MHI announces they now are producing thermoformed packaging made 100% from collected and recycled water, juice and sports drink plastic bottles. Trays, clamshells, blisters and more produced with Good Earth(tm) 100% recycled PET are also Biodegradable, Compostable and Recyclable. FDA approved, this proprietary material can be used for food and non food applications.

Good Earth(tm) 100% post consumer recycled content PET is the newest addition to MHI’s proprietary family of eco friendly packaging. This material expands MHI’s existing selection of material options marketed as “Todays’s Most Practical Alternatives” for environmentally responsible packaging.

Developed and manufactured by MHI, a vertically intergrated division of CEI Incorporated, this new proprietary material offers many environmental, performance and cost benefits for those looking to use more eco friendly packaging. This carbon footprint reducing option is not only made 100% from recycled plastic bottles, it is also biodegradable and compostable in a landfill or compost environment. It can also be recycled through existing programs.
Currently, the average person discards 166 plastic bottles annually with 8 out of 10 ending up in landfills.

FDA approval, high clarity, range of colors, temperature range and good strength make it an attractive and practical alternative for a wide range of food and consumer goods packaging. Performance and physical characteristics are the same as or close to the traditional materials (PET & PVC) it can easily replace and does not have any shelf life, storage or heat sensitivity limitations.

Cost of packaging manufactured from this newest Good Earth ™ material is usually less than the traditional material it replaces and is readily available.

Also available (depending on certain factors) is a “closed loop” program where plastic bottles can be picked up and then remanufactured into 100% post consumer recycled content thermoformed packaging for the company or institution returning the bottles.

For more information call 978-745-8876 or visit www.goodearthpkg.com

http://www.pr.com/press-release/106801

Six kilograms of carbon dioxide a day. If that sounds like little more than an obscure scientific measurement, think again. In the years to come it’s a figure we may have to get used to. Why? Because, say climate scientists, that’s the maximum daily amount of carbon dioxide each of us can generate if humanity is to have a chance of keeping the rise in global temperature below 2C.

That figure, endorsed by Lord Stern, then the government’s chief economist, in his 2006 report on the economics of climate change, is one of the best illustrations of the scale of the challenge of powering our world without endangering the planet.

Compare it with the amount we emit now. Britain generates about 10 tonnes per person each year - about 27kg a day. America generates about 60kg of CO2 a day, according to the Atlas of Climate Change, and China about 9kg, a figure rising as the country develops.

How, then, can humankind cut those emissions to 6kg by 2050, as Stern and like-minded climate scientists say we must? It adds up to about two tonnes a year, roughly equal to the amount emitted by a person in Mozambique.

Power generation lies at the heart of the debate. Around the world there are about 5,000 large power stations that burn fossil fuels, mostly coal or gas. They emit the equivalent of about 11 billion tonnes of CO2 a year - a huge chunk of the 49 billion tonnes generated globally by human activities, according to figures from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The panel says energy supply is responsible for 26% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Transport accounts for about 13% and buildings about 8%. Stern’s latest report, Key Elements of a Global Deal on Climate Change, states: “The importance of technological innovation in delivering this transformation can hardly be overstated.” In other words, technology is the best hope we have of cutting emissions.

According to a report from the consultancy McKinsey & Company, each unit generated will have to be made to produce 10 times more of everything - of CO2 power, food, consumer goods and so on - than today. And we have just 40 years to achieve that if the global temperature rise is to be kept below 2C.

John Pothecary is a divisional managing director at RPS, an international con-sultancy specialising in the development of energy resources and environmental management. He believes that global leadership is one of the biggest issues. “There are all kinds of technologies we can use to cut carbon emissions, but first we need the political and financial systems that will ensure they are adopted,” he says.

Pothecary is partly referring to the negotiations under way to draw up a replacement for the Kyoto Protocol, which will set emissions reduction targets. The negotiations will culminate in a United Nations conference in Copenhagen in December 2009, which will, hopefully, produce a new protocol.

It will have to set global targets for cutting carbon emissions that are perceived as fair and achievable. For the energy industry, Copenhagen is a giant fork in the road, the outcome of which will influence its actions for decades. A successful protocol could lead to a system of carbon quotas whereby each country would have a ceiling placed on its CO2 emissions. Any excess emissions would have to be covered by buying quotas from other countries, otherwise the country would face a fine.

If it worked, such a system could transform the relative costs of different fuels. Coal, for example, whose abundance makes it the cheapest bulk source of energy, could become the most expensive because it generates the greatest emissions. Nuclear and wind power, which currently cost two to threeCO2 times more than energy from coal, could become far cheaper in a low-car-bon world, and oil and gas may lie somewhere in between.

Such shifts would create a powerful incentive to develop the new technologies Stern refers to. Perhaps the most important is carbon capture and seques-tration, a system of stripping CO2 from power station emissions and storing it underground. In theory this could be adopted by most coal and gas power stations, turning them from polluting monsters into low-carbon paragons.

