Time to go back to the tap:  Americans’ bottled water habit costs $100 billion a year and uses 17 million barrels of oil in production alone, according to the Pacific Institute. We have the best tap water in the world, but, due to lack of investment in public supplies, that standard is poised to go downhill. For example, the EPA decided on October 3, 2008, not to regulate perchlorate, a component in rocket fuel and fireworks that disrupts thyroid function, in drinking water.

Municipal water systems are under threat from the bottled water industry, according to Elizabeth Royte, the author of Bottlemania: How water went on sale and why we bought it.  Our growing reliance on bottled water, in addition to creating plastic waste and a huge carbon footprint, also creates less incentive for the government to provide people with clean municipal water, Royte says, envisioning a world in which only the rich will have access to clean water via bottles, while the poor are left with substandard tap.

At the same time, reports like this New York Times article on pharmaceutical drugs in tap water make people leery about drinking from the faucet. And houses with old pipes can have lead in the tap water.

If you’re worried about contaminants in your municipal water supply, get more information on what’s in your water by checking out the EPA’s safe water site. Municipal water suppliers are required by law to provide you with a “Right to Know” report listing all of the contaminants in your water, and the National Resources Defense Council offers this online guide to deciphering the report. If your water’s uncontaminated or you’ve simply gotten so used to the taste of bottled that tap tastes icky, split the difference by getting a water filter for your home. There are many choices in a variety of price ranges, from a simple Pur or Brita pitcher to a whole-house reverse osmosis filtration system. Consumer Reports breaks it down for you by price range.

We don’t recommend home reverse osmosis or distillation systems, which cost so much, use so much energy and waste so much water that you may as well be buying bottled. Instead, go for carbon filters, found in carafes and most under-sink systems. Carbon filters take out lead, chlorine byproducts, some parasites, some pesticides, and some organic chemicals, though they won’t remove bacteria, arsenic, and other heavy metals. Most importantly for this argument, carbon filters eliminate unpleasant tastes and odors, making your already-safe tap water tasty, too.

Carbon filters also come in portable models. Water Geeks and Back to the Tap each sell to-go water bottles with a carbon filter built right into the lid so you can fill up at the park water fountain without fear. Our testers say the water tastes great, though the filter makes it a bit hard to draw it out of the bottle.

In addition to Brita and Pur, a new pitcher system we’ve found is Zero Water, an independently certified carbon-plus-extra-goodies filter that’s just hitting the shelves. It comes with an electronic water tester so you can see your tap water go down to zero total dissolved solids after it passes through the filter. It’s pretty cool; we tested it and found the water delicious and dissolved-solids free. The Zero filter takes out everything the carbon filters do, as well as mercury and chromium, and company officials say they’re working on a model that filters out , microorganisms, pesticides and traces of pharmaceutical drugs. We'll keep you posted.

Among the many pleasures Americans enjoy, squeaky clean tap water is right up there with a free press, voting, and rock-n-roll. If you want to know more about your right to clean tap water, read up on the Back to the Tap movement.

By Rachel Brown

Posted by Mindy Pennybacker on Oct 13, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

What if New England's maples up and took a walk? Got sick of pie festivals and peepers? Who could blame 'em? Indeed, forest "migration" north as the climate gets too warm is already upon us. Since 1971, winter temperatures in the Northeast have risen 2.8 degrees, and if current trends continue, our indigenous American maples may, by 2100, all have crossed the border into Canada. Vermont will feel like Virginia, and the Chesapeake Bay will become the Everglades? Will the sheep get too hot for making wool and cheese?

It's hard enough to be a tree, in the best of times. Between 1700, when Native Americans taught the colonists how to make maple sugar, to 1980, when widespread alarm arose about acid rain from the burning of fossil fuels, the world lost 1/5 of its forests. And so it continues to go, at an annual loss of $2-5 trillion, more than the amount Wall Street has lost (within the financial sector) this year, according to a new EU study. In Vermont, the value of maple syrup production was $13.3 million, and the trees' fall foliage is a mainstay of the state's $1.5 billion tourist industry. But the EU study, led by a Deutsch bank economist, also monetizes services provided by forests, such as preventing soil erosion and storm runoff, protecting water quality, and, of course, inhaling and neutralizing CO2, while oxygenating our air.

Maples are heroic trees: They continue to provide over-the-top displays of yellow and fuchsia, and sweet syrup, even as they suffer the blows of pollution, disease and climate change. Time to spare the trees for our own sakes. If only we could look so radiant under stress!

Posted by Mindy Pennybacker on Oct 11, 2008 at 1:00 AM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Which has a smaller carbon footprint, a sweater made of wool or polyester fleece? It's a perfect mental calculus for that fall foliage traffic jam, or while gliding through autumn's blazing patchwork on a lower-carbon-emitting bus or train, or powering it on your own carbon-free feet or bike.  But wait.  What about the carbon footprint of your hiking boots or your bike frame? Every product has a carbon life cycle, based on emissions released in its production and shipping, that's coming increasingly under scrutiny. A good opp for those who love a puzzle.

