Green-Livin

Green Livin Do You Need Nature Therapy?

2008-08-09T10:45:00.007-05:00

Green Livin Get back to green basics

One of the best ways to groom your inner green is to reconnect with nature. Understanding the significance of living a green life becomes a lot more important when you realize that you're part of nature yourself. I'm a firm believer that when I'm in my biggest funk simply walking outside can help me snap out of it. It's a reminder that there is just so much more to life than the minute issue currently overwhelming my thoughts. Is this therapy? What's Nature Therapy?

I believe that a holistic path of healing includes a personal and intimate connection with the natural world.

There are tons of programs that encourage reconnecting with the wilderness. The intention is to restore balance, harmony, inspiration, and imagination by attuning to the energies and seasons of nature.Nurture your greener side with afternoon medicine walks. The non-strenuous walk can be in a group or in solitude.

Go alone into nature for an allotted period of time and go back to basics. Don't worry, you learn what you will need to know about equipment and using a backpack, safety procedures, wilderness ethics, and minimal impact camping.

I believe in ecopsychology, a practice that joins psychology and ecology to assist us in remembering we are part of a very big life process and that we are embedded in nature.
Don't fret because you can practice nature therapy at home or plan your own therapeutic trip:

Pick a Saturday and go on a nature walk. I didn't say hike for a reason because the point of the walk is not the intense workout that you get from climbing a mountain; but rather, quieting your mind. Or if possible, sign up for a guided nature walk in your area.

Plan a camping trip or go national park hopping and check out all the spectacular nature out there. From Yellowstone to the Grand Canyon, the United States has the largest national park system in the world all waiting to be explored.

Green Livin Where the Wild Things Are

2008-08-08T09:36:00.006-05:00

Green Livin Why Children Still Need Nature

I believe that there is a subtle magnetism in Nature, which, if we unconsciously yield to it, will direct us aright.

~Henry David Thoreau

Green livin The creek was child territory, A communal green space.

As a child, I had a creek in my backyard. I lived at the creek. The minute perfection of a baby crawdad held in my palm elicited one of my earliest moments of wonder. My creek was an ever-changing constant. It could dry to a mere trickle in a dry summer or burst from its bank after a heavy spring rain with a current that begged attempts at rafting. It was a refuge, my chief source of entertainment, a place to play with like-minded adventurous friends, and a great source of snakes.

The creek was what anthropologists call a “magic circle of play”. A place both real and imagined; it was a world away from adults. Adults were rarely needed or wanted—unless we made an exceptionally interesting find. The imagined danger was delicious.

With surprising wisdom, the adults of my childhood left children to their own devices. They knew that children need the space, solitude and most importantly, unrushed time in nature. I knew neighbors were nearby if true need arose. In the many years of creek play, Luckily for me, my neighbors were familiar with children and childhood. The creek was child territory. A communal green space. At twilight, children crouched and flitted along its banks like moths. The creek was one of the first places I sought comfort in.

When my own sons were small, I looked forward to sharing the creek world with them and they were also thrilled with the creek’s offerings. We soon discovered, however, that the climate had changed. The fish and animals were thriving, but the banks had been groomed and planted up to the water’s edge. New neighbors worried about damage children might cause to the plantings and to themselves. One expressed fear that an injury in the creek might result in a lawsuit. The sidewalk that had connected the creek to several subdivisions was claimed as private property and made forbidden to the public. These actions speak not only to Americans’ growing litigiousness, but also of the pervasive paranoia, creeping isolationism, and culture of fear that is killing American neighborhoods and keeping our children indoors. Rather than agrue with neighbors, we departed the creek and mourned the loss.

Children have always been drawn to wild, natural spaces. Toddlers allowed to explore will seek out mud under a bush or explore the most unkempt area of a backyard. Children come equipped with a natural curiosity toward the wild. The author Valerie Andrews says in her book, A Passion for this Earth, “As a child, one has that magical capacity to move among the many eras of the earth; to see the land as an animal does; to experience the sky from the perspective of a flower or a bee; to feel the earth quiver and breathe beneath us; to know a hundred different smells of mud and listen unselfconsciously to the soughing of the trees.” In much of America, however, children have disappeared from the landscape.

Richard Louv in his book, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature Deficit Disorder, writes that a lack of exposure to nature leads to not only a decrease in a child’s sense of wonder, but also an actual loss of senses. Nature is restorative. A recent study from the University of Illinois shows what parents have long known anecdotally: that children suffering from ADHD who are exposed to green spaces show marked improvement. Nature therapy is becoming a popular recommendation among child psychologists. Yet fewer and fewer American children are playing outdoors.

I hope that we can reawaken within ourselves and in our children the love of green places. I hope we can remember that aesthetics should not take precedence over sharing the natural world with children. We need to reclaim the creeks and other magic circles for our children. If we fail in reconnecting with nature, We will have yet another generation of children who collectively echo the fourth grader in Louv’s book who announced, “I like to play indoors better ‘cause that’s where all the electrical outlets are”; a message truly worthy of our fear.

Green Livin Toyota Projects Gas Prices To Hit $5.00 By Middle Of Next Decade

2008-08-07T14:24:00.001-05:00

Green Livin Toyota Projects Gas Prices To Hit $5.00 By Middle Of Next Decade, We Think They're Being Optimistic

Toyota is basing its production plans on projections that US gas prices could rise as high as $5.00 a gallon as soon as 2015. The Japanese automaker also believes the full-size truck market will experience a significant recovery in the near future. Despite demand for its fuel-efficient Prius hybrid reaching an all-time high, it is unable to increase production of the vehicle until the 2011 model year. But gas hit $4.00 a gallon earlier this year: It seems unlikely that it'll take seven years for it to rise another dollar, so is Toyota being too optimistic with its projections?

Bob Carter, general manager for Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., made the projections in remarks to reporters at and industry conference yesterday. Going on to say that while he expects total full-size truck sales to drop to 1.45 million in 2008, from 2.14 million in 2007, he expects those sales to rebound.

"We are absolutely confident that the recovery will take place, it's just arguable when," Carter said. "We've reduced production. It's our intention to build to the market. But when that market comes back, the core buyer who uses the truck for employment, who uses it for work, whether it's the landscaping company or the contractor, can't substitute a Corolla or a Yaris."
But they could use a smaller, more fuel-efficient truck. Carter does expect to see a significant reduction in demand amongst recreational truck buyers — the kind of people who buy big trucks because they want them, not because they need them for work.

A new 2011 Toyota Prius is in the works, as is a new plant in Mississippi that will be capable of producing a significantly higher number of the hybrids. But until then, Carter says, "In the short term after having that kind of increase last year and a big increase the year before that we're restricted on capacity and components." But with a new Honda hybrid on the way, maybe priced as low as $18,000, and the Chevy Volt scheduled to arrive as early as 2010, that may not be enough — especially if fuel prices hit the $5-per-gallon figure earlier than Toyota is projecting.

[Automotive News, Sub. Req.]

(Photo: jalopnik )

Green Livin Coinstar Calls Cashing In Change 'Recycling'

2008-08-06T14:06:00.003-05:00

Green Livin Is Coin Star Really Recycling?

"Coinstar wants you to 'recycle' your coins in their machines, and save the environment! Minus their 8.9% fee of course." They even have a little wizard on their website that estimates how many parts of the environment—water, energy consumption, and geological waste—you save by putting those coins back into circulation, instead of hoarding them like the polar bear murderer you are. They don't provide any source for these estimates, though, and we're not convinced you're doing anything "green" other than lining Coinstar's pockets.

From Coinstar's website:

"Think of it as a new form of recycling—when you reuse your change instead of letting it sit idle in your coin jar, fewer coins are produced. And that translates into environmental savings by reducing hte need for limited natural resources used to create new coin.
We're deeply skeptical of any one-to-one benefit statement like this, not least because it ignores the total cost of running the Coinstar company, which is a key component of any coin recycling "movement."

If you're going to cash in your spare change, look for a Commerce Bank branch nearby first. Their change machines are free and you don't have to be a Commerce customer to use them.

