Breathe easier

By Rebecca Harnik

When it comes to air quality, I’ve always considered my house a safe escape from smoggy summer days.

But recently, I learned that indoor air quality can be much worse than that of the outdoors. In fact, studies have shown that one in five U.S. public schools has sub-par air quality, which startled me given the amount of time children spend in school buildings and the sensitivity of young bodies.

The problem with indoor air is that a lack of ventilation can allow toxins to build up over time, which can pose hazards to health. Common culprits that are often toxic include wall paint, cleaning supplies and many office supplies that you probably take for granted: copy machines, printers, pens, markers, paints, solvents, and glues, among many others.

These chemicals evaporate into the air and get trapped in closed spaces. Smoking indoors also is obviously known to have detrimental health effects, but these effects are more long term than many people realize-the toxins from smoking in a contained area linger and get trapped within the building, even when the smoke is no longer visible.

Because these toxins are related to a wide range of chemicals, many different symptoms can result from indoor air pollution, ranging from simple allergies, eye and respiratory irritation to damage to the central nervous system or cancer.

Also, since people react very differently to chemicals, one person may react immediately, while another may not. Because of the differential reactions, it becomes difficult to prove a certain indoor space as a culprit, and as a result it is hard to improve the building’s air quality.

As I have learned, there are several easy things that you can do to protect your health and keep better air in your home. First of all, try to get rid of toxic cleaning chemicals and inks. Several companies offer organic and non-toxic cleaning supplies and support sustainable and eco-friendly practices. Our family uses Seventh Generation, which I would recommend but there are many different products on the market with a commitment to the environment and healthy products.

If you must use certain paints or substances, read labels carefully. Follow the instructions if a label calls for good ventilation or recommends a mask or hand washing. Buy low volumes of these chemicals, make sure that you dispose of them safely, and avoid them whenever possible. But know that there are healthier alternatives, including low VOC paints.

Another great way to improve air quality inside your home is to ensure good air circulation. When using paint or other toxic chemicals, make sure that you open windows and turn on a window fan to suck out the fumes. Even when you aren’t using chemicals, open windows when the weather is fair! Although summer days can get hot, nighttime is often quite lovely. Turn off the air conditioning, use a fan, and open the windows up. You’ll cleanse your air and save energy.

My favorite way to wake up is from the scent of honeysuckle coming in with a breeze through the window-I highly recommend it.

Photo by Spacedout

Learning to live simply

By Sarah Kneezle

A backpack, two wool t-shirts, one pair of shorts, one pair of pants, a lightweight fleece, raincoat, windbreaker, three pairs of socks and underwear, a stove, two pots, a tent, a sleeping bag, camp shoes, trekking poles and food.

For 23 days last summer that list was everything I owned. My hike on the oldest wilderness trail in the country was a lesson on living simply. Traveling through the picturesque Green Mountains along the Long Trail in Vermont, nearly every item was a necessity.

Here, your apartment is a small waterproof tent and your closet, storage and dresser are on your back. The more you own, the more your back hurts.

On the first day, my boyfriend and I walked seven miles to the first shelter while lugging enough food to get us 155 miles -- a larger than average amount of grub before a re-supply. After a couple days, we were more than willing to donate a few unnecessary food items to fellow hikers.

It’s a strange feeling to be aware of every possession you own, from how much quinoa you have left in your food bag, to how dry each pair of socks you own is. But what’s stranger is your relationship to waste -- from Pop Tarts wrappers to human waste.

It was surprising to compare the amount of waste I produced living in a small apartment in Boston to what my boyfriend and I were carrying in the woods. A normal week in the city would result in about one to two kitchen-size trash bags, excluding recycling. But in the woods, we’d maybe fill a quart size zip-top bag.

Though the vagabond lifestyle of a thru-hiker isn’t for everyone, it’s easy to become an environmentalist and a conservationist by living in the woods. Many hikers, trail workers and mountain clubs advocate Leave No Trace outdoor ethics, which aims to respect wildlife habitats, minimize human impact and pack it in, pack it out waste reduction.

Not only is readjusting to “civilized” life a challenge, but it is easy to jump back into your old wasteful habits.

