ENN: Environmental News Network -- Know Your Environment

Permeable paving  If you’re considering building or replacing a driveway, carport, or other paved area, think twice before you invest in plain old concrete or asphalt. New materials and methods will not only make your property look better–they are better for the environment.

The key is allowing rainwater and snowmelt to drain into the ground, rather than sending them–and all the pollution they carry–into streets and storm drains. Just a 30-by-30 foot patch of concrete can shed over 550 gallons of water in a one-inch rain. Multiply that by thousands of homes, and you’re talking a tidal wave of potentially tainted H2O. Permeable pavement can even lower the temperature around your house in the summertime because, while it absorbs moisture, it absorbs less heat.

Top Tips

• Consider your options. Below are some permeable pavement possibilities, from very inexpensive small stones to pavers and even driveways and carports made of grass.
  • Small stones. These are the least expensive, and allow water to penetrate, but require more frequent maintenance because little stones are easily displaced. NOTE: By “stones,” we mean smooth stones, not crushed gravel, which lets water run off instead of down in the ground.
  • Grass. Yes, it’s possible to turn asphalt or concrete into lawns. This is achieved by sinking a durable plastic grid into the ground and letting the grass grow in it. Vehicles can be driven on it, just like on a driveway, but if they are parked for extended periods of time, the grass won’t grow.
  • Pavers. There are good-looking interlocking pavers that fit together like puzzle pieces but that have sufficient gaps between them to allow water to seep down into the ground.
  • Hollywood driveway. This old standby is well worth considering. Instead of a solid run of asphalt or concrete, it consists of two narrow, parallel strips of concrete, spaced so that a vehicle’s wheels can drive on them. Water soaks into the vegetation beside these strips. This type of driveway will be cheaper than solid concrete because less concrete is required. If the path is extremely long, however, it may be hard to follow, so drivers’ skills must be taken into account, especially if long backups are involved.
  • Pervious (permeable) concrete. Made by using less fine material in the concrete mix, perious concrete is durable and porous. Contact local contractors to see if they are familiar enough with this material to do an installation.
  • Porous asphalt. This type of asphalt works on the same principle as the perious concrete described above. It, too, is durable, but should be installed by an experienced contractor.

Article continues:  Sierra Club Green Home

An interesting new trend is emerging in home décor, one that eschews the arguably vicious centuries-long practice of adorning walls with stuffed animal heads. Once—and to varying degrees, still—considered an art predominantly consumed by the privileged—taxidermy is now falling out of fashion.

In an interesting New York Daily News article from January of this year, a woman hit her head against a mounted moose in a Manhattan bar. The woman suffered extensive head and neck injuries, and she ended up suing the restaurant. In response to this incident, the organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sent out a letter to the National Restaurant Association, urging all participating restaurants to give up taxidermy in their establishments. PETA moreover offered to replace each animal head with a “friendly faux” alternative.

In the letter addressed to the National Restaurant Association, PETA president and CEO Dawn Sweeney strongly suggested, as a New Year’s resolution of sorts, ” Take down and send us those old animal heads, which, these days, are more likely to put diners off than attract them, and we will provide you with an amusing and stylish faux head for the new year.”

Fair enough. However PETA’s offerings were not, as it turns out, an isolated incident of a somewhat infamously radical animal rights group inserting themselves in a rather absurd restaurant accident. For all intents and purposes, the faux taxidermy wall hangings are here to stay, at least for the moment. A quick Google search will reveal the various stores that offer such alternatives. Some are entirely focused on animal likenesses fashioned from recycled materials like, for example, Cardboard Safari. Cardboard Safari’s products are all made locally, and they’re individually laser-cut and painted. What’s more, the company offers not just wall hangings, but full body cardboard taxidermy as well.

However, even in more popular stores, like say, the high-end women’s clothing retailer, Anthropologie , those interested in owning environmentally-friendly animal home décor can still get their respective fixes. Anthropologie offers an interesting array of “Savannah busts“, which come in four options– zebra, giraffe, gazelle, and rhino. Each is made with repurposed cement bags and pages from antique French books.

In a culture that is becoming increasingly aware of the implications—both ethical and environmental—that are associated with hunting animals, a recycled alternative to taxidermy becomes a unique replacement that celebrates the wonders of the animal kingdom without harm.

