Dear EarthTalk: With all the talk of rising seas, what could happen to the rivers that flow into the oceans? Will they reverse flow? Will rising seas back up into fresh water lakes? And what happens to our groundwater should saltwater flow backwards into it? -- Sandy Smith, concerned Michigander

Copyright : "Getty Images."

The intrusion of saltwater from the sea into rivers and groundwater is a serious issue, but the threat is not from a reversal of flow, and our far inland lakes and rivers are not expected to be directly affected by the salty water of our oceans. However, the sensitive areas around the edges of our continents, where fresh water meets salt water, are at risk, and greater efforts must be taken to protect them. Some 40 percent of world population lives less than 40 miles (60 kilometers) from the shoreline. 

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global average sea levels should rise eight to 34 inches by the year 2100, a much faster pace than the four to 10 inch increase of the past century. Seas rise because of higher global temperatures, melting mountain glaciers and polar ice caps, and other factors. Higher temperatures also cause thermal expansion of ocean water, intensifying the problem. 

Rising sea levels cause major problems as they erode and flood coastlines and, yes, as they mix salt water with fresh. A November 2007 article in ScienceDaily posited that coastal communities could face significant losses in fresh water supplies as saltwater intrudes inland. And whereas it had been previously assumed that salty water could only intrude underground as far as it did above ground, new studies show that in some cases salt water can go 50 percent further inland underground than it does above ground. 

Salty water invading groundwater can reach not only residential water supplies but intakes for agricultural irrigation and industrial uses, as well. Economic effects include loss of coastal fisheries and other industries, coastal protection costs, and the loss of once-valuable coastal property as people move inland. 

Estuaries at the mouths of rivers have in the past handled rising ocean levels. Sediment that accumulates along the edge of an estuary can raise the level of the land as the sea levels rise. And mangrove swamps, which buffer many a coastal zone around the world, flourish in brackish conditions. But because of our preference for living in coastal areas, and our habit of re-engineering our surroundings accordingly, humans make matters worse by preventing natural processes from managing the change. On the coast, we build roads and buildings, and replace natural buffers like mangrove swamps with dikes and bulkheads to control flooding, which make the problem worse by preventing beach sediment from collecting. And as we dam rivers and create reservoirs, we trap the sediment that would naturally flow down to the sea.  

In some places, changes are happening. Governments are beginning to restrict or prohibit building in setback zones along the coast where risk of erosion is the greatest. A newer policy of “rolling easements” is also being tried, where developers are allowed to build in restricted zones but will be required to remove the structures if and when they become threatened by erosion. The IPCC recommends more drastic actions, such as creating more marshes and wetlands as buffers against the rising level of the sea, and migrating populations and industry away from coastlines altogether. 

CONTACTS: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, www.ipcc.ch.

Dear EarthTalk: Is it true that some baby bottles contain chemicals that can cause health problems for babies? If so, how can I find alternatives that are safer?     -- Amy Gorman, Berkeley, CA 

Copyright : "Getty Images."
No links connecting specific human illnesses to chemicals oozing out of baby bottles have been proven definitively. Nonetheless, many parents are heeding the call of scientists to switch to products with less risk. A 2008 report by American and Canadian environmental researchers entitled “Baby’s Toxic Bottle” found that plastic polycarbonate baby bottles leach dangerous levels of Bisphenol-A (BPA), a synthetic chemical that mimics natural hormones and can send bodily processes into disarray, when heated. 

All six of the leading brands of baby bottles tested—Avent, Disney/The First Years, Dr. Brown’s, Evenflo, Gerber and Playtex—leaked what researchers considered dangerous amounts of BPA. The report calls on major retailers selling these bottles—including Toys “R” Us, Babies “R” Us, CVS, Target, Walgreens and Wal-Mart—to switch to safer products. 

According to the report, BPA is a “developmental, neural and reproductive toxicant that mimics estrogen and can interfere with healthy growth and body function.” Researchers cite numerous animal studies demonstrating that the chemical can damage reproductive, neurological and immune systems during critical stages of development. It has also been linked to breast cancer and to the early onset of puberty. 

So what’s a concerned parent to do? Glass bottles are a tried-and-true chemical-free solution, and they are widely available, though very breakable. To the rescue are several companies making BPA-free plastic bottles (out of either PES/polyamide or polypropylene instead of polycarbonate). Some of the leaders are BornFree, thinkbaby, Green to Grow, Nuby, Momo Baby, Mother’s Milkmate and Medela’s. These brands are available at natural foods stores, directly from manufacturers, or from online vendors. 

Most of the major brands selling BPA-containing bottles are now also offering or planning to offer BPA-free versions of their products. Consumers should read labels and packaging carefully to make sure that any product they are considering buying says unequivocally that it does not contain the chemical. 

Unfortunately, switching to a BPA-free bottle is no guarantee the chemical won’t make its way into your baby’s bloodstream anyway. BPA is one of the 50 most-produced chemicals in the world. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), it is used in everything from plastic water jugs labeled #7 to plastic take-out containers, baby bottles and canned food liners. It is so omnipresent that the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) has found that 95 percent of Americans have the chemical in their urine. 

Also, nursing mothers—especially those who haven’t discarded their old BPA-containing Nalgene water bottles—may be passing the chemical along through their breast milk. And if that weren’t enough, BPA is also used in the lining of many metal liquid baby formula cans. The nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG) has posted email links to the consumer affairs offices of the major formula manufacturers so concerned parents can ask them to remove BPA from their product offerings and packaging. 

CONTACTS: Baby’s Toxic Bottle Report, www.chej.org/documents/BabysToxicBottleFinal.pdf; NRDC, www.nrdc.org; CDC, www.cdc.gov; EWG, www.ewg.org.

Dear EarthTalk: How much “old growth” forest is left in the United States and is it all protected from logging at this point?  - John Foye, via e-mail

Copyright : "Streaminspector, courtesy Flickr."

As crazy as it sounds, no one really knows how much old growth is left in America’s forested regions, mainly because various agencies and scientists have different ideas about how to define the term. Generally speaking, “old growth” refers to forests containing trees often hundreds, sometimes thousands, of years old. But even when there is agreement on a specific definition, differences in the methods used to inventory remaining stands of old growth forest can produce major discrepancies. Or so complains the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry (NCSSF) in its recent report, “Beyond Old Growth: Older Forests in a Changing World.” 

In 1991, for example, the U.S. Forest Service and the nonprofit Wilderness Society each released its own inventory of old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest and northern California. They both used the Forest Service’s definition based on the number, age and density of large trees per acre, the characteristics of the forest canopy, the number of dead standing trees and fallen logs and other criteria. However, because each agency used different remote sensing techniques to glean data, the Forest Service came up with 4.3 million acres of old-growth and the Wilderness Society found only two million acres. 

