Archive for July, 2011
To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?
To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?
Sometimes, simple acts such as going to the grocery store can turn into a moral dilemma. Is it better to choose the piece of organic fruit produced on the other side of the country or the non-organic version grown locally, 50 miles away? Are the benefits of chemical-free shampoo worth an extra 5 bucks a bottle? Will I really be able to enjoy a cheap chocolate bar knowing that the growers of the cocoa beans were likely not fairly compensated?
As much as I’d like to say that I always buy the product that is environmentally safe and sustainably produced, in reality, that’s not always the case. First, the sheer amount of information required to be able to distinguish between products is staggering. You need facts regarding environmental impact, transportation costs, and fair trade practices, to name just a few. And there are plenty of misinformation and greenwashing campaigns out there to steer you in the wrong direction.
Second, of course, there are times when the high cost of an ethically made product turns me off from buying it. Even consumers with the best of intentions have their breaking points.
The thing is, companies who go out of their way to implement sustainable practices endure a greater cost of production. Sure, they can sometimes capitalize on this by marketing to conscientious consumers who are willing to pay a bit more, but the fact remains that in today’s system, environmentally minded production is punished.
On the other hand, companies who move their factories (and jobs) to developing countries with lax environmental standards and cheap labor are able to make products at a fraction of the cost and undercut their competitors (while shipping materials and finished goods all around the world and adding to our greenhouse gas problems).
The way it’s set up, high environmental standards in one country drive companies to relocate in places where it’s permissible to pollute in order to compete in the marketplace. Chaco, the Colorado-based athletic sandal company, is a prime example of even a well-intentioned company being forced to follow suit to maintain competitive pricing on their products. In fact, 95% of all footwear in the world is produced in China, whose poor environmental regulation and sometimes dangerous environmental problems are well known.
With current talk about cap and trade emissions programs, this phenomenon may only get worse.
So how do we even the playing field and reward companies for good business practices?
When I think about this problem, I keep coming back to an idea I encountered in a casual conversation with a stranger while traveling. I can’t remember his face or his name, but his idea has stuck with me and festered in my mind for the better part of a year. His take was that putting the financial burden of environmental responsibility on the companies just doesn’t make sense for the reasons I’ve given above. In a global marketplace, it renders companies less competitive than those that operate free of environmental and labor regulations.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to put an “environmental impact” or “ecological footprint” tax on the product itself?
Ugh, a tax?
Initially, I didn’t warm to the idea either. But think about it: adding a tax proportionate to a product’s ecological and social footprint eliminates the cost advantage of irresponsible production. All those environmental costs that are currently not included in our economic system would be factored in and would increase the price of unsustainably made products.
This, in turn, would make moral dilemmas at the grocery store much easier. Is it more sustainable to buy distant, organic produce or local, non-organic produce? The tax-adjusted pricing should inform my decision. Can I afford the chemical-free shampoo? Yes, because the price of its chemical-laden competitors would be raised through the environmental impact tax and eliminate the cost advantage of choosing that product.
The money raised from the tax could fund its implementation and other sustainable programs such as public transportation (high speed rail, anyone?) and alternative energy. Perhaps it could even make a dent in our gaping budget deficit.
Won’t this cost me money?
You may be thinking, “Sure, that’s a good idea in concept, but that will raise my bills – grocery, clothes, everything.” Well, yes, that’s true. But maybe if we see the true cost of the products we casually consume, we can make a more informed decision about what is really necessary to our lives.
Additionally, programs such as this often have the greatest impact on the poor. But this could be compensated for by using some of the tax revenue for need-based assistance programs.
Regardless, running an economic system on the assumption of infinite resources is fundamentally flawed. Currently, environmental impacts such as air pollution, water pollution, and deforestation are not factored into the cost of a product: they are considered “externalities.”
These costs need to be included in the system in a way that does not punish those who engage in sustainable business practices. By taxing a product’s environmental impact, it levels the playing field for the consumer.
Disclaimer
Of course, I am not an economist or policy guru. I don’t know how to implement such a tax or if it would even be possible (though compared to creating a carbon trading market, perhaps it’s not that difficult). This is only the musing of a concerned, intelligent citizen trying to brainstorm ways to make our economic system fit within the bounds of our ecological constraints.
