It’s Blog Action day and I’m sure you know by now that Eastwick is contributing $1 per page view to the National Wildlife Foundation—which charges us to blog today. So far, it seems to me that the gamut of greenery has been run. We’ve got the Al Gore Nobel Peace Prize, the no-trash post from the office dog, why being cheap is the same as being green, and so on… I’ve been scrambling for an idea and then it came to me: strawberries.

The LA Times reported last week on the EPA’s approval of methyl iodide for use in mainly strawberry fields. Methyl iodide is supposed to be a replacement for methyl bromide, a pesticide long in use in the strawberry industry but now banned because of its proven damage to the ozone layer.

Please read the article for yourself as I don’t aim to address every infuriating fact in this blog post. But after reading, I did have to do some research on my own. I couldn’t believe that an administration who prides itself to “err on the side of life” would so blatantly ignore the concerns of scientists who have found that methyl iodide poses serious risks for “pregnant women and the fetus, children, the elderly, farmworkers and other people living near application sites.” Even worse, methyl iodide is labeled as a “neurotoxin and carcinogen that has caused thyroid tumors, neurological damage and miscarriages in lab animals.” That’s right, miscarriages. So lemme get this straight—we can place bans on abortions, even when the mother’s life is threatened, but a pesticide that causes miscarriages, no problem!

The biggest joke here is the EPA Administrator, Stephen L. Johnson.

I don’t know about you, but I would think that an EPA’s administrator’s job is to carry out the mandate of the EPA: “to protect human health and the environment.” How can someone even become an administrator of the EPA when they’ve held high-brow positions at questionable companies like Hazelton Laboratories (closely affiliated with carcinogen darlings like Monsanto and the Council of Tobacco Research) and Litton Bionetics (noted as the sixth leading biological weapons contractor for the U.S. Army in the late sixties to early seventies and widely thought to be responsible for engineering and spreading the West Nile Virus, AIDS-like viruses, and Ebola-like viruses )??? Clearly, Mr. Johnson’s relationships with his former colleagues have a role in the approval of methyl iodide. For more on Johnson’s shady background go here.

This is all very depressing but certainly not surprising. There’s little that can be done, as the provisions the EPA so generously bestowed upon the approval merely include “buffer zones.” The only light in this dark tunnel is that methyl iodide faces further review in California. It’s use can only be approved by the Department of Pesticide Regulation which apparently might have higher standards than the federal EPA. If you want to get in touch with them, click here: Methyl iodide is manufactured by Arysta LifeScience Corp and will be marketed under the name Midas—aahhh, golden strawberries for us all.

blog action day, environment, epa, green, Uncategorized

 A colleague of mine forwarded me this story on NYC’s taxis going completely green by 2012. This is part of Bloomberg’s overall sustainability plan he has outlined for the city, which includes the goal of a 30% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030.

What struck me most about this story were the comments from not only the city, but Fernando Mateo, president of the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers. Mateo says “in the short term, they’re going to have to spend more money, but in the long run they will save money. We support getting more hybrids on the road.” The city admits that hybrids are more expensive as well, but notes the increase in fuel efficiency will result in savings of more than $10,000 per year.

One of the biggest gripes I’ve seen out there on “going green” is the expense. As I noted in an earlier post, people want things fast and cheap (like Wal-Mart). The idea that you need to spend a little extra to save in the long run just doesn’t resonate with consumers who, again, want their goods fast and cheap.

So, I applaud NYC and Mateo for acknowledging that despite the expense, going green is an imperative and might even save them money in the future.

Oh yeah, and kudos to Yahoo! for donating 10 hybrids (with the Yahoo! logo plastered on the doors) to NYC’s green taxi initiative.

cleantech, environment, green, Uncategorized

Yahoo! has a great page on their Earthday site called This Green House. As you toggle through the different rooms, you can hover over the green icons and get some great environment-saving tips.

I don’t know where you’ve been if you have not noticed all the buzz (hype?) around green technology, sustainability, clean tech, greenwashing, however you want to label it. It’s not as if an environmental movement just popped up—it’s been around for over a century and it’s important to note that.

All this talk about going green reminds me of a period of time back when I was in high school. This was during California’s severe drought (back in the 90s) and there was a resurgence of the environmental trend, which had laid quite dormant during the 80s if I recall correctly. Anyway, we all joined the school environmental club, went to local environmental fairs, bought hemp bags, and started practicing water-saving tips like turning the water off while brushing your teeth. Heck, I even used to turn off the shower between shampoos and rinses, the drought was that bad. Sometime in my senior year, the novelty of going green wore off and I’m sure we were on to the next big thing– SUVs and blended mochas.

Today, the proliferation of talk around green issues has a number of factors contributing to it—the Kyoto Treaty, “Inconvenient Truth”, Hurricane Katrina, climate change and the reports published around it. And let’s not forget the star power, like Leo and Brad, being thrown at organizations like Global Green USA, who recently held their star-studded 3rd annual Pre-Oscar bash.  Face it—green has not only become cool, but it’s an imperative. No longer can we be content to toss our bottles in a separate bin, join an environmental club, and buy a Prius.

While I appreciate the buzz over going green and people’s sincere efforts in reducing their environmental impact, I hope this is not just the latest trend. Sure, companies like Wal-Mart can make a big deal out of their green efforts and we can all nod our heads enthusiastically– but slapping some white paint on your roof and publishing your carbon footprint is just not enough. Hello, Wal-Mart!! Have you looked at your business model lately??? Read Stacy Mitchell’s article on the impossibility of Wal-Mart going green for more on this.

The state of our planet is too precarious for this to end up as one of those “Trends of 2007.” This wave of green must be permanent and we need our leaders?? to implement policies and regulations that speak for the well-being of the planet and its citizens rather than for the good ole boys, like the oil industry and the NRA, that write fat campaign checks.

environment, green