| Sample
Weekly Installments
This
is how the columns will arrive in your "IN" box. Each week
we provide two questions/two answers. We also provide an image (use
optional) for each.
SAMPLE 1/Question 1:
EARTH TALK
From the Editors of E - The Environmental
Magazine
Dear EarthTalk:
I have been alarmed at recent news about dangerous substances in kids'
toys shipped to the U.S. from China, though I doubt that such concerns
are limited to Chinese products. What are the major issues associated
with chemicals in child toys?
-- Carla M., Chicago,
IL
Recent concerns surrounding toxic chemicals in children's toys have
focused on "phthalates" (pronounced THA-lates), a group
of chemical compounds typically added to plastics to increase their
softness and flexibility, and bisphenol A (BPA), a building block
for polycarbonate plastic that is used primarily in shatter-resistant
baby bottles. Phthalates are found in numerous industrial and consumer
products, including plastic intravenous (IV) bags used in hospitals,
fishing lures and nail polishes. One phthalate, diisononyl phthalate
(DINP), is commonly used in the manufacture of soft vinyl products
made for babies, such as bath books, rubber ducks and teething rings.
Studies have linked BPA to the disruption of hormone function in rats,
and to increased breast and prostate cancer cell growth, early puberty
and obesity in humans. Other studies have linked phthalates like DINP
to rodent cancers and genital abnormalities, especially in males.
The city of San Francisco would have been the first U.S. jurisdiction
to ban phthalates and BPA from children's toys and feeding products
under a "Stop Toxic Toys" bill signed by mayor Gavin Newsom
in June 2006, but lawsuits backed by chemical and toy manufacturers
(and filed by a coalition including the California Retailers Association,
the California Grocers Association and the American Chemistry Council)
stalled the initiative, which had been set to take effect December
1, 2006.
Then on October 15, 2007, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
signed into law AB 1108 (also known as the California Toxic Toys Bill),
making California the first state in the country to ban the use of
phthalates from children's products. "We are thrilled that California
is taking action to protect our kids from dangerous chemicals,"
said Dan Jacobson, Legislative Director for Environment California,
which co-sponsored the legislation along with the Breast Cancer Fund.
"This bill is so important because as children's minds and bodies
go through the delicate processes of growing and developing, they
are particularly vulnerable to chemicals that could affect proper
development."
The European Union considers phthalates dangerous enough to ban them
from children's products, and has ordered the removal of many variations
from children's products and banned still others, including DINP,
from anything that kids might put in their mouths. Environment California
and other groups see the EU ban as evidence that alternatives to these
plasticizers exist and must be explored in the U.S. "Many places
in the world have to comply with restrictions on phthalates,"
says Rachel Gibson, an attorney for Environment California. "It's
a mystery why we sell toxic toys to American kids."
Until more stringent regulations are passed, consumers can use the
recycling codes on plastic products to determine content. If it's
marked #7, it's polycarbonate plastic and contains BPA; if it's marked
#3, it's polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and contains potentially
harmful phthalates.
CONTACTS: Environment California, www.environmentcalifornia.org/environmental-health/stop-toxic-toys;
Breast Cancer Fund, www.breastcancerfund.org/site/pp.asp?c=kwKXLdPaE&b=3486437.
GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk,
c/o E - The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881;
submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/; or e-mail:
earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
SAMPLE 1/Question
2:
EARTH TALK
From the Editors of E - The Environmental
Magazine
Dear EarthTalk:
What is the status of Sea Turtle protection efforts? Don't many of
them die in fishnets and, as a result, are threatened with extinction?
-- Matthew Lieberman,
Wellesley, MA
Given their tenuous existence, sea turtles are considered by many
environmentalists as ambassadors for the world's troubled oceans.
They have graced the seas for more than 200 million years and survived
whatever catastrophe befell the dinosaurs. But they are now facing
a sharp decline in numbers around the world due mainly to human threats
such as the alteration of beach nesting habitat, the harvesting of
eggs for food, entanglement in fishing nets and pollution of ocean
waters.
Found in all the warm ocean waters of the Earth, sea turtles generally
remain at sea, returning to the surface for air and only coming ashore
to lay eggs and nest. The five species of sea turtles found in and
around North America are the leatherback, green turtle, hawksbill,
Kemp's ridley and loggerhead.