What do you think? Would such a tax have a beneficial effect on our production system? Join the conversation over at our website!
Jill Mueller is a conservation biologist, avid cyclist, and freelance writer. She has combined forces with a good friend and dietitian to start The Barefoot Badger, a blog promoting healthy, sustainable living. Check us out!
Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day
Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day
What is Earth Day?
While you have probably heard the words “Earth Day”, did you know there are two observations of Earth Day? The United Nations celebrates on the equinox; hundreds of countries celebrate Earth Day annually on April 22nd. Both events were birthed in 1969, with grassroots efforts, a focus on environmental awareness, and celebration of Earth.
Events to Leading to Earth Day
Prior to 1970, conservatism was an idea held by a minority of people. The notion that natural resources would become devastated to the point of extinction did not enter our collective thought. Pollution, from our buildings, cars, and behavior, was a normal industry by-product. The idea of being the world’s steward was lumped in a mindset of ‘a hippie thing’ and not understood by mainstream America. Two previous events tilted our environmental awareness: a book and a picture.
In 1962, marine biologist Rachel Carson published Silent Spring. The book talked about the commonly used, toxic pesticides used in agriculture and daily life. The title referred to the consequences of the devastating pesticides: a world without birds. Surprisingly, Silent Spring became a hit. Americans cared, and they wanted the facts.
In 1968, the world saw the entire Earth for the first time. Apollo astronauts photographed the planet on their flight home from the moon. The Earth looked beautiful with its swirls of blues and whites. The photo provided a startling awareness: people saw Earth as vulnerable and needing human care.
Earth Day is Born
In 1969, John McConnell promoted Earth Day as a global celebration of Earth’s gifts. The equinox seemed fitting time, as it was the mid-point of spring and autumn across the hemispheres. A peace activist, McConnell first presented his Earth Day idea to an audience at the UNESCO Conference on the Environment. He wanted Earth Day to be a global holiday, where the world celebrates Earth’s wonders and gifts.
On March 21, 1970, cities across the globe celebrated Earth Day. McConnell created an Earth Day proclamation that called upon people to take action against crises of the world, such as famine, war, and poverty. The proclamation also stated that participants would celebrate an international Earth Day to create a single community and embrace Earth’s gifts. The proclamation was endorsed by well-known people and leaders around the world: astronaut Buzz Aldrin, anthropologist Margaret Mead, inventor-scientist Buckminister Fuller, Japanese environmental scientist, Y. Fukushima, American senators, U.N. President S.O. Adebo, and UN Secretary-General Thant.
In April of 1970, the world celebrated another Earth Day event. The April 22nd event also began as a way to spread awareness of environmental issues. American Senator and conservationist, Gaylord Nelson, had actively toured the U.S. in the mid 1960’s with an environmental awareness agenda. Wanting the U.S. government to take an active role in environmental concerns, Nelson presented the idea for a national conservationist tour to President Kennedy, who supported the idea. While President Kennedy’s tour did not turn environmental issues into mainstream conversations, it was a beginning in changing America’s role in environmental issues. Nelson was inspired by college campuses’ widespread Vietnam protests, or teach-ins. He thought a nationwide conservationist teach-in would get more Americans involved in environmental issues.
Nelson presented his Earth Day idea to other government officials and news organizations. He promoted Earth Day to senators, governors, mayors, and college campuses’ newspaper editors. In November 1969, he formally announced a nationwide, environmental teach-in, called Earth Day, would be held in the spring of 1970. As the event became headline news, the public reacted enthusiastically. Nelson first handled Earth Day public relations from his senate office, but with the public’s overwhelming interest, the office moved into its own organization. Founder of Common Cause John Gardner helped with a temporary office, and college students helped field the office. Nelson appointed Dennis Hayes as coordinator of activities.
Approximately 20 million people celebrated the first Earth Day. In America, participation was high in schools, which ten thousand grade schools and high schools, two thousand colleges participating. Amazing numbers, considering the event started as a grassroots movement.