The NCSSF also studied the data, and they concluded that 3.5 million acres (or six percent) of the region’s 56.8 million acres of forest qualified as old growth—that is, largely trees over 30 inches in diameter with complex forest canopies. By broadening the definition to include older forest with medium-diameter trees and both simple and complex canopies, NCSSF said their figure would go up substantially. 

In other parts of the country, less than one percent of Northeast forest is old growth, though mature forests that will become old growth in a few decades are more abundant. The Southeast has even less acreage—a  1993 inventory found about 425 old growth sites across the region, equaling only a half a percent of total forest area. The Southwest has only a few scattered pockets of old-growth (mostly Ponderosa Pine), but for the most part is not known for its age-old trees. Old-growth is even scarcer in the Great Lakes. 

It is hard to say whether the remaining pockets of scattered old-growth in areas besides the Pacific Northwest will remain protected, but environmentalists are working hard to save what they can in northern California, Oregon and Washington. The outgoing Bush administration recently announced plans to increase logging across Oregon’s remaining old-growth reserves by some 700 percent, in effect overturning the landmark Northwest Forest Plan of 1994 that set aside most of the region’s remaining old growth as habitat for the endangered spotted owl. 

Protecting remaining old-growth is important for many reasons. “These areas provide some of the cleanest drinking water in the world, critical salmon and wildlife habitat, world-class recreational opportunities and critical carbon storage in our fight against global warming,” says Jonathan Jelen of the nonprofit Oregon Wild, adding that as much as 20 percent of the emissions related to global warming can be attributed to deforestation and poor forest management. “A growing body of evidence is showing the critical role that forests—and old-growth forests in particular—can play in mitigating climate change.” 

CONTACTS: NCSSF, http://ncseonline.org/NCSSF/; Oregon Wild, www.oregonwild.org

Dear EarthTalk: Is it true that palm oil, common in snack foods and health & beauty products, is destroying rainforests? If so, what can consumers do about it? - Emma Miniscalco, via e-mail 

Image Courtesy : "Netaholic13, courtesy Flickr."

It’s no wonder that worldwide demand for palm oil has surged in recent years. Long used in cosmetics, palm oil is now all the rage in the snack food industry, since it is transfat-free and therefore seen as healthier than the shortening it replaces. 

But to produce palm oil in large enough quantities to meet growing demand, farmers across Southeast Asia have been clearing huge swaths of biodiversity-rich tropical rainforest to make room for massive palm plantations. Today palm oil production is the largest cause of deforestation in Indonesia and other equatorial countries with dwindling expanses of tropical rainforest. Indonesia’s endangered orangutan population, which depends upon the rainforest, has dwindled by as much as 50 percent in recent years. 

The clearing of these forests is a big factor in global warming, given how much carbon dioxide (CO2) trees store when left alone. Once forests are cut, tons of CO2 heads skyward where it does the most harm. Also, when not replaced by palm oil plantations, rainforests help maintain water resources by absorbing rainfall and then releasing it into streams and rivers, thus minimizing flooding and soil depletion. 

Simply boycotting palm oil and the products containing it may not help, as reduced demand could force the companies behind the plantations to instead initiate more intensive timber harvesting and a widespread conversion of the land to agriculture, which would add a heavy pollution load onto the already compromised land, air and water. It is up to the countries involved in palm oil production to regulate the industry and budget sufficient funds for enforcement. But with huge profits coming in from the sale of palm oil, public officials in Indonesia and elsewhere are loathe to clamp down on their golden goose. 

Several of the largest palm oil producers have joined forces with banks and nonprofit groups to try to green up the industry. In 2003, some 200 commercial entities in the global palm oil supply chain met and established the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) to promote the growth of palm oil in an environmentally friendly manner. RSPO works to develop definitions and criteria for the sustainable production of palm oil, while facilitating the adoption of more green-friendly practices throughout the industry. The group celebrated its first shipment of “sustainable palm oil” to Europe this past November. 

Despite progress, many green leaders are skeptical that RSPO has the teeth to make a positive impact on the fast-growing palm oil industry. Greenpeace International considers RSPO to be “little more than greenwash,” pointing out that at least one RSPO-certified producer—United Plantations, a supplier to Nestlé and Unilever—is deforesting Indonesia’s vulnerable peat land forests. And Sinar Mas, another major RSPO player, has cleared tropical rainforest all over the country for its palm oil plantations, and is still expanding rapidly. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on deforestation throughout Indonesia so that the RSPO and the government can take stock and then proceed accordingly. 

CONTACTS: RSPO, www.rspo.org; Greenpeace, www.greenpeace.org.

Dear EarthTalk: I came home today to yet another set of phonebooks at my front door. I feel they are a great waste of paper, especially in this electronic age. How can I stop getting these books? Better yet: How can we get the phone companies to stop making them? -- Bill Jones, via e-mail 

Many of us have little or no use for phonebooks anymore. While such directories are helpful for that occasional look-up of a service provider or pizza place, consumers and businesses increasingly rely on the Internet to find goods and services. Directory publishers usually do make their listings available online nowadays, too, but the books are still money-makers for them as prints ads fetch top dollar even though their effectiveness is waning and much harder to track. 

According to the nonprofit YellowPagesGoesGreen.org, more than 500 million phone directories—nearly two books for every American—are printed and distributed every year in the U.S., taking with them some 19 million trees. Upwards of 1.6 billion pounds of paper are generated to produce the books from these felled trees, while 7.2 million barrels of oil are churned through in creating them (not including the gasoline used for local deliveries). Producing the directories also uses up 3.2 billion kilowatt hours of electricity and generates 268,000 cubic yards of solid waste that ends up in landfills (not including the books themselves, many of which eventually end up in landfills in areas where recycling is not available or convenient).  

Unfortunately, there is no centralized way for consumers to opt-out of receiving the big books like the National Do Not Call Registry for telemarketing. Most individual yellow and white page publishers have “no deliver” lists they can add you to, but they will not be held accountable if the books show up anyway. The YellowPagesGoesGreen.org website will find your local/regional directory pages publishers and ask them not to deliver on your behalf. The site warns, though, that there are no guarantees with this either. 

For their part, directory publishers insist they have made great strides in recent years to operate in an environmentally responsible manner. The Yellow Pages Association (YPA) and the Association of Directory Publishers (ADP) have collaborated on formal guidelines calling for source reduction in the production of directories, environmentally sensitive manufacturing practices and enhanced recycling programs. About 90 percent of industry members have adopted the guidelines so far. Examples in practice include the use of water soluble inks and recycling-friendly glues, not to mention forsaking the use of virgin trees in their books (many books are made from recycled old phonebooks, mixed with scrap wood; see a previous column that discussed this: www.emagazine.com/view/?3651). 

