Blogs

Build a better brunch

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 09 May 2008 11:04:29 PDT

Whether it's Mother's Day, Father's Day, or a romantic breakfast in bed, sometimes you want to make a brunch that's really special. And nothing says you care like choosing wholesome, good-for-you and good-for-the-planet ingredients.

Let's start with that morning classic, the incredible, edible egg.

We hope the chicken who laid the little orb on your plate spent her life clucking around on a sunny farm, pecking at worms, and chasing merry chicks. But the reality of modern agribusiness isn't so pretty.

According to the Humane Society of the United States, most egg-laying hens in America are confined to cages with only 67 square inches of space per bird. These crowded battery cages are stacked on top of each other, and the chickens can't walk around or even spread their wings.

This is why many groups advocate for "cage-free eggs," sometimes called "free range" or "free farmed." But as the Green Guide notes, none of these terms are regulated or verified by a third party.

Only the term "USDA organic" is verified, and this confirms is that the chickens were fed organic feed, not given antibiotics, and were given access to the outdoors. But USDA regulations consider five minutes of open-air access each day to be sufficient -- and "access" simply means that a door is available and the chickens can use it. Nobody forces them to go outside, plus the "outside" may simply be a bare patch of ground.

And cage-free birds are not necessarily raised in a cruelty-free environment. Most cage-free hens have part of their beaks removed to limit stress-induced aggression. They live less than two years, which is less than half the normal lifespan.

Plus, it's just not that easy to find cage-free eggs, as the New York Times and others have reported. The idea has become trendy, so Whole Foods, corporate cafes (yeah, Yahoo!'s included), universities, Ben & Jerry's, and even Burger King are flocking to free-farmed yolks.

But only a reported 5 percent of American eggs are either cage-free or organic (that's up 2 percent in the past three years). And the prices are sky-high -- around $2 more per dozen, or so USA Today estimates.

If you can find genuinely free-range eggs from a small farmer, such as at your local farmers' market, some folks swear that the taste is better and the eggs are worth the price. But if you're in the city or 'burbs with only a big-name grocery store, well, it's hard to say if the cage-free label makes much difference.

A better bet to improve breakfast is organic fruit. Who doesn't love a beautiful bowl of fresh fruit in the morning, or maybe some chopped fruit topping a pancake or waffles? Just make sure you're not serving up pesticides with those sweets of the earth.

The not-for-profit Environmental Working Group has a handy list of fruits and veggies ranked by how clean they are. The results of nearly 51,000 pesticide tests on produce between 2000 and 2005 were analyzed to create this guide. You can get a printable PDF to keep in your wallet and take to the store.

This guide lists the dirty dozen fruits -- these are typically so contaminated, you should always buy the USDA-certified organic versions, which are clean. Common breakfast fruits on the list include peaches, apples, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, grapes, and pears.

The list of the 12 cleanest fruits -- ones you don't need to buy organic because they're usually safe -- also features some morning faves. Look for ordinary pineapples, mango, kiwi, and bananas.

Add a pot of fair-trade coffee, and you've got a brunch to make your mom, dad, your sweetie, and even Mother Earth proud.

Asparagus games

Jay Weinstein, Forecast Earth Food Correspondent — Wed, 07 May 2008 16:49:23 PDT

Anyone who enjoys theater of the absurd will get a laugh out of this: Our DEA's policy of subsidizing South American asparagus farmers to wean them from growing coca has been so successful that subsidized Peruvian asparagus are out-competing our homegrown ones here at home.

To make our domestic asparagus more competitive with imports, we're subsidizing American asparagus farmers too, under terms of the past and present Farm Bills. Asparagus are sprouting up in markets all over the U.S. this month. But where are they from?

Head to farmers markets and farm stands to ensure your spears didn't fly thousands of miles on jet fuel.

One astute food writer posted an analysis of the comical asparagus situation on a sustainable food web site. The piece cites a new film about the two-fisted taxpayer giveaway. If that's not enough reason to seek out local asparagus, consider that asparagus start losing their natural sweetness the moment they're picked.

So now, when sweet local asparagus overflow the markets, look for spears with unwrinkled, unblemished skin, tightly packed, pointed tips, moist flesh where they were cut, and defiantly stiff stalks. If you trim the less tender bottoms of the stalks, save them for asparagus soup. On warm days, serve this spring treat chilled, garnished with a swirl of tart yogurt. Peru produces some beautiful folk music. That's a good thing to purchase from that faraway land, not asparagus in springtime.

Asparagus Soup

2 tablespoons olive oil

2 cups chopped sweet onions

1 bay leaf

1 pound asparagus, roughly chopped (bottoms and scraps are fine)

4 cups stock or water

1 cup fresh or frozen peas

Plain yogurt to garnish

In a heavy soup pot, add the oil, onions, bay leaf and asparagus. Season the vegetables well with salt and white pepper. Cook gently over medium heat until the onions an asparagus are very soft but not browned, about 15 minutes. Add stock, bring to a boil, and lower to a simmer; cook 5 minutes more. Stir in peas; remove from heat and remove the bay leaf. Transfer soup to a blender; blend until very smooth. Adjust seasoning to taste. For extra smooth soup, or if the asparagus bottoms were especially woody, pass the pureed soup through a strainer . Serve warm or chilled, garnished with a spoonful of plain yogurt.

LifeWire provides original and syndicated content to web publishers. Jay Weinstein, a chef trained at the Culinary Institute of America, is a New York based food writer, editor, and cookbook author. His food articles and recipes have been featured in The New York Times, Travel & Leisure, Newsday, Time Out New York, National Geographic Traveler, and numerous other publications. His latest book, The Ethical Gourmet, focuses on ecologically sustainable fine foods. He's currently working on a book about sustainable use of water.