What happens if Copenhagen fails to create a workable protocol? The stresses on the process are showing. Even Britain, which likes to portray itself as setting a lead on green issues, is already lobbying for aviation to be excluded from the EU’s target of getting 20% of energy from renewable sources by 2020.

David Eyton, research and technology vice-president at global energy giant BP, says: “It’s cheaper to produce energy from fossil fuels than from renewables, and there are plenty of them, so we will keep producing them and people will keep using them. That is our primary business for now.

“The policymakers at Copenhagen have to bridge that gap in costs and address greenhouse gas emissions. The decisions they make will determine our investment portfolio and the products we offer people for decades to come.”

Goodwill in short supply

Can global treaties on our climate lead to real cuts in carbon emissions? History suggests not. Lawrence Susskind, professor of urban and environmental planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has looked at the achievements of other global treaties on the environment and found them sadly wanting.

“More than 400 multilateral agreements such as the Kyoto protocol on climate change now exist, addressing problems including the loss of endangered species and habitats, ocean dumping, the shipping of hazardous substances, and desertification,” he says. “Yet there is no evidence to suggest that any of these are working with perhaps the one exception of the Montreal protocol on ozone-depleting chemicals.”

What all these treaties have in common is that they are administered by ad hoc secretariats, depend for funding donated by the very countries they are supposed to be regulating and are highly politicised - so the science gets distorted.

Even when they are agreed there is no central agency, no United Nations Environmental Treaty-making and Enforcement body with the means to enforce them. It means any successor to Kyoto is likely to prove just as pointless and ineffective as the rest.

Gas flow improved

Natalie Davies, 26, joined Shell in March last year and now works as a project services engineer based in Assen, northeast Holland. She is part of an extensive project to renovate and update the facilities and equipment used in processing gas from the huge Groningen field to make them more efficient and environmentally friendly.

Davies is Shell’s on-site representative, monitoring contractors that install ultrasonic gas-flow meters, which measure the gas before it is sent to the supplier. This includes filling the plant with nitrogen and helium to make sure connections don’t leak.

The hands-on role complements her theoretical experience, and she will eventually become a cost and planning engineer. Her work also counts towards chartership with the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Away from the spanners and slide rule, she is enjoying learning Dutch.

Davies joined Shell after gaining a masters of engineering from Cambridge University. After two years of general engineering courses, she specialised in manufacturing and took an internship one summer with a manufacturing company. Her time there led to a job offer, but she preferred the variety of options on offer at Shell.

“I wanted to join the energy sector because we are going to face huge challenges and I’ve always thought it’s better to be part of it and make a difference,” she says. “Being on the inside, I feel I can do that. It’s great to be on site and see in practice how everything works. It makes a lot more sense to see it yourself.

“It’s also a great learning opportunity and has flexibility and freedom too. If I see something interesting, I can speak with the contractor and find out what they are doing.

“I’m confident that schemes in the company are such that I will be challenged in whatever position I want to do. I’m quite ambitious and see myself moving to technical project management. There is flexibility and if I don’t like something, I can move, as it’s such a huge company.”

Dangers ahead

Greenhouse gases increase the atmosphere’s ability to trap , of which humanity releases heat. The best known is CO2 about 50 billion tonnes a year. Some is used by plants or absorbed in the sea but the rest stays in the atmosphere for decades. Levels have risen from about 280 parts per million before the industrial revolution to the equivalent of 430ppm.

This has helped warm the world by about 0.7C, with another 0.5C expected from gases already in the atmosphere. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that if greenhouse gas emissions rise at present rates, levels will reach 550ppm by 2035 - with temperature rises of 3C-4C.

Brown’s balancing act Follow the money

The International Energy Agency recently published a study on the cost of low-carbon technologies aimed at keeping global temperature rises below 2.4C. It found that the world needed to spend an extra £23 trillion from 2010 to 2050 to decarbonise power generation and promote energy efficiency measures that would stabilise the climate.

“The average year-by-year investments needed to achieve a virtual decarbonisation of the power sector include: 55 fossil-fuelled power plants with carbon capture; 32 nuclear plants; 17,500 large wind turbines and 215 square metres of solar panels,” said the report. “It also requires widespread adoption of near-zero emission buildings and deployment of nearly a billion electric or hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles. In the coming decade we need a global revolution in the way we produce and use energy.” Gordon Brown has already pledged the nation to cutting its emissions by 60% by 2050 compared with 1990 levels, and is likely to raise that to the 80% cut expected to be recommended by his new Climate Change Committee in its first report next month. Brown, however, has made it clear he also wants Britain to build more airports, roads and coal-fired power stations, and to expand its economy.

Defra, the environment ministry, has indicated that it expects Britain to meet up to a third of any future carbon emission reduction targets by purchasing carbon credits from developing countries, through an international trading system.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/career_and_jobs/careers_in/careers_in_energy/article4836600.ece

While the East Coast swelters in temperatures that are in the high 90’s, I waited for the usual environmental propaganda to say that this was proof of global warming, but it has not yet been pumped through the usual mainstream media system of lies about the climate.

