Compost tumbler - check.

After talking about it for almost a year, I finally ordered my super cool compost tumbler. This baby is fully loaded - made of 95% recycled materials (including plastic bags), it boasts a central aeration system, is completely portable, virtually rodent and animal proof (hopefully that will keep Baxter out!), and makes compost in 4-6 weeks.
AND it’s under warranty for 10 years.

I’m very excited about this because this is another goal that I had for myself in being more green. Now I can dispose of my kitchen scraps and other compostables properly, rather than throwing them into a landfill.

I’m also excited to start using this bad boy. I actually tried to start a compost pile at my last place of residence, but it didn’t really pan out. I had to build a makeshift wire cage around it to keep my dog Baxter out, which in turn made it extremely difficult to turn the pile as it needed. This tumbler will make my job so much easier and will keep out furry critters.

Unfortunately this is not the cheapest alternative to composting - the whole unit cost me $235 including shipping. I ordered it on ebay, through the Wheatgrasskits ebay shop. But it’s worth it to me.

Some other places online that sell this tumbler: Cleanairgardening.com, Urbangardencenter.com, and Organiccomposter.com.

Pollution permits - what up with that?

A couple of our Democratic candidates are keen on the idea of “pollution permits,” which would essentially give the “green light” (pun completely intended) to Hummer, big truck and SUV drivers to continue blasting out loads of carbon emissions - for a fee. Don’t get me wrong - I’m not an idiot. I understand how this can be a good thing. One would hope it would discourage future ginormous automobile sales and might spur large car owners to swap out for a more fuel efficient car. However, I can’t help but feel at the same time, this would really NOT affect people who currently own gas guzzlers at all. These cars are already wildly expensive - what’s a few hundred more dollars a month to continue polluting the environment? If anything, we should be implementing “pollution fines.” (which quintessentially are probably the same thing, just worded differently for the masses)

Why not instead start giving discounts, incentives, tax breaks, etc. to owners of fuel efficient vehicles?

Green resolutions for 2008

It’s a good time to sit back and take a look at my current greening progress, and evaluate what areas I still need to work on and what things I need to keep doing. Here’s how it breaks out:

Practices to maintain:

• Diligent recycling
• Implementing natural/biodegradable cleaning
  and grooming products into the home
• Shopping with reusable bags
• Turning off lights and power sources when not in use
• Reusing plastic bags and other non-recyclable item
• Using sponges for clean-up rather than paper towels
• Lower thermostat

Practices to implement:

• Composting
• Stop using ziploc bags, use only reusable containers
• Take quicker showers
• Offset carbon footprint from car
• Research carpooling options
• Research solar panel installation for home

Times Square NYE Ball goes green

2008 will apparently come in with a eco-friendly bang. The New Year’s Eve ball was re-fitted with 9,576 LED bulbs - very cool. Maybe the Empire State Building and the Statue of Liberty are next on the list? Way to go, Bloomberg!

Some parental be-bunking

At brunch last Sunday, my Dad and I really got into it about global warming and the green effort.

Dad is a Geologist and a very, very smart man. He’s written books for his field that I could never even begin to comprehend. And yet, he refuses to agree that man is mainly to blame for the current global warming problem, theorizing that the problem probably has more to do with nature’s own carbon emissions (volcanic erruptions, etc.). Needless to say I was pretty stunned hearing this from him, and found myself stammering to come up with a good rebuttle to his statements. Tonight, while surfing the web for ideas for an upcoming project, I stumbled across this website, which explains that the earth is naturally equipped to filter large amounts of carbon emissions - but unfortunately humans are producing it at a faster rate than the earth is equipped to deal with. Thus, the problem we are now finding ourselves in. For more information, CLICK HERE.

Have yourself a green little Christmas

Regretfully I was unable to purchase new LED lights for the house this year, as my current ones are working just fine. Darn. I was kind of hoping for a couple of the strings to be out. However, I’m trying to implement other green practices into my holiday preparations, such as recycled wrapping paper. Unfortunately this has been no easy feat - recycled wrapping paper is not easy to find, particularly on a local basis. Thankfully I found Paporganics.com and FishLipsPaperDesigns.com - both of which carry recycled wrapping paper and acoutrements (ribbons, tissue paper, etc.). Paporganics carries recycled hemp paper that’s dyed with all-natural dyes. Their ribbon is also made of hemp, and comes in an array of colors. Fish Lips carries the most FANTASTIC wrapping paper - all made from 100% post-consumer recycled paper and is printed with natural dyes. I was really excited to get this stuff - the designs are really cool and the paper looks and feels like normal wrapping paper.

