It comes up every summer, that pesty green quandary: Should you use strong chemicals like DEET to fend off the mosquitoes and ticks that can transmit the insidious Lyme Disease and the potentially deadly West Nile Virus?

We want to use less toxic protection, formulas that are based on natural ingredients or at least those that haven’t been shown to cause neurological damage (albeit in rare cases). Ironically, using DEET (N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide) to protect against West Nile forces you to choose between potential rare neurological side effects. Will you overreact to DEET or be the unlucky one whose case of West Nile runs amok, producing neurological manifestations? Which raises the question — what are the odds?

Turns out you are more likely to get a severe case of West Nile than you are to have a bad reaction to DEET (and you can control that possibility with careful application). The Centers for Disease Control reports that there were 44 fatalities caused by West Nile in the US in 2008 from among the 687 cases in which the virus  mushroomed into encephalitis or meningitis (meaning it induced swelling in the brain or spinal cord.)

So protecting oneself against mosquitoes is paramount. Yes, the issue can be slippery as citronella oil. There are many safer, natural compounds that repel mosquitoes (more on that in a minute). We don’t want to swim in chemicals. But we don’t want the July 4th barbie to wrap up in the ER either.

In the end, I have a hard time arguing against the best protection available. DEET does get the job done. Consumer Reports has shown it to be effective. The Centers for Disease Control endorses it (but notes in a fact sheet that rare cases of over exposure have resulted in kids having “seizures or brain damage”). The American Academy of Pediatrics views its use on little children older than two months favorably, noting that it is effective for about two hours at a 10 percent concentration, though it also cautions that DEET should be applied “sparingly on exposed skin” and not used under clothing, among other precautions.

I’m no expert, but here’s my compromise: When I send a kid (or myself) into mosquito territory, I use a first line of defense of clothing, longer sleeves, socks, pants. Conveniently, this gives me alternative surfaces on which to spray DEET, which minimizes its skin contact. If we’re talking woods and high grass, I will even apply a bit of a DEET product directly to pulse points (wrists and necks). Then I liberally spray an alternative product that’s considered skin safe (and contains a proven deterrent like lemon eucalyptus oil or soybean oil) on any other exposed skin, such as the back of necks, forearms, knees and calves.

I feel like this is the best of both worlds, though I know this is a solution that will satisfy neither those opposed to DEET or DEET boosters like the trade group, Consumer Specialty Products Association, which recently sent an email reminding us of DEET’S virtues. Still, it works for me, the Scout and the Nature Girl.

Speaking of chemicals, we have found that one of the best ways to reduce our mosquito risk is to cut back on chemicals in other ways. Our yard is pesticide-free and planted with mainly native plants, which has promoted a proliferation of beneficial bugs that eat mosquitoes, such as dragon flies. It’s a good argument for doing all we can to keep birds and bats around too.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Greenpeace followed up the release this week of its latest Carting Away the Oceans scorecard with a friendly and fishy demonstration outside Trader Joe’s stores in San Francisco.

Greenpeace members, two of whom dressed as orange roughy and others who parodied Trader’s by wearing Hawaiian shirts mimicking the store’s trademark uniform, handed out information on why its important to select and buy seafood that can be replenished and also asked prospective customers to sign petition postcards to privately held grocery company.

California-based Trader Joes is a grocery with more than 300 stores that caters to people looking for natural and organic and specialty items at reasonable prices. It prides itself on selling “unconventional and interesting products.” But Greenpeace has ranked the store dead last among national grocery chains for its conventional approach to selling seafood, specifically its lack of attention to seafood sustainability. The advocacy group says Trader Joes (which ranked #17 on the seafood scorecard) has no apparent plant to assure it is buying reputably fished and farmed seafood and sells “Red Listed” fish that are endangered by overfishing or habitat loss.

Orange roughy are on Greenpeace’s Red List, which includes several jeopardized fish that marine experts have identified as needing time to recover from over-harvesting and whose populations are at risk of collapsing.

