Gristmill

REACH

Great post over on greenState about the power and implications of the E.U.'s new REACH regulations (it stands for "Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals"). As Grist readers -- but few in the U.S. public -- probably know, very few of the 30,000 some chemicals on the market have been tested for safety. We're testing them -- you, me, our children -- right now, by using them. REACH says that companies must test chemicals, and publicly post the results, before putting them on the market.

Naturally, this scares the shit out of chemical companies, and they're doing everything they can to derail it, with the help of their handmaidens in the Bush administration. But the E.U. has become a global economic power, and we might not be able to manipulate them at will. Says greenState:

As the EU has an economy similar in size to the U.S., it will become difficult for the $500 billion chemical industry to develop one set of products for Europe and another set for the U.S. Once REACH is in place, citizens around the world will be able to access detailed information on the safety of chemical products, and use that information to force their own governments to pass similar laws. California has already indicated its desire to enact regulations similar to REACH, and other governments are sure to follow suit.

So this may be a new development for political activists in the U.S., that decisions in Europe can affect health and environmental standards around the world. But considering the current political climate in America, this comes as welcome news. Let's hope that the EU continues to pursue aggressive environmental legislation, and that corporate lobbyists do not succeed in weakening such legislation the way they have in the U.S.

Yup.

Kyoto and Africa

In this post, Jamais Cascio argues (among other things) that Kyoto will be a boon to African countries, because of the treaty's Clean Development Mechanism, which, as explained well here, allows companies and countries to build or fund clean energy projects in developing countries in exchange for carbon-emissions credits that can be traded on the open market. He points to this story, which describes several possible projects in South Africa that stand to benefit.

But South Africa is somewhat anomalous in Africa, in terms of stability and economic development. What of poorer, less stable African countries?

Environmental quality and the economy

I found this piece in the CSR frustratingly sketchy and inconclusive. It makes the somewhat obvious point that restrictive environmental regulations stimulate the growth of industries and technologies that meliorate environmental impacts. Pass a law that says coal-fired power plants have to install scrubbers, the scrubber industry benefits. So for that class of industries and technologies, environmental regulations do not, contra the anti-Kyoto crowd, suppress economic development.

But that gets us nowhere. As the author acknowledges:

Of course, green technology represents only a small part of the nation's economy. Gauging whether stricter environmental regulation helps - or hurts - the overall economy is tougher and more controversial.

To say the least. There's a good bit of research indicating that improving environmental quality is not an overall drag on the economy. But what greens need is a compelling -- and by compelling I don't mean rhetorically compelling, but empirically compelling -- case that clean technology is naturally going to grow and eventually eclipse polluting technology, and thus that it would be wise economically to use public policy to nudge us in that direction. That's certainly what I believe, and so too does Eric de Place:

Maintaining our economy's singular reliance on fossil fuels is not a smart growth strategy for the 21st century. Global supplies of petroleum are waning and combating climate change (principally through reductions in fossil fuel combustion) will become ever-more important. So clean energy alternatives and energy efficiency will be critical in the coming decades.

Numbers, though. I want numbers. Readers, help out: Point me to some numbers.

Cascadia scorecard

Today, Northwest Environment Watch released their annual Cascadia Scorecard. If you live in the Northwest -- or care about it -- you should give it a read.

Launched in 2004, the Cascadia Scorecard charts the Pacific Northwest's success at creating a sustainable economy and way of life.

The 2005 Scorecard gives a concise update on how Cascadia ranks in seven key trends--health, economy, population, energy, sprawl, forests, and pollution--but hones in on one of the most critical issues facing the region: energy.

It details the weaknesses of the region's energy system and argues that Cascadia can achieve true security, and a stronger economy, by investing in a clean-energy revolution that is already gathering force.

Most of the Scorecard data are available on the Web on the pages for each indicator; we also do daily updates on the Scorecard weblog.

The problem

An extraordinary piece of writing by Alex Steffen over on Worldchanging. If you are looking for a reasonably comprehensive but concise description of the problem in which we -- that is, humanity -- find ourselves, now you know where to find it. Required reading.

Now we’re golden

You think the reason more people don't switch to solar is because it's expensive and, well, takes effort? Nope, turns out it's just a fashion thing. At least, that's the theory behind multi-national Kyocera's solar panels, which masquerade as common roof tiles. (Special thanks to Phil, stuck in snowy Boston, for pointing this one out.)

Using a somewhat less subtle approach, an Australian company is moving forward with plans to build a 3,280-foot-high solar tower. Proponents say the tower will power 200,000 homes, and they've just purchased a 25,000-acre sheep farm to host it. Let the sun shine in.

Because it’s there

It’s difficult to work up outrage these days, I know. But still. Republicans have long had a >hard on for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It’s never made any sense — the amount of oil we could get is a tiny fraction of what we need, and it’s 10 years out in the […]

Biodegradable plastics

An intriguing story on Japan's increasing development and production of biodegradable plastics.

In 2000, production of such plastics stood at slightly more than 2,000 tons.

"It will increase to 50,000 tons this year and to 200,000 tons in 2010," the official [of the Biodegradable Plastics Society] said. ...  "Biodegradable plastics will account for about 10 percent of the market in around 2020."

Cool.

Poop is not funny

OK, maybe a little. Hot off the, er, presses: a company in Australia is seeking donations of kangaroo dung to make recycled paper. Inspired by African and Asian operations that make sheets from elephant excrement, Joanna Gair hopes to make "Roo Poo Paper" a household name. The "pooey" product has proven useful as a conservation fundraiser in some places and is, of course, a hit with the kids. "It's taken my breath away just how popular this [idea] is," Gair says. Which is not a funny quote at all.

Folks in Milford, Nebraska, might want to consider the same plan, since they just spent four months battling a massive, burning pile of manure at a feedlot. The 100-foot-long heap, estimated to weigh 2,000 tons, began smoldering due to organic action at its center (here's to the power of composting!). After the state Department of Environmental Quality cited clean-air violations, concerned parties spent several weeks pulling the pile apart, and finally quelled the fire. What a relief that is.