Life After Death

by

Image

 

Here at livegreenbegreen, we are always searching for new and inventive ways to maintain a green lifestyle. So when I came across this article which detailed the environmental effects of our deaths, my interest peaked to say the least.

The article, written by Yuan Gao and Robert Short, describes the environmental problem our passing’s cause as, “Every cremation creates about 160 kg of carbon dioxide (CO2).” This is a particular problem in China where nearly five million bodies were cremated in 2011 alone. More staggering is that the rate of cremation is increasing due to the aging population, which ultimately will result in an estimated 143,066 tons of additional CO2 being emitted. This figure fails to mention the other pollutions that will be released as a result of the process including, “…Sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, monoxide, hydrocarbons, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and mercury among others.”

Thankfully, the authors propose greener options to combat this growing problem. They advocate, “Burying the corpse in a simple and biodegradable bag or container under a tree, without building stone tombs or erecting tombstones.” This ultimately would save valuable land space in addition to reducing the emissions from a cremation alternative. Also, the additive of placing the bodies near trees enables them to absorb CO2 that naturally emits from the decaying body and enables them to grow naturally and sustainably. Lastly, this practice saves wood for those buried in wood coffins, and makes  ecological sense in that our bodies, in an act of retribution, serve as a natural fertilizer for the earth we used during our lifetimes.

While we tend to focus on changing our current habits to affect the world in a positive place, similarly our posthumous actions can have a lasting impact on our environment. By changing the way we think, we can all have a positive bearing on our planet both during our lifetime, and after death.

Source: http://theconversation.edu.au/dying-green-environmentally-friendly-burials-in-china-9857

Dramatic Shift in Belief in Climate Change Noted

by

A new study released by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication reveals that the majority of Americans now believe that global warming is affecting the weather and that it also is responsible for worsening extreme weather events.  Between the end of August through September of this year, more than 1000 people over the age of 18 participated in a survey regarding their beliefs about global warming.  The results then were weighted to give nationally representative numbers.  The findings of this survey represents a dramatic shift in Americans’ belief in climate change, even from March 2012.  Specifically, the following was noted:

  • A majority of Americans (73%) agreed that global warming had worsened the record-setting temperatures of this past summer.
  • A majority of Americans (64%) agreed that global warming affected the fast-moving band of thunderstorms (derecho) that traveled from Indiana to Virginia this past summer, causing widespread power outages and significant structural damage).
  • A majority of Americans agreed that global warming was responsible for the severe drought in the Midwest and Great Plains, last year’s unusually warm winter and the record forest fires in the western United States.

It appears that in the past, many people’s beliefs about climate change were tied to politics with conservatives debunking this phenomenon as a myth.  However, the severe weather events over the past year with its massive destruction of life and property have served as an eye opener of the reality of global warming and its ensuing problems to many Americans.  As Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication states on the subject of politics’ polarizing forces on climate change, “[i]t is the trend that I find in some ways most disturbing, because in the end, the climate system doesn’t care whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican.  It’s not like the floods are only going to hit Democrats or Republicans . . . conservatives or liberals. . . .  In the end, we all will suffer together and in the end, we’ll all have to solve this together.”  http://www.livescience.com/22069-polarization-climate-science.html

For the green movement and environmentalists and scientists, the acceptance of the existence of climate change and global warming by the majority of Americans represents a positive step in the direction to seek solutions to these problems.  Perhaps one day we all will live green, be green.

Global warming has become too personal and extreme
to ignore.

350.org Fights Climate Change from the Bottom Up

by

This Monday’s good green news features 350.org.  This global organization, led by author and environmentalist, Bill McKibben, focuses on global grassroots efforts to raise awareness of climate change caused by human impact, to confront climate change denial and to cut emissions of carbon dioxide, all in an effort to slow global warming.  The group’s name derives from climate scientist, James Hansen‘s, assertion that any atmospheric concentration over 350 parts per million is unsafe.  Rather than being one organization, 350.org is a global network of over 200 organizations around the world.