Instead, the reality is that the Earth continues to cool and one interesting example of that was a news item out of Aspen, Colorado. The Aspen Skiing company announced on Monday, June 9, that it will open Aspen Mountain from June 13 to June 15 for skiers and snowboarders. It seems that record winter snowfall has left an average of more than three feet of snow on the upper slopes.

In late May, despite Green predictions that the Arctic is melting so fast that it will provide a new route, a Northwest Passage, for ships, a group of eco-tourists on a vessel offering polar expeditions found themselves trapped when a former Soviet icebreaker, refitted for visits to the supposedly disappearing ice, was trapped in late May by ice.

According to Quark Expeditions of Norwalk, Connecticut, the ship included a heated indoor swimming pool, exercise rooms and a sauna, and I am sure the passengers, tiring of looking at a sea of ice appreciated them. Eventually, after being in the icy grip of Mother Nature for a week, winds and tide permitted the ship to break free of the ice pack.

In April, approximately on hundred sealing ships were trapped in ice floes off the northeast coast of Newfoundland while they were participating in the annual seal hunt off Canada’s easternmost province. It required the Canadian Coast Guard to rescue a number of the trapped vessels and their crews. However, at one point, an icebreaker sent to free them actually found itself trapped. As reported, “In addition to three icebreakers on hand, the Coast Guard is flying helicopters in to provide food and support to the stranded sailors.”

So much for the blather about the North Pole melting.

In May, meteorologist Anthony Watts issued a report on the way temperatures continue to cool. The new global data revealed a whopping three quarters of a degree Celsisus drop in temperatures since January. That may not seem like much, but climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA and now the principle research scientist at the University of Alabama, said that, “If you exclude the anomalous 1992 cooling from the Pinatubo volcano eruption, it’s the coolest May in 20 years.”

Even the U.S. government, courtesy of NASA, has admitted that the Earth is now a decade into a cooling cycle and it is likely to last at least two or three more decades.

Question: Why do both candidates for President keep talking about global warming?

All this is occurring as the Public Broadcasting System is preparing to foist a two-hour pack of lies in a television spectacular called “Heat.” Check your local listings for more of the same brainwashing and propaganda that has nothing to do with the realities of a Sun that has been largely devoid of magnetic storms, sunspots, for a few years now. It is the Sun that determines how warm or cool the Earth will be and this is a known sign of cooling. It has real scientists very worried.

And, of course, this planet is now approaching the end of the latest interglacial period between ice ages, about 11,500 years on the average, so some massive climate shifts will occur at some point, changing everything we humans have grown accustomed to over the past centuries.

What we called “civilization” coincides with this period between ice ages. A new one is going to ruin a lot of plans.

By Alan Caruba

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3457

The hippies are coming! The hippies are coming!

That may have been what the Wakarusa Music and Camping Festival initially attracted in its first few years of existence. The four-day festival at Clinton Lake State Park in Lawrence, Kan., prides itself in bringing in plenty of big names from the jam band scene along with premiere acts in alt-country, Southern rock, reggae and bluegrass while raising awareness for environmental issues.

For its fifth year, Wakarusa is trying something different.

The festival, which takes place Thursday, June 5 through Sunday, June 8, is expanding its musical horizons even further. They are bringing in indie rock mainstays like Built to Spill, piano-playing singer/songwriter Ben Folds, country legend Emmylou Harris, goofy alt-rockers Cake, underground hip-hop acts like Blackalicious and Del the Funky Homosapien and Uncle Monk, a bluegrass duo featuring none other than Tommy Ramone, the last surviving member of the seminal punk rock quartet The Ramones.

These are just a few groups on a jam-packed lineup including headliners like The Flaming Lips, Sound Tribe Sector Nine, Keller Williams, Zappa Plays Zappa, Mickey Hart Band featuring Steve Kimock and George Porter Jr., Galactic, The Avett Brothers and a ton of others.

Brett Mosiman, co-director of Wakarusa, realized that this year instead of having similar genres competing for the festival’s crowd over the four-day period, it would be beneficial to the festival to do a little bit of counter-programming with the more than 120 bands on the festival’s lineup.

“I think of part of it was just getting a handle on the fact that we have 300 or 400 hours or music,” Mosiman says. “If we wanted to keep five or six stages, we had to broaden the booking.”

The festival’s five stages will have music playing nearly 24 hours a day, which will be perfect for attendees who pay between $129 to $169 for a four-day pass.

But this year, Wakarusa is hoping that their diverse lineup featuring several big-name acts will get more of a local audience from Kansas City and other areas close by to get the Wakarusa experience, even if it’s only for a night.

“We kind want to offer a little something more for the people here in the regional community,” says David Barrett, director of marketing for Wakarusa. “We want people just to come out to Wakarusa for a day and see what it’s like.”

Or a weekend. Wakarusa is offering its usual single-day tickets for $49 while also offering a weekender pass for $99 in case people couldn’t take off four days because of something silly like jobs or kids or things like that.

