Urban Ecoist

I will totally admit that I stole this idea from this month’s National Geographic, but I really did think that it is such a good idea that really, I am just passing this on…It’s allowed.

Meet Ecofont. And it looks its best in 10 point. Anything bigger and you can start to see the holes. See what I mean?

The trick is that each letter, number or symbol has all these little holes in it. Holes mean no ink in that spot, obviously, and thus the savings in costly printer ink and more ink cartridges going into landfills by those of us that don’t bother to recycle them (I’m guilty of this sometimes).

Now, it’s not like you are going to save the world with a font here, but if you can conserve ink, why not, right? I have recently gone back to get my masters (the reason for sporadic new posts) and suddenly, I find that I am printing out a lot more than I used to. So this ecofont couldn’t have come at a better time. I cannot give you any quantifiable savings on my end as a newbie user, and I really doubt that I will be able to perceive a discernible difference considering my control (previous amount printed) was just changed. But I have faith that I will save ink, dammit!

Anyhoo, the font is available to you free via this site, ecofont.eu (yes, it’s a European product, because they care more about the world than we do here in ‘merica).

It’s a zip file and it is pretty easy to install. You can read some help files on the site if you find that you are having problems getting the file into your fonts drive, or whatever I did to get this to work. The only problem that I had was trying to find it listed under Ecofont. It’s Spranq eco sans in Word.

Ecofont download available here

National Geographic, ecofont, printing, ink

Owned by Heinz now...

I ran across an excellent article today on AlterNet (alternet.org). Usually, I am not one to simply phone it in and copy and paste an article onto this site, and I won’t do that, but I will paraphrase the article a bit and urge you to click here to go to the source article.

The writer, Andrea Whitfill, is a kindred spirit in that she also reads lots of labels to see whence our consumer products come (wow, not often I get to correctly use whence in a sentence). This annoying habit has plagued me for years. So much so, that my boyfriend won’t buy toilet tissue without checking with me about the producer and whether “we” support them or not.

However, sometimes there are no good choices.

Ms. Whitfill decided to look beyond the labels, as many a label is downright misleading, to see who was really behind some of those “crunchy” eco-sustainable-green brands that we (suckers) have come to love and support religiously (but in an atheistic way). And for many of us that think of ourselves as Earth-lovers, we may not want to met the “man behind the curtain.”

In summary, so as to encourage you to read the source, almost every company that you like to think of as “small” or “family-owned” or “natural and organic” is in reality a small subsidiary of a much, much larger corporation.

Clorox owns the Burt’s Bees brand. Tom’s of Maine is owned by Colgate-Palmolive. Coca-Cola bought Odwalla (also HonesTea) and Pepsi owns Naked. And there’s more in the article, and in the graphic below. Click here to see larger version.

The only upside to Big Corporations owning those specialty brands is that yes, those brands can now reach a bigger stage in the major grocery chains, so maybe more people will make the choice to go organic or natural (if those brands are still organic and natural — I have a hard time trusting that a major corporation wouldn’t tweak a “natural” brand to cut costs).

And maybe I am too much of a Pollyanna here, but maybe the parent corporations will learn something from their granola-lovin’ stepchildren…eh, probably not.

AlterNet, organic food, sustainable agriculture, food processors, natural food, health food brands, Clorox, Burt’s Bees, Tom’s of Maine, Colgate-Palmolive, Coca-Cola, Odwalla, HonesTea, Pepsi, Naked juices, major corporations

I have spent some time in the past on the issue of clean coal, both on this site and on Urban Ecoist’s sistah-site, Daily Science Dose, here and here. So it won’t come as any secret to anyone that I am skeptical of the fossil fuel industry and I like sharing my skepticism with all my smart and well-groomed readers.

I received my first update from a group called the ACCCE. At first, I had to wonder what group this was, but I sign up for newsletters from many, many organizations, so it was perfectly reasonable for me not to figure out immediately that ACCCE stands for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

The email itself doesn’t explain the acronym, but there are several handy links in the body of the message. One of which takes you to the Behind the Plug blog. Here, I’ll give you a link to it as well, it’s that awesome!