Because of widespread and increasing use of the Internet, many sources of information—from newspapers and magazines to newsletters and, yes, directories—are forsaking print for online placement. So it is really just a matter of time before phone directories follow that lead. In the meantime, asking to be removed from the delivery list of your local directory publisher can only help to hasten that inevitability. 

CONTACTS: YellowPagesGoesGreen.org, www.yellowpagesgoesgreen.org; Yellow Pages Association (YPA), www.ypassociation.org; Association of Directory Publishers (ADP), www.adp.org.

Dear EarthTalk: How can the new Obama administration and/or Congress undo the many anti-environmental actions the Bush administration undertook over the last eight years, including the obstruction of Bill Clinton’s landmark “roadless rule” legislation?    - Ann Lyman, Lake Tahoe, CA

The Bush administration has certainly been no friend to the environment. Besides working for eight years to overturn the Clinton administration’s “Roadless Rule” that prevented road building (and the logging that usually follows) on 58.5 million acres of national forests, the Bush White House has opened up 45 million additional acres of public land across the American West to oil and gas drilling during its tenure. 

Right now Bush is pushing to open up thousands more acres in sensitive areas around three national parks in Utah to more oil and gas extraction. According to The New York Times, these new oil and gas “leases” (the government leases drilling rights on public land to private companies) will be auctioned off on December 19, 2008, the last day the White House may carry out such transactions before leaving office. 

Obama transition team insiders have already hinted that they will work to overturn the Utah oil and gas leases once they are in power. Obama’s trump card might be the fact that Bush failed to give his own National Park Service (NPS) sufficient opportunity to comment on the proposed leases before forcing them through. Green leaders hope that Obama can at least re-set the decision-making process to give the NPS and other interested parties time to voice their concerns before the oil rigs and gas pipelines move in. Green leaders also hope that, beyond stopping the Utah leases, Obama will curtail the number of leases sold altogether, in part by forcing extraction firms to develop sites they already have rights to before leasing more acreage. Oil companies have already leased 68 million acres of lands they have yet to access. 

On the Roadless Rule, itself an 11th-hour executive order by Bill Clinton that has been mired in the courts since Bush tried to overturn it in 2001, Obama promised during the campaign that he would work with Congress to codify it as the law of the land. Luckily for greens, the back-and-forth on the issue over the past eight years has meant that only seven miles of new roads—yielding access to just 500 acres of timber—have been cut on lands slated for protection under the Roadless Rule during Bush’s tenure. 

Obama also has his work cut out on a number of other environmental initiatives ignored or opposed by the Bush White House. Chief among them is taking action on global warming. If one can believe the campaign rhetoric, Obama will work to get the U.S. on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050 through a number of initiatives. Jason Grumet, the Obama campaign’s lead energy and environment advisor, has indicated that the president-elect plans to move quickly on getting climate change legislation through in 2009 and working to make the U.S. a leader on mitigating global warming. 

Another way Obama can win green friends is to undo a Bush proposal, slated to take effect in December, to cut wildlife experts out of decisions affecting plants and animals protected under the Endangered Species Act. Bush has faced sharp criticism for disregarding or ignoring the input of scientists on many issues. Obama seems likely to want to re-assert the importance of science in policy decision-making. 

CONTACTS: Barack Obama on the Issues, www.barackobama.com/issues; U.S. Forest Service Roadless Rule Information, www.roadless.fs.fed.us

Dear EarthTalk: I’m thinking about starting an environmental club in my middle school.  Can you give me some ideas about how to start?  Can you connect me with other school clubs?- Rosemary, Andover Township, NJ

Starting an environmental club at school is a great way to get students energized about taking care of the Earth and helping their community while learning about some of the most important issues facing the world in the 21st century. 

EarthTeam, a non-profit environmental network for teens, teachers and youth leaders, offers many tips on how to start an environmental club. First and foremost is to make sure there are at least a half dozen or so other students interested in forming such a club to begin with, and then also finding a teacher, community leader or parent who is willing to serve as an adult sponsor. The sponsor’s role is to provide advice along the way and to help ensure the stability of the group from year-to-year given that all of the students, even the founders of the club, will eventually graduate, or move on to other interests or endeavors. 

Once the core membership and adult sponsor have been established, Earth Team suggests all sitting down together to decide on the club’s vision (“Why are we here?”) and to brainstorm about possible activities or projects to undertake (“What do we want to accomplish?”). Once these questions have been answered, it’s time to hold the club’s first official meeting, which should be advertised as widely as possible to other students who may be interested in finding out what the group is about and how they can get involved, too. 

The next step, according to EarthTeam, is to forge an action plan that focuses on one group-oriented, year-long project that has measurable benefits to the school or community and that can keep the interest of the student members—who will no doubt be spending long hours volunteering. Whatever project(s) the group decides on, members should develop a timeline that clearly lists goals, dates and responsibilities. 

In addition to undertaking the one major project, clubs can also host or sponsor special events for extra visibility. EarthTeam suggests getting students outside for a river or beach clean-up, a tree planting day, or a field trip to a local wetland, zoo or nature reserve. Another popular idea is to hold an Environmental Awareness Day to educate the entire student body about relevant green issues. 

EarthTeam is also a networking platform so clubs can work together and share experiences with each other to help get a sense of the bigger picture beyond one individual school’s locale, given the global nature of most environmental issues. Another great networking resource is the Greenspan website, which lists clubs in 21 different U.S. states as well as in Australia, Canada, Japan, Ghana and Malaysia. 

Another great resource for those starting up new or managing existing school environmental clubs is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Student Center website, which offers dozens of ideas for projects that both stimulate and enlighten participants while helping the local community. The website also provides links to several partner non-profit groups with club-worthy activities. 

CONTACTS: EarthTeam, www.earthteam.net; Greenspan Environmental Club Network, www.greenspanworld.org/environmental_club_network.htm; U.S. EPA Student Center, www.epa.gov/students

Dear EarthTalk: I understand that Toyota is planning to sell a plug-in Prius that will greatly improve the car’s already impressive fuel efficiency.  Will I be able to convert my older (2006) Prius to make it a plug-in hybrid vehicle?  - Albert D. Rich, Kamuela, HI

Copyright:  "Toyota."

Toyota is readying a limited run of a plug-in Prius, which can average 100 miles per gallon, for use in government and commercial fleets starting in 2009. Toyota will monitor how these cars, which will have high efficiency lithium ion batteries that haven’t been fully tested yet, will hold up under everyday use. 

