image by SkyTruth (Flickr CC)

Not to Canada bash, but the North American Country ­– known the world over as much kinder, gentler and more just in comparison to its neighbor, the big bad US of A – has been grabbing a few headlines lately for its deteriorating (or at least more conspicuously poor) environmental record.

And let’s be real. Environmental pollution is also a social justice issue. Coal kills people as well as animals and plants. Never mind greenhouse gases. Likewise the tar sands in Alberta. Likewise poisonous emissions from chemical plants on Canada’s Great Lakes.

So, without further ado, on to the bashing, or ahem, information dissemination.

The community of Ammjiwnang, located in the centre of Canada’s largest concentration of chemical industries around the Great Lakes, says that it has also seen rising asthma and cancer rates most likely linked to air pollution, which the World Health Organisation says is higher in the area than anywhere else in the country.

–Al Jazeera English

Check out the following video report on how a community of Canadian aboriginals is suing the Petrochemical company Suncor due to health problems attributed to chemical pollution.

In other Canada-as-pollution-villain news, recent satellite photo research by Environment Canada, Canada’s environmental agency, reveals that the pollution from the Alberta tar sands project is frightful.

From Click Green:

For both gasses, the levels are comparable to what satellites see over a large power plant – or for nitrogen dioxide, comparable to what they see over some medium-sized cities. It stands out above what’s around it, out in the wilderness, but one thing we wanted to try to do was put it in context.

Chris McLinden, research scientist, Environment Canada

So it would seem that Canada’s environmental agency is at odds with its country’s government. They’re also cracking down on coal pollution, according to this piece in the Calgary Herald. Consider me a bit skeptical.

photo by Antonio Jose Fernandez (Lord Jerome on Flickr CC)

A new report by WWF-UK and the Public Interest Research Centre finds that advertising is killing our sense of social justice and concern for the environment.

The late comedian Bill Hicks used to say, ‘if you work in marketing or advertising, kill yourself’.

I remember watching that part of his routine while I was up for a job at an ad agency. I didn’t really want the position (sour grapes perhaps, since I didn’t get it) but I know what he means. In advertising, you have to lie and convince people they need things which they don’t.

What ads do is basically increase expectations and aspirations for materialistic aspects of life.

From The Ecologist:

We are constantly being bombarded with appeals to extrinsic values from advertising, media, celebrity culture. Currently, society is in favour of these values, which are leading us to be more materialistic, more individualistic and less concerned about environmental and social issues.

– Guy Shrubsole, director of PIRC and co-author of report

According to the report, advertising feeds our extrinsic values, which are those we think others admire in us, based on status and material concerns, as opposed to the intrinsic values of family, friends, community and personal passions. Advertising, especially on TV, encourages extrinsic values and causes one to be more apathetic about intrinsic values, including social and environmental issues.

Read more in The Ecologist and the original report on WWF.org.uk.

photo by didiz rushdi (Flickr CC)

As the sport of surfing grows, so does its environmental impact. Surfing equipment made of non-biodegradable materials such as synthetic resin surfboards, neoprene wetsuits and petroleum-based surf wax are just some of the products used by surfers that can have a negative ecological footprint.

Environmentally conscious surfing companies such as Envirosurfer are attempting to address some of the ecological issues with surfing products and offer green alternatives. For example, wooden or epoxy boards, as well as surfboards made with bamboo-based resin, last longer, are less wasteful and less toxic than typical polyurethane boards. Other tips include using thinner and more durable wetsuits, which create less waste than typical models. Wetsuits which do not contain PVC are also a less toxic option. And while surf wax may not seem like the biggest problem in the ocean, there are quality petroleum-free waxes available, which are made from natural ingredients, making them more environmentally friendly.

In the more general beach-going category – and by no means limited to surfers – is the subject of sunscreen. Most sunscreens contain toxic chemicals like oxybenzone and other poisonous ingredients that pose dangers to sea life and may have human health concerns. Fortunately, sunscreens free of these toxins are also widely available.

Read the entire article here.

Also check out:

Ericeira: World Surfing Reserve

Eco Surf Rescue Uluwatu!

photo by Paul Stein ( _PaulS_ on Flickr CC)

(And why it’s just plain right.)

The protesters at Occupy Wall Street have been criticized for being a scruffy bunch of hippies with no clear central message. Indeed, if interviewed they usually preface their answers by explaining how their movement is a broad tent: grass roots, without leaders and based on a variety of premises and complaints. In short, there is no one key demand that functions in the way that anti-Vietnam War sentiments galvanized the protest movements of the 1960s.

So what.

The US is entrenched in two wars, neither, of which have a definitive end in sight. There is increasing class inequality on a global scale due to a succession of financial and political policies designed to increase and consolidate wealth in the hands of the richest. That small wealthiest percent in turn possess an inordinate amount of political power, which they may use to progressively enhance their riches and thereby gain more power in a sort of preposterously greedy positive feedback loop.

Republicans to the rescue: Ironically, the best sound bite to encapsulate the goals of Occupy Wall Street has come from one of its detractors, GOP Congressman Peter King of New York, who stated during a radio talk show:

I remember what happened in the 1960s when the Left wing took to the streets, and somehow the media glorified them and it ended up shaping policy. We can’t allow that to happen.

To resurrect an erstwhile and oft-mocked political slogan of America’s neo-liberal (or ‘Stalinist’ if you know absolutely nothing about politics or history) president: Yes we can!

That result of the Left ‘shaping policy’ would be great compared to the undemocratic, irresponsible, ecologically destructive, soul-sapping trend of deregulation and income gap widening that’s been going on since 1980.