Eating right

Trystan L. Bass — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:39:11 PDT

You've heard of low-carb diets, right? Atkins, South Beach ... but what about a low-carbon diet?

Just like our cars and the power plants the light our houses create CO2 emissions, the food we eat can contribute to climate change. Livestock creates 18% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, so meat and dairy products have a high carbon count. Processed, packaged goods shipped across the country consume a lot more energy than fresh, local foods.

You can calculate the approximate climate impact of your meal at EatLowCarbon.org, a nifty tool created by the food service company Bon AppÃ©tit. Just drag and drop ingredients into your virtual sautÃ© pan, and dish up an earth-friendly dinner.

I visited a couple places where Bon AppÃ©tit provides food service and encourages eco-friendly dining. See for yourself how college students and tech workers went low-carb this Earth Day.

Bon AppÃ©tit brought its low-carbon diet to more than 400 corporate and university cafÃ©s across the U.S. this year. The company contracts with places like Massachusetts Institute of Technology, adidas, Seattle Art Museum, Oracle Corporation, eBay, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Best Buy, and even Yahoo!.

At Santa Clara University, I talked to students and staff to see how they enjoyed the sustainable lunch choices. The response was very positive. An environmental studies major complimented the cafeteria for emphasizing local produce. The students also admired how Bon AppÃ©tit and the university worked together to educate people on making smart food choices.

Lindsey Cromwell, the university's sustainability coordinator, pointed out that the low-carbon diet is in line with the institution's long-term goal of going carbon-neutral. "As a Jesuit university, we're concerned with the ethical implications of all our decisions," she commented. Stewardship of the planet -- down to the food we choose -- is part of the life education Santa Clara University provides.

Bon AppÃ©tit's Director of Culinary Support, Marc Zammit, gave me a tour of the university's kitchen and pointed out what made the Earth Day meals 'low carbon.'

Cutting out beef is a big part of it, but this doesn't have to mean going totally vegetarian. Raising chicken, pork, and fish uses fewer resources than beef. If you can go meat-free a few days a week, that's great (and pretty healthy too). But trying a tilapia fish taco instead of a hamburger like some satisfied students did is a start.

Cheese is a tough one for many of us to give up. But at the university deli, Zammit showed how you can create delicious sandwiches without a slice of cheese. Yummy spreads like hummus and pesto add creamy texture and loads of flavor without dairy. Definitely worth trying at home!

I also checked out the corporate cafÃ© at SAP Labs. Executive chef Melissa Miller showed me around her kitchen, where she makes tasty meals like chicken pho. This Vietnamese noodle soup traditionally has beef, but her low-carbon version was just as popular as the standard.

Miller's crew also makes potato chips from scratch -- this avoids packaging, since they can serve them from big glass jars. And fresh chips taste better too! What a treat.

The cafÃ© also provides crackers for soups in jars (instead of individually wrapped), and condiments like ketchup and mustard are served in refillable containers (not packets). All of this reduces garbage.

This is something we can easily do at home too. Buying in bulk is often cheaper than buying lots of individually packaged items. We'll spend less and have less trash, so it's a win-win.

Both cafeterias encourage diners to use real china and silverware whenever possible. Paper and plastic to-go containers are frequently not recyclable or just not recycled, so they end up in the landfills. At Santa Clara University, the cafeteria uses 7,200 to-go boxes each week. If you stacked them up, that'd be almost as tall as the Empire State Building!Â

That's something we should remember when we get take-out food or are tempted to use paper plates at home for parties.

Want to learn more about how you can go low-carb? Check out Bon AppÃ©tit's low-carbon diet tips, including research behind why this helps the planet.

And get a recipe from the chef at San Francisco's de Young Museum for seafood stew to whip up your own sustainable dinner tonight.

Low-carbon seafood stew

Courtesy of chef Preeti Mistry — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:34:57 PDT

This eco-friendly recipe comes to us from Preeti Mistry, Chef at San Francisco's de Young Museum for Bon AppÃ©tit Management Company.

Editor's note: The recipe includes chardonnay wine for flavor. Depending on your location in the U.S., domestic wine isn't always the best choice. Several experts suggest that for people living west of the Mississippi River, wines from California, Oregon, and Washington State are the more eco-friendly choice. For those living in the east, wines from the eastern U.S. and from Italy, Spain, and France are more carbon-conscious.

Ingredients:
Â½ cup extra virgin olive oil
1 lb. local fish bones
2 medium size onions, diced
1 jumbo carrot, diced
2 bulbs fennel, diced
Â¼ cup chopped garlic
1 bunch thyme, picked & chopped
1 bunch oregano, picked & chopped
2 Meyer lemons, thinly sliced
2 cups chardonnay wine
2 fresh bay leaves
2 liters tap water

1 lb. fingerling potatoes, cut into bite-size pieces

Â½ cup extra virgin olive oil
4 medium sized shallots, finely diced
2 tbsp. salt
1 bunch flat leaf parsley, roughly chopped
6 cloves garlic, roughly chopped
1 lb. local mussels, cleaned
1 lb. local clams, cleaned

Bring olive oil to a medium heat in a large sauce pan. Add fish bones, onions, carrots, and fennel sautÃ© 10 minutes. Add garlic, thyme, oregano, and lemon slices, and continue cooking until bones and vegetables begin to brown. Turn heat to high and add wine. Scrape pot to release flavor, and let simmer until alcohol has burned off. Add water and bay leaves, bring to a boil, reduce heat, and simmer 15 minutes.

