Subway Takes the Challenge

I have blogged in the past about eating fast food and staying green at the same time. It may seem tough, but by parking your car rather than waiting in the drive-thru lane, taking only those supplies (i.e. napkins, bags, lids, containers, etc.) that you truly need, and staying away from Styrofoam, you can really reduce your impact while you eat fast.

Now Subway is making it a little easier to stay green when you eat in a hurry. First, Subway has moved storage locations closer to its restaurants to reduce fuel consumption by 1.6 million gallons annually. Second, Subway has announced that it will start buying cutlery that is made from polypropylene rather than polystyrene. The change in materials for Subway's annual order of 400,000 forks & knives will result in 2,800 barrels of oil saved/year and 1,200 metric tons less carbon dioxide in the air. Third, Subway's cups will also change to polypropylene which will mean 515,000 less pounds of resin used each year.

In addition, Subway is experimenting with green restaurants via a Kissimmee, Florida location that utilizes a multitude of green technology. LED lighting, low-flow water fixtures, light sensors in bathrooms, passive cooling, and variably controlled ovens should help the restaurant lower its electricity usage considerably while improving overhead costs in the long run.

Gore Finally Gets It

To keep Green Piece Blog relevant, I read stories and information on the environment all over the internet constantly. Anybody who has followed discussions of global warming on the web like I have has probably discovered that a lot of global warming skeptics aim their targets right at former Vice-President Al Gore. It is as if Gore himself created the concept of global warming and unless he lives a completely carbon-free life, he cannot be trusted on this issue.

Frankly, I think anybody can agree that it is impressive that Gore has been so committed to publicizing something he believes is a real threat. Too bad none of the politicians currently holding office are as steadfast in their defense of the environment.

However, Al Gore has given many of his critics a major opening for attacks on him. It has often been said that Gore's lifestyle doesn't necessarily reflect his passion for reducing carbon emissions. Anyone who watched "An Inconvenient Truth" probably noticed that Gore never traveled around in hybrid vehicles and flew very often. Gore's mansion in Tennessee has been a noted electricity hog with utility bills reaching over $1,200.

Gore's response to attacks on his lifestyle has always been that deniers were more interested in going after the messenger rather than the message. This argument is valid, but out of touch with reality. Many look to Gore to set an example for how individual responsibility can be the most effective way to curb global warming. It may be the strategy of deniers to point the finger at the messenger, but Gore should use this as an opportunity to educate people about things he has done to reduce his impact.

Finally, Gore gets it. Solar panels, rain collection devices, geothermal heaters and florescent light bulbs have all been added to Gore's beautiful Nashville home. In the face of a record heat wave last summer, the home actually cut utility costs by 11% when other Nashville homes were earning 20-30% higher-than-usual utility bills. This is especially impressive because Gore's home is more than 80 years old. The Green Building Coalition awards prizes to buildings that integrate energy efficient technologies. The top prize is Platinum, Gore's home won Gold. It is the only home in Tennessee to win that distinction.

Honestly, I don't think Al Gore needs a mansion in the first place. One of the best ways to lower your impact on the earth is to live in an urban center, not the 'burbs, and to live in a home that truly meets your needs. I am glad, however, that if he insists on living in such a large home, he is taking steps to make it as green as possible so he can set an example for others. As an aside, Gore also invests a great deal of money in the development of renewable energy sources.

For more go HERE

Polar Cities and You

When readers request a specific blog post, I try to be responsive. For instance, when Ron Paul supporters wanted to see more information about his environmental beliefs, I obliged. On several occasions I have received comments from one reader requesting a blog entry on "Polar Cities." So this one is for him.

Polar Cities are the brainchild of Dr. James Lovelock, a scientist and author. One of his largest accomplishments was the creation of the Electron Capture Detector, a device that brought about our knowledge of CFC's and their impact on the Earth's atmosphere. Dr. Lovelock has long supported the idea that the earth is less a giant floating piece of space dust and more a super-organism that is made up of its living and non-living parts. This "Gaia hypothesis" is the basis of Dr. Lovelock's view of our atmosphere and its impact on the earth's sustainability.