Government Actions
The strength of the Earth Day movement was clear to legislatures. Following Earth Day’s success, the U.S. government passed laws that targeted cleaner living. In 1970, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was established. The Clean Air Act followed with a focus on reducing air pollution, with the Clean Water Act doing likewise for water clean-up in 1972. The U.S. also passed the Endangered Species Act to protect animals from extinction.
Mainstream Americans talked about recycling and conservation. In the 1980’s, many people recycled within their neighborhood recycling programs. People’s awareness of their ecological responsibility became part of their lives and actions. Children learned the importance of taking care of their environment; they were taught to care for the earth and its animals. The iconic Smokey Bear (originated in the mid 1940’s) featured poster slogans, like “If not you, who?” and “Only you can prevent forest fires. We can’t.” Americans seemed to step-up to their roles as Earth trustees.
In the 1990’s, recycling programs reduced overall waste by twenty percent. With people and government taking responsibility, companies followed suit. Manufacturers looked at ways to reduce toxic by-products and appear environmentally responsible to their customers. Their marketing campaigns highlighted eco-friendly actions, like reducing environmental waste.
Resurgence
Even with progressive responsibility, people did not celebrate Earth Day as they had in the beginning year. Celebrations were still held, but they weren’t as widely attended or announced. In 1990, the original Earth Day coordinator, Dennis Hayes, organized a worldwide Earth Day. For the thirtieth anniversary of Earth Day, Hayes planned for a global celebration, with participation from countries around the world. The event was observed by 200,000 people across the globe. The movement continued with recognition that environmental issues impacted the world and spurred the international community to work as a unit and combat its shared problems. In 1992, leaders at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized their joint responsibility and planned for future projects on sustainable living.
Earth Day Birthday
In 2009, visionary Simon Ford led a grassroots effort on the internet. This global community focused on a renewed urgency about environmental issues. Their first major campaign focused on worldwide environmental crises, the responsibility of mankind to solve them, and a project to unite participants across the world. The event, Earth Day Birthday, formed, as a global event to celebrate Mother Nature’s gifts.
Successful Earth Day events in the past came from grassroots efforts in spreading environmental awareness. Earth Day Birthday joins online social networks with real world actions. Earth Day event organizers and participants find each other on the web. Supporters are spreading the word on environmental issues and taking action in their own communities. Earth Day Birthday provides the 20th century, grassroots effort in reaching eco-friendly people and making an impact on the planet.
For more information about Earth Day Birthday, this site provides Earth Day Birthday campaign details:
www.eventslisted.com/eventlaunchstrategies/category/launch-strategies/earth-day-birthday
Jennifer Akers is a freelance writer, book reviewer, and editor. She writes about family, education, business, and social marketing. Her eco-friendly passions started with an interest in making a difference in the planet and joining Earth day Birthday. To find out more about her freelance writing life, please visit: http://www.Squidoo.com/JenniferAkers
Temple Mecca Black Stone
The Plastic Bag: Ban Or Save?
As part of the conservation and environmental movement worldwide there are several campaigns aimed at banning the plastic bag. These fit in perfectly with going green at home and with our longer term life styles.
A quick search on the web will take you to the San Francisco Bay Area, “Bay vs Bag”, to the Daily Mail’s (UK) “Banish the Bags” as well as similar situations in Canada, Holland, China, elsewhere in the US and even Zanzibar.
A lot of the focus is based on the damage done to wild life, including sea mammals and birds; the effects on waste and the average number of bags used per person in different countries. In one of the lists I saw, Singapore was topping the list at 625 bags.
One of the targets is to reduce by 10% the yearly consumption of these bags.
On the other hand there are also “Save the Plastic Bag” campaigns, with the plastic industry behind it. Their main focus is highlighting what they call misinformation. Their points are based on “exaggerations” on the damage done to wild life; errors in how plastic bags are made (from ethane gas that would otherwise be burnt and not petroleum); effects of co2 vs methane; potential job losses and so on.
On the banning side of the argument, there can be exaggerations as well as questionable scientific data – questionable as in anybody can question it, after all to have an argument you must always have at least two points of view.