A primary feature of 350.org is its 350 workshop.  This group has helped organize workshops in more than 20 countries.  The staff members assist climate change campaigns in the development of skill building activities that effectively articulate their points.  They focus on leadership, organization and communication as the key components necessary to build the political will to solve the climate crises.  They help local green groups to organize marches, to participate in non-violent demonstrations in the Middle East, and to lobby political leaders on matters relative to climate change and clean energy.  Their primary goal is to utilize a worldwide approach to create a huge wave of climate activism globally that cannot be ignored and will lead to lasting large-scale changes.

Each year 350.org identifies key campaigns of concern.  Its current projects include moving India beyond coal, ending fossil fuel subsidies and showing the human face of climate change.  350.org boasts a very user-friendly website loaded with information on its organization’s mission, projects and available workshops.  The website also provides access to membership, as well as an opportunity to donate to help this worthy cause finance its missions.  350.org leads by example in the movement to fight climate change and to save the planet.  This organization presents a great opportunity to live green, be green.

Grassroots networking to fight climate change

 

Climate Change Ignored in First Presidential Debate

by

As everyone analyzes last night’s first presidential debate, it seems that a focus on the important and often urgent concerns of voters were sidelined by concern with style and appearance, resulting in a journalistic award of a “victory” for Mitt Romney.  This win for Romney clearly signals an ideological loss for the green movement.

First and foremost, Mr. Romney brazenly misstated President Obama’s investment in “green energy”, erroneously claiming that the administration had spent $90 billion on “green energy”, but that half of the companies that he had spent the money on had failed.  A report by the Washington Post declares this is a “flat-out false claim”.  Rather, the $90 billion was the sum set aside for “green” tech and research in the stimulus bill.  A substantial portion of these funds was used for efficiency projects, research and development, carbon sequestration, and upgrading the nation’s electric grid, among other projects.  Only a small percentage was spent on direct loans to clean energy companies, and contrary to Romney’s statement, very few of these companies have failed.

Secondly, to the dismay of the electric car industry, Romney called electric car companies “losers”, specifically Tesla, which is well on its way to becoming a successful and profitable business.  While President Obama did not call Mr. Romney out on the importance of clean energy and electric cars, he did look the camera in the eye and spoke to the American people, noting that he differed from Romney in that he was more interested in the development of renewable energy sources.  Additionally, he voiced the need to end federal oil subsidies.  Perhaps Romney summed up his commitment to the protection of the environment and the health and safety of its inhabitants by stating, “I like coal”.

Proponents of the green movement also are disappointed that Jim Lehrer, as moderator, disregarded climate control as an issue even worthy of discussion in the debate.  Despite receiving 160,000 letters from a coalition of nonprofit organizations dedicated to green initiatives requesting discussion on climate change, Mr. Lehrer ignored this issue.  Supposedly, the purpose of the debate was to give millions of voters an opportunity to “hear how the candidates plan to address the nation’s most urgent challenges”.  It appears that the moderator does not consider the climate crisis that important or urgent.

The green movement is a strong and dedicated one that is not going to go away.  It will not and cannot be dismissed alongside Big Bird.  While it cannot force a discussion of its issues at a debate, it can ensure that it is a force to be reckoned with at the ballot box.  It is clear to the green movement that climate change is devastating and a threat to our very existence.  Any discussion on education, construction, health care, or job creation must include climate change and environmental concerns to be effective.  Any voter who is concerned about health, welfare, employment and family issues and who wants to make sure there will be a healthy planet around for their children to inherit has a clear choice.  Hopefully, we will live green, be green.

Mitt Romney clearly takes a stand against green.

Count Me In the Celebration of Fair Trade Month

by

October represents the ninth annual celebration of Fair Trade Month.  Over the ensuing weeks, eco-friendly consumers, ethically committed retailers and brands will sponsor special activities to promote Fair Trade.  In this month’s “simple list”, the October issue of Real Simple notes that five million men, women and children in developing countries benefit from the global sale of Fair Trade products.