Here’s a nice quote from a piece in Earth Times:

The belief that higher corporate profits will somehow create jobs has proven itself a pipe dream. Wall Street profits rose 720% between 2007 and 2009 (yes, you’re reading that correctly) while unemployment rose by 102%. Are we to believe that we just need to wait a few more years, and these jobs will magically appear? Furthermore, are we to accept that our environmental crisis will halt until corporations decide to take on that challenge at some unspecified point in the future?

That’s right: the same ideology that gives corporations more rights than human beings also encourages those corporations to destroy the environment with unprecedented vigor, and then tells them that they aren’t doing any such thing, i.e., climate change is a scam orchestrated by a socialist world government plot. [Strange, somehow the governments of the world almost unanimously swing to the Right, yet we’re meant to believe the global Left controls all scientific bodies on Earth.]

Lest I dither further, here’s what some prominent Greens are saying about Occupy Wall Street, which it turns out isn’t just a noble picnic of so-called hippies and anarchists, but is rather proving to be the big tent it always said it was.

Matt Petersen of Global Green, USA writes in the Huffington Post:

photo by Paul Stein ( _PaulS_ on Flickr CC)

What is heartening about OWS is we are beginning to see the environmental movement join in, but it still seems to remain truly grass-roots. Our friends Bill McKibben and May Boeve at 350.org, who lead a global grassroots movement to fight climate change, have been at the forefront. McKibben conducted a climate teach-in this weekend for the protesters.

An article from Treehugger from way back near the start of OWS, puts some substantial Green pro-protest arguments forward:

[…] pervasive joblessness is a byproduct of the systematic dismantling of the American manufacturing base under the ideological pretext of free market absolutism and neoliberal globalization, an economic system disconnected from place and person. Re-localizing, re-regionalizing our economies, focusing on domestic needs first and export needs second, whether in so-called developing or developed nations (both inadequate words) is key factor in making our communities more environmentally resilient, more climate resilient, and in supporting local economies and jobs.

And then there’s the oily elephant in the room, covered in oil and blowing crude from its gas pump-shaped trunk, shaping policies, fueling wars, polluting the land and sea, and changing the climate. (It’s oil).

In closing, leave it to Naomi Klein, that sassy pin-up of the anti-globalization Left, to really bring it home:

The point is, today everyone can see that the system is deeply unjust and careening out of control. Unfettered greed has trashed the global economy. And we are trashing the natural world. We are overfishing our oceans, polluting our water with fracking and deepwater drilling, turning to the dirtiest forms of energy on the planet, like the Alberta tar sands. The atmosphere can’t absorb the amount of carbon we are putting into it, creating dangerous warming. The new normal is serial disasters: economic and ecological.

Read Naomi Klein’s entire piece in the Guardian.

Thank you, Naomi. And thank you, hippies, anarchists, Adbusters and Republican Congressmen for your fantastic work. Tomorrow I will post something about the protests in Europe.

Nick De Wannemaeker (Belgian windsurfing champion, O'Neill rider) - Image courtesy of planetblow.com

Nick de Wannemaeker, Belgian windsurfing champion and O’Neill rider who – I’m very proud to say – is my cousin (well actually my husband’s cousin but who’s counting), stars in a dark, epic surf movie highlighting the ecological disasters at hand if we don’t evaluate and change our approach to and relationship with nature.

The movie called Planet Blow is a small independent film, produced and directed by Sylvain Demercastel (artist, musician, director and also an O’Neill rider), about the adventures of a group of riders (surfing, windsurfing and kitesurfing) who, in their quest for surfing excitement and idyllic spots around the world, become aware of the ecological disasters faced by our planet.

This epic film, filled with flash backs, narration and scary views into a suffocating eco-dead future where there is little left of nature, is a shocking, ecological science fiction approach to the problem of climate change. The purpose of Demercastel is to open our eyes to the magnitude of the ecological disaster to come if we don’t take control and change our destroying habits towards nature.

Planet Blow takes us to the dark side. Following the trail of 4 riders in search of the perfect wave, the perfect wind and the perfect beach we discover idyllic locations in California, New York, Costa Rica, Morocco, the Philippines and Indonesia. With the unfolding of the story line however, the narrator sucks us into a dark future where the idyllic spots of the past have made way for a dark, depressing, close to unnatural future.

Although complex and difficult to grasp at times, this movie is worth seeing. The underlying environmental message is strong and tends to kick you in the teeth. For that alone everyone should appreciate it. And for the surf fans out there, the amazing surfing footage, the fantastic locations (who luckily still exist today!) and the guest appearance of Jack O’Neill playing himself really make this movie a must-see.

The trailer of the movie and lots of pictures of my cousin Nick can be found on the official Planet Blow website: planetblow.com.

Nick’s blog filled with videos of his amazing windsurfing skills can be found here: bel101.be.

The Planet Blow DVD is available for purchase through planetblow.com. An illustrated book by Julian Schlosser, Maxime Houyvet and Sylvain Demercastel is also available. The book is filled with beautiful pictures of a new kind of vision on the sport of surfing and our planet. One that in essence relates us to and shows us the unspoken bond that exists between mankind and nature.

photo by Salim Virji (Flickr CC)

On an episode of the UK comedy quiz show QI it was once mentioned that the worst thing you could do for the environment was own a pet. The show claimed that a large dog, for example, creates more greenhouse gases than an SUV (from its meat consumption presumably, rather than its biological functions).

I’m assuming the numbers referenced in QI were crunched based on averages, and did not account for individual lifestyle choices of pet owners, like becoming vegetarian, not having kids, feeding their pets home grown organic mealworms, keeping their cats locked inside or whatever.

There is no doubt that pets enrich our lives and as individual beings deserve to exist and not be abused. Nevertheless, millions of people keeping pets can tax the environment quite a bit. Cats kill incredible amounts of wildlife; dogs consume lots of resources and produce huge amounts of nasty waste. Non-native species or “pets gone wild” are transforming local ecosystems in fascinating and perhaps dangerous ways.