From the “saving” the industry point of view, there can be many counter arguments to the data that is presented. And this is quite understandable, after all their industry could be hit very badly. (This just reminds me that all businesses have a life time curve that goes from birth, to growth, to maturity and finally to demise. The time scale can be as short as a year to as long as a hundred years or more, but the end result is that it is replaced by something else).
Some of the arguments are saying that nets and not plastic bags are causing marine life casualties, that paper bags are a worse alternative (side stepping the plastic bag issue) and basically attacking the “plastic bag misinformation campaign”.
Very probably both sides are looking to make their points by reducing or ridiculing their opponents point of view. But the overall issue is still there – are plastic bags affecting our environment?
To get back to the plastic bag banning situation, where paper bags have the negative effect of more trees cut, the information that is being retrieved is very important. But it must also be as objective as possible. Having said that, we know that it takes literally centuries for plastic to degrade and this should be the foremost argument.
Just to expand a little on the paper bag argument, which is totally reasonable, the option is not to cut more trees. The options are to recycle and use bio-degradable alternatives.
In the old days, when plastic bags hadn’t been invented but grocery shops had, natural fiber bags were used and the customers were the ones who brought their own to the shop.
With just a little effort on the individual front, these campaigns wouldn’t be necessary.
Want to know about environment and natural living? Information, news and facts can be found at: http://natural-living-tips.com/
Recycle – Composting Food Waste Takes Care of Two Things at Once
Recycle – Composting Food Waste Takes Care of Two Things at Once
Years ago my dad taught me the benefits of composting food waste. It had nothing to do with any type of “green” movement or being environmentally friendly, no, it had everything to do with reintroducing nutrients back into the soil.
Here is what he taught me then and it still holds true today. By burying your food waste and kitchen scraps (no steak bones though), you are providing a quality food source for the creatures that live in your soil. From micro organisms and those creatures that the human eye can not see, up to worms, which of course we do see.
See, what happens is these creatures eat the food (and of course each other) and then finally the worms eat basically everything and their castings (worm poop) create the best nutrients your soil could ever have. By continually supplying your garden soil with food waste you are feeding the earthly creatures and they reward you with healthy soil. Now where can you get a trade off like that!
Ok so here is how you do it. Get yourself a fairly large Tupperware bowl. One large enough to hold at least a week’s worth of food scraps. Then after each meal dump everything and anything into that bowl. Just do not put steak bones in there, they wont biodegrade or be eaten by the worms. Banana peels, apple peels, coffee grinds, fish, vegetable scraps, egg shells and basically anything you don’t eat, all qualifies.
When your Tupperware bowl gets full, take it out to your garden and dig a hole about a foot to two feet deep and then dump the food scraps into the hole. Fill in the hole with the dirt and mark the spot with a stick or something else so that you do not dig up that area again for another three months. You need to give those little rascals some time to eat it all.
Now you simply repeat this process as the Tupperware bowl gets full. If you find that you live in colder climates where the ground may freeze for lengthy periods of time, then consider starting a warm box to recycle your food scraps. That goes beyond the scope of this article but I am sure if you Googled the search term “vermicompost” you will get all the information you will ever need.
So what are the two things I was talking about earlier? Well obviously the first is you are adding nutrients to your soil through composting food waste. The second is by composting your food waste you are limiting the amount of garbage that ends up in a landfill. The average four person house hold creates about 8 pounds of food waste per week. If every family in America followed this process we would eliminate nearly one billion pounds of food waste garbage a year. Now that is a lot of trash!
Do your part and compost your food waste. The worms in your garden will love you for it and so will everyone else in the environment.
About the Author
Bruce Tucker is a contributing writer to Mike’s How-To Blog, a blog that covers a wide variety of topics and how to do them. You can also follow him on Twitter.
Paper Bags Substitute Plastic Bags?
Paper Bags Substitute Plastic Bags?