Green Livin Toxic Chemical in Plastic Bottles & Cans

2008-08-05T13:08:00.009-05:00

Toxic Chemical in Plastic Bottles & Cans Damaging Children's Brains & Reproductive Organs but Government & Chemical Industry Remain Unconcerned

Green Livin A federal report finds 'some concern' that fetuses, babies and children are at risk from bisphenol A. But plastics industry officials see no serious risk.

Green Livin A controversial, estrogen-like chemical in plastic could be harming the development of children's brains and reproductive organs, a federal health agency concluded in a report released Tuesday.

The National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, concluded that there was "some concern" that fetuses, babies and children were in danger because bisphenol A, or BPA, harmed animals at low levels found in nearly all human bodies.

An ingredient of polycarbonate plastic, BPA is one of the most widely used synthetic chemicals in industry today. It can seep from hard plastic beverage containers such as baby bottles, as well as from liners in cans containing food and infant formula.

The federal institute is the first government agency in the U.S. to conclude that low levels of BPA could be harming humans. Its findings will be used to help regulators at federal and state environmental agencies to develop policies governing its use.

The draft report followed an 18-month review that was fraught with allegations of bias, heated disputes among scientists and the firing of a consulting company with financial ties to the chemical industry.

Some scientists suspect that exposure early in life disrupts hormones and alters genes, programming a fetus or child for breast or prostate cancer, premature female puberty, attention deficit disorders and other reproductive or neurological disorders.

Full Story: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/16/nation/na-plastic16

Green Livin Always Print Your Gas Pump Receipt As Proof Of Purchase

2008-08-04T09:46:00.002-05:00

Green Livin Shoplifting Always Print Your Gas Receipt

You probably wouldn't try to leave a retail store without a receipt, but you might not think about it when you're at the gas pump—after all, it's not like you're going to bring the gas back for a refund. But a reader points out that you should always have your proof of purchase just in case you end up in an awkward situation:

I had an interesting experience on Friday and a life lesson I think is worth passing onto other readers. On Friday I stopped at a United Dairy Farmers (local Cincinnati convenience store/ice cream parlor) to fill up while gas is relatively cheap. I pulled up to the pump, swiped my card, filled up, and paused before printing the receipt. Usually those things just end up wadding up in my pocket or under the seats of the car, but what the hell, I hit yes anyway. I then went inside to get a soft drink.

"Anything else?" the cashier asked. I said no, paid in change, and went back to my car. I pulled out of the lot, turned left, and I wasn't more than 200 yards away when a cop comes up behind me, lights flashing. I knew I couldn't have been speeding so I was genuinely confused. He said the woman at the United Dairy Farmers said I drove off without paying for gas. I said that was incorrect, and he said "She said it was a silver car, and she pointed at yours." I do drive a silver car, but I had paid for gas, and wait! I told the officer I had my receipt, and he wrote down the details: Amount, pump number, last 4 of my credit card, and the time. I also pulled out the credit card I paid with and my license, just to verify everything was on the up and up. He was cool about it, apologized, and I was on my way.

Lesson here is to always print that receipt out. I rarely check it against my statements now that I don't fill up as often. But without that 3x1 strip of paper I would have had a totally different story to tell. Needless to say I won't be taking my business to United Dairy Farmers anymore - being falsely accused of theft is a dealbreaker.

Green Livin At the Pump And Past The Limit

2008-08-04T09:06:00.006-05:00

Green Livin High Prices Cause Drivers to Hit Credit Card Cutoffs

Green livin the pump slowed and cut off Brendan Baker's gasoline purchase at $74. He returned the nozzle to the pump, swiped his credit card a second time, then put the nozzle back in his 2000 Dodge Ram 1500 and continued fueling. He finished pumping and looked at his two receipts, which totaled $95.23.

"Normally I don't keep them because they remind me how much money I wasted," said Baker, a computer technician refueling at his local Sunoco station in Centreville.

With skyrocketing gas prices, many customers are bumping up against pay-at-the-pump credit card limits -- often $75. Rules limiting these transactions are nothing new, but with gas prices exceeding $4 per gallon, it's increasingly easy to exceed the limit, leaving many customers to face the hassle of dealing with two-transaction purchases.

At the station where Baker was filling up, 30 to 50 cars out of a total of about 900 hit the limit each day, according to the station owner. On a recent Saturday afternoon, the station bustled with Toyota 4Runners, Tacomas and other fuel-thirsty vehicles.

Back in 2003, when Jeff Urban bought his Hummer, paying $75 to fill up would have been unthinkable. But now, Urban joked, his goliath SUV will soon be a three-transaction vehicle.
Getting cut off mid fill-up is "a pain," Urban said after fueling. "Especially in Northern Virginia, where it's a go-go-go lifestyle, it's an extra couple of minutes out of the day that frustrates you."
Customers who pay inside stations can still use their credit cards like anywhere else and face no limit.

But at the pump, the size of credit card purchases has been limited largely to protect gas stations, which can be charged if there's a problem with the transactions. Purchases at the pump are particularly vulnerable to trouble since no signature is required to verify the user's identity. And since the credit card is swiped before the gas is pumped, there's no way to know the size of the purchase when it's authorized.

Visa, MasterCard and Discover Card generally guarantee that merchants will be paid the first $75 of a pay-at-the-pump transaction. American Express determines its limits based on the contractual relationship with the companies. But beyond those levels, gas stations are more likely to foot the bill in what are called charge backs if a transaction is bad.

Gas station owners and managers say they are already hard-pressed to hand more money back to credit card issuers. The high price of gasoline has left many stations in a financial fix. They've squeezed their average markup to remain competitive and the interchange fees they pay to credit card issuers, which rise with the sale price, are up.

The average station makes a profit of $60 at the pump per day, says Jeff Lenard, a spokesman for the National Association of Convenience Stores. "It's not uncommon to lose money selling gas. So the idea of losing $20 or $50 [in charge backs] is too much."

Visa recently amended its rules to make it less risky for stations to increase the limit on pay-at-the-pump sales. Until April 2007, merchants could be charged the entire amount of any bad purchase over $50. That month, Visa changed its rules so that merchants were liable only for the amount of the purchase that exceeded $50. In April of this year, Visa increased the limit to $75.

Discover has also increased its limit to $75 from $50. MasterCard has had a $75 limit for several years.

Stations "are faced with two bad options -- allow the pump to go beyond $75 and risk not getting paid . . . or take a customer from frustrated [with gas prices] to outright anger," Lenard said.

Even when station owners want to take on more risk, limits are generally set by the oil companies rather than by the stations themselves. Sunoco limits the transactions to $75 if customers are using Visa or MasterCard. Chevron and Exxon Mobil's limits are either $75 or $100, depending on the credit card used. East of the Rocky Mountains, BP sets a pay-at-the-pump limit of $100, although a spokesman said some stations may choose to set higher limits.
In response to complaints over the payment restrictions, a few individually owned stations have increased their limits.

Gezahegne Daba, manager of a Hess station on the corner of New York and Montana avenues in Northeast Washington, said his station recently raised the pay-at-the-pump limit to $100 after a rash of consumer complaints.

Across the street, Thomas Goode paid an additional 2 cents per gallon to fill up the Chevy Astro van he used for work at a Shell station. A few months earlier, he had been using the Hess station, but it would cut him off at $50. After stopping at Shell one day, he discovered the station had a higher limit for his corporate card. "After I pumped the gas and I found out there wasn't a $50 limit on it, I just kept" going there, he said.

A Gaithersburg Liberty station recently negotiated to increase its limits to $75 from $50, though some cards still cut off at $50. The station also offers customers a 5-cent per gallon discount if they pay cash.

Many customers are taking the deal.

"I used to fill up with a credit card, but now I fill up with cash because it's cheaper," said Kevork Araklian, who said he expected his weekly gas bill for his 1998 Chevrolet Tahoe to reach $220 this week. He doesn't mind paying inside. "It just takes two seconds," he said.

A handful of area stations are avoiding the problem of interchange fees and charge backs altogether by accepting only cash. Filling up at a cash-only Freestate station in Rockville, Ann Seltz says she used to find paying with cash irritating until the fuel bill for her Audi A4, which should take only premium gasoline, got so expensive. "Now I go wherever's cheapest," she said.

Green Livin The 7 Most Fuel Efficient Used Cars Under $10,000

2008-08-03T08:49:00.003-05:00

Green Livin You're sick of your SUV and thinking of getting a car that's new to you, but which ones get the best gas mileage for the price? Green Livin and Consumer Reports has the answer — a list of the 7 most fuel efficient used cars for under $10,000.