An example of pure comedy genius:

Today’s post is all about the “regrettable choice” that my home state of Michigan has made by forcing Big Coal to slow down plans to build more coal-fired power plants in the Great Lakes State.

Recently, Michigan’s Governor has taken a stand to become a “green energy” state. The auto plants have let the state down, and she is looking to the future to save her sorry state. Have you not noticed the ads on TV every now and then (I usually see them during PGA Tour events) with Jeff Daniels talking about how great it is to do business in Michigan? Michigan is hurting, economically, as it has depended on old, dirty technology for far too long.

The Clean Coal blog claims that due to the automaker’s forced re-tooling, the state will be needing a “robust supply of baseload energy.” And renewable sources “will not be sufficient to meet that growing need.” No evidence to support that claim there, but why would Big Coal lie? Here’s the best part…

Gov. Granholm also set a goal to reduce the carbon footprint associated with power generation in her state. That goal can be best met through deploying new technologies that capture and store CO2, not through mandates that would lessen Michigan’s reliance on affordable, domestic energy resources like coal – which currently provides more than 60 percent of Michigan’s power.

There are currently eight new coal plants being proposed in Michigan. Each of these projects provides an opportunity to create jobs for Michigan workers and ensure that electricity production keeps pace with the state’s projected energy needs. These plants can be retrofitted with advanced technologies to capture and store CO2. In fact, given the time necessary to permit and construct a new power plant today, it’s possible that these technologies would become available for deployment at or very near the time these new plants are put into operation.

I added the emphasis on that last sentence.

So the argument is that coal will be just fine when the new technology is installed to capture the carbon and sequester it elsewhere. BUT…that technology is not available. The writer even admits that, but he lamely offers a possibility that those new technologies may prove successful enough by the time that these new coal plants are built that the plants can be retrofitted to reduce their emissions.

This post is just an example of the greenwashing going on. I am tempted to leave a comment, just for giggles, as the comment will only appear after being approved by the author.

And let’s look at the author. He’s Joe Lucas. He’s the ACCCE’s VP of Communications. And he also helped found a group called the Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, which is one of two groups that merged to form the ACCCE. The ABEC was a lobbying group. They got their funding from guess who, the mining industry. In just the last year that ABEC operated, the group received over 3 million dollars in funding.

Huh, I guess that it is “possible” that Mr. Lucas is maybe just a little biased…

coal, clean coal, ACCCE, Americans Coalition for Clean Coal Technology, Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, mining, Big Coal, carbon, Michigan, Governor Granholm, renewable, energy, automakers, technology, greenwashing, lobbyists

Sanyo has unveiled a new electric-hybrid bike for the Japanese market.  My question is, when will it come to the United States market?  Why must Asians always have the best technology, i.e. toys?

The Eneloop electric bicycle is designed to “harness the energy” from the braking system on the bike. It comes with a lithium-ion battery that is, of course, rechargeable. The best part in my opinion, as I live in a hilly city, is that the electric part of the bike can add extra power going uphill — up to double the power that my little legs can generate on their own.

Sanyo has an entire family of “eneloop” products which are based on the eneloop battery, which is a hybrid between regular old alkaline batteries and the traditional rechargeable batteries. The eneloop batteries are ready to use and can be stored for long periods of time, rather than needing to be charged before use and recharged often. According to Sanyo, the eneloop batteries are available in Japan and Europe, but the website doesn’t say anything about North America. I’m sure the disposable battery lobby is somehow involved…but then I usually blame lobbyists for most of our society’s dumbness when it comes to cleaner technology.

