Archive for August, 2011

PostHeaderIcon GM Foods Against


GM Foods Against

Genetically modified (GM) foods are not being found to be safe for humans, or for the environment. There are a number of reasons why there a growing number of people are against GM foods. Are Genetically Modified Foods Safe? The reason to resist the growth of GM food in our diet is that it has a negative impact on our environment; plants and animals grown organically are not distorting their genetic makeup.

And in the rush to accelerate the production of genetically modified foods, scientists are short cutting testing methods. Recently, the United States Tufts University, School of Medicine was involved in testing the effects of genetically modified rice directly on children (by-passing the usual practice of testing on animals). This direct testing on children created controversy and a formal letter of protest from 22 international scientists to the University; the protest letter has been made public through various social media. 
 
The letter protested the use of children as a breach of medical ethics code since children cannot legally give their consent (since it is not deemed to be informed consent) to participate in experiments. As Professor David Schubert, Salk Institute of Biological Studies said, “…it is completely immoral to feed this rice to children without proper safety testing … [i]t’s like putting a new drug on the market with no toxicology or safety trials”.
 
In defense of their position, the Golden Rice Organization issued a press release that states they “…us[ed] the correct Chinese and US government approved processes, the trials in China went ahead last year with the formal approval of their parents and the understanding of the children”.   How do children understand the impact of genetically modified food on themselves or the environment? It’s a complex subject that many adults have a hard time understanding. Also, how can anyone (parents, children, or testing scientists) understand what the long term effects of genetically modified “golden rice” are on the human body without prior study or testing? 
 
More importantly, will the overall risks of genetically modified foods over time out weigh the alleged benefits? Farmers have cross-bred plants and animals for hundreds of years to improve their products. Improvements to size, produce yield, taste, hardiness have been achieved through relatively natural means and within nature’s own boundaries; different species were not bred together.
 
With the discovery of DNA and a method of gene extraction, the concept of genetic modification was born. The intent of genetic modification is to create food that grows quickly, yields much, is resistant to pests, to disease, and to other natural events. However a number of scientists respond that the benefits are not worth the risks; genetically modified foods often become resistant to herbicides and pesticides requiring ever increasing amounts. There is the suspicion (still unproven) that pollinating bees have been affected by the increasing use of these chemicals and that both pollinator and predator species have been affected by the genetically modified crops (also known as transgenic crops) through habitat destruction and use of dangerous herbicides and pesticides. 
 
Since the introduction of genetically modified foods, some scientists are reporting that food-related illness has increased. The only published human feeding study confirmed that genetic material in genetically modified soy transferred into the DNA of intestinal bacteria and continued to function. What long term impact will these foods have on the population and the environment?  There are many more potential risks in the development of genetically modified foods. Animals that were fed genetically modified feed appeared to suffer from increases in fetal death, low birth weight, sterility, and more. The concern is that human reproductive failure and sterility or infertility will be long term consequences to using GM foods.
 
In the US, the Department of Agriculture reports that cotton and corn crops have been genetically modified to produce their own Bt toxins since 1996. Bt modified crops are insecticidal crystal proteins and are considered effective against crop-damaging caterpillars. The toxins are considered important for pest control and since resistance to herbicides and pesticides is growing, the sentiment is that these genetically engineered Bt toxins will help to protect the crops. The issue with the GM Bt toxins is that they are considered serious allergens; ever wonder why so many more children and adults are exhibiting allergic reactions than ever before?
 

The problem with genetically modified foods is that there is also a reaction for the action; unfortunately, globally, in our rush to grow food supplies, we have not taken the time to properly test and research the long term impacts and effects of genetically modified foods. It is easy to be against GM foods - our planet is at risk.

To read more about genetically modified foods and the healthy alternative – organic foods, please visit Is Organic Food Better?
Kris Bovay is the owner of Voice Marketing Inc, the business and marketing services company, with a difference. She is also the owner of a small business website, more-for-small-business.com and an organic food website, Organic Food For Everyone. Kris has 25 years of experience in leading large, medium and small businesses … and a life-long passion for healthy food and a healthy environment. Copyright 2008 – 2009 Voice Marketing Inc.

stove demo in Phuket

PostHeaderIcon american idol – green brain


american idol - green brain

The World Energy Crisis – How Can We Cope?

