As everyone probably knows by now I am a huge music fan. Just about anything and everything will at some point grace my speakers so when I hear songs with an environmental message I not only listen, I stand up and cheer! Miley Cyrus has recently released an album and as a staunch environmental supporter she wrote a song specifically geared toward Americans leading the charge to better care for the planet. It is basically a lead by example anthem to be Greener. Enjoy these lyrics and let’s all take some advice from Miley Cyrus to take care of the Earth!
Wake Up America
Oh, can you take care of her?
Oh, maybe you can spare her
Several moments of your consideration
Leading up to the final destination
Oh, the earth is callin' out
I wanna learn what it's all about but
Everything I read is global warming, going green
I don't know what all this means but
It seems to be saying
Wake up America
We're all in this together
It's our home
So let's take care of it
You know that you want to
You know that you got to
Wake up America
Tomorrow becomes a new day
And everything you do matters
Yeah, everything you do
Matters in some way
Stand up, I'll try if you will
Wake up, it's not a fire drill
All she needs is a little attention
Can you give her just a little attention?
Oh, it's easy to look away
But it's getting harder day by day
Everything I read is global warming, going green
I don't know what all this means but
It seems to be saying
Come on
Wake up America
We're all in this together
It's our home
So let's take care of it
You know that you want to
You know that you got to
Wake up America
Tomorrow becomes a new day
And everything you do matters
Yeah, everything you do
Matters in some way
I know that you don't wanna hear it
Especially comin' from someone
So young
But in the backseat
Yeah, they wanna hear it (they wanna hear it)
So come on (turn it up)
Come on (turn it up)
So come on (turn it up)
Wake up America (wake up)
We're all in this together
It's our home (it's our home)
So let's take care of it
You know that you want to
You know that you got to
Wake up America
Tomorrow becomes a new day
And everything you do matters
Yeah, everything you do
Matters in some way
Showing posts with label protect our environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label protect our environment. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Amazing News and a Huge Eco Step Forward
Although we do not generally like to reprint news stories around these parts, this one is just too perfect not to. Not to mention I am too busy doing the happy dance to rewrite it; the EPA just gained a few coolness points in my book. The original article location is linked to the title. How do you feel about this?
EPA review of mining permits signals policy shift
By DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer Dina Cappiello, Associated Press Writer – Wed Mar 25, 4:07 am ET
WASHINGTON – Breaking with the policies of the Bush administration, the Environmental Protection Agency is sharpening its oversight of mountaintop coal mining to ensure projects do not harm streams and wetlands.
EPA administrator Lisa Jackson on Tuesday directed the agency staff to review 150 to 200 applications for new or expanded surface coal mines, many mountaintop removal operations, pending before the federal government.
The agency also objected to two permits slated for approval by the Army Corps of Engineers because the companies had not done enough to avoid and minimize damage to water quality and stream channels.
The permits authorize mining companies that blast away mountaintops to access coal to dump the waste into streams and wetlands.
The actions "reflect EPA's considerable concern regarding the environmental impact these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams," Jackson said in a statement.
Environmentalists hailed the decision as a sea change in policy. The EPA has always had the authority to review and veto permits issued by the Corps of Engineers, but it rarely did so during the Bush administration.
The Corps has long been criticized by environmental and community groups and has been sued for failing to thoroughly evaluate the environmental impact of mountaintop removal.
Under the Clean Water Act, companies cannot discharge rock, dirt and other debris into streams unless they can show they will not cause permanent damage to waterways or the fish and other wildlife that live in them.
Last month, a three-judge appeals panel in Richmond, VA, overturned a lower court's ruling that would have required the Corps to conduct more extensive reviews. The appeals court decision cleared the way for a backlog of permits that had been delayed until the lawsuit was resolved.
The EPA's action on Tuesday could leave those permit requests in limbo a little longer.
Ginger Mullins, regulatory branch chief for the Corps' Huntington District, which covers portions of Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, said the EPA reviews will delay approval of projects.
"It will take more time," said Mullins.
EPA review of mining permits signals policy shift
By DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer Dina Cappiello, Associated Press Writer – Wed Mar 25, 4:07 am ET
WASHINGTON – Breaking with the policies of the Bush administration, the Environmental Protection Agency is sharpening its oversight of mountaintop coal mining to ensure projects do not harm streams and wetlands.
EPA administrator Lisa Jackson on Tuesday directed the agency staff to review 150 to 200 applications for new or expanded surface coal mines, many mountaintop removal operations, pending before the federal government.
The agency also objected to two permits slated for approval by the Army Corps of Engineers because the companies had not done enough to avoid and minimize damage to water quality and stream channels.
The permits authorize mining companies that blast away mountaintops to access coal to dump the waste into streams and wetlands.
The actions "reflect EPA's considerable concern regarding the environmental impact these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams," Jackson said in a statement.
Environmentalists hailed the decision as a sea change in policy. The EPA has always had the authority to review and veto permits issued by the Corps of Engineers, but it rarely did so during the Bush administration.
The Corps has long been criticized by environmental and community groups and has been sued for failing to thoroughly evaluate the environmental impact of mountaintop removal.
Under the Clean Water Act, companies cannot discharge rock, dirt and other debris into streams unless they can show they will not cause permanent damage to waterways or the fish and other wildlife that live in them.
Last month, a three-judge appeals panel in Richmond, VA, overturned a lower court's ruling that would have required the Corps to conduct more extensive reviews. The appeals court decision cleared the way for a backlog of permits that had been delayed until the lawsuit was resolved.
The EPA's action on Tuesday could leave those permit requests in limbo a little longer.
Ginger Mullins, regulatory branch chief for the Corps' Huntington District, which covers portions of Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, said the EPA reviews will delay approval of projects.
"It will take more time," said Mullins.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Power Shift 2009
Bill McKibben, author and environmental activist, speaks both passionately and enthusiastically in this video from Power Shift 2009.
What is Power Shift?
Power Shift was an event held in Washington DC from February 27 - March 2 of this year. A collective of amazing speakers as well as America’s youth (who are adamant about continuing the fight to stop global warming, increase use of renewable energy and lessen climate change impacts) gathered to enjoy lectures, concerts, workshops and receive training at the DC Convention Center.
Please enjoy as Bill shares his thoughts and experiences. He emphatically supports the organization 350.org. This is an organization dedicated to pursuing the shift back downward to 350 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere. That number is considered the minimum safest level. Currently we are at 387.
I urge everyone to visit the websites for Power Shift and 350.org for more information on how to get involved.