Now, I have to say that I could’ve done better and gone a step further, and purchased scrap fabric from a local craft store. That way I could re-use the same fabric every year. But, I am somewhat of a paper fiend, being a graphic designer and all, so naturally the idea of fabric didn’t appeal to me. That, and I also discovered that Denver Recycles does not accept wrapping paper in its bins. Lame.

Other things I’m lacking in: recycled garment boxes (I found a place that does sell these, however they’re only selling them in batches of hundreds, so I’m kind of screwed there, especially since none of my friends were interested in purchasing a ton of boxes - can’t blame them). Also, I’ve been bad about turning our Christmas lights off when we’re out - there’s something nice about coming home to a lighted, festive house during the holidays. Clearly, I need to rethink some priorities.

In better news, I’ve included a “Green Holiday” tips list in the upcoming “Wishlist,” published Sundays in the paper. This is a cool thing - I’m hoping folks will take heed to the fact that Denver won’t recycle certain items (wrapping paper) but will recycle others (junk mail, magazines, boxes, newspaper, etc.).

Anywho, hope you all have a very Merry Christmas, and if at all possible, try to implement some green practices into your holiday traditions.

Scary article on James Lovelock

My friend Kim passed this along to me the other day, and I haven’t been able to get it out of my mind. I’m not sure if it ran in Rolling Stone’s magazine, or just on its website. Anyway, considering the fact that this man is a respected scientist, his theories (or rather predictions) really freak me out. Here are a few excerpts from the article, which you can read in its entirety HERE.

By the end of the century, according to Lovelock, global warming will cause temperate zones like North America and Europe to heat up by fourteen degrees Fahrenheit, nearly double the likeliest predictions of the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations-sanctioned body that includes the world’s top scientists. ‘Our future,’ Lovelock writes, ‘is like that of the passengers on a small pleasure boat sailing quietly above the Niagara Falls, not knowing that the engines are about to fail.’ And switching to energy-efficient light bulbs won’t save us. To Lovelock, cutting greenhouse-gas pollution won’t make much difference at this point, and much of what passes for sustainable development is little more than a scam to profit off disaster. ‘Green,’ he tells me, only half-joking, ‘is the color of mold and corruption.’

Until recently, Lovelock thought that global warming would be just like his half-assed forest — something the planet would correct for. Then, in 2004, Lovelock’s friend Richard Betts, a researcher at the Hadley Centre for Climate Change — England’s top climate institute — invited him to stop by and talk with the scientists there. Lovelock went from meeting to meeting, hearing the latest data about melting ice at the poles, shrinking rain forests, the carbon cycle in the oceans. ‘It was terrifying,’ he recalls. ‘We were shown five separate scenes of positive feedback in regional climates — polar, glacial, boreal forest, tropical forest and oceans — but no one seemed to be working on whole-planet consequences.’ Equally chilling, he says, was the tone in which the scientists talked about the changes they were witnessing, ‘as if they were discussing some distant planet or a model universe, instead of the place where we all live.’

Lovelock’s doomsday scenario is dismissed by leading climate researchers, most of whom dispute the idea that there is a single tipping point for the entire planet. ‘Individual ecosystems may fail or the ice sheets may collapse,’ says Caldeira, ‘but the larger system appears to be surprisingly resilient.’ But let’s assume for the moment that Lovelock is right and we are indeed poised above Niagara Falls. Do we just wave as we go over the edge? In Lovelock’s view, modest cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions won’t help us — it’s too late to stop global warming by swapping our SUVs for hybrids. What about capturing carbon-dioxide pollution from coal plants and pumping it underground? ‘We can’t possibly bury enough to make any difference.’ Biofuels? ‘A monumentally stupid idea.’ Renewables? ‘Nice, but won’t make a dent.’ To Lovelock, the whole idea of sustainable development is wrongheaded: ‘We should be thinking about sustainable retreat.’

Lots going on

Last week I finished designing a 56-page magazine called, “The List,” which is inserted into both The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News on Thanksgiving Day. Basically the publication is a product-oriented piece, with a slight focus on local Denver merchants - though this year we sort of strayed a little from that.

Anywho, amazingly they let me write and design an “Eco-Friendly Gifts” page that included a sidebar on how to green your Christmas. It turned out really well and I was so happy I got to do it. Needless to say, I managed to squeeze in some other green-related info here and there throughout the rest of the mag, like on the pet gifts page and in a sidebar about Christmas trees.