The world has some decisions about sources for future energy. The increase in population and increasing demand present a problem. The cost of conventional non-renewable energy sources is on the rise. Oil, gas, water, coal, and other natural resources have a limit to their supply.

Gas, Oil and petroleum products are more expensive than ever, and the supply is running thin. Many may think that the planet may never run out of these however it seems that drilling these supplies is becoming ever more difficult. There have been three major energy crises thus far.

Due to the shortage of resources and decreased output, the cost of these energy sources has increased rapidly over the years.

How long will it take before all of these resources are exhausted? The truth is that we really do not know. Experts say that 50% of the world’s supply of available oil has been exhausted. Every day the demand is increasing and it could take mere decades to exhaust the supply of crude petroleum.

What could possibly be done about this situation? How can we as a society cope with the energy crisis at hand? What can we consumers do about this? We can all start by understanding the importance and impact that energy has in our lives. These supplies of energy should not be taken for granted. Additionally we should avoid wasting energy.

There are simple things that we could do to conserve such as getting involved with a car pool, check our car tires for proper inflation, and using fuel efficient vehicles. If we can cut down on our use of fuel and oil in everyday activities we can be further prepared for the impending energy crisis.

Another way that we can cope with the energy situation is by utilizing renewable energy sources. Solar and wind power systems are becoming ever more available. These power solutions are feasible, cost effective and environmentally friendly. In addition, you save on your power bill and help contribute towards a better future for our world.

Make power at home with solar and wind energy to eliminate your power bill. Get our complete guide at EnergySolutionsDIY.com.

PostHeaderIcon Can Paper Bags Substitute Plastic Bags?


Can Paper Bags Substitute Plastic Bags?

Bags hold an important place in our lives. They are sometimes referred to as the best personal carriers. They are made of various stuffs like cotton, synthetic, leather and so. But when it comes to general usage like for shopping, the names of two types of bags viz. plastic made and paper made bags come to our intellect. Both are fine, but the question is, which one is the best suited to our requirements. Lets discuss the peculiarities related with the two.

You might be thinking that paper bags are not as durable as those made of plastic. Also, we see that the latter are more commonly used than the former one. But, do you know plastic is a stuff which is really hazardous to the environment. It takes thousands of year to decompose. If burnt, it emits poisonous gases which again pollutes the environment. If buried in the ground, it makes the soil infertile. If thrown in the sea, it pollutes the sea water and proves to be a threat for the life of the sea creatures. One can imagine, how hazardous is plastic to our planet.

This perilous nature of plastic had forced the governments of many cities of the world to put a ban on the use of poly-bags, which are a major source of plastic pollution. Few cities of the world in which these polythene carriers are either completely or partially banned include San Francisco, New York, Texas, Germany, Dhaka, China, Kenya and Ireland to name a few. Even the government of Delhi had issued guidelines against the use of polythene. However, later on the government changed its decision to completely ban the polythene, due to some reasons. Government suggested the manufacturers to set up the recycling units on the basis of “polluter pays principles”. But the government has not completely given up the plan to ban these polythene carriers, it is in the pipeline.

In this context, paper bags are the best option. No doubt, they are unconventional, but they are eco-friendly and easy to recycle. Nowadays, there are various types of paper made bags available in the market. They are not only good looking, but also have ample of space to carry goods and are quite durable. The handmade paper bags available nowadays are designed to suit specific requirements which include carrying gifts, carrying wine, shopping etc. There is a separate bag to serve each purpose. Although, multipurpose bags are also made from paper. They are proving to be the best substitute for plastic or polythene carriers in the modern context.

Now, as we have told you every significant fact related to plastic and paper bags, It’s upon you which one to choose. The hazardous and non-disposable polythene, or the environment friendly and elegant paper bags.