What is Power Shift?
Power Shift was an event held in Washington DC from February 27 - March 2 of this year. A collective of amazing speakers as well as America’s youth (who are adamant about continuing the fight to stop global warming, increase use of renewable energy and lessen climate change impacts) gathered to enjoy lectures, concerts, workshops and receive training at the DC Convention Center.
Please enjoy as Bill shares his thoughts and experiences. He emphatically supports the organization 350.org. This is an organization dedicated to pursuing the shift back downward to 350 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere. That number is considered the minimum safest level. Currently we are at 387.
I urge everyone to visit the websites for Power Shift and 350.org for more information on how to get involved.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Forcing the Recycling Issue
Over here at Green Leaf it is rare that I copy and paste a news story as I like to put my own spin on things but this one is too good not to share just as it is. I am not quite sure what to make of the person behind this “hoax” but I will tell you what, they get a Five Green Leaf rating in my book not only for the content of their letter but for the ingenuity!
This story is taken from the Thursday edition of The Boston Globe and shared on boston.com; the title of the article is linked to the original. Enjoy!
Prank attempts to get Boston residents to put out recycling bins
By Donovan Slack, Globe Staff
If you see your neighbor carrying his recycling bin out to the curb Friday morning, tell him to relax. It was all a prank, perpetrated by someone who apparently wanted to see the streets of Boston abounding in blue.
A hoax letter written on official-looking City of Boston letterhead went out to some residents in recent days, demanding that people put out their blue recycling bins for the city to pick up by Friday morning or face a hefty charge on their real estate tax bill.
“Unfortunately for the very few not willing to comply, we have been approved by Mayor Thomas M. Menino to add a standard fee of $327.00 to your real estate tax bill,” said the letter. “The Boston city council has also approved this measure. Your last chance to avoid penalties will be Friday, February 13, 2009. Please place bins on sidewalk by 9 a.m. on this date.”
The name of the signer on the letter was a giveaway. When pronounced phonetically, it was an expression containing an expletive.
“This is obviously a prank,” said spokeswoman Dot Joyce. “The most concerning part was that someone used City of Boston letterhead.”
The city learned of the hoax when a West Roxbury resident called to ask about it today. The city doesn’t know how many people received it or who wrote it.”
City officials are investigating, Joyce said.
By Donovan Slack, Globe Staff
If you see your neighbor carrying his recycling bin out to the curb Friday morning, tell him to relax. It was all a prank, perpetrated by someone who apparently wanted to see the streets of Boston abounding in blue.
A hoax letter written on official-looking City of Boston letterhead went out to some residents in recent days, demanding that people put out their blue recycling bins for the city to pick up by Friday morning or face a hefty charge on their real estate tax bill.
“Unfortunately for the very few not willing to comply, we have been approved by Mayor Thomas M. Menino to add a standard fee of $327.00 to your real estate tax bill,” said the letter. “The Boston city council has also approved this measure. Your last chance to avoid penalties will be Friday, February 13, 2009. Please place bins on sidewalk by 9 a.m. on this date.”
The name of the signer on the letter was a giveaway. When pronounced phonetically, it was an expression containing an expletive.
“This is obviously a prank,” said spokeswoman Dot Joyce. “The most concerning part was that someone used City of Boston letterhead.”
The city learned of the hoax when a West Roxbury resident called to ask about it today. The city doesn’t know how many people received it or who wrote it.”
City officials are investigating, Joyce said.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Karma Might Be Tougher Than Originally Thought
One of my blog friends Karen constantly shares amazing recipes and wonderful insight into the world of Montana living on her own blog. She is a regular reader of Green Leaf Reviewer (thanks!) and sent me a link to this video back at the end of January. It is a hilarious and truthful depiction of what just might happen if we all decide to stop caring about our planet. Enjoy this short video and then please visit the website for Connect 2 Earth.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Money Doesn’t Grow On Trees Anymore
We have all heard the expression but after thinking about it a little bit today I realized that, well, essentially it does since the most frequently used money is made from paper. In 2000 the United States released the $1 Golden Coin called the Sacagawea with little interest to most, with the exception of some coin collectors. It might be surprising to learn that in the year 2007 the United States began a new $1 coin program featuring the Presidents.
Direct from the US Mint website:
“The United States is honoring our Nation’s Presidents by issuing $1 circulating coins featuring their images in the order that they served. The United States Mint issues four Presidential $1 Coins per year, with Presidents Harrison, Tyler, Polk, and Taylor being honored in 2009. Each coin has a common reverse design featuring a striking rendition of the Statue of Liberty. These coins feature larger, more dramatic artwork, as well as edge-incused inscriptions of the year of minting or issuance, "E Pluribus Unum" and the mint mark. "In God We Trust" will appear on the face of the coin starting in 2009. Although the size, weight and metal composition of the new Presidential $1 Coin are identical to that of the Sacagawea Golden Dollar, there are several unique features that make this coin distinctive.”
One of the coolest things about these coins is that they are not made of paper. A paper bill will go into circulation and last upwards of four years before it is destroyed. That is certainly a lot of trees killed since the United States prints billions of dollars annually. The coins can last for up to forty years in circulation which will significantly reduce the environmental impact of creating money. In addition to the obvious saving of trees another advantage is that once the coin comes out of circulation it can simply be melted down to create a brand new, shiny, dollar. Now that is recycling at its finest!
Direct from the US Mint website:
“The United States is honoring our Nation’s Presidents by issuing $1 circulating coins featuring their images in the order that they served. The United States Mint issues four Presidential $1 Coins per year, with Presidents Harrison, Tyler, Polk, and Taylor being honored in 2009. Each coin has a common reverse design featuring a striking rendition of the Statue of Liberty. These coins feature larger, more dramatic artwork, as well as edge-incused inscriptions of the year of minting or issuance, "E Pluribus Unum" and the mint mark. "In God We Trust" will appear on the face of the coin starting in 2009. Although the size, weight and metal composition of the new Presidential $1 Coin are identical to that of the Sacagawea Golden Dollar, there are several unique features that make this coin distinctive.”
One of the coolest things about these coins is that they are not made of paper. A paper bill will go into circulation and last upwards of four years before it is destroyed. That is certainly a lot of trees killed since the United States prints billions of dollars annually. The coins can last for up to forty years in circulation which will significantly reduce the environmental impact of creating money. In addition to the obvious saving of trees another advantage is that once the coin comes out of circulation it can simply be melted down to create a brand new, shiny, dollar. Now that is recycling at its finest!