Take these examples:

• The Stephens Island Wren, a species discovered in 1894 was subsequently wiped out within a year by a single house cat, named Tibbles.

• There are now estimated to be 150,000 wild Burmese pythons living in the Florida Everglades, not to mention untold numbers of Nile Monitor lizards.

• London parks are home to around 40,000 wild parakeets, originally from Africa and India.

The Guardian recently ran a “crowd-sourcing” piece to get feedback from readers on what they think and feel regarding whether or not pets are environmentally harmful – or whether or not they care. There has been some interesting discussion.

Here are a couple of highlights:

[…] in total a British population of approximately 9 million cats was estimated to bring home an average of 92 million prey items in the period of this survey, including 60 million mammals, 27 million birds and 5 million reptiles and amphibians.

While there are shelters overflowing with unwanted companion animals, we have a moral duty to adopt these creatures if we are able and willing (and ensure they are neutered). It is totally unacceptable to support the puppy and kitten mill industries, and that includes small scale breeders, as this just perpetuates the cycle of cruelty, unwanted pets and euthanasia for the thousands who can’t be rehomed. There is no such thing as responsible breeding.

Read the entire discussion on the Guardian website.

Further reading:

Guardian – UK animal feed helping to destroy Asian rainforest, study shows

A forest cover and water map of Mexico (source: blog.google.org)

Last week, at the beginning of the COP 16 Climate Conference in Cancun, Google launched its Google Earth Engine, a new tool by Google.org (the technology-driven philanthropic part of the gigantic organization). The Engine, a planetary-scale platform for environmental data & analysis, merges the world’s satellite imagery (more than 25 years of data good for trillions of scientific measurements) and makes it available online. The purpose of the tool is to help scientists, conservationists, environmentalists and independent researchers to track changes in the Earth’s environment and to map trends and quantify differences to the Earth’s surface. Possible applications include mapping and detecting of deforestation, mapping of land use trends and water resources and development of custom applications to suit the needs of those researching the Earth’s environment.

Thanks to Google’s large-scale cloud-computing infrastructure, data can now be crunched much faster than on stand-alone research computers. Moreover, data that was difficult or impossible to process or analyze in the past will now become widely available for analysis and research.

The challenge has been to cope with the massive scale of satellite imagery archives, and the computational resources required for their analysis. As a result, many of these images have never been seen, much less analyzed. Now, scientists will be able to build applications to mine this treasure trove of data on Google Earth Engine, providing several advantages.
- blog.google.org

With the launch of the Google Earth Engine, Google announced that it would donate 10 million CPU-hours a year over the next two years on the Google Earth Engine platform, to strengthen the capacity of developing world nations to track the state of their forests, in preparation for REDD.

Although the Google Earth Engine can be translated to many environmental monitoring and research application, Google is particularly interested in mapping and detecting deforestation; one of the main concerns and action points on the agenda at the COP16 Climate talks.

For the least developed nations, Google Earth Engine will provide critical access to terabytes of data, a growing set of analytical tools and our high-performance processing capabilities. We believe Google Earth Engine will bring transparency and more certainty to global efforts to stop deforestation.
- blog.google.org

Additional resources:
Google Earth Engine introduction from Google.org blog
Google Earth Engine web space
More on cloud computing from Wikipedia

In the middle of the Pacific Ocean there is a maelstrom of debris twice the size of Texas. It has been affectionately given a variety of clever names: the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, the Sea of Trash, the Eastern Garbage Patch, the Asian Trash Trail and (my personal favorite) the Trash Vortex. It is, in short, a spiraling swirl of rushing refuse, mostly of the non-biodegradable plastic variety: shampoo bottles, grocery bags, disposable razors, toys… you know, stuff made out of plastic. Which unfortunately, means just about everything these days. The Plastic Swirl is so big, it even has its own website (cough).

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is formed by currents from the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre, a mammoth whirlpool of ocean currents and wind, which lies between the Pacific coasts of North America and Asia. This vortex is caused in part by what’s known as the Coriolis effect – famous for its presumed (and erroneous) influence on the direction the water in your toilet spins when you flush it, depending on which hemisphere you happen to be in – and vorticity, which is, in layman’s terms, the tendency for water to swirl. The Patch lies at the epicenter of the Gyre, which itself takes up most of the Pacific Ocean, covering a surface area of 34 million square kilometers or 10 million square miles.

According to a documentary film called “Plastic Debris, Rivers to Sea” by the Algalita Marine Research Foundation, a non-profit research and educational organization based in Long Beach, California, studies in the coastal waters of Japan have shown that the amount of plastic in marine environments has increased 10 times every two to three years over the past decade. What’s more, the overall composition of marine debris in all the oceans of the world is about 60-80% plastic. So this is not just an American, Asian or Pacific environmental problem. It’s worldwide.

There are in fact five major ocean-wide gyres: in the North Atlantic, South Atlantic, North Pacific, South Pacific, and Indian Ocean. According to Greenpeace, the Sargasso Sea, a large part of the Atlantic lying between Europe and the Americas, “is a well known slow circulation area in the Atlantic, and research there has also demonstrated high concentrations of plastic particles present in the water.”

Starting to feel depressed? Well, since the Garbage Patch is located pretty far from any significant landmass, at least you won’t normally have to look at it. However, if you should take happen to be sailing your private yacht from the California coast to Hawaii, it’s unavoidable. You’re expecting a relaxing voyage through an unspoiled tropical ocean paradise, but suddenly find yourself surrounded by an endless flotilla of waste consisting of billions of plastic bags, bottles and the heads of Cabbage Patch Kids. Remember those?