For more information on paper bags, paper baskets, miscellaneous paper products and other handicraft items, you may visit the following sites:
http://www.handmade-paper-products.com/
http://online-handicrafts-center.blogspot.com/

IDGTV: Tech News For Update

PostHeaderIcon Homemade Biodiesel Kits Are Used to Make Biodiesel Fuel by First Timers


Homemade Biodiesel Kits Are Used to Make Biodiesel Fuel by First Timers

The cost of fuel has gone up again that people are thinking of alternative ways to save up on other things just so they can still continue to make use of their vehicles. Actually, there is a better way by which we can save up on fuel without having to let go of other necessities or luxuries that we have in our life. Sometimes we need all this to keep us going. When you take away one or two, you may take away your only source of happiness. So think twice before cutting off hobbies or things that you are already accustomed to.

One thing by which we can save gas is if we make it ourselves. It is possible since homemade biodiesel kits are available for consumers to buy them. There are instructions online and there are even step-by-step videos on how to make biodiesel fuel. These are especially useful for people who prefer to see it than reading about it. The great thing about seeing how it is made is you can actually see the equipments that are being used. So you can always pattern your equipment with what is being shown.

Since you will be doing it yourself, there are a couple of things you have to watch out for. You have to watch out for methanol and lye because it is dangerous. Aside from that, since you will be making use of heat and vegetable oils, fire is always a possibility. First time makers of biodiesel fuel should be extra careful when proceeding and like any other endeavor it takes practice to perfect it.

Cheryl Forbes owns and operates the website http://www.homemadebiodieselkits.com

american idol - green brain

PostHeaderIcon To Living a Greener Life – 5 Steps


To Living a Greener Life – 5 Steps

Lots of people talk about trying to live a greener life, with some even going so far as to completely change their lifestyle, but most people aren’t sure how to go green because they don’t know exactly what that means. Sure, most people know the basics that scratch the surface such as reusing, recycling and reducing the amount of waste output for their homes but there many other steps you can take to move towards a cleaner, greener environment.

If you’re wondering how you can make your life greener, here are five different tips that are simple and easy to implement and that don’t cost the you anything.  All it takes is a little dedication and after a few months, these five little things will become second-nature to you.

1. The next time you go shopping use cloth bags at the grocery store instead of paper or plastic.  These cloth bags can be purchased for as little as a few dollars each and they’re much stronger than paper or plastic bags and will last you through years of use. 

These bags help reduce waste since most people throw away the plastic and paper bags.  The hardest part of using cloth bags is remembering to take them to the store, but once you get in the habit of using them, it becomes unconscious habit.

2. Replace your standard light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs.  These bulbs use less energy and last for four to five years, almost 15 times longer than traditional bulbs.  While the cost of a compact fluorescent bulb is more than your standard bulb, they easily pay for themselves over time requiring less frequent replacement and reduced energy consumption.  In fact, studies show that a CF bulb can actually pay for itself within one to two months.  One CF bulb also saves about five pounds of greenhouse gas carbon dioxide a month.  Replacing every bulb in your home can have a huge impact on the environment and on your wallet.

3. Use public transportation.  By car pooling, taking the bus, or using the subway you can cut down on the amount of gas you use and the amount of exhaust your car emits.  While it may be an inconvenience in some ways, it is one of the best ways of helping the environment.  Even better, walk or ride your bike to work if possible.  This not only saves you money and helps the environment but it also keeps you fit and healthy!

4. Adjust your thermostat by a few degrees.  By turning your thermostat down by just two degrees in the winter, you can save over 50 pounds of greenhouse gas carbon dioxide per month while lowering your heating bill.  Turning it up a few degrees in the summer can likewise save you money and save the environment. 

5. Finally, only wash your clothes or run your dish washer when you have a full load.  It wastes water and electricity to wash and dry only a few pieces of clothing.  In fact, if you can, try to wash your clothes using the cold water cycle as it uses up to 50% less energy than a warm water one. 

By just doing these basics not only you can save some serious money but you can rest assured that you’re doing your part for a cleaner, brighter future. To discover more ideas you can use around your home for living green visit http://www.greentipsforyou.com!