Essentially, a plug-in version of the Prius reverses the roles of the two motors under the hood. The regular Prius relies more on its gas engine, switching to (or combining) use of the electric motor in slow traffic, to maintain cruising speed, and when idling or backing up. The car doesn’t need to plug in because its battery stays charged by the gas motor and by the motion of the wheels and brakes. The plug-in will primarily use its electric motor, allowing commuters to go to and from work every day fully on the electric charge, saving the gas engine for longer trips that exceed the distance the car can go on electricity alone. 

Toyota has made no announcement yet as to when consumers will be able to buy a plug-in; that depends largely on the results of the field test of the fleet version. But owners of a current or past model don’t need to wait. Those with automotive mechanical skills can convert their Priuses to plug-ins themselves. 

“The conversion is an easy DIY [do-it-yourself] project that you can do for about $4,000, if you choose to use sealed lead acid batteries,” says Houston-based Jim Philippi, who converted his Prius last year, using instructions he downloaded for free from the Electric Auto Association’s PriusPlus.org website. Philippi recommends that DIYers consult Google’s RechargeIT.org as well for useful background information. 

For those less inclined to a DIY, several companies now sell readymade kits (some also have kits for converting Ford Escape Hybrid SUVs). Ontario-based Hymotion sells plug-in kits for Prius model years 2004-2008 for around $10,000 via contracted distributors/installers in San Francisco, Seattle and elsewhere. Other providers include Plug-In Conversions Corp., Plug-In Supply, EDrive Systems, Energy Control Systems Engineering Inc. and OEMtek. All typically work with select garages that specialize.  

One potential worry about conversions is whether or not Toyota will honor the warranty that came with the original vehicle. The California Cars Initiative (CCI), which has converted several hybrids to plug-ins for research and demonstration purposes (sorry, they’re not for sale), says the carmaker needs to clarify the matter, since hybrid cars typically have four or five separate warranties. There is legal precedent, CCI says, that modifications cannot completely void warranties—only the part(s) affected by a retrofit. 

If you’re looking to convert, keep in mind that such a move is not about cost-savings, as it will take some time for fuel savings to justify the upfront cost of even a DIY. Most people interested in such a conversion are doing it for the sake of the environment, not their pocketbooks. 

CONTACTS: PriusPlus, www.priusplus.org; Plug-In Conversions Corp., www.pluginconversions.com; Plug-In Supply, www.pluginsupply.com; EDrive Systems, www.edrivesystems.com; Energy Control Systems Engineering, www.energycs.com; OEMtek, www.oemtek.com; CCI, www.calcars.org.

Dear EarthTalk: Can you recommend some sources for toys and other holiday gifts that are both safe and not harmful to the environment?  - Tracy Gately, Marblehead, MA

copyright: “Earthentree” 

Given the massive recall of toys contaminated with lead last year, let alone all the other bad news about chemicals seeping out of just about every other conceivable type of consumer item, it’s no wonder that people are nervous about what might be inside the wrapping paper this next holiday season. Luckily, growing environmental concerns—and consumer demand—means that plenty of safe and green-friendly items are available for those willing to do a little more than just walk around the closest shopping mall. 

For kids’ items, Oompa Toys (oompa.com) is hard to beat. The Wisconsin-based company offers thousands of child- and Earth-safe items. On Oompa’s easy-to-use website you can buy products ranging from toys, dollhouses and stuffed animals to learning games, musical instruments and art supplies to kitchen play accessories, kids’ furniture and tricycles, many items made with organic or recycled materials. 

Another interesting online source for kids’ toys is Washington-based Earthentree (earthentree.com), which sells dozens of pull toys, rattles, stackers and other goodies to stimulate young hands and minds. All of their products are handcrafted by “fair trade” (fairly compensated) artisans in India using sustainably harvested wood and natural vegetable-based dyes. And Hazelnut Kids (hazelnutkids.com) specializes in natural, earth-friendly wooden and organic cotton toys for kids and babies, and even offers gift-wrapping with recycled and recyclable paper. 

For grown-up gifts, EcoArtware (eco-artware.com) sells a variety of items made from recycled and natural materials, from bath and kitchen accessories to pet products to jewelry, including many hand-made items. Everybodygreen (everybodygreen.com) is another good source for green-friendly jewelry. The company’s No Plastic charm bracelets are made with corn starch-based resin, natural herbal tea dye and recycled brass. For those holiday parties you might be attending, wine aficionados might appreciate a bottle of Boisset Family Estates’ Yellow Jersey pinot noir (yellowjerseywine.com), which comes from France in a 100 percent recycled (and recyclable) plastic bottle. 

Looking for fair trade arts and crafts? Gifts with Humanity (giftswithhumanity.com) sells clothing, home décor, jewelry and more from artists in Asia, Africa and Central and South America. Organic Bug (organicbug.com) also sells fair trade items and other natural and organic products from clothing to home décor items to travel accessories. Other websites worth visiting for fair trade and/or green-friendly gifts include peacefulvalleygreetings.com, greenfeet.com, pristineplanet.com, nokiagreenstore.com, gaiam.com, acacia.com and vivaterra.com. A simple Google search for “green holiday gifts” will turn up many more. 

Another approach to the holidays, of course, for the sake of lessening one’s footprint and tightening the belt in a downturned economy, is to eschew traditional gift-giving in favor of donating to a local or national environmental group in the name of a friend or loved one. This can be accomplished by visiting the websites of your favorite green groups and making your way to their “Donate” page, or by visiting justgive.org or worldofgood.com (by eBay), both which facilitate contributions to worthwhile charities.

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve followed the trends in “eco-homes” now for many years. Are there equally encouraging things happening in the world of condos? -- Charlie Anderson, Seattle, WA 

“Phillip Ritz, courtesy Flickr”.

Believe it or not, condominiums may be some of the most environmentally responsible housing out there today, especially since more and more developers are paying attention to sustainability from the get-go.  

By their very nature, many condo complexes adhere to some of the most basic tenets of green housing: density, to maximize surrounding open space and minimize buildings’ physical and operational footprints; proximity to mass transit, given their typical location in urban areas; and reduced resource use per unit, thanks to shared systems, walls and common spaces. Builders can elect to layer on other green elements, such as high-efficiency appliances and HVAC systems, green roofs and organic landscaping. 

“Projects are embracing green [to] be more responsive to what the buying public is looking for,” says Gail Vittori, chairperson of the U.S. Green Building Council, which produced and manages the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) design and building standards. “They also want to have the built environment become much more in line with environmental and health considerations.”  

One example is Florence Lofts, a new development of 12 townhouses and a 4,200 square foot commercial building in downtown Sebastopol, California. The LEED-certified project features a photovoltaic solar system on the roof for hot water and other electrical needs, a commercial scale “gray water” system to divert sink and shower water for irrigation purposes, and a tank that collects storm water from roofs to prevent excessive run-off. 