In addition to The List opportunity, I’m also gearing up to design the Denver Newspaper Agency’s Green Guide, which will be distributed to employees. The guide is going to act solely as a resource guide for greening one’s day-to-day work practices; ie. recycling, using less paper, turning off computers, transportation, etc. Not surprisingly I’ve already run into a couple walls - having to do with transportation and office supplies. There’s a little confusion as to whether the company orders post-consumer paper or not. The paper we have supplied in our department is 30% post-consumer, but other sources are telling me that the company orders just regular paper. Bottom line, I’m sure I’ll be uncovering some interesting info along the way with all this.

Green Living vs. Convenience, ie., Lipstick at Lunch

First of all, please forgive my not posting in such a long time. I’ve been pretty slammed with work and freelance, but also, I admit that I’ve been a little discouraged lately with my green interests - primarily due to the previous post, dealing with the inefficiency of biodegrading in the U.S. But, I guess I just need to suck it up and keep trying to make a difference however I can!

Which brings me to my next topic: makeup. Yes, makeup. At lunch today, I had time to run a few errands - one of which involved buying new makeup. You know, foundation, lipstick, mascara. Anyway, on the shuttle bus down the mall, I pondered the question, “Where can I buy environmentally-friendly makeup?”, meaning, makeup that has been produced by a green-operating company. And, of course, the internet popped into my head first. Which is great, don’t get me wrong. But, I needed the makeup today, not in a week. And therein lies the main problem with green-living: the lack of convenience.

When you need it now, chances are, you’re going to buy non-green products. Which sucks. Because I’m a human being and can’t plan every hour of my existence. Thinking about this fact makes me mad - Why can’t green items start making appearances on the shelves of such places as Rite Aid, Walgreens, or even 7-11? (I know Burt’s Bees is available at Walgreens, which is a start) Why the heck can’t green be convenient?

I realize that this is the whole push behind the movement. Making green choices easier for the average Joe. Unfortunately we have a ways to go - which means, to you and I - Joe green-consumers - have to make an extra effort to make better choices. Which are 90% of the time, not always convenient.

So what did I do at lunch? I gave in and bought Revlon. Next time, however, I plan on planning more ahead and either ordering online or making a trip to Whole Foods.

Not as easy as it seems: On being biodegradable

So I’ve really been focusing on biodegradable products as of late. A lot of my stated goals have had to do with implementing biodegradable products into my household. Unfortunately, I’ve come to realize, via different informational articles, that just because something is in fact biodegradable, doesn’t mean it’s actually going to have the chance to break down properly. Bottom line: biodegradable items need to be disposed of properly in order to truly biodegrade, as it were.

Take for example, biodegradable leaf bags - made from corn. If you simply dispose of the leaf bags into normal trash, it’s very unlikely that these bags will have the chance to properly breakdown. Why? Because they’re thrown into landfills, which don’t foster the proper environmental conditions for biodegradable material to break down. However, if you were to dispose of those biodegradable leaf bags into a compost pile, the bag will in fact be able to properly break down, as compost piles provide ideal conditions for this sort of thing.

Here’s an excerpt from an article on WorldWise.com:

“Many products that are inherently biodegradable in soil-such as tree trimmings, food wastes, and paper-will not biodegrade when we place them in landfills because the artificial landfill environment lacks the light, water, and bacterial activity required for the decay process to begin. The Garbage Project, an anthropological study of our waste conducted by a group at the University of Arizona, has unearthed hot dogs, corn cobs, and grapes that were twenty-five years old and still recognizable, as well as newspapers dating back to 1952 that were still easily readable. When the conditions needed for biodegradable materials to naturally biodegrade are not provided, major garbage problems are the result.”

Here’s how long it takes for some commonly used products to biodegrade, when they are scattered about as litter:

Cotton rags	1-5 months
Paper	2-5 months
Rope	3-14 months
Orange peels	6 months
Wool socks	1 to 5 years
Cigarette butts	1 to 12 years
Plastic coated paper milk cartons	5 years
Leather shoes	25 to 40 years
Nylon fabric	30 to 40 years
Tin cans	50 to 100 years
Aluminum cans	80 to 100 years
Plastic 6-pack holder rings	450 years
Glass bottles	1 million years
Plastic bottles	Forever

So now, I’m faced with a dilemma: if I want to use biodegradable products will I be able to dispose of them properly?

One item I’m sorry I bought: biodegradable doggy bags. Once used, I throw these in normal trash cans, as I don’t have a special composter that can safely break down animal waste. Therefore, my using them is pointless. The same goes for biodegradable kitchen waste bags - these will get thrown into landfills, too.

So, with all this said, I’ve determined the following:

Biodegradable solvents are still usuable
Biodegradable bags for landfill waste are not
Biodegradable bags for compostable waste are still usuable (leaf bags, kitchen compost bags)