Raising Them Green

Forbes Lists The Top Ten Most Toxic Household Items

Melissa — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:32:38 +0000

Sure, the traditional chemical-based kitchen cleaner is toxic – but you already knew that. Forbes’ list of the Top Ten Most Toxic Household Items has some surprising (to me) culprits.

Baby care products – think flame retardants used in high chairs, cribs, and even nursing pillows. How about a side of PBDE with that order of fresh from the tap breastmilk?

Vinyl flooring and shower curtains – Okay, I admit, I love the smell of a vinyl shower curtain. I know that is just weird but that smell makes me smile. Perhaps I’m getting a bit of a buzz from the phthalates that are being off gassed?

Nonstick pots and pans – Teflon is great but if a Teflon-coated pan gets too hot, it can flake and off gas PTFE. I believe the recommendation is to get a nice cast iron pan instead – anyone know a good alternative?

Consumer electronics – power cables can have phthalates. This is one that I knew and so I try to keep the kids away from the cords for more than just the electrical shock risk.

Hard plastic bottles and containers – another non-surprise for me. Guess what these might contain? If you guessed BPA, you’re right. I love my Klean Kanteens.

Insulation – Good thing we don’t let the kids play in the attic. When I was a kid I ended up with some nasty flecks of fiberglass in my skin after playing with some cool pink insulation. I know insulation is different now but that experience was enough to make me weary of letting kids around the fluffy stuff.

Air fresheners and cleaners – I’ve written about this before, check out my Alternatives to Air Fresheners article for some neat ideas.

Cosmetics – These are nasty. Phthalates, parabens, and other nastiness are used to make makeup, deodorant, hair care products, nail polish, and more. Check out this Whole Foods Podcast on Natural Cosmetics.

Carpets – Teflon dangers are back, this time in your carpet and even treated furniture. Unfortunately we have a house full of carpet and a daughter with asthma. We’re planning on moving within 2 years and will be foregoing the carpet – I’m thinking bamboo floors.

Personal hygiene products – Soaps and lotions can have triclocarban, phthalates, and other toxins.

Did anything on this list surprise you? What are your favorite alternatives for some of these toxic household items?

Photo: SierraTierra

Prepare Your Kids for Earth Day 2010 – Earth Day’s 40th Anniversary

Melissa — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:24:01 +0000

April 22, 2010 isn’t just your ordinary Earth Day – this year will mark the event’s 40th Anniversary. Help your children prepare for Earth Day with this video from Kids Rock News.

Animal Factory by David Kirby

Melissa — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 02:06:06 +0000

Last week David Kirby’s newest book, Animal Factory, hit the store shelves. A review copy also hit my mailbox and I’ve been engrossed in the book since then. So far I’m impressed with Kirby’s story of three community activists that are working to stop toxic Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) from taking over rural America. It will probably be another week or two before I finish the article and can publish a comprehensive review but in the interim, here is an excerpt from the book (published with permission)

Introduction
by David Kirby,
Author of Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy, and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment

May 27, 2009

Many Americans have no idea where their food comes from, and many have no desire to find out.

That is unfortunate.

Every bite we take has had some impact on the natural environment, somewhere in the world. As the planet grows more crowded, and more farmers turn to industrialized methods to feed millions of new mouths, that impact will only worsen.

The willful ignorance of our own food’s provenance is curious, given our Discovery Channel-like fascination with the way in which everything else in our modern world is made. Some consumers will spend hours online reading up on cars, cosmetics, or clothes, searching out the most meticulously crafted or environmentally healthy products they can find, then run down to the supermarket and load their carts with bacon, butter, chicken, and eggs without thinking for a second where — or how — any of those goods were produced.

This is starting to change, of course. More Americans are coming to realize that the modern production of food — especially to provide for our affluent, protein-rich diet — has a direct and sometimes negative impact on the environment, the well-being of animals, rural communities, and human health itself. Some have joined in a contemporary consumer revolt of sorts that has put the corporate food industry on the defensive in recent years.

At the center of the storm are the large-scale, mechanized megafarms where hundreds of thousands of cows, pigs, chickens, and turkeys are fed and fattened for market, all within the confines of enclosed buildings or crowded outdoor lots.