Why buy used? Well, as CR says "depreciation accounts for 46 percent of the owner costs over a five-year period." Why not let someone else take the hit?

"By focusing on a nearly-new model, say 2-3 years old, you can find a vehicle that offers comparable fuel economy, performance, safety, and reliability as a new car, often with some transferable warranty coverage remaining.

Amen! Anyway, here's the list. Some of the cars are older than 2-3 years, but hey. They're all under $10k.

Here's the list:

2000 Honda Insight (manual) 51 mpg
2001-02 Toyota Prius 41 mpg
2000-05 Toyota Echo 38 mpg
1998-2002 Chevrolet Prizm 32 mpg
1998 Mazda Protegé LX 32 mpg
1998-2000 Toyota Corolla LE 32 mpg
1998-2001 Acura Integra LS (manual) 32 mpg

Consumer Reports has a list of the top cars from $10,000-$20,000, which you can view here.

Best used cars for fuel economy [Consumer Reports]

(Photo: smcgee )

Green Livin How Often Do You Really Need an Oil Change?

2008-08-02T10:27:00.001-05:00

Green Livin How often do you really need to change your car's oil? Conventional wisdom has always put it at every 3,000 miles to prevent engine wear, but isn't changing oil that frequently wasteful and unnecessary? Whats the "greenest" and longest-lasting oil you should use?

Green Livin There is much debate in the automotive world over how often drivers of typical passenger cars or light trucks should change their oil. The quick-lube chains usually recommend it be done every three months or 3,000 miles, but many mechanics would tell you that such frequent changes are overkill.

Indeed, most car owner's manuals recommend changing out the oil less frequently, usually after 5,000 or 7,500 miles.

According to the automotive website Edmunds.com, the answer depends more on driving patterns than anything else. Those who rarely drive more than 10 miles at a time (which doesn't get the oil hot enough to boil off moisture condensation) or who start their car frequently when the oil isn't hot (when most engine wear occurs) should change their oil more often -- at least twice a year, even if that's every 1,000 miles, according to Edmunds.

But commuters who drive more than 20 miles a day on mostly flat freeway can go as far as their owner's manual recommends, if not longer, between changes. As a car ages, more frequent changes might be in order, but that's for a qualified mechanic to decide on a case-by-case basis.

"The necessity of 3,000-mile oil changes is a myth that has been handed down for decades," writes Austin Davis, proprietor of the website TrustMyMechanic.com. He says that the economics of the oil change industry demand pushing customers to get their oil changed more frequently -- purportedly as "cheap insurance" against problems cropping up -- whether they need it or not. One of the largest oil change chains, Jiffy Lube, for instance, is owned by Pennzoil-Quaker State, and as such has an incentive to sell as much of the company's traditional petroleum-based oil as possible.

One way to reduce trips to and money spent unnecessarily on quick-lube outlets is to switch to synthetic oils, which last longer and perform better than their traditional petroleum-based counterparts. Davis says that educated drivers should opt for longer lasting, better performing synthetic oils, which are "most likely good for 10,000 to 15,000 miles or six months," whether or not their manufacturers recommend more frequent changes. Some synthetic motor oils, like Amsoil, NEO and Red Line, to name a few, are created specifically to last 25,000 miles or one year before needing a change.

While neither conventional nor synthetic motor oils are good for the environment if disposed of improperly or spilled, most environmentalists would opt for the latter since it lasts three or more times longer and thus reduces waste (or energy use if recycled). Researchers have also been experimenting with producing greener motor oils. One pilot project out of Purdue University has produced high-quality, carbon-neutral motor oil from canola crops.

But consumers should not expect to see such products on store or garage shelves anytime soon, as the costs of production are high and the availability of cropland is limited. But the very existence of such alternatives -- no doubt more are in the offing -- bodes well for the future as oil becomes more scarce and expensive.

Green Livin Total Solar Eclipse Tonight: Where, How to See It

2008-08-01T00:01:00.001-05:00

Green Livin Watch for the Solar Eclipse Tonight

Green Livin Solar eclipses have been blamed in the past for war, famine, and the deaths of kings. But the upcoming total eclipse tonight will mostly be celebrated by excited sky-watchers—even if it won't break any records.

The sun will be completely obscured for just under two and a half minutes, "a tad on the short side," according to astrophysicist Fred Espenak, an eclipse expert based at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

A typical eclipse lasts for three minutes, Espenak said, and the longest possible is seven and a half minutes.

When it starts, this year's full eclipse will be visible from a narrow arc spanning the Northern Hemisphere.

Its path will begin in Canada and continue northeast across Greenland and the Arctic, then southeast through central Russia, Mongolia, and China.

The eclipse will start around 8:30 a.m. Greenwich mean time in the eastern part of the arc, leading to totality in just under an hour.

In a much wider swath of the globe—including northeastern North America along with most of Europe and Asia—people will be able to see a partial eclipse.

"Drop Dead Gorgeous"

A multiple-exposure image shows the many phases of a total solar eclipse. During totality (the few minutes of time when the sun is totally eclipsed), daytime skies become as dark as a moonlit night and the ambient temperature drops noticeably

The moon crosses between Earth and the sun once a month during the new moon. For an eclipse to happen, the moon has to come directly between the two bodies—it can't be too high or low relative to Earth.

Sometimes the moon will be close enough that just an edge will pass in between, resulting in a partial eclipse.

About 25 percent of eclipses are total eclipses, and there are about seven of these a decade, Espenak said. But at any given geographic location, a total eclipse will be visible an average of once in 375 years.

The last total solar eclipse visible from the United States was in 1979, and it was seen mostly in the Pacific Northwest.

When a total solar eclipse takes place, about half the daytime world doesn't see any of it, Espenak said. Another 49 percent of people see it as a partial eclipse.

Less than one percent of people see totality, which Espenak describes as "drop dead gorgeous."

"On a scale of one to ten, a partial eclipse is of some interest," he said. "A total eclipse on that scale is ten million. It can't be compared to anything else. It should be on everybody's life list."

Of course, the weather can throw a monkey wrench in any observation plans.

This year, conditions in China are likely to be most favorable for getting a good look at the full eclipse, according to weather data analyzed by Espenak and Jay Anderson from the University of Manitoba in Canada.

Their calculations show that the skies above China in August are cloudy around 35 percent of the time, compared with upward of 90 percent of the time in many other parts of the eclipse's path.

"It's always a crapshoot," Espenak said. "You try to stack the odds in your favor."

Tom Burns, director of the Perkins Observatory in Delaware, Ohio, helped put together a viewing-safety Web site during the Christmas eclipse of 2001.

He was hearing too often, he recalled, of people trying to view the partial eclipse through sunglasses, compact discs, or—surprisingly—Pop Tart bags.

"The only time it's safe to observe an eclipse through a Pop Tart bag is if the Pop Tart is still in it," he said.

He and his colleagues, who frequently instruct groups of sky-gazers on safe sun-watching, instead recommend special eclipse glasses.

For the growing population of sky-gazers who would love to see an eclipse and can't make it northward this year, it might be best to make reservations to visit southern Illinois, he added.

Weather permitting, people there will get to see total solar eclipses in 2017 and 2024

Green Livin Four Day School Week in Bid to Cut Energy Costs

2008-07-31T00:01:00.003-05:00

Green Livin Schools kick off eco-initiative

Green Livin In what sounds like a bright idea school's are committed to studying the idea of a 4 day school week as energy costs climb. A practice which would mean less time on the road for school buses along with lower heating bills and CO2 emissions because the schools heat supply could be shut down for a three day weekend.

Not to mention the need for one less set of school lunches to be shipped and prepared, along with one less daily commute for school personnel. All of which would most certainly cut both energy usage and CO2 as well.

Is this a genuine possibility or a pipe dream?

Energy Saving Four Day School Week Has Drawbacks
Such is the question, particularly as changing a school district has, historically, been just slightly less challenging than turning a battleship for most people.

And there are plenty of reasons why the savings might not add up as well, particularly as the cost of day care for most parents would increase significantly as schools often serve a dual role for working parents in an age when two incomes is usually a necessity.