Last weekend, my boyfriend and I went backpacking again and I was reminded that living simply and monitoring your waste and consumption is important for a healthy planet.

Presidential candidates take the hot seat on the environment

By Christopher Forestieri

After eight years of neglect by an administration that is still “waiting until all of the facts are in” on global climate change, environmental issues are seeing a welcomed revival in the 2008 presidential election.

Both Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) have outlined plans to address global climate change and boast consistently pro-environmental records.

Both candidates acknowledge the reality of global climate change, and agree that man is a contributor. They also pledged support for investing in alternative energy sources and said that the U.S. should have signed the Kyoto Protocol.

However, voters should note several inconsistencies on both sides.

The League of Conservation Voters, an independent environmental advocacy group based in Washington D.C., rated the candidates’ dedication to environmental issues and scored Obama at 96 percent and McCain at just 53 percent.

But in 2005, Obama voted in favor of Dick Cheney’s energy bill, which, among other blows to the environmental movement, gave huge tax breaks to the oil industry.

The bill also set aside subsidies for ethanol based fuels, making it largely popular with a Southern Illinois constituency Obama sought to win over. Obama’s seat on the ethanol bandwagon seems inconsistent with his progressive platform and leaves many environmentalists wishing he would put a greater emphasis on more eco-friendly options.

McCain has spoken out against ethanol subsidies, citing the rise of food costs and that over-production of corn poses other risks to the environment-increased fertilization, pesticides and soil damage.

Despite ethanol’s alleged short comings, Obama has yet to shift his support for subsidies due to his continued push to make political gains in rural America.

But McCain may not be a total tree hugger either.

Though he voted against the 2005 energy bill, earlier this month McCain said he supported removing a federal ban prohibiting off-shore drilling in coastal states as a temporary solution to the price of oil even though he had been staunchly against the measure in the past.

After this incident McCain quickly sought to minimize any love lost within the environmental community earlier this week by proposing a $300 million prize for the development of “a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars."

There are many questions left to be answered in the months ahead and how each candidate responds will certainly highlight the differences yet to be seen.

Will Obama’s quest to court rural voters preclude his call for alternative energy sources outside of ethanol? Will McCain’s struggle to win over both environmentalists and oil bigwigs allow him to clearly define his plans for change in U.S. environmental policy?

With both Obama and McCain fighting to be seen as the least swayed by special interests, the direction each takes on environmental policy is likely to be a strong barometer of who is the true reformer.

Start your own organic garden

By Rebecca Harnik

While the summer sun shines down and warm breezes stir the air, my interest in gardens is blossoming.

Getting a garden started can be a great way to connect with nature and create a habitat for a variety of species. When starting up an eco-friendly garden, there are many important things to consider.

Environmentally friendly gardens can improve the health of plants while preserving natural resources and diversity. Organic gardens reduce chemical usage, improve water and air quality, cut down on pollution and can cut back on time and money spent on gardening.

Choosing what to grow in a greenscape can be a challenge and a bit overwhelming, however, it doesn’t need to be. Native species and plants that require less water are always a good choice. Avoid invasive species or those that don’t naturally grow in your area because they are more difficult to maintain, and can harm native plants.

It is also important to know what kind of garden you are intending to keep—flower, vegetable, herb—and make sure that your climate is suitable for the plants that you intend to grow.

Pay attention to your space: how much sun, the size of the area and know how much energy you want to put into it. Perennials, for example, are easier to maintain because they regenerate and do not need to be planted every year.

When preparing for a garden it is important to start with healthy soil. Using an organic compost to enrich soil is a great way to encourage healthy plant growth, and it reduces the need for fertilizers because composted soil is already rich with nutrients. Composting is a great way to help to reuse waste from food and lawn clippings to benefit your garden.

Also, mulching is very helpful—it can naturally prevent many weeds, while keeping moisture inside. Healthy soil attracts natural diversity of small beneficial organisms and will improve the quality of your garden and decrease the need for chemicals or pesticides.

The Environmental Protection Agency lays down five key steps to create a more environmentally friendly garden: maintain healthy soil, plant right for your site, practice smart watering, adopt a holistic approach to pest management and practice natural lawn care.

