Feb

28th

Consumer Reports BPA Test Results


OK, it’s not real estate related, but green living spans a wide range of topics, and few more personal than what we eat.  I’ll give you the bottom line first, in case you are a “headlines” reader. 

BPA=Bad, FDA=Slow on setting acceptable levels for food packaging.  Make educated food purchases until legislation is in place to protect you adequately.

BPA has been used for years in plastics and the lining of canned foods, and there is a debate about what levels constitute acceptable safety standards and whether it should be in contact with foods at all.  BPA has been associated with several types of cancer, heart disease, reproductive abnormalities and more.  FDA standards are based on testing done in the 80’s, and there is a body of more recent testing that suggests FDA’s current allowable levels are way too high for our safety. 

Consumer reports did a series of test of brand name canned foods including organically grown and some labeled BPA free, and you can go to the site for details, but suffice it to say they found higher than safe levels in a number of items they tested. 

Best bet, at least until it’s all sorted out:  Buy fresh…  Stanberry Green Team would also add buy local whenever you can… Find alternatives to canned foods, juices, and baby formulas… Store food in glass, and only microwave in glass containers.

 Here’s  a link to the full article if you want to read more: http://tinyurl.com/y9vtb2y

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Feb

12th

Use Fed Stimulus Money to Retrofit Your Home


Here’s a great article from the Philadelphia Inquirer about using Federal Stimulus money for energy efficiency improvement in your home; and see our Library for a printable/downloadable flyer with more particulars as well:

Until Dec. 31, 2010, homeowners can take advantage of a national tax credit on a variety of energy-saving products. Here’s a basic explanation of how the tax credit works, with help from the Internal Revenue Service.

There appears to be a cauldron of federal stimulus money going to waste these days because large numbers of Americans are more concerned about saving their houses than improving them.

This isn’t setting too well with the remodeling industry, especially home-center chains such as Home Depot, which has sent out a reminder that, earlier this year, Congress approved the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Meaning that, until Dec. 31, 2010, homeowners can take advantage of a national tax credit of 30 percent of the cost, up to $1,500, on a variety of energy-saving products. Insulation, windows and doors, roofing, heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems, tankless water heaters and alternative energy programs, such as solar panels and wind turbines, are covered.

Here’s a basic explanation of how the tax credit works, with help from the Internal Revenue Service.

What the law means: First, the provision that covers this is the Residential Energy Property Credit (Section 1121 of the act), which increases the energy tax credit for homeowners who make energy-efficient improvements to their existing homes. The law increases the credit rate to 30 percent of the cost of all qualifying improvements and raises the maximum credit limit to $1,500 for improvements placed in service in 2009 and 2010.

Didn’t we have this before? A similar credit was available for 2007. Standards for products that qualify for the credit are higher than the ones allowed in the 2007 law. To be helpful, the IRS is advising manufacturers on how they can certify that their products meet these new standards for the credit. Homeowners may continue to rely on manufacturers’ certifications under the 2007 law, such as EnergyStar labels, to see if products they bought before June 1 are eligible.

Here comes the sun: Then there is the Residential Energy-Efficient Property Credit, or Section 1122, of the Recovery Act. This is a nonrefundable energy tax credit designed to help individual taxpayers pay for qualified residential alternative energy equipment, such as solar hot water heaters, geothermal heat pumps, and wind turbines.

What’s new here: The new law removes some of the maximum amounts previously allowed, and permits a credit equal to 30 percent of the cost of qualified products.

So what should I look for? For insulation to qualify, its primary purpose must be to insulate (example: insulated siding does not qualify).

Windows, doors, and skylights: Starting Oct. 1, you’ll see a red or black label, in combination with EnergyStar designations, on these products. The label identifies high-efficiency products that now qualify as EnergyStar but don’t meet the stricter requirements effective April 1, 2010. Windows, doors, and skylights purchased on or after June 1, 2009, must have U-factor and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) ratings of 0.30 or less. These ratings must be certified by the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC). Look for the NFRC label.

Storm windows and doors: There is a tax credit. The best way to find ones that qualify for it is to ask your retailer for the Manufacturer’s Certification Statement for them.

