In almost every area of our lives, today’s economy has made a major shift towards the world of ecology, going green and eco-friendly. Consumers are emphasizing an eco-lifestyle and companies are investing in everything from renewable sources of energy to completely ecologically safe products. Cities, counties, and entire states in the U.S. and around the globe are focused on reversing global warming. In this environment it comes as no surprise that there is a walk-of-shame for states in the U.S. that are listed as the ‘least green’.

In 2011, the organization 24/7 Wallstreet analyzed each of the states in the United States to evaluate their levels of pollution. The term pollution covers a lot of territory including air, water, earth, recycling efforts, fossil fuel energy use, etc.. The variables that exist can be state-specific as well. Some states have large tracts of land but no real industrial base, therefore they don’t have a need for high level industry requirements. With that said, those same states may rank high in wind turbine but may have the largest quantity of power plants that are coal-fired. 24/7 Wallstreet used an evaluation scale for 49 metric areas. The metric information was gleaned from just about every organization possible, both Federal and not-for-profit. The data used for the analysis was based on 2009-2010, and included thousands of data input information.

Based on the intense analysis of all of the data, here is the list of the greenest states in the U.S.:

Colorado: This state scored above average in just about every one of the pollution scores. It stands as #6 against toxins that cause birth defects including waterway carcinogens. Colorado ranks as # 12 in particle pollution and # 7 in their targets for energy savings. Colorado can proudly claim 6% of their energy use from alternative resources and is # 8 in the best rating in the U.S.

Oregon: The state of Oregon is in the middle one third of the entire metrics for pollution, including a rank of # 29 in toxic waste violations from the EPA and #33 in general toxic exposure. Oregon has high standard ratings for both their policies and alternative energy initiatives, as they are #2 in the most energy-savings programs. This state rates as the second highest level for hydro-electricity energy and is # 8 in non-hydroelectric alternative energy which can mostly be attributed to their wind farms.

Idaho: This state produces 84.5% of all consumed energy via alternative sources. Idaho ranks as #5 for the production of geothermal energy, #6 for hydroelectrical power and has the 4th lowest rank of fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

Montana: The residents of Montana are proudly linked to their nickname of “Big Sky Country” and rightly so. This state ranks lowest in contributing factors of ozone particulants. Montana ranks well in many of the other categories, including # 7 for total use of energy. The rankings are a direct result of the fact that Montana has such a low population (3rd lowest in the U.S.)

South Dakota: This is another state with a low population density (5th lowest), however they also have a low pollution level. South Dakota can claim the fewest EPA violations (14) since 2000 and generates the 2nd lowest amount of hazardous waste annually. It ranks 4th in alternative energy policies, with a goal of accomplishing 10% energy use via alternative sources by the year 2015.

Hawaii: It must first be noted that approximately 25% of this state’s gross state product is a direct result of tourism. Hawaii has great concerns over their natural resources and the environment. They produce the least toxic waste annually and have the best score for 2 air quality measurements. In addition, Hawaii holds a ranking of # 6 in their energy savings programs combined with the policies.

Nevada: There may be a reason Nevada ranks so low on the water pollution scale; mainly because it is an arid/dry state. Nevada does rank well in the production of alternative energy due to their 2nd highest ranking in geothermal and solar photovoltaic energy. While the state may have lower levels of pollution and great scores in alternative energy Nevada ranks just a tad above an average score when it comes to the topic of policy initiatives.

New Hampshire: Low in pollution, New Hampshire ranks as the 4th lowest in harmful pollution via particles in the nation. They rank # 5 in toxic exposure and they have the 4th lowest level of waterways developmental toxins. New Hampshire also ranks as the 5th lowest for the release of toxins affecting reproduction and 5th lowest in the release of any chemicals that are cancer causing.

Maine: This state can claim that their energy use is almost at the fifty percentile from renewable sources. Main has the largest renewable energy source from non-hydroelectric. The state has the biggest percentage of timberland in the U.S. so it may not be a surprising fact that wood and wood waste offer the largest portion of their energy sources.