Government and industry call these massive compounds “confined [or concentrated] animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs (usually pronounced KAYfohs), though most people know them simply as “factory farms.” Chances are you have seen them from above, while flying in an airplane: long White buildings lined up in tightly packed rows of three, four, or many more.

CAFOs are where most of our animal protein — our milk, cheese, butter, yogurt, eggs, chicken, turkey, bacon, sausage, cold cuts, ribs, pork chops, and, increasingly, beef and fish — comes from these days. Old MacDonald’s farm — with his big red barn and clucking chicks in the yard — is quickly fading away into a romanticized past. Today, MacDonald would most likely be working as a contract grower for some conglomerate, raising tens of thousands of animals inside giant enclosures according to strict instructions dictated by the company, which typically owns the livestock but is not responsible for the thousands of tons of waste left behind before the survivors are trucked off to slaughter.

Large companies with kitchen-table names like Perdue, Tyson, Smithfield, Cargill, ADM, and Land O’Lakes now control much of the poultry and livestock production in the United States. They own the animals, they control the all-important processing and packing plants, they often operate their own distribution networks, and they sell an array of brands to consumers in the Supermarket.

This “vertical integration” model of production — some would call it an old-fashioned, illegal trust in need of a Teddy Roosevelt-style buster — leaves small and independent growers at such an obvious disadvantage that many of them give up animal agriculture altogether. Two percent of U.S. livestock facilities now raise 40 percent of all animals,1 and the vast majority of pigs, chickens, and dairy cows are produced inside animal factories.2

Livestock and poultry are very big business in America. Like all industries, agribusiness has barons that wield extraordinary political and economic clout, with billions at their disposal to spend on K Street lobbying, local and national political campaigns, saturation advertising, feel-good PR (see: “California, happy cows”), and other means of creating a favorable business climate for themselves.

And like many big industries, factory farms are major contributors to air, water, and land pollution. Science and government have concluded without a doubt that CAFOs are responsible for discharging millions of tons of contaminants from animal manure into the environment every year — much of it illegally.

Unlike the steel, auto, or coal industries, livestock operations are not subject to the same stringent rules, regulations, laws, and controls on environmental discharges. After all, what could be more important than the guarantee of an abundant, safe, and affordable food supply? What could be more sacrosanct in American legend and law than the farms and farmers who make sure our food gets to the national dinner table night after night?

Besides, how could a farm be considered a factory? There are no smokestacks on a farm. There are no chemical plants or refineries, and very few vehicles. Where, then, is all that supposed pollution coming from, and how much of a problem could there actually be?

Consider this:
Each year, the United States produces more than one ton of “dry matter” (the portion remaining after water is removed) animal waste for every resident,3 and animal feeding operations yield one hundred times more waste than all U.S. human sewage treatment plants.4
While human sewage is treated to kill pathogens, animal waste is not. Hog manure has ten to one hundred times more concentrated pathogens than human waste,5 yet the law would never permit untreated human waste to be kept in vast “lagoons,” or sprayed onto fields, as is the case with manure.
Manure can contain pathogens, antibiotics, drug-resistant bacteria, hormones, heavy metals, and other compounds that can seriously impact human health, aquatic life, and wildlife when introduced into the environment, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay produces one million tons of manure a year, enough to fill a football stadium “to the top row, including all the concourses, locker rooms, and concession areas.”6
Agricultural waste is the number-one form of well-water contaminants in the United States, where at least 4.5 million people are exposed to dangerously high nitrate levels in their drinking water. 7
A Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study of well water in nine Midwestern states showed that 13 percent of the supply had nitrate levels above the EPA standard of ten milligrams per liter.8
Feedlot odors contain some 170 separate chemicals,9 many of them known to cause respiratory ailments, diarrhea, depression, violent behavior, and other health problems.
Rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than cars, a UN report warns.10
Animal-factory proponents say that CAFOs are the most cost-effective method in the world of producing meat, milk, and eggs. They credit modern American agriculture with yielding the cheapest food in human history — which is hard to refute — and also the safest, which is debatable.

Animal industrialists say that by confining poultry and livestock to CAFOs — as opposed to letting them roam free on ranges, pastures, and fields — they are providing warm and clean environments where farm animals can thrive, free from the threats of the elements, predators, or even attacks from other farm animals. The delivery of food, water, and veterinary care becomes more efficient, they contend, and animals can be moved more quickly to market, increasing profitability.