And what may be a saving to the school district on energy bills and CO2 emissions may simply be transferred to those same parents as well. With the costs of running a school system currently spread over the entire population, it’s more than possible that those same costs will simply be redistributed to those with young children who often least can afford the increase.

Perhaps our readers have a suggestions on how schools might make a 4 day week work in an age of climate change and rising energy costs. Anyone able to see how it might work wonders?

Green Livin Cigarette Butt Litter

2008-07-30T07:45:00.010-05:00

Green Livin Only smokers can stop cigarette butt litter.

Whether by habit, lack of resources or lack of caring, not enough is happening to reduce the amount of litter. Cigarette butt litter is still around 50% of all the litter.

Reusable and fire-resistant, the pocket ashtrays are designed to make it easy for smokers to do the right thing with their cigarette butts.

Research shows that many new cars no longer have ashtrays, so more smokers are throwing cigarette butts out of car windows where they can cause roadside fires. Recent tests showed that for every 1,000 smouldering butts that are discarded, 40 fires could result.

To combat this Planet Ark, Clean Up and Landcare have distributed half a million Go Green pocket ashtrays into 1,000 Coles Myer retail stores.

So, purchase a Go Green BUTTsOUT pocket ashtray for the great outdoors and:

Keep our beaches and waterways clean

Reduce the risk of bushfires

Help protect our wildlife and vegetation

Stop the littering of 7 billion butts

Avoid butt littering fines

The $1.59 Go Green BUTTsOUT pocket ashtray is available now in 1,000 Coles and Bi-Lo supermarkets and selected Coles Express, Liquorland, Theo's and Vintage Cellars retail stores.
Ten cents from each ashtray sold is donated to Planet Ark, Clean Up and Landcare.

What is a BUTTsOUT?

A funky reusable pocket ashtray that you can put your cigarette butts in whenever you are outdoors or not near a bin.

The BUTTsOUT personal ashtray is fire-resistant and re-usable, lasting from 3-12 months. It is also:

Easy to use (single hand operation)

Traps in most smell and smoke

Fits easily into the palm of the hand,pocket or purse and can clip onto a belt or bag

The only personal ashtray made in Australia

Comes in over 100 colour combinations

Can be printed with logos and littering messages

BUTTsOUT resources and background include:

Councils Workplaces & Corporate Branding
Retailers
Universities & Colleges Hotels, Restaurants and Cafes

Sustainable solution – the three phase approach to reducing butt litter that BUTTsOUT has pioneered around the world, and has recently seen Colchester council achieve 86.6% reduction

ENpsych – the environmental psychology and behavioural principles that underpin the BUTTsOUT global approach

Campaign resources that provide the infrastructure, educational and awareness material and information for your campaign. Resources can be tailored to your needs to provide maximum impact

The 5 Star Butt Litter Compliance Checklist provides the means for building owners and/or tenants to assess their efforts to provide adequate education and disposal infrastructure for reducing cigarette butt litter around their buildings

The BUTTsOUT which is the centerpiece to all campaigns – a unique personal ashtray that is functional, re-usable, easy to use, and welcomed by smokers

Green Livin Johnny Depp's Island to be Solar and Hydrogen Powered

2008-07-29T09:59:00.004-05:00

Green Livin Buried in an article over on Huffington Post regarding carbon-free fuel is an interesting reveal that actor Johnny Depp is planning on converting his island home to run on solar hydrogen technology.

Back in 2005, Depp bought the the 35-acre island in the Bahamas for around $3m after being inspired by what friend Marlon Brando had done with his own Tahitian paradise. In an interview with the Guardian, the actor recalled his conversation with the late Brando,

“Depp said, ‘Hey, man, I found this thing, this island!’ Brando said, ‘Well, what’s the elevation? Do you have a water system there? What about the electricity?’

Several years later, it appears that Depp is finally getting serious about emulating Brando’s earth-friendly tech elements. According to Peter Hoffmann, the Pirates of the Carribean star is third in line to receive a grid-independent solar hydrogen system from Mike Strizki. The inventor created the nation’s first solar-hydrogen house in New Jersey — without sacrificing any of the amenities included in his 3,500 square-foot home. You can check out a video of his system below.

Depending on the size of Depp’s home on the island, the cost is expected to run between $250,000-$500,000 — which, for someone with an island, isn’t a bad deal for unlimited, clean energy.

Green Livin The Oil Sands Of Alberta

2008-07-28T09:00:00.003-05:00

Green Livin Where Black Gold And Riches Can Be Found In The Sand

There’s an oil boom going on right now. Not in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or any of those places, but 600 miles north of Montana.

In Alberta, Canada, in a town called Fort McMurray where, in the dead of winter, the temperature sometimes zooms up to zero.

The oilmen up there aren’t digging holes in the sand and hoping for a spout.

They’re digging up dirt — dirt that is saturated with oil.

They’re called oil sands, and if you’ve never heard of them then you’re in for a big surprise because the reserves are so vast in the province of Alberta that they will help solve America’s energy needs for the next century.

Within a few years, the oil sands are likely to become more important to the United States than all the oil that comes to us from Saudi Arabia.

Twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year, vehicles that look like prehistoric beasts move across an arctic wasteland, extracting the oil sands.

There is so much to scoop, so much money to be made.

There are 175 billion barrels of proven oil reserves here. That’s second to Saudi Arabia’s 260 billion but it’s only what companies can get with today’s technology. The estimate of how many more barrels of oil are buried deeper underground is staggering.

The oil sands are buried under forests in Alberta that are the size of Florida.

The oil here doesn’t come gushing out of the sand the way it does in the Middle East. The oil is in the sand. It has to be dug up and processed.

The oil sands look like a very rich, pliable kind of topsoil. Why doesn’t oil come out when squeezed? Well, because it’s not warm enough. If you add this to hot water you’ll start the separation process and you’ll see the oil come to the top of the water and you’ll see sand drop to the bottom.

It may look like topsoil but all it grows is money.

It didn’t always. The oil sands have been in the ground for millions of years, but for decades, prospectors lost millions of dollars trying to squeeze the oil out of the sand. It simply cost too much.

But then $40 a barrel happened and the oil sands not only made sense, they made billions for the people digging them. But it wasn’t just the price of oil that changed the landscape, it was the toys. That’s what they call the giant trucks and shovels that roam the mines.

Everything about the oil industry has always been big. It’s characterized by bigness, from the pumps to the personalities. But up here in Alberta, it’s frankly ridiculous. The mine operates the world's biggest truck. It’s three stories high and costs $5 million. It carries a load of 400 tons of oil sands, which means, at today’s oil prices, each load is worth $10,000 dollars.

The oil sands then go into a plant. They’re heated in a cell, which separates the oil from the sand. The result looks like something out of Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. This oil froth is then sent to an upgrader and eventually to a refinery.

The capital of the oil sands frenzy is a frontier town called Fort McMurray, which isn’t in the middle of nowhere. It’s north of nowhere and colder than the Klondike, but a boomtown just the same.

Is this comparable to a gold rush?

I think it’s bigger than a gold rush. We’re expecting $100 billion over the next 10 years to be invested in this area — $100 billion in a population that, currently, is 70,000 people.

"We’re managing $5 billion here. And, about 10 percent of it is in the oil sands. So, it’s the largest single investment we have," Pickens says.

And if oil sands are the answer for investors, does Pickens think the oil sands are the answer for the United States? "

Oh, I think so," he says.

A million barrels a day are now coming out of the oil sands and oil production is expected to triple within a decade. It won’t replace Middle Eastern oil but at that point it will be the single largest source of foreign oil for the United States, even bigger than Saudi Arabia, which sends a million and a half barrels a day to America.

"When it comes to exploration in the oil sands, you can’t drill a dry hole. It’s there," he says. "We know where it is. They’ve outlined it. You don’t have any risk. But other conventional sectors around the world, there’s a huge exploration risk."

The exploration risks are the least of it. Much of the world’s crude is in the Middle East where the instability is deeper than the oil. When Alberta’s blue-eyed sheiks took to Wall Street last summer in their Stetsons to drum up support for the oil sands, their message seemed to be, "If you can’t trust Alberta, who can you trust?"

