LowCGen

Already households are being forced to install “slop buckets” in kitchens so
that unwanted food can be collected separately.

In a report drawn up to boost recycling rates by business, companies are also
encouraged to also start collecting food waste separately.

Experts said this could mean introducing slop buckets into offices and some
companies are already removing traditional bins from beside desks so that
workers are forced to put paper, empty drinks cans or food waste in the
correct recycling bin.

‘Less is More’: Business Opportunities in Waste and Resource Management’ sets
out how companies can cut waste right through the supply chain. The most
effective way to do this is to encourage big manufacturers to reduce the use
of raw materials, for example by changing product design, and recycle more
from the factory floor.

But businesses can also make a difference by improving the collection and
recycling of waste produced in offices.

The report points out that the growing costs of landfill tax means it is
becoming increasingly costly to dump rubbish in holes in the ground.
Businesses will cut costs by ensuring waste is separated for recycling and
could even make money by setting up their own collection systems or
generating energy from waste.

Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, said business cannot continue to dump
so much in landfill.

“What’s good for the environment can be good for business,” he said “We need
to be smarter about re-using and recycling waste, getting the full value
from our resources rather than simply dumping it in landfill.”

Although the 24-page report stops short of telling businesses how to collect
the waste generated, it makes it clear that “over the coming years the
separate collection of recyclable material from households and businesses
will become even more important than it is today”.

Dr Michael Warhurst, a waste expert at Friends of the Earth, said this will
mean having more recycling bins in the office.

He said many offices have already removed waste paper baskets from beside
desks to force workers to use the right recycling bin.

“You need to make sure that where you have any sort of catering there are
food waste collection points and multiple recycling bins in the office and
where people make their tea and coffee,” he said.

“You do not have bins beside people’s desks as it encourages people to put
things in the wrong bin.”

Dr Warhurst said recycling in the office will be natural for most workers who
already recycle at home.

“It may even become simpler because people do the same things at home rather
than different things,” he added.

Dear EarthTalk: What happens to my old cell phone after I upgrade? Do the stores really recycle them or give them to the poor, or are they just ending up in landfills? Where can I take mine to ensure that it is dealt with properly?
– Paul G., Reno NV

As cell phones proliferate they are giving computers and monitors some competition for the dubious distinction as the largest contributor to the world’s growing e-waste problem. Indeed, toxin-laden electronics are clogging landfills and polluting air and groundwater supplies from coast to coast.

Cell Phones are Among the Fastest Growing Types of Trash
The average North American gets a new cell phone every 18 to 24 months, making old phones—many that contain hazardous materials like lead, mercury, cadmium, brominated flame retardants and arsenic—the fastest growing type of manufactured garbage in the nation. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Americans discard 125 million phones each year, creating 65,000 tons of waste.

Convenient Recycling Support for Cell Phone Users
Luckily, a new breed of electronics recyclers is stepping in to help. Call2Recycle, a nonprofit organization, offers consumers and retailers in the United States and Canada simple ways to recycle old phones. Consumers can enter their zip code on the group’s website and be directed to a drop box in their area. Most major electronics retailers, from Radio Shack to Office Depot, participate in the program and offer Call2Recycle drop-boxes in their stores. Call2Recycle recovers the phones and sells them back to manufacturers, which either refurbish and resell them or recycle their parts for use in making new products.

Recycling Cell Phones for Charity and to Help Developing Countries
The CollectiveGood organization takes used cell phones, refurbishes them, and then re-sells them to distributors and carriers for use primarily in developing countries, providing affordable communications to poorer citizens while helping to “bridge the digital divide.” They also recycle all non-functioning batteries through a partnership with the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation. When you donate your phone to CollectiveGood you can direct the profits from the sales to a charity of your choice.