Roofs? “Metal roofs with appropriate pigmented coatings” and “asphalt roofs with appropriate cooling granules” that also meet EnergyStar credits are eligible — just the materials’ cost, not the labor or roof coatings.

Alternative energy: Tax credits are available at 30 percent of the cost, with no upper limit through 2016, for existing homes and new construction, for geothermal heat pumps (they use about 30 percent less energy than a standard heat pump); solar energy systems — both solar hot water heating and photovoltaic power generating; residential small wind turbines with a capacity of not more than 100 kilowatts; residential fuel cell and microturbine systems with at least 30 percent efficiency, and hybrid gasoline-electric, diesel, battery-electric, alternative fuel, and fuel cell vehicles and electric cars.

Ask your tax accountant for details.

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Jan

24th

School Lunches:Greening the Programs


If you are a green minded parent, you may be concerned abuot the environmental and health consequences of the choices made by your child’s school.  BetterSchoolFood.org offers a simple, sensible action plan that starts with eating lunch with your child to see and taste what’s being served. 

The site has great resources for parents and you can become a member if you like. Here’s a quote to give you an idea of what they offer: “Have you been told “They won’t eat it” and “It’s too expensive” in response to wanting to improve the food in your school cafeteria?  Then we have good news for you! A study done by the University of Minnesota has found that school lunch sales don’t decline when healthier meals are served. The study also shows that more nutritious lunches don’t necessarily cost schools more to produce.”

Another good site is www.farmtoschool.org, which connects schools with local farms in school districts across the nation.  There are 1200 participating school districts in Texas, and the program helps improve the quality of food and is environmentally sound because the produce is more local.  Visit these sites to learn more about how this important component of your child’s education is being handled, and if you see a need for improvement; jump in and be part of the solution for your own kids and others. 

Here’s great Youtube video from Whole Foods called “Five Ways to Help Your School”  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6wSLaP1a0c&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=F68DD6C0034EA90D

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Jan

9th

Warming Car Engines…Gas Waster or Good?


Is it best to let your car warm up in the morning when it’s really cold? Or does that just waste gas?

Although you might think it’s easier on your car to let it sit and gently warm up, doing so is a bad idea for a number of reasons. Most importantly, it does indeed waste gas.

The vast majority of cars on the road today use electronic fuel injection. When your car’s engine is cold, the computer tells the fuel injectors to stay open longer, allowing more fuel into the engine to help it run cold. As the engine warms up, the injectors let in less fuel and everything returns to normal, so to speak. 

The problem is, letting your car sit and idle is the slowest way to bring it up to operating temperature because it’s generally sitting in your drive at just above idle speed. And this method to warm up also invites other problems. Remember that modern cars are equipped with a multitude of devices to help them run clean, including a catalytic converter (sometimes three of them), a device in the exhaust system that works to burn off unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust stream. A cold engine emits a far higher percentage of unburned hydrocarbons than a warm engine. Unfortunately, the average catalytic converter can’t process 100 percent of unburned hydrocarbons even in the best of times. Importantly, the catalytic converter needs high exhaust temperatures to work properly. Throw in a cold engine emitting a high percentage of unburned hydrocarbons, repeat several hundred times, and you can end up with what’s called a “plugged” converter. In a nutshell, the converter becomes overwhelmed and literally ceases to function. This won’t happen all at once but over time, the end effect is the same: poor mileage and significantly dirtier exhaust.

The best bet? Even when it’s 10 degrees F outside, start your car, let it run for 30 to 60 seconds to get all the fluids moving, then drive off gently. Your engine will warm up faster, your exhaust system will get up to temperature faster so the catalytic converter can do its thing, and you’ll use less fuel. Which is what you wanted all along anyhow, right?

If it’s below zero outside, it would be a good idea to give the engine five minutes or a little less before you drive off into the frozen wilderness!

— Richard Backus, editor in chief, Gas Engine and Motorcycle Classics magazines

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Jan

4th

Resolve: Greener Cleaning for 2010


A simple way to support your goals for going greener is to change the way you clean your home.  You can eliminate smells, germs, and grime without introducing toxic chemicals or supporting the production of these products using simple, inexpensive methods.