Bags hold an important place in our lives. They are sometimes referred to as the best personal carriers. They are made of various stuffs like cotton, synthetic, leather and so. But when it comes to general usage like for shopping, the names of two types of bags viz. plastic made and paper made bags come to our intellect. Both are fine, but the question is, which one is the best suited to our requirements. Lets discuss the peculiarities related with the two.
You might be thinking that paper bags are not as durable as those made of plastic. Also, we see that the latter are more commonly used than the former one. But, do you know plastic is a stuff which is really hazardous to the environment. It takes thousands of year to decompose. If burnt, it emits poisonous gases which again pollutes the environment. If buried in the ground, it makes the soil infertile. If thrown in the sea, it pollutes the sea water and proves to be a threat for the life of the sea creatures. One can imagine, how hazardous is plastic to our planet.
This perilous nature of plastic had forced the governments of many cities of the world to put a ban on the use of poly-bags, which are a major source of plastic pollution. Few cities of the world in which these polythene carriers are either completely or partially banned include San Francisco, New York, Texas, Germany, Dhaka, China, Kenya and Ireland to name a few. Even the government of Delhi had issued guidelines against the use of polythene. However, later on the government changed its decision to completely ban the polythene, due to some reasons. Government suggested the manufacturers to set up the recycling units on the basis of “polluter pays principles”. But the government has not completely given up the plan to ban these polythene carriers, it is in the pipeline.
In this context, paper bags are the best option. No doubt, they are unconventional, but they are eco-friendly and easy to recycle. Nowadays, there are various types of paper made bags available in the market. They are not only good looking, but also have ample of space to carry goods and are quite durable. The handmade paper bags available nowadays are designed to suit specific requirements which include carrying gifts, carrying wine, shopping etc. There is a separate bag to serve each purpose. Although, multipurpose bags are also made from paper. They are proving to be the best substitute for plastic or polythene carriers in the modern context.
Now, as we have told you every significant fact related to plastic and paper bags, It’s upon you which one to choose. The hazardous and non-disposable polythene, or the environment friendly and elegant paper bags.
For more information on paper bags, paper baskets, miscellaneous paper products and other handicraft items, you may visit the following sites:
http://www.handmade-paper-products.com/
http://online-handicrafts-center.blogspot.com/
Do We Want Too Much?
Do We Want Too Much?
What can be done about this increasingly worrying contribution to global warming?
The most important options to reduce aircraft CO2 emissions are:
Changes in aircraft and engine technology; use of alternative fuels, such as (sustainably produced) biofuels; regulatory and operational measures such as improvements in air traffic management; economic measures such as inclusion of aircraft emissions in emission trading schemes.
But, as Giovanni Bisignani, manager of International Air Transport Association (IATA), stated: “Emissions trading schemes only make sense with efficient infrastructure. The IPCC estimates that there is 12% inefficiency in air traffic management globally: we produce up to 73 million tonnes of carbon emissions each year by aircraft flying inefficiently due to air traffic management limitations”. **
On a personal level we could ask ourselves especially in the developed world: “Do we really need to fly so frequently?” The use of telework, teleconference and video conference could be largely increased to plan work and meetings. Can’t the development of land and air transportation infrastructures be balanced better according to the real needs of people and businesses? Trains could connect cities better and more cheaply for example in Europe, where the prices are not competitive with those of many flights anymore (and night train services have been reduced if not cancelled).
Life styles do matter because if millions of people want to have cheap weekends in relatively close tourist locations, many flights are needed to satisfy their desires and consequently a lot of pollution is generated. Also, our per capita emissions could be cut also by reducing the “surplus” trips, by slowing down our life rhythms and enjoying more local attractions in our free time. Who knows? We could discover the “exotic” in our own neighborhoods without flying to the Caribbean Sea…
Furthermore the relationship between the costs and the environmental externalities (i.e. costs not included in the economy like health damages caused by pollution) needs to be considered as well: there are higher marginal impacts for short-distance flights that should be considered in prices paid by passengers.
All these political, technological and personal choices are some of the good examples needed by the developing countries to follow the 21st century’s Western society along a new sustainable path which looks like the only good alternative forward.