Meanwhile, bring potatoes to boil and simmer until cooked through.

Let broth cool and then puree in batches in blender. Strain broth and set aside.

Heat second portion of olive oil in large sauce pan. Add shallots and garlic and simmer on medium heat for 2 minutes. Add mussels, clams, cooked potatoes, and fish broth, and bring to a boil, cover, and reduce heat to medium. Simmer 8 minutes or until shells open, then add parsley and garlic.

Yield: 4 entrÃ©e servings

Chef Preeti's Thoughts

I chose the seafood stew because I have always been a fan of using every part of the protein â in this case, flavorful bones from local fish. They are instrumental in creating a savory base for the broth, which is complemented nicely by the more subtle flavors of local herbs and spring vegetables.

Paired with the fragrant and floral tones of a chardonnay and the natural tartness of Meyer lemons, the result is a hearty, aromatic stew with rich and complex layers of flavor that is light enough to enjoy in the spring, when tomatoes â the more typical base for a seafood stew â are out of season.

Are we ready for climate change's health impacts?

Catherine Malina — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:51:33 PDT

This post is by Catherine Malina, an associate in the Health Sciences Program at Environmental Defense Fund and a survey interviewer for the "Are We Ready?" report.

Environmental Defense Fund released a new report [PDF] today on the U.S. public health systemâs state of preparedness for global climate change. Itâs based on a survey of local health department directors from across the country. I was one of the survey interviewers.

Is our nation ready to address the public health challenges of a warming planet? Our survey found thereâs much work still to be done.Â

Climate change already contributes to disease and premature deaths worldwide, as populations experience greater health risks from more frequent and intense heat waves, extreme weather events, reduced air quality and infectious disease. The new EDF report, written in collaboration with the National Association of County and City Health Officials and George Mason University, evaluates our public health infrastructure based on a survey of 133 local health departments in 39 states.

Public health officials concerned
The survey, conducted over the course of two months, included health officials in all parts of the country - from Utah, Kentucky and Florida, to Wisconsin, North Carolina and Maine.

In each interview I asked public health directors about their perception of climate-related health risks, and the status and adequacy of their departments' programs in response to these dangers. Directors also described their current or planned activities to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the additional resources they would need to more effectively deal with climate change as a public health issue.

I learned that there is widespread concern about climate change and the public health challenges it presents. This was true from small, rural counties to large, urban centers, and the suburbs in between.

Most of the directors were both personally and professionally interested in the issue, and believed climate change had already taken place in their jurisdiction. Even more believed they would see the local climate change over the next 20 years. I was struck to learn that a large majority thought their area would experience one or more serious public health problems as a result of climate change.

Lack of funding for long-range planning
Tellingly, most of the directors I interviewed saw the public health effects of climate change as an important priority for their department, but relatively few identified it as a top priority. Many admitted they lacked the resources and expertise to fully respond to the challenge. One director said:

We have limited staff and budget, so time is spent on routine issues. We don't have the ability to focus on long-range planning.

Another - one of many - echoed this response:

It would be a priority, but I don't have the funding for it.

Though we're not where we need to be, hearing this made me feel optimistic. Public health directors recognize the challenge ahead and are eager to find solutions.

Where we go from here
Our survey shows that local health directors across the U.S. are looking to state and national leadership for guidance and support. Improving public health's capacity to respond to climate change impacts will require closing a gap in resources and funding, but there are many opportunities to reduce health risks through smart policies that serve both climate and health goals.

For a detailed set of recommendations on how the U.S. can prepare for these health impacts, and to learn more about the survey, check out the full report [PDF].

The real thing

Jay Weinstein, Forecast Earth Food Correspondent — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:20:47 PDT

For health-and environment-conscious people who love Coca-Cola, now's a good time to stock up. During the seven days of Passover, the Coca-Cola Company reverts to its original formula, making the soda without high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which it began substituting for sugar in 1985.

This is done as a goodwill gesture to the Jewish community, which is forbidden by religious law to consume grains (including corn, from which HFCS is made) during the eight days of observance. This year, Passover runs from Saturday April 19 through Sunday April 27.

Many in-the-know Coke lovers who are concerned about the prevalence of highly processed corn sweeteners in the American diet for ecological or health reasons, or who simply miss the taste of Coke before the switch (you'll be able to tell the difference, believe me), take this opportunity to stock the pantry with HFCS-free Coke. It's available in most areas with a sizable Jewish population, and is easily distinguished from ordinary Coke by the bright yellow caps on its bottles (regular Coke bottles have red caps), and the Hebrew and English lettering on the cap, indicating that it is "Kosher for Passover."

Reasons for choosing this limited edition cola vary. For instance, the reason Coke substituted in HFCS in the first place was that ultra high-yield corn created record low corn prices. This made the corn-based sweetener much, much cheaper than the cane sugar or fructose (not the same thing as HFCS) that it had used since the 1880s. So much cheaper, in fact, that it slashed the cost of producing the beverage, and allowed for the introduction of super-sized takeout drinks, Big Gulps, free refills, and lots of other avenues to greater consumption. But high corn production is fueled by large chemical inputs like petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides, which cause extensive ecological damage.

It's not that sugar production is a great boon to the environment. It has land and water use problems too. But the increase in HFCS food and beverage consumption has led to increased ecological stresses, dependence on petroleum inputs, and, some say, the obesity epidemic in America today. Now that prices for corn are edging up due to demand for biofuels and a worldwide food pinch, we may see a downsizing of sweetened food product portions, Coca-Cola included. Maybe smaller bottles of Coke aren't a bad thing, either. But in the meantime, Coca-Cola sweetened the old fashioned way with cane sugar is on shelves until the end of this week.

