Latest Articles

EPA and Ground Zero

The U.S. EPA's atrocious track record around Ground Zero in New York City continues

NYT:

Abandoning an ambitious cleanup plan for Lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn, federal environmental officials said yesterday that they would clean, at no cost, any apartment south of Canal Street with unacceptable levels of contaminants from the collapse of the World Trade Center.

Bike guy, meet clue. Clue, bike guy.

Slate carries the story of a guy who tried and failed to use his bike for useful purposes. Why he failed becomes painfully obvious if you can read between the lines.

He owns four bikes, which he rarely uses "for actual transportation." Like our president, he rides for fitness and recreation only. He is single, childless, owns a dog of course, and has no aging parents to care for (the exact opposite of my lifestyle). He also telecommutes and lives near a 17-mile bike trail that passes close to most places he would want to go (stores, bars, and restaurants). You would think it would be nearly effortless for him to use his bike for just about every local errand. Not so!

Is the fuel efficiency of hybrid cars worth the extra money?

Anybody thinking about selling their old car and buying a hybrid should check this out: Brandon U. Hansen at OmniNerd calculates the monthly gas savings of trading in your current vehicle for a hybrid; how much you'll need to take out in a loan; monthly payment of the loan compared to current car payment; and (voila!) a pretty graph showing the "maximum economically justified hypothetical hybrid sticker price vs hypothetical hybrid gas mileages for various gas prices."

The post considers lots o' info about hybrids, and comes to the conclusion:

While no "green" person would ever advocate buying a hybrid for purely economic reasons, it is painfully obvious that existing hybrids lack the ability to make up for their steep prices with gas savings.

Bummer. According to this, at least, hybrids don't yet have the right appeal to the typical American consumer.

Maybe you knew that already. But aren't the equations and graphs cool? I think so; then again, I used to do long division for fun.

Glaciers, what glaciers?

Here's a new one to me. When glaciers get in the way of mining gold, move them. When public outcry won't let you move the glaciers, redefine them. Harder to get worked up about moving "ice reservoirs," after all.

Here's the November 18 story about mining company Barrick Gold's plan for its Pascua-Lama project in Chile, found in your favorite source and mine, The Mining Journal:

BARRICK Gold Corp has submitted revisions to its environmental-impact assessment (EIA) for the Pascua-Lama gold development project to the Regional Environmental Commission of Chile's Atacama region.

The commission had asked for amendments to the company's plans for the project, including possibly using underground mining for a portion of the mine which would otherwise require the removal of glaciers in the area.

However, Barrick says "studies by international glaciologists redefine "the accumulations of ice" as "ice reservoirs" rather than glaciers.

The company says the resubmission of the EIA, which still includes the planned removal of the ice, contains improvements in monitoring of water quality, treatment of acid runoff, water management, solid-waste management, dust treatment, and protection of flora and fauna.

Tips for greening conferences and events

Surely you’ve attended the Conference from Eco-Hell. Eco-hell, or just plain hell? Photo: iStockphoto/Elerium Studios. You know the one. It begins with an endless paper trail of direct-mail advertisements. It’s held in some remote suburban locale, accessible only by car. At registration, you are issued a conference bag filled with promotional papers and doodads you’ll […]

A super-enviro band

My friend Kevin loves the band Cloud Cult, and so, apparently, does everyone else. I haven't heard their music, because ... no, I have no good excuse. But I think they're my new favorite band. From their site:

All profits, after expenses, of Cloud Cult CD sales and performances are donated to environmental charity work.

Instead of creating new plastic, Cloud Cult's CD is packaged in cleaned reused jewel cases (the band painstakingly hand cleans thousands of cases for each CD release). These used jewel cases are donated by the box-load to Earthology Records from all over the nation.

Earthology is located on a small organic farm in Northern MN, is powered by geothermal power and wind energy (Windsense Project), and the recording studio is built from recycled and salvaged materials.

Cloud Cult CD inserts and print materials are on 100% postconsumer recycled paper and printed with nontoxic soy inks by a local family owned print shop.

Cloud Cult's CD shrink-wrap is not the industry standard toxic PVC. It is environmentally benign LDPE and is packaged by Goodwill Industries, a nonprofit focused on assisting handicapped individuals. Through its relationship with the University of IL, Earthology will soon be packaging all materials in a 100% earth-friendly shrink-wrap, made of nontoxic biodegradable corn cellulose.

Check them out.

Who the public trusts on the environment

The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll (PDF), ably summarized by Ruy Teixeira, probes the public's confidence in the two parties on a variety of issues.

On the question of "protecting the environment," the Democrats outpoll the Republicans by 39%. (Dems 49%, R's 10%, both about the same 21%, neither 13%, not sure 7%.) The difference was 27% back in 1992 and has risen fitfully ever since. After a small dip in 2002, it is now at its highest ever.

Make of it what you will.

(Interesting -- though not eco-related -- thoughts on the poll from Ed Kilgore and Mark Schmitt.)

Can we make a power shift without nuclear power?

Yesterday I noted that Judith Lewis' otherwise excellent piece on nuclear power elided what is, from the environmentalist's point of view, the central question: Could we achieve the same power shift away from fossil fuels without nuclear power?

Latter-day green proponents of nuclear power say we couldn't, but that's all they do: say so. Why can't we get some kind of definitive answer? Lewis, in an email, says the question is just too damn vexed:

The thing is, I could find people who could show you the math that says wind and solar could replace coal next year, and an equal number of sane and competent experts who would argue, convincingly, that they aren't. I don't think we'll know who's right until someone actually does it -- someone with huge piles of cash to pour into distributing renewable power on a large scale.

That sounds about right to me. I've seen confident claims that plug-in hybrids alone could solve the energy problem, and equally confident claims that nothing -- no mix of solar, wind, nuclear, whatever -- is going to make up the difference from oil. I've seen a lot of confidence, but nothing that strikes me as dispositive.

So how to puzzle through this question?

Sustainable-ag legend Joel Salatin can farm — but can he write?

Over the past 20 years, Joel Salatin has emerged as a sort of guru of the sustainable-food movement. His 500-acre Polyface Farm in Swoope, Va., is legendary among a small circle of foodies for its robustly flavored beef, pork, chicken, and eggs. Among farmers, Salatin has won cult status for his innovations in multi-species, pasture-based […]

Carbon Choppy

Northeast greenhouse-gas pact delayed The long-negotiated and much-anticipated — by us climate geeks anyway — cap-and-trade climate pact among nine Northeast states, originally set to be announced this week, has been delayed. Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) has extended negotiations, saying that with recent spikes in energy prices, the plan would raise the cost of […]