The Oracle of Omaha Looks To The Skies

by
Warren Buffett speaking to a group of students...

Warren Buffett speaking to a group of students from the Kansas University School of Business (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It is noteworthy that Warren Buffett, one of the principal investors of our era, has turned his investment attention to solar energy.  Even if you do not follow the markets you, likely know are familiar with Warren Buffett. Whether it is from the fact that he was the world’s richest man for an impressive period of time or from frequent discussion regarding his famous frugal lifestyle or his witty comments on our nation’s politics, you know two things about him, namely, he is very rich and incredibly successful. As one could imagine, these two things go hand in hand. Mr. Buffett accomplished this by becoming, “arguably the greatest value investor the world has ever seen. His investment holding company, Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A), has averaged a compounded annual gain of 19.8% since 1964”.[1] When Mr. Buffet speaks, the world listens, and when he takes action, we take heed. Mr. Buffet is known, in particular, for his style of investment, the long haul. He will take large positions in companies and hold them for a long time. When Mr. Buffet decides to purchase stock in a company, he is not looking to make a few quick dollars. He is looking for something with inherent value that he feels is undervalued and can produce long term success. That is why many ears perked when it was announced that, “Mr. Buffet’s MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company has acquired two SunPower solar photovoltaic power  plant projects in California for between $2 billion and $2.5 billion. The adjacent Antelope Valley Solar Projects will be built in Los Angeles and Kern counties and will generate 579 megawatts of electricity for utility Southern California Edison. At peak output that’s the equivalent of a big fossil fuel power plant”.[2]

To understand why Mr. Buffet made this purchase, we only need to look at one of his recent purchases and to abroad to understand the future he sees. Let us first look at Mr. Buffet’s purchase of Burlington North Santa Fe Railway in February 2010. When they looked at the railroad industry they saw that, “fuel prices were up 120% since the March 2009 lows[,] unemployment stubbornly hovered around 9% in most areas[,] [and] shipping rates, as measured by the Baltic Dry Index, were 1/10th of their 2008 highs”.1 Many people enjoy quoting FDR’s line, “we have nothing to fear but fear itself”, but do not grasp the context of the words. We recognize the meaning behind the words but tend to fail to see the world to which they were spoken. They were words spoken in the thralls of the Great Depression, reaching out to a world in the grip of compounding fear. Fear, like many traumatizing forces, tends to have a multiplier effect and a perceivable impact on outcomes. People were living in a world where there did not seem to be a light at the end of the tunnel, but what they failed to recognize is that they were the ones who had to dig to the light. Mr. Buffet not only recognized that the light was there, but also comprehended what was necessary to reach that light.  Now he is reaping the rewards: “the freight railway industry is enjoying its biggest building boom in nearly a century…Profit in the industry has doubled since 2003, and stock prices have soared…Fortune has even dropped a “green” gift in the industry’s lap. A train can haul a ton of freight 423 miles on a gallon of diesel fuel, about a 3-to-1 fuel-efficiency advantage over 18-wheelers, and the railroad industry is increasingly promoting itself as an eco-friendly alternative”.[3] What we have found buried in this purchase is a sound decision that showed vision and an in-depth understanding of the intersection of both environmental concerns and the drive for profit. How successful was this purchase for Mr. Buffet? In the first nine months of 2012, BNSF accounted for roughly a quarter of Berkshire’s profits. To put that in context, Berkshire owns roughly eighty companies.[4] When Mr. Buffet undertook this purchase, he followed the wisdom of his own words: “‘In business I look for economic castles protected by unbreakable ‘moats.’’”1 Now he turns his gaze to the solar industry, and to understand why, we must turn our gaze abroad.