While you are at Wakarusa, you may notice how friendly the festival is to the environment it occupies. The generators run on biodiesel. Recycling also is a huge emphasis. Last year’s festival recycled 8,000 pounds of waste that would normally end up gracing local landfills. They are also instituting their first-ever composting program, so whatever food you don’t want (or think tastes like crap) can go towards growing a happy little plant. Bob Ross would be proud.

They will also have a sustainability meeting featuring the editor of Mother Earth News, Brian Welch, a campus tour of human rights awareness and a no-sweat fashion show to display clothes not manufactured in sweat shops.

If you ask Mosiman, these activities are an essential element of Wakarusa’s identity.

“(They’re) all the normal things for us, but I don’t think they are normal for most festivals,” Mosiman says. “We just consider that part of the brand now.”

And another characteristic of the Wakarusa brand is the vendors. The 75 food, arts and crafts vendors will be selling a little bit of everything. On the arts and crafts side, you could pick up clothing, glass marbles, art, glow-in-the-dark light covers, bottle holders and goods made of bee wax. As far as food goes, Madina Salaty, Wakarusa’s vendor coordinator, says they have everything from “healthy options to junk food.” You’ve got your pizza, hamburgers, fries, but you’ve also got organic and vegetarian options, Cajun, Indian, Middle Eastern, Mexican and Chinese food to choose from.

Salaty says that while the number of vendors has slightly increased this year, high gas prices have kept vendors who consistently travel many miles to sell their products at Wakarusa from making the trip.

“We have lost several vendors,” she says. “They have specifically told me that that’s the reason.”

The location of Wakarusa should be enough for people to ignore the prices at the pump. The festival will once again place at Clinton Lake State Park, southwest of Lawrence, Kan. The 1,500 acre facility has plenty to offer those who aren’t just there for the music, with beaches, an 11,000 acre lake, horseshoe pits and hiking trails.

“The amenities are really like no other festival that’s held in a field or a polo ground,” Mosiman says. “It’s really like a family vacation.”

Mosiman knows the traveling aspect of Wakarusa may be less tempting with gas prices so high, but he thinks that shouldn’t stop you from enjoying a unique musical experience, no matter how long you decide to stay.

“I think it’s impacting everybody, and our big message is that you still got to have fun. You have to cut loose,” Mosiman says. “Don’t let those greedy oil bastards take away your fun and your Wakarusa weekend.”

For more information, go to www.wakarusa.com.

by Blake Hannon

http://www.stjoenews.net/news/2008/may/30/loud-outdoors/?diem

The arrival of Earth Day next week, combined with the drop in retail sales numbers, seems like a good time to ask whether the age of rampant consumerism is over or whether it has just stalled.

Earth Day seems like an anti-buying-stuff kind of time, but retailers are working to make it the time to get consumers to switch over to green products. And there are plenty of green products on the market.

So with sales down across the nation, will consumers embrace the message and start buying green? It’s hard to tell. So far this year, it seems that consumers can only afford to buy food and gas.

The rampant consumerism blog, www.rampantconsumerism.blogspot.com, has not had a posting since November, about the same time retail sales began a free fall. Coincidence?

Last week, the International Council of Shopping Centers reported the weakest sales for the month of March since 1995. The ICSC tracks 80 retailers and takes into account sales at stores open at least a year, as well as total sales.

Gap Inc. saw same-store sales plummet 18 percent this year, while sales increased 6 percent in the same month last year.

Department stores Kohl’s and J.C. Penney also were hard hit, reporting double-digit drops in sales at stores open at least a year.

Even Wal-Mart and Target, where shoppers can buy food and health and beauty aids, were struggling. Sales at Wal-Mart rose 0.7 percent, compared with a 4 percent increase last year. Target saw same-store sales decline 4.4 percent during March, compared with a 12 percent rise a year ago.

While retailers blame the weather and the economy for slow sales, it might be wise to ask whether the thinking has shifted about buying.

It’s true that by and large consumers have less discretionary income, but there may be some weariness in consuming goods for the sake of it.

But for those who figure concern for the planet in their shopping decision, there are some retailers that are trying to get customers by “going green.”

Sur La Table, with a new store in downtown Sarasota, has a whole host of environmentally friendly products. From the low-tech micro fiber slippers that allow you to clean your floors while walking around the house to the high-tech sanitizing system that allows you to kill bacteria on food and countertops, Sur La Table is talking up its green products.

Perhaps the most astounding is a new chemical-free sanitizing system. The Lotus Sanitizing System infuses water with extra oxygen to create a sanitizing agent.

The company claims the water can “neutralize 99.9 percent of bacteria and pesticides on food and household surfaces, plus remove stains, mold and mildew and deodorize countertops and floors.”

I tried the system and was surprised to find that the water does cut through grease and does a really good job of cleaning, better than some cleaning products I have used.

The sanitizing machine is $169.95 at Sur La Table and comes with a bowl, in which consumers can sanitize fruits, vegetables and even meats, a spray bottle attachment, two microfiber cleaning cloths and the cartridge that infuses the water.

Once you own it, you might never have to buy cleaning products again. Of course, you do have to buy replacement cartridges.

So it certainly will not end shopping, but it might make some consumers feel good about what they buy.