Friday, January 2, 2009
All Nations Are Joining in the Fight for a Better Environment
This video from the Scottish Environmental Minister is inspiring to watch as he details their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the year 2050 as well as their impending marine bill and use of renewable energy resources. It is a global issue and it is fantastic to see that many other nations, large and small, are not only aware of the threat but that they are taking steps to do their part to better the planet for all living things. Way to go Scotland!
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Shaving Waste From A Landfill with a Razor Sharpener?
Here in the United States there are several large companies that provide tools for hair removal through a blade of some sort -- Gillette, Norelco, Bic and Schick are some of the best known to provide disposable or electric shaving implements. Electric razors are a good environmental choice as they help reduce waste from landfills since the heads or foils will be used many more times than a disposable blade but they are also a draw on electricity as they recharge through a base unit. Since the base can be unplugged while not in use however a moderate offset can be achieved. As a gal who prefers to take care of this particular activity while showering, an electric solution is not feasible for me so I have been interested to find something that would extend the life of the razors I do use if at all possible.
While watching television I was introduced to a product called Save A Blade which claims to resharpen the blades of disposable style razors, therefore extending their life to approximately 200 shaves from a single blade. I was intrigued and decided to look into reviews of users who had tried the product to see if others think it is as great as it claims to be.
The first place I went was Amazon because I have never found the reviews to be held back -- if a user loves or hates the item they share their opinion freely. Save A Blade received nine reviews for a mix of two with five stars, one with two stars but six with one star. The most commonly stated fact was that the unit will destroy the blades, not sharpen them and that it will actually cause more cuts than before it was used. Ouch!
While doing my research however I came across some information for a way to extend the life of a blade that was so simple I almost yelled “well, duh”! Dry off the blade after use. The blade of a razor will oxidize and rust when introduced to moisture for lengthy periods of time which causes pitting, the main offender for killing a blade. Simply drying it off with a towel by patting lightly or using a hair dryer is said to lengthen the life by 122%. But be cautious of using a hair dryer only if it is already in use as otherwise it is a definite waste of electricity. Nothing like a free solution to saving a little money and the environment as well as a few band-aids since there will be far fewer nicks or cuts to heal.
While watching television I was introduced to a product called Save A Blade which claims to resharpen the blades of disposable style razors, therefore extending their life to approximately 200 shaves from a single blade. I was intrigued and decided to look into reviews of users who had tried the product to see if others think it is as great as it claims to be.
The first place I went was Amazon because I have never found the reviews to be held back -- if a user loves or hates the item they share their opinion freely. Save A Blade received nine reviews for a mix of two with five stars, one with two stars but six with one star. The most commonly stated fact was that the unit will destroy the blades, not sharpen them and that it will actually cause more cuts than before it was used. Ouch!
While doing my research however I came across some information for a way to extend the life of a blade that was so simple I almost yelled “well, duh”! Dry off the blade after use. The blade of a razor will oxidize and rust when introduced to moisture for lengthy periods of time which causes pitting, the main offender for killing a blade. Simply drying it off with a towel by patting lightly or using a hair dryer is said to lengthen the life by 122%. But be cautious of using a hair dryer only if it is already in use as otherwise it is a definite waste of electricity. Nothing like a free solution to saving a little money and the environment as well as a few band-aids since there will be far fewer nicks or cuts to heal.
Friday, December 19, 2008
A Big Storm Is Brewing but How Do We Melt the Ice?
I live in the Boston area and our first really big snowstorm of the year is currently underway. It got me thinking about how we rid ourselves of the packed down white stuff from roadways, sidewalks and on our own doorstep. Generally the two types of traction adding or melting products in our area are sand or salt, but I became curious about the environmental benefits or drawbacks of these two most popular options.
Salt
☼ Will melt snow but only at temperatures above fifteen degrees Fahrenheit (or so)
☼ Is corrosive and will eat into concrete and metal (think how fast car bodies rust out or that white ring on boots)
☼ Can inadvertently harm vegetation due to increased sodium levels seeping into dirt
☼ Will help to dry surfaces
☼ Can harm pets (digestive, sores) as they lick chemicals from their paws
Sand
☼ Will give traction but will not melt snow or ice
☼ Is not corrosive
☼ Can runoff into water ways and clog drains or sewers
Salt would appear to be the smarter alternative as it will melt and dry the surface where snow or ice were once located but in the long term it has far more extensive drawbacks to the land, pets, water and our structures. This all made me wonder if there was an alternative out there that would be friendly to our entire environment and still take care of the clean up of ice and snow.
I Googled in every possible way I could conceive to locate an environmentally friendly option for melting ice that was also safe for pets and there was only one product available. The product is called Safe Paw and it is created from a “crystalline amide core infused with special glycols”; not salt. I looked into what an amide is and sadly the scientific explanation did go a bit above my head but from what I could infer it is an ammonia type substance with a potential tie to amino acid. The glycols help melt snow because they are an antifreeze substance (commonly found in the liquid in our cars).
Safe Paw works up to two degrees below zero and does not heat up like many compounds do (such as calcium chloride which can cause burns to skin if not handled properly). Additionally the product claims to leave a shield after it melts the ice (also claiming to begin melting immediately) so ice will not refreeze for up to three days.
This is a product I will keep in mind for when I move out of an apartment and into a home. I would love to hear if others (especially those with pets or children) have used or will give this product a try. For the innovation and potential environmental benefit I am granting Safe Paw a Three Leaf Rating. Once I try it out someday that might even go up!
Salt
☼ Will melt snow but only at temperatures above fifteen degrees Fahrenheit (or so)
☼ Is corrosive and will eat into concrete and metal (think how fast car bodies rust out or that white ring on boots)
☼ Can inadvertently harm vegetation due to increased sodium levels seeping into dirt
☼ Will help to dry surfaces
☼ Can harm pets (digestive, sores) as they lick chemicals from their paws
Sand
☼ Will give traction but will not melt snow or ice
☼ Is not corrosive
☼ Can runoff into water ways and clog drains or sewers
Salt would appear to be the smarter alternative as it will melt and dry the surface where snow or ice were once located but in the long term it has far more extensive drawbacks to the land, pets, water and our structures. This all made me wonder if there was an alternative out there that would be friendly to our entire environment and still take care of the clean up of ice and snow.