I can see this kind of hybrid moped-bicycle becoming popular in my urban environment of Portland, Oregon, and other hilly cities across the US. I would hope that a bike could become popular in many, many other cities, but unfortunately American urban planning over the past century seems to eschew centralized layouts and instead prefer the suburbs to house everyone in cookie-cutter McMansions. I am not sure if suburbanites would be as well served by adding a bicycle/moped to their family’s vehicle fleet, but it could be a great way to get to school for teens or for anyone making a shortish journey to wherever it is that Americans drive to constantly.

And I am not sure if this kind of electric bike would need to be regulated like a moped in the US. Mopeds requires licenses to drive, whereas bikes do not. If licenses would be required for a hybrid such as the eneloop, then I can see how this bike may not be as easy to own and use in the US. But if the eneloop and it’s ilk did not require additional licensing, this could be a good move for kids getting around, you know, to and from soccer practice so Mom can get rid of the SUV.

Wow, I am living in a dream world, aren’t I? Kids cannot be allowed to wander the streets on their own, or so it seems. And Americans giving up their cars and their hour commute to and from work– never gonna happen.

Still, for urbanites, the eneloop could be an excellent way to increase your bicycle-based travels. The eneloop also claims to boost speeds up to 1.8 times. It’s not much, but if I can get a few miles farther without totally wiping out my legs and showing up ruddy-faced and sweaty to an appointment or a meeting, that could be a very cool thing for me — and everyone who has to sit near me.

Sanyo, electric bike, hybrid, bicycle, lithium ion, battery, alkaline, rechargeable, Japan, Europe, commute, biking, SUVs

Honestly, I think that is what Thanksgiving is all about — sustainability. The newly arrived, brass buckled English at Plymouth Rock had to learn that pretty quickly anyway.  It started out as then and still is a harvest festival, and to have a harvest year after decade after century, one must be sustainable.  Do your part even if you are not a farmer. Support the sustainable farmer.  Instead think of yourself as a pilgrim to brighter shores, a newcomer to an age of environmental awareness, a refugee to the land of green, a — ok, I’ll stop.

Today let’s talk Turkey.

Let’s face it, Americans love turkey for Thanksgiving. I am not exception. However, once I got older, I noticed that the dry turkey my mom made every year was not exactly her fault. She bought the brands she knew, namely Butterball. Granted, some years, it turned out pretty good, but I never really got into the Thanksgiving turkey thing (sorry, Mom).

Then I had wild turkey. And suddenly, turkey was good. I got it. But I still don’t get why so many people still go for the factory birds. My mom was a product of the 1950’s agricultural… cough, revolution that lead to the rise of the factory farm, so she could not really help it. Marketing works. It was funny that my parents were big farmers market people for produce, but didn’t know jack about where meat came from. And I don’t think it was just my parents. Americans have been kept in the dark when it comes to how our meats are produced, and most Americans liked it that way. Now, you have to look for organic, and free range, and no antibiotics.

Well, there’s a reason for that.

Even if you don’t want to get all hippie on the checklist of environmental buzz words, if there is any more compelling a reason to go with an organic turkey, I cannot think of it. Taste. Turkeys are not meant to be confined to cages. Turkeys are not meant to be so breast-heavy that the bird cannot reproduce without artificial insemination. Turkeys are not meant to be injected with oils and salt water in order to taste better.

The less you do to a turkey, the better it will taste. Turkeys are meant to cover a wide area, eating grubs and insects and small plants that turkeys eat. When you taste a turkey that is raised outside of the factory farm system, you will be a convert. Be careful not to fall for the word “natural” on the label. Look for the organic certification on the label. Unless you happen to get your turkey at a small local farm, since sometimes the smaller farms will not pay the cost of getting certified, and instead rely on talking to customers directly about their farming practices rather than a logo on a package.

Also, besides taste and flavor, there are other reasons to go organic. Factory farms feed their turkeys grain, which is grown with the use of unsustainable and ultimately detrimental farming practices, such as pesticides and genetically modified seed. The antibiotics that those turkeys are given ultimately end up in the water system.

And if you get your turkey from a local source, you can count on the fact that less fuel was needed to get that turkey to your table.