Besides, according to these industrialists, consumers demand cheap, lean, uniform cuts of meat, and using CAFOs is the only possible way to deliver that.

But animal-factory opponents, whose ranks are growing — they are not only consumers, but scientists, politicians, and farmers, as well — charge that the only way CAFO production can be profitable is by passing along, or “externalizing,” certain costs associated with raising so many animals in such a small place.

In 2008, the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production released a landmark report on CAFOs. It reached some very sobering conclusions about their impact on our health, the environment, rural communities, farm workers, food safety, animal welfare, and the looming threat of evolving microbes — including antibiotic-resistant E. coli, MRSA, and, of course, swine flu virus.

The Pew report reminds us that the price of protein, given the externalities of animal-factory production, often goes well beyond the price tag in your grocer’s aisle.

“These ‘externalities’ may include anything from changes in property values near industrial farming operations, to health costs from polluted air, water, and soil, and spreading resistant infections or diseases of animal origin, to environmental degradation or cleanup costs — all of which are ‘paid’ by the public,” the Pew Commission said, “even though they are not included in the cost of producing or buying the meat, poultry, eggs, and milk that modern industrial animal agriculture provides.”11

Animal Factory is not strictly an anti-CAFO book, though many in the agricultural community will perceive it that way. I do not call for an end to industrial animal production, nor do I draw any personal conclusions myself. Informed consumers — whether of food or of information — are vital to a healthy democracy. I would never dream of telling people what to eat or, more important, what not to eat. But we all have a responsibility, even an ethical obligation, to know where our food comes from, and what impact its production has on the environment and public health, before we take it home and fry it up in a pan.

Wherever possible, I have tried to include voices from the animal-production industry and other CAFO supporters. Many farmers believe that industrial animal production is the only option open to them if they are to remain in farming, and they are grateful to the large companies for providing steady contracts and a stable economic environment for them to survive.

One powerful argument for agribusiness is that it offers a lower retail price of food to shoppers. For consumers, factory-farmed meat, milk, and eggs are usually considerably more affordable than their organic, free-range, or “sustainably produced” counterparts. Most working families do not have the luxury of buying high-end, “boutique” protein. Some opponents of CAFOs would counterargue that families should simply cut down on the animal products they buy.

I am not a vegetarian, and you will occasionally find me in line for fast food, so I have no business telling others how to eat. Food — like sex, politics, and religion — is an intensely personal, emotional, and complicated subject.

Moreover, farmers are not evil people. The farmers I got to know, including those who operate CAFOs, seemed to genuinely care about the environment, the animals, their communities, and the quality and safety of the food they produced.

On the other hand, I cannot dismiss or forget what I witnessed firsthand in my three years of reporting this story. I met with people living within smelling distance of animal factories in the chicken belts of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia, in the hog belt of North Carolina, in the upper Midwestern CAFO states of Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio, and in the arid western dairy regions of Texas, central California, and the Yakima Valley of Washington.

Everywhere I went, the story was the same: CAFOs had fouled the air, spoiled the water, threatened property values, changed the face of local agriculture, and made life miserable for thousands of people, though certainly not everybody.

Sadly, I could only tell a fraction of the stories I heard. This book is not an encyclopedic history of all forms of animal production in the United States. Many people, for example, will notice and perhaps criticize the paucity of information about the raising of beef cattle and farmed fish in America. Though I am not trying to somehow “clear” beef of any responsibility, I do think that its production is the least problematic of all CAFO-related protein; most U.S. beef cattle are still owned and raised by independent producers — on open pasture, grassland, or through grazing permits on federal land — and spend only the last few months of their lives being fattened on grain in massive feedlots, which most certainly qualify as CAFOs, with all their attendant environmental issues. (Another reason I did not write about beef feedlots more is that, aside from residents of Yakima Valley, they were not an issue for any of the people I profiled.)

As for fish farms, they certainly present challenges that keep some environmentalists up at night, including farmed-salmon escapees that introduce harmful pests such as sea lice and viral diseases that infect wild fish populations. One could write an entire book on the environmental impact of fish farms alone. On the other hand, I have never heard anyone complain about foul odors or noxious gases coming from fish farms.

Animal factories of every stripe are currently under fire. So what does that mean for the future of CAFOs? Will they be reformed into universal acceptability? Will they be litigated into oblivion? Will they be driven out of the country? The truth is, none of those things is likely.