Sea turtles are protected in and around U.S. waters under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), which lists the hawksbill, leatherback, Kemp's
ridley and green turtle as "endangered," while the loggerhead
is listed as "threatened." (A species is considered endangered
when it is on the brink of extinction; if it is experiencing serious
threats that may eventually lead to its extinction, but the situation
is not yet critical, it is classified as threatened.) Harming, harassing,
killing, importing, selling or transporting any sea turtle, hatchling
or eggs is considered a violation of federal law punishable by a stiff
fine and jail time.
Outside the U.S., many other countries have similar laws designed
to protect the world's remaining and beloved sea turtles. And the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), an
international agreement signed by 169 countries and designed to prevent
the trade in endangered wild animals and their parts, also protects
sea turtles. But such measures often look much better on paper; enforcement
efforts are often inadequate and as a result sea turtle populations
continue to plummet.
According to the Florida-based Caribbean Conservation Corporation
(also known as the Sea Turtle Survival League), present goals for
protecting sea turtles include: cracking down on the illegal international
trade in turtles and turtle products; forcing fishing boats to use
"turtle excluder devices" in their nets to decrease turtle
deaths; establishing more coastal refuges to keep development from
encroaching on turtle nesting beaches; decreasing artificial light
near nesting beaches (light scares turtles away); enforcing laws to
minimize the dumping of pollutants and solid waste into the ocean
and near-shore waters; and stepping up turtle monitoring activities
so conservation efforts can stay focused where they are most needed.
Individuals can do their part by steering clear of sea turtles when
they are laying eggs on beaches, making sure to never remove or handle
a turtle egg in any way, and keeping house lights (and even flashlights
and camera flashes) off at night on or near nesting beaches. Concerned
persons can also help by joining and supporting organizations working
to protect sea turtles, such as the Caribbean Conservation Corporation,
the Sea Turtle Restoration Project and the National Save the Sea Turtle
Foundation.
CONTACTS: Caribbean Conservation Corporation's "Information
on Sea Turtles and Threats to Their Survival," www.cccturtle.org/sea-turtle-information.php;
Sea Turtle Restoration Project, www.seaturtles.org; National
Save the Sea Turtle Foundation, www.savetheseaturtle.org.
GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk,
c/o E - The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881;
submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/; or e-mail:
earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
SAMPLE 2/Question 1:
EARTH TALK
From the Editors of E - The Environmental
Magazine
Dear EarthTalk:
I am considering buying Honda's natural gas Civic. What exactly comes
out of a natural gas vehicle's tailpipe, and how harmful to the environment
is natural gas extraction and refinement? Which is greener, a hybrid
or natural gas car?
-- Alex Neal, San Diego CA
Honda's natural gas Civic GX, which debuted in 2006 in California
but is now becoming available in other parts of the country, just
may be the cleanest mainstream car on the road. At least the American
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) thinks so. The nonprofit
group publishes an annual Green Book listing the greenest (and meanest)
cars of the year, and put the Civic GX at the top of its 2007 environmentally
friendly car list, edging out Toyota's hybrid Prius.
Although neither car is a slouch when it comes to fuel economy and
reduced emissions, the natural gas-fueled Civic scored slightly better
than the Prius on both counts in ACEEE's battery of tests. It also
scored better in terms of the pollution generated in the manufacturing
processes.
Natural gas is the cleanest burning of all fossil fuels. According
to the U.S. Department of Energy, the burning of natural gas emits
117,000 pounds per billion (ppb) BTUs of carbon dioxide as compared
to gasoline's 164,000. Its 92 ppb of nitrogen oxide emissions are
considerably lower than gasoline's 448, and its mere one ppb of sulfur
dioxide emissions is dwarfed by gasoline's 1,122. Natural gas also
emits just seven ppb of particulates compared to 84 for gasoline,
and it emits no mercury whatsoever against the trace amounts emitted
by gasoline-burning engines. Natural gas combustion does generate
slightly more carbon monoxide than gasoline, at 40 ppb versus 33,
but the difference is negligible.
The big trade-off for Civic GX owners is the car's limited 220-mile
range between fuelings. The gasoline-powered Civic can go 350 miles
on a tank; the Prius, even with just an 11-gallon tank, can go considerably
further operating at as much as 55 miles per gallon in highway driving.
While a few dozen natural gas refueling stations have popped up around
the U.S., they are few and far between. For those who need to make
longer trips but still value a greener ride, a hybrid may be the best
bet, as it will produce only marginally worse emissions while taking
advantage of the ubiquity of gas stations out on the road.