Toni Whitt

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080415/COLUMNIST94/804150323/-1/newssitemap

Whether by lowering your thermostat or unplugging seldom-used appliances, chances are you’ve recently attempted to scale back on energy use.

In fact, you may be one of the consumers who have bought more than 1.5 billion Energy Star-qualifying products since the label was introduced in 1992. Last year, one in three people reported using the label as part of a purchase decision, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. If they’d bought an Energy Star-qualified commercial dishwasher, they might be saving an estimated $200 per year, according to the Department of Energy. Those that took home an Energy Star refrigerator can look forward to a 15% less expensive monthly electricity bill.

Other ways of saving energy include fixing a leaky faucet and checking your insulation levels. But the most comprehensive way might be to figure out exactly how much damage you’re inflicting so you’ll know how much to cut back.

Author Alexandra Shimo-Barry knows how. In her new book, The Environment Equation, Shimo-Barry, a national reporter for Maclean’s in Canada, teaches readers how to quickly calculate their carbon footprints, or the amount of greenhouse gases in units of carbon dioxide, they’re producing by using the following formula:

A.) Multiply your monthly electricity bill by 105

B.) Multiply your monthly gas bill by 105

C.) Multiply your monthly oil bill by 113

(if you don’t use either B or C, enter 0.)

D.) Multiply total yearly mileage by .79

E.) Multiply the number of flights–4 hours or less–by 1,100

F.) Multiply the number of flights–4 hours or more–by 4,400

G.) Do you recycle newspaper? If no, add 184. If yes, add 0.

H.) Do you recycle aluminum and tin? If no, add 166. If yes, add 0.

A+B+C+D+E+F+G+H = your carbon footprint. A number below 6,000 (reflected in pounds per year) is excellent. Over 22,000? Not so great. Good is anywhere from 6,000 to 15,999, while 16,000 to 22,000 is average.

If your number is higher than you would like, there’s good news–there are hundreds of ways you can shrink your carbon footprint, and many of them aren’t as sacrificial as you might expect.

That’s because Shimo-Barry says that lack of will, not austere alternatives, is the No. 1 barrier blocking would-be waste-reducers.

“There’s still inertia when it comes to making small changes,” she says. “But Americans emit 20 tons of carbon dioxide per year. Even if we cut that by a ton–which isn’t difficult–it would make a huge difference.”

Simple Steps
Eating locally grown food is one of the easiest ways to reduce your footprint. Whether you begin visiting the farmer’s market every Saturday to pick up local fruits and vegetables or, if you are able, dining at restaurants serving regional fare, eating locally allows you to eat well without funding the emissions used to import food from other countries and regions.

Jason Karas, founder of Cambridge, Mass.-based Carbonrally.com–a gaming Web site that challenges users to reduce personal emissions through online competitions–says that drinking locally microbrewed beer is another way to shrink your footprint, for much the same reasons as eating regional food.

“It’s also a great way to support local entrepreneurs,” says Karas.

Buying second-hand is another luxurious choice. For many, vintage shopping has become as chic as getting on the list for the newest pair of Christian Louboutins. Buying vintage clothing and accessories is more than looking sharp: These practices will reduce your carbon footprint by eliminating the energy it takes to produce something new. What’s more, you might get that Hermes Birkin for $2,000 instead of $8,000. Those not so used to buying second-hand should read “Shopping Tips for Vintage Clothing Collectors.”

How are you cutting back on energy use? Weigh in. Add your thoughts in the Reader Comments section below.

Sustainable wood furnishings are another smart lifestyle alternative. Before you redecorate your home by raiding the Conran Shop, consider buying pieces from eco-friendly shops like Vivavi and Environment Furniture. Both offer stylish, modern goods–like a mid-century-styled credenza or a curvy bamboo rocking chair–that are Forest Stewardship Council-certified, which means they’ve met 57 earth-friendly criteria established by the organization. These include minimal pesticide use, protection of local wildlife and unionization for loggers.

In the market for a second home? A penthouse on Central Park South might not sound like the most efficient way to cut carbon, but city living is often friendlier to the environment. That’s because many urbanites rely on public transportation. And even a two-floor penthouse in the Trump Tower uses far less energy than a sprawling seven-bedroom mansion. What’s more, when water, sewage and electricity are shared, less copper–which is found in plumbing and electrical systems and is one of the largest contributors to landfills–is needed.

All evidence that living grandly can do the earth well, as long as you know where to cut back.

Lauren Sherman

http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2008/04/15/green-carbon-living-forbeslife-cx_ls_0415carbon.html

By now, everybody knows the pitfalls of using disposable plastic bags. Happily, that means manufacturers are dreaming up better-looking (and much more environmentally friendly) alternatives for toting groceries, toys and books. Here’s a sampling:

Made from 100 percent recycled materials, the Great A&P Tea Co.’s bags feature imagery depicting seashells, fruit and animals. And they’re easy on the wallet, too: costing 99 cents at Long Island Pathmark, Waldbaum’s and A&P grocery stores. (Pictured at left.)