But not everybody has enough space for their own garden. If you live in an apartment or an area with limited lawn space, try checking out community gardens in your city. Community gardens offer a smart way to bring nature to your neighborhood.

These gardens can revitalize neglected spaces, help connect diverse groups of people within the neighborhood, allow people to share knowledge of gardening and recipes and improve the appearance of a neighborhood. The American Community Gardening Association has a helpful website, and can help locate a nearby garden or offer tips on community gardening.

Now go get lost in a garden! The songbirds and butterflies will thank you, and I bet that you will be proud of your hard work when you’re eating delicious organic vegetables.

Colleges get wise about going green

By Sarah Kneezle

While the success of a college’s sports teams are important to many students, others focus instead on their alma mater's dedication to the environment.

In Bar Harbor, Maine, students at College of the Atlantic all major in human ecology, the study of human relationships to the environment. Students here engage in environmental conservation, get their hands dirty with organic gardening and take classes in activism.

"Being green is our job,” said Millard Dority, the Director of Campus Planning, Buildings and Public Safety, on the college’s website. “We foster a human ecological environment here on a daily basis, so our students, and all of us, learn from what we have and from what we do."

The college, which was voted the greenest university in the world by Grist.org, was the first U.S. institution to pledge carbon neutrality, a way of off-setting energy use with renewable resources, and held the first zero-waste graduation.

Other colleges have become involved by joining the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, a pledge to address global warming and reduce the carbon footprint of higher education facilities.

By signing the commitment, colleges must complete an emissions inventory, set a target date to go carbon neutral, integrate sustainability into coursework and create an action plan to address global warming on campus.

Since 2006, hundreds of college and university presidents have signed the commitment and on earth day, the ACUPCC announced that all 50 states, including Washington D.C. are represented in the commitment.

“Colleges and universities must lead the effort to reverse global warming for the health and well being of current and future generations,” said Michael Crow, founding member of ACUPCC and president of Arizona State University.

Some colleges have made green improvements by incorporating primitive brown matter: cow poop.

In 2006, Green Mountain College in Poultney, Vt. signed up to receive more than 50 percent of its electricity from Vermont dairy farms as part of Central Vermont Power Service’s Cow Power program, which cuts the college’s carbon emissions by 3,500 metric tons.

Even schools without sustainability offices have decided to build green. In 2006, Emerson College opened its first LEED certified residence hall, thanks in part to advocacy by Earth Emerson, the school’s student-run environmental group.

LEED Certification, which stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, is a green building system created by the U.S. Green Building Council that requires eco-friendly building construction and assigns ratings—certified, silver, gold and platinum—based a building’s conservation and sustainability.

Even the Ivy League is turning green, with Harvard, Stanford and Yale Universities all reducing their environmental impacts through sustainable programs.

“Each and every one of our [Green Campus] programs and services proves its worth financially, organizationally and environmentally,” claims Harvard University’s Green Campus initiative website.

Make your school go green—urge your college president to sign the ACUPCC, join an environmental advocacy group on campus, start a dorm recycling program and urge your classmates to reduce, re-use and recycle.

Photos by Harvard University and CVPS

Environmental Policy 101: Cap and Trade

By Christopher Forestieri

With global climate change sure to be a key issue in the 2008 election, the U.S. Senate has started debating legislation that would set a cap on the permissible level of greenhouse gasses companies can emit each year.

Ideally, congress would create a ceiling on total emissions and let the free market dictate the proportions by allowing companies that use less energy to trade their excess to companies that exceed the limit.

As time passes, the permissible level of total emissions would be decreased and the revenue generated by the sale of emissions allowances would be put into alternative fuels. Hopefully, the need for carbon-based fuels would also be reduced.

Proponents suggest that this system is more flexible than a ridged, across-the-board limit on emissions. But critics are quick to point out several factors that must be considered. First, cap and trade is based on the assumption that the development of alternative fuels will keep up with the timetable set for lowering the emissions ceiling.