**”Talks to reduce aircraft global-warming emissions
For further information on Climate Change please visit the Responding to Climate Change website – http://www.rtcc.org
About The faircompanies
When Sea Levels Rise
It is no new scientific fact that there is a slow steady increase of temperature; we’ve been studying and recording changes for a few decades. For some reason people are only now starting to take notice of how desperate the situation is.
Due to the increased temperature, sea levels are on the rise. It now is easier for boats full of scientists to access the Northwest Passage for research due to the polar icecaps melting . Areas that were once almost unreachable are now becoming navigational and the search for precious gems, gold, and oil is on! There is no end to mans greed.It makes sense that when the sea levels rise the ground surfaces slowly disappear. We will lose our agriculture farmlands. There may not be enough food needed to sustain ourselves, let alone other countries that we already support. Many farmers will lose their farms and their lifestyle.
Should sea levels on the rise be a worry about freshwater? Our drinking water is not a luxury it is a necessity and is as important for people, plants, and animals. The possible damage to freshwater due to rising sea levels should be a major worry to all of us.
For hundreds of years polar bears have been the king of the Arctic ice and roamed over vast areas of icy tundra. But with the icecaps melting away, and the distance between ice flows becoming greater, many polar bears have drowned from exhaustion before reaching shore. It also makes hunting their primary source of food, the seal, more difficult. Dying of hunger is now a probable fate for many of them.
The total extinction of many of the world’s beloved land animals may be just around the bend due to rising sea levels.
Show some concern about the environment and save money at the same time by searching for eco friendly products from sites like http://www.EnergySavingProject.com.
The author is a specialist in environment, energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Efforts Conservation
Efforts Conservation
How often have we come across lovely historical sites suffering from neglect and misuse? Every country needs to take good care of its historic places. Because things like malls, stadiums and highways can be built again. But a historic place which is neglected and misused will lose its glory and slowly disintegrate into zilch. And no amount of action plan or noble intentions can ever bring a historic place back to its former glory when it has been totally neglected and abused by us. The oldest of historic sites can be preserved for the future generations if we have a proper plan for their conservation.
Conversation of historic places requires a systematic approach. If the historic site is conserved with the help of a proper plan, it will show amazing results. While chalking out a plan for the conservation of historic sites, it’s very important to keep the costs under control. If the costs go up to an unwanted level, it will draw criticism from the general public and act like a death sentence for the conservation of other similar projects in the future.
The first thing which should be done by the restoration experts is to check the age of the historic site. This can be easily achieved by conducting a series of scientific tests. It can also be done if there are public or archaeological records of the site. Once we know the actual age of the historic site, we get to know the actual worth of the site – this doesn’t mean that if a site is not very ancient – it’s not worth taking care of.
Also check the sturdiness of the materials which have been used on the historic site. This will need a proper list of all the materials used on all the structures found on the site. Factors such as the effect of temperature, humidity, weathering, fire, air pollution, storms and flood on the material found on the site needs to be studied in detail, so that best possible plan to prevent further degradation of the site can be prepared.
Don’t forget to note the architectural design of any structures present on the site. This is needed to take help of conservation experts according to the style they specialize in. Taking the help of the best of experts who are not competent in the architectural design displayed at the historic site would create a major problem for your conservation project.
Your team of conservation experts also need to keep a track of all the past repairs and changes made on the historic site. The problems faced by the previous restoration team while restoring or repairing the historic site too needs to be researched and noted down. Always remember materials like wood and leather rot quite easily, on the other hand stone articles and pottery items always manage to survive better. Once you have finished your complete study of the historic site, you can then do the restoration part of the site step by step in a phased manner till it is complete. You might even have to restrict the number of visitors, once it has been restored, as although the site has got its former glory, it might not be in a state that it can be exposed to an endless number of people everyday.
For more information on the historical sites of the world, visit Matt’s website about world historical sites, especially his favorite place, tikal.
For People A Green Vocabulary
For People A Green Vocabulary
The international passion to protect our planet from the ravages of pollution and to preserve our natural resources for future generations has become an everyday fact of life. With international support by “green” political parties, consumer organizations, celebrities and politicians, the green movement has become a powerful force with an agenda that needs to be addressed by industry, politicians and consumers. Discussions about the environment are taking place in corporate board rooms, legislative hearings, and by consumers in supermarkets and department stores.