First, easily make your own cleaning solutions- Buy industrial sizes of white vinegar, baking soda, and some orange oil. Buy a non-noxious liquid soap like Mrs. Meyers and some Borax.  Buy or reuse a couple of sprayer bottles. Lay in a supply of microfiber cloths (so you can keep bathroom and kitchen cloths separate), rubber gloves, and a pumice stone.  You’re ready to go!

 Kitchen: Mix equal parts vinegar and water in your sprayer bottle for cleaning surfaces.  Especially greasy mess? Add a few drops of the orange oil. You will avoid combining toxic chemicals with food preparation surfaces.  Use baking soda for cleaning the inside of the fridge.  Make a paste of vinegar and soda for baked on oven messes (conventional oven cleaners have some of the most noxious chemicals going, and you will inhale them and introduce them into your food if you use them), and for stinky sink drains areas.  Stainless appliances?  A few drops of the liquid soap and wipe down with the grain.  If you have to have a commercial grease fighter to be happy, try Holy Cow in a gallon size, and mix with water in your sprayer bottle.  Not only are you eliminating toxic chemicals in your home, but reducing the demand for highly toxic chemicals in plastic bottles and all the environmental damage that goes with that entire process.

 Bathrooms: Use your 50/50 vinegar water spray here for surfaces and mirrors as well.  Baking soda paste scrubbed into grout and tub and sink gunky areas works great.  You can use Borax, which is cheap and non-toxic, for mildew areas in showers.  Industrial cleaners typically contain glycol ethers, which are easily absorbed through the skin and have been linked to reproductive problems and birth defects in animal studies.  Not a good idea, and way overkill considering the simple alternatives! 

Baking soda and your scrub brush to clean the “throne”, and if it needs whitening, hydrogen peroxide works or try (gently!) scrubbing stubborn stains with a pumice stone.

 While we are on the subject of clean, fresh smelling homes, please consider reducing or eliminating the use of aerosol sprays, scented oils, plug-ins, etc.  Many of these have not been tested for health effects, and add to the number of particles we breath in our indoor spaces that may contribute to allergies, breathing problems, and generally poor indoor air quality.  Opt for sensible ventilation practices instead; an open window when climate allows and use of vent fans to pull odors out.   

 Our Stanberry and Associates wish for you is a healthier, safer, and more eco-wise clean home for 2010, and a Happy New Year. 

 For further reading: 

 

http://www.seventhgeneration.com/show-whats-inside/cleaning-products-ingredients-guide

 

http://www.womenandenvironment.org/campaignsandprograms/SafeCleaning/recipes

 

HouseLogic green cleaning articles: http://tinyurl.com/yl4u7ha

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Jan

2nd

New Climate Change Policy? Displacement.


The Copenhagen climate change meeting might actually turn out to be a success over time. China introduced their plan to limit green house gas emissions which was embraced by most of the world with the exception of Europe and the United States, although Barack Obama made some favorable comments about the Chinese plan.

So what is the Chinese plan? Basically it is one of energy displacement without any caps on emissions. They plan on radically increasing the amount of energy that they will produce from renewable resources (wind, solar, and even nuclear) but will not agree to any caps on carbon emissions. The idea is that renewable energy will always be used before a utility will turn to burning fossil fuel to generate electricity. The more renewable energy you build, the less fossil fuel you burn based on a given demand. If you can grow your renewable infrastructure to the point where you are increasing your renewable energy capacity faster than your electric demand then you will start reducing carbon emissions.

China currently receives only a tiny fraction of its electric power from renewable sources (other than hydroelectric). They will try to double their renewable energy production each year for the foreseeable future. It will take many years of doubling to reach an equilibrium point with an economy growing 10% per year. They talk about reducing the carbon output for each unit of production.

Why are the Chinese using this approach? Cap and trade just doesn’t work for them. They can’t put carbon limits on an economy that is growing 10% per year. If the caps really worked, their growth rate would decline substantially. They are not willing to give up the growth which provides jobs for the hundreds of millions of Chinese looking for work to move out of poverty.

To implement this policy of displacement, the Chinese government had decreed that power companies must buy all of the renewable energy produced even if the price of that energy is higher than the price of energy produced from fossil fuels. Note that the price renewable energy producers can charge is regulated by the government but is typically set at a price that provides a decent return for the company. China will also provide fast approval for renewable projects and will work to build out their electric grid to connect new power sources.