All of these viewpoints inform Dr. Lovelock's fear that billions of people will die as a result of unsustainable global temperature increases from carbon emissions into the Earth's atmosphere. This brings us to the concept of Polar Cities. Dr. Lovelock has suggested that those people who do survive the temperature increases will be the ones who flock to the arctic regions of the planet and establish communities there.

To many, this concept begins to border on science fiction. The very idea of a snowy cluster of people from different nations attempting to survive in a currently uninhabitable part of the planet will probably put conservative global-warming-doubters in a tizzy. Obviously, this is an idea that is looking many centuries down the road and doesn't take into account the possibility that humans develop a system for slowing and reversing the effects of global warming.

Regardless, its an interesting hypothesis to consider. If you're curious what a Polar City might look like, Dan Bloom has created a series of illustrations that paint a completely internalized world of tunnels, tubes, and cubes. You can check them out HERE.

Now I have to get back to life in my "Bi-Polar City" of Washington, DC.

Ron Paul's Environmental Issues

Months ago, I ran into some trouble with Ron Paul supporters when I failed to represent his views on the environment in a 2008 Republican Candidates Environmental Platform blog entry.

Due to the overwhelming response I received from Paul's loyal backers, I did some research and created THIS post on his environmental voting record. I chose to blog about his voting record because, at the time, Dr. Paul had nothing on his own website about his views on environmental policy. Later, I found a great Q&A with Ron Paul that you can read HERE.

Now that some time has passed and Ron Paul has become a major media star, I return to address his environmental views once again. Incidentally, Paul is seriously looking at winning the Nevada Republican primary.

On Congressman Paul's website, he has created a new environmental area in the "Issues" pages. I thought this information might round out the facts I have presented in the past. The site says this...

The federal government has proven itself untrustworthy with environmental policy by facilitating polluters, subsidizing logging in the National Forests, and instituting one-size-fits-all approaches that too often discriminate against those they are intended to help.

The key to sound environmental policy is respect for private property rights. The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while increasing the cost of polluting.

In a free market, no one is allowed to pollute his neighbor's land, air, or water. If your property is being damaged, you have every right to sue the polluter, and government should protect that right. After paying damages, the polluter's production and sale costs rise, making it unprofitable to continue doing business the same way. Currently, preemptive regulations and pay-to-pollute schemes favor those wealthy enough to perform the regulatory tap dance, while those who own the polluted land rarely receive a quick or just resolution to their problems.

In Congress, I have followed a constitutional approach to environmental action:

• I consistently vote against using tax dollars to subsidize logging in National Forests.
• I am a co-sponsor of legislation designed to encourage the development of alternative and sustainable energy. H.R. 550 extends the investment tax credit to solar energy property and qualified fuel cell property, and H.R. 1772 provides tax credits for the installation of wind energy property.
• Taxpayers for Common Sense named me a "Treasury Guardian" for my work against environmentally-harmful government spending and corporate welfare.
• I am a member of the Congressional Green Scissors Coalition, a bipartisan caucus devoted to ending taxpayer subsidies of projects that harm the environment for the benefit of special interests.

Individuals, businesses, localities, and states must be free to negotiate environmental standards. Those who depend on the land for their health and livelihood have the greatest incentive to be responsible stewards.

Better Battery Technology

I have a dream. In my dream the United States exclusively relies on renewable sources of electricity. A mixture of solar, wind, and ocean current electricity will sufficiently supply every person with the energy they need. In addition to this exclusive source of renewable energy, my dream paints a portrait of transportation that is powered by electricity from these renewable sources. Cars that plug in to their garages at night, high-speed trains with electric lines attached, and airplanes containing large non-explosive batteries in place of gas tanks.