Charred salmon, or salmonlike char?

Jay Weinstein, Forecast Earth Food Correspondent — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:27:48 PDT

Since American home cooks discovered the joys of grilling fish in the 1990s, countless tunas and swordfishes have been sacrificed at the Weber. But true mastery of the tricky art of fish grilling was easily measured by how well a cook could grill salmon, a delicate-fleshed fish that tastes great with a modest touch of char from a very hot grill.

Experts agree that getting the desired whisper of charred taste without overcooking the fish required a well-seasoned grill, patience not to move the fish before it formed a skin and released from the bars, and an experienced eye for doneness.

Since the early 2000s, though, awareness of health threats posed by farm-raised salmon, pollution and ecological damage wrought by the industry, and general distaste for the artificially colored product coming from salmon farms has led many Americans to turn to more expensive wild salmon.

Of course, the salmon farms were created to meet a demand that wild stocks could never meet. At the same time that demand for wild salmon is peaking, the federal government is taking emergency measures to close down salmon fisheries in some of the most important waterways of the Pacific Northwest.

It seems that massive diversions of river water for agriculture have decimated the salmon populations in the Sacramento River and in the Klamath River Basin. So much for barbecuing them!

With wild and farmed salmon now on the do-not-grill registry, what pink-fleshed fish is left? Enter a salmon relative with a juicy, salmonlike character and a great environmental record: arctic char.

It's larger and less bony than other salmonids like trout, and naturally oily enough to cook well on the grill. These fish can be substituted easily into your favorite salmon recipe. Just cut cooking time in half to account for their thinner fillets.

They are available either wild or farm-raised. Their aquaculture doesn't cause as many eco issues as salmon farming, because these fish naturally school very tightly, gain more weight per pound of feed than salmon, and can be raised in closed "raceways," where escapes into the wild are rare and waste can be contained. Wild stocks also rebound rapidly from fishing pressures.

Char is available in more and more fish markets. If your local store isn't carrying it, ask why. Your grill awaits.

Sustainable, affordable alternatives to salmon

Trystan L. Bass — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:35:30 PDT

Last week, the salmon fishing season was cancelled before it even began. Due to surprisingly tiny numbers of Chinook salmon (aka king salmon), the Pacific Fishery Management Council banned commercial and recreational fishing for 2008 of this popular fish.

The only wild-caught salmon left are smaller varieties from Washington state and Alaska, so prices are expected to soar. Estimates are about $30 to $40 a pound.

Atlantic salmon is still available, but that farmed fish has a host of health and environmental problems. Environmental Defense warns about high levels of PCBs and dioxins in farmed salmon. The Monterey Bay Aquarium's Seafood Watch notes that salmon farmers use a lot of pesticides and antibiotics, which get into the fish and the nearby ecosystem.

So what's a fan of fish dinners to do? Where do you go for those all-important omega-3s? What do you look for at the market or on a restaurant menu?

U.S. Tilapia - this fish is becoming more common in stores and is very affordable. U.S.-farmed Tilapia are more eco-friendly than the Latin American type, so make sure to ask.

Rainbow trout - A good choice for grilling and sometimes available smoked. Reminds me of childhood camping trips!

U.S. catfish - A Southern favorite that I find easy to cook, catfish is farmed responsibly. And it tastes great with hush puppies on the side.

Arctic char - Farmed in an environmentally sound manner, this fish comes from the U.S., Canada, Norway, and Iceland. It's also called Alpine char.

White seabass - Not really a seabass, this is also known as king croaker, weakfish, or seatrout.

Want more ideas about sustainable seafood? Read through our safe fish guide for expert resources about the best from the ocean.

CDC says climate change threatens health

Sheryl Canter — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:44:24 PDT

This post is by Sheryl Canter, an online writer and editorial manager at Environmental Defense Fund.

At a congressional hearing last Wednesday, Howard Frumkin, a senior official at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said there was strong scientific evidence of major health problems due to climate change in the next few decades, including:

Heat waves that put children and the elderly at risk
Danger of droughts and floods from extreme weather
Increased food-borne and water-borne infectious diseases
Worsened air pollution due to higher temperatures
Migration into new areas of vector-borne diseases like malaria

At least he got to say it. Last October, CDC testimony on the health risks from global warming was censored by the White House.

Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif), who chaired the hearing, said she suspected that "a layer of screening" continues to limit what CDC officials are allowed to say.

While insisting that CDC had no position on EPAâs pending regulatory decisions, Frumpkin said, "â¦there is strong evidence that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas â¦ and there is strong evidence that climate change affects public health in many ways."

Cracking the produce codes

Jay Weinstein, Forecast Earth Food Correspondent — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:44:51 PDT

Have you ever looked at two bins of apples, one labeled "organic," and the other "conventional," and wondered if the apples might not be the same? I have. And since discovering a little secret of the produce industry, I've found that you really have to be a detective in the aisles these days.

The secret is the price look-up (PLU) codes. They're an international numbering standard that identifies each type of produce, so that computerized cash registers can ring up the cost of fruits and vegetables automatically. They're also a powerhouse of information for savvy shoppers. The code indicates whether the item is a conventional, organic or genetically modified (GM) crop.

The codes are based on four-digit numbers for conventional produce, to which an extra digit is added to indicate organic or GM status. If the number is five digits beginning with a 9, then the item is organic. If the item is five digits beginning in 8, then it is a genetically modified crop.

For example, the PLU code for bananas is 4011. If the PLU sticker on the banana bunch reads 94011, then they are organic bananas. If the PLU sticker reads 84011, then the bananas are a genetically modified variety.