I Googled in every possible way I could conceive to locate an environmentally friendly option for melting ice that was also safe for pets and there was only one product available. The product is called Safe Paw and it is created from a “crystalline amide core infused with special glycols”; not salt. I looked into what an amide is and sadly the scientific explanation did go a bit above my head but from what I could infer it is an ammonia type substance with a potential tie to amino acid. The glycols help melt snow because they are an antifreeze substance (commonly found in the liquid in our cars).
Safe Paw works up to two degrees below zero and does not heat up like many compounds do (such as calcium chloride which can cause burns to skin if not handled properly). Additionally the product claims to leave a shield after it melts the ice (also claiming to begin melting immediately) so ice will not refreeze for up to three days.
This is a product I will keep in mind for when I move out of an apartment and into a home. I would love to hear if others (especially those with pets or children) have used or will give this product a try. For the innovation and potential environmental benefit I am granting Safe Paw a Three Leaf Rating. Once I try it out someday that might even go up!
Congratulations for the effort Safe Paw!
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Further Exploring Milk Paint
A couple days ago we went over a home improvement list and one of the items I mentioned as being a Greener option to latex based paints was milk paint. I received a comment from Ginger, my favorite Vegan With A Purpose, who raised an excellent point with regard to obtaining the milk for the paint. She said:
okay, i have to say it: i can definitely see how milk would be a much safer option than some nasty chemical, but considering how much land space and food it takes to sustain one cow for that milk, not to mention the consequences to her and her children, i don't think i'd call it environmentally friendly. i do like that brick wall finish though. :)
First off, thanks for the compliment on the brick (latex, fyi). Second what an interesting point with regard to the environment! It is no secret that, although I have greatly reduced my intake of anything with a face, I am still a carnivore so this was something I had not considered. In addition, I pride myself on being environmentally aware as I do my day job of painting so I was even more intrigued to dig into this question with gusto!
Ginger you raise a very interesting point with regard to milk based paints. I must admit that I have never used these paints (primarily why I suggested to try Eco Spec) so I went digging to do more research on their composition, mostly to see if milk paint is actually made from milk.
Milk paints generally come in pigmented powder form and are mixed with a liquid. The milk comes from salts of casein (the protein found in cow's milk so yes, in its truest form milk paint is actually made from the proteins of milk). The casein is the binding agent which allows the pigment be transferred to a hard surface (this is why once the powder is wet it will actually spoil, just like milk).
Before I lose everyone let me share a few key points about paint and some of the terms associated with it.
Paint is typically made up of three substances: Pigment, Liquid and Binder. When we go to a home improvement store and pull a pre-mixed can of Navajo White off the shelf we are purchasing tint (pigment), water (liquid) and latex (binder). Pigments can be derived from sources found in nature (blueberries, grapes) or created as chemical compounds in a factory. The liquid (water, oil, milk, etc) is used solely as a carrier to ensure the pigment can move across a surface and it will eventually evaporate. A binder holds the pigment and liquid together and is generally a resin of some kind (an organic substance derived from plants) which allows the pigment to attach to the liquid for application.
A fourth substance sometimes used in conjunction with paint, but not always included, is called Extender. Common uses are: for increasing length of drying (open time) or leveling (ability to spread) such as glaze, to act as a mildew resistant and, moisture repellant. When selecting extenders be sure to utilize similar properties to the selected paint -- “water and oil don’t mix”!
It is important to note the subsequent evaporation of the liquid in a paint is where the bulk of VOC will come into play. VOC stands for volatile organic compounds and are the gasses emitted into the atmosphere as a liquid dries (evaporates). This is why many painters choose to avoid alkyd (oil) paints as their solvent make up is higher. Paint might be dry to the touch in an hour or so but paint will not fully cure (dry & bond) for at least 30 days, if extenders are added it is longer and all that time gasses are being released into the space it inhabits.
So with all that said, why is milk paint a less safe alternative since it likely utilizes 100% all natural based ingredients?
As Ginger indicated it is all about the cows. To raise just four cows it is advisable to garner upwards of two acres of land. (Sadly I could not locate the exact proportion of casein to additional substances so I was not able to determine an exact number of milk required to produce one bag of paint, but for kicks let’s say it is the four). In this projection, for every bag of milk paint we would need two acres of land. These four cows would need to be fed and given water as well…and then look out for the methane gasses produced. It is estimated that upwards of twenty percent of the methane found in the atmosphere is simply from cows breathing. The more cows, the more they breathe, the more methane, the quicker that ozone layer deteriorates.
So what is a good faux finisher, painter, homeowner and environmentalist to do?
We weigh the options and determine the most environmentally sound one for our own personal benefit. Ginger is a vegan, therefore would be hard pressed to ever consider using a dairy based substance on her wall. Although not a vegan, I am concerned with the environment which leads me to use latex based paint for a few reasons.
First, more methane is produced from cows than harmful gasses are produced in the creation of latex based paints. Second, since milk paint would spoil if left to its own devices, a sealant top coat is required. That is twice the water to wash brushes and twice the product being created. Third, latex paint is readily available meaning I can purchase it from a local source if I so choose, which reduces transportation to get it to me. Finally, I am not nervous about the health risks to my respiratory system or the emission of VOC into the atmosphere due to the introduction of products like Eco Spec or other paint labeled as No VOC (be mindful that some chemicals are still emitted even with Zero VOC paints).
The bottom line is always “think globally, act locally”. Consider the overall environmental impact to the planet but make smart choices based on your own personal environment.
okay, i have to say it: i can definitely see how milk would be a much safer option than some nasty chemical, but considering how much land space and food it takes to sustain one cow for that milk, not to mention the consequences to her and her children, i don't think i'd call it environmentally friendly. i do like that brick wall finish though. :)
First off, thanks for the compliment on the brick (latex, fyi). Second what an interesting point with regard to the environment! It is no secret that, although I have greatly reduced my intake of anything with a face, I am still a carnivore so this was something I had not considered. In addition, I pride myself on being environmentally aware as I do my day job of painting so I was even more intrigued to dig into this question with gusto!
Ginger you raise a very interesting point with regard to milk based paints. I must admit that I have never used these paints (primarily why I suggested to try Eco Spec) so I went digging to do more research on their composition, mostly to see if milk paint is actually made from milk.
Milk paints generally come in pigmented powder form and are mixed with a liquid. The milk comes from salts of casein (the protein found in cow's milk so yes, in its truest form milk paint is actually made from the proteins of milk). The casein is the binding agent which allows the pigment be transferred to a hard surface (this is why once the powder is wet it will actually spoil, just like milk).
