Super Eco

Photo credit: start cooking kathy and amandine, Flickr

Today I'm sowing mesclun seeds in my Victory Garden. Mesclun is my favorite way to get mixed greens in a salad. All winter we get it at the supermarket in plastic bags with some international food company's logo on them, trucked in from somewhere far away, and sadly susceptible to slime as soon as you open the package.

In the spring the prospect of fresh greens helps me get the garden started. Mesclun is one of the earliest things I plant and it's a great motivator. I buy individual packs of seeds and mix them together before planting. Three leaf lettuces (black seeded simpson, a red leaf, and oak leaf), arugula, radicchio, and endive make up my mixture, but seed companies have pre-mixed packets available that provide even greater variety.

Succession planting is the key to success, and it takes some planning to know how many feet of row to plant each week. Planting four or five feet a week gives us fresh mixed greens into the middle of summer. I'm about a week late already.

Everybody knows that you need your greens to stay healthy, and mesclun salads alone won't do the trick. Collard greens, kale, spinach, swiss chard, bok choy, dandelion, mustard greens, savoy cabbage, watercress, arugula, green cabbage—all of the above can add some variety to our meals. At our house broccoli and green salads have long been our nod to eating our greens, but Beth recently ran across a recipe for "green soup," and it has made an interesting addition to our meals. You can serve it hot as a side dish, or mix it into many different dishes, from spaghetti sauce to chicken soup.

• One bunch parsley
• 3 medium zucchini
• ½ lb. Green beans
• 5 stalks celery

Steam together for 8-10 minutes. Purée in a blender and refrigerate until you're ready to use it. If you're into smoothies, green soup is a great addition to the morning blend.

Photo credit: Claude Monet, Wikimedia commons

Back in the early 1900s, Claude Monet painted a series of pictures of his impressions of London. At that time London was a smokier place than it is today because people burned coal for heat, lots of coal! The sky was generally dark with pollution, and Monet recorded that in his paintings. I think he  had soot in his eyes.

About half of all the electrical generation in the US comes from coal fired plants. The EPA can tell you how clean your energy is (or isn't!) Enter your zip code and you'll get immediate feedback about the fuel that's used to generate your electricity. They can also give you a pretty accurate estimate of the carbon impact of your use. When I saw the data I was all, "So what does this mean?" I mean, I wasn't totally confounded, but my power company burns coal. I kinda knew that already. But now what can I do about it?

I could picket the electric company offices, I suppose—carry a sign that says "These people burn coal." I'm not sure anyone would get the message. More constructively, I can take a look at my carbon footprint, and make an effort to be more energy efficient. And—heads up, this was a new idea for me, maybe for you too—I can buy green power. The EPA's green power locator showed me a wind power alternative available here and now from my electric company. For about $100 per year, I can offset my share of the coal fired power plant's emissions by using clean power. For a few bucks extra each month I'll get clean, renewable electricity.

If I pay a small premium to buy green power now, and if I make that effort to become a little more energy efficient, more alternative energy generators will be installed, and less coal will be burned. At this point I can say I've wiped some of the soot out of my own eyes.

Photo credit: richardmasoner, Flickr

Do you really need a car? Your family budget will look fat if you simply ditch it. Here are five ways to get around if you decide to reduce your dependence on the family car.

1. Bike or walk to work—this is a good idea anyway. You'll stay fit and you'll enjoy watching the world go by at a more pleasant pace than it does in traffic.
2. Bike or walk to get around town—people who are withdrawing from their automobile habit will be advised to look at trailers and helmets for the little ones. The trailer is handy for marketing as well as toting toddlers. Another helpful hint I'll share has to do with bicycle seat soreness. If you're not used to riding, you'll likely want to be sure that you have Anti Monkey Butt Powder (or its equivalent) available. Truckers and motorcyclists as well as bicyclists find AMBP to be practically a medical necessity.
   