Trader Joe’s has not replied to a query for response.

To keep the heat up on the chain, Greenpeace also opened a website, called “Traitor Joe’s” where a cartoon pirate welcomes people to his “one stop shop for ocean destruction.” The site further explains Greenpeace’s seafood campaign.

Greenpeace is urging consumers to buy from stores that are trying to minimize their impact on the oceans by selling sustainably farmed or caught fish. It’s new rankings released this week commended Wegman’s, Ahold USA, Whole Foods and Target for doing the best job to maintain an eco-friendly seafood counter. Safeway, Harris Teeter and Wal-Mart also received acceptable marks. But Greenpeace listed nine grocery chains, national and some regional, as doing little to help save the oceans and urged consumers to not buy seafood from those retailers. (Trader Joe’s was last among national chains, with three regional chains ranking lowest on the 20 store list.) For more details on Trader Joe’s response to Greenpeace’s seafood campaign, see the listings on the seafood scorecard.

The company responded to Greenpeace’s query for information on its seafood practices by saying its policy is guided by “listening to its customers” but declining to give any more information, according to Greenpeace’s report card. Greenpeace concludes in its report that the chain is not affiliated with any conservation groups, has no discernible seafood policy to reduce environmental harm and in addition, that signs posted in some of its stores suggesting that its seafood is environmentally friendly appear to be mere marketing ploys.

The company’s stated reliance on customer input helped shape Greenpeace’s decision to have Trader Joe’s customers sign petition postcards asking for strong seafood policies, a spokeswoman explained.

(Photo credit: Greenpeace, San Francisco.)

Somewhere in between the sleep-away camps, beach excursions and baseball games of summer, kids and parents alike generally see the appeal of the sand-free floors and refrigerated air of a good museum. Institutions across the country know this is a great time to squeeze some education into kid-friendly, entertaining exhibitions; here’s a list of some of the best nature-oriented attractions for vacationers who’ve felt a bit too much heat this month.

Restaurants looking to green their operations by generating some of their own electrical power are finding it easier as vendor companies try to fill in the gaps.

Owl Power Company, for instance, has developed a way for restaurants to more conveniently use vegetable oil as fuel. Owl’s Vegawatt is a combined heating and power system that runs on vegetable oil and can be connected to existing heating and power systems to be used as supplemental green energy.

Founded by James Peret, President and CEO of Owl Power Company, Vegawatt was first introduced last December at Finz Seafood & Grill in Dedham, Massachusetts.

Here’s how it works: A restaurant deposits vegetable oil waste into the unit and Vegawatt goes to work using a four-step cleaning process to turn used vegetable oil into biofuel. The unit is located outside the restaurant; just like a central air conditioning unit is placed. It contains one electrical hookup, a water feed, and a return feed. This reduces the power required for the water heater, because the water is partially heated through the Vegawatt. Better yet, the Vegawatt requires no maintenance, according to Owl.

While Vegawatt cannot power an entire restaurant, it can produce 10-25% of the energy required, which could translate to hundreds of dollars per month on saved utility costs. Right now, some restaurants pay companies 10-25 cents per gallon to dispose of their used vegetable oil, though others use their oil in vehicles.

With Vegawatt, a restaurant can saves an disposal costs and turn their oil recycling into a cash-positive operation.

Vegawatt, says Owl, provides many environmental benefits. It is:

• Non-toxic
• Non-flammable
• Produces no liquid byproducts
• Reduces carbon emissions
• Decreases waste going into landfills

The $22,000 Vegawatt co-generation systems can be leased or purchased. The company says a restaurant can save about $1,000 a month — offsetting the purchase price in two years — if it produces 80 gallons of waste vegetable oil per week.

As with many of green products, there are multiple government incentives when purchasing Vegawatt. A company could qualify for a federal tax credit on 30 percent of the cost, and also possibly receive state refunds.