100,000 people are needed in Fort McMurray. That’s why one oil company has built a runway to fly workers daily from civilization to Fort McMurray. But why would anyone want to come work in a place where temperatures plummet to 40 below and the sun sets shortly after it rises in the long winter? Well, perhaps because the oil companies pay some of the highest salaries in North America.

The oil companies still have other problems. Creating energy from oil sands requires so much energy that the oil companies wind up spiking greenhouse gas emissions. "And they do it in volumes that exceed any other production of oil crude anywhere on the planet," says Elizabeth May, the director of the Sierra Club of Canada.

She takes issue not only with what the oil sands are doing to the atmosphere, but to the land. The oil companies, environmentalists say, are digging up an entire province. Take a helicopter ride over the mines and you’ll think you’re flying over the moon after a moonquake.

"One of the reasons they can be mined the way they’ve been mined is the out of sight, out of mind aspect of it. And your film crew is one of the few that’s gone in there to look at how devastating this is," May says.

The oil companies say they will reduce greenhouse gasses and they point out they are required by Canadian law to refill old mines and plant new trees, and that is happening — slowly. One company, Syncrude, has even introduced bison to land that once was a barren pit.

There is a larger question that not only environmentalists are asking: will the availability of an enormous supply of secure oil right next door mean America will have little incentive to reduce its dependence on oil?

"What Canada’s doing," says May, "is continuing to feed the U.S. addiction to fossil fuels, instead of being the kinda friend who says, 'Let’s make a helpful intervention here.' We're acting as the supplier of a drug fix to the U.S., while all the time saying, 'Just say no.' But we keep selling it."

As blank as the landscape around Fort McMurray, where the world of oil exploration ends.

Does Pickens think the days of cheap oil are gone?

"They’re gone," he says. "From what we knew as cheap oil, when I pumped gasoline in Ray Smith’s Sinclair station on Hinkley Street in Holdenvale, Oklahoma, 11 cents a gallon, that’s gone."

Will we ever again see $1.50 a gallon? "We won’t ever see $1.50 a gallon. No, that’s gone," says Pickens.

Right around the corner from Fort McMurray you can still see oil being produced the traditional way. It’s picturesque now. The wells are still pumping but they belong to the past, like the iron horse that once rode across these prairies.

The future? Up here in Alberta they’re convinced it’s in the dirt.

Green Livin A Modest Proposal: Eco-Friendly Stimulus

2008-07-27T08:30:00.005-05:00

Green Livin ECONOMISTS and members of Congress are now on the prowl for new ways to stimulate spending in our dreary economy. Here’s my humble suggestion: “Cash for Clunkers,” the best stimulus idea you’ve never heard of.

Cash for Clunkers is a generic name for a variety of programs under which the government buys up some of the oldest, most polluting vehicles and scraps them. If done successfully, it holds the promise of performing a remarkable public policy trifecta — stimulating the economy, improving the environment and reducing income inequality all at the same time. Here’s how.

A CLEANER ENVIRONMENT The oldest cars, especially those in poor condition, pollute far more per mile driven than newer cars with better emission controls. A California study estimated that cars 13 years old and older accounted for 25 percent of the miles driven but 75 percent of all pollution from cars. So we can reduce pollution by pulling some of these wrecks off the road. Several pilot programs have found that doing so is a cost-effective way to reduce emissions.

MORE EQUAL INCOME DISTRIBUTION It won’t surprise you to learn that the well-to-do own relatively few clunkers. Most are owned, instead, by low-income people. So if the government bought some of these vehicles at above-market prices, it would transfer a little purchasing power to the poor.

AN EFFECTIVE ECONOMIC STIMULUS With almost all the income tax rebates paid out, and the economy weakening, Cash for Clunkers would be a timely stimulus in 2009. As was made clear during the Congressional debate last winter, prompt spending is critical to an effective stimulus program. And the quickest, surest way to get more consumer spending is to put more cash into the hands of people who live hand-to-mouth.

Here’s an example of how a Cash for Clunkers program might work. The government would post buying prices, perhaps set at a 20 percent premium over something like Kelley Blue Book prices, for cars and trucks above a certain age (say, 15 years) and below a certain maximum value (perhaps $5,000). A special premium might even be offered for the worst gas guzzlers and the worst polluters. An income ceiling for sellers might also be imposed — say, family income below $60,000 a year — to make sure the money goes to lower-income households.

The numbers in this example are purely illustrative. By raising the 20 percent premium, lowering the 15-year minimum age, or raising the $5,000 maximum price or the $60,000 income ceiling, you make the program broader and costlier — and create a bigger stimulus. By moving any of these in the opposite direction, you make the program narrower, cheaper and smaller.

People who sell their clunkers would receive government checks, perhaps paid to them at the motor vehicle bureau office where they turn in their old vehicles. They would be free to spend this money as they see fit, whether on a new car or truck or some other form of transportation — or anything else. To ensure that the program really pulls clunkers off the roads, only vehicles that had been registered and driven for, say, the past year would be eligible.

The government can either sell the cars it buys to licensed recyclers for scrap, or refit them with new emissions controls and resell them. But the government must not ship the cars to poor countries, where they would continue to belch pollutants.

Cash for Clunkers is not the pipe dream of some academic scribblers. Local variants are either now in operation or have been tested in California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Texas, Virginia and several Canadian provinces. So there is no need for a “proof of concept.” Rather, a national Cash for Clunkers program could learn from all this experience in building a better system.

THE big need to date has been money, which is why the scope of Cash for Clunkers programs has been limited. And that, of course, is where the need for stimulus comes in. We now want intelligent ways for the federal government to spend money.

Here’s a high-end cost calculation for a national program. Suppose we took two million cars off the road a year, at an average purchase price of $3,500 (the top price in the Texas program today). Including all the administrative costs of running the program, that would probably cost about $8 billion. Compared with other nationwide income-transfer or environmental policies, that’s a pretty small bill. For stimulus purposes, it would, of course, be better to run the program on a larger scale, if possible. There are over 250 million cars and light trucks on American roads, and some 30 percent are 15 years old or older. That’s at least 75 million clunkers. At five million cars a year — an ambitious target, to be sure — the program would cost less than $20 billion, still cheap compared with the $168 billion stimulus enacted in February.

And what would all this money buy? First, less pollution. The Texas program estimated that clunkers spew 10 to 30 times as much pollution as newer cars. Second, the subsidy value (the 20 percent premium in my example) is a direct income transfer to the owners of clunkers, who are mostly low-income people. Third, these folks would almost certainly spend the cash they receive — not just the subsidy, but the entire payment, giving the economy a much-needed boost.

Oh, and I left out a fourth possible goal. By pulling millions of old cars off the road, Cash for Clunkers would stimulate the demand for new cars as people trade up. It need hardly be pointed out that our ailing auto industry, like our ailing economy, could use a shot in the arm right now. Scrapping two million or more clunkers a year should help.

With today’s concerns over stimulus, inequality and greenhouse gases, as well as an aging vehicle fleet, Cash for Clunkers is an idea whose time may finally have come. Write your congressman.

Green Livin 7 Celebrity Environmentalists in Need of Green 101

2008-07-26T07:50:00.003-05:00

Green Livin We love our green celebrities, but for the most part, they are as fresh and new to this fight against climate change as Brangolina's twin babies Knox Leon and Vivienne Marcheline are to the world. They can give global warming a big 'ol kick in the organically-grown cotton pants simply by gracing the covers of supermarket rags. They can get the word out by looking posh in gleaming hybrids, shopping with chic reusable bags, or sending thousands of extra stilettos to New Orleans. But just like free-range baby chicks taking their first tottering steps into the farmyard, sometimes they fall in a big pile of cow dung meant for the methane digester.

We're not going to call them eco hypocrites, that term that is all the rage now. These folks are on the right track, just under informed or misadvised. Here are our top seven green celebrities who need to enroll in Eco 101 ASAP.

1.)Paul McCartney and the Lexus Hybrid Delivered by Plane Fiasco

Given, it wasn't really the fault of our favorite green knight (and apparently he's really peeved). But somebody in his posse should have kept closer tabs on how that free Lexus LS600H Hybrid was going to get from Japan to the U.K. Green car it was -- but not any more. Delivery by plane instead of by boat means its transport footprint was 100 times larger, and it got 4 mpg for the first 5,966 miles of it’s life without even hitting the road. The shocking carbon blunder: This Beatles alum might as well have jumped in his car and driven around the world six times.