All of this is totally possible. If this country could muster up the courage to break the stronghold that the coal, oil, and nuclear industries have on our energy policy, we could easily begin building a renewable infrastructure that would ultimately save money, create more jobs, and make America the leader in energy innovation.

While we wait for our leaders to become courageous, the battery industry is developing more and more technologically advanced batteries for use in electric cars. Today, Toshiba announced a new battery that can be charged to 90% capacity in less than 5 minutes. That means an electric car could be charged in the time it takes to run into the store for milk. The battery is currently being tested in construction machines like fork lifts, but they could see mainstream placement in automobiles by 2010.

These batteries could charge about 5,000 times before losing their ability to take an electric current. They are safer than lithium batteries, so they will not explode or overheat. Plus, they can withstand temperatures as cold as -22 degrees.

My dream isn't as wild as you might think. Read more HERE

Bleach and the Environment

I have blogged in the past about the harmful effects of bleach in your home. Today, however, I read a very well written piece about exactly how bleach affects your body and the environment on Grist.org.

Grist says...When considering chlorine bleach for other household uses, remember that bleach is dangerous to your lungs and mucus membranes. The production of bleach results in production of dioxins. As you use the bleach, it may produce trihalomethanes, linked to cancer, and adsorbable organic halides, which are harmful to marine organisms.

The truth is, you can get your home just as clean by using vinegar, baking soda, or soap. Everywhere we look we see new house cleaning products that promise to kill all the bacteria in your home. You don't want to create a completely germ free environment for your family, though, because its better to develop a strong immune system that will fight germs in places that haven't been cleaned so deeply.

Christmas Lights Shed Lead

Ah Christmas, a time to gather the family together, drink hot chocolate and decorate your beautiful tree. Many of my fondest holiday memories include helping dad staple-gun Christmas lights to the outside of our home, "One goes out, they all go out!"

Unfortunately, you might want to shy away from including children and the elderly in these activities in the future. CNN has uncovered a disappointing fact about Christmas lights, they contain a potentially lethal level of lead. This isn't the first time I've told you about lead hiding in our holiday decorations. See the Fake Tree vs. Real Tree discussion HERE. What is so insidious about this new discovery is that it means you can't buy unleaded fake trees or lights.

Like in fake Christmas trees, manufacturers use lead to stabilize the PVC chemical they use to build Christmas lights. The scientific analysis done by CNN was completed at Quantex Laboratories and uncovered lead levels on the lights that even surprised Dr. Leo Trasande of New York's Sinai School of Medicine.

"There is no level at which lead exposure is safe," Dr. Trasande said. "Even at one microgram/deciliter -- the lowest level in a person's blood stream that we can detect -- that level has been associated with cognitive impairment in children."

Often, children will help put up the Christmas tree and will then put their hands in their mouths, instantly carrying lead to their bloodstream and organs. Of the four brands tested, Wal-Mart's showed the highest concentration of surface lead.

Unfortunately, the level of lead on these lights is totally legal because the US government, through the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has not created rules that forbid such lead concentrations. If you want your kids to help with the decorations this year (and why wouldn't you?) make sure they only hang ornaments, wear gloves, and wash their hands.

For the full CNN story go HERE.

Green Gift Wrapping Suggestions

I admit it, I stole these great suggestions from a Minnesota state government website. But they are just so clever and creative. I challenge you to incorporate them into your gift wrapping plans this year. I will!

PS - These suggestions save money too.

Trying to avoid the "gift wrap trap?" Here are some great ideas for gift wrapping alternatives.