The company is selling primarily in the Northeast, but hoping to expand to the Mid-Atlantic states. “There is a lot of interest in California, Hawaii, the Caribbean, and other places internationally as well,” Peret said.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

In 1986, the International Whaling Commission banned the catching and killing of whales for commercial purposes worldwide. Whale populations — such as the North Pacific gray and the North Atlantic right whale — were threatened because of centuries of unrestricted hunting.

That ban is still in effect, with two exceptions: aboriginal peoples whose survival depends on whaling (Alaska, St. Vincent, the Grenadines, Denmark and the Russian Federation) and whaling for scientific purposes.

Citing “scientific” work, in the last year Japan killed about 1,000 whales, and estimates run from 12,000 to more than 23,000 killed since ‘86.

Iceland and Norway have simply refused to comply with the ban, and last year they, too, killed hundreds of whales.

The 61st meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), made up of 85 representatives, took place last week on the Portuguese island of Maderia. To the frustration of many, the commission made no progress on addressing the three countries’ ongoing killing of whales for what conservationists say is strictly commercial purposes.

On the IWC meeting web pages, numerous reports and summaries of the recent gathering are available. One report spelled out the number and species of whales killed globally in the last year. The parsing of much of the data-filled information varies according to who is reading it.

Australia is most outspoken in its opposition to Japan’s whaling, especially in the Southern Pacific whaling sanctuary. Australia’s conservationist-minded representatives have reportedly threatened to take Japan to international court for its killing of whales.

The majority of whales being killed are smaller Minke whales, which are not endangered or threatened. Iceland and Norway have publicly stated that their commercial whaling is an issue of national sovereignty and that they are whaling in a “sustainable” way, catching a species that is plentiful. The IWC lists population estimates of each species of whale.

Japan’s chief representative at the meeting, Akira Nakamae, reportedly defended his nation’s position, saying that whaling can be done in a “sustainable manner.”

But Humane Society International representatives at the IWC meeting called for an end to any legalized killing of whales. Although they lauded the IWC for passing a resolution concerning the effect of climate and environmental changes on the whale and dolphin populations, they decry Japan’s use of the “scientific” loophole to commercially kill whales. Their “Save Whales - Not Whaling” report contains more details.

Greenpeace made an opening statement at the meeting in Madeira, calling for the IWC to become a conservationist group and stop attempting to “manage whales for the benefit of the whaling industry.”

Though they had much criticism for the IWC, Greenpeace did laud a report introduced during the meeting that detailed the booming business of whale watching around the world.

The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society also called for the IWC to stop the taking of humpback whales in Greenland (by Denmark). The World Wildlife Federation reports that 13 whale species are still endangered or vulnerable, even after the years of IWC protection. The Pew Whale Conservation Project also took the IWC to task for making little progress in protecting whales.

PHOTOS: From top (Japanese whaling ship) Greenpeace.org.uk ; Whale Adoption ; Whale Adoption

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

A new California law goes into an effect this week that will make it easier to recycle dangerous mercury thermostats. The Mercury Thermostat Collection Act of 2008 increases the number of thermostat collection locations and requires heating and air conditioning wholesalers with physical locations in California to collect thermostats from the public and contractors. Retailers are also encouraged to participate.

Co-sponsored by the California Product Stewardship Council and Sierra Club California, AB 2347 is California’s first full producer responsibility legislation and makes California only the third state to pass such a law in an effort to protect public health.

Mercury is a potent neurotoxin. On average, mercury thermostats contain about three grams of mercury. Each year in the U.S., as many as 630,000 infants are born with mercury levels associated with IQ loss, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

“We want contractors and the public to know that this new law is in effect to protect the public from mercury exposure,” Heidi Sanborn, CPSC Executive Director, said in a statement. “Having the producers fund and manage the collection system reduces public costs to manage the product at the end-of-life and is in line with the overall framework for an Extended Producer Responsibly (EPR) system adopted by the California Integrated Waste Management Board in 2008.”