Captain Charles Moore, founder of Algalita, found just such an ecological nightmare on his way back from a boat race in 1997. He was so struck by the enormity of the environmental catastrophe he was inspired to let the world know about it. Captain Moore has since published two major scientific research papers concerning marine pollution. One shocking result of his research was that the amount of plastic in the central Pacific outweighs zooplankton by 6 to 1. Zooplankton is a broad term used to collectively refer to all the tiny animals that live in the oceans, seas and other bodies of water. They include microscopic animals, shrimp-like krill and other crustaceans, certain molluscs and baby fish. Zooplankton plays a crucial role in the ecology of our oceans, and it is under threat from plastics.

You see, what is most ecologically dangerous about the Garbage Patch may not be the enormous eyesore of swirling milk jugs and the pitiful sight of sea turtles choking on discarded magic markers, but rather what can’t be seen. The biggest problem with plastic is not that it just sticks around in its original molded form, such as a creepy doll’s head or a pair of Hawaiian flip flops, but that it degrades into invisible tiny floating beads the size and shape of small plankton. And it’s in this way that the plastic really enters the ecosystem, by literally entering the bodies of sea life. Certain marine animals – particularly jellyfish – eat plankton, and many marine birds and sea turtles in turn eat jellyfish. This results in serious nutritional deficiencies, hormonal problems and toxicity for these animals and any others – including humans – connected to them via the food chain. Oh yeah, the little plastic beads are also full of pollutants absorbed from the seawater. Now do you see why Oprah was so shocked?

So is there any solution to the environmental fiasco known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch? The Environmental Cleanup Coalition has what seems to be a good, albeit ambitious plan, although in an article for July 2008 issue of Discover magazine, Captain Moore himself is decidedly more pessimistic about actually cleaning up the swirl. The only “solution” according to him would be to prevent additional debris from getting into the ocean. This would ultimately mean using a lot less plastic, disposing of it more responsibly and recycling as much as possible.

So the next time you’re swimming in the Caribbean or lounging on a beach in Corfu, please don’t chuck your empty Evian bottles into the sea. And if your beach ball accidently rolls into the ocean and starts to float away, go and get it, or it may end up killing some cute dolphin or a blue whale, not to mention swirling around in a nightmarish Trash Vortex in the middle of our most vital of resources.

By Graham Land

Additional resources:
Greenpeace article on the Trash Vortex
Article on Oprah and the Great Pacific Garbage Patch from The Huffington Post
Algalita Marine Research Foundation
Link to Algalita documentary “Plastic Debris, Rivers to Sea”

image by Hexayurth Project (public domain)

Is an environmental catastrophe on its way? How would you fare in a world where ecological disaster tests the limits of your archery and tent-setting-up skills? Would you be the rugged survivalist, the cannibal or the brainy nerd in the Hawaiian shirt?

Saci Lloyd and Graham Land have fun discussing climate change-induced end of the world scenarios, Gaia theory and the Dark Mountain Project.

To download this podcast in mp3, AAC or Ogg Vorbis click here

Join the Facebook group for El Pod of Cast

Saci Lloyd’s Carbon Diaries website

photo by Robert Wade (Flickr CC)

The UK’s top business lobby group CBI released a major report on Monday regarding climate change.

The report stressed that both the British government and climate scientists need to improve their communication skills if they want businesses to adapt to a changing climate and that businesses themselves should include ‘climate risks’ as part of their corporate reports.

From a report in the Guardian:

In particular, the report recommends that the existing UK Climate Projections should be repackaged so that they can be easily understood by non-climate specialists and that the government’s upcoming Climate Change Risk Assessment should feature specific recommendations on how regulated sectors need to adapt to climate change.

According to an article in the Financial Times, climate risks that UK businesses need to prepare for include increased flooding, higher temperatures – which might affect electrical substations – as well as issues with water and food supplies.

In related news, UK Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman made her first speech on climate change since taking office. Spelman warned that climate change is now ‘inevitable’ and focused on climate adaptation, rather than mitigation.

It is vital that we carry on working to drastically cut our greenhouse gas emissions to stop the problem getting any worse, but we are already stuck with some unavoidable climate change. Because of this, we need to prepare for the best and worst cases which a changing climate will entail for our country.

–Caroline Spelman

Is the Environment Secretary just being realistic or is her paradigm shift designed to give support the sweeping Tory-Lib Dem spending cuts?

For more on this story see the following piece in the Telegraph:

Climate change is inevitable, says Caroline Spelman

The municipality is going to give each household two different garbage cans: one for rubbish, one for recyclables. Each will have a micro-chip inside.

This is all part of a new automated trash collection system. Micro-chips will be placed in both your recycling bin and your waste bin. Each chip generates a report that tells the city how efficient their waste collection services are. But it will also tell them if you’re using your recycling bin.

Click here to read more about it on the City of Cleveland’s official website.

The European Union (EU) established the REACH system (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) an integrated system for Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals and establishing a European agency for these products. This system requires companies that manufacture and import chemicals to assess the risks arising from their use and take the necessary measures to manage any risk to be identified.

The burden of proof with regard to the safety of chemicals manufactured or sold is on the industry. The regulation aims to ensure a high level of protection of human health and the environment, as well as to strengthen the competitiveness of chemical innovation.

My focus was on flame retardants.

What are flame retardants?

Flame retardants are added to certain components, printed circuit boards (PCB), plastic containers and cables, to reduce their flammability for example, they prevent or reduce the possibility of a fire starting and spreading flame.

There are several types of flame retardants, they are divided between those containing chlorine and bromine compounds (also known as halogenated flame retardants), those containing phosphorus and nitrogen compounds and inorganic flame retardants.

The halogenated flame retardants Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs) are found in many household products, such as furniture, computers and other electrical equipment. They are designed to protect homes and offices from the effects of fires by slowing the rate at which objects burn.
Some types of brominated flame retardants are:

Why ban flame retardants?