Another example is The Riverhouse overlooking the Hudson River in New York City’s Battery Park district. The LEED-certified, 320-unit building—the new home of actor/environmentalist Leo DiCaprio—has geothermal heating and cooling, twice-filtered air, non-toxic paint, and landscaped roof gardens. 

But not all developers need to break the bank to go green on their condo and apartment projects. Two-thirds of the units in Harlem’s much-publicized 1400 Fifth Avenue building—touted as New York’s first green condominium, are considered affordable, priced at $50,000 to $104,000 and restricted to families of moderate income. Also in the New York metropolitan area, Habitat for Humanity recently announced it has assembled a green design team to build “real affordable condos” in New Rochelle and other parts of Westchester County. 

“If you’re doing a moderately green building, the premium to build is typically in the 1.5 to two percent range. It’s very small,” says Leanne Tobias of Malachite LLC, a Maryland-based green real estate consulting firm. Additionally, the carrying costs for green units are lower, since such buildings operate on less energy and water and generate less waste than conventional high-rises. “All of those will be savings every month for the homeowners or residents of those buildings,” Vittori adds. “That’s a big plus.”  

CONTACTS: U.S. Green Building Council, www.usgbc.org; Habitat for Humanity, www.habitat.org; Malachite LLC, www.malachitellc.com.

Dear EarthTalk: What are these “ocean deserts” I’ve been hearing about? Also, didn’t I read that there was a huge mass of plastic bottles floating around somewhere on the ocean surface? - Wally Mattson, Eugene, OR

So-called “ocean deserts” or “dead zones” are oxygen-starved (or “hypoxic”) areas of the ocean. They can occur naturally, or be caused by an excess of nitrogen from agricultural fertilizers, sewage effluent and/or emissions from factories, trucks and automobiles. The nitrogen acts as a nutrient that, in turn, triggers an explosion of algae or plankton, which in turn deplete the water’s oxygen. 

According to the Ocean Conservancy, a dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico—where the Mississippi River dumps untold gallons of polluted water every second—has expanded to over 18,000 square kilometers in the last decade. Many other such dead zones have also undergone rapid expansion in recent years. 

A recent study by German oceanographer Lothar Stramma and a team of prominent international researchers confirms this phenomenon and also points the finger at global warming. Their data show that oxygen levels hundreds of feet below the ocean surface have declined over the past 50 years around the world, most likely a result of human activity. And as ocean waters warm due to climate change, they retain less oxygen. Furthermore, warmer upper layers of water stifle the process that brings nutrients up from colder, deeper parts of the ocean to feed a wide range of surface-dwelling marine wildlife. 

The expansion of these dead zones is bad news for most marine inhabitants and the ecosystems they thrive in. Thousands of different species already stressed from over fishing and other threats, now must contend with expanding hypoxic areas throughout regions that once constituted healthy habitat. 

The accumulation of plastic debris and other trash in the ocean is not necessarily related to hypoxic zones, but is yet another major problem facing the world’s fragile marine ecosystems. California-based sea captain and ocean researcher Charles Moore discovered what is now known as the Eastern Garbage Patch—an aggregation of plastic and other marine debris occupying some 700,000 square kilometers in the North Pacific Ocean—during a crossing of the North Pacific in 1997. In a 2003 article in Natural History Magazine, Moore reported being astounded that he couldn’t be further from land anywhere on Earth yet he could see plastic bags and other debris coating the ocean’s surface as far as the eye could see. 

Individuals can help the oceans and their inhabitants by making smart daily choices that can have collective, positive impact. Lowering your carbon footprint—driving less, biking more, donning a sweater instead of turning up the heat—is one way to help stem the spread of hypoxic zones, which is directly related to industrial activity and the amount of greenhouse gases we spew into the atmosphere. 

And limiting plastic and plastic bag use is the best way to prevent such litter from ending up swirling around mid-ocean. Some countries, such as China, and many large cities—San Francisco, for example—have banned plastic grocery bags. If your city hasn’t yet taken this step, pressure them to do so—and in the meantime bring your own reusable bags to the market and avoid plastic wherever else you can.  

CONTACTS: Ocean Conservancy, www.oceanconservancy.org; Natural History Magazine, www.naturalhistorymag.com.

Copyright 'Getty Images'
Many of us may be too dependent on over-the-counter painkillers to treat the occasional headache, especially given the side effects of such drugs. Ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin) can increase the risk of heart and circulation problems—including heart attack and stroke—and is also tough on the digestive tract. Too much acetaminophen (Tylenol) has been linked to nausea, diarrhea, and kidney and liver problems. Many natural health care practitioners disparage drugs for merely masking the symptoms of larger problems.

All headaches are not the same and gobbling down pain pills will not address the causes, whatever they may be. Some headaches are caused by tension; others stem from sinus congestion, caffeine withdrawal, constipation, food allergies, spinal misalignment or lack of sleep. And then there are migraines, which researchers think are neurological in nature: The brain fails to constrict the nerve pathways that open the arteries to the brain, resulting in a pounding headache as blood flows in unchecked. Assessing what kind of headache you may have can help lead the way to a solution beyond deadening the pain with a pill.

To make tension headaches go away, the Farmers’ Almanac recommends applying an ice pack to the neck and upper back, or, even better, getting someone to massage those areas. Also, soaking the feet in hot water can divert blood from your head to your feet, easing any kind of headache pain in the process.

Another all-natural headache cure is acupressure (like acupuncture, but without the needles), which promotes healing throughout the body by stimulating channels of energy known as meridians. Victoria Abreo, alternative medicine editor for the website BellaOnline, says that anyone suffering from a tension headache can employ a simple acupressure technique to help relieve the pain: “With one hand, press the shallow indention in the back of the head at the base of the skull. Simultaneously, with the thumb and forefinger of the other hand, press firmly into the upper hollows of the eye sockets, right where they straddle the bridge of the nose and meet the ‘t’ of the eyebrow bridge.” She says to press softy at first, and then more firmly, holding for three to five minutes.

As for migraines, avoiding certain trigger foods might be key to staving them off. Abreo says migraine sufferers should try steering clear of dairy products, processed meat, red wine, caffeine and chocolate. New research has shown that some people with specific dietary deficiencies are more prone to migraines.

According to Dr. Linda White, who writes about natural health for Mother Earth News, some recent clinical trials have shown three nutritional supplements—magnesium, riboflavin and coenzyme Q10—to be particularly effective at reducing the frequency and severity of migraines. Also, a number of herbs—including feverfew, butterbur, lavender, gingko biloba, rosemary and chamomile—have proven track records in preventing or stopping migraines. Since herbs can be potent and are not regulated or tested, headache sufferers should consult a trusted doctor or naturopath before using alternative remedies.