Dubbed the new “it bag” by Teen Vogue, this Earth-friendly Baggu tote will help reduce your carbon footprint. Available in a variety of colors and made from sturdy ripstop fabric that will carry up to 25 pounds. Sold for $8 each or $22 for a pack of three at baggubag.com. (Pictured  below)

Lightweight and waterproof, the Envirosax bag comes in a variety of unusual designs and colors, each sized just right for toting vacation souvenirs or beach gear. Costs $8.50 each or $37.95 for a pack of five at envirosax.com.

In Asia, they were used as rice and feed bags for transporting various goods. In New York, recycled totes by Gecko Traders can carry your groceries, beach gear or anything else. These durable bags are made by a fully certified Fair Trade Co-op in Cambodia. Plus, no two bags look exactly alike. The recycled totes have even been vetted by Treehugger.com, a blog dedicated to green living. They cost $35.95 at reusablebags.com (Pictured at left.)Made with 100 percent organic cotton and water-based inks, the oversize Beleaf tote can fashionably carry you through a weekend’s worth of errands but withstand the weight of bulky grocery items, too. It’s $36 at beleaf.com.

Read more about eco-friendly decorating, green celebrities and ways to reduce your carbon footprint on Newsday’s section on “green living,” newsday.com/green.

http://weblogs.newsday.com/features/home/cheap_thrills_blog/2008/04/green_shopping_the_best_of_the.html

Of all the things to obsess about, toilet paper has never been at the top of my list. Or the bottom.

Then I met Jeff Wells, a pleasant, earnest ornithologist who lives in Maine and was visiting Philly. Wells and a few environmental groups say I should buy paper products made from recycled paper - not trees.

Now, Wells obsesses about birds, billions of which breed in Canada’s boreal forest, which he also obsesses about because he’s a scientist with the International Boreal Conservation Campaign.

The boreal stretches nearly from Alaska to the Atlantic; it absorbs tons of carbon dioxide and it’s a major summer nesting ground for birds that winter in backyards like mine.

But the boreal forest is being logged at the rate of 2.5 million acres a year, Wells says. Some is for lumber, sure. But also for paper. Toilet paper.

Paper giant Kimberly-Clark says all the leading consumer tissue brands in North America contain primarily virgin fiber.

In a longstanding dispute, the company says it mainly uses leftover tree pulp, but environmentalists insist that entire trees are being given over to toilet tissue.

The company said about 11 percent of its virgin pulp comes from the boreal - which is then reforested.

Still, environmentalists wonder why we are, in effect, flushing virgin wood pulp of any sort down the toilet when at the same time we’re sending nearly half of all the perfectly good paper left over from home and office use to landfills.

“It’s one of those things that just doesn’t make sense in today’s world,” Wells said.

At least half a dozen companies now make TP from recycled paper. I took a field trip to area grocery stores to investigate.

OK, then, talk about obsessed. In one paper goods aisle, there were 18 kinds of toilet paper - including one aimed specifically at children.

Every store also had at least one eco brand. I bought seven. Back home, I piled my loot onto the dining room table and took stock.

The eco-packages had pictures of trees and cute slogans: “Soft on Nature, Soft on You.”

And in case anyone should miss the “100 percent recycled” label, they had names such as Nature’s Balance, Earth First, Sunrise, Earth Friendly and Seventh Generation.

All were white, so I guess that matters to most people. (The eco brands touted a chlorine-free bleaching process.)

Many were embossed with flowers or butterflies, which seemed silly until I learned the designs hold the paper together after it has been air-fluffed to make it softer.

Traditional toilet tissue ranges from half a cent to 4.5 cents per square foot. The eco-brands were actually less: half a cent to 2.3 cents per square foot.

Seventh Generation contends on its packaging that if every household in the United States replaced just one four-pack of virgin fiber TP with recycled, it would save the equivalent of nearly a million trees.

The toilet paper awaited me. I tried them all.

I’m happy to report I have not had to seek medical attention for abrasions from scratchy paper - because it was fine.

Allen Hershkowitz is a proponent of recycled toilet tissue and a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Now, he is obsessed. He has timed himself in the bathroom and says it takes less than five seconds to use up a piece of tissue.

And for that, he asks, we’re using trees?

Recently, he went to a swank French spa to give a speech. The TP was brownish, stiff. But, “the president of France goes there,” he said, “and everybody survives.”

Still, I recently had a bad cold, my nose raw from all the tissues, and I wasn’t even using recycled.

I told the spokeswoman at Seventh Generation, and she laughed. In cold and flu season, even they “concede to softer brands,” she wryly noted.

So maybe I’ll just go with the virgin pulp for my delicate nose. And I’ll take eco-paper for, uh, the other end.

No more trees for me.

GreenSpace:

For more about recycled paper and trees, go to: http://go.philly.com/greenspace

GreenSpace: Pointers for Paper Products

What’s in recycled: Environmental groups advocate paper products made from 100 percent recycled materials. Look for a high percentage of “post-consumer” material, made of paper recycled from homes and offices. Regular “recycled” can contain leftover paper from industrial processes.