These compounds accumulate in the food chain (bio-accumulation) and so are eventually consumed by humans. Exposure can also occur via skin contact or inhalation. Some of these compounds are considered harmful to certain organs and DNA, as well as causes of degenerative diseases and cancer.

Some PBDE compounds decompose in the environment forming, thus, more toxic compounds. The PBDEs can be transferred from materials treated with flame retardants and their environmental effects be long lasting. The PBBs can particularly affect the endocrine (hormonal) system in animals. Similarly, some kinds of chlorinated flame retardants, normally used in plastics, are considered toxic.

The substitution of brominated flame retardants (BFRs)

The BFRs are used in a wide range of consumer products: electronics, textiles, foam for upholstery, carpets and building materials – all jobs where the risk of fire requires attention. The increase in the use of plastic and synthetic combustible materials has contributed to growth in the use of flame retardants.

With increasing evidence of the dangers of flame retardants in the late ’80s, particularly PBBs (polybrominated biphenyls) and PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), Germany, Denmark, Holland and Sweden have begun to restrict and prohibit their use. In a mission statement in 1989, the chemical and plastics manufacturers in Germany stated that they would not produce or use PBDEs.

Has the electronics industry found alternatives to BFRs?

The electronics industry has begun to find alternatives, ranging from material substitution (replacement of halogenated flame retardants with non-halogen) to exchange functional (replacing plastic cases with metal).

Apple does not use RFB in the plastic cases of its products.

Sony Europe has begun to find safer substitutes for halogenated flame retardants. Sony has developed halogen-circuit boards used in television sets, VCRs and DVD players in Europe. The printed circuit boards use a resin material that is itself flammable. Sony’s engineers have adopted a structure containing a resin with nitrogen to increase resistance to heat.

Samsung Electronics Co. has developed a “green” semiconductor that does not use halogen compounds or toxic substances like lead, chlorine and bromine. The company was the first to develop a packaging and a form that does not contain lead or halogens. The alternative has improved the quality of the product and has saved 960 million won (684,000 euros). Samsung has publicized its efforts on the replacement to increase its image as an environmentally friendly company.

National / Panasonic (Matsushita) has joined forces with other major manufacturers to develop alternative electric cables and plastic compounds that contain no halogens. In September 1999, they began to market the first wide screen TV without halogen compounds.

NEC, a leading manufacturer of mobile phones, office equipment and personal computers, aims to abandon the use of halogenated flame retardants by 2011.

IKEA prohibits a large number of hazardous materials in its product lines, including azo dyes in textiles and has totally banned the RFB in their products and PVC. IKEA chooses textiles and materials which by their nature are difficult to ignite and can often completely avoid the use of chemical protection from the flames thanks to new materials, such as linings of non-woven materials that are inherently flame retardant.

Matsushita website: http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/lead-free/eindex.html ENDS Report 270, Chemical Firms Move to block shift to bromine-free PCs ENDS Report 308, September 2000. NEC unveils circuit boards free of halogen or phosphorus compounds Personal meeting with Magnus Bjork, IKEA, the Brominated Flame Retardants and Foam Furniture Conference and Roundtable: EPA 9. San Francisco, April 2003

Assess the safety of chemical alternatives to BFR

The German Environment Protection Agency (UBA) has examined the toxicity to humans and the environment of 13 flame retardants, with the objective to assess the feasibility of substitution with less hazardous compounds. They selected red phosphorus, ammonium polyphosphate and aluminum trihydroxide as alternatives less problematic for the environment. Red phosphorus can technically be used in a variety of polymers to meet even the most stringent fire safety standards, although it might not work for all applications.

The LU has emphasized that “it is encouraging that there is a general trend towards abandoning the use of halogenated flame retardants in products, replacing them with less hazardous compounds or through the redesign of systems flame retardants, for example by creating more distances from potential sources of heat. “

The results of these surveys are summarized in Table 1.

I. Ban recommended

• Decabromodiphenyl ether
• Tetrabromobisphenol A (additive)

II. Replacing

• Tetrabromobisfeneolo A (reactive)
• Tri (chloropropyl) phosphate

III. Property issues:

• Hexabromocyclododecane
• Sodium borate decahydrate
• Antimony trioxide

IV. No advice possible because of gaps inknowledge of phosphate:

• Bis (pentabromofenil) ethane
• Resorcinol-bis-diphenyl
• Pirovatex new CP
• Melamine cyanurate

V. Unproblematic use :

• red phosphorus
• Ammonium polyphospha
• aluminum trihydroxide

UBA (2003). Precautionary Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Chemicals. Part 1: New Strategies for the Ecological Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Substances. http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/index-e.htm

My conclusion

The BFRs represent major industrial chemicals which use has increased dramatically over the past few decades. They are produced to prevent fires and thus can have a direct and obvious benefit.

However, concerns are being raised because of their persistence, bioaccumulation, and potential for toxicity, both in animals and in humans. Production and use patterns are different in various parts of the world. There is clearly a need for more systematic environmental and human monitoring to understand how and where these chemicals are being released into the environment, and what is happening to them once they enter the environment.

What fate and transport processes are involved in their entrance into the environment?

Are the commercial products breaking down in the environment or in biota?

Is food the major pathway, as is true for many other POPs, or are there other potential sources?

Once we understand what the exposure levels are in both people and wildlife, what should be our level of concern?

Our toxicology database is inadequate to truly understand the risk. Many of the studies that do exist involve the commercial mixtures, which do not represent human exposure.We need studies that focus on the congeners, and potentially their metabolites and/or breakdown products, present in people and wildlife in order to understand the risk from exposure to BFRs.

Warming, which is a global climatic phenomenon, responsible for flood and drought in various parts of the globe, moves and gains strength.

Experts “called into question all meteorological models developed over the last ten years”.