Only time will tell how this dramatic saga plays out. But humankind may not have the last word on whether CAFOs will be with us in twenty years.

That decision will belong to nature.

And nature did not intend for animals to live by the hundreds or thousands, crammed together inside buildings, raised with pharmaceutical products, with no access to grass, sunlight, or the clean, healthy scent of outdoor air.

NOTES

1. USDA Agricultural Research Service, “National Program 206: Manure and Byproduct Utilization Action Plan,” 2005, http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=409616&showpars=true&fy=2008.

2. USDA National Statistics Service, “Farms, Land in Farms, and Livestock Operations,” 2006, http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1259.

3. USDA Agricultural Research Service, “FY-2005 Annual Report: Manure and Byproduct Utilization,” 2006, http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/programs/programs.htm?np_code=206&docid=13337.

4. Charles P. Gerba and James E. Smith, Jr., “Sources of Pathogenic Microorganisms and Their Fate During Land Application of Wastes,” Journal of Environmental Quality 34, no. 1 (2004): 42-48, http://jeq.scijournals.org/cgi/reprint/34/1/42.pdf.

5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Detecting and Mitigating the Environmental Impact of Fecal Pathogens Originating from Confined Animal Feeding Operations: Review,” EPA/600/R-06/021, September 2005, http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r06021/600r06021.htm.

6. J. Warrick and T. Shields, “Md. Counties Awash in Pollution-Causing Nutrients,” Washington Post, October 3, 1997.

7. B. T. Nolan, B. C. Ruddy, K. J. Hitt, and D. R. Helsel, “A National Look at Nitrate Contamination of Ground Water,” Water Conditioning and Purification 39, no. 12 (1998): 76-79, http://www.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/pubs/wcp_v39_no12/.

8. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health, “A Survey of the Quality of Water Drawn from Domestic Wells in Nine Midwest States,” September 1998, http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/statistics/environmental.

9. Confined Livestock Air Quality Committee of the USDA Agricultural Air Quality Task Force, Air Quality Research and Technology Transfer, “Risk Assessment Evaluation for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations,” July 12, 2000, 7, http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r04042/600r04042.pdf.

10. H. Steinfeld et al, Livestock’s Long Shadow-Environmental Issues and Options (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006), http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM.

11. Pew Commision on Industrial Animal Production, “Putting Mean on the Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America,” a Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2008, http://www.ncifap.org
The above is an excerpt from the book Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy, and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment by David Kirby. The above excerpt is a digitally scanned reproduction of text from print. Although this excerpt has been proofread, occasional errors may appear due to the scanning process. Please refer to the finished book for accuracy.

Author Bio
David Kirby is a Huffington Post contributor and author of the New York Times bestseller Evidence of Harm, winner of the 2005 Investigative Reporters and Editors Award for Best Book, and finalist for the New York Public Library Helen Bernstein award for Excellence in Journalism. He lives in Brooklyn, New York. Visit www.AnimalFactoryBook.com.

You Can Also Find Me on 1-800-Recycling.com

Melissa — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:23:05 +0000

I can’t wait until I graduate in May, then I’ll have more time to write for myself. As it stands right now, I have my own blogs, I have blogs that I contribute to, and I’m in a writing-based degree program. I’m writing all the time. I joined the blog team at 1-800-RECYCLING.com a bit ago and I just realized that I haven’t shared any of my work here.

So here’s what I’ve been up to at 1-800-RECYCLING.com.

Green Living in B.C. — Synergy at Dockside Green

n the summer of 2008, Synergy at Dockside Green in Victoria, BC, received a LEED Platinum rating from the Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC). Phase I of the residential complex earned 63 out of a possible 70 points on the CaGBC’s LEED for New Construction (LEED-NC) 1.0 checklist — the highest-scoring LEED Platinum project on record.

Google Employees Embrace Recycling

When a business decides to increase on-site recycling, it must have the employees on board with the plan in order to be successful. If a business wants employees to recycle but doesn’t have companywide guidelines, it needs to have enthusiastic employees. Google has enthusiastic employees.

The Lexus HS 250h Takes Recycling to a New Level

I had been writing and reading about the HS for almost a year by the time I purchased it, but it wasn’t just the fuel efficiency or the “hybrid-only luxury” tag that attracted me to the vehicle, it was also the fact that the Toyota takes recycling to a whole new level with the HS.

