Conservation 101: the Compete to Conserve Blog

California Coastal Cleanup Day is this Saturday, September 20, 2008.

This Saturday, September 20, 2008, is the 24th annual California Coastal Cleanup Day. Cleanup events are taking place throughout the state and it’s not too late to volunteer. For a map of event sites, go to http://www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/ccd2.html and contact an event coordinator for directions. There are more than four cleanup locations in the San Francisco Bay Area alone (which is good that we have so many volunteers; bad that we have so much trash to clean up!).

Last year, according to organizers, more than 60,000 volunteers collected more than 900,000 pounds of trash and recyclables. For an eye-opening look at the trash that collects in our nation’s waterways, see the San Franciso Chronicle’s excellent photo essay: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2008/09/18/MN7K12V9PJ.DTL&o=

Painting is more fun with non-toxic paint.

I was a big fan of Home Depot’s Behr brand paints, until I learned that mainstream paints emit dangerous toxins called volatile organic compounds (VOCs). When it came time to repaint the rooms our house, I decided to use “green” paints that reduce indoor air pollution and are more environmentally friendly.

A friend who is a building contractor recommended we try “natural” paint. Seems easy enough, but the more I read, the more I realized I was green on the topic of green paint. (Eartheasy.com offers a great round-up of the types of non-toxic paints and who offers them.) I decided the best way to learn was to experiment, so I chose two types of non-toxic paints (natural and synthetic) in three brands: AFM Safecoat, Yolo Colorhouse, and BioShield. Here’s what I found:

AFM Safecoat Pros:

• Available at lots of green home improvement stores
• Zero VOC (be sure to ask your retailer to use tints without VOCs, too!)
• Low odor dissipated within two days–much faster than my old Behr paints
• Wide color selection (”Blue Wish” is the color shown in the photo above.)
• Good coverage
• Available in flat, eggshell, semi-gloss, and glossy finishes

Cons:

• Paint chips not easily available
  (I know they are wasteful, but they are handy. Instead, I had to wait until the paint chip book was returned by another customer and then check it out for three days. Eco-friendly, yes. Convenient, no.)
• Not an entirely natural paint

AFM Safecoat is my overall favorite of the three non-toxic paint brands I tried, the main two reasons being availability and color selection. I also liked that while it did give off an odor, it wasn’t the strong chemical-smelling odor found in standard high-VOC paints.

Yolo Colorhouse Pros:

• Paint chips and poster-size swatches made with real paint available for purchase
• Available at lots of green home improvement stores
• Zero VOC (be sure to ask your retailer to use tints without VOCs, too!)
• Low odor dissipated within two days
• Good color selection (though not as wide as AFM Safecoat)
• Available in flat, eggshell, semi-gloss, and glossy finishes

Cons:

• Fair coverage, it didn’t stretch quite as far as the AFM Safecoat paint for the same size room
• Not an entirely natural paint

I love the Yolo Colorhouse color choices, and the big swatch gave me a good sense of what the color would like in the room we painted (much better than a standard 1-inch paint chip). But the coverage wasn’t good enough to make it my top pick.

BioShield Clay Paint Pros:

• Water and clay based, so I consider it a “natural” paint
• Odor dissipated within four days (a little longer than the others, but faster than standard paint)
• Odor was earthy smelling, not like that chemical, solvent smell present in nail salons
• Excellent coverage, the same amount of paint stretched further than the others
• Free chips available to order online; a kit with real paint swatches of all their colors is also available for $12.50

Cons:

• Costs more than AFM Safecoat or Yolo Colorhouse paints: $44/gallon versus $38
• Not available at as many retail outlets (You can order online, though.)
• Color selection, while attractive, is limited compared to the other brands
  (Eco Home Improvement in Berkeley taught me how to blend two colors to achieve the shade I wanted, but I prefer to buy off the shelf.)
• Not available eggshell or gloss finishes (They do offer a trim enamel, but according to instructions, it requires sanding between coats–too fussy for me!)

I love the BioShield clay paint we tried. If I hadn’t been in a hurry to finish my work, I would have used it for all my walls, if not the doors and trim. But the hassle of ordering and waiting for color swatches, and then ordering and waiting for my chosen colors was not worth it for me. If you are a good plan-ahead type though, this brand of paints comes highly recommended.