Vermont: A key factor to note for Vermont is that it has both the lowest GDP and the 2nd smallest population in the U.S. This then creates an understandable situation where they have less pollution than many of the other states. Vermont has the least amount of cardinogenic toxin releases and the smallest of carbon footprints as compared to any other state. Vermont ranks in the top 15 in twenty out of 28 categories for green efforts. They have numerous policies for the promotion of efficiency and pollution reduction

Over the last twenty years there has been a hot debate as to whether China should assist in the cost of global pollution. Countries around the world are all jumping on the band wagon to clean up the earth; each with the small or large part that they can play. China, on the other hand, has not been quite as reticent to join. The opinion of the Chinese government seems to have been that they shouldn’t have to pay to clean up a mess that they really didn’t participate in.

You might look at the logic that China presents as a formidable argument against participation in a global pollution problem. However, you also have to know that in 2006, China jumped ahead of the previous stats for the United States as the country with the highest emissions of carbon dioxide; the main gas responsible for global warming. At the same time, the U.S. emissions level decreased. Another key aspect to note is that while China did sign the Kyoto Protocol and the United States did not, they signed with the agreement that there was not a requirement for reduced emissions by developing nations.

The overall explosion of growth in China is unprecedented. As was predicted, the quantity of automobiles in China has increased almost exponentially, adding to the higher rate of pollution. Once the massive economic growth began to occur, China did not have anything in kind of regulatory process in place to coordinate or govern the problems that would follow. Air pollution introduced a demand for more industry and that created scenarios for other types of pollution such as water pollution. The few regulatory fines that are set in place are at such a low payment requirement that the offenders often do not have a problem paying fines.

There is a great level of concern expressed by the Chinese citizens themselves. There has been a thirty percent increase every year of complaints to the problem of pollution within their country, and the Chinese people are trying to turn to their government for answers and results. While it has been slow to respond, internally the government seems to be levying a more serious attitude even in their larger corporate offenders. A few large companies have actually been shut down because of extreme violations.

All of this adds up to the fact that China wasn’t ready for their own growth explosion which tumbled into a financial melt down in any clean up process. One might agree that China shouldn’t have to invest in a financial situation that occurred before their time, but they are in the middle of the quagmire now.

China is currently looking to and working with a number of industrial nations and learning from their past experiences. There is growing interest in China in the solar power industry as a major answer to the high demand for power. The role that China plays may add a benefit when they combine power with the United States in the development of technologies that will assist in the reduction of gases and resources that contribute to global warming. There are excellent potential advantages for the U.S. to work with China so that the two countries that are contributing the most pollutants can reduce the effect in joint ventures. Other recommendations for areas that China could work toward would be the pursuit of electric or alternative fuel vehicles. This would help to eliminate China’s dependency on oil and fossil fuels.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_China’s_economic_responsibilities_for_climate_change_mitigation

Our Western culture seems to be enamored with bottled water. Whether fresh from the spring or just out of the tap, it seems to be an easy method in our quasi race to be healthy.
You have probably seen some of the television and online commercials displaying the massive quantity of plastic bottles that this love affair is producing. In our attempt at complying with the medical reason to drink water, we have taken this topic to excess (as usual) and we are producing a major pollutant that is rising as a priority environmental problem.

According to WWF (World Wildlife Fund) we manufacture billions of tons of plastic every year for the plastic bottles that we carry around with us. While many of us accomplish our due diligence to recycle these bottles, most do not. We therefore see these bottles everywhere: in landfills, on the streets, in the parks and in our lakes and oceans. It is estimated that around 86% of the oceanic pollution is currently plastic. The problem is so bad that there are now ‘islands’ of plastic, linked together, floating in the oceans. In addition, there are large quantities of energy and polluting related manufacturing needed to make these bottles. Since they are a petroleum product, we are inducing a continued need for oil. All in the name of drinking the required ounces of water every day. In landfills, the resins and BPA can leak into the environment, the water system and combine to make a toxic cocktail. Something to note is that the process of recycling the plastic takes far less in green house emissions than the actual production of the bottles.

