Image: epa.gov

As a new climate and energy bill winds its way through the U.S. Senate, opponents and watchdog groups are voicing concerns that the proposed legislation could strip power away from the Environmental Protection Agency and individual states.

According to multiple reports, a draft in progress from Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) would call for greenhouse gas curbs across multiple economic sectors, with a target of reducing emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. Power plant emissions would be regulated in 2012, with other major industrial sources phased in starting in 2016.

The three met with industry leaders on March 17 to discuss features of the bill. Among the potentially controversial items: Restricting the EPA’s powers to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and curbing states’ climate laws and regulations.

“It wasn’t in our earlier bills, but in terms of getting this energy independence, job-creating carbon pollution bill going, this gives the business community the predictability that they need. It’s very important to them,” Lieberman said.

Industries generally are eager to consolidate new climate rules under one federal program rather than deal with regulation on a case-by-case or state-by-state basis. Any weakening of the Clean Air Act, however, is likely to encounter stiff resistance from environmental groups.

Center for Biological Diversity Executive Director Kieran Suckling was quick to go on the attack.

“If correctly reported, the Kerry, Lieberman, Graham approach is unacceptable. It won’t stop global warming, and by attacking the Clean Air Act, it will remove the only tool we currently have that can do so,” he said in a statement released by the organization.

“Kerry, Lieberman, and Graham appear to be taking Congress to a new low in its long-term failure to rise to the challenge of stopping global warming.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the subcommittee that oversees the EPA budget, also voiced skepticism about the proposed changes.

“I don’t think it should pre-empt EPA from anything,” she said.

Bill Becker, executive director of National Association of Clean Air Agencies (which represents state and local air pollution control agencies) added his concerns.

“Climate change is such a monumental problem that action at all levels — local, state and federal — is essential if we are serious about achieving our ultimate goals,” he said. “Future climate legislation should build upon this successful partnership, not supplant it, and preserve the rights of state and local governments to take more stringent actions where needed.”

Kerry later told reporters that a full draft should be ready by next week, but was unsure when it might be released.

Ready to spend a little time in the dark to show that you aren’t in the dark about climate change? Earth Hour 2010 is just around the corner.

Image: myearthhour.org

The event – organized by the World Wildlife Fund and scheduled for 8:30 p.m. local time on Saturday, March 27 – once again will feature millions of Americans turning out their lights for one hour in support of action on climate change. In 2009, an estimated 80 million people in the U.S. and nearly a billion around the world participated on some level, resulting in the lights going dim at such iconic venues as the Eiffel Tower in Paris, New York’s Empire State Building, the Sydney Opera House and the Great Pyramids of Gaza.

Earth Hour started in 2007, in Sydney, Australia, when 2.2 million homes and businesses turned off their lights. A year later, more than 50 million people across 35 countries answered the call. Last year, over 4,000 cities in 88 countries officially switched off.

Other famous American sites expected to go without all non-essential lighting this year: Mount Rushmore in South Dakota, St. Louis’ Gateway Arch, Sea World in Orlando, the strip in Las Vegas, the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, Washington D.C.’s National Cathedral, California’s Santa Monica Pier and the Space Needle in Seattle.

Outside the U.S., the WWF said it expects thousands of cities in more than 105 countries to take part. The list includes Athens, Bangkok, Cape Town, Delhi, Dubai, Geneva, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Manila, Moscow, Rome, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tel Aviv and Toronto.

With prices down and incentives still available, more and more individuals and businesses are looking into solar panels as a way to cut down energy costs and protect the environment. According to a poll released this week, support also is growing for solar on the utility scale.

A utility-scale solar plant in Blythe, Calif. Image: First Solar

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) unveiled statistics gathered by Gotham Research Group that show 75 percent of those surveyed advocate the development of solar energy plans on public lands. The survey also determined that solar was the first choice as best use of public land (38 percent).

Asked which energy sources the government should prioritize, respondents picked solar farms and wind (22 percent each), natural gas and nuclear (16 percent each), oil (11 percent) and coal (4 percent). Findings were based on polling conducted February 24-26, involving a sample of 500 American adults 18 years of age or older. The margin of error on the total sample of 500 is +/- 4.4 percent.

“When Americans talk about solar energy, they usually envision rooftop systems, which are great. But it’s important to also realize the significant role that utility-scale solar has to play,” said Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), who joined a conference call to announce the results.