Changing Attitudes about Cell Phone Recycling
Another player is ReCellular, which manages the in-store collection programs for Bell Mobility, Sprint PCS, T-Mobile, Best Buy and Verizon. The company also maintains partnerships with Easter Seals, the March of Dimes, Goodwill Industries and other nonprofits that undertake cell phone collection drives as a way of funding their charitable work. According to ReCellular vice-president Mike Newman, the company is trying to change attitudes about used cell phones, to get consumers to “automatically think of recycling cell phones just as they currently do with paper, plastic or glass.

States and Provinces Lead the Way on Mandatory Cell Phone Recycling
Neither the United States nor Canada mandates electronics recycling of any kind at the federal level, but a few states and provinces are getting into the act at their own initiative. California recently passed the first cell phone recycling law in North America. As of July 1, 2006, electronics retailers doing business there must have a cell phone recycling system in place in order to legally sell their products, whether online or in-store. Other U.S. states considering similar legislation include Illinois, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Vermont and Virginia, while the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and New Brunswick are likely to jump on the mandatory cell phone recycling bandwagon soon.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com.

EarthTalk is a regular feature of E/The Environmental Magazine. Selected EarthTalk columns are reprinted on About Environmental Issues by permission of the editors of E.

Dear EarthTalk: Is it true that some foods we buy contain genetically engineered ingredients known to cause health problems?
—George Kaye, New York, NY

First made available in the U.S. during the mid-1990s, genetically modified foods have become staples of American agriculture, though most consumers are unaware of this.

According to the non-profit Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, the majority of corn, soy and cotton grown by American farmers today are from seeds genetically engineered to repel pests without the need for spraying pesticides or herbicides. Genetically modified versions of canola, squash and papaya are also coming on strong in the U.S.

Genetically Modified Foods Caused Lesions in Mice
As is the case with so many scientific controversies, the jury is still out regarding the potential health effects of genetically modified food products. But while conclusive results have been hard to come by, some of the few studies conducted on animals fed diets consisting of genetically modified foods have generated some disturbing results:

• In one study, potatoes engineered to contain an insect-repelling gene to improve agricultural yield caused intestinal damage in the test subjects–some lab mice. While the mice did not die from eating the genetically modified food, lesions that formed in their digestive tracts gave researchers pause enough to recommend more thorough testing of the “transgenic potatoes” before marketing them to humans.
• In another study, mice were fed so-called “Flavr Savr” Tomatoes–tomatoes developed in the early 90s by Calgene that were “optimized for flavor retention.” Similar lesions arose in the intestines of the mice, causing reviewers from the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to conclude that “the data fall short of ‘a demonstration of safety,’” adding, “unresolved questions still remain.” Yet later, yielding to the pressure of industry lobbyists, the FDA not only approved the Flavr Savr for mass human consumption, but also claimed that all safety issues had been satisfactorily resolved.

According to Belinda Martineau, a Calgene researcher who later published the tell-all book, First Fruit: The Creation of the Flavr Savr Tomato and the Birth of Biotech Foods , when the Flavr Savr hit store shelves consumers were not particularly impressed with its taste. Also, farmers were coping with disease problems and low yields, the very problems the technology sought to address in the first place. Eventually the FlavrSavr — or “Franken tomato,” as some cynics dubbed it — was abandoned altogether.

Europe Against Genetically Modified Foods, U.S. Uncertain
[The FlavrSavr] legacy lives on, however. Many environmental advocates feel that the FDA’s nod on the Flavr Savr set the bar particularly low for approval of other genetically modified foods that may or may not cause health problems. Further, it remains to be seen what effects these hybridized species might have on the environment at large, reason enough to delay the mass release of genetically modified foods into the market until more is known.

Meanwhile, European countries have remained steadfast against allowing genetically modified crops to be grown on their own farms for fear of widespread environmental contamination. And whether or not to allow genetically modified food imports into Europe is a matter of great debate right now within the European Union.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com.

EarthTalk is a regular feature of E/The Environmental Magazine. Selected EarthTalk columns are reprinted on About Environmental Issues by permission of the editors of E.