TheGrahamBaileyShow Episode 3 in Going Green

PostHeaderIcon Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day


Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day

What is Earth Day?

While you have probably heard the words “Earth Day”, did you know there are two observations of Earth Day? The United Nations celebrates on the equinox; hundreds of countries celebrate Earth Day annually on April 22nd. Both events were birthed in 1969, with grassroots efforts, a focus on environmental awareness, and celebration of Earth.

Events to Leading to Earth Day

Prior to 1970, conservatism was an idea held by a minority of people. The notion that natural resources would become devastated to the point of extinction did not enter our collective thought. Pollution, from our buildings, cars, and behavior, was a normal industry by-product. The idea of being the world’s steward was lumped in a mindset of ‘a hippie thing’ and not understood by mainstream America. Two previous events tilted our environmental awareness: a book and a picture.

In 1962, marine biologist Rachel Carson published Silent Spring. The book talked about the commonly used, toxic pesticides used in agriculture and daily life. The title referred to the consequences of the devastating pesticides: a world without birds. Surprisingly, Silent Spring became a hit. Americans cared, and they wanted the facts.

In 1968, the world saw the entire Earth for the first time. Apollo astronauts photographed the planet on their flight home from the moon. The Earth looked beautiful with its swirls of blues and whites. The photo provided a startling awareness: people saw Earth as vulnerable and needing human care.

Earth Day is Born

In 1969, John McConnell promoted Earth Day as a global celebration of Earth’s gifts. The equinox seemed fitting time, as it was the mid-point of spring and autumn across the hemispheres. A peace activist, McConnell first presented his Earth Day idea to an audience at the UNESCO Conference on the Environment. He wanted Earth Day to be a global holiday, where the world celebrates Earth’s wonders and gifts.

On March 21, 1970, cities across the globe celebrated Earth Day. McConnell created an Earth Day proclamation that called upon people to take action against crises of the world, such as famine, war, and poverty. The proclamation also stated that participants would celebrate an international Earth Day to create a single community and embrace Earth’s gifts. The proclamation was endorsed by well-known people and leaders around the world: astronaut Buzz Aldrin, anthropologist Margaret Mead, inventor-scientist Buckminister Fuller, Japanese environmental scientist, Y. Fukushima, American senators, U.N. President S.O. Adebo, and UN Secretary-General Thant.

In April of 1970, the world celebrated another Earth Day event. The April 22nd event also began as a way to spread awareness of environmental issues. American Senator and conservationist, Gaylord Nelson, had actively toured the U.S. in the mid 1960’s with an environmental awareness agenda. Wanting the U.S. government to take an active role in environmental concerns, Nelson presented the idea for a national conservationist tour to President Kennedy, who supported the idea. While President Kennedy’s tour did not turn environmental issues into mainstream conversations, it was a beginning in changing America’s role in environmental issues. Nelson was inspired by college campuses’ widespread Vietnam protests, or teach-ins. He thought a nationwide conservationist teach-in would get more Americans involved in environmental issues.

Nelson presented his Earth Day idea to other government officials and news organizations. He promoted Earth Day to senators, governors, mayors, and college campuses’ newspaper editors. In November 1969, he formally announced a nationwide, environmental teach-in, called Earth Day, would be held in the spring of 1970. As the event became headline news, the public reacted enthusiastically. Nelson first handled Earth Day public relations from his senate office, but with the public’s overwhelming interest, the office moved into its own organization. Founder of Common Cause John Gardner helped with a temporary office, and college students helped field the office. Nelson appointed Dennis Hayes as coordinator of activities.

Approximately 20 million people celebrated the first Earth Day. In America, participation was high in schools, which ten thousand grade schools and high schools, two thousand colleges participating. Amazing numbers, considering the event started as a grassroots movement.

Government Actions

The strength of the Earth Day movement was clear to legislatures. Following Earth Day’s success, the U.S. government passed laws that targeted cleaner living. In 1970, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was established. The Clean Air Act followed with a focus on reducing air pollution, with the Clean Water Act doing likewise for water clean-up in 1972. The U.S. also passed the Endangered Species Act to protect animals from extinction.

