Story of Stuff.

If you are a parent of a school age kid in the U.S., it’s hard to avoid the back-to-school marketing that is in full swing, even with 3 more weeks of summer vacation left.

The last thing most kids want in the middle of a sunny August day is to be reminded of the impending return to school.

And the last thing parents want is to inadvertently expose their kid to hazardous chemicals.

Unfortunately, many of today’s common school supplies contain PVC, a toxic plastic found in items such as backpacks and 3-ring binders. Not only is PVC itself bad news, but many PVC items – including school supplies – contain additional toxic chemicals, like phthalates, that are harmful to children’s health.

So, before you stock up on school supplies, take some time to learn how to recognize and avoid PVC.

Today, August 8th, the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (CHEJ) released the 4th annual Back-to-School Guide to PVC-Free School Supplies.

The guide is huge a great resource for parents, teachers, school nurses and administrators looking for safer alternatives to PVC school stuff. It contains PVC-free options for backpacks, 3-ring binders, laptops, notebooks, lunchboxes, and more in over 20 product categories.

As concerned parents and educators, we need to:

A) Avoid PVC products in our homes and schools and

B) Join a campaign to get PVC out of all products, especially those marketed to kids.

You can learn how to recognize and avoid PVC by reviewing CHEJ’s Back-to-School Guide and other resources on their site. Once you’ve learned how to keep PVC out of your home and schools, forward the guide to friends and to your kids’ teachers to spread the word.

And then join the campaign!

CHEJ works with parents, teachers and others around the country who want to educate and organize to keep PVC out of our communities. Don’t worry if you haven’t worked on a campaign like this before; CHEJ welcomes new people and provides all kinds of training and support! To get involved, contact Makia Burns at CHEJ, MBurns@chej.org. Email her soon, because she is holding a national conference call for PVC organizers in the U.S. on August 11th – ask her for details if you want to join.

Some environmental health problems are really complicated and involve complicated or painful trade-offs. This is not. We need to stop using PVC plastic. It’s toxic. It’s unnecessary. Dozens of companies and governments around the world are already moving away from PVC. Let’s add our homes, our schools and our communities to the growing list of Safe, Healthy, PVC-Free Zones.

Originally posted on TreeHugger:

At NYC’s Density, the World’s Population Could Live in Texas

by Alex Davies, Paris, France on 07.27.11
 population-density-map-nyc-texas-1.jpg

Images Courtesy of Tim De Chant, Per Square Mile

It turns out that if you wanted every person in the world to move to Texas, finding room for everyone wouldn’t be your biggest problem. A series of maps produced by denisty blog Per Square Mile shows that if the entire world’s population- 6.9 billion people- lived at the same density level as New York City, we could all fit within the borders of the Lone Star State.

population-density-map-nyc-texas.jpg

At Paris levels, we would need Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. If the world lived like Houston, we would take up most of the continental United States: 1,769,085 square miles.

This doesn’t mean that the whole world could actually live in Texas, considering the need for farmland, industrial space, and energy production. (Although what if all the roofs generated solar power?) And there’s a lot to be said for the benefits of living in the country.

But Per Square Mile’s density statistics are thought-provoking. Density is more sustainable than sprawl, and while it might be hard to convince every person on Earth to move to Texas, we could all afford to live a little closer together. (Though we don’t have to live like New Yorkers.)

Via Gothamist

More on density vs. sprawl:
How Urbanism, Building Efficiency, and Cleaner Cars Can Solve Climate Change (Book Review)
Israeli New Urbanists: Density Will Make Our Cities Better Places to Live
Are Cities Green, Or Are We Just Pigs in a Factory Farm?

Written by Stephen Messenger, a Treehugger blogger

Agent Orange is one of the most devastating weapons of modern warfare, a chemical which killed or injured an estimated 400,000 people during the Vietnam War — and now it’s being used against the Amazon rainforest. According to officials, ranchers in Brazil have begun spraying the highly toxic herbicide over patches of forest as a covert method to illegally clear foliage, more difficult to detect that chainsaws and tractors. In recent weeks, an aerial survey detected some 440 acres of rainforest that had been sprayed with the compound — poisoning thousands of trees and an untold number of animals, potentially for generations.