If you can’t find these brands at your local retailer, you might consider trying Home Depot’s new zero-VOC paint called Freshaire Choice. You can order free color chips online and purchase the paint at your local Home Depot.

photo credit: How can I recycle this

BBC reporter Christine Jeavans swore off plastics for the month of August, chronicling her trials in a riveting blog. Her self-imposed rules allowed her to keep the plastics she already owns, but she gave up buying any new items made of plastic, in plastic containers, or wrapped in plastic.

It wasn’t easy. Or even realistic. Jeavans slipped up occasionally, and kept a tally of items. While she didn’t lead an entirely plastic-free month, she estimates that her family reduced their plastic consumption by 80 percent, compared to an average month in which she tallied their plastic usage.

Critics of her experiment point out that plastic is a highly convenient, economical material, which Jeavans acknowledges. Sometimes, plastic could even be considered environmentally friendly, because it extends the shelf life for many foods, thus reducing food waste, and its lighter weight (compared to paper) means it takes less fuel to transport.

Jeavans maintains the point of her exercise was not to demonize plastic, but to get people thinking about the consequences of mindless waste. It’s a topic I’ve been thinking a lot about lately. As it stands now, most of the responsibility for waste reduction falls upon individual consumers,  even though the majority of packaging waste comes industry, and consumers are often limited in their conservation choices. What are you supposed to do if your recycling center doesn’t accept plastic lids? Keep them in your basement until the neighbors call the fire department on you?

It’s important for consumers to reduce, re-use, recycle as much as possible, but on a macro level, manufacturers and producers should also think about the life cycle of each and every product they make. Otherwise there’s gonna be more junk than our basements or landfill can handle.

Jeavans wrote a BBC piece about the beginning of her journey and posted a short video:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7508321.stm

The BBC published her conclusions here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7591751.stm

The Barkingside 21 blog has a great post regarding “A Month without Plastic” and points us to two articles that suggest rising plastics costs may encourage landfill ming for materials:
http://barkingside21.blogspot.com/2008/08/month-without-plastic.html

photo credit: photohome_uk

The choking exhaust you smell when a tour bus is idling is small when compared to the massive toxic emissions that come from idling tankers and container ships at our nation’s ports. So it’s with welcome relief that Newsweek reports that America’s biggest ports, Los Angeles and Long Beach, have kicked off new plans aimed at reducing pollution. About 44 percent of the country’s international cargo–cars, clothes, cosmetics, you name it–comes through these two ports alone, so the effects could be significant.

Newsweek says:

“The constant stream of diesel ships and trucks emits a noxious mix of sulfur and nitrogen oxides and particulate matter that permeate nearby neighborhoods. In the L.A. area, studies attributed 120 premature deaths each year to the docks, mostly from heart and lung ailments; the cancer risk nearest the ports is almost twice the already-elevated risk in the region. Worse, while the chances of contracting cancer are dropping overall in L.A., they grew in port areas by 15 percent between 1998 and 2005. ‘It sticks out like a sore thumb,’ says Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which oversees pollution-control planning in the L.A. area.”

The plans include shifting idling container ships from “bunker fuel” to cleaner burning marine diesel or even electricity while docked. The alternative fuels are more expensive, but plan supporters say lower fuel prices don’t take into account the high health care costs associated with pollution-related illnesses. The Coalition for Clean Air, for example, says that measures that allow shipping growth to continue while capping emissions at 2001 levels can save $1.4 billion in health care costs and productivity over 20 years.

More resources:

For the full Newsweek article, “The Greening of America’s Two Biggest Ports,” September 9, 2008:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158126

The California Progress Report on legislation that would help pay for port pollution reduction:
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/08/major_legislati_1.html

photo credit: sutefani in orlando

My three-year-old is in the peak of her “Why?” phase. So when she asks why we have to turn off the water after washing our hands or brushing our teeth, I tell her that we don’t waste water. That, of course, prompts another “Why?” which gives me the chance to explain the interconnectedness of our consumption, the environment, and our own personal budget. (The answer, in case you were wondering, is because wasting isn’t good for the planet and because Mom can’t afford it.)

The same line of reasoning goes for food. That’s why I’m a major proponent of making a monthly menu and a grocery shopping list that I veer from only for fun treats that we consume right away. Since I began the menu/list plan, food rarely spoils in our home. I estimate I save about $25 a week (that’s $1,300 a year)–more if you consider what I’d spend eating out if I hadn’t bought wisely.