Sanborn praised the efforts of Honeywell International Inc., as part of the Thermostat Recycling Corporation (TRC), and the California Retailers Association for supporting the recycling legislation.

Related links:

• Get information about free thermostat recycling in California

Bats have creeped us out since man and bat first met. But not many of us know just how important bats are to mankind’s existence and fewer of us know that at least five species of bats are battling an epidemic that could have devastating consequences for both bat and man.

To quote the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, “Worldwide, bats play critical ecological roles in insect control, plant pollination and seed dissemination” (seed dissemination is critical to rain forest regeneration). There are 25 species of North American bat.

Barbara French, a biologist at Bat Conservation International (BCI) in Austin, TX. gave this capsule on the bond between bat and farmer: “A colony of 150 Big Brown bats can protect farmers from up to 33 million rootworms, which are serious crop pests. Many bats feed on moths. The moths lay eggs that develop into caterpillars, like corn earworms and army worms, which feed on a huge variety of crops.” And bats love mosquitoes, too.

That something was terribly wrong in the bat world was first noticed in February, 2006 in Howe’s Cave, 40 miles west of Albany, N.Y. A photograph of hibernating bats showed many had an unusual white dust on their noses, ears and wings; the find was named White-Nose Syndrome (WNS) and in less than 12 months WNS had traveled 450 miles south from Howe’s Cave. The epidemic has now spread to more than 65 caves in nine New England and Mid-Atlantic states and several caves in Canada are suspected of harboring the fungus.

Gray bats and Virginia Big-eared bats are severely threatened: even before WNS they were federally listed as endangered species. Indiana bats are now losing population, nearly to the levels of the endangered Virginia big-eared bats.

Despite the continuing search to find the source of this condition by numerous laboratories and state and federal biologists, the cause of the bat deaths remains unknown.

There really isn’t much to go on; nobody knows what is causing WNS … cavers, pesticides, global warming and more may or may not be the cause. But we do know these three facts:

• Bats hibernate in cool or cold caves and abandoned mines;

• WNS is a cold-loving fungus; and

• During hibernation bats, like all other hibernating mammals, live off their stored fat reserves.

Apparently WNS triggers a desire for food in bats, breaking their hibernation cycle; those that are strong enough to do so struggle to fly out into the cold winter environment in search of non-existent insects. Those bats, too weak to fly, die and fall to the ground. Again, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: “We have found sick, dying and dead bats in unprecedented numbers in and around caves and mines from Vermont to Virginia. In some hibernaculum, 90 to 100 percent of the bats are dying.”

Melia Bayless, another biologist at BCI, says “WNS is a huge scientific mystery … it’s a puzzle. We don’t know yet whether the fungus is the cause (originating on the bat) or whether it’s opportunistic (picked up somewhere else) bu susceptible bats. We don’t know how the fungus is transmitted but we do know other fungus spores (in mammals and animals) can be transmitted and held for a long time.

Here’s a product that gives new meaning to the phrase, “tread lightly.” The Timberland Company has unveiled the Earthkeepers 2.0 boot, designed to be disassembled and recycled rather than discarded at the end of its product life.

The company says consumers who buy the Earthkeepers 2.0 boots can simply return them to any Timberland store for recycling at the end of their use. Timberland says it will launch a “second life” program to pilot reusing components from the returned boot to make a new pair of shoes.

Eighty percent of the Earthkeepers 2.0 boot can be recycled or re-used, including:

• Leather that is refurbished at the company’s factory in the Dominican Republic
• Green Rubber soles that will go back to a Green Rubber factory in Georgia for recycling. Green Rubber’s patented D-Link technology effectively breaks down tire-rubber so that it can be recycled repeatedly back into new products, including Timberland outsoles
• Removable metal hardware that can be reused in new footwear or recycled
• Polyester lining that can be recycled into new polyester products

The Earthkeepers 2.0 boot, part of a broader Earthkeepers collection, will be available to consumers in Fall 2009.