Factory Turkey Stats
Top 10 Turkey Producing States in 2007 (in order)

* Minnesota
* North Carolina
* Arkansas
* Virginia
* Missouri
* California
* Indiana
* Pennsylvania
* South Carolina
* Iowa

Top U.S. Turkey Processors
Live Weight Processed (Million Pounds) *
Butterball, LLC 1375
Jennie-O Turkey Store 1255
Cargill Value Added Meats 1112

*Estimates for 2007 from February 2008 Watt Poultry USA

The next farm on the list produces only 271 million pounds of turkey, which is still a lot, but Butterball, Jennie-O and Cargill are the big boys. I would avoid their products in general, and if you really care about your family and loves ones, give them a real feast on Thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving, sustainability, sustainable, feast, farmers, farm, factory, turkey, turkeys, organic, natural, Plymouth Rock, harvest, pilgrim, Butterball, Jennie-O, Cargill

Seems there may be a problem with granite countertops, and if you have them, you may have invited radon into your home.

Does that mean that you should go to the expense and bother of removing said countertops? Probably not, as the radon emitted by the small amounts of uranium that may be present within that granite, are equally small. You probably breathe in more radon every day simply breathing.

However, some countertops or any other granite surfaces that are used for decorative facades do have some rather high levels of uranium. Not only is uranium radioactive, which is bad enough in and of itself, but as uranium decays it gives off radon. Radon is odorless and colorless, so it is not like you can see radon. Some houses’ basements also pose a danger of emitting radon, depending on the surrounding rock and soil.

You can have your house tested for radon. There are also radon test kits that are commercially available, usually costing around $25. If you find that you have elevated levels of radon in your home, you should contact your state radon office by accessing the EPA website’s list here.

The Environmental Protection Agency (if you trust it) claims that there is no conclusive evidence of danger from granite, but of course, you never know when you just happen to get that one countertop that just happens to have really high levels of uranium, coupled with the fact that your house sits on soil that also emits high levels of radon, and well, you see where I am going with this.

This remodel may have gone a bit overboard with the radon…er, I mean granite.

Radon is a carcinogen, that is it causes cancer. In radon’s case, it causes lung cancer, and the EPA estimates that 7000 to 30000 deaths from lung cancer may be attributable to radon every year. Radon may also cause emphysema, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic interstitial pneumonia.

If you are thinking about putting in new countertops, you should check out all the recycled materials that are available, like icestone (at right), which is made from recycled glass, or even materials like concrete and bamboo.

granite, countertops, countertop, kitchen, bathroom, radon, uranium, cancer, lung cancer, emphysema, pulmonary fibrosis, recycled materials, icestone, glass, concrete, bamboo

Recently, I purchased a bottle of Clorox’ new line of so-called eco-friendly cleaning products by the brand name of greenworks, a cute pun to also make you feel better about buying the product.

The bottle has the reassuring stamps of approval of the EPA and the Sierra Club. It says “natural” in 18 point font above the 12 point “dishwashing liquid”, so it has to be good.

Then I looked at the other side.

Granted, the Greenworks dishwashing liquid works really well. The suds last for quite some time, thus reducing my need to apply more soap to a sponge. I seem the be going through the bottle slowly. The fragrance is rather light, or perhaps that is simply my impression due to allergies. The bottle is easily recyclable (being a #1 plastic bottle), and the bottle states that it contains a minimum of 25% post-consumer recycled plastic. That is great, could be better, maybe, but still pretty good.

However, looking over the listing of ingredients does not quite alleviate my concerns for this product being a wise, ecologically-friendly choice for dishwashing detergent.

Here’s the list:

Water. That’s fine. Citric acid. Sure, even the fragrance with essential oils sounds okay.

Wait, “fragrance with essential oils.” That is an odd use of words. Why not just essential oils? Unless it doesn’t use simple essential oils, but something else? What makes up the something else?