CONTACTS: Farmers’ Almanac, www.farmersalmanac.com; BellaOnline, www.bellaonline.com; Mother Earth News, www.motherearthnews.com.

Dear EarthTalk: Backyard fire pits have become the latest must-have gardening feature. How bad are they on the environment?  - Michael O’Laughlin, Tigard, OR

With fall setting in and the mercury starting to drop, many of us want to extend our time outdoors, and sitting around a backyard fire pit has become one of the most popular means to do so. But even though it may be fun—s’mores anyone?—it is not good for the environment, especially during times when air quality is already poor.

It’s hard to assess the larger impact of backyard fire pits on local or regional air quality, but no one questions the fact that breathing in wood smoke can be irritating if not downright harmful. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), so-called fine particles (also called particulate matter) are the most dangerous components of wood smoke from a health perspective, as they “can get into your eyes and respiratory system, where they can cause health problems such as burning eyes, runny nose and illnesses such as bronchitis.”

Fine particles also aggravate chronic heart and lung diseases, and have been linked to premature deaths in those already suffering from such afflictions. As such, the EPA advises that anyone with congestive heart failure, angina, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema or asthma should steer clear of wood smoke in general. Children’s exposure to wood smoke should also be limited, as their respiratory systems are still developing and they breathe more air (and air pollution) per pound of body weight than adults.

Geography and topography play a role in how harmful wood smoke can be on a community-wide level. People living in deep, steep-walled valleys where air tends to stagnate should be careful not to light backyard fires during smog alerts or other times when air quality is already poor. Lingering smoke can be an issue even in wide-open areas, especially in winter when temperature inversions limit the flow of air.

The Washington State Department of Ecology reports that about 10 percent of the wintertime air pollution statewide can be attributed to fine particles from wood smoke coming out of wood burning stoves. While a wood stove may be a necessary evil as a source of interior heat, there is no excuse for lighting up a backyard fire pit during times when you could be creating health issues for your neighbors.

Another potential risk to using a backyard fire pit is sparking a forest fire. Some communities that are surrounded by forestland voluntarily institute seasonal burn bans so that residents won’t inadvertently start a forest fire while they are out enjoying their backyard fire pits. If you live in one of these areas, you probably already know it and would be well advised to follow the rules.

If you must light that backyard fire pit, take some precautions to limit your friends’ and family’s exposure to wood smoke. The Maine Bureau of Air Quality recommends using only seasoned firewood and burning it in a way that promotes complete combustion—small, hot fires are better than large smoldering ones—to minimize the amount of harmful smoke. The moral of the story: If you need to burn, burn responsibly.

CONTACTS: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), www.epa.gov; Washington State Department of Ecology, www.ecy.wa.gov; Maine Bureau of Air Quality, www.maine.gov/dep/air

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve suddenly been seeing a lot of those tiny “Smart Cars” around. Who makes them and what is their fuel efficiency? And I’m all for fuel efficiency, but are these cars safe? - David Yu, Bend, OR

Copyright : Pic "tatianes, courtesy Flickr."
Originally the brainchild of Lebanese-born entrepreneur/inventor Nicolas Hayek of Swatch watch fame, Smart Cars are designed to be small, fuel-efficient, environmentally responsible and easy to park—really the ultimate in-city vehicle. Back in 1994, Hayek and Swatch signed on with Daimler-Benz (the German maker of the venerable Mercedes line of cars) to develop the unique vehicle; in fact, the company name Smart is derived from a combination of the words Swatch, Mercedes and the word “art.”

When initial sales were slower than hoped for, Hayek and Swatch pulled out of the venture, leaving Daimler-Benz full owner (today Smart is part of Mercedes car division). Meanwhile, rising oil prices have driven up demand for Smart vehicles, and the company began selling them in the U.S. earlier this year.

Measuring just a hair over 8 feet long and less than five feet wide, the company’s flagship “ForTwo” model (named for its human carrying capacity) is about half the size of a traditional car. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the car’s fuel efficiency at 33 miles per gallon (mpg) for city driving and 41 mpg on the highway (although actual drivers report slightly lower results). Three ForTwos with bumpers to the curb can fit in a single parallel parking spot.

And with soaring gas prices, the cars have been selling like hotcakes in the U.S. The company’s U.S. distributor is working on importing an additional 15,000 cars before the end of 2008, as its initial order of 25,000 vehicles is almost depleted. Some four dozen Mercedes Benz dealers across the country have long waiting lists for new Smart vehicles, which sell for upwards of $12,000.

As for safety, the ForTwo did well enough in crash tests by the independent Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) to earn the group’s highest rating—five stars—thanks to the car’s steel racecar-style frame and liberal use of high-tech front and side airbags. Despite such good safety performance for such a tiny car, IIHS testers caution that larger, heavier cars are inherently safer than smaller ones.

Beyond safety concerns, some analysts bemoan the ForTwo’s price tag as unnecessarily high given what you get. The cars are not known for their handling or acceleration, although they can go 80 miles per hour if necessary. The website Treehugger.com suggests that eco-conscious consumers might do better spending their $12,000 on a conventional sub-compact or compact car, many which get equivalent if not better gas mileage not to mention likely faring better in a crash.

But for those who need a great in-city car for short errands and commutes, today’s ForTwo might be just the ticket. Environmentalists are hoping Smart will release the higher mileage diesel version of the ForTwo, which has been available in Europe for several years, in the U.S. soon. And they are keeping their fingers crossed for a hybrid version, which could give the hugely successful Toyota Prius—which looks almost huge in comparison—a run for its money in terms of fuel efficiency and savings at the pump.

CONTACTS: Smart USA, www.smartusa.com ; IIHS, www.iihs.org .

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve read that household cleaners contain cancer-causing toxic ingredients. What should I do, then, to keep my house clean but also safe for my kids?  -- Christine Stewart, via e-mail

While much of the research is mixed or inconclusive, a variety of human and animal studies have linked chemicals common in household cleaning products with a wide range of health risks. 

The most offensive common ingredients, according to a 2006 study by the University of California Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, are ethylene-based glycol, used commonly as a water-soluble solvent in cleaning agents and classified as a hazardous air pollutant by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and terpenes, a class of chemicals found in lemon, pine and orange oils that can morph into carcinogenic compounds when they mix with ground-level ozone. 

Also, chlorine, often labeled as “sodium hypochlorite” or “hypochlorite,” is almost ubiquitous in household cleaners, unfortunately for the inhabitants of many homes. Breathing in its fumes can irritate the lungs, and as such poses a serious health risk to those with pre-existing heart or respiratory problems. 