3. Take public mass transit. There is often room for your bike.
4. Car pool locally, or car share for regional trips. Explore alternatives. Does your city have a service like Zipcar available? We're all getting attuned to carrying cloth bags in the supermarket, but we haven't begun to scratch the surface of car pooling. Next time you're stuck in traffic, look at all the single passenger cars around you and think how much faster the traffic would flow if people doubled up!
5. Drive a hybrid. While this represents a compromise, not all of us are equipped to rough it day-in and day-out, regardless of how much AMBP we use. But if you can double your gas mileage with a hybrid, cutting your fuel use in half, you'll have come halfway to auto independence. If you go with this option, just be sure that the car is designed well enough that you can have a bike rack mounted!

Photo credit: willem!, Flickr

"Our ecosystems are not just getting warmer or colder or wetter or drier. They're disappearing," Brendan Borrell observes in a Slate essay this week. He makes a pretty good case for taking a hard look at what we do to fight climate change before we destroy any more ecosystems than we already have in this struggle.

One example of what he's talking about: Conservationists now blame European climate change legislation for the loss of Indonesian rain forests. The EU policies that promoted biofuels such as palm oil were directly related to the habitat depletion caused by clear-cutting rain forests and replacing them with palm plantations. The result? A monoculture woodland that may be carbon neutral in itself, but which has replaced the wildly diverse habitat of all the jungly birds and beasts, flowers and hardwoods that once grew where the palm trees now stand.

Certainly the effects of climate change have an impact on species. The golden toad of the Costa Rica cloud forests is now extinct and the likely culprit is a subtle shift in weather patterns. The mist now settles higher on the mountain due to atmospheric warming. The toad's moist habitat dries a little, he falls prey to some deadly toad disease, and pretty soon it's buh-bye Mr. Toad.

But species lost due to climate change take a backseat to the horrible effects on biodiversity that clear cutting rain forests has in the wild ride of habitat destruction.

Taking a long look back to the Vietnam war, I'm reminded of the unfortunate Air Force Major whose mouth ran ahead of his mind when he said, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." Something like that may be happening today. How many ecosystems have we had to destroy in fight against global warming? 

Photo credit: HighlandBlade, Flickr

Like the ubiquitous penguins, tens of thousands of people are flocking to the shores of Antarctica for a look at the eco-disaster that is unfolding there. By January—mid-summer in the southern hemisphere—tourist ships are jockeying for harbor space at the more convenient landing places. The waters are so crowded that when a cruise ship hit an iceberg and capsized in November, 2007 there were three other tourist vessels near-by to rescue the stranded passengers.

Antarctica belongs to no nation, or perhaps it belongs to all. The purpose of the Antarctic Treaty, which went into force in 1961, is "to ensure in the interests of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord." There have been about 200 updates to the treaty, many of them related to conservation of habitat and protection of animals.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called for more international control of the Antarctic tourist industry. The Senate is now considering draft language for an amendment to the Antarctic Treaty that would guide the international community's efforts to prevent and respond to environmental emergencies. The amendment extends the treaty's marine conservation rules and "more accurately reflects the boundaries of the Antarctic ecosystem," according to Clinton. The amendment seeks to protect the fragile polar eco-systems from the effects of man. The polar travel business has experienced explosive growth over the last fifteen years and regulation now is called for to prevent pollution and destruction.

The larger cruise ships carry over 2,000 passengers who are presumably fascinated by the idea of seeing Antarctica before all the ice melts. What they hope to see is likely far different from what they'll experience. Many, perhaps most, travelers agree that one of the impressive experiences during their time onshore in the frozen south was the overwhelming stench of penguin poo. The penguin rookeries have been piling up guano since the dawn of time. Nobody told the penguins they should clean up because visitors were coming.  

Photo credit: mksfly, Flickr

It's official. Greenhouse gases are really air pollution. They endanger the public health and welfare of the citizens of the US of A. Well, it's not official yet. There are still public hearings to be held. But this could be the year that science and the public interest trump the interests of big oil and the US auto industry (or at least what remains of it).

Last week the Environmental Protection Agency published the findings that will make it official that carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) constitute "air pollution."

And I thought those ingredients were there just to toughen up our lungs! Silly me.