Can we fully understand environmental concerns and energy implications without a working knowledge of basic green vocabulary? Do we understand all the issues relevant to tax incentives for oil companies? Can we properly compare the organic and nonorganic products that we decide to eat or wear every day? In essence, to think and live green you need to speak and understand green.
Understanding some key green terms and their implications can help us evaluate alternatives between our planet and sacrificing aspects our personal lifestyle. It can help us decide how we cast our vote or spend our money or how we live our lives. A green vocabulary can help us reduce our “carbon footprint “. The following represents what is best described as a green vocabulary of definitions and commentary to help eco-oriented consumers make informed green decisions.
A Green Vocabulary for Green People
Organic identifies products made under the authority of the Organic Foods Production Act. Organic production guidelines are established to use organic materials and practices that improve ecological balance. Organic production incorporates agricultural system components to enhance natural biological systems.
Organic Agriculture is an ecological farming system that promotes natural chemical and biological cycles that improve soil fertility and maintains a balanced and productive farming system. Any products introduced to this system for fertility or pest protection are of natural composition. It eliminates the use of harmful synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, growth stimulants or antibiotics. These essential restrictions can reduce contamination or pollution to our air, water or food supply.
Natural Fibersare “certified” organic fibers derived from organic agriculture such as cotton, bamboo and hemp.
Certified Organic Cotton is derived from organic agriculture. The cotton is grown without artificial pesticides or fertilizers. Conventional cotton farming ranks about fourth in the use of pesticides in the US. Several of the top pesticides used in nonorganic cotton farming are EPA recognized carcinogens. It takes 1/3 of a pound of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers to make one organic T-shirt disregarding the use of any toxic dyes (Organic Trade Association). A typical organic tee shirt is also about the same weight but without these harmful chemicals. Organic cotton is produced using conservation minded or “sustainable” approaches to crop production. Such practices help to retain and promote soil fertility and the natural recycling of soil resources.
Organic Certification is provided by various organizations. The most widely recognized standards are GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard) which is the basis for the statement “100% certified organic cotton” used by many green companies.
Fair Labor Practices are not necessarily restricted to agriculture but generally support fair wages and healthy working conditions.
Fair Trade Certification “…guarantees consumers that strict economic, social and environmental criteria were met in the production and trade of an agricultural product.”(www.transfairusa.org).
Sweatshop-free describes the absence of manufacturing conditions currently existing in many countries, referred to as “sweatshops”. They are production facilities or factories where goods are produced cheaply by minimizing workers’ salaries, and increasing working hours. Proper environmental health standards are diminished, yet demands for high levels of productivity still remain. These sweatshops may thrive from corporations seeking to increase profits by subcontracting inexpensive labor.
Sustainable means conserving and preserving limited natural resources and energy supplies. It is connected with the term “recycling” when natural products are re-used like rubber (for tires, shoes) or paper/trees (for books, business cards, magazines etc.), or wood (for recycled furniture). They are made from or made into recycled, carbon based products. A good example of preserving our resources is Trees for the Future, a charitable organization dedicated to replacing and planting trees. Unfortunately, most of our energy production is derived from organic (carbon based) fossil fuels that cannot be recycled as compared to wind or solar energy. All of this is connected to our lifestyle and our “carbon footprint” discussed next.
Carbon Footprint is a descriptor of environmental impact. It describes the consumption of carbon based natural resources or the production of carbon by-products like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide or “greenhouse emissions”. It’s about lifestyle and the amount of carbon based resources we consume through transportation, climate control, manufacturing etc. Basically it relates to how much each of us consume in terms of natural resources to meet our needs. In general each of us should be committed to reducing the size of our “footprint” to sustain resources for present and future generations.
Eco-fashion is a general term describing organic clothing that has addressed the needs of the environment as well as socially responsible working conditions.
Eco-friendly suggests a product or process than has a reduced impact on the environment.