2.) When Woody Harrelson Forgot His Vegan Belt and Shoes

Woody Harrelson was green before it was trendy. He scaled the Golden Gate Bridge to save the redwoods, was inspired by the fish he saw during a scuba trip to become a vegetarian, is keen on biodiesel (he took a road trip across the West Coast in a hemp oil-fueled biodiesel bus), and doesn't like it when scientists stick pins in rats.

But what to do when you are in France for the Cannes Film Festival without your most favorite vegan belt and shoes? Why fly them over from California, of course.

Don't worry, he has taken punishment into his own hands and is now starving himself on an island for 40 days. We don't mind if you eat Woody, but the veganism extremism is a bit over-the-top...

3.) Arnold Schwarzenegger and the State of California's Tax on Used Fryer Grease

Dear Arnold, with all the amazing eco initiatives rolling out from the state of California, we've notice a bit of umm..slippery bureaucracy. Do you really need to tax fryer grease repurposed from a chowder house? Mechanic Dave Eck inspired the world with his feet of vegetable oil-powered vehicles, but California through the book at him. Granted the Governator was out of the loop, but seems a bit unfair that in the Golden State, Eck's a tax cheat and illegally operating without a "diesel fuel supplier's license" and permission from the Air Resources Board. Oh yeah, the poor guy also needs $1 million in liability insurance just in case he spills some.
The good news? He can drive in the carpool lane.

4.) Google Founders and Their $60 million dollar "Party Plane"

Gotta have at least one air travel culprit on this list. In the workplace, media giant Google is greening the way with a solar-clad headquarters, cafeterias serving hormone-free chicken, beef from free-range cows and eggs from cage-free hens, and free shuttle service for employees. They even have an employee incentive plan that encourages walking, biking, and taking public transportation.

Course, that doesn't mean the co-founders follow it: After a public dispute, Sergey Brin and Larry Page were revealed to be more concerned about the size of the mattresses in their $60 million dollar "party plane." The Boeing 767 carries 180 passengers in commercial use and is three times as heavy as a conventional executive plane, says the Wall Street Journal. Tripped out with the comforts of home, the Google plane is luxury all the way, with customized showers, dining rooms, and bedrooms...which leave room for only 50 people.

5.) Gwyneth Paltrow's Perfume Smells Fishy

Oh Gwynnie, you promote hybrids, shop for organic products and green baby furniture, and support Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and Father of Inconvenient Truth Al Gore, so why are you hawking a perfume line that contains seriously dangerous chemicals? According to the Cosmetic Database, Estée Lauder Pleasures Delight body lotion gets a hazard score of 8 out of 10 (10 being dose yourself with this stuff and bring on the cancer, birth defects, reproduction failures, and immune toxicity). And it's not like she didn't have better options: Of all the skin creams on the market we could lather up with, 96 percent show better scores.

6.) Vanity Fair's Green Issue Features Material Girl

Ok, so this one's not exactly a celebrity, but Vanity Fair, tell us again: How exactly is Madonna green? Spending almost 10,000 dollars a month on Kabbalah-blessed hydration, she's more the Queen of Bottled Water than the Queen of Pop. Some even blame her for starting the trend in the 1980's, with her promotion of Evian. She also invests in oil exploration, and her carbon footprint could squash us flat, at 100 times the average British citizen's. And no hybrid for this gas-wallowing diva: Her fleet includes a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, Audi A8s, and a Mini Cooper S.

7.) Cold Play Frontman Chris Martin and the Dead Mango Trees

He's probably the least green of those on our list, but Coldplay frontman Chris Martin (husband to #5) gets kudos for his fight for fair trade, eco-themed lyrics, and his aversion to meat. In 2005, he was named PETA's World’s Sexiest Vegetarian. Yep, the intentions were good when he launched his scheme to offset CO2 emissions created by 26 million in album sales by planting 10,000 mango trees in southern India. Bummer we never saw the fruits of his labor. Most of the trees died in 2006. v

Green Livin Miley Cyrus 'eco-anthem'

2008-07-25T00:01:00.001-05:00

Green Livin Wake Up America

Green Livin Miley Cyrus (aka Hannah Montana) wants America to wake up and deal with global warming ... though she's not quite sure what that means. At least, that's what she admits in a song -- dubbed an "eco-anthem" by some, though I'm curious what qualifies it as an anthem -- on her new release Breakout.

It may seem not to fit on an album whose title track whines "Every week's the same/Stuck in school's so lame/My parents say that I'm lazy/Getting up at 8 a.m.'s crazy/Tired of bein' told what to do/So unfair, so uncool." But once you listen to it (or read the lyrics), you may agree with the Entertainment Weekly reviewer who suggests Miley "talks about our troubled planet as if it were a needy adolescent." In which case, perhaps the song fits quite well.

No word yet on whether she'll be touring by biodiesel bus, releasing the CD in ecofriendly packaging, or really doing anything more than singing about doing something. But as many artists have found recently, singing eco-songs is one step in the right direction.

Listen to Miley's "Wake Up America" here and check out the full lyrics below:

Wake Up America

Oh, can you take care of her
Oh, maybe you can spare her

Several moments of your consideration
Leading up to the final destination

Oh, the earth is calling out,
I wanna learn what it's all about,
But everything I read -- global warming, going green
I don't know what all this means, but it seems to be saying

Wake up, America, we're all in this together
It's our home so let's take care of it
You know that you want to
You know that you got to wake up, America
Tomorrow becomes a new day and everything you do
Matters, yeah, everything you do matters in some way

Stand up, I'll try if you will
Wake up, it's not a fire drill
All she needs is a little attention
Can you give her just a little attention?

Uh oh, it's easy to look away
But it's getting harder day by day

Everything I read -- global warming, going green
I don't know what all this means, but it seems to be saying

Wake up, America, we're all in this together
It's our home so let's take care of it
You know you want to
You know that you got to wake up, America
Tomorrow becomes a new day and everything you do
Matters, yeah, everything you do matters in some way

I know that you don't want to hear it
Especially coming from someone so young

But in the back seat, yeah, they want to hear it (they want to hear it)

So come on (turn it up)
Come on (turn it up)
So come on (turn it up)

Wake up, America, we're all in this together
It's our home so let's take care of it
You know that you want to
You know that you got to wake up, America
Tomorrow becomes a new day and everything you do
Matters, yeah, everything you do matters in some way

Green Livin Celeb's Gone Green

2008-07-24T00:01:00.014-05:00

Green Livin Leonardo DiCaprio's Eco-Charity. Plus Tommy Lee's Rockin' Green Life and Jesscia Alba's A Green Mom

...A genuine go-to-green guy, Leonardo DiCaprio always takes time for the environment. Now, the actor is selling his $300 thousand Jaeger-LeCoultre watch to benefit his eco-charity, the Leonardo Dicaprio Fund. DiCaprio teamed up with the Swiss watch-maker to sell his and another $400 thousand time-piece in the fall of 2008 - 100% of proceeds will go to his fund. A big chunk of cash to drop on a watch - no doubt! But, at least the "crazy" money spent on these luxury items will go to a worthy cause.
Check Out: Leonardo Dicaprio Fund

Tommy Lee's Vegetarian Diet:

...It must be love! The hard-living rocker says he's gone veggie in an effort to rebuild his relationship with ex-wife and PETA fave Pamela Anderson. "I just went vegetarian and I dig it, I feel lighter, I like it. I figured that this is something I hadn't done yet but wanted to," reveals Tommy Lee. And I'm sure Tommy's show on Planet Green, "Battleground Earth," also taught him a go-green trick or two. Watch Tommy Lee talk about going vegetarian.

Jessica Alba Thinking Green Vaccines:

...Just like all new moms, the actress is worried about her child's health. She's already greened her daughter's nursery, wardrobe, and diet - now she's concerned about vaccinations. "I've been reading a lot about kids and infections, autism and vaccinations," adds Alba. According to ecorazzi, the average child receives 24 vaccines to protect against 16 different diseases. Opponents think kids' today receive too many, too soon and many of these vaccines are toxic. Read about How To Green Your Baby.