There are PLU code stickers on virtually every piece of fruit, banded around every head of lettuce or bunch of spinach, and stamped onto the bag of every bag of organic salad greens. But that doesn't prevent certain confused grocers from mislabeling them. I've discovered conventional Fuji apples (4129) in the "organic Fuji apples" (94129) bin many times. It's strange that I've never found organic apples in the conventional bin.

In any case, knowing the codes will ensure that you get what you intended to get every time you shop.

Jay Weinstein's blog posts are provided by LifeWire, a part of The New York Times Company.

How the world wastes $100 billion per year

Hank Green — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:53:15 PDT

Bottled water is either the largest hoax ever pulled offÂ or a marvelous example of exactly how lazy we, as a species, really are.

The world spends $100 billion on bottled water every year. Strangely enough, this water does not get to the millions of sick and dying people who do not have access to clean drinking water.

To bring potable water to the entire world would cost around $30 billion -- less than half of the amount that people who already have clean drinking water spend on bottles of the stuff every year.

I am honestly very angry about this, and I haven't even gotten into the environmental problems. In fact, I'm not going to ... I'm just going to leave it there ... and have this be my monthly rant at EcoGeek.

Data via Earth Policy

Bottles, bottles, everywhere

Ramon Cruz — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:38:01 PDT

This post is by Ramon Cruz, Senior Policy Analyst for Living Cities at Environmental Defense Fund.

It's ironic. In many parts of the world, there is no clean drinking water. Here in the U.S., pure, drinkable water flows out of every tap, and yet Americans buy a staggering amount of bottled water. We pay big bucks for it, too â more than $15 billion a year.

Worse of all, the bottles are overflowing our landfills and contributing to global warming. Take a look at this video from Doug James:

Also illustrating the case against bottled water:Â

More than a quarter of bottled water is just processed tap water, including Pepsi's Aquafina and Coca-Cola's Dasani. Despite this, bottled water consumption is growing at 10 percent a year, faster than any other beverage. We drink 15 times more bottled water today than we did in 1976.

This doesn't mean we're healthier, despite the ads. Federal regulations for municipal water are far more stringent. Bottled water rules allow higher levels of many contaminants, with more lenient requirements for filtration, testing, and reporting. See NRDCâs bottled water report for details of contaminants by brand.

The earth isnât healthier for it, either. According to the Pacific Instituteâs fact sheet (PDF), manufacturing the 30+ billion plastic water bottles we bought in 2006 required the equivalent of more than 17 million barrels of oil, produced more than 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide, and used three times the amount of water in the bottle.

And these numbers don't include transporting the bottles. Nearly 25 percent of bottled water crosses national borders before reaching consumers.

Adding in transportation, the energy used comes to more 50 million barrels of oil equivalent -- enough to run 3 million cars for a year.

Case study: Fiji water
Fiji Water produces more than a million bottles of water a day, while more than half the people in Fiji do not have reliable drinking water (see this Fast Company article). Adding to the irony, Fiji itself uses almost no bottled water, according to a Pacific Institute report (PDF). They export it.

Shipping Fiji Water around the world increases its environmental footprint. Manufacturing and shipping a one-liter bottle produces over half a pound of greenhouse gas emissions and uses nearly 7 times the amount of water in the bottle, according to calculations by Pablo PÃ¤ster on TriplePundit.

The heavy use of water is as serious as the greenhouse gas emissions. Water is fast becoming a scarce resource.

What about recycling?
Recycling would help, but we donât usually do it. Less than 20 percent of the 28 billion single-serving water bottles that Americans buy each year are recycled. Some estimates are as low as 12 percent.

According to a Container Recycling Institute report (PDF), the national recycling rate for all beverage containers is 33 percent. In states with deposit systems, the rate jumps to 65-95 percent. But of the 11 states with deposit laws, only three include containers for non-carbonated beverages (like water), though non-carbonated beverages now comprise 27 percent of the market.

Last November, Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) introduced a national bottle bill to address global warming that includes water bottles and other non-carbonated beverage containers.

The beverage industry, which long resisted deposit laws, has started to cooperate â mainly because it sees bottled water as the answer to the soda sales slump. Following months of bad publicity, manufacturers like Coke, Pepsi, and NestlÃ© have begun making lighter-weight plastic bottles and are encouraging consumers to recycle.

Better yet, carry tap water
If you buy bottled water, recycle the bottle. But the better solution â for you and the environment â is to drink tap water, both at home and at restaurants:

Tap water is cleaner than most bottled water.
Tap water is delivered to homes and offices for $0.002 a gallon. Bottled water, which can cost as much per gallon as gasoline, is a thousand times more expensive.

The quality of municipal water in the U.S. is generally excellent. Donât let the recent reports about pharmaceuticals in tap water deter you â see this TreeHugger post for why.

But if you donât trust tap water or you have old plumbing or you think tap water tastes funny, then try a water filter like those from PUR or Brita. To learn more about water filters, check out the rated list of water filter review sites at Consumer Search.

To carry water with you, use a reusable container filled with tap water. But donât reuse single-use water bottles. This can expose you to bacterial build-up and carcinogens leached from the plastic.

Quite a few companies make reusable water bottles. Thereâs an ongoing debate about the safety of the polycarbonate plastic some use, but there are many safe reusable bottles made from other materials.

Use it or lose it
National Geographicâs Green Guide notes, "the federal share of funding for water systems has declined from 78 percent in 1973 to 3 percent today." This places the financial burden almost entirely on local governments.

Food and Water Watch also talks about how important it is to stop this trend and maintain the quality of municipal water. Its Take Back the Tap (PDF) report gives a detailed overview of the issues surrounding tap water versus bottled water.