• Scarves, handkerchiefs or bandannas.
• Old posters and maps.
• Pages from a child's coloring book taped together (especially nice for relatives who would enjoy the artwork).
• Old sheet music.
• Newspapers (foreign newspapers are great).
• Last year's holiday paper (press with warm iron if wrinkled).
• Wallpaper scraps.
• Home-sewn cloth bags.
• Fabric scraps.
• Pictures or advertisements from magazines and catalogs.
• Sunday comic pages.
• A present in a present (for example, a hat in a matching scarf, jewelry in a wooden box, cookies in a reusable tin or cookie jar, barbecue grill utensils or picnic supplies in a tablecloth, kitchen gifts in towels or all-purpose cloths).
• A plain box decorated with leftover glitter, paint, markers, etc.
• A cake pan, basket or a wooden box.
• Reusable decorative bags.
• A “Hollywood box:” individually wrap or decorate the top and bottom of a box with a separate lid. Encourage the recipient to reuse the box.
  Purchase wrapping paper made from recycled paper.

Packaging:

• Dry, popped popcorn (include a note explaining that birds can eat it.)
• Biodegradable starch packing peanuts.
• Used packing peanuts from previous gifts (unwanted packing peanuts, if they are clean, are accepted by many packaging stores for reuse).
• Crumpled ads from the newspaper. (The ink on glossy paper won't smear as it does on the rest of the newspaper.)

For more go HERE

Dreaming of a "Green" Christmas?

Its December finally! The snow is falling here in Washington, DC. Already, people are hosting parties and talking about seeing family and friends. Its a really exciting time.

About now, you are thinking about your holiday budget, your travel plans, your shopping list, or your holiday meal. These are all pieces of your December puzzle. Of course there is one more piece, the green piece. You can't forget that one!

This holiday season its really easy to incorporate some eco-thinking into your routine. Newsweek has some great tips on doing just that, most of them I've addressed before, but let me organize them into one easy post.

1. Use LED Lights: Target, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, etc. all sell LED holiday light strings that look just like traditional lights. How are they different? They're technologically advanced! A string of these lights will last longer and use 80-90% less energy. Make sure you attach all of your lights to timers so they don't stay on when nobody can see them.


2. Bring Your Own Bags: This year, bring your own bags to the mall and reduce the clutter of paper shopping bags around your house. Bring a clip to attach receipts to the outside of your bag so you don't have to worry about being detained for shoplifting.


3. Make Your Wrapping Part of the Gift: Isn't gift wrap one of the biggest wastes of money and resources? Instead, buy some scarves, wraps, sweaters, etc. to wrap those gifts and give them something extra they can keep. Or better yet, wrap gifts with materials you have at home. Retailers also sell recycled wrapping paper for you traditionalists.


4. Buy A Real Tree: Fake trees are manufactured using petroleum and contain lead. They're also not biodegradable. This year, buy a real tree and bring it to the recycling drop-off point in your community so they can make mulch out of it.


5. Throw Greener Parties: At your holiday party, make sure you buy food that is organic and grown locally as much as possible. Only use plates, glasses, utensils, etc. that are reusable. Keep recycling containers convenient for your guests.

You can read more HERE.

Real Trees vs. Fake Trees - What is Greener?

Its that time again, time to make the decision whether to pull out your old boxed fake tree and start attaching those color coded wire branches, or drive down to the farmer's market and tie a real tree to the roof of your car.

Maybe you never though much about it, but there are some pretty significant differences between fake and real trees when it comes to their impact on the health of your family and the environment. Since this blog is all about integrating the "Green Piece" into your daily life, let me explain those differences, they might surprise you!

Your first instinct might be to think fake trees are better for the earth because they are "renewable." Although they are used year-after-year, the polyvinyl chloride (PVC) used to create them is horribly destructive to the planet and relies on gasoline as its base. You can learn more about PVC HERE.

Additionally, PVC manufacturing generates multiple types of carcinogens. Because 85% of America's fake trees are produced in China, this manufacturing process is even more unregulated and unruly.

We all know how China loves its lead. This love extends to your fake tree. Lead is used to strengthen the otherwise weak PVC. The Children's Health Environmental Coalition has warned consumers that fake trees shed lead-laced dust. That's why your fake tree will probably contain a warning not to inhale or eat any dust or parts that may come loose. So much for eating out of that box of chocolates sitting under your fake tree this year.