Carbon footprinting involves highly complex calculations using all sorts of variables that, well, vary, depending on who's doing it. Patagonia's terrific Footprint Chronicles measure the CO2 emissions and other environmental impacts of 15 products, including clothing, luggage and shoes. Newly analyzed this season are their Wool2Crew (responsible for 47 lbs. of CO2) and Cashmere Hoody (a mere 7 lbs, even counting the shipping from Mongolia to California).  Both are lighter than the polyester fleece Talus rainjacket, which packs a heavy carbon history of 66 lbs., mostly due to the petroleum used to make the fiber. The recycled poly Synchilla vest represents only 26 lbs. Of course, to fairly compare it with the others, you'd have to calculate the weight of the missing sleeves. And, the company did not include the potent greenhouse gas methane , released by cows, sheep and goats, in its carbon measurements, according to Jill Dumain, Patagonia's director for environmental analysis. "We have been talking about how to include more information on several aspects of animals in the supply chain," Dumain adds. In the Kyoto Accords, methane and nitrous oxide are considered carbon equivalents . 

We suspect that, even with the methane added in, the natural fibers would still tread lighter on the earth. After all, they're a renewable resource. Another plus:  Patagonia's wool and cashmere come from happy animals grazed on pastures free of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. Virtually visit these farms in New Zealand and Mongolia on slide shows, and fall in love with these totally cute cashmere goats. And if you're a leaf peeper and knitter, wool grown and processed organically by Vermont's Green Mountain Spinnery is worth a detour to pretty Putney. If you don't knit, consider an organic wool sweater like those sold here. Say baa-bah to pesticides and count carbon along with sheep.

Posted by Mindy Pennybacker on Oct 9, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The economy. Energy. Burgeoning carbon footprints vs shrinking portfolios. Not an appetizing picture. Still, we gotta eat. To alleviate some of the stress surrounding these complex and confusing issues, let’s look to the past for simple, green solutions. During the Great Depression, consumers had to differentiate between needs and wants, and you may have witnessed the legacy of that frugal time in the spending habits of your grandparents and their friends. It’s time we all started buying like that generation. 

Cutting some waste and expense is easy. Last year, Americans spent $15 billion dollars on bottled water, which is actually more than they spent on iPods. According to the Earth Policy Institute, making plastic bottles requires over 17 million barrels of oil annually. A Great Depression solution: Buy a reusable bottle and refill it with patriotic (i.e. tap) water.  Or, to combat the 28 Billion disposable coffee cups Americans run through each year, buy a reusable coffee mug and brew your own at home.  If landfill talk doesn’t worry you, how’s this for fear factor:  One latte a day adds up to $1,200 dollars.  Yikes. 

As for "food" prints:  In May, 53 percent of consumers said they were cooking more from scratch, which is a good way to save money and eat healthier, without the added sugars and fats in prepared foods. It's also greener, because the carbon footprint of processed foods is higher than for whole foods, according to the Environmental Defense Fund. To go greener, as a general rule, eat local, and shave off some of the average 1,500 miles food travels to your  table. If you want affordable local produce, the Eat Well Guide lets you search their database of co-op groceries, farmers' markets, and community supported agriculture (CSA) groups by zip code. Ask for locally produced foods at your grocery store and your nearest Wal-mart, a company which recently announced a major commitment to sourcing regional.

You can become a small-scale local producer, yourself. During WWII, in order to conserve fuel and resources, Americans turned to a practical, patriotic and eco-friendly solution: Grow your own. In 1943, 20 million American homes had a Victory Garden. In the present time, if you want to grow veggies on the windowsill or a back (or front) yard plot, check out Revive the Victory Garden.  

Another old-school, money-saving tip is to buy in bulk. Due to economies of scale, it's simply more affordable, plus it eliminates much of the waste associated with packaging and avoids the hassle of constantly reordering each time. Organic comes in bulk, too.  When you type in keywords like eco grocery at Amazon, hundreds of products packaged in "eco bags" pop up on the screen. They includes such necessities as cereal, grains, and pasta, toilet paper and biodegradable trash bags. For a list of natural grocery stores in your area where you can purchase bulk grains to put in jars, check out Green People's database.

If the past is the best indicator of the future, we will eventually get ourselves out of this economic pickle.  But to do it right, we must conserve both fiscal and natural resources as easily as we had previously been using them up.

by Margaret Teich

Posted by Mindy Pennybacker on Oct 7, 2008 at 9:15 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Let’s face it: Even with email and texting, sometimes you still need the paper trail. However, as with all appliances these days, there are eco-friendly printer options available to the savvy consumer that use post-consumer parts and utilize less energy than conventional models.

Always look for Energy Star-rated models, which use at least 25 percent less energy than non-rated models, last longer, and save you an average of $115 over the appliance’s lifespan. Find a complete list of Energy Star-rated printers here. Be sure to choose all-in-one multitaskers that print, fax, scan, copy and you name it, because these use less energy than separate machines. And, as a rule, inkjet printers use 90% less energy than laser models, according to EPA’s guide to an energy-efficient office, which also advises that machines be turned off when not in use.

When you buy a new printer, you should also look for a model that is made of recycled and recyclable materials. Printers made from post consumer plastic waste, meaning plastics that were already used by a consumer and then discarded, are the only printers that can truly claim the “recycled” label. HP’s Deskjet D2542 is made from 83 percent post consumer waste, uses ink cartridges made from 75 percent post consumer waste, and is Energy Star-rated, using 40 percent less energy in idle and sleep mode than other HP models. Its packaging is recyclable, too. HP also has a recycling page with links to donate or recycle your old products and manage paper use.

Printer cartridges, of course, can be recycled, and you’ll get a $3 rebate,  at Staples, sent back to manufacturers using  free UPS labels, or bundled with your school group for fundraising or donated to other non-profits through Recycle4charity.

 By Rachel Brown 

Posted by Mindy Pennybacker on Oct 3, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)