Dear EarthTalk: How many Americans are adversely affected by air pollution and what can we do to improve air quality? —Tom Weaver, Sioux City, IA

According to the State of the Air 2005 report, published by the American Lung Association (ALA), air pollution levels improved in many parts of the nation during the first few years of the new millennium, but millions of Americans still face dangerous levels of air pollution.

Millions of Americans Breath Unsafe Air
The ALA report highlights the sad fact that, despite pro-environmental sentiment and strong regulations, more than half of the U.S. population lives in counties with unsafe levels of either smog or particle pollution. Smog is the worst offender and is often directly responsible for cases of decreased lung function, respiratory infection, lung inflammation and aggravation of respiratory illness. Some 142.7 million Americans live in counties rated with failing grades by the ALA for this airborne pollutant.

Meanwhile, another 76.5 million Americans live in areas where they are exposed to unhealthy short-term levels of particle pollution. Children and the elderly are especially at risk. Short-term, or acute, exposure to particle pollution has been linked to increases in heart attacks, strokes, and emergency-room visits for asthma and cardiovascular disease. Particle pollution is most dangerous to those already suffering from asthma, heart disease, bronchitis and emphysema.

Clear Air Act Under Attack in Congress
The ALA’s annual tally of America’s air pollution is based on readings from air quality monitors in every county in the nation. The organization is currently working hard to protect the Clean Air Act from the budget-cutting efforts of several key lawmakers. It is also engaged in a vigorous campaign to force the cleanup of the country’s dirtiest power plants. Old, coal-fired power plants are among the biggest industrial contributors to unhealthy air, especially particle pollution in the eastern United States.

Individuals can help improve air quality by cutting down on driving to reduce vehicle exhaust, and by refraining from burning wood or trash that sends particle pollution into the air. The ALA also suggests getting involved in community reviews of air pollution plans and supporting state and local efforts to clean up air pollution. Urging members of Congress to protect the Clean Air Act is another way for individuals to get involved.

Editor’s Note: The American Lung Association has updated their report since this article was published. State of the Air 2006 includes updated information and an interactive map you can use to learn about the air quality where you live.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com.

EarthTalk is a regular feature of E/The Environmental Magazine. Selected EarthTalk columns are reprinted on About Environmental Issues by permission of the editors of E.

Recycling or reusing cell phones helps the environment by saving energy, conserving natural resources and keeping reusable materials out of landfills.

Cell Phone Recycling Helps the Environment
Cell phones and personal digital assistants (PDAs) contain a variety of precious metals, copper, and plastics. Recycling or reusing cell phones and PDAs not only conserves these valuable materials, it also prevents air and water pollution and reduces greenhouse gas emissions that occur during manufacturing and while extracting and processing virgin materials.

Five Good Reasons to Recycle Cell Phones
Only about 10 percent of the cell phones used in the United States are recycled. We need to do better. Here’s why:

• Recycling just one cell phone saves enough energy to power a laptop for 44 hours.
• If Americans recycled all of the 130 million cell phones that are tossed aside annually in the United States, we could save enough energy to power more than 24,000 homes for a year.
• For every one million cell phones recycled, we can recover 75 pounds of gold, 772 pounds of silver, 33 pounds of palladium, and 35,274 pounds of copper; cell phones also contain tin, zinc and platinum.
• Recycling one million cell phones also saves enough energy to provide electricity to 185 U.S. households for a year.
• Cell phones, PDAs and other electronic devices also contain hazardous materials such as lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic and brominated flame retardants. Many of those materials can be recycled and reused; none of them should go into landfills where they can contaminate air, soil and groundwater.

Recycle or Donate Your Cell Phone
Most Americans get a new cell phone every 18 to 24 months, usually when their contract expires and they qualify for a free or low-cost upgrade to a new cell phone model.

The next time you get a new cell phone, don’t discard your old one or toss it into a drawer where it will just gather dust. Recycle your old cell phone or, if the cell phone and its accessories are still in good working order, consider donating them to a program that will either sell them to benefit a worthy charity or offer them to someone less fortunate. Some recycling programs also work with schools or community organizations to collect cell phones as fundraising ventures.