This guest post is contributed by Mariana Ashley, who writes on the topics of online colleges. She welcomes your comments at her email Id: mariana.ashley031@gmail.com.

For the past five years, Worldwatch has explored the history, production method, and environmental and social impacts of everyday products – from chopsticks to pencils – in the Life-Cycle Studies section of its bi-monthly magazine, World Watch.

Overview

Milk has nourished young mammals for millions of years, but only humans skim, shake, “chocolify,” and otherwise alter and commodify the milk of other species. Yet before cattle were domesticated some 9,000 years ago, milking a cow was an extreme sport and humans avoided or just ignored their milk. And after weaning, they had no need for the enzymes that separate lactose sugars, so most older humans were lactose intolerant. But geneticists guess that 5,000-7,000 years ago in Europe a rare adventurous lactose-tolerant individual dared to drink the milk from his or her cattle. Those with similar genetic advantages eventually followed in a similar milky way.

Many of the cultures that first developed tastes for milk, such as the almost entirely lactose-tolerant Scandinavians, continue to drink it the most: The highest annual per-capita milk consumption worldwide is found in Finland (184 liters) and Sweden (146 liters). More than 578 million tons of fresh milk were produced in 2008, a 20-percent increase from 1998, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. China, Brazil, and India accounted for nearly half of the decade’s increased output. The FAO expects that milk consumption will double by 2050.

Production

Like humans, cows must become pregnant to produce milk. Within a calf’s first two days, females are removed and raised for dairy production, while males are often sold for beef. Cows are increasingly living out their lives in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). In the United States, the largest dairy farms raise an estimated 1,200 cows each, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The GAO estimates that such large farms generate 30,502 tons of manure apiece each year, forming lagoons of waste that often generate runoff water pollution and foul the air with nitrous oxide and other contaminants.

Dairy herds are fed corn or soy to increase daily milk production. However, cows evolved to eat grasses, so a starch-based diet often results in increased physiological stress and infections, which producers typically minimize through multiple antibiotic injections every year. Larger operations treat herds with pesticides to prevent irritation from flies and lice, exposing farm workers and potentially contaminating nearby water resources. Some producers also treat their cows with bovine growth hormone (or rBST), which researchers have linked to calf deformations, udder infections, and cancer risks in milk consumers. While the United States considers rBST health risks to be “manageable,” the hormone is banned in Australia, Canada, most of Europe, and New Zealand. Consumer opposition has led several dairy farms to end rBST use voluntarily; applications in the United States decreased by at least 5 percent since 2002, according to the U..S. Department of Agriculture.

Dairy farms contribute, on average, 93 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with milk (with dairy processing and packaging production responsible for the remaining gases), mostly due to methane released directly from cows and land-use changes associated with creating cow pasture. On average, one kilogram of milk is responsible for one kilogram of carbon dioxide equivalent, according to the International Dairy Federation. The FAO, in a report released in April, estimated that the global dairy sector contributes 4 percent of human-caused greenhouse gases. Each kilogram of milk also requires nearly 10 liters of water for feed, cleaning, and production.

Doing Better

Milk can generally be certified as organic if dairy herds are fed crops (or pasture) free of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, genetic modification, and slaughter byproducts such as manure or blood. Farmers must also grant herds access to pasture during growing seasons, treat the cows humanely, and separate any sick cows treated with antibiotics.

In addition to organic certification, several governments and industries are rolling out initiatives to limit dairy farm waste, emissions, and water use. The United Kingdom, for instance, announced its Milk Roadmap in 2008 – a voluntary campaign to reduce water usage 5-15 percent per liter of milk by 2010, develop manure management plans on 95 percent of farms, and reduce dairy-related greenhouse gases 20-30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

Link to Worldwatch Institute

By: Kathleen Neil, Contributing Editor

Since the time my father sat me behind the wheel of a surplus World War II Jeep and taught me to drive a standard transmission, I have admired the durability and dependability of internal combustion engines. It was simple, there were really only two things to remember: always be sure there was gas in the spare tank and whenever possible park on a downward slope. The past two days in La Jolla, California, Toyota Motor Company has persuaded me that there can be good and green driving though computers.