You might think that it would be a good idea to just wash out your water bottle and reuse it. Unfortunately, that’s a bad idea. These bottles contain phthalates which degrade as the age of the bottle increases and actually adds this chemical to the water itself. Millions of water bottles are aging everywhere, and, unless recycled are actually causing a major environmental impact.

An alternative concept that is becoming more popular is to purchase the reusable portable water bottles. Why we need these bottles to be produced in a variety of decorator colors and designs is beyond me, but, one supposes it is to encourage people to buy them because they are attractive. Repackaged as ‘sports bottles’, a down side to that is again, what the bottle is made of. Most contain BPA (Bisphenol A) which is used in the manufacturing of plastic bottles. The studies and reports vary on the toxicity of BPA, but it comes down to the higher the quantity in the plastic bottle, the more of a serious health concern it is.

We need to make a complete turn around about our obsession with bottled water. As a culture, we are going to destroy the environment unless we make this change. There are BPA free and environmentally safe water (or sports) bottles that are being manufactured by companies that are also environmentally conscious. Yes, they are a bit more costly, but an investment in just one of these bottles can pay for itself.

Filtered water has already been proven to actually be healthier than the bottled water we are so fond of purchasing. The filters are now made to remove many more of the chemicals and minerals that are commonly found in tap water. The answer is fairly simple: purchase a BPA Free, environmentally friendly water bottle and a high quality filter – and you have an unlimited resource for healthy water: just turn on the tap!

http://www.allaboutwater.org/environment.html
http://www.iwma.com/programs-events/Impact%20of%20Plastic.html
http://www.livestrong.com/article/166320-negative-effects-of-plastic-bottles-on-the-environment/

The magic microbe
Groups of scientists from around the world are astonished at this phenomenon. Basically, what happens is that when pieces of plastic are colonized by microbes, a protective film is created around them. This protects the species that will eat them from potential toxic effects of the plastic. There is also evidence that suggest the microbes will assist with the break-down of plastic in this way as well.

Pseudomonas bacteria to the rescue
Another life form that was discovered to help our oceans is the pseudomonas bacteria, which can help transform the low-grade plastic from our bottles into plastic that is biodegradable. This discovery could also aid with the billions of bottles that are currently overflowing our landfills. So, these bacteria could not only help our oceans, but our land as well.

The future of our planet

There are still many things we don’t know about our planet and the life forms it has created to help clean up our mess. These microbes and bacteria could play a major role in saving a lot of marine life, as they are key to breaking down toxic chemicals and biodegrading what was once thought of as non-biodegradable. So, there is hope for cleaning up the plastic garbage patch after all.

Click here for Part 1 of article

You have probably heard of the great garbage patch in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. It is currently the epicenter of plastic pollution on our planet, which is very harmful to the ocean fauna. It can poison and choke fish and other animals in the sea, and an even bigger problem is that the toxic chemicals coming from the plastic garbage patch are absorbed in the water.

A long-term problem
The great garbage patch is a long-term problem for our planet, because it takes thousands of years to break down a material like plastic. There are 300 million tons of globally-produced plastic that reach the marine environment every year. The use of plastic has become ingrained in our daily lives and it is ubiquitously used in disposable ways by consumers. Naturally, the fastest growing type of waste that eventually ends up in our oceans is plastic, which slowly accumulates over time.

An unexpected solution

But recently scientists discovered a new possible solution. They found that plastic is not as impervious as they had thought before. In other words, some natural forces have been discovered that can help break down the plastic garbage patch. Scientists discovered certain types of microbes living in the sea that are able to colonize plastics and quite possibly reduce the scale of environmental pollution coming from them.