Before I lose everyone let me share a few key points about paint and some of the terms associated with it.
Paint is typically made up of three substances: Pigment, Liquid and Binder. When we go to a home improvement store and pull a pre-mixed can of Navajo White off the shelf we are purchasing tint (pigment), water (liquid) and latex (binder). Pigments can be derived from sources found in nature (blueberries, grapes) or created as chemical compounds in a factory. The liquid (water, oil, milk, etc) is used solely as a carrier to ensure the pigment can move across a surface and it will eventually evaporate. A binder holds the pigment and liquid together and is generally a resin of some kind (an organic substance derived from plants) which allows the pigment to attach to the liquid for application.
A fourth substance sometimes used in conjunction with paint, but not always included, is called Extender. Common uses are: for increasing length of drying (open time) or leveling (ability to spread) such as glaze, to act as a mildew resistant and, moisture repellant. When selecting extenders be sure to utilize similar properties to the selected paint -- “water and oil don’t mix”!
It is important to note the subsequent evaporation of the liquid in a paint is where the bulk of VOC will come into play. VOC stands for volatile organic compounds and are the gasses emitted into the atmosphere as a liquid dries (evaporates). This is why many painters choose to avoid alkyd (oil) paints as their solvent make up is higher. Paint might be dry to the touch in an hour or so but paint will not fully cure (dry & bond) for at least 30 days, if extenders are added it is longer and all that time gasses are being released into the space it inhabits.
So with all that said, why is milk paint a less safe alternative since it likely utilizes 100% all natural based ingredients?
As Ginger indicated it is all about the cows. To raise just four cows it is advisable to garner upwards of two acres of land. (Sadly I could not locate the exact proportion of casein to additional substances so I was not able to determine an exact number of milk required to produce one bag of paint, but for kicks let’s say it is the four). In this projection, for every bag of milk paint we would need two acres of land. These four cows would need to be fed and given water as well…and then look out for the methane gasses produced. It is estimated that upwards of twenty percent of the methane found in the atmosphere is simply from cows breathing. The more cows, the more they breathe, the more methane, the quicker that ozone layer deteriorates.
So what is a good faux finisher, painter, homeowner and environmentalist to do?
We weigh the options and determine the most environmentally sound one for our own personal benefit. Ginger is a vegan, therefore would be hard pressed to ever consider using a dairy based substance on her wall. Although not a vegan, I am concerned with the environment which leads me to use latex based paint for a few reasons.
First, more methane is produced from cows than harmful gasses are produced in the creation of latex based paints. Second, since milk paint would spoil if left to its own devices, a sealant top coat is required. That is twice the water to wash brushes and twice the product being created. Third, latex paint is readily available meaning I can purchase it from a local source if I so choose, which reduces transportation to get it to me. Finally, I am not nervous about the health risks to my respiratory system or the emission of VOC into the atmosphere due to the introduction of products like Eco Spec or other paint labeled as No VOC (be mindful that some chemicals are still emitted even with Zero VOC paints).
The bottom line is always “think globally, act locally”. Consider the overall environmental impact to the planet but make smart choices based on your own personal environment.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
The Environment Gets Funny
Back in November, NBC promoted Green Week, the second annual, week long effort on every show the network airs (from daytime soaps to late night comedy) to promote the concept “Green Your Routine” by including bits and pieces of environmental jargon, product placement, conversation or practice. Would this concept fly? Would the nation believe that two people could walk down the hall of wherever they work (even if it is a secret Government agency or police precinct) discussing things like global warming or recycling?
Considering the average person may actually discuss these issues off the cuff in their day to day lives, there were plenty of ways to fit it into scripts without sounding preachy. There are characters that have always had an eco edge, prompting all of us to subconsciously absorb smart practices. For example, the character of “Munch” on Law & Order: SVU was talking about the benefits of recycling years ago. This is all well and good for the shows that can casually drop in a line or pan out from a wind farm as the characters run to save the world or something, but when it comes to the live shows there is an inherent challenge to make eco-speak flow as if it was a completely normal part of daily speech; it is one thing to show a five second frame of Chuck recycling a water bottle but it is quite another to get eco in stand up comedy.
Comedians sometimes use the reverse psychology method to bring awareness. They mention all the things they “do” which the public can infer as a joke, laugh at, but subsequently become more aware of in the process. Laughter can be an amazing tool for learning. Done completely tongue in cheek, Conan O’Brien from Late Night told all of us how to be more environmentally aware in our daily routines, even though he simply can not follow suit.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Impossible Not To Notice
Meet the Press is one of my personal favorite ways to spend a Sunday morning. Although I do not consider myself highly politically motivated, it is still important to me to watch how the people running our country respond to pointed questions that in other circumstances they may not want to answer. Tim Russert was my favorite host of this show because he was tough and relentless. After he passed away last summer and they brought in recently retired Tom Brokaw, replaced by Brian Williams on the Nightly News, to temporarily fill in I thought it was a fine choice.
This morning the televised interview was one that Tom recorded yesterday in Chicago where he interviewed President Elect Barack Obama. The interview was well put together with excellent questions as well as brilliant follow ups and there were times that Tom appeared to put a bit of the hammer down on Barack, such as the time frame for the middle class tax cut now that things have changed, economically speaking, so much since his campaign, or when it comes to his smoking. Like I said, the interview was good but that is not at all what struck me over the course of the hour long program. For the first time I paid more attention to the commercials than the program I was watching.
I wish I had counted because it would be a safe estimate to state that approximately 75% of the televised support was from companies or organizations promoting the environment.
Yippie!
There were some old standby ads such as those offered by Exxon Mobil for fuel efficiency or a spot or two of the NBC standard “The More You Know” but one commercial in particular, shown near the beginning of the program, struck me so positively that I actually remembered the website without writing it down.
That site is called This Is Reality.
The commercial is shown immediately upon clicking on the site so speakers are in order and what we hear is a gentleman telling all of us he is entering a new clean coal facility. He walks through the door and we see him suddenly standing in the middle of the desert. The end of the commercial flashes one simple sentence on the screen:
In reality, there is no such thing as clean coal.
Halleluiah! With all the mind boggling confusion over this extremely sensitive issue it is great to see someone finally putting the truth right out there.