Clean, green sweep

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:25:50 PDT

So you're throwing open the windows and beating the winter blues out of the house. Spring cleaning is under way -- why not do it in an eco-friendly fashion this season?

Many of the cleaning products found in the kitchen and bathroom are full of harsh chemicals that are toxic for you and your family plus the planet.

The Union of Concerned Scientists notes that most cleaners contain petroleum products, phosphates, phthalates, or chlorine. These ingredients are either nonrenewable resources, polluting to the environment, or harmful to our health. Bad news all around!

And frankly, they're not necessary to get stuff clean. Our grandmothers kept the homefront spotless with good old-fashioned ingredients like baking soda, vinegar, lemon juice, borax, and plain soap. If you want a fancy scent, add a natural essential oil. Planet Green has a bunch of easy recipes to make your own green cleaners.

If you don't have time to mix your own stuff, look for certified biodegradable products, such as Planet brand. The EcoLogo certification is a globally recognized environmental certification worth looking for on cleaning products too.

Seventh Generation has an excellent guide to getting the toxins out of your home, and this brand of papers and cleaners lists all of its product ingredients on its website.

Even eco-celeb Ed Begley Jr. has weighed in on green cleaning with his own line of products called Begley's Best. The cleaners earned a Crade-to-Cradle certification, which means the product is not only environmentally safe but the design itself is efficient and the company is socially responsible.

Lastly, when you do get rid of any toxic cleaners, be careful. Don't just pour them down the drain. Check this saftey info about disposal, and contact your local hazardous waste department (check your phone book), if necessary.

Restaurants tap into water

Trystan L. Bass — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:27:42 PDT

New York City's famed Algonquin Hotel, Zagat-rated l'Absinthe Restaurant, and flashy Ruby Foo's on Times Square all are serving up tap water. The posh A.O.C. restaurant and wine bar in Los Angeles is adding tap water to its list of potables. And San Francisco's influential Slanted Door restaurant is going with plain ol' H2O too.

Why are more than 2,000 restaurants around the U.S. selling glasses of ordinary tap water for a buck this week?

It's called the TAP Project, and this is a nationwide effort supporting UNICEF and World Water Day.

Between March 16 and March 22, participating restaurants will serve tap water at $1 a glass. For every dollar raised, a child in a developing country will have clean drinking water for 40 days.

Search on the project's website to find restaurants near you. More are still being added.

If there isn't one in your town, you can also donate directly to the TAP project.

UNICEF's water sanitation work reaches out to the 425 million children around the world who don't have access to clean water. The TAP Project makes it easy to help right now at your local restaurant.

A cool, clean drink of water

Trystan L. Bass — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:00:21 PDT

In the U.S., we often take clean water for granted. Turn on the tap and - ta-da! - drinkable H₂O. But across huge swaths of the planet, it's not that simple.

According to the United Nations, 2.6 billion people - that's 41% of the global population - lack access to clean water.

That's why the U.N. has set aside March 22 as World Water Day, which calls on governments and individuals to recognize how crucial water is to our health, economy, and environment.

While the numbers can be staggering - 6,000 children die each day from diseases that could have been prevented by having access to clean water and sanitation - the solutions are surprisingly simple.

A mere one-dollar investment in providing access to clean water will return seven dollars in economic productivity, because people don't get sick, don't miss work and school, and live longer.

Folks like you and I can help those in the developing world get access to sanitation.

One way is through the Give PÅªRÂ® Water campaign. For every P&GbrandSAVERÂ® coupon you redeem during March and April 2008, Procter & Gamble will donate one liter of safer, cleaner drinking water to needy children in developing countries. Look for these coupons in your Sunday newspaper.

You can also give directly to a nonprofit like WaterAid America, which works in communities around the world to build clean water systems. A donation of just $30 can train a mason to build latrines in Nepal, while a contribution of $120 can buy a rope-pulley water pump in Uganda.

You can also donate your time, either in person or online, through WaterPartners International, a nonprofit group that helps provide safe drinking water and sanitation around the world. It also works with U.S. schools to raise awareness, create unique fundraisers, and inspire the next generation to help the planet.

On March 22, you can participate in live or virtual water marches sponsored by Starbucks. In New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, Las Vegas, and other cities, people will walk miles to draw attention to water issues. These marches are inspired by the 3-6-mile journey women and children in many countries make every day just to get water.

Dip your toes in these great opportunities to help the world to a cleaner drink of water!

How sweet is that message?

Trystan L. Bass — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:02:25 PST

"Be mine." "Hot stuff." "Kiss me." Cute messages of love on a classic Valentine's Day candy -- the biggest selling sweet other than chocolate for February 14th.

But not the sweetest message you could give to the planet. Here are the top three reasons why Valentine's conversation hearts are not eco-friendly:

#1 -- Sugar

Did you know that sugar production around the world is damaging natural treasures like the Great Barrier Reef off Australia's coast and the Everglades wetlands in Florida?

According to WWF International, 121 countries produce the annual 145 tons of sugar the world eats. And unfortunately, this sugar cane and sugar beets are grown with plenty of pesticides and create toxic runoff into soil and water.

The Sugarcane Production and Environment Report (PDF) notes that it takes a whopping 1,500-3,000 liters of water to produce just 1 kg of sugar. Refining factories regularly belch out soot, ash, and other solids, while ammonia is released during sugar processing.

Better management practices could make sugar a cleaner product. But until cane growers agree to be sustainable, consumers might want to make more informed choices.

It'd be great if we could find more fair-trade sugar, but in the meantime, it's not a bad idea to cut back on sugar. Easier on the waistline anyway.