El Niño, one of the most impressive natural phenomena that affect our planet, is also changing appearance, perhaps due to changes in climate. It was discovered that NASA has been monitoring its appearances with environmental satellites, the last of which ended in early 2010.

El Niño, also known by the acronym ENSO, El Niño-Southern Oscillation, is a periodic climatic phenomenon that occurs in the Pacific Ocean on average every five years. It usually causes a warming of Pacific Ocean currents and of Central and Eastern Europe and simultaneously, changes in atmospheric pressure in the Western and Central Pacific. The phenomenon often results in flooding, especially along the western areas of South America because of the heavy rains that the phenomenon carries with it, as well as droughts in Australia and neighbouring areas.

The main element that made El Niño different in recent years compared to decades ago was the fact that its warmer waters have moved into the heart of the Pacific Ocean, rather than east. This could have important implications in long-term climatic impact, not only on the areas surrounding the largest ocean on Earth, but on the entire planet.

Tong Lee of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory said:

Our study concludes the long-term warming trend seen in the central Pacific is primarily due to more intense El Niños, rather than a general rise of background temperatures.

This should explain why in recent years along the tropical Pacific Ocean there has been an increase in the temperature of surface water and this is particularly evident after the passage of an El Niño event.

It is important to know if the increasing intensity and frequency of these central Pacific El Niños are due to natural variations in climate or to climate change caused by human-produced greenhouse gas emissions.

–Tong Lee.

In other words, the increasing ocean heat is due to El Niño and other global warming, but what makes El Niño so powerful in the heart of the ocean is the increase in global temperature.

If this trend continues in the near future, according to researchers, it will change the climate projections for coming years, since they were created in the Nineties, taking into account that El Niño would have remained where it was during previous decades.

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory – NASA/NOAA Study Finds El Niños are Growing Stronger

The circulation of groundwater  in Rome is being threatened by great transformations in natural physiographic systems completely upset by great peripheral urban settlements. Rome is supplied by springs located several hundred km’s from the city.

Local sources contribute marginally to the supply, such as the Acqua Vergine Spring and some other mineral water springs.

The groundwater quality is consistently damaged by extensive urban development, characterised by large new districts developed without respect to regulations (average dimension of thousands of inhabitants), and by the excessive quantity of wells connecting upper water tables that are often polluted with the deep water tables, which are generally non-polluted.

In about 53% of wells, E coli bacteria were found, while the percentage drops to 16% for the deepest wells (more than 100 m deep). The disposal of effluent waters from these districts, made by uncontrolled septic tanks, leads to soil pollution and leakage in the underlying water tables.

The surface waters shaped in geological areas in the roman countryside are landscapes of great value, in some parts with large agricultural flood plains, in others with narrow gorges. These create the dense hydrographical network of the tributaries of the Tiber and Aniene Rivers. The rivers and streams in Roman territory have a very variable discharge. In the case of the Tiber River, this is not only due to the characteristics of the river and its watershed, but also to the dams built upstream mainly for production of hydroelectric power, and to the water intakes from the river, mainly for irrigation, as well as from springs located in the watershed.

Some of the tributary streams of the Tiber and Aniene Rivers are completely dry during drought periods, while others have a consistent discharge during all seasons. The water intakes for different uses (agricultural, industrial, households) produced a general degradation of river ecosystems.

The hydrological network is the receptor of seventy-one public sewers, which were not previously treated by the treatment plants located in the territory of the city. The effluents brought by those sewers correspond to about 500,000 inhabitants. This fact leads to an organic pollution, characterised by the consistent presence of E coli bacteria, high values of BOD, and low values of DO. Moreover, the same water bodies collect about 1316 private sewers, surveyed by the province of Rome, which was instituted by the National Law 319/76, the law dealing with the control of water quality. During the surveys made by the province, a significant quantity of unauthorised sewers was detected.

Concerning the vulnerability of river ecosystems due to low discharges in dry periods, studies are ongoing to define criteria and methods for managing the river in such periods of minimum flow and determining a minimum standard of water quality and biological function.

There is no problem of a shortage of drinking water for the territory of the city of Rome because of the abundant resources. Nevertheless, it is necessary to diminish water consumption in order to achieve the result of sustainable water use; in fact, in the city of Rome, the per capita/per day consumption is about 450l, one of the highest in Europe.

There is a lack of good practice of water re-use, due to the quantity of available resources; it would be better to develop it in order to solve, with this type of low-quality water, the demand for non-drinkable water, such as water for the irrigation of public gardens, for industry, for representative fountains, particularly in dry seasons typical of the Mediterranean climate. The goal for water quality is to reach a given biological quality class and to respect the limitations established in the rules and regulations on aquatic life.

Here is powerful testimony to the seriousness with which communities consider the adverse effects of golf courses. According to a report by the OECD, Japan’s early success in combating pollution is threatened by increasingly wasteful patterns of consumption.

Japan’s total land area is about the same as the state of California. Over 100 million people live in this land space.

Before World War II, there were only 23 golf courses in all of Japan and only 72 in 1956. Now, there are a total of 1,700 golf courses in operation, with another 330 under construction and roughly 1,000 in various stage of planning.

Japan consists of islands covered by many mountains, and it is fairly easy to develop golf courses rather than developing agriculture and housing. Developers clear-cut the forests and use bulldozers to level hilltops and fill in valleys. As a result, golf course construction is identical to the destruction of environment. Even though 67 percent of Japan’s total land area is covered by forest, its forest products self-sufficiency rate has fallen 30 percent. Japan now must import much of the timber used in construction and the wood chips used for making pulp.

Forests serve as a kind of natural dam, storing rainwater in the leaves and soil. Natural water circulating from forests feeds rivers and streams. In contrast, golf courses have only one-fourth the water retention capacity of an equivalent forest area. Most rainwater simply runs off the greens and fairways. This produces flooding downstream. On the contrary, the water flow to rivers and creeks downstream from golf courses drops to a dribble during periods of drought. During golf course construction, rainfall sends mud pouring from the barren ground into streams. This often makes the water inappropriate for agricultural or residential use.