Real trees aren't perfect either. Because farmers may use pesticides or fertilizers to improve growth time and crop abundance, real trees could contribute to pollution of lakes and streams. Not to mention the annual waste generated by all those trees dumped on January 2nd.

Your best bet is to buy your real tree from a Farmer's Market where a local farmer can testify to whether the tree was grown organically or with chemicals. After you are done with the real tree, chop it into smaller pieces so it is easier for garbage processing. Go to THIS SITE to find tree recycling areas in your community. If you can, buy your tree at a farm where its roots are still in tact a week before Christmas and re-plant it in your yard after the holidays.

I hope that makes your decision over which Christmas tree to use this year a little easier.

Find out more HERE.

Another Show-Down Lost by Congress

I have to say that for a long time I defended this Congress and its seeming lack of accomplishments. I felt like they had accomplished some important legislation but failed to properly publicize their work. Plus, there is a political perfect storm in Washington, between a veto-happy President who is not up for re-election, a narrowly divided Congress, and a very politically diverse majority party. However, Congress' complete failure in raising fuel economy standards has me utterly frustrated.

The current fuel economy standards are identical to those of 1978. They are older than I am. In spite of technological innovations and improvements, not only do we have the same internal combustion engine of the early 1900's, but we also have the same fuel efficiency standards of the disco-era. There is a dual reason for the lack of courage by former and current politicians to make changes to this standard...1) Oil Special Interests, 2) Automobile Special Interests.

In the face of very serious public demand for low-impact automobiles these two groups have been hugely successful in slowing innovation down to a complete halt. Every election cycle, politicians espouse the need to break our reliance on foreign oil and to build a manufacturing sector that would create new jobs while leading the world in energy technology. But once the campaigns are over, these same politicians march to the tune of the special interest pied piper.

A perfect example of this cowardly approach to legislating is the soon-to-be-passed CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) reform bill. This bill was initially designed to set a path to innovation for the United States by setting a strict fuel efficiency standard that must be met by 2020. Every automobile would have had to get at least 35 miles per gallon by that date. The idea was, if automobile companies were forced to make trucks more fuel efficient, they would just create a new technology that would far surpass the 2020 goal and everyone would benefit.

But once again, politicians caved to the special interests and created enough loop holes in the CAFE Reform Bill that the carrot-stick scenario is gone. There are no more incentives for automobile companies to innovate.

For instance, "work trucks" like the Dodge Ram and Ford F-150 will be exempt from the new fuel standards. My father drives an F-150, and not for construction purposes. In addition, if an automaker builds a car that will burn either gasoline or ethanol (a flex-fuel car) then they can avoid the new standards. Do you know where you can get ethanol? I don't. In fact, only about 1.5% of those who own flex-fuel automobiles actually fill them with ethanol. The jury is still out on whether ethanol is any better for the air then gasoline.

The saddest part of this whole debacle is the fact that politicians pretend this new reform is actually good news. They create media opportunities where they can brag about how good this is for the health of our environment and how it will stave off global warming. Folks, it isn't going to mean a thing to anyone.

I guess Congress is finally accepting the fact that it hasn't accomplished anything over the past year. They are pushing through watered-down legislation just to have the opportunity to brag about something. Unfortunately, they are doing so at the cost of our environment and our economy. Read more here.

Hybrids Awash in Green-Washing

There is a phenomenon in the corporate PR world called "Green-Washing." This innocent sounding term is in fact a terrible trend in polishing up a corporation's image to give consumers the impression that the corporation is concerned about the environment. Pretty advertisements and completely insignificant changes to the corporation's policies are used to bring in more money rather than actually do something about the health of our planet.

Unfortunately, hybrid technology in automobiles have started receiving the Green-Washing treatment. Two cases in point...