The reason that coal is not a clean energy resource is complicated. Mining it involves disruption to the Earth itself -- destruction of mountains -- and because of the location anything left behind, missed or forgotten can enter run off rain, ending up in our waterways. The coal itself is a dirty substance as it is essentially a rock created from biodegraded plants preserved in earth and water. Burning this substance will release CO² emission, better known as greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. If power plants were able to capture those emissions prior to their release (known as carbon capture and sequestration or CSS) it would create a system where coal could in fact be burned more cleanly but still there is no way to be 100% “clean” when it comes to coal.
Sadly, not a single plant in the United States has put into place a way to capture the gas or address the other environmental challenges presented with ecologically responsible coal mining. The coal we burn is about as far from clean as we can get. Not to mention that since coal is a fossil fuel source it will eventually run out. So what is the alternative to burning coal since it is the number one leading resource for creation of electricity in this country?
Renewable resources such as wind, solar or hydro power can replace the dirty, dangerous business of coal mining and burning. These are areas where efforts in this country could truly make a world of difference and This Is Reality has reminded me today of why we should all look into those resources to keep our planet strong.
I am granting This Is Reality a Four Leaf rating for its information, desire to get it out there and courage to tell the truth.
This morning the televised interview was one that Tom recorded yesterday in Chicago where he interviewed President Elect Barack Obama. The interview was well put together with excellent questions as well as brilliant follow ups and there were times that Tom appeared to put a bit of the hammer down on Barack, such as the time frame for the middle class tax cut now that things have changed, economically speaking, so much since his campaign, or when it comes to his smoking. Like I said, the interview was good but that is not at all what struck me over the course of the hour long program. For the first time I paid more attention to the commercials than the program I was watching.
I wish I had counted because it would be a safe estimate to state that approximately 75% of the televised support was from companies or organizations promoting the environment.
Yippie!
There were some old standby ads such as those offered by Exxon Mobil for fuel efficiency or a spot or two of the NBC standard “The More You Know” but one commercial in particular, shown near the beginning of the program, struck me so positively that I actually remembered the website without writing it down.
That site is called This Is Reality.
The commercial is shown immediately upon clicking on the site so speakers are in order and what we hear is a gentleman telling all of us he is entering a new clean coal facility. He walks through the door and we see him suddenly standing in the middle of the desert. The end of the commercial flashes one simple sentence on the screen:
In reality, there is no such thing as clean coal.
Halleluiah! With all the mind boggling confusion over this extremely sensitive issue it is great to see someone finally putting the truth right out there.
The reason that coal is not a clean energy resource is complicated. Mining it involves disruption to the Earth itself -- destruction of mountains -- and because of the location anything left behind, missed or forgotten can enter run off rain, ending up in our waterways. The coal itself is a dirty substance as it is essentially a rock created from biodegraded plants preserved in earth and water. Burning this substance will release CO² emission, better known as greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. If power plants were able to capture those emissions prior to their release (known as carbon capture and sequestration or CSS) it would create a system where coal could in fact be burned more cleanly but still there is no way to be 100% “clean” when it comes to coal.
Sadly, not a single plant in the United States has put into place a way to capture the gas or address the other environmental challenges presented with ecologically responsible coal mining. The coal we burn is about as far from clean as we can get. Not to mention that since coal is a fossil fuel source it will eventually run out. So what is the alternative to burning coal since it is the number one leading resource for creation of electricity in this country?
Renewable resources such as wind, solar or hydro power can replace the dirty, dangerous business of coal mining and burning. These are areas where efforts in this country could truly make a world of difference and This Is Reality has reminded me today of why we should all look into those resources to keep our planet strong.
I am granting This Is Reality a Four Leaf rating for its information, desire to get it out there and courage to tell the truth.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Timberland Is Reaching the Masses With Humorous Eco-Clothing Ads
In society these days it is sometimes difficult to get a point across without a big shock value ad. Using any means necessary to promote a product has become the norm from sex to drugs to rock ‘n roll and anything in between. The downfall of this is that eventually the general public becomes numb to the concepts and stops paying attention regardless of how big or bold the campaign is. This has become especially true with regard to television commercials and now that the tidal wave of green is spreading across the land advertisers must figure out a way to focus our attention on getting behind these products and services.
I typically do not watch much television as I do not feel that there are many unique, quality shows out on the airwaves worth my thirty to sixty minutes but what I do love to watch is sports, particularly football. When thinking on some of the advertising I have seen that sticks with me most of the commercials I remember have been while watching sporting events because these advertisers tend to use humor to make us remember their products. Yesterday while watching Sunday afternoon football (and the Patriots won by the way, woo hoo!) I witnessed a commercial that had me rolling so hard I knew it would become my focus for today’s post.
Timberland has a new product on the market called the Earthkeepers™ boot and they conceived of one of the most hysterical ads I have seen of late to introduce us to it. Here is the minute long commercial:
All I could say at the end of this ad was GO NATURE! The Earth is clearly sick and tired of us taking from her so when this guy arrives to enjoy a little bit of it, the planet fights back against his hypocritical values as he attempts to stomp all over her in his ‘made from all new material’ fancy boots. The Earthkeepers™ boot his friend is wearing has a lining made from 70% recycled material, the outsole is 30% recycled and do not worry, if nature tosses you into that raging river they are waterproof as well.
I do not tend to hike often and already have a nice pair of boots that I use for when I do but when those wear out I will seriously consider checking out Earthkeepers™. For promoting not only nature, but recycled material and eco-friendly clothing, as well as giving us a hilarious marketing campaign for an Earth friendly product that could be deemed ‘boring’ by the masses, I am granting a Four Leaf Rating to Timberland.
Innovation in product and how to promote it -- yippie!
I typically do not watch much television as I do not feel that there are many unique, quality shows out on the airwaves worth my thirty to sixty minutes but what I do love to watch is sports, particularly football. When thinking on some of the advertising I have seen that sticks with me most of the commercials I remember have been while watching sporting events because these advertisers tend to use humor to make us remember their products. Yesterday while watching Sunday afternoon football (and the Patriots won by the way, woo hoo!) I witnessed a commercial that had me rolling so hard I knew it would become my focus for today’s post.
Timberland has a new product on the market called the Earthkeepers™ boot and they conceived of one of the most hysterical ads I have seen of late to introduce us to it. Here is the minute long commercial:
All I could say at the end of this ad was GO NATURE! The Earth is clearly sick and tired of us taking from her so when this guy arrives to enjoy a little bit of it, the planet fights back against his hypocritical values as he attempts to stomp all over her in his ‘made from all new material’ fancy boots. The Earthkeepers™ boot his friend is wearing has a lining made from 70% recycled material, the outsole is 30% recycled and do not worry, if nature tosses you into that raging river they are waterproof as well.
