Lights Out

Australia has announced that they will phase out incandescent light bulbs(Wiki) by changing the energy efficiency regulations for lighting. This will save energy and cut GHG emissions. The change is expected to take effect in 2009 or 2010.

This is another example of how government regulation is required, fortunately or unfortunately, to change habits. Will it spawn a black market in old light bulbs? It also demonstrates how small changes can have a big impact once implemented across the population.

Adventures of the Toxic Tuna

More news about mercury contamination in tuna. In Canada, the CBC conducted an investigative report to determine how much tuna was on the shelves that exceeded government limits on mercury. They found that about 13% of canned, albacore tuna exceed the 0.5ppm guidelines.

Ironically, late last week they had a news story about how eating fish during pregnancy increases the intelligence of the child.

No mention is made as to the source of the mercury contamination in fish.

With all the reports, studies, investigations and regulations it is becoming impossible to eat anything. Why don't we just try to reduce the pollution, chemicals in the environment and processing of food so we can eat?

Constant Consumption

An article I spotted on Yahoo made me wonder. It is titled "When to replace common household items". Sure it's great to know that you should replace a 4 year old computer but what do you do with the old one? That's what really got me with this article. It is probably going be read a few thousand times today and people might run out and buy new computers and mattresses with no thought on what to do with the old stuff. I've written about electronics recycling in the past and I think it is very important that consumers consider the life cycle of their purchases. We obviously have to since media, government and industry are not.

If you don't like what's going on tell somebody

I recently read an editorial in my community newspaper about how some local politicians do not act in accordance with the wishes of the community. I'm sure we've all felt that way at one time or another.

There is no excuse to not have your voice heard. Every elected official has an email or a toll free number to call. I see people everyday yakking on their cell phone, thumbing through messages on their BlackBerry every chance they get about who knows what. Loads of people are complaining they don't have time do anything let alone be involved in their community. Well, take 5 minutes while you're walking around the grocery store or idling your car needlessly in front of it and call your local politician or send them an email and let them know what you think. With the technology we have today we are at the closest point in human history to participative democracy. That requires some of you to participate. It won't take to much of your time and maybe things can change for the better.

Health and the Environment

I read an article in the Globe and Mail today by Andre Picard. I have included the text of the article here. It sums up the link between preserving the environment and human health.

OUR FUTURE WELL BEING RESTS ON SPENDING TO HEAL THE PLANET

For more than a generation, health has been top of mind for Canadians. In virtually every survey, health care has been pegged as the No. 1 political and social priority.

But now the environment has supplanted health at the top of the worry list, and is probably there to stay for a long time.

This sea change in attitudes has a lot of people in the health field worried. The political predominance of health has meant the cash has flowed freely and providers have had a lot of clout.

Nobody likes being brushed aside by a green newcomer but, objectively speaking, the focus on the environment could be the best thing that ever happened to the health of Canadians, and to our beloved (but largely rudderless) medicare system.

After all, nothing has more impact on the health of individuals, and the health of a population as a whole, than the environment.

But, be careful. The term environment needs to be defined fully and appropriately.

In health terms, environment is defined as the physical, social and cultural surroundings that have an influence on individuals and communities.

This goes well beyond pollution and carbon emissions. It includes urban design, transportation policies, educational philosophy, food choices, affordable housing, employment possibilities and much more.

Put simply, where we live affects how we live, and how we live affects how healthy we are, and how long we live.

This is a discussion that is long overdue and, hopefully, the newfound interest in the environment will open that door.

The mistake that has been made in health care has been to focus on illness care, to focus on treatment of symptoms rather than on prevention.

In the past generation -- the three decades since 1975 -- health-care spending has increased to $148-billion from $7.5-billion.

It may be heresy to say so in health circles, but that money can be spent more wisely. There needs to be a rebalancing -- spending less money on sickness care and more on keeping the population healthy.

What we need to treat is what the renowned social scientist Sir Michael Marmot has dubbed "the causes of the causes of poor health."

Those root causes are largely environmental.

If we are going to have a healthy society, if our health-care system is going to be sustainable, we need to adopt a healthy, sustainable lifestyle.

The soaring interest in the environment is fuelled by the realization that our energivorous ways are killing the planet, and they are eventually going to kill us, regardless of how much treatment is available for health woes.

The green approach is to create an environment that is health-enhancing -- one where people are not only protected from biological, chemical and physical hazards, but where making the healthy choice is the easy, natural choice.

That is certainly not the case today in Canada.