The Prius 2010 Plug-In Hybrid Vehicle (PHV) is not the car I would hand over to my twenty-something son. It would be a waste. The seamless transition from electric to hybrid and back to electric that I experienced with my driving habits would not work for him since the driver really doesn’t feel it when you depress the accelerator pedal and the on-board (computer) system decides what the road and your foot are telling it are the optimal power sources. Low speed, stop-and-go, gentle pressure on the accelerator, and no strenuous road demands tell the Prius PHV to keep you in electric mode.

On the other hand, fast acceleration from a stop-light into a left-hand turn across traffic, or expressway driving demands and the internal combustion engine aspect is right there without you realizing it to give the driver an anxiety-free feeling. I drove the vehicle twice, first the afternoon of April 12th in mixed city-expressway along a 10-mile route (68% of that in electric mode), and second the afternoon of April 13th in city (with heavy traffic) driving along a 14-mile route (74% of that in electric mode). The dash display showed I got 99.9 miles to the gallon both times, but I later learned that’s the limit of the gauge, too bad, I’m sure I did much better than that.

Toyota has also reinforced my sense that they are a good corporate citizen in the way they set up and ran the Sustainable Mobility Seminar in La Jolla from April 12-15, 2010 where I had the opportunity to drive and learn about the 2010 Prius PHV. With only a brief and interesting early morning presentation about the Prius itself, the rest of the seminar was an exceptionally open and unfettered series of excellent speakers and great opportunities to ask questions of a diverse collection of experts about the most pressing environmental questions facing us now.

No need to take my word for it, look for yourself http://www.toyota.com/esq/events/2010/Sustainable_Mobility_Seminar_.html.

A couple of weeks ago, Tel Aviv University students joined others at Harvard, Oxford, Columbia, and many other universities worldwide in a campaign – Meat Free Mondays – that demonstrates their high level of education regarding vegetarianism’s positive effect on the environment.

The meat industry is one of the most energy intensive and carbon emitting industries in the world, and so vegetarianism (or vegawarianism) is a more eco-friendly option. Even if it is for only one day of the week, as in the case of Meatless Mondays in Tel Aviv.

The global Meatless Monday campaign is led by Paul McCartney, Yoko Ono, and other celebrities along with climate change scientists and public health institutions.

So what did Meatless Monday at Tel Aviv University look like?

Like hundreds of free vegetarian meals distributed to students free of charge and invitations to attend lectures on the relationship between eating meat and climate change. And what was on the vegetarian menu? Smoked tofu appetizers, seitan (wheat gluten), vegetarian shawarma, soy goulash, and an Indian legume dish.

But the initiative was not limited to that one Meatless Monday. The university cafeteria will now serve a special vegetarian dish every Monday.

Professor Dan Rabinowitz, the former president of the Israel Union of Environmental NGOs, said that “changing our eating habits, as suggested by ‘Meatfree Monday’, is the simplest and most effective way for each of us to help, quite without effort, the global campaign aimed at stopping climate change.”

Original Article from Green Prophet
For more information on the Meat Free Monday initiative: Supportmfm

There’s a plan afoot among evolutionary scientists to launch a big new project — to look back in time and find out how climate change over millions of years affected human evolution.

A panel of experts from the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., has given its blessing to the plan. They say it could unveil a whole new side of human history.

Anthropologist Rick Potts, who heads the human origins department at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, has been pushing the idea that “climate made us” for years.

Lately, he’s been putting together an exhibit called “What Does It Mean to Be Human?” Among cabinets displaying dozens of skulls of human ancestors, and bronze statues of Neanderthals and other evolutionary experiments, there are displays suggesting the novel idea that climate change influenced how we evolved.

“The explanations that we’ve had tied human origins back to an African savannah or to a European ice age,” Potts says, “and it was never really adequate to understand the plasticity, the versatility of the human species.”

Habitats Kept Changing, And So Did The Humans

Darwin’s idea was that living things adapt to a place — a habitat.

But Potts says habitats kept changing because climates kept changing. Centuries of drought, for example, would shift to centuries of monsoons, over and over. Which raises a question, Potts says: “Not how did humans become adapted to a specific ancestral environment, but how did we become adaptable?” Extraordinarily adaptable to so many different environments.

“And that’s a totally new question,” he says, “one that Darwin never really addressed.”

