your old phone and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label from the Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
Sony
• Take Back Recycling Program
• Notebook Trade-in Program
Sony Ericsson
• Offers consumers the ability to print pre-printed shipping label from their Web site and mail in old devices (any make or model) free of charge.
• Offers an event based cell phone recycling program. For more information on setting up a cell phone recycling program in your area, contact Steve Coston (steve.coston@sonyericsson.com).
Sprint
• Offers two cell phone recycling programs for consumers:
o The Sprint Buyback program offers Sprint customers an account credit for returning eligible Sprint and Nextel models of phones.
o The Sprint Project Connect program is available to all consumers. It accepts wireless phones, batteries, accessories and connection cards for recycling - regardless of make, model, condition, or service provider.
You can participate in either program at no charge by visiting Sprint's Web site or a Sprint retail store. Use the store locator to find a participating store near you.
• Sprint provides consumers with the free cell phone data eraser tool to clear any personal information from the phone.
Staples
• EcoEasy offers consumers in-store recycling of computers, monitors, printers, desktop copiers and other electronic waste for a fee of $10 per item
• All Staples stores offer in-store collection bins where consumers can drop-off cell phones, PDAs, chargers, other handheld electronics, and ink and toner cartridges for recycling ($3 rebates are available for some eligible toner cartridges).
T-Mobile
• Handset Recycling Program offers both in-store drop-off locations and a mail-in recycling option for cell phones, PDAs, and accessories. To use the mail in option, simply box up your mobile devise and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label (PDF) (1 pg, 1.2MB, about PDF) from the Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
• Postage paid recycling bags are included with all purchases. Customers can also pick up a recycling envelope at any T-Mobile store. Use the store locator to find a participating T-Mobile store in your area.
Toshiba
• Recycling and Trade-In Program
Verizon Wireless
• Verizon Wireless' HopeLine program collects no-longer-used wireless phones and equipment in any condition from any service provider. The used phones are either refurbished for reuse or recycled. Used phones can be returned to any Verizon Wireless retail store across the country. Use the Store Locator to find the Verizon store closest to you.
• Wireless phones and equipment donations can also be sent to:
Verizon Wireless HopeLine
c/o CMB Wireless Group
630 Broadway Avenue
Holbrook, NY 11741
Government-Supported Donation and Recycling Programs
• e-cycle St. Louis: Electronics Recycling for the Region
This consumer electronics collection program has been developed by the St. Louis Regional Partnership for Electronics Recovery to encourage reuse and recycling of unwanted electronics in the St. Louis region.
• eRecycle.org
This Web site provides guidance and information to consumers in California about recycling electronics.
• Federal Electronic Challenge
If you are a government agency or a business, check out the Federal Electronics Challenge for tools on how a large institution can donate or recycle its used electronics.
• www.ecyclingtools.com
This resource kit provides information on the entire lifecycle of electronics and contains useful information to help you address your e-waste concerns
These are just a few of many different opportunities to find a safe and environmentally friendly way to get rid of your electronics. These websites and information was pulled from an EPA website (http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/materials/ecycling/index.htm).
Find a Local Program
• Earth 911
Earth 911 is a comprehensive communication medium for the environment. Earth 911 has taken environmental hotlines, web sites and other information sources nationwide, and consolidated them into one network. Once you contact the Earth 911 network, you will find community-specific information on eCycling and much more.
• My Green Electronics
Provided by the Consumer Electronics Association, this site is a resource for consumers wishing to purchase green products and/or searching for local opportunities to recycle or donate used electronics.
• Electronic Industries Alliance's Consumer Education Initiative
The Electronic Industries Alliance's eCycling Central Web site helps you find reuse, recycling and donation programs for electronics products in your state.
• TechSoup
TechSoup has compiled a comprehensive body of information to promote computer recycling and reuse. This site provides resources for those who would like to donate hardware, those who would like to acquire recycled hardware, and refurbishers.
• Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation (RBRC)
RBRC can help you recycle portable rechargeable batteries commonly found in cordless power tools, cellular and cordless phones, laptop computers, camcorders, digital cameras, and remote control toys. Search for collection sites by zip code.
Manufacturer and Retailer Programs
Manufacturers and retailers take different approaches to give you several options to donate or recycle your electronics.
AT&T Reuse and Recycle
• Reuse & Recycle Program offers you the option to bring unwanted cell phones, Personal Data Assistants (PDAs) and other accessories (regardless of the manufacturer or carrier) to an AT&T operated store or participating authorized dealer store near you. Use the store locator to find a participating store near you.
• For information on holding a cell phone recycling collection at your business or in your community, please visit AT&T's online starter kit for donations.
Best Buy
• Best Buy offers consumer electronics recycling programs in all Best Buy U.S. stores. Best Buy will accept most electronics, including TVs, DVD players, computer monitors, cell phones and more. Consumers can bring in up to two items a day per household. See Best Buy Recycling for details.
• Drop off old cell phones, rechargeable batteries, and ink-jet cartridges at the free recycling kiosks located just inside the door of every US Best Buy store.
• Trade in unwanted electronic products for Best Buy gift cards or just recycle it for free. See Best Buy Trade-In for a step-by-step process for Tech Trade-In.
Dell
• RECONNECT (specific cities within California, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas only) is a comprehensive electronics recovery, reuse and environmentally responsible recycling partnership between Goodwill Industries and Dell, Inc. for consumers in participating communities.