The First Solar deal with China to build 20 GigaWatts of solar collectors by the year 2020 is a good example of this policy at work. China guaranteed First Solar a rate tariff on the electricity produced that would make them a profit if they would build a factory in China to produce the panels. China will build the transmission lines to get the power to market for them. In 2020 China will have 20 GigaWatts for solar power which will mean they will product 20 GigaWatts less power from fossil fuels when the sun shines.

The displacement policy means Chinese wind and solar system producers are gearing up to increase production dramatically. This high consistent demand is allowing them to use scale to drive down manufacturing costs. One day renewable may become cost effective as a power source compared to fossil fuels and China won’t have to subsidize their production. In the mean time China creates whole new industries with tremendous export potential and thousands (millions?) of new jobs. They also don’t have to be heavy handed with energy consumers. Consumers will pay a slightly higher price for electricity as the utility companies pass through the higher prices they pay for renewable power.

Read more at Examiner.com:  http://tinyurl.com/y85gcks

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Dec

30th

Avoid Seven Foods for a Healthier 2010


Avoid These 7 Foods and You’re Off To A Healthier New Year- Courtesy www.dhlovelife.com, Darryl Hannah’s very interesting living green site.

1. Canned Tomatoes-  The expert: Fredrick vom Saal, PhD, an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A

The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Acidity — a prominent characteristic of tomatoes — causes BPA to leach into your food.

2. Corn-Fed Beef- The expert: Joel Salatin, co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of books on sustainable farming

Cattle were designed to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. A recent comprehensive study found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium, and potassium.

3. Microwave Popcorn- The expert: Olga Naidenko, PhD, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group

Chemicals, including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), in the lining of the bag, are part of a class of compounds that may be linked to infertility in humans. In animal testing, the chemicals cause liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer. Studies show that microwaving causes the chemicals to vaporize — and migrate into your popcorn.

4. Nonorganic Potatoes- The expert: Jeffrey Moyer, chair of the National Organic Standards Board

Root vegetables absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides that wind up in soil. In the case of potatoes they’re treated with fungicides during the growing season, then sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines before harvesting. After they’re dug up, the potatoes are treated yet again to prevent them from sprouting.

5. Farmed Salmon- The expert: David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany

Nature didn’t intend for salmon to be crammed into pens and fed soy, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. As a result, farmed salmon is lower in vitamin D and higher in contaminants, including carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT.

6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones- The expert: Rick North, project director of the Campaign for Safe Food at the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility

Milk producers treat their dairy cattle with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST, as it is also known) to boost milk production. But rBGH also increases udder infections and even pus in the milk. It also leads to higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor in milk. In people, high levels of IGF-1 may contribute to breast, prostate, and colon cancers.

7. Conventional Apples- The expert: Mark Kastel, codirector of the Cornucopia Institute

If fall fruits held a “most doused in pesticides contest,” apples would win. And increasing numbers of studies are starting to link a higher body burden of pesticides with Parkinson’s disease.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment


Dec

17th

Greening Your Holidays!


So many of us are committing to positive environmental changes in large and small ways, and the holidays can present challenges to that commitment.  Read on for Stanberry Green Team’s encouragement for greener festivities with no sacrifice of fun! 

Green Buying:  Smart buyers buy local.  Buy close to the source as much as you can for your holiday foods and gifts.  Keeping money local helps in many ways; it vastly reduces use of fuel for storage and transportation of food and goods.  It puts money in the hands of people who spend money locally, economically empowering the community where you live and work, thereby supporting schools, parks, and other public systems. 

 Green Gifting:  Think conscious consumerism here.  Thoughtful choices might include passing along something that you have loved to someone who would cherish it.  People love homemade consumable gifts, or homemade anything.  Give a Go Local card from AustinFarmersMarket.org that gives ongoing discounts with local businesses.  Give gifts that empower like minded folks.  How about giving someone a set of cloth napkins and a decorative holder to replace paper ones?  Wrap gifts in reusable gift bags or arrange items in a basket…

 Green Decorating: Think “reusable” with ornaments you buy, or go with a theme that includes items from nature; fresh greens, flowers, plants, pinecones.  If you are replacing lights, consider replacing with LED.  These festive lights have a much longer life span than incandescent lights. What’s more, they use up to 90% less energy, are non-UV emitting, and remain cool to the touch, so they’re safer than traditional lights. Put outdoor lights on timers to manage the energy use. 