The most heavily subsidized public facilities in this country are roads. As taxpayers, we massively subsidize fundamentally unhealthy and environmentally unsound public policies such as urban sprawl, commuting and the transportation of goods (namely food) over long distances.

Meanwhile, we grossly underfund public transportation, make urban dwellers absorb the full brunt of infrastructure costs (thus further subsidizing the unhealthy practices of suburbanites), and we cry poverty rather than build more bike paths, parks and recreational facilities.

These are health issues, and they are environmental issues. Même combat, as they say in French.

Instead of being green with envy, the leaders of the health sector should embrace the green movement and make them powerful allies.

Environmental leaders, too, can learn from the health sector, benefit from its experience in dealing with the crushing weight of public expectations and the frustrations of political compromise and, above all, by not repeating its mistakes.

The health system in Canada went astray when it abandoned the simplicity and common sense that are the hallmarks of good public-health policy and allowed itself to be seduced by the siren song of technology -- fancy new drugs, machines and techniques that oftentimes provide marginal benefits at high costs.

In the environment field today, the dominant discussion relates to carbon emissions. There, too, technology is being held out as the solution. Treating that sickness is necessary, but it's not enough.

Good health begins with prevention of illness. Sustaining health requires a healthy environment.

We know the science. We know the stakes. We need to act.

By healing the planet, we will heal ourselves.

Barack Obama and the Environment

So he's popular for many reasons. But what is his position on the environment? In previous posts I've linked to sites to get voting records on various politicians. I found an article from 2004 on Grist about his environmental stance and it sounded pretty good. Another site/blog, Global Warming Awareness, gives him good reviews as well.

If he were to win the presidential election in 2008 what could he change? From what I have seen he does seem to be a practical environmentalist with his support for efficiency and alternative energy. I think we've seen so many politicians come and go with great promises that we may be permanently skeptical. However, I think Obama is the first politician in a long time to really energize the public. I know George W. Bush accomplished that for the Republicans when he came and maybe Obama is only reaching the Democrats. I hope that, regardless of the winner, positive changes in our society and its relationship to the environment are a result.

Valentine's Day Massacre

No not that one. The one you may have been a part of today. The slaughter of trees.

Just kidding. I'm not that crazy but I need catchy titles since I've been on a little hiatus with revamping the page and all. There really is a massacre of trees though. According to some Hallmark research 180 million cards are exchanged annually not including the ones the kids give in the classrooms. That is a lot of paper and processing to make these cards. I'm not opposed to holiday celebrations or anything like that. My point is to show how large the collective impact of buying one card. For the people who think their own little changes won't make a difference look at it from the other side. Imagine the effect of 180 million homes with solar panels...

Hope it worked

I've revamped the site and hope it looks better. I checked it out in IE and found that on the lowest resolution it doesn't look very good. I don't think to many people use that low resolution so I'm not going to try too much more. Let me know if you think it looks good. I know it isn't perfect and I still have some bugs to fix. I know one of my recent posts isn't looking right. I still use Firefox and find it looks the best there. I'll be back to my regular posting tomorrow.

Changes Coming Soon

Recently it was brought to my attention that my blog looks like crap in Internet Explorer. I use Firefox and was unaware of this. I got on IE the other day and saw for myself the problems on my page. I will be changing the layout with a new template over the next few days in hopes that my blog will look cleaner and better.

What "Green" Means To Me

Lately I have been using the tag “green consumption” on some of my posts. I started wondering what that actually meant. It would probably mean different things to different people. I believe it is a practical approach to life with environmental concerns considered in every possible way. The reality is many of us live in suburbs, shop at grocery stores, have numerous appliances and enjoy most of the comforts attributed to a North American or “western” lifestyle. I think the difference is that those of us who are concerned realize that this lifestyle cannot be sustained. Many of us were comfortable living the way we were so it is difficult to change overnight. I’m of the opinion that if everyone takes small steps with an end goal of lifestyle change that we can make a huge difference. We’ve all seen the stats on how much electricity would be saved if every household used one CF light bulb or turned down the thermostat by 2 degrees. Small changes by a lot of people can go a long way.

So, my interpretation of “green consumption” or “green living” is living your life and doing what you do but considering the consequences. Not that crazy is it? Don’t leave the lights on. Buy things with less packaging. The three Rs. Composting. Cut down your driving. Solar panels. Electric cars. Organic food. Calculating your ecological footprint. Think about the future impact of what you are doing today. Consider every purchasing decision from an ecological perspective.

I think the “environmental movement” has been left out of the mainstream because of the acceptance of mass consumption combined with the thought that any changes would be so radical we would all die. Promoting practical alternatives and explaining them using the current economic framework will encourage change throughout society. Demonstrating that everyone can do it and that it is easy will generate the widespread impact that is needed to make a difference to the environment.