Potts is one of the authors of the National Academy of Sciences report, and proposes that it was flip-flopping climate that sparked some of our biggest evolutionary adaptations — the invention of better tools, for example, or a bigger brain.

Article Continues: NPR Topics: Health & Science

It’s a dream that’s probably flitted through everyone’s mind at some point: to travel completely baggage-free.

The problem of course, for those of us unable to afford a new wardrobe for each destination, is what to wear when you get there. Zero Baggage hopes to provide the answer.

The startup has concocted a service for travelers that provides them with the clothes and other essentials they need at their final destination. Users simply fill in an online virtual suitcase, the contents of which will be waiting in their hotel room when they arrive. Items are used but clean and well-maintained, new or one-use only.

Weight saved by eliminating checked luggage can be converted into carbon credits which can be spent on various treats. The service hopes to be up and running in November.

But will it fly?

As Zero Baggage founder Catharine MacIntosh points out in an airy promotional video, a handful of discount airlines have already instituted no-baggage flights. And fees for checked baggage have been going up.

But while there is no doubt that many many people would jump at the opportunity to ditch their luggage, sharing clothes with virtual strangers may not be the answer they are looking for.

On the other hand, many people wear second-hand clothing. And as for intimates and toothbrushes, you’ll still have your carry-on.

Weightless living

Zero Baggage will also offer “virtual closets” in different cities. Travelers can store their own and rented items in these closets for use when they get there. And it’s not necessary to travel to take advantage of Zero Baggage’s store of circulated items — they can be rented at home as well.

Think of it as a concierge service for communitarians, or a way to bring “us closer to a state of seamless travel and weightless living,” as Zero Baggage explains on its website.

From ENN Affiliate, Triple Pundit

A new study suggests that hand sanitizers containing ethanol are much more effective at removing rhinovirus from hands than washing with soap and water. Sanitizers containing both ethanol and organic acids significantly reduced recovery of the virus from hands and rhinovirus infection up to 4 hours following application.

The researchers from the University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville and Dial Corporation, Scottsdale, Arizona detail their findings in the March 2010 issue of the journal Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

Rhinovirus is the known cause of approximately 30 to 35% of common cold cases in adults. Hand-to-hand contact is one of the main avenues of transmission contributing to the spread of rhinovirus infections. In the study researchers compared the effects of hand washing with soap and water and an ethanol-based hand sanitizer by contaminating the fingers of healthy volunteers with rhinovirus and then randomly grouping them and administering one of six hand treatments.

The experiments ranged from a control group who had no treatment, several groups who washed their hands for differing amounts of time (some with soap, some without), and several who used varying amounts of hand sanitizer. Results showed that the ethanol hand sanitizer removed approximately 80% of detectable rhinovirus from hands and was much more effective than no treatment, water alone, or soap and water. Soap and water removed rhinovirus from 31% of hands.

Further, researchers added organic acids to the ethanol-based sanitizer and analyzed its ability to provide persistent antiviral activity against rhinovirus following application. Results showed that the sanitizer containing both organic acids and ethanol inactivated the virus on hands and prevented infection 2 to 4 hours following application.

“The ethanol-containing hand disinfectants were significantly more effective than hand washing with water or with soap and water for removal of detectable rhinovirus for the hands in this study,” say the researchers. “Furthermore, a formula containing organic acids and ethanol resulted in residual activity that significantly reduced virus recovery from the hands and rhinovirus infection for up to 4 hours after application.”

From ENN Affiliate ScienceDaily

Spring arrived this weekend in the Northern Hemisphere.

After what was a cold and snowy winter in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast US, Spring arrived and there are signs of nature awakening. The spring flowers are appearing and there are new birds in our backyards and parks. The earth smells like Spring as frozen soil thaws and wood molds release their pungent aromas.

So get out and enjoy it!

Spring is a great time to get out in nature and see what is thawing, stirring, and growing. Animals we have not seen all winter are rousing from their winter hibernation, plants that are dormant all winter are sending out new growth, and spring flowers are appearing. There are spring programs at parks and nature centers all over the US.

Here are some good activities for families:

Take a nature walk or hike. Find a nearby park, nature center, or wildlife refuge. Many have spring activities the might include guided walks, observation areas, and workshops for children.