Those who already use natural gas for home heating can pay $5,000
for a car fueling system installed in their garage or driveway. While
that cost may seem high, owners can save about $1 per gallon over
gasoline and can also get a federal $1,000 tax rebate. (Also, like
the Prius, the purchase of the Civic GX itself qualifies for a federal
tax break of $2,000 as well as up to another $2,000 in state and local
incentives where applicable.) Some Honda dealers lease home systems
for between $34 and $79 monthly. Honda pegs the fuel cost at 3.75
cents/mile, compared to 8.8 cents/mile for the gasoline-powered Civic.
Regarding the extraction and distribution of natural gas, the fuel
is often sourced along with or near oil reserves, and involves similarly
invasive drilling methods. Accidents do happen from time to time and,
though natural gas does not spill like oil and cause ground and sea-level
ecosystem disturbances, it rises into the atmosphere where it contributes
directly to global warming.
CONTACTS: Database for State Incentives for Renewables
and Efficiency, www.dsireusa.org; ACEEE's Green Book, www.greenercars.com;
Honda Civic GX, http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-gx.
GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk,
c/o E - The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881;
submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/; or e-mail:
earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
SAMPLE 2/Question 2:
EARTH TALK
From the Editors of E - The Environmental
Magazine
Dear EarthTalk:
Bottled water companies would have us all believe that tap water is
unsafe to drink. But I've heard that most tap water is actually pretty
safe. Is this true?
-- Sam Tsiryulnikov, Los Angeles, CA
Tap water is not without its problems. The nonprofit Environmental
Working Group (EWG) in 2005 tested municipal water in 42 states and
detected some 260 contaminants in public water supplies, 140 of which
were unregulated chemicals, that is, chemicals for which public health
officials have no safety standards for, much less methods for removing
them.
EWG did find over 90 percent compliance on the part of water utilities
in applying and enforcing standards that exist, but faults the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to establish standards
on so many of the contaminants-from industry, agriculture and urban
runoff-that do end up in our water.
Despite these seemingly alarming stats, the Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC), which has also conducted extensive municipal as well
as bottled water tests, says: "In the short term, if you are
an adult with no special health conditions, and you are not pregnant,
then you can drink most cities' tap water without having to worry."
This is because most of the contaminants in public water supplies
exist at such small concentrations that very large quantities would
need to be ingested for health problems to occur.
NRDC does caution, however, that pregnant women, young children, the
elderly, people with chronic illnesses and those with weakened immune
systems can be especially vulnerable to the risks posed by contaminated
water." The group suggests that anyone at risk obtain a copy
of their city's annual water quality report (they are mandated by
law) and review it with their physician.
As for bottled water, it is first important to know that 25 to 30
percent of it comes straight from municipal tap water systems, despite
the pretty nature scenes on the bottles that imply otherwise. Some
of that water goes through additional filtering, but some does not.
NRDC has researched bottled water extensively and has found that it
is "subject to less rigorous testing and purity standards than
those which apply to city tap water." Bottled water is required
to be tested less frequently than tap water for bacteria and chemical
contaminants, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration bottled water
rules allow for some contamination by E. coli or fecal coliform, contrary
to EPA tap water rules which prohibit any such contamination.
Similarly, NRDC found that there are no requirements for bottled water
to be disinfected or tested for parasites such as cryptosporidium
or giardia, unlike more stringent EPA rules regulating tap water.
This leaves open the possibility, says NRDC, that some bottled water
may present similar health threats to those with weakened immune systems,
the elderly and others they caution about drinking tap water.
The bottom line is that we have invested considerably in highly efficient
municipal water delivery systems that bring this precious liquid straight
to our kitchen faucets anytime we need it. Instead of taking that
for granted and relying on bottled water instead, we need to make
sure our tap water is clean and safe for all.
CONTACTS: Environmental Working Group, www.ewg.org/tapwater/findings.php;
EPA Local Drinking Water Information, www.epa.gov/safewater/dwinfo.htm;
NRDC, www.nrdc.org/water.
GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk,
c/o E - The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881;
submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/; or e-mail:
earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
E/The Environmental Magazine
28 Knight Street
Norwalk, CT 06851
Telephone: (203) 854-5559/x106 - FAX: (203) 866-0602
e-mail:
earthtalkcolumn@emagazine.com
|