In an excellent article posted September 9, 2008, MainStreet.com takes this line of thinking one step further. Wasting food wastes more than food and money. It also wastes water:

“In the U.S., we throw away 30% of our food every year, according to the [Stockholm International Water Institute]. That wastes enough water to meet the needs of every household in North America for a year. It also wastes more than $48 billion a year, the report found.”

For the full MainStreet.com article and more money-saving tips, go here:
http://mainstreet.com/article/lifestyle/food-drink/save-money-food-help-save-world

photo credit: subewl

School is in session, and our family has gone from packing beach bags to packing lunches. Because one of my Compete to Conserve goals is to be more mindful of packaging waste, this seasonal switch has me obsessing over how much waste is created from just one child’s lunch. Add two adults, because we often pack our work lunches, and then multiply it by all the other packed lunches in the country and you’ve got a huge hunk of junk!

So how can you reduce packaging waste without driving yourself crazy? I don’t have an easy answer for that one. Convenience is what drives people to flock to disposable juice boxes and prepacked lunchables, not a villainous desire to destroy the planet. And many is the time that I long for their grab-and-go ease. That said, with a little planning and practice, packing a waste-free, or less wasteful, lunch can get easier.

Here are 5 things I do to make packing a waste-free lunch easier:

1. Make a monthly menu (1/2 hour at the onset saves me lots of time later).
2. Place plastic baggies and wrap in a hard to reach place to avoid temptation.
3. Assemble of stable of reusable, but replaceable (even the most mindful kids and adults occasionally lose things), containers, utensils, and cloth napkins (old washcloths or cut-up tees will do, too).
4. Pack fruit that doesn’t require packaging, such as apples, bananas, and oranges.
5. Go Ford-assembly-line style: Pack the same lunch for everyone in the family.

It’s definitely tempting to think that my kid’s lunch doesn’t make a difference, but then I remember that the New York State Department of Conservation says one child bringing a disposable lunch creates 67 pounds of trash a year.

If you are interested in packing waste-free lunches for your family, here are some more helpful resources:

San Mateo County’s Tips for a Waste Free Lunch at Home and at School
http://www.recycleworks.org/schools/lunch.html

“Back to School Lunch with Less Waste,” on Cheap Like Me
http://cheaplikeme.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/back-to-school-lunch-with-less-waste/

“Green Savings Tips for School Lunch,” on OrganicMania
http://organicmania.com/2008/04/02/green-savings-tip-for-school-lunch/

photo credit: Inferis

Last month, the California legislature missed an opportunity to do the right thing and phase out the use of BPA (bisphenol A) in baby bottles, cups, and baby food cans and jars sold in the state. Contrary to what the critics would have you believe, it would have banned the use of BPA only in products intended for anyone under the age of 3.

Senate Bill 1713, introduced by California State Senator Carole Migden, passed in the Senate, but even after several rounds of amendments and votes, failed to pass in the Assembly. This is a real shame. It had been hoped that the bill, if passed, would lead the way for other states to follow suit.

BPA, in case you haven’t heard, is a chemical additive found in clear, shatterproof plastics and in canned-food liners. It’s also a well-known endocrine disrupter that is linked to a variety of ailments, including infertility and breast and prostate cancer.

Would you want to give a known carcinogen to your baby? Remember, babies are in a state of rapid development, so environmental toxins can play a more harmful role in amounts smaller than is needed to harm adults. It’s no wonder that parental outcry has strong-armed manufacturers to produce alternative baby products that don’t use BPA. (With cups at least. So far, it seems, all cans of baby formula contain BPA. Powdered cans contain less, however.)

Most parents, i.e., voters, are overwhelmingly in favor of SB 1713. I know a few parents who are indifferent to it, but none who are clamoring to include even a suspected toxin in products that developing babies use every day. So who sank it? Primarily, the plastics industry. These are the same people who mailed a flyer misleading voters to believe that the BPA phase out would include a wide range of favorite consumer goods, even those intended for adults.

The American Plastics Council insists the amount of BPA that leaches from BPA-containing cups and bottles into food and drink is safe. Unfortunately, the tobacco companies, after decades of knowingly lying about the dangers of smoking, pretty much ruined the industry safety line for everyone. When companies talk about “acceptable levels of risk” these days, do you believe them unquestioningly?