Officials from Brazil’s environmental agency IBAMA were first tipped to the illegal clearing by satellite images of the forest in Amazonia; a helicopter flyover in the region later revealed thousands of trees left ash-colored and defoliated by toxic chemicals. IBAMA says that Agent Orange was likely dispersed by aircraft by a yet unidentified rancher to clear the land for pasture because it is more difficult to detect than traditional operations that require chainsaws and tractors.

Last week, in another part of the Amazon, an investigation conducted by the agency uncovered approximately four tons of the highly toxic herbal pesticides hidden in the forest awaiting dispersion. If released, the chemicals could have potentially decimated some 7,500 acres of rainforest, killing all the wildlife that resides there and contaminating groundwater. In this case, the individual responsible was identified now faces fines nearing $1.3 million.

According to a report from Folha de São Paulo, the last time such chemicals were recorded in use by deforesters was in 1999, but officials say dispensing the devastating herbicide may become more common as officials crack down on environmental crimes.

“They [deforesters] have changed their strategy because, in a short time, more areas of forest can be destroyed with herbicides. Thus, they don’t need to mobilize tree-cutting teams and can therefore bypass the supervision of IBAMA,” says Jerfferson Lobato of IBAMA.

While Agent Orange was originally designed to clear forest coverage in combat situations, its use became a subject of controversy due to its impact on humans and wildlife. During the Vietnam War, the United States military dispersed 12 million gallons of herbicide, impacting the health of some 3 million, mostly peasant, Vietnamese citizens, and causing birth defects in around 500 thousand children. Additionally, the chemical’s effect on the environment have been profound and lasting.

Last month, over three decades after Agent Orange was last used in Vietnam, the US began funding a $38 million decontamination operation there. Meanwhile, in the Brazilian Amazon, the highly toxic chemical was being discovered anew and sprayed over the rainforest.

This post was originally published by Treehugger.

Right now, EU law makers are introducing an important bill which would impose strict pollution standards on car and lorry fuels and would effectively ban tar sands fuel, the world’s most filthy and environmentally destructive transport oil. But shockingly, the UK is opposing it.

Our government is bending under pressure from the oil industry and the Canadian government, who stand to make billions if they can get an ally to water down the law and remove the clause that bans tar sands. We can expose these dirty dealings, and demand the government support the law and protect the climate.

Tomorrow, campaigners will meet with Transport Minister Norman Baker. Let’s show him the British public is united against any attempt to undermine this critical legislation — sign below, then send this to everyone:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/crude_politics/?vl

Tar sands fuel is nasty stuff. Oil companies destroy and degrade millions of acres of pristine Canadian forest and displace indigenous communities just to reach the unrefined bitumen. Refining it spreads cancerous heavy metals and sulphur through the air and leaves a barren, toxic landscape. The US Environmental Protection Agency says refining tar sands causes at least 82% more carbon pollution than refining conventional oil. But for Canada and the oil companies, the returns are lucrative — oil giants recently announced a $379 billion investment in them.

The EU wants to help stop this catastrophe, but the UK is standing in the way. The EU’s proposed Fuel Quality Directive would set a binding 6% climate pollution reduction target for Europe’s transport fuels by 2020. We need to make sure that our government – which likes to parade green credentials – doesn’t cave to tar sands oil interests.

Our political leaders should be securing a cleaner energy future for us and our children, not caving in to polluters that bring oil spills and climate change. Time is short — we need to convince the transport minister by June 23rd. Let’s tell the UK government to keep dirty fuels out of the EU. Sign the petition now, then forward this email to friends who want clean air:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/crude_politics/?vl

In a world with a safe and stable climate, using energy will not come at the expense of our natural environment. Canada’s tar sands are an out-dated approach to energy, where profit outweighs pollution. We have a chance to make a change now. Together, we’ve influenced international climate summits, world leaders and our parliaments — now let’s take another decisive step towards a cleaner future.

With hope,

Alex, Maria Paz, Morgan, Iain, Ricken, Stephanie, Giulia, Pascal, Benjamin, Luis, and the rest of the Avaaz team

SOURCES

UK undermining EU tar sands ban
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/may/30/uk-undermining-tar-sands-ban

Pollution fears as UK blocks European ban on fuel from tar sands
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/pollution-fears-as-uk-blocks-european-ban-on-fuel-from-tar-sands-2291598.html

Why Europe could decide the fate of Canada’s tar sands
http://thetyee.ca/News/2010/10/20/EuropeDecidesFate/

Canada tries to hide tar sands carbon emissions http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/01/canada-tar-sands-carbon-emissions

US Environmental Protection Agency review of tar sands impact http://yosemite.epa.gov/oeca/webeis.nsf/(PDFView)/20100126/$file/20100126.PDF?OpenElement (pdf)

YouTube – DON’T REVOKE BP’S CORPORATE CHARTER!.