According to the non-profit Cancer Prevention Coalition, some other problematic chemicals found in many household cleaners include crystalline silica, an irritant to the eyes and lungs and a likely carcinogen, and butyl cellosolve, which has been linked to kidney and liver problems and is reportedly toxic to forming cells. The group lists dozens of other potentially dangerous ingredients in household products on the “Hazardous Ingredients in Household Products” PDF available for free on its website. 

Gaiam, a leading purveyor of green household and lifestyle items, reports that the average American household contains between three and 25 gallons of toxic materials, mostly in the form of household cleaners filled with petrochemical solvents designed to dissolve dirt. The company bemoans the fact that no law requires cleaning products manufacturers to list ingredients on their labels or to test their products for safety, leaving it up to consumers to make sure their homes are not only clean, but also non-toxic. 

Luckily there are plenty of “greener” alternatives now widely available from manufacturers like Gaiam, Earth Friendly Products, Citra-Solv, Ecover, Mrs. Meyers, Sun and Earth, SimpleGreen, Method, and Seventh Generation, among many others. Even big players are getting in on the act. Clorox recently released a new line of home cleaning products under the Green Works label to attract a greening clientele. 

For those so inclined, making your own green cleaning solutions is easy and cheap. According to The Green Guide, consumers can “circumvent the armada of commercial cleaners” by keeping handy an ample supply of eight ingredients for nearly every do-it-yourself cleaning job: baking soda, borax, distilled white vinegar, hydrogen peroxide, lemons, olive oil, vegetable-based (liquid castile) soap, and washing soda. 

CONTACTS: Cancer Prevention Coalition, www.preventcancer.com; Gaiam, www.gaiam.com; Earth Friendly Products, www.ecos.com; Citra-Solv  www.citra-solv.com; Ecover, www.ecover.com; Clorox Green Works, www.greenworkscleaners.com; Mrs. Meyers, www.mrsmeyers.com; Sun and Earth, www.sunandearth.com; Seventh Generation, www.seventhgeneration.com; SimpleGreen, www.simplegreen.com; Method Green Home Care Products, www.methodhome.com .

Copyright pic: “Rob Baxter, courtesy Flickr.”
What type of solar energy capture system you put on your home depends on your needs. If you want to go full tilt and generate usable electricity from your home’s rooftop—and even possibly contribute power back to the larger grid—tried and true photovoltaic arrays might be just the ticket. A typical installation involves the panels, which are constructed of many individual silicon-based photovoltaic cells and their support structures, along with an inverter, electrical conduit piping and AC/DC disconnect switches.

These systems can cost tens of thousands of dollars to install, and as such may not pencil out for those looking for the cheapest power solution. But the upside is that homeowners with photovoltaic panels on their rooftops can rest assured that as long as the sun shines, they will have power to spare without generating emissions of carbon dioxide and other noxious pollutants. 

Qualified solar installers can usually advise clients on which specific types of systems will work best given the specific location of a home. U.S. homeowners can find qualified photovoltaic installers via the website FindSolar.com. And the North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) provides a free searchable database of its U.S. and Canadian members specializing in home solar set-ups. 

For less demanding applications, such as for heating water for your home or swimming pool, a much simpler (and less expensive) solar thermal system might be all you need. A basic hot water system usually consists of a solar collector—basically a small metal box with a glass or plastic cover and a black copper or aluminum absorber plate inside—tied into the building’s plumbing and electrical works. According to the industry tracker website Solarbuzz, such solar collectors are usually mounted on rooftops.  

Professional installers can get your home up and running with a solar thermal system for less than $4,000 in most cases. While the savings in your electric bill may be small, homeowners in it for the long haul will definitely save over time, all the while enjoying the fact that you have lowered your family’s carbon footprint significantly. 

Homeowners looking to find out more about residential solar systems should be sure to check out the RealGoods Solar Living Sourcebook, a 600+ page renewable energy “bible” now in its 30th edition. The book features the latest nuts-and-bolts information on how to harvest renewable energy in a variety of ways depending on need. And RealGoods also sells much if not all of the equipment needed.  

Another reason to consider going solar in one fashion or another is tax incentives. According to the Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE), 17 states now offer homeowners some kind of tax rebate or incentive for the purchase and/or installation of solar power equipment of any kind. You can see what if any your state offers by logging onto the dsireusa.org website, where the searchable database is available in its entirety for free. 

CONTACTS: Solarbuzz, www.solarbuzz.com; FindSolar.com, www.findsolar.com; NABCEP, www.nabcep.org; RealGoods, www.realgoods.com; DSIRE, www.dsireusa.org.

Dear EarthTalk: My body doesn’t tolerate cheese well. Are there dairy-free cheeses that will be easier on my constitution and better for the environment, too?- Steve Sullivan, Seattle, WA 

Copyright :Pic courtesy:“massdistraction, courtesy Flickr."

With some 30 to 50 million Americans suffering from various degrees of lactose intolerance, and an estimated three million of us now eating animal-free (vegan) diets for humane, environmental and/or health reasons, the production of alternatives to dairy products has started to become big business.  

But while substitutes for milks and ice creams abound, mostly soy- or rice-based blends that have come a long way since they first appeared on grocery shelves, finding satisfactory alternatives to the many varieties of cheese can be a challenge. But the choices are expanding rapidly. 

The first place to look might just be your regular supermarket’s produce section—that’s often where you’ll find Galaxy Foods’ Veggie line of non-dairy cheeses. After all, they are made from soy, a crop. Galaxy’s offerings come shredded, grated, in slices and in hunks. Fans swear they taste just like the real thing. And they are all excellent sources of calcium without cholesterol, saturated/trans-fats or lactose.  

Galaxy also offers cheeses made from rice. And while some of both the Rice Brand and Veggie line contain small amounts of cultured milk salt, dried skim milk protein and trace amounts of lactose, Galaxy also make two purely vegan varieties, usually found in the dairy sections of grocery or health food stores. 

A few other popular brands made with rice include Rice Slices and Lifetime Low Fat Jalapeno Jack Rice Cheese. Check the shelves of your local organic or natural food market to find one or more to sample.  

Another leading producer of dairy-free cheeses is Scotland’s Bute Island Foods. The company began making its own vegan hard cheese alternatives (sold under the Sheese brand name) in 1988, and has since expanded into cream cheese alternatives (Creamy Sheese) as well. From pizzas to sauces to sandwiches to spreads, Bute Island has vegan and lactose-intolerant cheese lovers covered. 

Some other soy-based choices that get good reviews include Good Slice Cheddar Style Cheese Alternative (great for sandwiches), vegan-friendly Tofutti Soy Cheese Slices, Follow Your Heart’s Vegan Gourmet (pizza, anyone?), and Teese (it melts with the best of them), among others. 