This movement has proved to be a great way to enhance the lives of farmers and workers.  A certified Fair Trade product must be produced in a manner that is socially and environmentally responsible, including, but not limited to, no employment of children or engaging any practices that threaten the environment.  Additionally, all workers for these businesses must receive fair compensation.

Fair Trade Month is an opportune time to make a commitment to the green movement through the purchase of Fair Trade products.  While shopping, trade in an item on your list for a Fair Trade version—maybe a cup of coffee for starters.  This also is a good time to learn more about the Fair Trade movement.  Get socially connected as a fan of Fair Trade Certified on Facebook where up-to-date information on the latest news on this movement is available, along with recipes, give-aways and conversation from dedicated supporters.  Fair Trade USA can be followed on Twitter and Instagram and is a great source for information.

Perhaps you already are committed to do something special for Fair Trade Month but need ideas.  There are several options available, including making a donation to Fair Trade USA.  Monetary gifts to this nonprofit organization support farmers and workers globally and specifically in the areas of economic security, schools, scholarships, environment sustainability and empowerment of women.  Other ideas include gifts of Fair Trade products to friends and family members, which will commemorate important milestones while also introducing them to this wonderful concept.  Thirdly, this is an opportune time to join or start a Fair Trade campaign in a local community or on a college campus.

Any contribution made to the Fair Trade movement is important, and “every purchase matters”.  Getting involved in the Fair Trade Movement during this celebration month is an excellent way to live green, be green.

Count Me In!

 

Changing the Paradigm of How We Shop Responsibly

by

The company Amazon seems poised to one day take over the world. Whether it’s the ability to shop for virtually whatever we want in our underpants, or their newest innovation of trying to bring same day delivery of goods, Amazon never ceases to amaze. By venturing into green items, the firm is looking to bring a whole new shopping experience to those conscious of the environment.

The new site will be called vine.com and aims to provide only the most environmentally friendly goods to your household.  The company’s mission statement is to, “[e]xamine and scrutinize the claims made by each supplier and manufacturer so that, when adding a product to their basket, consumers can enjoy peace of mind that a purchase really is organic.”

Here is a screenshot of the website:

Image

As you can see, the site offers a variety of products, ranging from household to grocery items.  That being said, we have seen some attempts by companies to make sustainable shopping easier and more convenient. One such example is Green America which, “…[i]s designed to help consumers source locally produced produce.” So what makes vine.com so different? Well, being that it is the brainchild of amazon.com, you know quality and customer satisfaction are assured. Based on its past successful ventures and ideas, the firm seems only to expand its business when the concept is right and can benefit a majority of people. My experiences with the parent site have only been positive, and it is safe to assume that I will expect the same kind of experience when I use vine.com. The fact that the site will have a dedicated team to making sure all of its products are environmentally friendly is both assuring and a sign of how far the green movement has come. With the help of vine.com, purchasing sustainable products will be even easier, and now with the added benefit of being able to do it in our favorite pair of Hanes.

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/amazon-launches-vine-a-site-green-consumers-article-1.1170591#ixzz27oWhvXbj

NBC Education Nation Fails on Green Initiatives

by

This week’s NBC Education Nation was touted as a must-attend/must-see event for anyone interested in the education of America’s youth.  This summit, hosted by NBC in New York’s Rockefeller Center brought together more than 300 leaders in education, philanthropy, government and the media.  Guest speakers included President Barack Obama, Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, and a host of other CEO’s, politicians, journalists, etc.