“Large solar installations use economies of scale to achieve significant cost savings and help Americans to get the most solar ‘bang for the buck.’ It’s great to confirm that the rest of America is just as excited about utility solar as we are.”

According to the SEIA, five new pilot plants came on line in 2009 and more than 100 utility-scale solar projects are under development. The group estimates that projects represent more than 17 gigawatts of capacity, enough to provide clean power to 3.4 million households and to create more than 100,000 jobs.

Bald eagle. Image: Karen Laubenstein, USFWS

By Kate Nolan
Green Right Now

The recovery of North American bald eagles is a triumph for the Endangered Species Act.

One of the first species proposed for listing under the Act in 1973, bald eagles in the lower 48 states grew from a failing population of just 400 breeding pairs to 8,000-9,000 before they left the ESA list in August 2007.

A ban on the insecticide DDT initially halted the deadly assault on the species, but it was the Act’s sustained defense of eagle breeding zones that allowed the birds to multiply exponentially over the 34 years of protection.

DDT (which reduces the bird’s ability to reproduce) is still banned, and breeding areas will remain protected during a monitoring period that may last 20 years.

Now, almost three years since delisting, information is emerging on the condition of the birds. Much looks promising, but concerns linger, such as the risk of lead poisoning, illegal shootings and a controversy over whether eagles in the Southwest still need ESA protection.

A comparative eagle count is expected this spring, in mid April,  when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service releases a national population estimate. Based on a survey conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,  the report will provide detailed information on specific geographic areas that can be compared to earlier surveys to assess growth.

Some numbers have already appeared informally, showing continued expansion in Delaware, Arkansas and the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge area, which borders four states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois) and is something of a magnet for eagles.

The Refuge was expected to draw more than 5,000 migrating eagles this winter. In Minnesota alone, authorities have counted 700 nests; the state has the largest bald eagle population outside Alaska.

But beyond the numbers, some troubling details have emerged.

Lead suspicions

In Iowa, host to 2,000 to 4,000 migratory eagles every year, bird rehabilitation centers are reporting high lead levels in the eagles they are treating.

“Our database shows that in 2009, 26 eagles died in Iowa from ingesting lead. We shoot deer here with lead slugs. If animals are wounded and not retrieved, the eagles later feed off of it and absorb the lead,” said Kay Neumann of SOAR, a raptor rehabilitation group in Dedham, Iowa.

Lead damages nerves, and lead bullets have been banned in California because it was killing condors there. Few studies have focused on the effects of lead bullets on eagles.

Neumann found that 60 percent of eagles treated in Iowa had lead poisoning. Of the 78 with lead in their systems, only six could be released. She and other rehabbers are pushing for use of non-lead bullets. Wildlife authorities in Iowa and numerous other states encourage hunters to use copper and other types of ammunition.

In response to delisting, Iowa is setting up a program for monitoring the state’s 250 nests.

Image: Dave Menke, USFWS

“Eagles are doing well in Iowa; there are more than ever. But we are approaching it a little more rigorously now from a research point of view,” said Stephanie Shepherd, a state wildlife biologist. The greatest concern is agricultural run-off. Chemicals from crops get into waterways and fish, and eagles eat the toxic fish.

“Lead is on our radar screen, but there are no good studies on how prevalent the poison is in a population of eagles,” Shepherd said.

Lead has a more acute impact when it involves shooting eagles. The law on “taking” eagles has changed somewhat since delisting. Under ESA protection, eagles could be disturbed or killed under specific circumstances, with a permit. Two federal laws still prohibit hunting of eagles, but permits remain available for removing nuisance eagles. New rules decrease the radius of the area around a nest that is protected.

Wildlife officials around the country report illegal eagle takings are not rampant, but there have been incidents. In 2009, a Florida man was convicted and sent to prison for shooting an eagle. And in Iowa, an unidentified hunter illegally shot a juvenile eagle that was feeding on a deer carcass.

“Shooting eagles and hawks was a huge problem in the 1950s, but shooting these birds has decreased greatly since then,” said Greg Burcher, Director of Bird Conservation at National Audubon Society. Sometimes eagles compete with fishermen, but rarely clash violently.

According to Burcher, the biggest long-term threats to bald eagles are coastal development and water quality issues.

Arizona birds retain protection

Water is a key survival factor for eagles in Arizona, which remain the only bald eagles in the U.S. still listed. Concerns for their viability have fueled a lasting struggle between conservationists and federal officials, culminating in a lawsuit that has at least postponed delisting the birds.