Now onto the not-so-good. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate is one of those chemicals that the jury is still out on. According to Cosmetic Database, there are studies going back to 1950’s indicating problems such as skin and eye irritations, animal studies in which mutations occurred as well as problems in both the reproductive and endocrine systems. But it was approved of as safe for both cleaning products, cosmetics, and as a food additive. That kind of creeps me out, that I can use it to create lather as well as puff up marshmallows.

The International Chemical Safety Card goes so far as to say that SLS can be absorbed by the skin and through the lungs. So it is not as if you have to drink the stuff to be exposed. I, for one, don’t use gloves when washing the dishes, but I think I may start.

Just when I think it can’t get any worse, I turn to the Material Safety Data Sheet on sodium lauryl sulfate (also known as sodium dodecyl sulfate) and it says that SLS actually increased the permability of your skin. So the more you are exposed, the more your skin can absorb.

Not sure how “green” greenworks is.

I could not find much info on the alkyl polyglucoside or the coco dimethyl amine oxide. A website for a company called Organix South, Inc. defines alkyl polyglucoside as…

Alkyl Polyglucoside- A mild surfactant base derived from a reaction of cornstarch glucose and a natural fatty alcohol (decyl polyglucose).

And I could find nothing on the coco dimethyl amine oxide, although I did run across a warning about sodium lauryl sulfate when it bonds with an “amine” — a study showed a link to cancer. So with the coco dimethyl amine oxide…oh, I’m sure it’s safe. I am not going to think about it anymore. La la la la la.

Oh, yeah, and corn-based ethanol has been exposed for the fraud it is. Corn is technically a wash when it comes to being a sustainable resource that can replace a carbon based fuel/alcohol. Still I guess it is better than petrochemicals in the soap.

clorox, greenworks, ingredients, natural, eco-friendly, ecofriendly, sodium lauryl sulfate, EPA, Sierra Club, recyclable, dishwashing liquid, soap, detergent, chemicals, International Chemical Safety Card, alkyl polyglucoside, coco dimethyl amine oxide, Material Safety Data Sheet, corn, ethanol

Greenpeace has just released it’s updated ninth edition of the Guide to Greener Electronics. As this site is not Flash-enabled, I cannot embed the neat-o graphic to give you a quick view of which companies are making the grade in responsible manufacturing as well as disposal and recycling of their obsolete gadgets.

© Greenpeace / Will Rose

Oddly, as I traded in a Nokia (which leads the rankings) for a Motorola cell phone, I find myself on the lower end of the responsibility scale. Same with my Xbox 360. Luckily, the Dell laptop I use and the Apple desktop are in the middle in the rankings, but that really doesn’t make me feel any better. I hate my Dell, but I love my Xbox. What is an ecoist-nerd to do?

Let’s first look at Motorola. Here is the Greenpeace summary of the company’s efforts.

Motorola drops to 15th place, scoring 3.7 points, losing points because although its models of chargers are certified as Energy Star compliant in March 2007 – this is not since the latest energy efficiency standard for chargers (v.1.1) came into effect, which was in January 2005; it therefore scores no points on this criterion. In the U.S, all Motorola’s mobile phone chargers exceed ENERGY STAR Tier 2 requirements by more than 50 percent in sleep and standby/no-load modes – but what about chargers sold outside the US? On the other energy criteria Motorola scores relatively well for disclosing greenhouse gas emissions, committing to cuts and reporting a 5.4% renewable energy use (as proportion of all electricity purchased) in 2007. Motorola scores better on the chemicals and e-waste criteria. The company has launched 55 models of mobile phone with BFR free circuit boards. However, Motorola is the only mobile phone brand to still fail to commit to eliminating all BFRs and PVC with a timeline, in all of its products. On waste issues, Motorola provides a take-back and recycling service in 73 countries, representing over 90% of global mobile phone unit sales. It reports a global take-back rate of 3% of total handsets sold in 2005.