#2 -- Corn syrup

Next in the original recipe for Necco's Sweethearts Conversation Hearts is corn syrup. Now, we're not positive if this is the awful high-fructose corn syrup that's in so many of our processed foods (and has been linked to the American obesity crisis). But any kind of corn syrup has little to recommend it.

Corn is massively over-farmed and subsidized in the U.S., and this is causing a host of environmental problems right on our doorstep. Grist points out that corn farmers pour 10 billion pounds of fertilizer on their fields every year, and this junk washes down the Mississippi River into the Gulf of Mexico. The waste creates a giant algae bloom known as the "Dead Zone" that kills fish and marine plants.

#3 -- Gelatin

Number three in the recipe and the third reason these seemingly innocent treats aren't so innocent for the eco-minded is the stuff we usually associate with wiggly-jiggly Jello. Gelatin is often used in candies and desserts as a stabilizer or to simulate the mouth-feel of fat.

If you weren't aware of it already, gelatin comes from animals. Specifically, it's the boiled-down collagen from connective tissues, bones, and skin of cattle and pigs.

As we've noted before, raising livestock for food is pretty inefficient and produces far more greenhouse gases than eating a plant-based diet. You don't have to be hardcore about it -- just cutting back on animal products a few days each week for a more flexitarian lifestyle is earth-friendly.

Intstead of conversation hearts ...

Want some alternatives to those candies? If you're the sentimental type, buy a pack of recycled-content pink construction paper, cut it into big heart shapes, and write your own sweet messages on each heart.

Scatter them around your Valentine's house, tuck one in your honey's briefcase or purse, sneak one in the car before your loved one drives off to work -- this will be a Valentine's Day to remember!

Or if your sugar prefers something edible, go for fair-trade or organic chocolates. That'll guarantee a gift that's rich, decadent, and sweet on Mother Earth too.

Vegan cupcakes take over the world

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:13:59 PST

Want to try something new with your Valentine? Try baking up some sweet treats that avoid animal products. Raising dairy cattle uses a ton of resources, so when we cut back on consumption, we can reduce our carbon footprint as much as if we drove a hybrid car.

Baking without dairy, eggs, or butter may seem like a contradiction in terms. But you'll find tons of cookbooks and websites to help. The Post-Punk Kitchen has a handy vegan baking 101 tip sheet to start you off.

Eggs can be replaced with silken tofu, soy yogurt, finely ground flax seeds, even a banana. Milk is easily swapped with soy, rice, or almond milk. And of course you can use margarine instead of butter, or use vegetable oil in a reduced amount.

One of the most popular desserts around is probably the cupcake. It's so trendy that specialized cupcake-only bakeries have opened up around the U.S., and brides are ordering cupcakes instead of wedding cakes. The book Vegan Cupcakes Take Over the World has taken this fad and made it eco-friendly and so have many green bloggers.

Want some inspiration before you hit the kitchen? Check out the luscious-looking vegan cupcakes photo pool on Flickr or the vegan baking pool. Now that your mouth is watering, let's get cooking.

The Bittersweet Blog has yummy recipes such as classic chocolate cupcakes and root beer float cupcakes. The only unusual ingredient in these is soy milk, which most major grocery stores carry. For people with Celiac disease, there's even a wheat-free version of the root beer float cupcakes.

Chocoholics will be tempted by the name of this recipe: too much chocolate for you, cupcake. These rich treats from the Have Cake, Will Travel blog use Dutch-process cocoa, plus chocolate chips. The same site has a more subtle recipe for low-fat rosewater cupcakes.

The Vegan Feast Kitchen whips up a almost-no-fat chocolate cupcake (earth-friendly and waistline-friendly!). And the Vivacious Vegan combines two great tastes into a banana peanut butter cupcake.

And if you're all cupcaked-out, how about some other Valentine's Day sweets? Start with heart-shaped strawberry muffins for your love.

Then try these surprisingly easy dark chocolate truffles. Even simpler are puff pastry chocolate 'ravioli' -- so elegant and charming, you shouldn't save them for just February.

If you're really ambitious, give authentic (and still vegan) petit fours a shot. Your loved one will be truly impressed.

Dangerous CFLs? Don’t believe the hype

John Balbus — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:01:00 PST

This post is by John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Health Scientist at Environmental Defense.

On February 3, Parade published a misleading Medical Alert column with the headline "Bright Lights, Bad Headache?" by Dr. Isadore Rosenfeld. It starts with a list of unsubstantiated claims:

As energy-saving fluorescent lightbulbs become standard, new research suggests some dangers: Flickering bulbs have been reported to precipitate migraines or even seizures, though manufacturers say the new models have been improved. Fluorescent light also can aggravate skin rashes in people with lupus, eczema, dermatitis or porphyria.

Environmental Defense could find no published scientific studies demonstrating that compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) trigger migraines or seizures. And unlike older fluorescent tube lights, modern CFLs with electronic ballasts donât flicker.

Rosenfeldâs statement about fluorescent light harming people also is highly misleading. While there is a theoretical risk to people with severe photosensitive skin diseases from the small amount of ultraviolet light emitted by CFLs, most people with eczema -- a very common disease -- have no such photosensitivity.

People who are unable to tolerate any sunlight due to photosensitivity may be advised to avoid additional exposure to the small amount of ultraviolet light from CFLs, but this is only a subset of people with eczema and lupus.

The piece then mentions that CFLs contain mercury. This is true, but the amount of mercury in a typical CFL is very small, only 4 to 5 milligrams, and newer bulbs have even less. This is almost one thousand times less than what used to be in mercury thermometers.