Are Concert Venues Consciously Recycling?

Attending a concert is something that most Americans have probably done at some point in their life. Concert attendees are there for one thing: the music. Concert venues are typically hosting these events for one thing: the money. However, concerts are big waste generators. Used drink cups, soda bottles and long lines at the restroom lead to quite a bit of waste generated in a short amount of time.

Is Internet Gaming Eco-Friendly?

Although it may be safe to assume that the vast majority of hardcore Internet gamers aren’t the least bit concerned about the environmental impact of their habit, there are some gamers out there that are curious if their hobby is eco-friendly. I’m one of those gamers.

Commercial Playground Equipment – Greener Than You Think

I grew up in Arizona. It gets hot here in the summer. Did it stop me from going down that metal slide at the park? Nope. Did it hurt when I went down it? Yep. Did I do it over and over again? Yep. My kids will never know the joy (er, pain) of sliding down a metal slide.

Lookie Here! I’m on Forbes.com

Melissa — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:15:20 +0000

I’m so excited, I just found out that one of my articles from the Mother Nature Network is up today on Forbes.com – woo!

Red Lobster Goes Green

Red Lobster is going green. Darden Restaurants, which owns the seafood chain as well as Olive Garden and LongHorn Steakhouse, is launching a sustainable restaurant design initiative. The initiative will require that all new restaurants be built to the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED standards. Additionally, restaurant remodels will need to be built following the LEED Rating Systems code when feasible.

Make Your Own Organic Baby Food

Melissa — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:16:10 +0000

When my son was an infant, the only option I thought I had for organic baby food was Earth’s Best. Thankfully we live close enough to a Whole Foods Market that carried these products. By the time my daughter was born two years later, Earth’s Best baby food was in our local supermarket. However, a lot changed in those two years. I realized that I didn’t have to buy organic baby food, I could just make it myself. And to be honest – it was easy.

If you’re overwhelmed at the thought of making your own organic baby food, check out this video featuring Dr. Greene. Making your own organic baby food is easy, some might even call it fun, and it is the best for your baby.

New School Lunch Safety Rules Coming – Summer 2010

Melissa — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:58:42 +0000

I’ve written about some questionable school lunch safety issues before and so I was excited to see that the U.S. Department of Agriculture will be launching new school lunch safety rules this summer. According to the USA Today, this will be the most comprehensive change to the school lunch safety program in a decade.

The first step in these changes is not surprising – stronger beef safety standards. Recall after recall in this country is related to the nation’s beef supplies and so it is a natural first choice for reform. The stronger beef standards will be implemented in July and then new standards for poultry, eggs, and produce will follow suit.

“The USDA reforms, announced Feb. 4, focus largely on how beef and other foods bought for schools are tested for salmonella, E. coli O157:H7 and other contaminants. The department will commission research, including a study by the National Academy of Sciences, to ensure that its testing standards meet those of the most selective commercial buyers, Morris said. He serves as a deputy administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service, the USDA branch that buys meat and poultry for the school program.” Source: USA Today

Now stronger food safety rules are great but I wish that the school lunch program would migrate to an organic or at least sustainable food model. Even with the school lunch requirements enacted, these lunches are still comprised of less than desirable food products and may not be doing much to help with our nation’s childhood obesity rate.

Photo: Micah Sitting

My New Lexus HS 250h Has Been Recalled

Melissa — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:44:36 +0000

Last night, I was writing about the impending 2010 Toyota Prius recall for the Mother Nature Network and I didn’t see a thing about a possible Lexus recall. Imagine my surprise when I wake up this morning and realize that my new Lexus HS 250h has been recalled. Okay, well it isn’t exactly new, we purchased it on October 16, 2009. But it is new-ish! If you are the owner of a 2010 Toyota Prius or Lexus HS 250h, here are the recall details straight from Toyota!

Recalls Underscore Toyota’s Commitment to Address All Vehicle Quality and Safety Issues Promptly and Effectively

TORRANCE, Calif., February 8, 2010 – Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc, today announced it will conduct a voluntary safety recall on approximately 133,000 2010 Model Year Prius vehicles and 14,500 Lexus Division 2010 HS 250h vehicles to update software in the vehicle’s anti-lock brake system (ABS). No other Toyota, Lexus, or Scion vehicles are involved in this recall.