“We can be deliberate about designing the ‘greenest’ footwear out there — but if at the end of the day those products still end up in a landfill, we haven’t really closed the loop on our environmental responsibility,” Brian Moore, Timberland’s VP of Men’s Product, said in a statement. “With Earthkeepers 2.0, we have an opportunity to influence the environmental impact of our products in a way we haven’t before - after the point of purchase.”

When you fish for seafood at your local grocery, it can be difficult to tell whether you are supporting sustainable fishing practices.

Was the snapper you selected caught using legal, sustainable fishing practices? Should you even be buying it? Is the Chilean Sea Bass you just purchased on the “Red List” of jeopardized marine species? Does the grocery you’re patronizing buy seafood certified by the Marine Stewardship Council?

Greenpeace is trying to help you sort it all out - and assure that groceries do not ignore the need to keep our oceans and fisheries healthy.

The worldwide conservation group published its third “Carting Away the Oceans” scorecard on Tuesday, outing several grocery chains that flout efforts to support sustainable seafood methods and lauding the stores that are helping conservationists.

The group is calling on customers to stop shopping for seafood at the lowest ranked stores, which have made little or no effort to support ocean ecosystems by selling sustainble seafood, including such large chains as Costco, Publix and Trader Joes.

The scorecard assessed and ranked the top 20 U.S. grocery chains on their green seafood credentials, giving top marks to Wegmans, Ahold USA, Whole Foods, Target, Safeway, Harris Teeter and Wal-Mart. These stores have all made strides toward responsible seafood buying and selling, though they may be innovating in different ways, Greenpeace reported.

Wegman’s, which was ranked number one on the list, for instance, has created a public sustainable seafood policy and supports a variety of initiatives aimed at supporting practices that preserve ocean ecosystems. The New York-based chain’s seafood policy dictates that wild-caught fish be properly reported and that capture methods meet certain standards; the store also buys from aquaculture groups that aim to avoid using pesticides, antibiotics and wild fish as feed. It actively seeks out items that have been certified by the Marine Stewardship Council and has removed several red list seafood species, though not all, from its inventory.

Privately owned Wegman’s, which operates 70 stores in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, provides in-store information to educate customers about seafood sustainability.

Ahold, listed number two on the Greenpeace list, operates as Stop & Shop, Giant and Martin’s Food Markets and is owned by Royal Ahold of the Netherlands. It deserves good marks for developing the “Choice Catch” program under which it avoids buying illegally caught seafood and takes ecological impacts into account, Greenpeace reported.

Ahold also gives preference to farmed seafood that is pesticide and antibiotic-free, but could do a better job of in-store education, according to the score card. Ahold has announced they will no longer sell Chilean sea bass, orange roughy and shark (they already have stopped sales of bluefin tuna and Atlantic halibut) but still sell other jeopardized seafood, the report said.

Whole Foods and Target (third and fourth on the Greenpeace list) also have worked to eliminate many unsustainable items from their inventory, though fast-growing Whole Foods, which previously ranked number one on Greenpeace’s seafood score card, continues to offer “a tremendous amount of red list seafood options.”

Green-minded visitors to northern Colorado should consider a tour of the New Belgium Brewing Company in Fort Collins. New Belgium, best known for its Fat Tire Amber Ale brand, is one of the most environmentally progressive breweries in the world. The brewery has used wind-powered electricity since 1999, and green-design methods have been incorporated throughout the company. I visited the headquarters on a recent trip and discovered that many aspects of company life are dedicated to sustainability.

New Belgium sponsors a charity bike-and-music event called “Tour de Fat” in eleven cities in the United States, including Austin, Chicago, Minneapolis and Portland, that encourages people to trade their car for a bike, at least for a day. At Tour de Fat events, beer is served in compostable cups, and  performers take to a solar-powered stage. (A Tour de Fat schedule is online.)