An 18-hole golf course requires three to four tons of various germicides, herbicides, and pesticides every year to keep the green and fairways healthy, to combat weeds, and kill insects.

Some of these chemicals are carcinogenic, while others are known to cause deformities and nerve damage. There have been reports of massive fish kills in fish hatcheries polluted by toxins in the water from golf courses. The nitrogen and phosphorus in the fertilizers will mix with rainwater and eventually flow into a reservoir. The high nutrient content of water will stimulate the growth of algae. Consequently, this requires the water treatment plant to use higher volumes of chlorine to cleanse the water.

Golf courses use pesticides containing organic phosphorus. After application, the pesticides evaporate in the air and are absorbed by the human body via the skin and lungs. Caddies and greenkeepers often experience health problems because of the air pollution.Golfers themselves breathe in the toxins as they walk the course before the newly sprayed pesticides have settled down.

Winds sometimes carry the chemical agents to surrounding neighborhoods, and people living near golf courses worry that their health may also be affected. Golf has an image as a healthy sport, but it may be quite different in reality.

A research group in Canada also identified the problematical factors of golf courses. Soil samples were taken from greens and fairways, and sediment samples were taken from waterways and analyzed for the presence of mercury. Greens had the highest mean mercury concentration, and the majority of greens exceeded Canadian environmental levels set for mercury in soil. Sediment from a golf course lake had higher mercury levels than a lake located 5 km from the course. Mussels from both lakes were analyzed, and those from the golf course lake near the greens had methylmercury and total mercury levels an order of magnitude greater than those from the reference lake. Fish in both lakes contained methylmercury, but the level was higher in fish collected near the golf course greens. The construction of golf courses in scenic natural sites, such as forest areas and coral islands, also results in the destruction of biodiversity.

“Much of what is called golf pollution is something altogether imagined or emotional,”

says Norio Nomura, an official at the Ministry of Construction in Tokyo.

“When the most precious commodity in Japan—land—gets grabbed up fast, the people react sharply and emotionally.”

Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka, a devoted golfer, adds:

“Golf courses retain greenery. Japan needs more greenery and more golf courses.”

Many think that the environmentalists are overstating the case, and that golf is hardly in the same league as the other pollutions strangling Japan.

see more on www.time.com

photo by kozumel (Flickr CC)

The amount of rubbish produced every year in the EU is 3 billion tonnes. This waste takes time to disintegrate and so mountains of garbage grow day by day.

At the Ikos waste management site in Normandy in the north of France, bacteria are being cultivated and used as a way of accelerating decomposition. Taking the liquid that comes off of household rubbish, they fill basins and store the sewer-like soup in warm conditions, allowing the bacteria present to multiply rapidly. This microbe-heavy concoction is then regularly poured on top of the rubbish where the bacteria munch through the waste.

Elsewhere in the Ikos site, land that has been subjected to oil spills or used as industrial wasteland gets a bacterial cleansing. Here the earth is separated and the polluted elements piled up and covered with plastic sheets. A system of pipes supplies oxygen to the soil, as the type bacteria that works on petrol needs oxygen to prosper.

Therefore, for each form of waste, there is a bacterium that can help reduce the time it stays visible and active in our immediate environment. Boosting bacteria may be a tool to keep fields green and prevent our world from being submerged by rubbish.

Chernobyl, the site of the worst nuclear accident in history (in 1986), is now attracting a growing number of tourists curious to see if life has returned to the area cordoned off for the past 24 years. Some say that in the absence of men, nature is flourishing. Although trees and shrubs have grown through the cracks of the abandoned buildings, not everyone is convinced that the site has become what you could call a nature reserve. The area remains highly radioactive, in some places levels are 10,000 times higher than average.

See more in this video:

Pollution from the combustion of fossil fuels causes global warming and acid rain. Pollution brings unexpected and sometimes serious and devastating changes in our land, rivers and sea environments. Pollution can kill animals and plants and it probably kills us too. We know that pollution can cause health problems such as respiratory illnesses. Polluting our world should not even be an option, especially when there are alternatives, as there are nowadays. And when we can’t do anything else, but pollute, we should be investigating the best alternatives to the polluting technology. We should be. Please check out the actions listed below which can help reduce the amount of pollution in our world.

• Recycling everything that you can recycle!
• Buy organic food! This can sometimes be slightly more expensive but it will reduce the amount of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, artifical fertilizers, hormones, antibiotics and who knows what else, being used in the agricultural industries.
• Buy products with biodegradable packaging (or packaging that you will actively recycle). Look out for these in the shops you buy from, they should be clearly labelled.
• Re-use your plastic shopping bags or better still don’t use plastic bags. Buy a rucksack or other bag to use for your shopping.
• Use public transport, walk or cycle… or car share.
• Use less harmful detergents in your home. For example the Ecover range of detergents are sensitive to the environment and the more people that use these the more we can reduce pollution of our environments.

Image Source: Stock.Xchng. By: BigEvil600.

Jumping on the green wagon this time is Tropicana Juice. The company has already made great effort in recycling and reducing their carbon footprint. Now, their latest mission to save the earth requires your help.

If you’ve bought any Tropicana Juice lately, you’ve probably noticed they have a new “Juicy Rewards” point system going on. All of their juice products now come with a special code (usually under the cap). You simply have to go to their website, create a free account, and submit the code.

Points for the codes vary, but can add up to a savings of $15 per carton. These points can be redeemed for a variety of things, including camping gear, a massage, or museum discounts, among a lot of other things.