I do have to wonder how the “take-back” percentage is figured out. Is it just what Motorola itself takes back or any of the phone recyclers? I know that when I switched over to Credo Mobile, I was sent an envelope to recycle my old phone. Let’s say that is also a Motorola, but if I am sending it to a third-party recycler, would that phone be counted by Motorola in it’s “take-back” numbers?

Now, Microsoft.

Microsoft is in 17th position with a miserable score of 2.2 points, mainly on toxic chemicals criteria. The company provides a timeline of the end of 2010 for eliminating phthalates. On e-waste, Microsoft scores only on its weak support for Individual Producer Responsibility. On energy, the company only scores for reporting its total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, from its own operations and although it now has a Climate Change Policy it makes no reference to specific reduction targets for greenhouse gases.

Perhaps Microsoft has been spending too much of its efforts in its lame ad campaigns, instead of making the company more environmentally responsible? The Seinfeld ad was just stupid, and watching Bill Gates “adjust” himself was just disturbing.

Good thing I have put off buying that Wii. Check out Nintendo’s scoring.

Nintendo remains in last place with a pitiful 0.8 points out of 10, scoring zero on all e-waste criteria. The company has banned phthalates and is monitoring use of antimony and beryllium and although it is endeavouring to eliminate the use of PVC, it has not set a timeline for its phase out. Nintendo discloses carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from its own operations and commits to cutting CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases by 2% over each previous year. However, Nintendo admits that an increase in business led to a 6% rise in CO2 emissions in 2006.

If you would like to explore the Guide to Greener Electronics yourself, you can visit the Greenpeace website here.

This guide and many like it underscore the problems with the end-life issues with the electronics that we all have and love. I will discuss more about the problem with e-waste in the next few days.

© Greenpeace / Natalie Behring

Greenpeace, Guide to Greener Electronics, Motorola, Nokia, Microsoft, Dell, Apple, Wii, Nintendo, Xbox, Xbox 360, e-waste, toxic substances, recycling, environmentally responsible computing, cell phone recycling, take-back

Something that would make me laugh if I were not one of the millions of guinea pigs in the experimentation is how so many items that we use in our day-to-day lives are presented as safe until years later new research proves quite the contrary.

One thing I do not understand is how the government agencies that are in charge of protecting the public seem to overlook proper and long-term testing of certain chemical compounds. Everyday it seems that there is a new chemical that is starting to show it’s true dangerous nature, and this week, Bisphenol-A, has made the news. Unfortunately, despite new and growing evidence that plastic #7 can be detrimental to your health, the Food and Drug Administration has decided to wait until more proof of possible danger before the agency will ban the chemical or even limit it’s use.

Here’s the thing. The FDA says that the bisphenol-A present in many of the plastics marked #7 and in the plastic lining of cans is in such low amounts that it cannot harm us. Huh. You would think that any amount of potential harm would throw up a red flag as if the research cannot determine the health risk, how can the same research prove what a safe level is?

Last year, I did a little research on Proctor and Gamble’s environmental and health record. It seems that P&G had been under fire for nail polish that contains dibutyl phthalate. P&G claimed that it only used the phthalates in low enough levels that posed no human harm. Besides, phthalates don’t bioaccumulate so you simply pass them in your urine. I know that should ease my mind, but it just doesn’t.

And the same thing is going on with bisphenol-A.

Here’s a breakdown of the bisphenol-A (BPA) debate going on right now. New research shows a connection between BPA and such maladies as heart disease and diabetes. Granted, our society has high occurrences of both diseases in our general population, but another study showed that BPA can affect a hormone that protects humans from diabetes.

My opinion usually runs along the lines of better safe than sorry. BPA is widely used in those re-usable water bottles as well as bottles used to feed babies. Also, BPA is used in the lining of aluminum cans for soda, and even other canned goods. Many manufacturers of baby products are starting to phase out BPA. Start phasing out the use of BPA in your own life, just to be sure. In case years from now, the FDA does finally find conclusive proof that BPA is dangerous at any level.