The ABS, in normal operation, engages and disengages rapidly (many times per second) as the control system senses and reacts to tire slippage. Some 2010 model year Prius and 2010 HS 250h owners have reported experiencing inconsistent brake feel during slow and steady application of brakes on rough or slick road surfaces when the ABS is activated in an effort to maintain tire traction.

Toyota has responded to owner concerns with a running production change for 2010 Prius that was introduced last month, improving the ABS system’s response time, as well as the system’s overall sensitivity to tire slippage. The production change for the HS 250h is planned for later this month.

“We’re committed to doing everything we can – as fast as we can – to restore consumer trust in Toyota, and these recalls are part of this effort,” said Jim Lentz, President and Chief Operating Officer, Toyota Motor Sales. “We regret the inconvenience this recall will cause to Prius and HS 250h owners, and will do our best with the support of our dealers to make sure that it is conducted in the most trouble-free manner possible.”

Mr. Lentz continued: “As part of the quality improvement program announced by Toyota President Akio Toyoda last week, our company is undertaking a top to bottom review to ensure that our vehicles meet our own high standards of safety and reliability, now and for the future. We are taking steps to implement more stringent quality control across the company, to investigate customer complaints more aggressively and to respond more quickly to any safety issues we identify.”

The recall will allow Toyota dealers to perform the software update on 2010 Prius vehicles sold prior to this running production change. Only Prius vehicles produced since May 2009 and all HS 250h vehicles are subject to this recall. First- and second-generation Prius vehicles use a different ABS system and are not involved in this campaign.

The ABS system on the Lexus HS 250h is similar in design to the Prius. The software adjustment planned for HS 250h production and dealer modification is being finalized and will be announced very soon.

Toyota will begin mailing letters to Prius owners included in this recall next week and HS 250h owners within the next few weeks, to let them know when to bring their vehicles into a dealership. Owners will only receive a letter if their vehicle is involved in the recall.

Separately, Toyota will conduct a voluntary safety recall on approximately 7,300 early production – 2010 model year Camry vehicles equipped with the 4 cylinder engine to inspect for a power steering hose that may be in contact with a front brake tube. This contact could lead to a hole in the brake tube and cause a brake fluid leak, increased brake pedal stroke and greater vehicle stopping distance.

Owners of the involved 2010 Camry vehicles will be notified by mail starting in the middle of February.

Detailed information about these recalls is available to customers at www.toyota.com/recall and at the Toyota Customer Experience Center at 1-800-331-4331.

Have a Green and Local Valentine’s Day Celebration

Melissa — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:13:04 +0000

Valentine’s Day is just around the corner. I’ve written about how my husband makes a greener choice for Valentine’s Day before – shopping at the Organic Bouquet. However, a Connecticut-based morning news show takes it a step further and encourages everyone to have a green and local Valentine’s Day celebration.

Even if you don’t live in Connecticut, you can definitely shop at a local farmer’s market or CSA for your Valentine’s Day dinner.

Note to email subscribers: This post has an embedded video, please click through to view the video.

Will Your Child Have a Green Job One Day?

Melissa — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:41:23 +0000

I often write about green jobs and the importance of a clean energy economy for the Mother Nature Network. I am passionate about the importance of a clean energy economy and so it was nice to see President Obama focus on this for a good portion of his State of the Union address. Although I’ve been writing about green jobs for almost a year and a half, I never thought about the idea that one of my children will have a green job one day.

My oldest is only eight, so he’s got a long time before he enters the workforce. Right now, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has provided millions of dollars to green jobs training programs that focus on certain underserved communities, including youth. The unemployment rate among teens in this nation is outrageously high. In December 2009, the national unemployment rate was 10% but 27.1% of teenagers were unemployed. So these training programs are providing an opportunity for teenagers to learn a new skill that will prepare them for a green career, not just a green job.

However, many of these training programs are geared at weatherization, energy efficiency, and other construction-based trades. I don’t see Alexander in any of these fields. For a few years he wanted to be an Egyptologist but now he’s thinking something more technical and in the computer/information technology field. The good news is, he can still find a green job in the IT industry…green jobs are everywhere.

So have you ever thought ahead to your child’s future and wondered if he will have a green job one day?

Photo: greenforall.org