Click here to continue reading

2) Storm Water Pollution
Storm water is next on our list of 3 kinds of pollution you may not have heard about. This refers to melted snow and rain that runs down surfaces like paved streets, parking lots, highways, rooftops. When running water hits these surfaces, it can take all sorts of pollution with it like pesticides, fertilizers, oil, animal waste, trash, and soil. Then the water could flow straight into local lakes, bays or streams. It may also go through storm pipes, from where it will be released into a local waterway. What’s worse is that in urban areas the large artificially constructed surfaces increase peak flows, which have various hydrologic effects like loss of habitat, instream sedimentation, and streambeds channels.

The amount of pollutants in storm water is quite significant due to the runoff volume, and in general, these pollutants are not safe for human health. These harmful elements include bacteria, organic compounds, viruses, and toxic metals. It is certainly not safe to drink it, and you shouldn’t swim in it either. Polluted storm water may cause some beaches to be closed, and it can trigger algal blooms that are toxic.

3) Body Pollution

This may come as a surprise to many, but in many of the world’s livestock-producing countries the farmers mix the animals’ feed with a tiny amount of antibiotics. According to them, this helps them grow and keeps them healthy. But what does that mean for us? Public health groups have spoken out against this practice, because when antibiotics are routinely provided, the bacteria inside the body becomes immune, developing a resistance to them. One of the serious growing health concerns in the world is antibiotic-resistant infections. There are many contributing factors to this problem, including the fact that antibiotics are over-prescribed by doctors to patients. But the small amounts fed to livestock are also contributing to this issue. These antibiotics are a major source of pollution for the human body.

Click here for Part 1 of article

We all know that there are different sources of pollution that exist all around the world. Most of these are the standard ones – greenhouse gas emissions, water contamination by factories, nuclear power plants, etc. But there are also different sources of pollution that are more subtle and not very much talked about. Here are 3 kinds of pollution that few will know about:

1) Rivers, a.k.a. Trash Canals

This is a sad reality in many countries in Asia. For example, the Mekong Delta rivers in Vietnam are so full of garbage (mostly discarded bits of plastic), that motorboats often get stuck because their engines get caught onto pieces of trash. The story is similar in China, Cambodia, Bangladesh, India… It starts at the individual scale and ends with massive industrial waste going into the rivers as well. And then we wonder why things like the Pacific Garbage Patch are such a serious issue in our world today.

Click here to continue reading

There has been some debate in the last couple of years about the best solution for the plastic bag problem currently plaguing us. Should we use biodegradable plastic bags or reusable carrier bags? Let’s examine the issue in a bit more detail.

There is a common belief that because biodegradable plastic bags are BIODEGRADABLE, then it must be the best thing to use. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. These ‘biodegradable’ bags pose a whole new range of problems, so, they are hardly a solution to the current plastic problem. (To read about oxo-biodegradable plastics, click here).
Here we will examine the truth behind biodegradable plastic bags and explain why reusable carrier bags are the real solution to the plastic problem.

Huge Energy Consumption
The American Chemistry Council analyzed these biodegradable plastic bags to find that they require about 300 percent more energy to produce compared with their regular polyethylene counterparts. Moreover, their production used up 18 times the amount of water and it emitted 4 times more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere!
So, is all that extra energy, water consumption, and CO2 emissions really worth it to produce a bag that will biodegrade? Most likely not. Which is why reusable carrier bags have the clear advantage, since they eliminate those problems altogether and get the job done just as well or even better.

Lack of Facilities
Another problem with biodegradable plastic bags is that you cannot recycle them with conventional plastic bags. So, because of the lack of proper facilities for their disposal, most of them end up in landfills anyway. And do you think they biodegrade in landfills? Not at all! They sit there, just as regular plastic bags do, contributing to litter and pollution. This is because they need proper facilities in order to biodegrade, and landfills just don’t cut it.