The markets for refurbished cell phones extend far beyond U.S. borders, providing modern communication technology to people in developing nations who would otherwise find it unaffordable.

How are Materials from Recycled Cell Phones Used?
Almost all of the materials used to manufacture cell phones—metals, plastics and rechargeable batteries—can be recovered and used to make new products.

Metals recovered from recycled cell phones are used in many different industries such as jewelry making, electronics and automotive manufacturing.

Recovered plastics are recycled into plastic components for new electronic devices and other plastic products such as garden furniture, plastic packaging and auto parts.

When rechargeable cell-phone batteries can no longer be reused, they can be recycled to make other rechargeable battery products.

SEATTLE, WA–(Marketwire – April 9, 2010) –  WI Environmental LLC, working with CSR Marine, of Seattle, has passed certified testing of its product XR-88™ to remediate dangerous metals contained in stormwater runoff. When tested WI Environmental’s chemical rendered results that far exceed Washington state’s allowable discharge amounts of copper, lead and zinc, demonstrating a potential solution to Puget Sound clean up efforts. XR-88 treats and turns inert heavy metals and most poisons including arsenic; the by-product sludge can be disposed of easily as it requires no special disposal requirements. Additionally, previous toxicity tests have proved no harmful effects to aquatic life and the food they consume.

“We see the immediate need for our product in Puget Sound. We believe XR-88 and our technology will save millions if not billions in regards to the Puget Sound clean up effort. Researching all available technologies and tests performed in regards to the Puget Sound, we realized to date there was not a product or technology that passed the stringent current Washington State Regulations or new regulations being proposed April 21^st,” according to Timothy Wandell, president of WI Environmental. “When you pass non-detect levels of metals and turn them inert there is no better remediation you can achieve. We hope in the future Washington state takes these results into consideration for its regulations and standards.”

Due to the high cost of research, development and testing in the U.S., WI Environmental chose China to explore the possibilities of its product. Over five years, over 100 tests were completed for treatability and cost benefit analysis with probably the highest concentrations and most deadly contaminants, including hexavalent chromium, in the world. XR-88 achieved not only the Chinese National Standard but exceeded it by more than double. XR-88 has passed all U.S. EPA tests including the TCLP test for leachability. The tests with CSR were performed on stormwater runoff and effluent from a pressure washing system to remove bottom paint which contains high levels of copper and zinc.

XR-88 is very cost effective and equipment requirements are 10 percent of what current technologies use. Additionally, the possibility of blending and distributing XR-88 in Washington state would cut the costs of treatment, create thousands of much needed “Green Jobs” and become a major export product worldwide.

“We look forward to working closely with Washington state and the many people and organizations committed to the restoration of our most prized natural resource,” adds Wandell. 

About WI Environmental

WI Environmental, Inc. is an environmental solution company founded by Timothy D. Wandell for the purpose of combating heavy metal contaminants worldwide. Headquartered in Seattle, it licenses qualified governments and companies for manufacturing and distribution of its patented and trademarked technologies for air, water and soil remediation systems. It is the sole licensed company for the trademarked XR-88 chemical and production. For additional information contact info@wienvironmental or visit www.wienvironmental.com. 

Rajendra Pachauri – Chairman of the IPCC

As Chairman of UN science body the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCCC) he received a Nobel
Prize. But the admission this year that the IPCC wrongly claimed the
Himalayas could melt by 2035 damaged his reputation. Further allegations
about the quality of research and the release of steamy novels penned by Dr
Pachuari have not helped and some environmentalists have called for him to
resign. However the former engineer is a fighter and expects to be in charge
of bringing together the next report on the science of climate change due
out in 2014.

“The reality is that our understanding of climate change is based on a
vast and remarkably sound body of science – and is something we distort and
trivialise at our peril.”