Graph: BPA is at unsafe levels in one of every 10 servings of canned foods (11%) and one of every 3 cans of infant formula (33%)
(Courtesy of Environmental Working Group)

Ways to avoid BPA (condensed from a US News article):

A word from the Environmental Working Group.

Nestlé, makers of Good Start and Mam brands, repeatedly told EWG researchers that its powdered formula cans contain no BPA. Nestlé’s emails to parents repeat this claim, but the company has failed to document this in writing or provide information on their alternative to EWG, despite our numerous requests to the company. In any case, EWG cannot recommend Nestlé baby formula due to the company’s long history of ethically suspect infant formula marketing practices in the developing world. Nestlé’s claim that it uses BPA-free packaging, if true, would be welcome news, because it suggests that other manufacturers could switch to safer packaging materials and reduce babies’ BPA exposures.

Powdered formula sold by Enfamil and Similac are reduced-risk choices, because only the metal tops and bottoms of their packages – not the cardboard sides – are metal and lined with BPA-based plastic. Earth’s Best Organic and PBM (which make dozens of store brands) are more of a concern: they are sold in an entirely metal can, which means the formula has more contact with a BPA-coated surface.

bisphenol-A, BPA, plastic, #7, baby bottles, baby formula, canned goods, health, heart disease, diabetes, FDA, hormone, Environmental Working Group, Nestle, Enfamil, Similac, Earth’s best Organic

It is that time of year when the little kiddies are sent off to school, and that means that parents are buying the usual pencils, paper, crayons, markers, rulers, etc. But are you aware of where some of those supplies come from companies with very different ways of looking at the world? Let’s look at pencils today.

What a better way to discuss a renewable resource like wood with kids than by teaching them about something so ubiquitous as that ol’ number 2? First of all, what kind of wood is used in pencils, and where does that wood come from? Forest Ethics has just released a report card for pencil companies, and which pencil you purchase can make a difference.

Most pencils are made from soft woods such as cedar, and a large amount of cedar is found on the West Coast of the US. Some pencil companies are definitely ahead of the curve when it comes to working with sustainably harvested wood to make their pencils. Two good choices for pencils are ForestChoice, from CalCedar, and Greenline Paper Company’s Eco-Writer. ForestChoice uses Incense-Cedar from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified forests, which has ten principles and fifty-six criteria for determining the environmental impact of the wood harvested from certain forests. The Eco-Writer pencil is made from recycled materials, and attempts to avoid using wood at all.

Some pencils to avoid for being less envir-aware are the Green Apple line of pencils from Red Apple School Supplies. Though the Green Apple’s are made from recycled cedar, it is not clear where that cedar is coming from in the first place. Also, the pencils are made in Japan, so the shipping involved may undermine whatever benefits the pencil offers. Another less-than-awesome choice is Papermate’s Earthwrite pencil line. True, the Earthwrite’s are made from recycled or reclaimed wood, but that wood may be coming from forests that are clear-cut out of the Sierra Nevada, which are under threat. Although Earthwrite does use some FSC-certified wood, it is not clear if all the wood is sustainably-harvested.

A couple of companies to avoid altogether include the pencil giant, Dixon/Ticonderoga. This company did at one time offer pencils made with FSC wood, but no longer. I say we start emailing them and bugging them to make this a priority, or simply stop buying the D/T pencils and maybe they will get the message. Another “evil-doing” (Sorry, I watched Bowling For Columbine last night, and George Bush’s favorite term is my new fav, too) company is USA Gold. I just checked out the Mega Brands website (the USA Gold parent company), and it lists the USA Gold pencil as “are made from sustained yield cedar.” However, ForestEthics gives USA Gold an “F” for using wood from Sierra Pacific Industries, which ForestEthics calls out for using wood from non FSC-certified forests.

In all fairness, I did pop by Sierra Pacific Industries website to see how they deal with the whole sustainable forests issue. SPI says that it is a voluntary partner in the Sustainable Forest Initiative, which they say is similar to FSC. If you want to read a bit more about this he said, she said bullsh*t, you can read this San Francisco Chronicle article from earlier this year. It does seem that there is some debate as to what constitutes sustainable forestry. Perhaps I will revisit this another day.