I do not tend to hike often and already have a nice pair of boots that I use for when I do but when those wear out I will seriously consider checking out Earthkeepers™. For promoting not only nature, but recycled material and eco-friendly clothing, as well as giving us a hilarious marketing campaign for an Earth friendly product that could be deemed ‘boring’ by the masses, I am granting a Four Leaf Rating to Timberland.
Innovation in product and how to promote it -- yippie!
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Luckily I Am Married
Otherwise I would become a groupie, attending every show, to hold up a sign that says
For Jason Mraz.
Just when I thought this guy could not get any cooler he proves me wrong by hooking up with Reverb. The not for profit group, founded by Guster member Adam Gardner and his wife Lauren Sullivan, is primarily focused on helping musicians green their tours and, in addition to Jason, have worked with the likes of Bonnie Raitt, Dave Matthews Band, Jack Johnson, Avril Lavigne, Fall Out Boy, The Fray, Maroon 5 and so many more it would be impossible to list them all.
The far reaching efforts of this organization are definitely impressive as they educate and provide advice for anyone who has a tune in their ear; everything from carbon offset programs for fans (because of the travel to get to the show) to green cleaning supplies for the tour bus. Their list of business partners and non profit group affiliation is really impressive.
This video includes a new song which sets off the images really nicely and Jason sits beside the ocean, intermittently discussing the benefits of getting together with Reverb.
I am giving both Reverb and Jason a Four Leaf Rating for such solid efforts in spreading the eco-tour word!
For Jason Mraz.
Just when I thought this guy could not get any cooler he proves me wrong by hooking up with Reverb. The not for profit group, founded by Guster member Adam Gardner and his wife Lauren Sullivan, is primarily focused on helping musicians green their tours and, in addition to Jason, have worked with the likes of Bonnie Raitt, Dave Matthews Band, Jack Johnson, Avril Lavigne, Fall Out Boy, The Fray, Maroon 5 and so many more it would be impossible to list them all.
The far reaching efforts of this organization are definitely impressive as they educate and provide advice for anyone who has a tune in their ear; everything from carbon offset programs for fans (because of the travel to get to the show) to green cleaning supplies for the tour bus. Their list of business partners and non profit group affiliation is really impressive.
This video includes a new song which sets off the images really nicely and Jason sits beside the ocean, intermittently discussing the benefits of getting together with Reverb.
I am giving both Reverb and Jason a Four Leaf Rating for such solid efforts in spreading the eco-tour word!
Say it with me -- “C’mon Jason, let me interview you for this blog because you are certainly doing your part to help green our world and we all love you for it!”
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
You Have A Little Something Green on Your Collar
In the 100 or so years from 1780 - 1880, a movement was taking place known as the Industrial Revolution which, although greatly responsible for a large planetary impact, paved the way for the introduction of the eco-technologies of the rising Green Collar Revolution of today. Innovations in harnessing the power of water were used as far back as the 1700’s along fast moving rivers to run mills and increase production of materials such as cotton and wool. After the Civil War many of these mills were switched over to run on steam power and coal was the largest source of fuel for the literal fires. As job creation boomed in manufacturing, mining and additional manual labor sectors, an entirely new class of people began to emerge known as the blue collar worker.
Blue collar work was, and still is, labor intensive and it directly impacted creation of roadways, homes, buildings and even the machinery used to construct these end products. A stigma of “hard working” was attached to this sector with good reason; the jobs were difficult on the body and often required employees to get dirty so workers wore uniforms, which frequently included blue shirts, and thus a term was coined. Through increases in construction came the desire for new innovations to amplify production time and, with the advent of computers, a new era dawned known as the Information Age.
Before the 1980’s, expensive computers were generally reserved for large corporations to store data but as this decade progressed, lower cost, personalized microcomputers began arriving in offices and homes world wide. The 100 year old typewriter suddenly had some competition as workers began to “word process” their documents, taking advantage of innovations such as a backspace feature which removed the stroke permanently as opposed to just erasing the ink but leaving the key stroke visible on the page. Work was streamlined, efficiency increased, and by the late 1980’s it seemed as if every office worker had a computer at their desk connected by the Internet.
What began as a way to share files and protect what we now call a company network, reached a pinnacle in 1989 with the creation and introduction of the World Wide Web. The sharing of information, data and job functionality was completely redefined over the course of the following decade as a community of “end users” spawned with the introduction of a computer into almost every home. Other tech-terms infiltrated daily vocabulary, including the words telecommuting and outsourcing, which generated a shift in thinking to where work was completed and how much it would cost. The President of a company in Canada no longer needed to pay for employee benefits to hire an in-house Assistant as that worker could complete all the functions of their job from their home in Hawaii. A Customer Service Representative was simply a person on the other end of a phone line that could ring anywhere. The large world became increasingly smaller and we realized a fact that had been true all along -- everything is connected.
A rapid transformation occurred in many corners of the world as McMansions seemingly sprouted from “seed”, roadways were created and rail travel diminished into the single car driver, one time use products were touted as all the rage and people began to live lives of cheap and easy convenience. But sometimes convenience comes with a hefty price tag. The Industrial Age was in full swing in 1824 when the French physicist Joseph Fourier discovered the greenhouse effect, but it took almost 150 years for an entire generation of people to recognize the significance of the impact it has on our planet. Grassroots organizations formed to push this issue into the forefront in the mid 1900’s indicating that we had better reduce our consumption of resources or the planet would heat to the point of entire species extinction; potentially including humans. The focus of the masses however rested in monetary increase over the next half century until something surprising happened that seemed to halt the pace of production -- a movie about global climate change starring a former Vice President of the United States won the Academy Award for Documentary of the year in 2007.
To the environmental activists fighting for increased awareness on the subject of climate change An Inconvenient Truth did nothing more than to reaffirm their staunch beliefs, but when a tough as nails man begins to cry in a movie theatre as he watches a virtual polar bear drown due to the inevitable melting of the ice cap and then leaves the theater saying “I want to do something”, it is clear that the world has finally rallied behind saving itself. Groups, organizations and job markets focused on environmental protection surged in popularity as more and more people showed their desire to get involved and a new set emerged known as Green Collar.