Cycling has long been part of New Belgium’s corporate culture. Before he founded the company, Jeff Lebesch went on a tour of Belgian breweries, traveling through Europe in 1989 on a mountain bike, a rarity at the time. Many people commented on the “fat tires” he used, which inspired the name of Fat Tire Amber Ale. Today, employees of New Belgium each receive a mountain bike on the one-year anniversary of their hire date. They are encouraged to use the bikes to commute to work, thus reducing their carbon footprints. Outside the headquarters, dozens of bikes are lined up, looking well-used.

Tours of the brewery are free, and they are offered several days per week. One of the first things visitors notice is the beautiful pine wood used throughout the building, on ceilings, walls and floors. The wood has a bluish tint, meaning it’s “beetlekill” wood. Throughout Colorado, thousands of acres of lodgepole pines have been lost to a pine bark beetle infestation. The beetle injects a fungus into the trees, which tints the wood blue. Using the wood is a way to utilize these dead trees, the tour guide explained.

The most impressive sight on the tour is the gigantic “Merlin” brewing kettle, the size of a school bus. Traditional brew kettles heat the wort (unfermented beer, the liquid that comes from mashing grains) in a giant kettle that heats from the bottom, similar to how you heat a pan of water on the kitchen stove.

The Merlin, made by the Germany company Steinecker, has a huge cone-shaped heating element standing inside the vast cylindrical kettle. The liquid heats more quickly than in a traditional kettle because the heating surface is much larger, and the wort heats from the center out. Since the wort heats faster, the brew kettle uses less energy than traditional methods.

Every brewery produces a large amount of wastewater as a result of the brewing process. New Belgium built its own water-treatment plant, which includes anaerobic digestion. The company also uses the methane produced by the plant to generate electricity and heat. As it continues to work on new ways to save energy, New Belgium plans to install a solar photovoltaic array.

Best of all for visitors, each brewery guest 21 and up can sample four types of beer for free, in the first-floor bar called the “Liquid Center.” Most visitors start with the Fat Tire, and then move on to try other flavors, like Sunshine Wheat, Skinny Dip and Blue Paddle.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

City centers are often portrayed as grimy, polluted places. And they can be grimy, polluted places - the daily destination for thousands of carbon-emitting commuters and home to many smokestack industries.

Just don’t blame the people living there. Households closer to the urban action are, on average, far less polluting, according to research by the Center for Neighborhood Technology. The reason is not hard to fathom: People living in more densely developed areas drive less and are more likely to take public transportation.

“Cities are more location efficient - meaning key destinations are closer to where people live and work,” said Scott Bernstein, president of the Center for Neighborhood Technology, in a statement explaining the center’s research.

Conversely, people living in the suburbs drive farther to services, including often commuting to their workplace (in the city or another burb), which makes them less “location efficient” — and more polluting.

The Center for Neighborhood Technology, a 30-year-old non-profit based in Chicago and focused on urban living, has put together a collection of nifty maps where you can see the effects of this phenomenon in which city dwellers emit fewer greenhouse gases than suburbanites. The maps are the graphic expression of the center’s Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, which suggests that families could lower their carbon emissions by living closer to the urban center, though perhaps not too close, where the real estate prices kick into hyper-drive.

The index is calculated by using regional median incomes and stacking them against the costs of housing and transportation to give “the true cost” of living in a certain place. (To see more on the methodology, click here.)

See an example of the H+T Index on the map above of the LA area, which shows the highest carbon dioxide pollution per household comes from outlying areas (shown in red) compared with the lower GHG households (shown in yellow) closer to the city center.

It makes sense, urban dwellers are closer to restaurants, workplaces and an array of services, as well as public transportation, so they’re not weighed down by transportation costs nor are they spewing much exhaust.

They’re also may be saving far more money than people may realize, says CNT president Scott Bernstein.

The group’s research has found that city dwellers may save 15 to 20 percent of their income moving to a closer-in location compared with their counterparts in the suburbs. With the costs of buying, insuring and fueling a car running around $5,100 a year in major cities, jettisoning a vehicle could make a big difference to a financially stressed family.