Of course, the FDA, the European Food Safety Authority, and the Japanese National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology also claim BPA is safe. But even the American Plastics Council admits that the U.S. National Toxicology Program says there is “some concern” regarding BPA exposure in infants and children and that “more research is needed.” (That phrase always raises my eyebrows.) Non-Toxic Kids has a good graphic that shows that the “some concern” level is no cause for dismissal.

Both Canada and Japan have taken a “just in case” approach and moved to ban the use of BPA in baby products. Don’t our families deserve the same level of precaution?

What’s Next
The fight is not necessarily over. Senator Carole Migden will be replaced by Mark Leno in November. When I called her office, they suggested letting him know you support the proposed ban. He could draft a new bill if enough people voice their support.

More Resources:
“Caution Is the Right Reaction to Chemical,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2008
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-fi-lazarus13-2008aug13,0,3672425.column

“California Assembly Rejects Two Bills on Chemical Bans,” The Sacramento Bee, August 19, 2008
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1167258.html

“BPA in Formula: This Is Not a Call to Panic,” on Enviroblog
http://www.enviroblog.org/2007/12/bpa-in-formula-this-is-not-a-c.htm

Lush employees go naked in San Francisco.

Who among us hasn’t done work in the buff? Pants sometimes take a backseat to meeting a deadline now that Blackberries, laptops, and home computers let many of us occasionally work from home. But going to work naked when you face hundreds of people a day? That’s what store employees of the cosmetic company Lush did last week to promote its “naked” package-free body and bath products.

Wearing nothing but aprons that read “Ask me why I’m naked,” employees at 27 stores across the U.S. handed out flyers that encouraged customers and passersby to consider the environmental impact of packaging. Yes, it was a publicity stunt, but it was a fun, good-natured way to inform people on an otherwise dismal subject.

The U.K.-based retailer says that packaging contributes 2 percent to global greenhouse emissions and plastic consumes 8 percent of the world’s oil resources. The State of California says that packaging makes up one third of the 66 million tons of waste Californians throw away each year.

Industry is the biggest offender of packaging waste, but consumers contribute to the pile, too. With that in mind, Lush sells many of its products, including shampoo, without packaging and in bars that are sliced to size. (Liquid shampoo, because it’s mostly water by volume, weighs more and takes more energy to transport. It also requires plastic packaging.) At a customer’s request, a salesperson will wrap bars in paper to take home. That, of course, defeats the idea of no packaging, so repeat customers often come in with a reusable baggie or soap dish.

More resources:

“Bare Facts on Packaging,” August 28, 2008, SFGate.com
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/chrongreen/detail?blogid=50&entry_id=29565

Use Less Stuff Report, for consumer tips and the latest research on waste reduction
http://www.use-less-stuff.com

Slow Food Nation '08 in San Francisco.

Slow Food Nation ’08 came to a close in San Francisco yesterday, leaving, organizers hope, very little waste.

Festivals, fairs, amusement parks, and sporting events are notorious for the amount of garbage left in their wake. Along with porta-potties and drunken dudes, trash is an unfortunate reality associated with otherwise joyous county fairs and street fairs. That’s what made Slow Food Nation’s commitment to zero waste such a welcome relief. (”Zero waste” strives to eliminate waste, regarding trash as a resource that can be reused or re-purposed.)

Bins, Staff Made Zero Waste Easy

The weekend-long festival was like Disneyland for foodies with a conscience. Featuring a farmers’ market, a bevy of speakers, a large “Victory Garden” of fruits and vegetables growing outside City Hall, and lots of “slow food” from local restaurants, Slow Food Nation also sported plenty of easy-to-find bins for separating waste into three categories: recyclables, compostables, and landfill. Vendors were careful to offer only items that could be composted or recycled.

The festival also hired a helpful, energetic, friendly staff to help festival-goers place the right items in the right bins. Contamination continues to be the bugaboo of recyclers, so adding a human element no doubt aided organizers’ efforts.

Who Else Is Moving Toward Zero Waste?

Of course, while Slow Food Nation as an organization goes to great pains to not be elitist, the festival was clearly populated by people who already have an interest in sustainability and zero waste practices. More interesting, and maybe even more valuable, would be seeing these efforts in practice at events like the Sonoma County Fair or a 49ers’ game, where larger and more diverse population segments come together.

The Sonoma County Fair did host a “sustainability pavilion” this year, but the fair’s sustainable efforts seemed to end there. When I attended, garbage bins were overflowing with heaps of non-biodegradable utensils and food scraps and food-soiled papers that could have easily been reclaimed and composted.