Electric Cars

I read an interesting list at Autoblog Green noting 10 electric cars that are available for purchase. Unlike the Chevy Volt or Tesla they are a little more readily available. I remember a few years ago reading about a company that would convert old Renaults into electric cars. That company, Feel Good Cars, now makes the ZENN, which stands for Zero Emissions No Noise. I like the look of it and on their site they have a calculation of conventional car costs compared to the ZENN. Maybe a little small depending on where you have to commute and the distance. I'm pretty excited about the availability of new technologies in the transportation sector. Some concerns are that while using plug-in electric vehicles will reduce CO2, it will be offset if they are charged by coal generated electricity. If your house is powered by solar or wind then I guess you could be carbon neutral on that front. Like any new technology, economies of scale and consumer demand will determine if it is viable in the longterm.

A new food guide

Canada has had a food guide offering suggestions or guidelines on dietary choices. They just released a new version. The guide is available here. It has an interesting interactive feature that you can find your dietary guidelines based on age and sex. It's interesting.

I think healthy eating is something that requires constant monitoring and effort. Just like an investment portfolio. You have to keep up with it to get the best return. There is no doubt that it is difficult to eat properly with all the "convenient" options available. Some days people just don't want to think and try to prepare a meal and take a shortcut. Your personal health situation will obviously dictate how you can eat. There are certain things that we should probably avoid totally but everyone has something they really like and don't want to give up. I try to eat what I find healthy and best for my family while allowing room for some fun stuff like pizza and chocolate. There is enough information for everyone to make informed choices and the new food guide only adds to that.

"The Dirt on Clean'

The title is borrowed from an episode of CBC's Marketplace that examines the use of Triclosan (Wiki), a chemical added to many products for anti-bacterial purposes. It is added to all kinds of products from hand soap to toothpaste. Reading the Wiki I was alarmed that when combined with chlorine it can make chloroform and has a chemical composition similar to dioxins. I think I'll take the germs.

During the Marketplace episode I was also interested that researchers were analysing the impacts of applying sewage sludge to farmland and how persistent Triclosan may be. So I searched a little more and sure enough at Johns Hopkins they found that it does pass through municipal wastewater treatment. I'm not sure where the research is at now but they are looking to see if it passes through the food chain.

Why would this be a problem? I think ingesting an anti-bacterial agent probably won't help your digestion out as we need bacteria in there to help us out. Another reason I can think of is the possibility of additional impact on humans to something that can't break down. Remember Teflon? I also think there are concerns about the impact it has on creating resistant bacteria. With so many questions why do we keep seeing more products with it added?

The IPCC report

Another report on climate change was released today. I haven't read it and I'm not sure if I will. I have seen a lot of headlines leading up to the release and the news today was full of related stories. I guess I'm getting fed up with all the news, reports, and hype. I would much rather see something being done I guess. I've noticed a distinct increase in the use of experts that do not agree with the scientific findings that point toward human caused climate change. An equally growing number of politicians and economists are also speaking out. I'm not sure what to make of it anymore. Will anything be done or not? Isn't pollution and waste of resources a good enough reason to try? Maybe I'm just confused with all the coverage and opinions. I think political rhetoric and grandstanding are causing global warming more than anything else...

The Tesla

The electric car could give us some hope in reducing the damage of personal transportation. Also check out the Wiki on Nikola Tesla, from who the car gets its name.

Can we quit the automobile

The automobile is the single best and worst thing to happen to humanity. The amount of personal freedom and ability to transport people and goods across great distances quickly is amazing. The amount of energy used to build and operate automobiles, and other vehicles, is unbelievable. The pollution created from them is also staggering. Can we be more efficient? Can we change our lifestyle? Can we walk anywhere?

North America has a particular problem. Geography almost requires this type of transportation. However, different planning can change the needs in urban areas. Reducing the "want" factor will also go a long way in minimizing the resources used. Environmental concerns seem to be taking over all areas of our lives but when it comes to car purchases fuel efficiency and environmental protection are still not the primary reason for a purchase. I guess part of the question is what demand is generated by the consumer and what is created. Do we all want to live in the suburbs with 2 SUVs in the driveway that we drive every chance we get? Can we live without Caesar salad in January? Personal choices will need to be made to generate change. Business and industry will come around because they will be forced to find efficiency in resource consumption to cut costs and grow profits. Waste used to be cheap. Now it is expensive and creates bad PR. Nobody can afford that.