I have followed this summit online, reading excerpts from town hall meetings and blogs, as well as watching reports on the local news stations.  A lot of problems with the education system have been mentioned, but the subject noticeably avoided was green initiatives.  In fact, some of the suggestions offered may conflict with the green movement.  Primarily, there is an emphasis on technology in education, which endorses equipping students with tablets, laptops and smart phones to be used in the classroom.  While this may sound like a great idea on the surface, one can only imagine the magnitude of the negative impact of this huge amount of electronic debris on the environment.  Of course, such ideas are great for Microsoft and other computer and electronics manufacturers, who make large notations to schools or who sell these products to students at a discount, thereby reaping large financial gain and tax credits.  Their bottom line is different than that of the green movement.  Also, one must question the equity in this suggested program.  To effectively address the issue of education, any program would need to be inclusive of all children irrespective of station in life.  It would be unfair for students in the poor school districts to be left out of these programs because they do not have access to Internet or other systems necessary to support the use of these devices.

Another topic not addressed at the summit was learning environment.  To be successful in school, students need access to physically healthy structures.  This summit seemed to ignore the fact that there are a lot of “sick” school buildings still in use, once again predominantly in poor communities.  Many children in this country attend schools that are polluted with mildew, mold, outdated structures or inadequate/no heating system or air conditioning, thereby making learning difficult or impossible.  The provision of a suitable learning environment has to be part of the education nation dialogue.

A third topic of the summit was online learning.  There are two sides to this story also.  Access to online courses is beneficial to some people, but it should not replace the traditional classroom, which presents a valuable opportunity to ask questions, and more importantly, to hear the questions and comments of other students and instructors.  I can recall times that a student did not ask a question, but a teacher recognized a confused look and addressed concerns of that individual.  Online courses potentially remove the ability of a teacher to recognize the need for additional help from a student who may not be able to verbalize this need.  Any online course programs definitely should incorporate a hybrid component, which require some face-to-face group meetings.  Additionally, school attendance presents an opportunity for the school systems to guarantee healthy meals for breakfasts and lunches.  This is important for so many children and must be continued.

The issues discussed here represent only a few of the issues that needed to be addressed at the NBC Education Nation Summit.  There was some discussion of curriculum, but the Summit should have included experts in the green movement, as these individuals are well aware of the environmental issues that need to be addressed through education.  Discussion could have included the need for commitment to develop and implement educational programs to build the workforce to find solutions to green issues threatening the planet.

This writer thinks the NBC Education Nation has earned an F for its grade for this year’s summit.  Our very existence mandates that we learn green, live green, be green!

Green initiatives were not well represented in 2012 NBC Education Nation Summit

Rebellious Naturals Dig Their Heels In On Organics

by

It is amazing that in this whimsical world of information and technology, we are bombarded on a frequent basis with “new” and often-conflicting information on health regimens and dietary and nutritional information.  Yesterday Vitamin D was a good thing.  Today it is bad.  The same thing applies to fish oil– a miracle supplement a few months ago and now useless.

I find it refreshing that Jesse Ziff Cool, chef and lecturer, and owner of Cool Cafe has dug in her heels on the health benefits of organic nutrition.  It is interesting to note that Jesse Cool operates out of Stanford University, the home of the recent study questioning organics.  It is with strong conviction that Ms. Cool, who also is the author of Simply Organic, states, “I’ve been pioneering and advocating organics for 37 years.  Once you really embrace that, you don’t want to feed yourself or anyone near you anything that could some day harm you.  All you want is real food”.  Her philosophy will not be changed by one study.

Others in the business of organics concur with Ms. Cool.  They include Bob Quinn, the president of KAMUT International (www.Kamut.com) and Arran Stephens, CEO of Nature’s Path (http://us.naturepath.com).  These two men note that the Stanford study is inconsistent with their experiences of 25 and 45 years respectively.  I agree with the theory of organics from a common sense approach.  Surely food grown without “toxic pesticides, glyphosate herbicides, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, sewage sludge and radiation” must be healthier for everyone—farmers, consumers and the environment, than food produced using these substances.

It is important to keep abreast of research and studies on organics and other matters affecting your health and the environment.  It also is important for each of us to turn on our internal filters and delete false or faulty information from our internal and external databases.  As quoted by Voltaire and aptly restated by Ellen Kamer, (columnist at the Edgie Veggie) “tend your own garden”.  Let’s eat green, live green be green.