 Green Waste Management: We generate so much additional waste with guest, gifts, holiday feasts!  Buy foods and gifts with less packaging when you can.  Make it easy to stick with recycling by having clearly labeled bins to show guests how that is handled in your home.  Use real dishes and cloth napkins; wean yourself from disposables.  Compost your kitchen scraps in one of the new under-the-sink systems. 

 Stanberry and Associates wishes you and yours  a green and festive, warm and happy holiday season!

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Dec

8th

The Prius Effect


This is a great article written by Bryan Welch, Editor of Mother Earth News, that describes a phenomenon that is worth attention about how consumers “vote” with their dollars…

2010-prius

The experts at the Toyota Motor Co. were persistently wrong about the Prius. They seriously underestimated how popular it would be.

When it appeared in Japan in 1997, the world’s first mass-produced gasoline-electric hybrid car was not immediately recognized as a serious automotive challenge to the omnipresence of the internal-combustion engine.

The car was introduced to Japanese drivers in 1997. About 18,000 sold that year. On Earth Day, 2000, Toyota announced that the car was on its way to the United States, and the first American drivers stepped into their new hybrid cars in August.

Throughout the next five years, the only way to get hold of a Prius in the United States was by preordering one from the manufacturer. The waiting time for a new Prius was often more than six months. Its popularity was not based on economic necessity. When the new car first launched in the United States, gas was cheap. At that time, regular gasoline was selling for about $1.30 a gallon and inefficient SUVs were in their heyday. Toyota would debut a website via which car buyers could make a “pioneer purchase” of the Prius. About 6,000 American consumers signed up and got their hands on a Prius that first year, and about 20,000 sold worldwide, most of them in Japan. In 2001, 29,000 Priuses sold worldwide. By 2007, Toyota was selling 10 times that — 181,000 cars in the United States alone. And people kept putting their names on the waiting lists. Those sales numbers would have been much higher if production had kept pace with demand.

No other hybrid or fuel efficient car has been nearly as successful. The Toyota Yaris, which gets 80 percent of the Prius gas mileage and costs about half as much as a Prius, sold about half as many units in 2008. At 2008 fuel prices, you would have to drive your Prius at least 50,000 miles before the price difference was paid off in fuel savings.

The Honda Civic Hybrid was a dud in comparison to the Prius. Although its price and fuel efficiency were comparable, the car sold about 20 percent as many units in 2007. Compared with the 159,000 Priuses sold in the United States during 2008, Honda sold about 31,000 Civic Hybrids.

The Civic’s gass mileage, price, technology, reliability and overall quality were all comparable to the Prius. The biggest distinction between the two vehicles was their appearance. The Civic Hybrid looks like any other Civic, except that it has a little “Hybrid” emblem on its back end and a higher sticker price. The Prius looks like, well, a Prius. It’s perfectly recognizable from half a mile away.

So why would the Prius outsell the Civic Hybrid by a factor of five to one? Because the Prius is cool. Its wonky design instantaneously became a symbol for environmental awareness. Driving around in Prius projects the driver’s identity as a person who cares about the planet, and enjoys new technology. The same could be said of the buyers of any hybrid, but the Prius design projects the message more effectively. So the Prius is cool.

Read the rest here: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Rancho-Cappuccino/Toyota-Prius-Effect.aspx?utm_content=12.07.09+HE&utm_campaign=HE&utm_source=iPost&utm_medium=email

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


Nov

29th

Green Home Trends


Green Home Trends: Ten Ways to Make your Home Greener…  A nice overview and links for ten new products; smokeless, portable indoor/outdoor fireplace, biodegradable furniture, home composting systems, new light emitting strips, water conserving plant and lawn systems and more.

http://www.realtor.org/rmohome_and_design/articles/2009/0902_househome_greener

Bookmark and Share

Comment Here


« Older Entries