Mainstream Americans talked about recycling and conservation. In the 1980’s, many people recycled within their neighborhood recycling programs. People’s awareness of their ecological responsibility became part of their lives and actions. Children learned the importance of taking care of their environment; they were taught to care for the earth and its animals. The iconic Smokey Bear (originated in the mid 1940’s) featured poster slogans, like “If not you, who?” and “Only you can prevent forest fires. We can’t.” Americans seemed to step-up to their roles as Earth trustees.

In the 1990’s, recycling programs reduced overall waste by twenty percent. With people and government taking responsibility, companies followed suit. Manufacturers looked at ways to reduce toxic by-products and appear environmentally responsible to their customers. Their marketing campaigns highlighted eco-friendly actions, like reducing environmental waste.

Resurgence

Even with progressive responsibility, people did not celebrate Earth Day as they had in the beginning year. Celebrations were still held, but they weren’t as widely attended or announced. In 1990, the original Earth Day coordinator, Dennis Hayes, organized a worldwide Earth Day. For the thirtieth anniversary of Earth Day, Hayes planned for a global celebration, with participation from countries around the world. The event was observed by 200,000 people across the globe. The movement continued with recognition that environmental issues impacted the world and spurred the international community to work as a unit and combat its shared problems. In 1992, leaders at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized their joint responsibility and planned for future projects on sustainable living.

Earth Day Birthday

In 2009, visionary Simon Ford led a grassroots effort on the internet. This global community focused on a renewed urgency about environmental issues. Their first major campaign focused on worldwide environmental crises, the responsibility of mankind to solve them, and a project to unite participants across the world. The event, Earth Day Birthday, formed, as a global event to celebrate Mother Nature’s gifts.

Successful Earth Day events in the past came from grassroots efforts in spreading environmental awareness. Earth Day Birthday joins online social networks with real world actions. Earth Day event organizers and participants find each other on the web. Supporters are spreading the word on environmental issues and taking action in their own communities. Earth Day Birthday provides the 20th century, grassroots effort in reaching eco-friendly people and making an impact on the planet.

For more information about Earth Day Birthday, this site provides Earth Day Birthday campaign details:
www.eventslisted.com/eventlaunchstrategies/category/launch-strategies/earth-day-birthday

Jennifer Akers is a freelance writer, book reviewer, and editor. She writes about family, education, business, and social marketing. Her eco-friendly passions started with an interest in making a difference in the planet and joining Earth day Birthday. To find out more about her freelance writing life, please visit: http://www.Squidoo.com/JenniferAkers


PostHeaderIcon Reduce – The Holy Grail


Reduce – The Holy Grail

The hard truth is that we all need to reduce. Reduce the amount of money we spend. Reduce the amount of food we eat…and our waistlines. And reduce the amount of stuff we throw away. In fact new we look at the 3 R’s of reduce, reuse, recycle, they are actually in that order for a reason. It is a hierarchy for a reason and reduce is the Holy Grail. Put in its simplest terms reduce means that we use less of the earth’s resources and in any environmental scheme should be our first priority.

That said, it is also the hardest to accomplish. When I thought about all the things we do to be greener, the number of examples of reducing stumped me. I suppose the most obvious example of our efforts to reduce was the decision some months ago, not to purchase an automobile. My husband has the use of a company van, but even that is rarely used. The difficulty comes when we want to go anywhere as a family. The work van has only one bucket seat in the front that fits three people. Obviously this presents difficulties. Even on our Saturday shopping trips with my mother-in-law, I end up sitting in the back of van; a solution that is both dangerous and illegal for the children. About a year ago, when I was working full-time, we were seriously considering buying a vehicle. But in the end, we thought the expense was too much when you consider not just payments, but insurance, road tax, maintenance and gas. Instead, we signed up for StreetCar; a car rental scheme that you pay a monthly fee to join and an hourly or daily rate only when you need to use a car or van. Looking back, that was one of the best decisions we have made both for the environment and family finances.