We turn to Germany which has been making waves lately with its energy reports. Their numbers from this past summer show us why Mr. Buffet was attracted towards solar:

“Renewables now account for 25 percent of energy production, up from 21 percent last year, the country’s energy industry association (BDEW) said in a statement that reinforced Germany’s position as a leader in green technology…Solar energy saw the biggest increase, up 47 percent from the previous year”.[5]

Germany is no small fish; it is a member of the G8 and has a GDP of $3.479 trillion, with a GDP per capita of $42, 625.[6] As such, Germany is quite comparable and offers a viable alternative for America. As of 2011, renewables only accounted for 9% of US energy consumption, with solar only accounting for 2% of that.[7] Unfortunately for the renewables sector, there are many barriers to entry into the energy market in America. Most notable are the huge subsidies given to fossil fuel companies that artificially lower prices. Despite these obstacles, renewables are making inroads. Science has for the most part always been on their side but now the economics are beginning to adjust as well with, “the cost of PV modules, currently the single largest part of system cost, and [falling] 74% in the last twenty years”.7

Still, however, one must question Mr. Buffet’s wisdom. Why would he invest in solar, which makes up such a small percentage of an already small percentage, when he could invest in oil? Oil, already, accounts for 36% of total US energy consumption 7 and the US is set become a net energy exporter in the next few years.[8] Mr. Buffet recognizes that despite the fact oil production is on the rise, we are no longer simply paying prices based on our demand, but on world demand. As such, we no longer solely determine the price.

So then what do we make of Mr. Buffet’s decision? Mr. Buffet, in my opinion, merely did what he has always done. He saw an undervalued industry that has room for growth and decreasing costs. With his purchase he bought a company which not only, “will build and operate the projects for MidAmerican Renewables, and the energy will be sold to Southern California Edison in accordance with two long-term agreements that have received approval from the California Public Utilities Commission”[9],  but will print the blueprint of a way forward in America. Germany has already shown us that despite the common argument, it is possible to put yourself on a renewable energy track, while maintaining a high standard of living.  We have a castle for a model, but we still need the moats. The moats, of course, are the inherent failures of the fossil fuels, both economically and environmentally. People enjoy stability and control in their lives, and a country whose energy consumption is reliant on fossil fuels can expect neither. In the end, we are left with an industry with growing demand and shrinking costs. Furthermore, we have an administration that has made its support for renewables crystal clear. Mr. Buffet is in this for the long haul and in the long haul, the sun is always going to be there.  Warren Buffett clearly recognizes the economic value of investing in alternative energy that helps us live green, be green.

By Sean Patrick Maguire

__________________

[1] http://www.investmentu.com/warren-buffetts-railroad.html

[2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2013/01/02/warren-buffett-in-2-billion-solar-deal/

[3] http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2008/04/30/railroads.ART_ART_04-30-08_C8_5RA29I0.html

[4] http://blogs.star-telegram.com/dfwjobs/2012/11/bnsf-continues-to-be-a-profit-leader-for-berkshire-hathaway.html

[5] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/26/germany-renewables-idUSL6E8IQIA720120726

[6] http://www.gfmag.com/gdp-data-country-reports/268-germany-gdp-country-report.html#axzz2Hh9Mj2kK

[7] http://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS03-12.pdf

[8] http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/01/20131514160576297.html

[9] http://inhabitat.com/warren-buffet-buys-worlds-largest-solar-plant-for-just-over-2-billion/

SunPower Corporation

SunPower Corporation (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A Green Movement Requires A Green Body

by
High-fructose corn syrup for sale

High-fructose corn syrup for sale (Photo credit: Steven Vance)

 

The fact that America has an obesity epidemic is no secret. Apologists argue that this is a product of the world in which we live.  Americans, today, live a more sedentary lifestyle than in the past, and as a consequence, we have become fatter. Of all of the member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), America has the largest population percentage (30.6%) that is obese.  Coming in at 23%, the United Kingdom is the second most obese nation, and interestingly, of all the other OECD countries, it is comparably most similar to America in terms of cultural aspects.  Following the sedentary lifestyle argument, it would only follow that the world’s most developed nations would have comparable obesity rates. However, in reality, this is not the case. The G8 countries are the most affluent in the world, yet none have an obesity rate close to that of America.  Having already listed the obesity rate of two G8 Nations, now allow me to name the rest: France: 9.4%, Russia:  Anywhere between 16.2% and 20 %; Russia does not actively report on obesity)[1], Italy: 8.5%, Germany: 12.9%, Canada:14.3%, and finally Japan: 3.2%.[2]