ForestEthics, sustainable forestry, pencils, back to school shopping, ForestChoice, CalCedar, Greenline Paper Company, Eco-writer, Forest Stewardship Council, FSC, Green Apple, Red Apple School Supplies, Papermate, Earthwrite, Sierra Nevada, Dixon/Ticonderoga, USA Gold, Mega Brands, Sustainable Forest Initiative, SFI, Sierra Pacific Industries, SPI

I was in REI yesterday looking for a small compass for my significant other. Being in a new state, surrounded by trees, and not being able to see the horizon, he is really struggling to get his bearings. Here in Texas, I’ve never struggled to know which direction was North. And honestly, it’s a very rare occasion when I have gotten lost. But I imagine being in NC, it might be a little different.

Either way, REI has introduced a new label to their lines that will indicate which items are eco-friendly. Basically what this will mean is that the item is made with recycled, renewable and/or organic fibers. By mid-September, it is reported that they will have more than 40 items with the new labeling.

“While we previously offered REI brand clothing that contained environmentally sensitive fibers, we are moving from a grassroots approach to a formalized commitment to environmental performance in our products,” said Lee Fromson, vice president of REI Gear & Apparel. “Many of our customers recognize that their purchase decisions have a direct impact on the natural world, and we are committed to offering alternatives that are more environmentally friendly.”

REI, eco-friendly, icon, label, tag

I know I posted about it several weeks back, but I wanted to provide an update. I got the Jimi wallet this morning in the post. It came in a small bubble-lite envelope made of 100% recycled paper (25% PCR - post consumer?) It is teal. It came with a small operator’s manual stuck inside. Filled with witty quips, it seems really more for laughs than for instruction. And if you were able to open the Jimi in the first place, I doubt you really need the instructions. But they are quite novel.

My initial thoughts on it are that it might not hold enough credit cards for the average user. It will only hold 5 - 4 in the credit card slot and 1 in the money clip. The manual says it can hold 3 folded bills, so while I don’t typically carry money, I might fit a couple more cards there. We’ll see.

It’s my post to test it out for a minimum of two weeks, then provide feedback. I’m think after that I should use it 2 more weeks then provide my final assessment (or make any modifications to my original assessment.)

Okay… but I don’t get it.

It’s a bag. It doesn’t do the laundry or mow the lawn. It doesn’t put cream cheese on my bagel. It’s a bag. Just a plain, old, ordinary bag.

A bag so insecure about its place in the bag hierarchy that it feels the need to proclaim, “I’m not a plastic bag.” Well duh.

I mean, am I missing something here? I mean they sold out in 29 minutes in NYC. Who cares if Keira Knightly was last seen carrying one? It’s a bag, folks! If your friend jumped off the Empire State Building, would you?

You would? Oh, well then, nevermind.

I’m not a plastic bag, keira knightly, Anya, plastic, bag

You remember the jingle, right? Transformers! More than meets the eye! Well that’s exactly what I heard in my head when I first saw the unique products available over at nobodyandco. The Piccolo table and bench were the first items I was exposed to from their product line. The interesting thing about these two items is that since they are constructed of single slats of wood, when you tug on them, the furniture lengthens making a longer table and a longer bench. Now there’s room for everyone at the picnic table.

Of course, if you look around their site a bit more, you’ll find La Bibliochaise (my favorite) which is a chair whose exterior is a book case, as well as the Piola. And while it make not be the most efficient use of space, it is by far the most unusual bookcase I’ve ever seen.

Like a scene right out of Little Shop of Horrors, botanicals have just made a leap forward on the evolutionary food chain. Well, not really. But with the technology provided by Botanicalls, your very own Audrey II’s can call you when they are thirsty. And even better than your teenager, they’ll also call you to say, “Thank you.”

Check out the video here. And this is hilarious.