“If you’re at the edge, saving through conservation this way is a better proposition than increasing your income by X amount,” Bernstein said.

There also are convenience and accessibility features to living in an urban environment that can make sense to a family of any income, he continued. The point of the index is to illustrate for people that they have a choice of where to live and that the savings on transportation can make urban living a value proposition.

“This is evidence based. It’s not just a philosophy,” said Bernstein, who oversaw the review of all U.S. major metropolitan areas.

As for that gritty, grimy image of urban centers, Bernstein says that air pollution can be just as bad in certain outlying regions, when air patterns take industrial or auto emissions there. Suburban subdivisions also are frequently built near expressways, which degrades the quality of the air, he said.

Air pollution does present barriers to moving to certain urban locales, he conceded, but moving to a more accessible region doesn’t necessarily mean moving “downtown” so much as it means “urbanizing more places.”

The H + T index does not analyze other quality of life issues. It does not, for instance, assess the psychological value of being closer to urban amenities, nor does it weigh the value of better-rated public schools in suburban locations. Those are matters for a different matrix dealing with overall quality of life issues. The H+T Index is simply calculated to show the transportation cost of living in a certain location.

In the course of looking at the relative transportation costs, though, the Center for Neighborhood Technology did review carbon dioxide emissions related to vehicle travel in 55 metro areas in the United States. Overall, the researchers found that the transportation-related emissions of city folk were about 70 percent less than of those living in suburbs.

In areas where sprawl is extensive, and comes with sparse public transit, transportation costs can gobble up to 28 percent of the area household median income, the center researchers noted.

“If you’re deciding where to live, consider moving to an urban area. You’ll help fight global warming by emitting less CO2. And you’re likely to drive less, so you’ll spend less on transportation, saving up to $5,000 annually,” Bernstein said.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Once, people pounded clothes with rocks to get them cleaned. Now we’ve come full circle, with dry cleaning  headed back to those Earthy roots.

Many people are familiar with the use of hazardous chemicals in modern dry-cleaning solution. The primary cleaning solvent used in most dry-cleaners is perchloroethylene or “perc”. The Environmental Protection Agency classified this petroleum chemical as a Toxic Air Contaminant and a probable human carcinogen and many environmentalists believe that the residue on your clothes can’t be a healthything.

Now there is a better alternative and believe it or not, it is made essentially from liquefied sand.

GreenEarth Cleaning developed this non-toxic and non-hazardous liquid silicone dry cleaning solvent, which is safe for you and the environment. It is made of three natural elements: sand, water, and carbon dioxide. Liquid silicone is used in many products you use everyday such as lotion, shampoo, and conditioner.

This technology also is better for your clothes, according to GreenEarth. It will not cause fabrics to fade or shrink, allowing your garments to last longer. “Perc and other hydrocarbons are aggressive as they interact with the fabrics, dyes, and trims of today’s fashions. The GreenEarth silicone system is gentle due to the low surface tension of the silicone fluid and its characteristics of remaining inert rather than interacting with the fibers and trims,” said Tim Maxwell, President of GreenEarth Cleaning.

There are approximately 1,500 GreenEarth Cleaning machines being used by dry cleaners today, from single store businesses to large dry cleaning chains. Nextcleaners is a chain of dry cleaners in New York and New Jersey that has been using the new liquid silicone solvent.

“We believe GreenEarth solvent is presently the most practical eco-friendly solution without compromising the dry cleaning service quality in the marketplace. It’s is also the most widely used eco-friendly solution and the only one presently approved by the State of California,” said Kam Saifi, President and CEO of Nextcleaners. In addition to the use of GreenEarth Cleaning, they are making additional strides to benefit the environment, such as the use of bicycle transportation for delivery and pick up.

Thanks to efforts made by GreenEarth and its affiliates, the dry cleaning industry is beginning to change its ways.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media