 

Despite having very similar levels of living, America’s obesity rate is staggeringly higher. However, it would be factious of me not to say that there is not a correlation between income levels and obesity rates.  The OECD has taken note and has released some staggering facts such as, “until 1980, fewer than one in ten people were obese. Since then, rates doubled or tripled and in 19 of 34 OECD countries, the majority of the population is now overweight or obese. OECD projections suggest that more than two out of three people will be overweight or obese in some OECD countries by 2020”1. Nonetheless, the question must be asked: despite obesity being on the rise, why does America appear to have such a huge head start? While a sedentary lifestyle does undoubtedly play a role, there is another dominant factor as well. Your good old Uncle Sam is determining what you are and aren’t eating through laws and taxes.

 

America was founded as a democracy, but that has not stopped the establishment of kings in this country. The first and most famous king was, of course, King Cotton. The economic power of this cash crop helped propel the economic success of America in a pre-industrialized world. While it is uncomfortable to think that the forging of cotton and slavery together helped establish America on the world stage, it is a reality, and it is our duty as Americans not to shy away from our past. However, our King today started out in a more humble fashion and ascended to the throne over the course of American history. I am, of course, talking about King Corn, present in America at the first landing of settlers and saturating American culture today, quite literally might I add. Agriculture in America is a business that is heavily supported and subsidized by the federal government. While we will be primarily discussing its negative consequences, we must recognize that it was started to help farmers in the Great Depression, and many programs, such as crop insurance, are beneficial. However, this government support has morphed over the years and skewed the market in favor of corn and corn-based products. So how does this all work? It works through the rather bluntly titled Farm Bill:

 

“The 2008 Farm Bill approved $300 billion in mandatory spending (this figure does not include discretionary spending measures that are approved separately). About two-thirds (67%) of the spending measures were allocated toward nutrition, followed by agricultural subsidies (15%), conservation (9%), and crop insurance (8%). The remaining three percent included credit, rural development, research, forestry, energy, livestock, and horticulture/organic agriculture.”[3]

 

The Farm Bill is typically renewed every five years, but has yet to be renewed in whole. At the moment, it is a victim of Congressional gridlock, a reexamining of its benefits, and the pull of the corn lobby.

 

farm-bill-allocation1

 

This pie chart details the percentages of the bill from 2008. As you see a majority went towards the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps. We, however, are to focus on the 14% that went to crop subsidies. With regards to the 2008 Bill:

 

“The [2008] bill [gave] some $4.9 billion a year in automatic payments to growers of [corn and soy] such commodity crops, thus driving down prices for corn, corn-based products and corn-fed meats. Cows that are raised on corn, rather than grass, make meat that is higher in calories and contains more omega-6 fatty acids and fewer omega-3 fatty acids—a dangerous ratio that has been linked to heart disease.

 

Cheap corn has also become a staple in highly processed foods, from sweetened breakfast cereals to soft drinks, that have been linked to an increase in the rate of type 2 diabetes, a condition that currently affects more than one in 12 American adults. Between 1985 and 2010, the price of beverages sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup dropped 24 percent, and by 2006 American children consumed an extra 130 calories a day from these beverages. Over the same period, the price of fresh fruits and vegetables rose 39 percent. For families on a budget, the price difference can be decisive in their food choices.”[4]

 

Here are some more numbers to put the effect of corn syrup into perspective:

 

  • Percentage of high fructose corn syrup in Americans’ daily caloric intake: 7
  • Percentage of U.S. caloric sweeteners made from high-fructose corn syrup: ~40
  • The year that high fructose corn syrup became available in the U.S. food supply: 1967
  • Percentage U.S. consumption of high fructose corn syrup rose between 1970 and 1990: 1,000%
  • Percentage of obese Americans in 1960-1962: 13.4
  • Percentage of obese Americans in 2005-2006: 35.1
  • Approximate ratio of obese Americans in 2007-2008: 1 in 3

 

One could argue that America itself has been the test subject since 1967 concerning the effects of high fructose corn syrup. Actual clinical studies are starting to point in the same direction as well. As stated in a recent study published in the journal, Global Health:

 

“Researchers compared the average availability of high-fructose corn syrup to rates of diabetes in 43 countries. About half the countries in the study had little or no high-fructose corn syrup in their food supply. In the other 20 countries, high-fructose corn syrup in foods ranged from about a pound a year per person in Germany to about 55 pounds each year per person in the United States. The researchers found that countries using high-fructose corn syrup had rates of diabetes that were about 20% higher than countries that didn’t mix the sweetener into foods. Those differences remained even after researchers took into account data for differences in body size, population, and wealth.”[5]

 

This all begs the question of what we as the public can do about this. There are a wide variety of answers. Some argue for getting rid of the subsidies altogether or extending them to fruits and vegetables. Both arguments rest on the notion of the even playing field upon which capitalism is built. Let the consumer vote with his/her wallet, and the invisible hand will choose the one that is more beneficial. However, we must recognize that corn has a huge head start in this affair, and as such the two hardly can be deemed to be on even footing. This should be taken into consideration during the debate itself, the debate which is still ongoing. This is still a debate which the public can affect, whether you support the status quo or seek change of any kind. Your voice  still can be heard by your Representative and your Senator. Of course this is America, home of the ‘do it myself’ attitude. If you’ve lost faith in the political process in this country, and I think there may be several of you out there, why not break the chain, if only a little, by planting your own garden? Democracy is and should never be a top-down process. If a bill is to become law or if something is to be given preference, it should be initiated at the behest of the people. This helps to ensure that we live green, be green.

 

 

 

By Sean P. Maguire

 

[1] http://www.oecd.org/health/49716427.pdf

 

[2] http://www.aneki.com/countries2.php?t=Countries_with_the_Highest_Obesity_Rates&table=table_obesity&places=2=*=*=*=*=*&order=desc&orderby=table_obesity.name&decimals=–1&dependency=independent&number=all&cntdn=asc&r=-373-404&c=&measures=Country–obese%20population%20aged%2015%20and%20over%20(OECD%20Countries)&units=–&file=obesity

[3] http://www.snaptohealth.org/farm-bill-usda/u-s-farm-bill-faq/

[4] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fresh-fruit-hold-the-insulin

[5] http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20121127/high-fructose-corn-syrup-diabetes

 

Silver Lining in Fiscal Deal for Commuters

by
MONROE STREET PARKING LOT IN CHICAGO HOLDS 2,7...

MONROE STREET PARKING LOT IN CHICAGO HOLDS 2,700 CARS FOR COMMUTERS AT LAKE SHORE DRIVE. NEW CONSTRUCTION IS UNDERWAY… – NARA – 556196 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While most of the conversation on the recently passed fiscal cliff deal has focused on large-ticket items, such as tax rates, tax breaks, and unemployment benefits, the deal did address and enhance a subsidy for commuters, which is a silver lining for the green movement.

Over the past year, the tax code has provided a subsidy for commuters who drive to work. Under this provision, an employer could cover up to $240 per month in parking expenses tax free for drivers.  Conversely, commuters who took public transportation were only covered for up to $125 of their monthly expenses.  Under the new fiscal cliff deal, the two benefits are set at equal levels, retroactively for 2012 and for 2013.

This provision definitely is a victory for the green movement, which stresses the need to reduce gas consumption and the number of cars on the road.  Also, the argument to increase the benefit to those who take public transportation brings to light the realization that subsidized parking is a distortion because there is a cost involved to provide and maintain parking facilities for drivers, thereby causing an adverse impact on land use.

Hopefully by equalizing the benefit for parking and taking public transportation, more people will opt for the latter.  Discussions on programs such as these now entertain the possibility that commuters who opt for the parking subsidy would be allowed to take the cash benefit.  The goal here is to encourage car or van pooling, which still goes a long way to reduce the number of automobiles on the road on any given day.  Also some jurisdictions are considering plans to increase the cash benefits for commuters who bike to work.

Given that transportation is the second largest household expense for America’s workers, along with the fact that most commuters drive to work alone, provisions to increase commuter subsidies for public transportation and to provide cash benefits for carpooling are very important.  They provide strong incentives for people to adopt behaviors that protect the environment, reduce our carbon footprint and successfully live green, be green.