The other obvious example I found of reduction was our decision a year ago to switch to bags for life. We now have a stack of them beneath our kitchen sink and faithfully use them for our Saturday shops. But I do admit to occasionally forgetting them when just running out to grab something quickly. When this happens though, we make certain to re-use (we’ll talk more about that tomorrow) any plastic bags we get for outings or for small bin liners. Did you know that in the UK alone 100,000 TONNES of plastic bags are thrown away each year; that is the equivalent of 70,000 cars? So if there is one thing, I can encourage you to do, it is purchase bags for life. My store sells the sturdy plastic ones for about forty pence, the jute ones are about a pound, and the pretty cloth ones are about three pounds with a portion of the proceeds going to charity. Or it is very simple to make your own if you sew.

Speaking of which, sewing and mending our clothes is another excellent way of reducing. My boys from my husband to my sons are always wearing holes in their jeans on the inside thighs. Before the economic downturn, I admit we were likely to just toss them out and purchase new ones. But since I have not been working, we have instead taken them to the drycleaners and had them patched. The cost of the repairs is less than the cost of purchasing new (although I am committed to mending them myself from now on…a further savings). And we have reduced in a very small way the demand for jeans.

Of course, as I sit at my desk in my bedroom I am witnessing another reduction…the daylight streaming in through the open curtains. One of the first things I do each morning is open the curtains and the blinds. By using natural light when and where possible, we are reducing the amount of electricity that we consume and that the power grids must generate. We are also of course saving money on our bills. My husband is a genius at this; going around and turning off and unplugging everything he can each night before bed. I admit though that being American this whole switch on the plug thing still gets me and I often forget to do that, but I am improving. Of course, another example was turning down our thermostat during the winter and wearing heavier layers of clothes instead. In fact, I can think of only a couple of days this winter when we turned our heat on before night fall at all.

These are just a few ideas of ways that our family is reducing. There are many other things that we and you can do to cut back on the things we consume and help save our earth’s precious resources. On Friday as I said, we will do a mini-inventory and I will commit to new ideas on how our family can better live the 3 R’s reduce, re-use, recycle. I will be especially focusing on reducing since this is the most important of the R’s.

Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme.

Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end.

Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.

Technologies For New energy

PostHeaderIcon Farmers Are Being Pushed to Increase in Size Or Get Out! How to NOT Be One of Them


Farmers Are Being Pushed to Increase in Size Or Get Out! How to NOT Be One of Them

It doesn’t matter what size it is, your farm is an ever increasing asset, even more so if you can provide chemical free, clean food.

Australian conventional food prices are forecast to quadruple in price over the next five years. The reason is Asia. We are in the middle of a global revolution in the way we think, eat and live.

This week I received this news from Craig Sobey who has recently toured China with representatives from five city councils, Austrade and Regional Development Victoria and reports that there is a real opportunity for all to take a significant market share in this period.

Basically, if it is Australian and premium quality there is a ready market. Australia is seen as a source of safe food regardless of whether it is organic or conventional. At this stage price does not appear in the conversation, just consistent supply and traceability. The interest in all products represented included convenience food packages (pre-cooked), meats, dairy, wines etc.

Did you know:

  • This co-op now owns China’s fifth biggest supermarket chain with over 500,000 stores.
  • There is a farmer’s co-op representative with over five million members?
  •  6,000 of them over 30,000 sq metres. The supermarket turned over 18 billion dollars in 2007 with revenues growing by 150 % per annum on average.
  •  They have offered an entire Australian Pavilion for Aussie produce including organics in their premiere stores in Beijing and Shanghai. Organic Wines were the big attraction.,
  •  China creates 80,000 millionaires each year.
  •  There are over 350 million middle class and a niche market of super wealthy Chinese? (Craig told me that French wine is selling as much as $600 a bottle and even one watermelon cost $40!).