This finding has been two years in the making. For some reason, after the Supreme Court put the air pollution problem in the hands of the EPA in April 2007, they were a little slow-yes, cautious and reserved-about attacking the problem. While the court found that greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act they left it up the EPA Administrator to determine whether or not automobile emissions contribute to air pollution. Lisa Jackson, the new Administrator, found last week that auto exhaust indeed does contribute to climate change.

To this I say, "Well, duhhhhh...."

I mean, I'm grateful and all. I'm pleased with the new direction. I get it about this being a sign of a fundamental shift in the US stance on global warming, and I get it that until recently we've acted like our national bird was the ostrich in our approach to climate change. But there's something a little embarrassing about the belated interest we're showing in greenhouse gases on the public policy front. 

Public hearings on the finding will be held next month in Arlington, Virginia and Seattle, Washington. The hearings will be webcast for people who can't be present. I wonder what big oil and the auto makers will have to say.

Photo credit: WordRidden, Flickr

I went grocery shopping today at our local food co-op and came home with two heavy bags of organic produce and a pocket full of pamphlets. Can't help myself. When people put printed matter in front of me, I'm compelled to read it. Maybe there's a twelve step program or something.

"Hi, I'm Frank and I'm a compulsive reader."

"Hi Frank!"

I couldn't ignore a glossy write-up titled "All About Organic Foods." I felt a little short-changed. The pamphlet was not "all about," but mostly about about retailers of organic food. Yet it had a list headed "The Dirty Dozen Produce Items: Most Contaminated with Pesticides." Here they are:

1. Strawberries
2. Bell peppers
3. Red raspberries
4. Peaches
5. Nectarines
6. Celery
7. Apples
8. Spinach
9. Cherries
10. Grapes (imported)
11. Pears
12. Potatoes

So I'm thinking "What about parsnips? And turnips?" I could abstain from parsnips and turnips. Strawberries, peaches, and raspberries are another matter. No way will I give up the good stuff. So the solution, obviously, is "buy organic." (Remember the name of the pamphlet!) And whether or not your produce is organic, wash it! But especially wash it if it's not organic and it's on the dirty dozen list.

Let's pick on peaches. One study found 45 pesticides on peaches. Check it out, here's the list:

2 4-d, Acephate, Allethrin, Azinphos methyl, Benomyl, Captan, Carbaryl, Chlorothalonil, Chlorpropham, Cypermethrin, DCPA, DDT, Diazinon, Dicloran, Dicofol, Dimethoate, Diphenylamine (DPA), Endosulfans, Fenbuconazole, Fenbutatin oxide, Fenvalerate, Fludioxonil, Formetanate hydrochloride, Imazalil, Iprodione, Lindane (BHC gamma), Malathion, Metalaxyl, Methamidophos, Methidathion, Methomyl, Mevinphos Total, Myclobutanil, Norflurazon, O-Phenylphenol, Parathion ethyl, Permethrin Total, Phosmet, Piperonyl butoxide, Pirimicarb, Propargite, Propiconazole, Tebuconazole, Thiabendazole, Triadimefon.

Is that ridiculous? I don't even know what most of those are, but 2 4-d stands out. 2 4-d (or 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, as the organic chemists call it) was the primary ingredient in Agent Orange, a defoliant used from 1961 through 1971 in Vietnam. It's not good for children and other living things. I think it's worth paying a premium for produce that doesn't come contaminated with Agent Orange. Do you agree?

Photo credit: Rubber Slippers in Italy, Flickr

High on the hill in Brooklyn's Green-Wood Cemetery, the tomb of the unknown gourmet has carved upon it this simple epitaph: "Don't eat the fish."

It makes you pause and ponder.

Somebody with a sense of humor was responsible, I'm sure—somebody who can laugh away a case of fatal food poisoning. Was the fish spoiled, I wonder? Was it contaminated with mercury? Dioxin? PCBs? Or was it some particularly virulent strain of salmonella?

Improper food handling is the leading cause of food poisoning. The best way to avoid seafood-borne illness is to buy fresh, and pay attention to handling and preparation. I love fresh seafood, but I can't always find it. Our home in the midwest is a long way from the beach. Sadly, most of the fresh water fish around here, particularly walleyes, contain dangerous levels of methylmercury, a neurotoxin that can seriously impair brain development in children. Pregnant mothers are advised against eating these fish. While I'm as macho as the next guy and I scoff in the face of foodie danger, I must admit that I generally avoid our local freshwater fish too.