• Recycling and Donation
• Asset Recovery Services
eBay
• Rethink Initiative provides information, tools and solutions that make it easy to find new users for idle computers and electronics, and responsibly recycle unwanted products.
Hewlett-Packard
• Product Recycling (including hardware, LaserJet supplies, and Inkjet supplies)
• Trade-In Program
• Hewlett-Packard/Compaq Asset Recovery Services
Intel
• Students Recycling Used Technology (StRUT) provides technology-based education for K-16 students through the process of refurbishing donated equipment for schools.
o Silicon Valley StRUT
o Arizona StRUT
o Oregon StRUT
LG Electronics
• Offers consumers a free mail-in recycling program for old cell phones and their accessories (any make or model). Simply box up your old phone and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label from their Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
• Offers consumers free take back and recycling of any product such as televisions, monitors, audio equipment, video cassette players and recorders, DVD players and recorders, combination TV/VCR and TV/DVD units, set top boxes and accessories associated with those products that have the LG, ZENITH or GOLDSTAR brands. Consumers can drop off up to 5 items at any one time for free at any of these locations.
Motorola
• Consumers can visit Motorola's Web site to print out postage paid mailing labels (PDF) (1 pg, 112K, about PDF) and send in any unused phones or accessories.
• Motorola also created the Race to Recycle program, an innovative fundraising opportunity for K-12 schools, that allows them to earn extra money by recycling old mobile phones.
NEC Display Solutions
• Total Trade Program
Nokia
• Offers a free mail-in recycling program for old cell phones. Simply print a prepaid shipping label and send in your unwanted phones. Additionally, consumers can pick up a prepaid shipping envelope at any of the Nokia flagship stores in Chicago and New York.
Office Depot
• Tech Recycling Boxes ($5-$15 depending on size) are available at participating stores. You can fill the boxes with as many used consumer electronics (cell phones/PDAs, computers, televisions, etc) as will fit and drop the unsealed boxes off at any Office Depot store to be recycled.
• Every store has kiosks where consumers can drop off used cell phones, batteries and accessories.
Samsung
• Offers a mail-in recycling program to customers who want to recycle Samsung cell phones and accessories. Simply box up your old phone and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label from the Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
Sony
• Take Back Recycling Program
• Notebook Trade-in Program
Sony Ericsson
• Offers consumers the ability to print pre-printed shipping label from their Web site and mail in old devices (any make or model) free of charge.
• Offers an event based cell phone recycling program. For more information on setting up a cell phone recycling program in your area, contact Steve Coston (steve.coston@sonyericsson.com).
Sprint
• Offers two cell phone recycling programs for consumers:
o The Sprint Buyback program offers Sprint customers an account credit for returning eligible Sprint and Nextel models of phones.
o The Sprint Project Connect program is available to all consumers. It accepts wireless phones, batteries, accessories and connection cards for recycling - regardless of make, model, condition, or service provider.
You can participate in either program at no charge by visiting Sprint's Web site or a Sprint retail store. Use the store locator to find a participating store near you.
• Sprint provides consumers with the free cell phone data eraser tool to clear any personal information from the phone.
Staples
• EcoEasy offers consumers in-store recycling of computers, monitors, printers, desktop copiers and other electronic waste for a fee of $10 per item
• All Staples stores offer in-store collection bins where consumers can drop-off cell phones, PDAs, chargers, other handheld electronics, and ink and toner cartridges for recycling ($3 rebates are available for some eligible toner cartridges).
T-Mobile
• Handset Recycling Program offers both in-store drop-off locations and a mail-in recycling option for cell phones, PDAs, and accessories. To use the mail in option, simply box up your mobile devise and accessories, print off the pre-paid mailing label (PDF) (1 pg, 1.2MB, about PDF) from the Web site and mail in the phone for recycling.
• Postage paid recycling bags are included with all purchases. Customers can also pick up a recycling envelope at any T-Mobile store. Use the store locator to find a participating T-Mobile store in your area.
Toshiba
• Recycling and Trade-In Program
Verizon Wireless
• Verizon Wireless' HopeLine program collects no-longer-used wireless phones and equipment in any condition from any service provider. The used phones are either refurbished for reuse or recycled. Used phones can be returned to any Verizon Wireless retail store across the country. Use the Store Locator to find the Verizon store closest to you.
• Wireless phones and equipment donations can also be sent to:
Verizon Wireless HopeLine
c/o CMB Wireless Group
630 Broadway Avenue
Holbrook, NY 11741
Government-Supported Donation and Recycling Programs
• e-cycle St. Louis: Electronics Recycling for the Region
This consumer electronics collection program has been developed by the St. Louis Regional Partnership for Electronics Recovery to encourage reuse and recycling of unwanted electronics in the St. Louis region.
• eRecycle.org
This Web site provides guidance and information to consumers in California about recycling electronics.
• Federal Electronic Challenge
If you are a government agency or a business, check out the Federal Electronics Challenge for tools on how a large institution can donate or recycle its used electronics.
• www.ecyclingtools.com
This resource kit provides information on the entire lifecycle of electronics and contains useful information to help you address your e-waste concerns
These are just a few of many different opportunities to find a safe and environmentally friendly way to get rid of your electronics. These websites and information was pulled from an EPA website (http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/materials/ecycling/index.htm).
Monday, January 18, 2010
Cleaning Products
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.
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.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)