However there is real interest in China for organics (which they refer to as Green Food) and particularly food safety/ traceability which is the paramount concern for all serious buyers they met. A new Australian wide network (not for profit) company is being formed for all sections of the organic market. This is so that a pool of members can tackle the export markets together. Its goal is to give you an export premium to help make membership very appealing.

The time is ripe for all growers to stop and think about the future of their farming. What choice will you make? Your future will depend on it. Even if all of Australia’s certified organic farmers, processors etc. were to unite they could not supply the market in China alone and therefore there is untapped potential over the next ten to twenty years to be further developed.

Farming Secrets is a club for farmers who want to farm healthier and more profitably. Farming Secrets reconnects them with the experts through supporting them with one to one help and constant support from experts in order to fast track their farming goals that much quicker.

Hugo Disler

For More information about Natural and Organic Farming visit http://www.farmingsecretsblog.com

To discover the secrets of natural and profitable farming, visit http://www.farmingsecrets.com

Online News Video Of A "green" fleet

PostHeaderIcon Ban Or Save the Plastic Bag?


Ban Or Save the Plastic Bag?

As part of the conservation and environmental movement worldwide there are several campaigns aimed at banning the plastic bag. These fit in perfectly with going green at home and with our longer term life styles.

A quick search on the web will take you to the San Francisco Bay Area, “Bay vs Bag”, to the Daily Mail’s (UK) “Banish the Bags” as well as similar situations in Canada, Holland, China, elsewhere in the US and even Zanzibar.

A lot of the focus is based on the damage done to wild life, including sea mammals and birds; the effects on waste and the average number of bags used per person in different countries. In one of the lists I saw, Singapore was topping the list at 625 bags.

One of the targets is to reduce by 10% the yearly consumption of these bags.

On the other hand there are also “Save the Plastic Bag” campaigns, with the plastic industry behind it. Their main focus is highlighting what they call misinformation. Their points are based on “exaggerations” on the damage done to wild life; errors in how plastic bags are made (from ethane gas that would otherwise be burnt and not petroleum); effects of co2 vs methane; potential job losses and so on.

On the banning side of the argument, there can be exaggerations as well as questionable scientific data – questionable as in anybody can question it, after all to have an argument you must always have at least two points of view.

From the “saving” the industry point of view, there can be many counter arguments to the data that is presented. And this is quite understandable, after all their industry could be hit very badly. (This just reminds me that all businesses have a life time curve that goes from birth, to growth, to maturity and finally to demise. The time scale can be as short as a year to as long as a hundred years or more, but the end result is that it is replaced by something else).

Some of the arguments are saying that nets and not plastic bags are causing marine life casualties, that paper bags are a worse alternative (side stepping the plastic bag issue) and basically attacking the “plastic bag misinformation campaign”.

Very probably both sides are looking to make their points by reducing or ridiculing their opponents point of view. But the overall issue is still there – are plastic bags affecting our environment?

To get back to the plastic bag banning situation, where paper bags have the negative effect of more trees cut, the information that is being retrieved is very important. But it must also be as objective as possible. Having said that, we know that it takes literally centuries for plastic to degrade and this should be the foremost argument.

Just to expand a little on the paper bag argument, which is totally reasonable, the option is not to cut more trees. The options are to recycle and use bio-degradable alternatives.

In the old days, when plastic bags hadn’t been invented but grocery shops had, natural fiber bags were used and the customers were the ones who brought their own to the shop.

With just a little effort on the individual front, these campaigns wouldn’t be necessary.

Want to know about environment and natural living? Information, news and facts can be found at: http://natural-living-tips.com/

NEW WORLD SAVIOUR

PostHeaderIcon To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?


To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?

Sometimes, simple acts such as going to the grocery store can turn into a moral dilemma. Is it better to choose the piece of organic fruit produced on the other side of the country or the non-organic version grown locally, 50 miles away? Are the benefits of chemical-free shampoo worth an extra 5 bucks a bottle? Will I really be able to enjoy a cheap chocolate bar knowing that the growers of the cocoa beans were likely not fairly compensated?