Take a bike ride or roller blade. There are rails – to – trails routes in many areas, including urban and suburban locations where you can safely bike or roller blade away from traffic. These often offer views of natural areas from perspectives you just can’t get from a car.

Go fishing! Fishing, catch and release, is a great activity for children. In most states, children under a certain age, typically 16 or 18, but in some states a younger age, do not need fishing licenses (adults can help too). Some towns sponsor spring fishing contests for children too.

Put up a bird house. If you have a yard with trees, put up a bird house or two. These can be made by those with basic wood working tools, or purchased at hardware stores or nature centers. Seeing birds move in and raise young is a great way to observe birds close up. Consider a bird bath or other source of water too.

Plant a garden. Gardens are a great way for children to learn about plants (and insects!). A garden can range from a backyard or community vegetable garden to a windowsill herb or flower garden. Seeing seeds germinate and grow into plants, flower, and set fruit, is to watch the miracle of nature close up. Gardens can provide food, spices, and flowers, or all three! Plant some seeds, or get starter plants from a garden center or store and see what fun this can be!

Green Lessons From Our Neighbor to the North – by Laine Seaton
Executive Director, Environmental Fund for Arizona

Minnesota is kicking our butt. No, I’m not talking ice hockey or the fact that they have 10,000 lakes – yes, it’s not just their state motto. Rather, I’m talking about their killer support for their environment – hey, they have 10,000 lakes to keep pristine remember? But seriously, Minnesota is leaving us in the dust when it comes to supporting the environment through workplace giving. What’s that you ask? Workplace giving is just that – where employees in companies, cities, counties, universities, or really any organization can give to charities through their workplace, usually via payroll deduction.

For decades, the United Way has been the biggest player on the block. But more recently, other groups, called federations, have joined in looking for an equal piece of the workplace giving pie, representing other nonprofit sectors including the environment. EarthShare (link to www.earthshare.org) is the granddaddy of environmental federations and has 19 state affiliates across the country. There are however a few of us ‘rogue’ independent greenies, like our own Environmental Fund for Arizona (EFAZ) (link to www.efaz.org), but the Minnesota Environmental Fund (link to www.mnenvirofund.org) is one that we Arizonans would be wise to emulate.

In a little over 15 years, MEF has established itself in 140 campaigns across the state, including private companies as well as cities and counties, and now brings in on average $900,000 in donations annually for its 25 environmental group members. No matter how you slice it, that’s a nice chunk of change for MEF members to help continue their missions.

Now contrast this to how Arizona is matching up…or not. Just 17 workplaces across the entire state currently include a ‘green’ choice in their workplace campaigns. For those of us who connect the environment, smart growth, and sustainability to the health and vitality of Arizona’s future, not to mention who believe in the ‘spirit of philanthropy,’ you’d think offering an environmental choice to workplaces would be easier. It’s not. Unfortunately, sometimes long-standing tradition trumps common sense and cool ideas.

Why is ‘giving green’ at work so darn great and why should Arizona take notice? I’ll tell you. Not only does it introduce hundreds, if not thousands of folks to smaller environmental nonprofits who might not have access to companies themselves, but do amazingly cool work for our environment, but it allows Arizona employees to learn about the significant variety of environmental issues being tackled across the state, and helps them to get involved. Think Sonoran Institute and their work with Superstition Vistas. Think Audubon Arizona and their recent opening of the Nina Mason Pulliam Rio Salado Audubon Center, the gateway to a lush Sonoran riparian habitat used by over 200 species of birds and other wildlife. And don’t forget Grand Canyon Trust. They’re our champions of Arizona’s – and the nation’s – spectacular treasure, the Grand Canyon and the Colorado Plateau. These are just 3 of 29 organizations that make up EFAZ (link to www.efaz.org). Here’s another reason – one that is ridiculously obvious. Arizona is pushing ‘green’ in a big way, no not just to save the planet but for more practical reasons, like recharging our state’s economy with green jobs. Solar energy…hello? Water issues…we’re all over it. Why wouldn’t companies, cities, counties, and universities welcome a green choice into their campaigns?

So, what’s the moral of the story? Let’s not let Minnesota keep kicking our environmental butt. Isn’t the Grand Canyon and the Sonoran Desert worth saving? I say ‘wake up Arizona and smell the organically-grown, fair trade coffee.’