Paper recycling update: Last week, the American Forest and Paper Association announced that in 2007, an all-time high of 56 percent of the paper used in the country was recovered for recycling. It totaled 54.3 million tons - more than 360 pounds for every person in the country. The group set a goal of 60 percent by 2012, which still leaves 40 percent more to go.

Historical note: Yo! Philadelphia is a cradle of paper progress. In 1690, William Rittenhouse and William Bradford founded the first North American paper mill along the Wissahickon Creek, making paper from old cloth rags. (Wood wasn’t used in the United States until the early 1900s.) Scott Paper Co., founded by two brothers in 1879 in Philadelphia, marketed the first rolls of toilet paper, and today Kimberly-Clark employees still make Scott products at the plant in Chester.

What’s ahead: Major manufacturers are making changes. Kimberly-Clark is test-marketing Scott Naturals. The line includes facial tissues from 20 percent post-consumer recycled fiber, TP from 40 percent, and paper towels from 80 percent.

By Sandy Bauers

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/sandy_bauers/20080407_GreenSpace__On_a_roll__Dead_trees_go_down_the_toilet.html

I’m happy to see that ‘environmentalism’ has become trendy, and that there is a growing movement in our society to reduce the impacts of our civilized lifestyle. Yet, those of us who have long considered ourselves ‘environmentalists’ fear that it may be too little too late, and that the movement is becoming co-opted by the very forces that we have been struggling to defeat.
http://treesit.blogspot.com

The crisis we face now can be traced back to decisions our culture made over 10,000 years ago, and compounded since then by millions of subsequent decisions. This process, whereby we went from a species in equilibrium with it’s environment to one that is currently destroying all life around it, has been greatly accelerated in the last 100 years or so. While this acceleration roughly corresponds with the rise of fossil fuel use, it is not these particular resources, or use thereof, that bear the entire responsibility for our current crisis.

The use and impacts of these energy resources, being such a prominent and immediate threat to life, have been focused upon by the new environmental (green consumer) movement as not only key targets, but in some cases, the only targets.
Many old-school environmentalists define their ideology and activism not just by a desire to reduce our ‘carbon footprint’, but also by a desire to have an abundance of intact eco-systems and a broad diversity of life on the planet. Hybrid cars and compact fluorescent light bulbs may reduce the amount of carbon we emit into the atmosphere as we go about our busy civilized lives, but unless we begin to take a brutally honest approach to a wide variety of elements of society, the toxic sprawl will continue to drive thousands of critical species (including our own) into extinction.

The problem lies in the centralized, industrial way that we choose to support ourselves as a culture. The most sustainable and ‘eco-friendly’ products of the mass consumer culture still require appalling amounts of water, energy, resources and labour to produce. All of these things need to be transported, and as these industries have been globalized, the distances that these things need to be transported have increased to the absurd and convoluted. The fuel used by the production and transportation is but one impact of the process. An army of heavy equipment, fabricated from steel, copper, zinc, iron and other resources (as well as petroleum products such as lubricants and plastic) are used in the production and transportation of ALL industrialized mass consumer products. In the case of the automobile, the vast majority of the energy and materials used and the waste and pollution created occurs in the production process.

Where do these materials come from? Whose land? Where does the massive waste our consumer society generates go? Whose land? Who builds the earth moving equipment and mining machinery? Who operates them? Who works in the factory that processes the raw materials and assembles the products? Who loads them onto trucks, ships, planes and trains? Who drives these vehicles? What are the working conditions for all these people? What kind of quality of life do they have? A great deal of exploitation is occurring around the world to bring us our ‘sustainable’ products. The cost of retrofitting the world with green technology and fuelling it with energy that costs more to produce than fossil fuel (as all other energy does) certainly doesn’t leave us much with which to pay a living wage to those who toil for our comfort.
These issues, though often referred to as ‘social justice’ issues, factor into the ideology of many environmentalists. Nowhere is an environmental issue not a social justice issue. Every step in the process of bringing mass consumer goods to the homes of the civilized world, impacts the lives of people who work in these industries and whose homes are downriver, downwind or have been destroyed by these industries.

A globalized mass consumer world is not compatible with the ideal of social justice for all. The industrial system requires slavery and exploitation. It requires increasing access to resources, which means displacing people, mainly poor and indigenous people, from their land base.

Mining and blasting processes, which are critical to the production of material for ‘green energy’ infrastructure, are apocalyptic to any ecosystem. The waste generated by these processes poisons rivers, lakes and oceans and in turn poisons the people who rely on these waterways for sustenance and survival.

These and other effects are also to be seen in the production, transportation and retailing of the ‘green’ and ‘sustainable’ products and infrastructure that is being created and proposed. (A good local example is the development on Spaet [Bear] Mountain, in which the future of the local indigenous cultures, which are in jeopardy in part from diabetes and other health effects of the western diet, relies on access to traditional wild foods. By reducing the land base of these peoples, you reduce their access to healthy food and sabotage their efforts to survive into the future. This can reasonably be called genocide.)