Sources for this Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/how-congress-shapes-your-commute/2011/10/19/gIQA7GHOxL_blog.html
http://odenton.patch.com/articles/marc-commuters-could-benefit-from-fiscal-cliff-deal

 

 

The New Year Ushers in New Green Laws

by
Bill Daniels getting chicken feed from the fee...

Bill Daniels getting chicken feed from the feed bags which he must store in one of his three rooms. Panther Red Ash… – NARA – 540999 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The New Year ushered in new legislation in many states, including some “green laws” that we find worthy of comment today.

The state of Maryland enacted a new law that prohibits the use of chicken feed that contains arsenic, a known carcinogen.  This is the first law of its kind in this nation, which bans the use of arsenic-containing additives, specifically roxarsone, in chicken feed.  The bill to prohibit arsenic-containing chemicals in chicken feed was sponsored by Del. Tom Hucker (D-Dist 20) of Silver Spring.   Del. Hucker notes that this new law is “a win for all Marylanders.”  Historically, arsenic-containing additives were added to chicken feed to protect the birds from parasites.  However, this chemical can build up in the birds’ bodies and manure and then can be washed into the Chesapeake Bay.  it is important to note that arsenic has been linked with diabetes, heart disease and cancer.  This win comes with a caveat as the poultry industry expresses concern that roxarsone (previously manufactured by Pfizer and voluntarily suspended in 2011) could be marketed again as a similar product by a different company.  It is important that we watch for any new developments that may occur in response to this new legislation.

A second piece of legislation worthy of mention is New York’s new law that exempts the sale and installation of commercial  solar energy system equipment from state sales use tax.  This law was enacted in response to the state’s commitment to “achieve the goal of 45 percent of New York State’s electricity needs through clean renewable energy and improved energy efficiency by 2015.”  Sen. George Maziarz (R-C, Newfane) Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications, notes that eliminating all state sales tax on solar systems equipment and installations and providing local municipalities the option to do the same should serve to stimulate the economy with increased commercial solar installations and the creation of more jobs to complete the work.  This law definitely should serve as a model for other states to increase the use of clean renewable energy while simultaneously stimulating the job market.

energy

energy (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

Our third selection of legislation to discuss can be found in the state of Iowa, which enacted a new law that allows the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to permit anglers to fish with three poles and a total of six hooks for an additional $12 licensing fee.  This law is aimed to spur ice fishing which is trying to rebound after a poor showing last winter.  Additionally, the Iowa DNR passed a new law that makes licensing more convenient by permitting hunting and fishing on a combined license.  The goal of these laws are to promote more outside activity, which definitely is green.

There are so many things we can do to protect the environment and promote healthy living.  Today we at LGBG salute the states of Maryland, New York and Iowa for the steps they have taken to protect the environment and to help us all live green, be green.

English: Iowa Department of Natural Resources logo

English: Iowa Department of Natural Resources logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sources for this article:

http://www.gazette.net/article/20121231/NEWS/712319987/1122/bethesda/New-Maryland-laws-target-veterans’-licenses-chicken-feed-elections&template=gazette

http://bellmore.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/laws-taking-effect-on-jan-1-2013#

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/viewart/20130101/NEWS10/301010068/Updated-5-new-laws-new-year-take-effect-Iowa

New Year Ushers In New Green Legislation

by

The New Year ushered in new legislation in many states, including some “green laws” that we find worthy of comment today.

The state of Maryland enacted a new law that prohibits the use of chicken feed that contains arsenic, a known carcinogen.  This is the first law of its kind in this nation, which bans the use of arsenic-containing additives, specifically roxarsone, in chicken feed.  The bill to prohibit arsenic-containing chemicals in chicken feed was sponsored by Del. Tom Hucker (D-Dist 20) of Silver Spring.   Del. Hucker notes that this new law is “a win for all Marylanders.”  Historically, arsenic-containing additives were added to chicken feed to protect the birds from parasites.  However, this chemical can build up in the birds’ bodies and manure and then can be washed into the Chesapeake Bay.  it is important to note that arsenic has been linked with diabetes, heart disease and cancer.  This win comes with a caveat as the poultry industry expresses concern that roxarsone (previously manufactured by Pfizer and voluntarily suspended in 2011) could be marketed again as a similar product by a different company.  It is important that we watch for any new developments that may occur in response to this new legislation.