Too Long to Break Down
Even when these biodegradable plastic bags do end up in proper places to biodegrade, they still take a while to do so. In the right conditions these bags will break down into water, carbon dioxide, and methane. They should be composted within 12 weeks, and it will take about 6 months to fully biodegrade. However, this means that they will stick around long enough to cause harm to nature. Animals can mistake them for food. Also, if it is windy and these bags get caught on trees and bushes (as we’ve all seen before), they will not be exposed to microorganisms in the soil that are vital to their breakdown. So, in the end, these biodegradable plastic bags pose exactly the same problems as conventional polyethylene ones. (To read get some eco-friendly home tips, click here).

So, the conclusion is that there is certainly much less environmental impact from reusable carrier bags than from biodegradable plastic bags. Reusable bags also have a better performance overall, and, of course, they last! So, the choice is obvious – reusable carrier bags win in every regard.

For more information on biodegradable plastics, go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodegradable_plastic

In our unstable times, when almost everything we do as humans is said to cause pollution, there are some things that some of us still try to do in order lead an environmentally-friendly lifestyle. Unfortunately, this becomes more and more difficult, as we learn about more and more things that pollute our environment. Here are three of these things, some of which were initially intended to help the environment!

1) Energy Efficiency (Flourescent) Bulbs

This is the first on our list of things that cause pollution, and a very surprising one indeed. They do help save energy, but at the same time they pose a threat to the environment because what is inside them is considered poisonous. The way these fluorescent bulbs work is they heat gases inside a glass tube. Among these gases is mercury, which is a neurotoxin that is very dangerous. It may cause brain and kidney damage in humans. The amount of this chemical is extremely small (only about 5 mg), but it is enough to make 6,000 gallons of water unsafe to drink if it were to be dissolved in it. Even the new ‘low-mercury’ bulbs are said to be able to make as much as 1,000 gallons of water unsafe to drink.

2) Cows

Next on our list of things that cause pollution are these simple farm animals that are ubiquitous around the countryside. The problem with cows is that because of their belching, a huge amount of methane is released into the atmosphere. This is a toxic greenhouse gas, and it is a big one among the things that pollute. According to statistics, one cow can emit as much as 53 gallons (200 liters) of methane per day. This daily amount is roughly the same as what is produced by an average vehicle! The reason cows produce so much pollution is because they have four stomachs, all of which are used for food digestion. They do not use intestines like humans. The cows’ stomachs are, therefore, full of bacteria, which serves to help their digestion. It is precisely this bacteria that produces methane.

3) Solar Panels

The idea behind solar panels is a good one, and once they are built, they do help produce clean energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The problem arises when it comes to actually building them. It causes more pollution and more greenhouse gas emissions to build solar panels than they will actually save during their existence. In order to construct one solar panel (let’s say the size of 1 square meter), 40kg of coal must be burned by a factory. This may not sound like much, but by burning that amount of coal, even the least efficient power plant can generate 130 kilowatt-hours of electricity. This is equivalent to keeping an LED light bulb on for 30 years, 12 hours a day. But the solar panel built with that amount of coal can only last 20 years. So, the big question is, would it even be worth it?

3) Most of the garbage comes from Asia.

If you’ve ever visited the less developed countries in Asia, this will become obvious. The Mekong Delta in Vietnam alone could probably be responsible for a large chunk of the garbage in the Pacific. China and Bangladesh are not far behind, if not ahead. The problem is that people are not educated with regards to rubbish in these countries. The rivers there serve as sewage canals, and whatever the population doesn’t want gets discarded into them (individuals and large corporations alike).

4) The garbage concentration will continue to stay the same over the years.

There is a common belief that if no one cleans it up now, it will just keep growing and the water will get more and more contaminated. This is not entirely true, since a lot of the trash sinks to the bottom, since a lot of the particles in it are more dense than seawater. Also, a lot of the trash gets washed up on islands in the middle of the Pacific, instead of just floating around. Not that this is a better option, but it at least it won’t keep accumulating on the water surface.

Click here for Part 1 of article