Julianne Moore's A Natural Beauty:

...Love an actress who keeps her beauty real. At 47, Julianne is happy to look her age. "I don't know why women do botox," reveals Moore,"It doesn't make them younger, it just makes them look like they have had work done." Moore's secret to a youthful glow? Living away from Hollywood (she's in New York) and a happy home life with her husband Bart Freundlich and their two kids.

Green Livin Graywater

2008-07-23T11:01:00.005-05:00

Green Livin What is Graywater?

“waste water that does not contain sewage or fecal contamination (such as from the shower) and can be reused for irrigation after filtration.”

Graywater Central, from Oasis Design, defines it in a slightly different manner:
“Any water that has been used in the home, except water from toilets, is called graywater. Dish, shower, sink, and laundry water comprise 50-80% of residential waste water. This may be reused for other purposes, especially landscape irrigation.”

As part of ways to save the planet, we recommend the re-use of water, but what are the benefits of using graywater? Again, Graywater Central lists a few:

Lower fresh water use
Less strain on failing septic tank or treatment plant
Graywater treatment in topsoil is highly effective
Ability to build in areas unsuitable for conventional treatment
Less energy and chemical use
Groundwater recharge
Plant growth
Reclamation of otherwise wasted nutrients

Greywater.com is a great source of information that provides step-by-step information on how to set up an irrigation system, how much water you could save, what to do about pollutants and so on.

Advanced Greywater Treatment

Green Livin The Sun Lounger

2008-07-22T10:16:00.001-05:00

Green Livin Solar Sun Chair

It seems an obvious idea, doesn't it? By their very nature, sun loungers spend an awful lot of time soaking up rays, so why not turn that energy into something more than just a whole lot of sunburn for you?

This chaise lounge has a panel over the head made of solar panel fabric that acts as a sunshade and moves to protect you from the sun. At the same time it collects solar energy. This is converted into electricity that can be used to charge all those essential gadgets needed for the beach such as a dock to download your digital camera pictures and load up MP3 players and even a GPS in case you get lost. It has a sliding laptop table so that you can read Green Livin at the same time. Of course there are speakers and long-range WiFi antennae. Called the "Tech Chair", the humble sun lounger has been transformed into an "advanced technological hub of summer entertainment".The concept, perhaps surprisingly, is the brainchild of designers at PC World.

Green Livin 17 Electric Cars You Must See

2008-07-21T08:33:00.009-05:00

Green Livin Electric Cars

Over the past 3 years, TreeHugger has wrote about many electric cars. We think it's time to look in the rearview mirror, so here's an overview. If you see anything you like, just follow the links to see the original articles.

Electric Roadster by Tesla Motors

The electric car that made a lot of people do a double-take (in a good way). Yes, it's expensive, and yes, it's only a two-seater, but it can make people want it like few other green cars, and someone has to pay the early-adopter 'tax'. Our first post about it was in two years ago. Since then, we've written about the opening of the first Tesla Motors store in California, about what happens to a Tesla battery pack at the end of its life, and recently about Tesla's hiring of a new VP of Engineering and Manufacturing. Update: The Tesla electric Roadster has just started shipping to customers and Martin Eberhard Blogs About Getting his Tesla Roadster.

Model S by Tesla Motors

We don't really know much about Tesla's second car yet, so no picture. It used to be known as the 'Whitestar' but is now the 'Model S'. A 5-seat, 4-door sporty sedan in the vein of the BMW 5. Should sell for about $60,000 and manage 225 miles on a charge.

E6 Electric Car by BYD

BYD is China's biggest battery maker, and that gives them an edge over most automakers when when it comes to electric cars (the battery's always the big challenge). The E6 electric car was introduced at the 2008 Beijing International Auto Show. We don't know yet when the company will start selling it, but its F6DM plug-in hybrid is scheduled for 2010 (probably to be followed by the F3DM plug-in hybrid). Range for the E6 should be 300 km (186 miles).

XS500 Electric Car by Miles

When we first wrote about the XS500 by Miles, it generated quite a bit of excitement because of its relatively low price tag for a highway-capable electric car: $30,000. We then got more information about the XS500 and confirmation that the target price was now "$30,000 to $35,000" for the 2009 XS500 in the US. The XS500 should have an all-electric range of about 120 miles.

i MiEV Electric Car by Mitsubishi

We've written a lot about the cute little i MiEV electric car by Mitsubishi. It seems relatively close to commercialization. Mitsubishi even announced that it was 1 year ahead of schedule, and it has plans to sell it globally. For more, you can see photos of the i MiEV at the New York Auto Show and three Japanese commercials.

R1e Electric Car by Subaru

The R1e by Subaru is kind of a cross between the i MiEV above and Toyota's iQ urban car (spy shots of the Toyota iQ here). For more, you can see photos of the Subaru R1e driving around New York City, and more info about the two R1e electric cars that will be tested by the New York power authority. Our guess is that the R1e won't be commercialized - it's probably a learning platform for Subaru - and the Subaru G4e electric car has more chances of making it to market.

Electric Supercar by Hybrid Technologies

This one is still a concept, and who knows if it will ever be sold, but we're told that a prototype should be on the road next Autumn. It was designed by Hybrid Technologies and doesn't seem to have a name yet. They have planned two version: All-electric, and plug-in hybrid. The latter will try to compete in the Automotive X Prize.

Electric Minis by PML and BMW

This is actually two different electric cars. The first one is a normal Mini that was modified by PML (pictured above). They added electric motors in the wheels and it could apparently do 0 to 60 in about 4 seconds! The second version of the electric Mini has been announced by BMW, but unfortunately they're only going to sell them in California, and they're only going to make 500.

EV1 Electric Car by General Motors (RIP)

Next we have the now defunct EV1 electric car that was manufactured by General Motors between 1996 and 1999, and leased in California and Arizona. A good way to get more background info on it is to watch the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car?. Some people have questioned how good it actually was, but even if it had big flaws, that's a little beside the point. It was a first, and should have opened the floodgates for more. Instead, the cars were crushed and even removed from museums.

Electric Car by Mercedes (2010)

We don't yet know what this one will look like (pictured above is the F700 concept), but Mercedes has announced ambitious plans to eliminate fossil fuels from its car lineup by 2015, and that includes an electric car in 2010. We'll have to wait and see.

Electric Car by Nissan (2010-2012)

Similarly to Mercedes, Nissan has announced an electric car to be introduced in 2010 and mass-produced in 2012. We don't know yet what it will look like or what it will be called. Pictured above is Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn in front of a test-car (not electric).

REVA Electric Car

When we dig a bit deeper in the archives, we find the REVA electric car. It's not exactly going to set the mainstream car market afire, but it has the benefit over many other electric cars to be available now. In fact, you can probably see some driving around London.

ZENN Low Speed Electric Car by Feel Good Cars

According to the makers of the ZENN electric car, the name is actually an acronym for "Zero Emissions, No Noise". It is a "low speed neighborhood vehicle" with a top speed of 25 mph and a range of 40 miles.

Tango Electric Car

Mostly known as "That small electric car that George Clooney drives!", the electric Tango is faster than you might think: With a 0 to 60 time of 4 seconds, it can smoke quite a few sports cars. Bonus: You can park 3-4 of them side by side in a regular parking spot.

Eliica Electric Car by KEIO University

A few years ago, this 8-wheel electric monster got segments on evening news all around the world. Even Japan's then prime minister went to have a look. The Eliica electric car is a true speed demon. In the right conditions, it can do 400kph (250mph), and 0 to 100km/h (0 to 60 mph) in 4 seconds. It is powered by li-ion batteries, and the only thing is can't do is go back to the future.

Wrightspeed X1 Electric Car

The fastest electric cars mentioned above can do 0 to 60 mph in about 4 seconds. That's fast, really fast! But that's not enough, apparently: The X1 can do 0 to 60 mph in 3 seconds, leaving the competition in the dust. There's even a popular video of the electric car beating a Ferrari and a Porsche.

Saturn SP1 Electric Car Conversion by Students of Napoleon High School

It's no the prettiest of most high-tech electric car featured here, but we've got to give some kudos to teachers and students of Napoleon High School in Jackson, Michigan. This 1995 Saturn SP1 was converted to run on electricity as part of a school project for the automotive-technology students. Now that's the kind of homework we wish we had in high-school!