Do-it-yourselfers might want to experiment with making their own non-dairy cheese using ingredients such as tofu and yeast. A quick web search will yield many recipes for making cheese and for using non-dairy cheeses in favorite dishes. Many of the best are collected in Joanne Stepaniak’s The Ultimate Uncheese Cookbook, available in some bookstores as well as from Amazon.com and other online vendors.  

With so many good choices, not to mention recipes for home cooked varieties, many a vegetarian may just make the leap into full-fledged vegan eating. And existing vegans can rejoice: French Onion Soup (dairy-free, of course) is back on the menu. 

CONTACTS: Galaxy Foods, www.galaxyfoods.com; Bute Island Foods, www.buteisland.com; Follow Your Heart, www.followyourheart.com

Dear EarthTalk: Can those energy-efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs that are popular now cause headaches because of the flickering they do? I converted my whole house over last fall and both my kids were complaining of headaches on and off. - Sandy, Eugene, OR

Pic courtesy: "armisteadbooker, courtesy Flickr."

With a switch to energy efficient compact fluorescent (CFL) light bulbs already in full swing in the U.S. and elsewhere—Australia has banned incandescents, Britain will soon, and the U.S. begins a phase-out of incandescents in 2012—more and more complaints have arisen about the new bulbs causing headaches. 

Many experts say that the issue is being overblown, however, that there is no scientific evidence that the bulbs cause headaches and that a kind of hysteria has grown out of a small number of anecdotal reports.  

Industry experts acknowledge that day-to-day exposure to older, magnetically ballasted long tube fluorescent bulbs found mostly in industrial and institutional settings could cause headaches due to their noticeable flicker rate. The human brain can detect the 60 cycles per second such older bulbs need to refresh themselves to keep putting out light.  

However, modern, electronically ballasted CFLs refresh themselves at between 10,000 and 40,000 cycles per second, rates too fast for the human eye or brain to detect. “As far as I’m aware there is no association between headaches and the use of compact fluorescent lamps,” says Phil Scarbro of Energy Federation Incorporated (EFI), a leading distributor of energy efficiency-related products—including many CFLs.  

But Magda Havas, an Environmental & Resource Studies Ph.D. at Canada’s Trent University, says that some CFLs emit radio frequency radiation that can cause fatigue, dizziness, ringing in the ears, eyestrain, even migraines. You can test to see if CFLs in your home give off such radiation, she says, by putting a portable AM radio near one that’s on and listening for extra static the closer you get. She says that such electromagnetic interference should also be of concern to people using cell phones and wireless computers. 

Sometimes headaches are due to eyestrain from inadequate lighting. When replacing an incandescent bulb with a CFL, pay attention to the lumens, which indicate the amount of light a bulb gives out (watts measure the energy use of a bulb, not the light generated). A 40-watt incandescent bulb can be replaced by an 11-14 watt CFL because the lumen output is approximately the same (490); a 100-watt incandescent can be replaced by a 26-29 watt CFL, both providing about 1,750 lumens. If you’re still skeptical, replace a 40-watt incandescent with a 60-watt equivalent 15-19 watt CFL, which will boost lumens to 900. 

Another consideration is color temperature (measured in degrees “Kelvin”). CFLs rated at 2,700 Kelvin give off light in the more pleasing red/yellow end of the color spectrum, closer to that of most incandescents. Bulbs rated at 5,000 Kelvin and above (usually older ones) give off a less pleasing white/blue light. 

The Environmental Defense website provides a handy chart comparing the watts and lumens of incandescents versus CFLs, along with further discussion about color temperature. 

CONTACTS: EFI, www.efi.org; Environmental Defense, www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagid=630.

Dear EarthTalk: How does congestion toll pricing, used in some cities around the world, cut down on vehicle traffic and promote green-friendly public transit?  

Copyright :
Pic courtesy:“Getty Images.”
Despite increasing green awareness and steadily rising gasoline prices, Americans and other denizens of the developed world—not to mention millions of new Chinese and Indian drivers hitting the road every week—are loath to give up the freedom and privacy of their personal automobiles. But snarled traffic, longer commute times and rising pollution levels have given city transportation planners new ammunition in their efforts to encourage the use of clean, energy-efficient public transit. One of the newest tools in their arsenal is so-called congestion pricing (also called variable toll pricing), whereby cars and trucks are hit with higher tolls if they access central urban areas at traditionally congested times.

Singapore was the world’s first major city to employ congestion pricing in 1975 when it began charging drivers $3 to bring their vehicles into the city’s central business district. The system has since expanded citywide, with toll rates at several locations changing over the course of a day. Funds generated by the program have allowed Singapore to expand and improve public transit and keep traffic at an optimal flow. Some of the tangible benefits of the program, according to Environmental Defense, include a 45 percent traffic reduction, a 10 miles-per-hour increase in average driving speed, 25 percent fewer accidents, 176,000 fewer pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted, and a 20 percent increase in public transit usage.

London implemented a similar plan in 2003 that was so successful it was extended to some outlying parts of the city in 2007. Today, drivers pay $13 to bring their vehicles into certain sections of London during peak traffic hours. According to the Victoria Transport Policy Institute, London’s plan has significantly reduced traffic, improved bus service and generated substantial revenues. Environmental Defense says the plan reduced congestion by 30 percent, increased traffic speed by 37 percent, removed 12 percent of pollutants from the air and cut fuel consumption and CO2 emissions by 20 percent.

A 2006 congestion pricing experiment in Stockholm produced similar results, shrinking commute times significantly, reducing pollution noticeably and increasing public transit use during a seven-month test. The day after the trial ended, traffic jams reappeared, so Stockholm voters passed a referendum to reinstate the plan. Today the city has one of the most extensive congestion pricing systems in the world.

Perhaps the next major city to implement congestion pricing will be New York, if Mayor Michael Bloomberg gets his way. In July 2007, the state legislature rejected Bloomberg’s first such proposal—which would have used funds collected to pay for expansions and improvements to the regional public transit system—but ever-increasing congestion and pollution might force lawmakers’ hands in the future.

“A congestion pricing plan is the most cost-effective way to jump-start transit improvements and reduce traffic congestion,” says Wiley Norvell of Transportation Alternatives, one of a handful of groups working with Bloomberg to craft a version of the plan that will fly with state lawmakers. With two-thirds of New Yorkers opposed, it looks like an uphill battle for now, but advocates say passing such rules is inevitable.

CONTACTS: Environmental Defense, www.environmentaldefense.org; Transportation Alternatives, www.transalt.org.

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve read that plastic bottles are not always safe to reuse over and over as harmful chemicals can leach out into the contents. I’m wondering if the same issues plague Tupperware and other similar plastic food storage containers. - Sylvie, Dawson City, Yukon, Canada