“Biofuels” are transportation fuels like ethanol and biodiesel that are made from biomass materials. These fuels are usually blended with the petroleum fuels — gasoline and diesel fuel, but they can also be used on their own. Using ethanol or biodiesel means we don’t burn quite as much fossil fuel. Ethanol and biodiesel are usually more expensive than the fossil fuels that they replace, but they are also cleaner-burning fuels, producing fewer air pollutants.
What Is Ethanol?
Ethanol is an alcohol fuel made from the sugars found in grains, such as Corn, Sorghum and Barley. Switchgrass can yield almost twice as much ethanol as corn, estimates geneticist Ken Vogel, who is conducting breeding and genetics research on switchgrass to improve its biomass yield and its ability to recycle carbon as a renewable energy crop.
Other sources of sugars to produce ethanol include: Potato skins, Rice, Sugar cane, Sugar beets, Yard clippings, Bark and Switchgrass.
Most of the ethanol used in the United States today is distilled from corn, gving rise to concerns over world food shortages, as biofuels demand increases. Scientists are working on cheaper ways to make ethanol by using all parts of plants and trees rather than just the grain. Farmers are experimenting with “woody crops,” mostly small poplar trees and switchgrass, to see if they can be grown cheaply and abundantly.
Ethanol Is Blended With Gasoline: About 99% of the ethanol produced in the United States is used to make “E10″ or “gasohol,” a mixture of 10% ethanol and 90% gasoline. Any gasoline powered engine can use E10, but only specially made vehicles can run on E85, a fuel that is 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline.

Ethanol Is Nontoxic and Biodegradable. Using ethanol means that we use less oil (a nonrenewable fuel) to make gasoline. Unlike gasoline, ethanol is nontoxic (safe to handle) and biodegradable; it quickly breaks down into harmless substances if spilled.
Ethanol Can Reduce Pollution. When small amounts of ethanol are added to gasoline, usually less than 10%, there are many advantages. Ethanol reduces carbon monoxide and other toxic pollution from the tailpipes of vehicles, making less air pollution. It also keeps engines running smoothly without the need for lead or other chemical additives.

Ethanol is made from crops that absorb carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. So growing crops for ethanol may have the potential to balance out carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere. The impact of greater ethanol use on net carbon dioxide emissions depends on how ethanol is made and on whether or not indirect impacts on land use are included in the calculations.

What Is Biodiesel?

Biodiesel is a fuel made from vegetable oils, fats, or greases — such as recycled restaurant grease. Biodiesel fuel can be used in diesel engines without changing them. It is the fastest growing alternative fuel in the United States. Biodiesel, a renewable fuel, is safe, biodegradable, and produces lower levels of most air pollutants than petroleum-based products; below is a video of the backyard version of the process of making biodiesel:

Of course all this uses up land that could be used for food. This practice is better run at small-scale local levels, using waste products exclusively.

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research...
Image via Wikipedia

Your old sofa – and much more – could be composted, say University of Manchester scientists

22 Feb 2010

Polyurethane plastics used to make a host of products from furniture fillings to shoe soles, cable insulation and paints – and which can be difficult to recycle – could soon be degraded in compost heaps, thanks to a study at the University of Manchester.

Dr Geoff Robson and his team at the Faculty of Life Sciences have found that certain fungi can degrade the plastic in soil. Furthermore the rate of degradation increases when the volume of these fungi is increased or nutrients are added to the soil to boost the fungi’s activity.

They are now carrying out further studies to make sure the degradation of polyurethanes does not adversely affect the composting process or its products.

Dr Robson, whose Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) funded study is published in the Applied and Environmental Microbiology, said: “This is a significant finding. Polyurethanes are used to make many, many products and can take up a large amount of volume in landfill sites, which are rapidly running out of space. This makes it a major environmental pollutant.

“This study opens the possibility that fungi could be used to degrade these materials instead of dumping them into landfill sites.”

The team placed polyurethane pieces in soil containing fungi and bacteria. As the polyurethane, which is made from petroleum, degraded, the number of fungi increased as they digested the byproducts, showing that it was indeed the fungi that were breaking down the plastic.