Green Livin Flying Pigs ?

2008-07-20T08:15:00.001-05:00

Green Livin Radioactive Pigs

Las Vegas -- It hit 117 degrees here. But what's heating up longer term is another kind of heat -- radiation. The Department of Energy applied for its long-sought permit to open a permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. DOE proceeded, as it always has on this project, with reckless disregard of the fact that isn't nearly ready to answer the questions that will arise. Just before the filing, the State of Nevada revealed that it had identified between 250 and 500 legal flaws in the permit process, any one of which could be the basis for a legal challenge.

Steve Frishman, technical policy coordinator for the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, warned: "We believe there should be real designs….The whole license application is whether the NRC can say whether there will be reasonable assurance the repository is safe. How can you have reasonable assurance when you don't know what the (radiation) doses are to the public?"

More evidence of the hard-wired sloppiness that has plagued Yucca from the start popped up a week after DOE filed for its NRC permit. Holtec International, one of the nation's largest manufacturers of nuclear waste storage systems, called Yucca a "doomed undertaking" and said the safety procedures proposed by DOE were a "fool's errand."

Normally outsiders have a hard time grasping the technical issues at Yucca, but this latest recklessness is simplicity itself. Yucca lies near earthquake faults and is expected to experience quakes of up to 6.5 on the Richter scale. DOE rejected Holtec's proposal that the nuclear waste casks undergoing the four-year "cool down" period before being storied permanently should be tied down with seismic anchors. Now in San Francisco, where I live, gargoyles on office building are seismically anchored. It seems abundantly clear that nuclear waste casks should be as well. But DOE wants to save money and, as Holtec said, in an earthquake "pigs will fly before the casks will stay put." Again, this is not the opinion of Greenpeace -- it's a company that stores nuclear waste as a business.

So how does this play out politically? Nevada is a Presidential battleground state, and has a closely contested Congressional seat as well.

Sixty percent of Nevadans continue to oppose Yucca. More than half say that a Presidential candidate's stance on Yucca will influence their vote in November. John McCain supports Yucca. Barack Obama opposes it. More troubling for Nevadans, McCain favors an investment of hundreds of billions of dollars in constructing at least 45 new nuclear power plants, and perhaps as many as 145. These new plants if built will need storage -- and Yucca, as presently designed, will be full. But the pressure will be enormous to just ship the added waste to Nevada, on the grounds that it is already at risk.

As Clark County Commissioner Rory Reid put it during McCain's most recent visit to Las Vegas, McCain "believes Nevada is a wasteland."

Commissioner Reid also drew a sharp contrast between the two candidates: “While Sen. McCain wants to bury the most toxic substance known to man in our state, Sen. Obama wants to spend billions of dollars to invest in new technologies that will create 5 million new jobs across the country.”

McCain's response to Nevada was scornful. From the seemingly safe distance of California, he rejected the notion that there could be anything wrong with the Yucca site, saying “It’s not a technological breakthrough that needs to be taken; it’s a NIMBY problem.” However, it appears that NIMBY is a relative concept, depending on whose backyard we're talking about. Because when asked earlier what he thought about the safety of just shipping radioactive waste through Arizona to get to Yucca, McCain, as this YouTube clip shows, made it clear he didn't like the idea at all.

But about a half million Nevadans have moved into the state since DOE last seriously tried to move the Yucca Mountain project along. Our challenge is going to be educating those new residents about the federal plan to use junk science and rushed permits to make their state the designated sacrifice zone to revive the financial fortunes of America's nuclear power complex

Green Livin Green Spaces

2008-07-19T07:54:00.003-05:00

Grand Canyon Adventure

Few subjects utilize Imax 3-D as fully as the whitewater rafting journey chronicled in Grand Canyon Adventure. There's plenty of bucking and torquing through the Colorado River's Class IVs, and in more placid moments, panoramas induce a sense of wonderment for the Southwest's lifeline and the gorge that it created.

This sort of grandeur hardly needs a narrative, but Grand Canyon Adventure hitches itself to one anyway by tagging along with author/photographer/anthropologist Wade Davis and daughter Tara. Narrated by Robert Redford and scored with Dave Matthews Band remixes, their trip takes place amid pleas to save it from drought, overuse, and mismanagement.

The Davises are easy to like but hard to take seriously, especially when Bobby Kennedy, chief attorney of Riverkeeper and passionate spokesman for the environmental movement, is in the next boat. Yet Kennedy receives scant screen time, perhaps because his crusade contrasts too starkly with the Davises' affecting family story.

The Colorado is as imperiled as it is spectacular. Imax does a great job with spectacle, but the peril remains as grave as ever.

Green Livin Starbucks going rBGH Free

2008-07-18T07:36:00.010-05:00

Green Livin Udderly awesome

If you haven't been ordering that double whipped Frappuccino at your local Starbucks with soy milk, you've likely been gulping down Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH). It makes cows produce more milk, but it's thought to increase the risk of breast, prostate, and colon cancer in humans (if only they could come up with something to make cows squirt machiatto directly from their udders).

But now, after two years of pressure from the organization Food and Water Watch, Starbucks has announced that it's going to go rBGH free by December 31, 2007.

Moo-chas gracias, Starbucks! (photo: Tami Witschger)

Whew! Now you can guzzle that cinnamon dulce de leche latte with abandon (so long as you don't mind that growing coffee generally requires cutting down the rainforest, or that Starbucks busts unions).

Starbucks spokesman Brandon Borrman says the campaign had nothing to do with the decision.
"This decision was purely driven by our customers," Borrman said. "Increasing numbers of our customers were calling and asking us to do it, and the number of customers ordering organic milk was increasing, and we wanted to meet that demand."

Food and Water Watch spokesperson Jennifer Mueller noted that much of that activity (including 33,000 emails) was generated from call-in days conducted by her organization.
If you want to thank Starbucks CEO Jim Donald for not poisoning you with milk (or ask what "doppio" really means), you can reach the company at 1-800-235-2883.

Green Livin Toyota Struggles to Meet Prius Hybrid Demand

2008-07-17T00:01:00.001-05:00

GREEN LIVIN DETROIT - The surge in popularity for it's hybrids have left Toyota Motor Corp facing an unusual problem. A shortage of their popular models like the Prius hybrid.

The limited inventory of small cars has really hurt Toyota, which reported a 11.5 percent drop in US sales in June.

In contrast, Japanese rival Honda Motor Co reported a 13.8 percent sales rise on record demand for its Fit subcompact car and Civic sedan.

Toyota executives said a dwindling inventory of vehicles, such as the Prius, Yaris and Corolla, forced the automaker to try and keep up with demand , while US auto sales dropped almost 9 percent.

Sales of Toyota's Prius, the top-selling hybrid in the US market, fell 26 percent as dealers ran short of inventory and customers faced a six-month waiting list.

"It is very doubtful that there is going to be able to satisfy the Prius demand and that is very unfortunate," said Jim Lentz, Toyota's head of North American sales.

Toyota had a one-day supply of the Prius hybrid and a 2-1/2 day supply of its hybrid Camry sedan at the end of June.

Toyota cars also ran low in June. Dealer supply of Corolla sedans was down to a 15-day supply, while Yaris had a 7-day supply at the end of June, the automaker said. Toyota expects inventories of Yaris and Corolla to increase in August and was working on its hybrid battery manufacturing plant in Japan.

The current Prius uses nickel-metal hydride batteries made by Panasonic EV and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co Ltd.

Toyota, which put the first hybrid car on the road in 1997, goal is reaching global annual sales of 1 million hybrid vehicles by 2010, more than double last year's sales.

Toyota's Lentz said the production constraint made it hard to forecast the market for the hybrid model in the US, the Japanese automaker's largest market.
"We don't know what the top end on Prius is," Lentz said.

In the US market the 3 major Japanese automakers were mixed in June with Nissan Motor Co posting a 7.5 percent decline.

Honda skirted the downtrend in overall US light car sales, outselling Chrysler LLC for the 2nd month in June and ranked 3rd in the US market.

The 3 major Japanese automakers increased their share of the US market to 1.8 over a year ago.

The market share of the 3 Detroit automakers General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co and Chrysler -- fell to 45.8 percent in June from 50.2 percent a year earlier