While people certainly should avoid exposing themselves to the mercury from a CFL if it breaks (see my previous post for how to properly dispose of CFLs), the exposure from a single broken bulb is comparable to the mercury in a few cans of tuna, and would not be expected to cause ill effects.

Articles like "Bright Lights, Bad Headache?" that make serious claims of harm from CFLs need to substantiate those claims with solid science. Why? Because CFLs have the potential to dramatically reduce energy use, and coal-generated electricity releases much more mercury (and other toxic pollution) than CFLs.

Parade does a disservice to its readers and the environment by propagating inaccuracies, half-truths and misleading statements. Instead of a medical alert, it should be issuing a junk science alert and tracking down the facts.

Tree huggers hate treadmills

Trystan L. Bass — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:14:58 PST

Sometimes, it isn't easy being green. Not during the depths of a dark, cold, rainy winter. You want to get healthy, maybe lose those extra pounds of holiday flab. But now TreeHugger tells you that the gym's treadmill pumps out 2 lbs. of C02 and burns as much energy as 15 of those wasteful incandescent lightbulbs.

"Pick a machine without a plug," the greenies say.

Sorry, not until spring unless you live in Arizona. I'd love to go jogging outside. Frankly, the treadmill bores me silly and makes me feel like a hamster in a wheel.

But when the sun goes down before I get home from work, this little female runner isn't heading into the streets alone, even if the sidewalk is dry. And for folks who live in snow country, indoor gyms can be the only consistent opportunity for activity in this cold season.

Considering the high rates of obesity in America, I'd rather encourage folks to work out, even if that uses a little fossil fuel. After the spring thaw, yeah, let's head for the great outdoors.

Just don't give up a workout with the "earth-friendly" excuse. If you feel strongly about it, buy a carbon offset.

Eating locally -- in Las Vegas?

Heather McKee — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:49:42 PST

Glitzy lights, extravagant hotels, hookers, dice gamesâ¦and a farm? The infamous buffets of Sin City may soon be able to advertise their food as wholesomely local. A 30-story farm is in the works for Las Vegas â an agricultural skyscraper designed to include over 100 different crops, from miniature banana trees to strawberries.

Nevada officials believe the vertical farm could produce enough food for 72,000 people a year â and $25 million in agricultural products, most going to local casinos. They also expect it to be a popular tourist attraction, and believe it may help change the image of Las Vegas as a place of excess and waste.

Iâll be a monkeyâs uncle if Vegas changes its image (purposely or otherwise), but the planned vertical farm will offer a testing ground for increasingly important urban agricultural methods. The $200 million project is hoped to be completed by 2010.

Source: Next Energy News

CFL migraine concern starts crazy wildfire

Hank Green — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:14:41 PST

There's a Daily Mail story making the rounds on the blogosphere with the headline "Energy Saving Bulbs 'Can Cause Migraines' Warn Experts." Oh come on ... are you serious?

Spend a little time reading the article and you discover that one 'expert,' who is in charge of a migraine awareness charity, said that there is "concern." He worries that it's possible ... that's all.

Is this really a story? Let's at least have someone do a study first, before the headline "CFLs Cause Migraines!!!" spreads like wildfire over the Internet. I mean, I love blogs, but I've seen this story retold in five different places now ... not one mentioning that it's just one guy who's concerned.

Not to say that I'm not happy for the level of concern. Concern is a good thing, and I think it should be investigated. But the truth is, the concern about migraine-inducing flickering is a non-issue with current CFLs, which are no longer stroboscopic (they give off constant, non-flickering, light.)

Public health professionals are catching the fever

John Balbus — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 11:11:53 PST

This post is by John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Health Scientist at Environmental Defense.

Damage to public health from climate change is already occurring around the world, with over 160,000 extra deaths occurring annually from malaria, diarrhea, malnutrition, and flooding.

Public health professionals are taking notice, and looking for solutions.

Climate change and its effects on human health took center stage at last week's annual meeting of the American Public Health Association (APHA). Three sessions were devoted to the topic, including a plenary session attended by 700-800 people. A policy resolution calling for an economy-wide cap on greenhouse gases passed easily.

After the plenary session, APHA executive director Georges Benjamin held a press conference where he announced that climate change will be the theme of next April's Public Health Week. The organization plans to release a set of recommendations for addressing the health impacts of climate change at that time.

Many presentations focused on how to stop global warming.

Dr. Brian Schwartz of Johns Hopkins caught the audience's attention with an eloquent call to "reconnect the disconnect" between our intellectual understanding of the need to lower greenhouse gas emissions and our personal energy consumption choices, from house size to automobile use.

Dr. Howard Frumkin of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) discussed how public health professionals can apply their skills to the health challenges of climate change. He showed a great "back to the future" slide describing the health benefits of low-carbon behaviors from the past like walking children to school.

When it identifies a clear threat to health, the public health community can mobilize significant change. Messaging and advocacy from the public health community has transformed the fast food hamburger from a staple to a symbol of our obesity epidemic, and removed soft drink marketing from our schools.

It took the finding that tobacco harmed bystanders to eliminate smoking from public spaces, and that may be the type of framing that can build momentum for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr. Jonathan Patz from the University of Wisconsin made this case in his presentation at the plenary session. Public health professionals might be able to drive change by likening the carbon dioxide coming from automobile tailpipes to second hand smoke emitted from cigarette tips, while at the same time demonstrating the health benefits of other modes of transportation.

The challenge is making this case stick when the people harmed live on another continent or in the future -- far removed from the "smoker."

One thing is certain. The public health community is starting to get it. Look for more action from this corner as April and Public Health Week draw near.