First, Toyota has rolled out its new Hybrid Toyota Hylander SUV. The promotional materials for the car are designed to give buyers piece of mind when they buy this vehicle, because they are buying a "hybrid." What the materials don't tell you is that Toyota expanded the Hylander's width, height, and weight. In the end, these changes + the new hybrid engine result in ZERO additional fuel economy. The Hybrid Toyota Hylander SUV gets the same gas mileage as the previous, non-hybrid model. Read more HERE.

Second, the Lexus LS Hybrid costs $104,000. At that price, this car should get both incredible fuel economy AND great performance. But Lexus decided to focus exclusively on performance by installing a 5.0-liter V8 engine with a high-output, electric drive motor that gets 438 horsepower. This sedan gets 20 miles per gallon in the city and 22 on the highway. What a waste of hybrid technology and a waste of an opportunity to design a luxury automobile that doesn't waste fuel. Read more HERE.

This is a frustrating trend to see in the automotive industry. They are taking advantage of consumers' positive impression of hybrid vehicles. It almost makes you think that the car companies have a stake in fuel sales and no matter what technology offers, they must still find a way to keep us all addicted to gasoline. I hope buyers don't fall for these tricks.

Green Piece Blog's Linkage

I wanted to make a note of all the great blogs and sites on the internet that have linked to or mentioned this Green Piece Blog. I certainly appreciate their attention and I encourage all our readers to stop by these sites to see the great content they are contributing to the net.

http://www.foodfacts.info/blog/2007/10/fast-food-and-keeping-green.html

http://www.elrst.com/2007/11/02/green-roofs-and-walls-a-brilliant-idea/

http://www.360eats.com/index.cfm?blog=Fast%20Food%20News

http://www.ecollo.com/post/2007/10/3-tips-to-be-green-when-you-choose-fast-food.aspx

http://www.greendaily.com/2007/11/04/renew-a-room-with-green-planet-paints/

http://www.abundancetips.com/News/Abundance-Tips/Cozier-Calmer-Greener-Office.html

http://sew-knotty.blogspot.com/

Plasma, LCD TV Electricity Usage

In a former post you can read HERE, I wrote about how plasma TV's burn through more electricity then traditional tube televisions. This was pretty alarming to myself and many readers, mostly because the world is moving away from tube TV's and toward these flat panel displays.

If you are thinking about buying yourself or somebody else a new TV this holiday season, CNET has gone through the process of documenting the energy usage of the major flat panel displays to help make you a more educated consumer. I'll post the information below. You can read more by going HERE.

Samsung HL-T5687S
56-inch rear-projection
0.12 (Watts/Square Inch)
154.78 (Total Watts)
$47.45 (Yearly Cost)
Most-efficient (plasma)

Vizio P42HDTV
42-inch plasma
0.25 (Watts/Square Inch)
188.26 (Total Watts)
$58.70 (Yearly Cost)
Most-efficient (LCD)

Sony KDL-46S3000
46-inch LCD
0.22 (Watts/Square Inch)
202.58 (Total Watts)
$61.83 (Yearly Cost)
Fewest watts consumed

Sharp LC-32D43U
32-inch LCD
0.33 (Watts/Square Inch)
144.11 (Total Watts)
$44.41 (Yearly Cost)
Most watts consumed

Panasonic TH-58PZ700U
58-inch plasma
0.42 (Watts/Square Inch)
609.53 (Total Watts)
$185.28 (Yearly Cost)

Whole Foods Bag Discount

Just a quick note to discuss something that happened to me this weekend.

I was at Whole Foods shopping for all the Thanksgiving fixings. When it came time to check out, I handed my cloth bags to the cashier as I always do. This time, however, she counted out the bags and entered the number into her register. Then, a magical thing happened, it deducted money from my bill!

It was like 7 cents/bag, but still! I don't know how long this program has been in effect, but it was very rewarding. Thanks Whole Foods.