A second piece of legislation worthy of mention is New York’s new law that exempts the sale and installation of commercial  solar energy system equipment from state sales use tax.  This law was enacted in response to the state’s commitment to “achieve the goal of 45 percent of New York State’s electricity needs through clean renewable energy and improved energy efficiency by 2015.”  Sen. George Maziarz (R-C, Newfane) Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications, notes that eliminating all state sales tax on solar systems equipment and installations and providing local municipalities the option to do the same should serve to stimulate the economy with increased commercial solar installations and the creation of more jobs to complete the work.  This law definitely should serve as a model for other states to increase the use of clean renewable energy while simultaneously stimulating the job market.

House Failure to Aid Sandy Victims Sends Distress Signal

by
FEMA Trailers

FEMA Trailers (Photo credit: Urban Sea Star)

The recent action by the House Republican leadership to allow the current Congressional term to expire without voting on an aid package for Hurricane Sandy victims speaks volumes about the GOP‘s commitment to fight climate change and help those hurt by its severe weather.  Moreover, this Congress’ lack of action represents an abandonment of responsibility and duty to American citizens.

To date, there still are thousands of people whose homes and businesses were damaged or completely destroyed by the storm.  Many families are caught up in bureaucratic entanglements and local ordinance conflicts that prevent them from repairing their homes and businesses or finding accommodations close to their former schools and businesses so that they can regain some sense of normalcy while trying to get their lives back on track.  While FEMA trailers are being delivered, there still is a process required to secure such lodging.  Once approved, the families have to wait for the trailers to be delivered, secured to a pad and hooked up to utilities.  As many families as possible are being placed in local rentals, and as can be expected, there is now a scarcity of available properties.

With that said, the result is that the storm was emotionally and financially damaging to so many people with the massive loss of property and life.  The resulting homelessness and uncertainty have pushed the scales to a tipping point.  The victims of this storm need help now, and our government is capable of providing that help.  Shame on any Congressman who chose to leave without making this right.  If the House of Representatives cannot not act on this because they want to go home on vacation, we as citizens must rally together and use the vote to send them home for good.

Climate change is real and its adverse weather occurrences is equally damaging to the financial and mental health of its victims.  Super storm Sandy struck the New Jersey/New York/Connecticut area in November.  The next storm could be anywhere in this country.  The face of each Sandy victim is the face of any American citizen.  Let’s stand together to protect ourselves by seeking solutions to climate change and global warming with its severe weather.  Let’s all live green, be green.

Happy Green New Year

by

This year has soared by, and we would like to thank all of our friends, old and new and our followers and co-bloggers for your support for our group and for your commitment to the green movement.  We wish you all a Happy New Year.

As we move forward to a new year, we know that it is important that we renew our commitment to protect the environment and the green movement so that we can live green and healthy lives.  As we face the fiscal cliff, we are aware of the uncertainty of the continuation of some of the successes that we have already achieved.  There is a chance that we may lose some gains in the area of alternative energy (wind and solar energy) , and we may see decreased financial support for our national parks and forests.  However, we will not be deterred.  We will start the new year out maintaining our personal commitment to live green by continuing our routine habits of recycling, living healthier, eating healthy diets, supporting local eateries and local farmers, and taking all the steps we can to reduce our carbon footprint.

We also must remain mindful of the eco-cliff.  As bad as financial debt is, environmental debt is worse.  Our legacy to our children must take into consideration the state of the environment.  There is no value in a country with a balanced budget but with polluted air, depleted natural resources and lack of fresh water.  Failure to deal with the looming eco-cliff will hurt the U.S. economy, plus the lives of billions of people around the world.  In this new year, we must keep environmental issues in the forefront of discussion, policy and legislation.