Complicating our concerns for food safety are the issues associated with sustainability. Monterey Bay Aquarium sponsors a website called Seafood Watch that has up to date information on the US seafood market, with tips on what to buy and what to avoid. Naturally there's also an iPhone application, so if you're faced with a complex menu choice, or you want to know if your sushi is sustainable the information is right at your fingertips. The info is also available in a variety of formats from the Blue Ocean Institute.

I think if you're walking the tightrope of eco-consciousness and food safety where seafood is concerned, the best thing to do is find a fish market you trust to be on that same path. Otherwise, as the man said, "Don't eat the fish."

Photo credit: Peter Blanchard, Flickr

"Failure to Yield," a new report by the Union of Concerned Scientists on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) shows that the risks of genetically engineered crops far outweigh the benefits. A revolution in agriculture that would dramatically raise yields was promised by the GMO advocates, but so far, after thirteen years of commercialization, it hasn't happened. GMO crops are not the answer to improved yields.

On Tuesday German Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner announced that MON 810 maize (the only GMO crop permitted in Germany) would be banned from cultivation. Germany has allowed the strain to be grown since 2005, but Aigner said she has concluded the crop poses a threat to the environment. Because of this decision the Monsanto seeds will not be allowed to be planted in Germany this season. Germany joins France, Austria, Hungary, Luxembourg, and Greece in banning the product.

Genetically engineered crops designed for large, pesticide-ridden monocultures, are the polar opposites of organic agriculture. They encourage industrial farming practices that ruin the soil. They deprive planters of the right to save seeds. They put our crops at risk due to genetic drift and the long term effects of human consumption haven't been adequately studied. Monsanto markets soybeans and corn that are herbicide resistant, and corn that by a genetic tweak produces its own insecticide as protection from the European corn borer. Try to wash that insecticide off before eating your corn.

While the facts don't support the claims that GMO crops have higher yields, they do have a built in marketing advantage based on a trait that makes their seeds sterile. The option to save seeds is taken away when the farmer buys into GMO cropping. I don't want to sound too strident about this. Doubtless there are good uses for genetic engineering. I personally want to have one more child with certain exceptional traits. For example, s/he should be a superior flugelhorn player. Genetic engineering may offer advantages in this regard. But in my grocery cart? I think not.

Photo credit: Sixtybolts, Flickr

Poor people in third world countries who use sooty cooking stoves are responsible for about twenty percent of global warming, according to the New York Times. These are of course the hundreds of millions of families who cook each day in clay ovens heated by burning dung. If these "black carbon" polluters would clean up their act, they could have an immediate impact. "Replacing primitive cooking stoves with modern versions that emit far less soot" is the way to go, says the Times. Millions of twenty dollar stoves replacing the traditional clay ovens would effectively eliminate black soot and thus improve public health and reduce global warming.

Twenty dollars is about 1000 Indian rupees. The average family spends about one rupee per day on dung patties for fuel. Eureka! Solar cookers would have a three year payback and their effect on global warming would be immediate! Sarcasm is dripping from that last sentence. I think the whole idea is totally lame.

We could do it. We could distribute millions of stoves in a short time. We could probably influence India to mandate the use of the solar cookers or the clean burning stoves. We could force alternative energy solutions on people in their own homes. But I hope we are prepared for some push-back. The clean burning cook stoves break. The clay ones don't. The family's roti, a delicious flat bread cooked over earthen stoves, would taste different, would in fact require a new recipe to prepare. Each family would have to learn a whole new way of cooking. There are too many draw-backs to list.

But, if I've got this right, rather than focus on big oil or the big coal companies, somebody has floated the red herring of picking on the little guys and mandating a huge cultural shift in the rural subsistence economies of entire continents. Bravo! But why stop at replacing earthen stoves with solar cookers? Let them use convection ovens! Let them use microwaves! (Pardonnez moi, if I'm channeling Marie Antoinette here).