The awesome thing about this new points program is they can also be redeemed to help the rainforest. All you have to do is donate 3 points. Why? Well, a donation of 3 points will save 100 square feet of rainforest. In particular, they are working to save the rainforest of the Ashaninka Corridor in Peru.

This is all being done in partnership with CoolEarth, which you can find out more about here.

Best of all, it’s free! Well, apart from paying for the juice–but small bottles count towards the campaign, too! And drinking juice is a great way to keep healthy.

The “Rescue the Rainforest” campaign ends on November 15, 2010. So, get out there, buy some Tropicana Juice, redeem those points and save that rainforest!

Environmental and animal-welfare groups are urging the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to persuade the World Health Organization (WHO) to act against the eating of whale meat.

These groups say that whale meat is highly contaminated with mercury and should not be eaten. But whaling nations say they already have health guidelines in place.

“But still, the Faroe Islands are only about 200 miles off the Scottish coast. It’s a lovely place and they are certainly seeking eco-tourism, presenting themselves to the world as a very green and attractive place to go to. But that seems to clash somehow with the on-going enthusiasm for whaling.”

He said that in order to address the issue, it was important to understand why the local population kept on with the centuries-old tradition of the whale hunt.

“To so many of us in the countries that are sitting next door it just seems totally unacceptable. It is very clear that this form of hunting is incredibly cruel. There is no way it would be accepted in the British Isles, it would be against the law for conservation and welfare aspects.

“Killing the animals that come to those waters to breed, killing the youngsters and the pregnant mothers – and this all happens within sight of each other. These are intelligent animals, they are fully aware of what’s going on around them,” he stressed.

But Ms Sanderson said that killing pilot whales was not worse than slaughtering other animals, and that the local authorities were always trying to monitor the hunt and “improve things”.

“The circumstances are not entirely controlled, obviously, but if you can ethically accept hunting of wild animals at all, than you have to accept that in some circumstances things don’t always go according to plan.”

“Red deer in Scotland – are they all shot? Some are shot and wounded and they run off into the forest and it takes hours for them to die. “

“That never happens at the whale hunt in the Faroes. They may take a couple of minutes to die, but certainly not hours, like hunted animals in other form of hunting can.”

Though the conservationists think it is rather unlikely for IWC to extend the whaling ban to cover small cetaceans, many hope that getting people to think about their health will do the trick.

Lorenzo Fantacuzzi

See more on www.bbc.com

image credit: Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com (Flickr CC)

A: The environmental impact of meat and dairy products is a complex problem.

The livestock industry is damaging our planet in many ways. It is polluting the air – according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization report, it generates more greenhouse gas emissions, including CO2 (18%) and methane, than the whole world’s transport (13,5 %).

It is polluting the water – gigantic containers called “lagoons”, where livestock animals’ manure and urine are stored, may leak or even break under heavy rains and storms. The waste is highly toxic and very often contains lots of antibiotics and dangerous bacteria.

Factory farming is also wasting far too much water:

Animals need much more water than grain to produce the same amount of food, and ending malnutrition and feeding even more mouths will take still more water.

–Alex Kirby, BBC News Online environmental correspondent

Factory farming causes deforestation – for example, according to an article in the Ecologist, 98% of imported soy animal feed for Britain’s poultry, pig and dairy farms originates in South America, where soybean farming has been linked to deforestation. To read more about this issue, go to this article.

Not only are billions of animals killed for meat every year, but millions die because of deforestation, which is decimating ecosystems.

It has been estimated that one hamburger made from Costa Rican beef results in the eradication of one large tree, 50 saplings, seedlings from 20-30 different species, hundreds of species of insects and a huge diversity of mosses, funghi and microorganisms

– Zephie Begolo, Viva! environment campaigner

Overfishing, which simply means catching too much fish, is also a significant problem, as more and more marine ecosystems are thretened with collapse.

From overfishing.org:

It’s not only the fish that is affected by fishing. As we are fishing down the food web the increasing effort needed to catch something of commercial value [,] marine mammals, sharks, sea birds, and non commercially viable fish species in the web of marine biodiversity are overexploited, killed as bycatch and discarded (up to 80% of the catch for certain fisheries), and threatened by the industrialized fisheries.

To find out more on how to go green and get support cutting down on meat and dairy products, visit the homepage for Viva! HOT! Campaign.

If you have any questions about environmental issues or anything else relating to the site and topics we cover on Greenfudge, just Ask Joanna.

David Cameron and Chris Huhne, photo by DECCgovuk (Flickr Creative Commons)

Former UK Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband thinks the new coalition government’s energy policies are a ‘huge disappointment’ to industry and to the country.

Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? He’s in the shadow cabinet and that’s sort of their job. Yet it seems Miliband is indeed more pro-active in terms of helping green industry than his replacement, current Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne.

From BBC News:

On a range of issues such as wind power, renewable heat and the green investment bank the government was going “backwards not forwards” compared to the Labour administration, Mr Miliband claimed.

Besides all the big cuts they are making, the coalition government is throwing its green eggs into three baskets: cutting energy use and investing in electricity and carbon markets.

The Telegraph’s environment editor Geoffrey Lean is not convinced. He details the almost across the board cuts the Tory-Lib Dem coalition has made, though fairly acknowledges their commitment to combat climate change (how can they do both?) as well as their plans to help households become more energy efficient. The government has also confirmed that it is renewing the commitment to subsidize biogas.

Across Whitehall the Business Secretary,Vince Cable, has axed a key body dealing with electronic waste. And Caroline Spelman, the Environment Secretary, has withdrawn funding from the Sustainable Development Commission, scrapped the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (thus showing what she thinks of ministers’ two sources of independent, non-political scrutiny and advice) and abolished the Commission for Rural Communities, which tackled deprivation in the countryside. The savings were minuscule.

Read Geoffrey Lean’s entire piece in the Telegraph:

David Cameron runs the greenest government ever? Tell it to the birds