As much as I’d like to say that I always buy the product that is environmentally safe and sustainably produced, in reality, that’s not always the case. First, the sheer amount of information required to be able to distinguish between products is staggering. You need facts regarding environmental impact, transportation costs, and fair trade practices, to name just a few. And there are plenty of misinformation and greenwashing campaigns out there to steer you in the wrong direction.

Second, of course, there are times when the high cost of an ethically made product turns me off from buying it. Even consumers with the best of intentions have their breaking points.

The thing is, companies who go out of their way to implement sustainable practices endure a greater cost of production. Sure, they can sometimes capitalize on this by marketing to conscientious consumers who are willing to pay a bit more, but the fact remains that in today’s system, environmentally minded production is punished.

On the other hand, companies who move their factories (and jobs) to developing countries with lax environmental standards and cheap labor are able to make products at a fraction of the cost and undercut their competitors (while shipping materials and finished goods all around the world and adding to our greenhouse gas problems).

The way it’s set up, high environmental standards in one country drive companies to relocate in places where it’s permissible to pollute in order to compete in the marketplace. Chaco, the Colorado-based athletic sandal company, is a prime example of even a well-intentioned company being forced to follow suit to maintain competitive pricing on their products. In fact, 95% of all footwear in the world is produced in China, whose poor environmental regulation and sometimes dangerous environmental problems are well known.

With current talk about cap and trade emissions programs, this phenomenon may only get worse.

So how do we even the playing field and reward companies for good business practices?

When I think about this problem, I keep coming back to an idea I encountered in a casual conversation with a stranger while traveling. I can’t remember his face or his name, but his idea has stuck with me and festered in my mind for the better part of a year. His take was that putting the financial burden of environmental responsibility on the companies just doesn’t make sense for the reasons I’ve given above. In a global marketplace, it renders companies less competitive than those that operate free of environmental and labor regulations.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to put an “environmental impact” or “ecological footprint” tax on the product itself?

Ugh, a tax?

Initially, I didn’t warm to the idea either. But think about it: adding a tax proportionate to a product’s ecological and social footprint eliminates the cost advantage of irresponsible production. All those environmental costs that are currently not included in our economic system would be factored in and would increase the price of unsustainably made products.

This, in turn, would make moral dilemmas at the grocery store much easier. Is it more sustainable to buy distant, organic produce or local, non-organic produce? The tax-adjusted pricing should inform my decision. Can I afford the chemical-free shampoo? Yes, because the price of its chemical-laden competitors would be raised through the environmental impact tax and eliminate the cost advantage of choosing that product.

The money raised from the tax could fund its implementation and other sustainable programs such as public transportation (high speed rail, anyone?) and alternative energy. Perhaps it could even make a dent in our gaping budget deficit.

Won’t this cost me money?

You may be thinking, “Sure, that’s a good idea in concept, but that will raise my bills – grocery, clothes, everything.” Well, yes, that’s true. But maybe if we see the true cost of the products we casually consume, we can make a more informed decision about what is really necessary to our lives.

Additionally, programs such as this often have the greatest impact on the poor. But this could be compensated for by using some of the tax revenue for need-based assistance programs.

Regardless, running an economic system on the assumption of infinite resources is fundamentally flawed. Currently, environmental impacts such as air pollution, water pollution, and deforestation are not factored into the cost of a product: they are considered “externalities.”

These costs need to be included in the system in a way that does not punish those who engage in sustainable business practices. By taxing a product’s environmental impact, it levels the playing field for the consumer.

Disclaimer

Of course, I am not an economist or policy guru. I don’t know how to implement such a tax or if it would even be possible (though compared to creating a carbon trading market, perhaps it’s not that difficult). This is only the musing of a concerned, intelligent citizen trying to brainstorm ways to make our economic system fit within the bounds of our ecological constraints.

What do you think? Would such a tax have a beneficial effect on our production system? Join the conversation over at our website!

Jill Mueller is a conservation biologist, avid cyclist, and freelance writer. She has combined forces with a good friend and dietitian to start The Barefoot Badger, a blog promoting healthy, sustainable living. Check us out!