Steve McIntyre – Blogger

A shadowy figure who is almost unknown outside the blogosphere, Mr McIntyre
has nonetheless been behind much of the recent controversies behind climate
change science. His website Climate Audit
was one of the first to post up the stolen emails from the University of
East Anglia that led to the ‘climategate’ scandal. Before that he questioned
the infamous ‘hockeystick graph’ showing a rise in temperature as carbon
dioxide levels rose. He continues to question climate science and drives
much of the sceptical debate on the internet.

“Everything that I’ve done in this, I’ve done in good faith,’ Mr
McIntyre on the Climategate blogs.

James Murdoch – Media mogul

A well-known advocate of fighting climate change, the head of News Corporation
Europe and Asia and son of Rupert Murdoch is in more of a position to bring
change than many politicians. Through his popular newspapers and television
channels he is already influencing public opinion. Sky is broadcasting a
number of environmental programmes already and teaming
up with WWF to save one billion trees in the Amazon rainforest.

“Business has to do more to tackle climate change.”

Samantha Cameron – Tory leader’s wife

Another power behind the crown, Mr Cameron’s conversion to all things green is
said to be have been influenced by his wife. As ‘Sam Cam’ becomes a key
influence in the election, her views could also sway green votes. She is
certainly key in persuading people the Tories are no longer the ‘nasty
party’ for the environment.
In her first appearance on the WebCameron she was shown on the campaign
trail, while her husband biked to work.

“She doesn’t need any campaigning tips” – David Cameron

Prince of Wales – Heir to the throne

Talking to plants might be laughed at back home, but the Prince’s support of
environmental issues has brought him worldwide respect. The
Prince’s Rainforest Project is in talks with leaders of rainforest
nations to set up new financial systems so rich countries pay poorer nations
not to chop down trees. The heir to the throne’s opinion on genetically
modified crops, architecture and organic farming also influence
environmental policy.

“If we lose the battle against tropical deforestation, we lose the
battle against climate change.”

Al Gore – US Senator

The oscar-winning US Senator raised
awareness of global warming through his film An Inconvenient Truth. He is
now travelling the world helping governnments and business to cut their
emissions. The Senator is also campaigning to get a climate change laws
introduced in America that will put a cap on carbon emissions. The
legislation will encourage China to act and could break the deadlock in
climate change negotiations. But it is not popular among Republicans or the
industrial states and it may be another year before it passes.

“We can end our reliance on fossil fuels.”

Arnold Schwarzenegger – The Governor of California

The former actor and Governor of California
is an unlikely hero of the green movement, despite being a Republican. He
has led the way in California with limits on pollution and incentives for
green energy. Mr Schwarzenegger is planning on bringing together other
regions and even cities to discuss how they can cut emissions, even if a
global deal fails.

“I believe technology and economic focus will overtake the politics and
regulatory efforts of national governments. We are beginning on a historic
great transformation, a new economic foundation for the 21st Century and
beyond.”

Caroline Lucas – UK’s best hope for first Green MP

The leader of the Green Party
and MEP could soon be a Member of Parliament. Although Green MPs are common
in the rest of Europe it will the first time an environmental party has
managed to gain a seat in the UK. She may be a lone voice but the very fact
voters are backing green policies will encourage other politicians to take
an interest in environmental measures. Her influence will be even more key
in a hung Parliament.

“We really are trying to do something extraordinary.”

Felipe Calderón – President of Mexico

The President of Mexico will be a key player in the
next round of international climate change negotiations due to take
place in Cancun at the end of the year. The United Nations meeting is a
chance for the world to draw up a legal treaty that will half greenhouse
gases by 2050. The Danish Presidency were key in the last round of talks in
Copenhagen and Mexico is key in bringing rich and poor nations together.

‘There are two things that threaten the very existence of humanity: the gap
between man and nature and the gap between north and south, between rich and
poor.”