During the next year, we would like to focus more on policies and legislation regarding green issues.  Our goal here is to keep you abreast of pending legislation in different jurisdictions on issues important to the green movement.  We would like to bring notice to our representatives in Congress who support green initiatives, as well as those who consistently thwart our efforts.  This past election year proved costly to “flat earthers” and others who doubted or totally denied the existence of climate change and its impact on global warming.  We owe our thanks especially to the efforts of the League of Conservation Voters and Momsrising.org for their tenacity and relentless determination to bring climate change doubters to task and block their reelection.  We must continue with this effort, and LGBG wants to concentrate time and effort into lobbying our Congress and local public officials in this regard.

We here at LGBG are excited and energized about our work for the new year.  We will continue to research and learn, share and educate and do all that we can to protect our environment so that we all can live green, be green.

Source for this article:

http://ecopreneurist.com/2012/12/29/the-eco-cliff-and-the-fiscal-cliff/

Fiscal-Cliff-1

Credit :  Ecopreneurist

What Are You Going To Do With That Christmas Tree?

by
English: Pine tree (Pinus strobus) needles in ...

English: Pine tree (Pinus strobus) needles in the winter (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While we still have some time left to enjoy our Christmas trees, wreaths and garland, we do have to decide what we are going to do with these items after the holidays are over. Of course, one option is to sit your tree curbside to be picked up by your local trash collector. A glance at the pickup schedule will give you the dates for curbside pickup. Most localities will recycle these materials for mulch.

If you would like to start the year off right with a strong commitment to living green, there are other alternatives for your greenery. Today we will review a few of these ideas, and maybe you will find a suggestion you want to try.

  • Some Christmas trees can be recycled for medicinal purposes, such as pine sap used as an antibacterial to seal wounds. See website http://www.livestrong.com/article/256118-uses-of-pine-tar-ointment/. Along these same lines, pine needles can be used for medicinal teas, which are purportedly beneficial for antibacterial infections. This idea does come with a caveat. It is mandatory that you know what kind of tree you have. Many trees on the market today are fir, rather than pine. You do not want to consume fir needles ever.
  • Thickener. Pine cones can be ground up and used as a thickener like flour or corn starch. The inner bark of the pine tree is full of Vitamin C. Once again, you must know definitively that you have a pine tree.
  • Firewood and starter. Once the wood has dried out completely, it can be used for firewood. It is important to monitor the buildup of creosote in your chimney as these softer woods do cause a fast buildup. However, these products are great for outdoor use in bonfires or fire pits.
  • Fish covers and habitats. If you have a pond, sunken trees make a great fish cover. It is important that you check local regulations prior to sinking trees in lakes to create fishing spots.
  • Fertilizer. Ground pine trees can be used in your home compost pile. If you have alkaline soil, this much will lower the pH.
  • Potpourri. The needles from pine, spruce or fir trees can be combined with other scented plants, cloves, or orange peels and essential oils to creat great scents for the home that also can be used for gifts.

If you are not interested in taking on any of the above-mentioned projects, you still can discard your Christmas tree in a manner that is environmentally conscientious. The National Christmas Tree Association’s website contains very helpful information on conservation projects which use real Christmas trees. Some of these suggestions also make excellent projects for scouts and other community organizations. Please go to http://www.realchristmastrees.org/dnn/default.aspx for further information.

The Christmas holiday is a wonderful time to celebrate life, renewal and the environment. This gift-giving time presents a unique opportunity to give back to the earth. Your recycled trees are fully biodegradable and can be used in so many ways to live green, be green.

Celebrate The Holiday With Eco-Friendly Wrapping Products

by
English: Used paper is collected for paper rec...

English: Used paper is collected for paper recycling in Ponte a Serraglio near Bagni di Lucca, Italy Deutsch: Altpapier auf einem Recyclinghof in Ponte a Serraglio bei Bagni di Lucca, Italy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While the stress, hustle and bustle of the holiday season makes it difficult to stay focused on green living, especially as it pertains to gift wrapping items, we at LGBG want our readers to know that eco-friendly gift wrapping materials are available.  This alternative will go a long way to make us all feel better about that heap of discarded wrapping paper, cards and gift tags that we see every Christmas morning.