Rebellious Naturals refuse to be moved by Stanford Study which dismisses the benefits of organics

Investing in Green Technology

by

You probably are familiar with the old adage, “put your money where your mouth is”.  This saying definitely applies to the green movement.  Green initiatives require an enormous financial commitment to develop and advance the technologies necessary to address the issues of climate change and to reverse the pollution of the Earth.  Statistics collected in Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2012 Report, a study backed by the UN Environment Program, have tracked financial investments in green energy globally since 2004.  These statistics reveal the following:

  • Investment in renewable energy accounted for 44% of all new energy generation capacity added last year.  This represents an increase in renewable investment, up from 34% in 2010 and 10.3% in 2004.
  • The majority of the money invested in renewable energy came from the private domain and largely was invested in the area of research and development.  In fact, investment from the private sector was twice that of government and public bodies.
  • The renewable energy sector of emerging economies, such as India and China, has the biggest boost.
  • In 2009, China surpassed the United States in total annual investment, and in 2011, it attracted more money than any other country.

While these statistics show a financial commitment to the green movement, statistics indicate that investment in green initiatives still lags behind that of traditional sources.  In 2011, only 6% of the world’s energy requirements were generated by renewable sources.  A caveat to this situation is that many clean tech companies have suffered from the volatility of the markets over the past two years, and in many countries, policies established to encourage investment in renewable energy have been weakened by austerity measures undertaken to upright faltering economies.

When considering investing in renewable energy or other green initiatives, the due diligence requirement cannot be understated.  Thorough understanding of this market sector is mandatory.  For example, it is important to know that these markets require government confidence and commitment in order to be successful.  Financiers require stable policy to back green investments.  It is important to identify mature technologies because they have longer track records.  These often include onshore wind and solar energy.  Remember:  Lower technological risks equal more finance.

Investing in renewable energy and green initiatives presents potential opportunities for financial gain, as well as moral commitment to the green movement.  As with any investment, make sure you do your homework and seek professional advice so that you understand the many factors involved.  A place to start your journey to green investments is: http://www.sustainablebusiness.com.

Let’s live green, be green!

Due diligence– Prior to investing in any commodity, do your homework, and if necessary, seek professional financial advice.

Coral Reefs are in Grave Danger

by

Coral reefs all over the world are suffering severe damage from climate change, and as the levels of manmade greenhouse emissions continue to rise, the window of opportunity to save the corals are dwindling.  According to a report published in the journal, Nature Climate Change, “approximately 70% of corals are expected to suffer long-term degradation by 2030, even if strict emission cuts are enforced”.  Loss of the coral reefs would be devastating to the ecosystem because the corals are home to about 25% of the world’s ocean species.  In addition to providing coastal protection, they support tourism and fishing industries for millions of people globally.

Scientists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research at the University of British Columbia and the Universities of Melbourne and Queensland in Australia conduct studies on the impact of climate change on coral reefs.  With the use of climate models to calculate the effects of different emission levels on 2,160 reefs worldwide, the researchers concluded that “[t]he rise of global average temperatures, warmer seas and spread of ocean acidification due to greenhouse gas emissions . . . pose major threats to coral ecosystems”.  To protect coral reefs, sea surface temperatures must decrease greater than 2 degrees Celsius, which is the limit viewed as a safe threshold to avert most devastating effects of climate change—i.e., drought, sea level rise and crop failure.    The study advises that a limit of the mean temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius is needed to save at least half of the coral reefs.

A separate report issued last week notes the threat to the Caribbean corals and urged action to limit pollution and aggressive fishing practices.  Average live coral cover is down to 8% today, compared to 50% in the 19070s as reported by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

These research findings should serve as a wakeup call on the severely negative impact of climate change on our ecosystems.  We need to act to save our environment while there is time.  Let’s live green, be green.

Coral reefs are under threat of degradation from global warming resulting in increased water temperatures.