Viscount Monckton – Sceptical lord

The UK’s most notorious climate change sceptic may not be taken very seriously
at home but his title allows him to influence people around the globe. The
3rd Viscount of Brenchley has appeared on US talk shows and regularly
gives lectures arguing against the scientific consensus. The UKIP peer
is also campaigning for voters in Britain to support the sceptic view by
voting for UKIP.

“Carbon dioxide is plant food.”

James Hansen – Controversial scientist

His testiomony on climate change to Congress in 1988 helped raise awareness of
global warming and he was the leading figure on the issue for many years.
But the head of the NASA Goaddard Institute for Space Studies is becoming
increasingly frustrated with the reluctance of Government to take action. He
has railed against coal-fired power stations, calling them “death
factories” and called on the public to protest. His view may not be
popular with politicians but he is still a respected scientist capable of
frightening the public and perhaps President Obama himself into taking
action.

“The greatest danger hanging over our children and grandchildren is
initiation of changes that will be irreversible on any time scale that
humans can imagine.”

Nigel Lawson – Sceptical lord

The former chancellor of the exchequer has reinvented himself as the leader of
the climate sceptics in the UK and internationally. He has set up the
Global Warming Policy Foundation to allow scientists and commentators to
question the consensus on global warming. The think tank is asked to comment
on leading climate change stories and was a key critic of scientists during
the “climategate” scandal. Lord Lawson of Blaby remains
unconvinced that global warming is manmade.

“I think that the ordinary bloke has an instinctive sense that it
wouldn’t be too bad if the weather warmed up.”

Eric Schmidt, Chief Executive of Google

Tackling climate change may need the help of Google.
The world’s leading Internet search engine is not only spreading information
but providing many of the solutions to the problems of climate change. It is
already possible to calculate a household’s energy use through Google or to
look at the carbon emissions of different countries. In the future the
mapping system Google Earth could be used to measure rates of deforestation.
Google itself is cutting down on its energy use by using renewable energy to
power offices and the vast banks of computers needed to store information.

“Change occurs when people are scared.This is the time to have this
conversation, set out bold agendas and go for it. You’ve got to go out and
take a stand.”

GREELEY – One Weld County commissioner calls the law absurd. The Weld County Sheriff says he will not enforce it.

The source of their ire is a state mandate that will require many vehicle owners in Weld County to obtain a tailpipe emissions test.

The test is geared towards curbing ozone-causing pollutants. It has been a requirement in Denver for years, but last year the state legislature expanded the emissions testing program to much of the Front Range, including Weld County.

Weld County Commissioner Sean Conway says Weld County should be exempt from the testing because it already meets federal standards.

“There are other ways from a more cost-effective aspect of reducing ozone levels, we have done those in Weld County and it’s worked,” Conway said.

But the federal government looks at Weld County within a region – a region that includes Denver and several other counties – and finds the region to be in violation of federal ozone standards.

“Every county is part of this regional ozone challenge and every part needs to do their part,” said Paul Tourangeau, director of the state Air Pollution Control Division.

There will be two testing sites in Weld County, one in Greeley, the other in Del Camino. Vehicles outside certain boundaries will be exempt from testing.

The test itself costs $25 and would be required every two years. It could take hundreds of dollars to bring a failed vehicle into compliance.

Weld County Sheriff John Cooke says the law targets low-income vehicle owners and, therefore, he says he will not encourage his staff to enforce it.

“When this becomes law we’re going to sit down with traffic officers and with the deputies and pretty much educate them on what this law means and why I feel it’s harassment of our community,” he said.

“That’s a local law enforcement issue,” Tourangeau said. “But this is state law and we would hope that all law agencies and offices that are charged with implementing and administering this program appreciate the important public health needs to protect what are over 3 million people that live in this nine-county non-attainment area.”

The tailpipe tests would be required starting Nov. 1.

Forecasters predict sunny skies today with a high of 74 and a low of 47. Sunny Friday. Chance of rain Sunday.

Air quality today is moderate, according to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.