There are a number of companies that make paper products from recycled materials that deserve to be mentioned.

  • Of The Earth makes paper products from “at least 50% recycled content from fibers derived from the Himalayan lotka bush“.  The products from this company are available in solid and festive patterns  The fibers in these papers are strong enough to make the paper reusable.  The paper products from Of The Earth are extra special because their holiday selections are embedded with wildflower seeds that can be planted in the spring.  Of The Earth also offers sustainable ribbons with beautiful designs that enhance any gift.  http://www.custompaper.com/papers/gift_wrap/gift_wrap.html
  • Fish Lips Paper Designs sells holiday gift wrap made from at least 50% recycled paper.  This paper is printed with soy-based inks and hosts a smooth satin finish.  This company touts that its paper “will make even the worst gift look fun and exciting”.
  • Botanical Paperworks delivers paper products made with recycled paper, also with embedded wildflower seeds.  Your gifts delivered with this company’s cards and tags are special because “they just keep on giving”.
  • Lucky Crow Gift Bags is a leader in the growing trend of fabric gift bags.  These colorful sacks can be used for storage, display or they can be regifted.
  • These alternatives to traditional paper gift products offer a great way to protect the environment.  With all of these suggestions, we can have beautifully wrapped gifts without destroying trees.  This definitely is a way to celebrate the season while protecting the environment, which helps us live green, be green.

Source for this article:  http://www.thedailygreen.com/green-homes/latest/christmas-holidays-gift-wrap

Small Change, Big Difference: Ways to Spruce Up Your Living Room

by

Are you tired of the way your living room looks? Do you find yourself browsing through interior decorating magazines looking for ideas, only to be scared off by the prices for room re-dos? Do you yearn for a fresh new look for one of the most popular rooms in the house? If so, you are far from alone. Redecorating the living room is a common item on the household To-Do list. Fortunately, with a little time, creativity and a bit of money—but not too much—anyone can transform their drab and dull living room into a warm, environmentally friendly and inviting area the whole family will love.

Budget Decorating

One of the first things you should do when sprucing up your living room is determine what you want for the focal point. This can be the fireplace, a television set, or an attractive piece of artwork. Once you decide on the main feature of your room, set up conversation areas around it with furniture and other accessories.

Focal Point

Rearranging where and how your items are situated can make a huge impact on your room in very little time. Instead of putting everything against the walls, read up on furniture placement and put chairs and other items closer together so people can visit easily. If you can, try to have seating for at least six people in the living room. If you’re not sure how to stay environmentally aware while purchasing your focal point, you can buy antique chairs and tables; that’s an easy way to stay green.

Accents

Add an accent to the focal point; this could be an attractive vase filled with long-stem red roses, an interesting piece of sculpture, or a long painting behind the sofa. GreenYourDecor.com suggests you create your own arrangement to fit any them, color scheme or occasion and gives a step-by-step guide to creating your own. You can use anything fresh; from cranberries, to oranges, to lemons, you will have a more organic setting in your home.

If you feel your living room could stand to have a bit more color, but you are nervous about painting the entire thing a vivid shade of red, blue, orange or other bright color, consider an accent wall. A Houzz article features beautiful photos of accent walls in various colors. As a bonus, you don’t need a ton of paint or time to create an eye-catching wall that adds a definite touch of pizzazz to the room without feeling overwhelming.

Drapes

The style and color of drapes in your living room can really impact the overall feel of the room. In most cases, the drapes should match the largest piece of furniture in the space. Changing the window coverings can be a relatively inexpensive way to jazz up the living room and make it look newer and more contemporary. Use more natural, organic material. Stay away from big name brands that use dyes, synthetic polyesters and nylons and silk. And shop local; buy products manufactured within 500 miles or less.

Floors

The floors should be a bit darker than the walls. Achieving this can be done in a variety of ways; wooden floors could be stained in a darker tone, area rugs in deep colors could be placed over the carpet, or if you have it in your budget, you could re-carpet the area in a rich tone that complements the walls. HGTV.com suggests to use bamboo and eucalyptus because they grow quickly; they’re hard woods and are sustainable.

Small living room