Dr Robson added: “Fungi which naturally occur in soils have a remarkable capacity to degrade dead plants and animals, playing a pivotal and essential role in nutrient cycling in the environment. This study demonstrates some of these fungi also have the ability to degrade man-made polyurethanes.

“We demonstrated increased degradation of polyurethanes when buried in soil either by enhancing the activity of fungi already present by adding nutrients to the soil or by adding specific fungi to the soil that had previously been isolated from the surface of degrading polyurethane.”

The team is now investigating how best to apply their findings to polyurethane waste management. One possible method would be to spray fungi onto the polyurethane but another method would be to compost polyurethane along with other compostable materials – using already existing facilities.

Dr Robson, a biochemist and plant biologist who has studied fungi for many years, said: “Fungi are the classic underdogs. If we didn’t have fungi, we wouldn’t be here – we would be buried under mountains of stuff that they break down for us. They are also a treasure chest of pharmaceutical products, producing not just penicillin but also other antibiotics and immunosuppressant drugs. They are used to make arachadonic acid, the fatty acid essential for brain development in babies and used in baby milk formula, and their enzymes are used to turn milk into cheese, make bread dough rise better, clean our clothes in detergents and make fruit juice amongst many, many other applications.

“There is very little research on fungi compared to other microorganisms and only a fraction of them are actually known – around 20% have been identified.

“This latest finding just shows what amazing organisms they are.”

Notes for editors

The paper ‘Effect of Biostimulation and Bioaugmentation on Degradation of Polyurethane Buried in Soil’, in Applied and Environmental Microbiology, is available.

For more information, a copy of the paper or an interview with Dr Geoff Robson contact Media Relations Officer Mikaela Sitford on 0161 275 2111, 07768 980942 or Mikaela.Sitford@manchester.ac.uk.

via Your old sofa – and much more – could be composted, say scientists (The University of Manchester).

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The End of the Affair: Watch on BBC iPlayer

Part 3 of the BBC series documenting the history of the British motorway, looking at how we began to question the promises made by the motorway and along the way found our voice of protest. After the first 1,000 miles or so had been built, the impact of motorways on both town and country was becoming apparent and Middle England rose up and disrupted public inquiries to voice its frustration, and showing the extent of public protest which has spanned generations, long before Swampy.

Click for PDF Map of Hardy Farm Sports Centre 'Restoration' Proposals (pdf) This shows a large area of land to the south of the proposed new clubhouse, apparently also purchased by West Didsbury and Chorlton Grounds LtdHistoric Hardy Farm, part of Chorlton Meadows in the Mersey Valley, is under threat from development. A company called West Didsbury and Chorlton Grounds Ltd, fronted by Rob Turley who is also vice chairman and CEO of West Didsbury and Chorlton AFC (a separate entity), and formerly of Turley Associates planning consultancy, has purchased all the land shown green on the map, with the immediate intention of building 8 new football pitches including an astroturf pitch, Exempla style fencing and 15 metre (49ft) high floodlights for 2 pitches.

Clicking the map should open a PDF in a new window (Adobe Reader requ’d) in which can be seen the extent of the proposal.

Some of this land has been purchased from Manchester University; who owned the rest is not known.

The area is rich in wildlife and biodiversity; it is the only wild open space in South Manchester and there are already too many under-used football facilites See Google map close by. Floodlights and fencing will completely change the character of the area, and the lights may disturb bats, which are already on the decline in England. Once it is gone it is gone.

A Planning Application has already been submitted for the floodlit pitches; planning already exists for the other pitches, dating from UMIST’s ownership

Objections deadline was Oct 1st 2009, however if you missed the deadline please keep submitting objections. Generally, the dept. will still include ones that are in when they are collating their report. Objections, even as late as the day before committee are included in late representations.

Links: Friends of Chorlton Meadows (biodiversity, photos) | In the News | Contact your Councillor or MP

UPDATES : For more information, posters, leaflets and to see what is happening and what you can do, visit:

WWW.SAVECHORLTONMEADOWS.CO.UK

Sudden Oak Death is a disease that has killed hundreds of thousands of trees in California and Oregon. It has infected large areas of live oak and tanoaks forests. This microscope footage shows the zoospores of Phytophthora ramorum, the causal agent of SOD, emerging from the sporangia. Under the right environmental conditions infectious zoospores are released and will infect new host trees. …

© 2011 Permaculture Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
Powered by WordPress Lab