Unlike associations of the past where a white collar job meant big responsibility and big money or blue collar indicated dirty work and lower wages, the Green sector is nothing more than an entire people coming together to contribute their skill, time and effort in the best way possible to save the Earth from peril; these jobs do not define a class based on monetary status as so many labels have in past generations but rather bring all people together collectively regardless of salary, age, gender, race or creed. The engineer in a high paying position who designed solar panels is just as vital to planetary survival as the worker who makes minimum wage to install that panel on the roof of the home of an organic farmer. We make our connections over a burning desire to maintain our planet so generations 500 years in the future have a beautiful place to call home.
It is a wonder to marvel at the progress humans have made in the past 500 years toward safer, more secure lives of abundance but none of that would have been possible without the acceptance of the ideals of progressive minds. The year 2009 is rapidly approaching and as we redefine what it means to not only make a living but make a life for ourselves it is vital to shift our approach from cheap and disposable to sustainable and renewing. The Green Collar Revolution will be the movement that gives new meaning to forward thinking.
Blue collar work was, and still is, labor intensive and it directly impacted creation of roadways, homes, buildings and even the machinery used to construct these end products. A stigma of “hard working” was attached to this sector with good reason; the jobs were difficult on the body and often required employees to get dirty so workers wore uniforms, which frequently included blue shirts, and thus a term was coined. Through increases in construction came the desire for new innovations to amplify production time and, with the advent of computers, a new era dawned known as the Information Age.
Before the 1980’s, expensive computers were generally reserved for large corporations to store data but as this decade progressed, lower cost, personalized microcomputers began arriving in offices and homes world wide. The 100 year old typewriter suddenly had some competition as workers began to “word process” their documents, taking advantage of innovations such as a backspace feature which removed the stroke permanently as opposed to just erasing the ink but leaving the key stroke visible on the page. Work was streamlined, efficiency increased, and by the late 1980’s it seemed as if every office worker had a computer at their desk connected by the Internet.
What began as a way to share files and protect what we now call a company network, reached a pinnacle in 1989 with the creation and introduction of the World Wide Web. The sharing of information, data and job functionality was completely redefined over the course of the following decade as a community of “end users” spawned with the introduction of a computer into almost every home. Other tech-terms infiltrated daily vocabulary, including the words telecommuting and outsourcing, which generated a shift in thinking to where work was completed and how much it would cost. The President of a company in Canada no longer needed to pay for employee benefits to hire an in-house Assistant as that worker could complete all the functions of their job from their home in Hawaii. A Customer Service Representative was simply a person on the other end of a phone line that could ring anywhere. The large world became increasingly smaller and we realized a fact that had been true all along -- everything is connected.
A rapid transformation occurred in many corners of the world as McMansions seemingly sprouted from “seed”, roadways were created and rail travel diminished into the single car driver, one time use products were touted as all the rage and people began to live lives of cheap and easy convenience. But sometimes convenience comes with a hefty price tag. The Industrial Age was in full swing in 1824 when the French physicist Joseph Fourier discovered the greenhouse effect, but it took almost 150 years for an entire generation of people to recognize the significance of the impact it has on our planet. Grassroots organizations formed to push this issue into the forefront in the mid 1900’s indicating that we had better reduce our consumption of resources or the planet would heat to the point of entire species extinction; potentially including humans. The focus of the masses however rested in monetary increase over the next half century until something surprising happened that seemed to halt the pace of production -- a movie about global climate change starring a former Vice President of the United States won the Academy Award for Documentary of the year in 2007.
To the environmental activists fighting for increased awareness on the subject of climate change An Inconvenient Truth did nothing more than to reaffirm their staunch beliefs, but when a tough as nails man begins to cry in a movie theatre as he watches a virtual polar bear drown due to the inevitable melting of the ice cap and then leaves the theater saying “I want to do something”, it is clear that the world has finally rallied behind saving itself. Groups, organizations and job markets focused on environmental protection surged in popularity as more and more people showed their desire to get involved and a new set emerged known as Green Collar.
Unlike associations of the past where a white collar job meant big responsibility and big money or blue collar indicated dirty work and lower wages, the Green sector is nothing more than an entire people coming together to contribute their skill, time and effort in the best way possible to save the Earth from peril; these jobs do not define a class based on monetary status as so many labels have in past generations but rather bring all people together collectively regardless of salary, age, gender, race or creed. The engineer in a high paying position who designed solar panels is just as vital to planetary survival as the worker who makes minimum wage to install that panel on the roof of the home of an organic farmer. We make our connections over a burning desire to maintain our planet so generations 500 years in the future have a beautiful place to call home.
It is a wonder to marvel at the progress humans have made in the past 500 years toward safer, more secure lives of abundance but none of that would have been possible without the acceptance of the ideals of progressive minds. The year 2009 is rapidly approaching and as we redefine what it means to not only make a living but make a life for ourselves it is vital to shift our approach from cheap and disposable to sustainable and renewing. The Green Collar Revolution will be the movement that gives new meaning to forward thinking.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Movie Spotlight: Idiocracy
An Army Librarian (Luke Wilson) addicted to television, and a Prostitute (Maya Rudolph) who calls herself an artist, are dubbed as the two most average people on the planet and chosen to participate in a top secret governmental experiment where they would be placed in hibernation chambers for a full year. Through a series of ludicrous twists that only Mike Judge (Beavis and Butthead, Office Space) could conceive, the Colonel in charge of the experiment is arrested, the military base is demolished (with the chambers still inside of course) and the debris from the deconstruction taken away so a Fuddruckers can be built on the site.
Through narration we are taught that being smart is not exactly a requirement for procreation and a series of graphs points out how the birth of morons begins outpacing the intelligent, essentially creating a completely dumbed down society. Fast forward 500 years into the future to the year 2505 when the great garbage avalanche takes place, bringing the hibernation chambers with it and the main characters are reintroduced into society. By a miracle of chance, they are now the smartest people on the planet.
This is where my environmental brain kicked into high gear. The garbage was piled so high it created mountains taller than the Alps and I sensed it might not be too far off from reality if something were not done now to offset it. Additionally the world had become one big advertising campaign where everything was sponsored by something and that something was not always the right choice. For example, the entire planet drank nothing but a liquid containing electrolytes which took over many of the government agencies and began claiming it was the best solution for everything, including watering plants.
The outcome of the movie is of course very predictable and it is typical Mike Judge fashion -- a cult style classic comedy but sadly not speaking to the mainstream. I will challenge that association however by giving this movie a Three Leaf Rating, reminding ourselves how important it is to take care of our environments -- the planet, local businesses and our free thinking minds -- so we do not become the type of society that begins naming our children after popular products like corn chips or luxury cars. Oh wait, that has already begun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)