In short, any movement of ideology that does not advocate eliminating our dependence on a globalized industrial way of life can not with any real conscience call itself ‘environmental’, at least not in the sense that the word is used to mean respect and active protection of biodiversity and ecological equilibrium.

Any eco-philosophy that fails to take into account the impact of actions on all life from the smallest micro-organism up to entire human cultures is but a means to feel good about one’s excessive consumption and material addictions.

Those of us in the privileged world have become addicted to the comfort of abundant material wealth. Yet in the majority of the world, thoroughout the majority of history, people thrive, on far less, produced closer to home with less resources, used more efficiently for longer periods of time before being discarded, and discarded in a way that can even contribute to new products.

The true sustainable energy sources in this world are direct solar (to heat food, water, grow food, etc), methane digesting of food waste to produce electricity, heating and cooking fuel, and other technologies that can be built and maintained on a personal or community level.

Further energy reduction is achieved by localizing resource use and reducing the need for most transportation, as well as eliminating many of the products that those of us in the privileged world take for granted.

It’s true that we live in a world where many communities lack the resources for even basic survival, and must rely on imports from other communities, but from this need has arisen a system that is wasteful, inefficient and in most cases unnecessary. If we cannot return to a localized economy than we should be focusing on a future where these impacts occur only where they truly need to, and resources and energy used in the most efficient ways.

Those of us who live in areas with abundant resources could do a much better job of utilizing these resources. Cities could be growing food on rooftops, or in yards that are now only used for ornamental grass and shrubs. Rainwater can be utilized and grey water collected to reduce impact on watersheds and oceans. Food and other waste can be used to produce methane to eliminate the need for hydro-electricity, natural gas and home heating fuel. (And to save land from landfill and avoid flushing it into the ocean where it harms marine life.)

Other waste materials can be used to make new products, and this reduces the impact of extracting, producing and transporting materials and products.

We need to start perceiving the true impacts of using new products. As necessary as each new product may be in our lives, each time we purchase and consume them it is like throwing a live grenade into the communities affected by the production of these products. As necessary as each product may be, it can never be forgotten that we must TAKE LIFE to create it, and in the case of the land and ecosystems from which the raw materials and energy originate, that life may take thousands of years to return, if it returns at all.

Some purchases are unavoidable, but in the case of our culture, most ARE avoidable, thus we have no excuse for such casual taking of life.

‘Sustainable’ products and energy are that which can be harvested and produced close to where we live, with the least possible impact on the natural environment, with attention to quality (so they last), that fill a needed role in our lives, and can be re-used, recycled or discarded in a way that creates the least impact. All other products are destructive and counter-productive to our struggle to survive on a healthy planet.

The green consumer movement is not ‘environmentally friendly’, and the measures being proposed by the new mainstream environmental movement are nowhere near a solution for the crisis we face. If the power to ‘save the environment’ is in the hands of the people, than we need to use those hands to create the world we want, not to hand power over to the corporations and governments to pervert and waste. A centralized industrial world can only create ecological damage, genocide and exploitation. It’s time we began taking the radical alternatives seriously and begin to examine the impacts of every aspect of our lives.

- in solidarity with all life,
Kalanu
http://treesit.blogspot.com
http://bullsheet.wordpress.com
http://pedaltopetal.blogspot.com

PHOENIX— Goodwill of Central Arizona celebrates its newest store opening with a “green spring cleaning” theme. So clean out your closets and clean up on bargains!  Donating and shopping at Goodwill keeps hundreds of millions of pounds of used clothing and household items out of landfills and puts them into the hands of those who can reuse them. Revenue generated from the resale of donated items is put directly into the community to fund work skills development and employment services for the disadvantaged in central Arizona.

Goodwill will open its 39th store near Ahwatukee, 15633 S. 32nd Street, at 9 a.m., Friday, March 28, 2008.  Stop by, shop and enter to win prizes, as well as find great bargains and unique treasures.  Prizes include an Oreck vacuum, EarthMaids cleaning services certificates and earth-friendly cleaning products and the grand prize of two open-ended roundtrip domestic air tickets, donated by US Airways. Individuals donating items during the grand opening will receive a $5 off coupon good toward their next purchase.  Refreshments will be served.

Regular store hours are 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Saturday; 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday. Tax-deductible donations will be accepted during regular store hours.

Grand Opening events are stocked with over 100,000 quality items including electronics, furniture, clothing, jewelry and household goods.

Goodwill of Central Arizona, an organization dedicated to helping individuals in central Arizona with disadvantaging conditions overcome their barriers to employment and find self-sufficiency through the power of work.

Celebrating 60 years of serving the community, Goodwill of Central Arizona is one of the oldest and largest non-profit agencies in Arizona. Our mission is to “Put People to Work” throughout Arizona by providing job training and career services to those with vocational disadvantages that can include physical and emotional barriers, welfare dependency, illiteracy and age. In 2007, we served almost 11,000 youth and adults on their quest toward self-sufficiency and secured over 4,400 employment opportunities. For more information on Goodwill of Central Arizona visit www.goodwillaz.org.

http://www.evliving.com/cities_news.php?action=fullnews&id=9153