As the acceptable level of emissions is reduced (which is necessary to reach the far lower levels needed to make an impact), the cost of fuels will increase greatly. If a viable alternative to fossil fuels were to emerge, this cost would be offset.

However, there is a fear that advancements in alternative fuels will not be sufficient enough to meet the energy demands of a nation which uses fossil fuels to generate more than 80 percent of its power supply.

Failure to keep up with this demand will result in a serious cost increase for many Americans. This is not likely to sit well with a populace currently mired in a recession-laden economy and faced with already high energy costs seen almost unanimously as excessive. Nor will it serve to move Americans toward the newly recharged environmental movement.

Another potential factor that could alienate the general public and undermine the positives of cap and trade is the benefit the legislation would have for lobbyists.

With proceeds from the sale of energy allowances proposed to fund alternative fuels, special interest lobbyists will no doubt show up to claim their piece of the pie, skewing the public’s perception of cap and trade.

While the goals of cap and trade are certainly formidable, its potential to impact the economy negatively raises doubts in my mind as to whether now is the right time for this type of legislation. Though it would be a tremendously positive step towards tackling global climate change, I feel it could ultimately damage the public’s perception of the environmental movement and risk the support needed for future legislation.

Popularity of this legislation among the general public is essential for the environmental movement to realize its aspirations. But Americans will need to see a payoff after sustainable initiatives are passed.

For good or ill we are a culture of instant gratification, a grim assessment no doubt, but one that must be recognized and dealt with. Peoples’ lives may not have to drastically improve for environmentalism to work, but they certainly cannot worsen.

Increased tax burdens and rising costs will be a major roadblock and will certainly prove disastrous, as will the impression that these burdens benefit pork barrel spending and special interest lobbyists.

With the great opportunity that environmentalism’s renewed popularity in Washington presents, it would be a shame to wreck it with what many see as typical Washington politics.

Hopefully, as the general election campaign begins to gain momentum, each candidate will more clearly define their environmental stance and offer solutions to a flawed proposal with worthwhile goals.

Get on your bike!

By Rebecca Harnik

As gas prices skyrocket, the world continues to warm, traffic jams creep along our highways and pollution chronically plagues many cities, commuting to work is becoming more burdensome and the situation is looking hopeless. Except for bicycle commuters.

Bicycle commuting is an easy way to protect the environment from car-related issues and decrease our dependency on the automobile. And it is likely much easier than you’d imagine. In the long run it will probably save money, get you in better physical shape, boost endorphins, improve your mood (especially if the alternative is a traffic jam) and clear you of the guilt and frustration of driving. Biking could even be speedier than your current drive or walk.

I recently biked from St. Paul, Minn. to Chicago with a few friends and the trip fueled my love for biking. We felt that we absorbed so much more of the character and intricacies of different towns and cities than we would have by car. Also, we connected much more personally with many interesting and kind people along the way. I think that you will likely agree that passing people on a bike path will fill you with much more happiness than dealing with the road rage of stressed drivers.

According to the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, one-quarter of all car trips that Americans make are one mile or less. This can be a five-minute bike ride. If you are nervous about a long ride, start slowly, if you need to. I am currently attempting to eliminate all of these one-mile drives from my life and am biking them instead. You should, too! If you don’t feel able to go all the way to work, try biking part of the way to a bus station or metro, and then lock your bike up there. If it works well, then expand your trip.

If you need ideas for a good bike route, start by looking online. Many cities and states have their own bicycling organizations, or offer bike-specific maps labeling the most optimal bike roads. Also, check your state’s Department of Transportation website for bike suggestions. If none are listed, contact the department and demand such services. If all else fails, try paying attention to bikers in your area, and ask them for advice on bike routes.

Of course, not every city has a good bicycle infrastructure. Many cities forbid bikes from using the sidewalk, yet offer no safe alternative on the road, and suburbs can be devoured by highways with few bike trails.

If your city has poor or dangerous biking conditions, be sure to let your representatives know your needs! Write letters, and talk to neighbors and friends to try to improve your community. Taking action can make it easier for others to join the ride.

Other concerns? There are a lot of great sites that offer advice on many different issues. I like this one a lot:

Commuting101