Still, bit by bit, various festival organizers across the country and trying to make love for a good party compatible with zero waste. Alameda County, across the Bay, employed zero waste practices in its last county fair. Walworth County, Wisconsin, published a case study on their efforts to encourage less waste. And this year’s Silver Lake street fair in Los Angeles worked to get vendors to switch to biodegradable carryout containers and to get people to “think before you toss.”

More resources:

Slow Food Nation ‘08:
http://slowfoodnation.org/

Case Study: Walworth County Fair, Wisconsin:
http://www.besmart.org/publicplacerecycling/Case-studies/Walworth-County-Fair/wc-fair.html

“‘Wasted’ at the County Fair,” on Mom Goes Green:
http://www.momgoesgreen.com/%E2%80%9Cwasted%E2%80%9D-at-the-county-fair/

“The Greening of a Los Angeles Street Festival,” August 24, 2008, The Los Angeles Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-me-sunsetjunction24-2008aug24,0,1134965.story

“Slow Food Brings Many Issues to the Table,” August 29, 2008, San Francisco Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/29/MNKQ12K54L.DTL

Cyclists and pedestrians take to Sunday Streets SF.

Yesterday, San Francisco hosted its first Sunday Streets event, providing Bay Area residents and visitors nearly five miles of car-free road to bike, walk, and play. Stretching from Portsmouth Square, which borders Chinatown and the Financial District, to the Embarcadero, down through South of Market and the Bayview, streets normally choked with automobiles were filled with cyclists, baby strollers, and lots of leisurely pedestrians.

Next Sunday Streets SF Is September 14

A second Sunday Streets SF event is planned for Sunday, September 14, 2008. City organizers say that if the event proves popular and doesn’t negatively impact businesses, they would like to continue and expand the program. They hope it will bring more people to the city, enhance life for residents, get people out of their cars, and promote physical fitness.

It’s also a fabulous opportunity to people watch. I saw people riding unicycles, old-fashioned high-wheel bikes, tandem bikes, and more. I also saw one pedicab driver smoking on his break and thought that it might not be the best habit for a pedicab driver.

Some Merchants Worried about Business

Despite the event’s apparent success, Sunday Streets SF isn’t without critics. I heard more than one toddler beg to be carried as we continued along the route. The parking lots that charge $15-30 to park for the day sat empty, and I’m guessing their owners were not happy.

Fisherman’s Wharf merchants, especially, were worried that street closures would hamper business. Funny, I thought only selling Alcatraz shot-glasses and “I Got Crabs at Fisherman’s Wharf” t-shirts might be bad for business, but we’ll have to wait and see until Sunday’s sales figures come in.

Many Fisherman’s Wharf, Chinatown, and North Beach merchants similarly opposed the demolition of the Embarcadero Freeway after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The controversial freeway, which blocked beautiful views of the bay and turned the area into a pedestrian no-man’s-land in the 1950s, was reviled by many city residents. Now that retail and dining business is booming along the waterfront and the area hosts wide sidewalks and bike lanes, you’ll find few people who want the massive old freeway back.

In my own walking-induced euphoria this Sunday, I paid $8.50 for a small Icee and cotton candy, so hopefully that will help put skeptical merchants in the black. My family also bought lunch at the Ferry Building, which was packed with hungry diners and shoppers.

Popular Car-Free Events Spreading Worldwide

Modeled on Bogotá, Colombia’s 25-year-old Ciclovía events that close 70 miles of city streets every Sunday and major holiday, Sunday Streets SF is just one of a growing global phenomenon. Worldwide, Guadalajara, Mexico; Santiago, Chile; Ottowa, Canada; Tokyo; Paris; and Kiev have hosted similar car-free events. This summer, New York City and Portland, Oregon, also freed up roads for cyclists and pedestrians.

More resources:

Videos of Ciclovía and other Sunday city street closures:
http://www.sundaystreetssf.com/PortlandSundayParkways.html

“Thousands Enjoy SF’s Sunday Streets Event,” September 1, 2008, San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/01/BAC212M16J.DTL

“Ciclovia New York City” on the WashCycle blog:
http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2008/07/ciclovia-new-yo.html

“Ciclovia Comes to North America,” on CommuterPageBlog: http://www.commuterpageblog.com/2008/06/cyclovia-comes.html