Low Impact Dyes refers to dyes used the manufacture of goods that should have minimal impact on the environment. Sometimes the term non-toxic is used here as well.
Green is a generally positive term referring to the environment, organics or even a green lifestyle to be discussed shortly.
Conscientious Clothingdescribes organic clothing has addressed environmental, ethical and socially responsible standards.
The Green Lifestyle
Green Lifestyle or Green Living describes a lifestyle reflecting a strong commitment to the environment. In addition, it addresses compassionate and positive thinking. It means choosing a life with charitable deeds and practices, reflecting compassion for the environment and others. Green living is being proactive and incorporates spiritual growth leading to ethical thinking.
Social Responsibility can be defined as accepting responsibility for others and taking action against social injustice. It includes meeting the needs of others through charitable giving.
Charitable Giving describes a sense of genuine compassion and reacting to it with charitable practices towards others.
In summary, a green lifestyle represents caring for the environment combined with positive thinking leading to ethical behavior and compassionate living. Ultimately, your deeds represent positive thoughts in action. The result can be a clean, safe environment and a better quality of life for yourself and others.
If you learned some green vocabulary, be sure to use it to make decisions and set priorities in your life. Think about adopting a greener lifestyle!
Bob Folkart is Vice-President of Live Life Organics, a company devoted to encouraging the living of a passionate life through environmental awareness. Live Life Organics has created a range of eco-friendly, organic cotton clothing from adults to babies. Every item of apparel displays positive inspirational messages promoting courage, hope and compassion and includes a plantable hang tag that recycles and grows into wild flowers. To view these organic products, go to: http://www.livelifeorganics.com.
Green Tech News
China also needs to get on board.
Our world is facing a huge crisis today in the form of global warming. Though most recognize that it is a bomb ticking away and awaiting to explode, few of us actually make an effort to change this dangerous trend. Lots of research and methods are being discovered and discussed but very few concrete steps have been taken yet. The major culprit is the industries that contribute maximum carbon dioxide and other dangerous gases to the environment. Although it is imperative that each of us do something to reduce our carbon footprint on earth, the industries and huge factories in the developing worlds should be forced to take up real concrete methods of curtailing pollution.
With rising population, the world has to increase production of materials and goods for all. This obviously calls for more and more industries in the world, which will only add more emitting pollutants to the atmosphere. The world needs to come together to work out solutions that can both save the environment and maintain economic development.
The problem of global warming represents a serious threat to the entire world. We are running out of time as warned by many scientists around the globe. People have created this problem by greatly increasing the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; and people working together will be the only way to stop it.
As President Obama makes an effort to introduce and promote green enterprises and industries, he will face a startling fact. Most pollution is created by China and the developing world. So no matter how much the developed world reduces their carbon emission, countries like China will compensate it with more pollutants. The per capita emission has increased six times today thanks to industrial projects which do not follow minimum environmental laws and directives.
It is imperative that Chinese President Hu Jintao and the other world leaders start to outline a plan now that will be followed by most countries, particularly China, in going green in their business practices.
However, the problem facing the world is that if we tackle this problem from a micro level, we come face to face with industrialists who are trying very hard to make their business a success and increase profit. There is nothing wrong in that because more profit would mean greater investment and a stronger economy. But most of these factory/industrial owners do not take into account the bad effects of pollution due to the emissions and discharges from their units.
Scientists across the globe are insisting that the environmental costs should also be included in the production costs. But, unfortunately, the busy industrialists do not have time to take into account the social and environmental responsibilities of the company; and, hence, little to no effort is made by them to alter the situation. Forcing the overworked staff to look into ways to follow the green norms is not cost effective in the long run.
A better way to tackle the problem is to hire a Green Consultant. The Green Consultant would look into individual business practices and suggest concrete methods to reduce pollution and reduce wastage and improper use of resources. For a nominal fee the consultant would work throughout the year to move the business toward a successful GCI Green Building certification. However, because businesses differ in nature, region, demands, budget, etc., it would make sense that one approach for all may not work well.
Consult the Green Business League website to learn more about the consultant and their expertise.
Samm Parker is author of this article on Nationalgeographic.
Find more information about Global warming here.