The Arizona population provides a good illustration of what it takes to bring back a failing flock.

The eagles had dwindled to five pair in the 1970s, when a local Audubon group teamed with the U.S. Forest Service to start a nest-watcher program that remains a key to recovery. Twenty watchers sign up each year to camp out for months in the vicinity of the mostly remote breeding areas, record bird behavior and alert authorities about problems. From the nest-watching activities has grown a consortium of Audubon groups, state and federal authorities, Indian tribes and public utilities that work together to protect and monitor nests and coax the eagle numbers upward.

Image: USFWS

The ESA’s habitat protection ensured that the state’s burgeoning development and cattle and mining activities wouldn’t take down the trees and cliff sides needed for nests. By now, 61 nesting areas and as many as 50 breeding pairs have been identified, but state biologists say the population remains fragile because it is so small.

Resources budgeted for the bald eagle recovery have been based on their endangered species status. So, when the Fish and Wildlife Service began efforts to delist eagles nationally, conservationists feared resources would dry up.

Maricopa Audubon and the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned to have the Arizona eagles listed separately as a “distinct population segment.” A fish-eating bird in the Sonoran desert, these bald eagles have made some dramatic adaptations to the heat. They are smaller, mate earlier in the season, and their eggs have thicker shells than other eagles. Some evidence suggests that, unlike other eagles, they fare better during drought than rainy periods.

But the Fish and Wildlife Service rejected the petition in 2006, so the groups sued in federal court. Subsequently the court ordered federal authorities to reassess the eagles.  In March, government officials submitted a new assessment, with more outside input, that drew the same conclusion as the first: the Arizona eagles were significantly different, had threats to their survival – but were not important to the survival of eagles in general and therefore should be delisted.

The court has not yet ruled on whether the finding is legal, but alarm is spreading among nature-watchers.

“It’s a very serious problem. It means more water transfers away from eagle nesting areas to cities and new developments. Eagles are going to go down the tubes if they aren’t protected here,” said Dr. Bob Witzeman, conservation chair of Maricopa Audubon.

Witzeman founded the state nest watch program and hired the state’s first nest guardian. In Arizona, eagle survival requires clear abundant streams. Mining and cattle activities can cloud the water with algae and sediment so eagles can’t see the fish they need to eat. Witzeman worries that without the force of the ESA, no one will have the authority to keep waterways unspoiled for eagles.

Because the complicated eagle support committee remains in force, state wildlife biologists are optimistic for the current breeding season. Nest watchers have observed 44 babies, but some eagle pairs haven’t laid their eggs yet. In 2009, 48 babies survived.

Historic rains have stirred up waterways, but in the words of one biologist, “there’s a hell of a fish population this year.”

James Driscoll, an Arizona Game and Fish Department biologist who has worked with Arizona eagles since 1991 when the annual baby count was 18, sees no looming problems, except for the state bureaucracy.

The eagle program is supported by so-called Heritage funds derived from the state lottery. They are increasingly eyed as a solution to a worsening state budget crisis.

“If so, we’ll have to reprioritize. We can’t lose 25 percent of our funding and continue to do the same thing,” said Driscoll.

Copyright © 2010 Green Right Now | Distributed by GRN Network

Image: Susanne Miller, USFWS

From Green Right Now Reports

An initiative to put an end to international trophy hunting and commercial trade in polar bear parts was defeated in a vote at the United Nations’ Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in Doha, Qatar. The same group also voted down a proposal to ban the export of Atlantic bluefin tuna, a fish used extensively in sushi and sashimi.

The proposal to protect the polar bear was sponsored by the United States and supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) among other groups. NRDC lawyers and conservation experts have asserted that the bears suffer unsustainably high harvest levels in the face of trophy hunters and a market for pelts, paws, teeth and other parts.

“While there has been a lot of positive momentum in polar bear conservation recently, this is a real setback,” said Andrew Wetzler, Director of NRDC’s Wildlife Conservation Project. “It keeps some of the most important populations of polar bears squarely in the crosshairs. We will continue work to find a new way to protect polar bears from this unsustainable hunt.”

A 2007 report by the U.S. Geological Survey offered a “conservative” estimate that the total population of polar bears would decline by over 70 percent in the next 45 years as global warming literally melts their habitat. A year later, the U.S. listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

The proposal before CITES sought to “uplist” the species to the more highly protected class 1 status under international treaty. It was defeated by a vote of 62-48 with 11 abstentions.

Image: NOAA

Meanwhile, only the United States, Norway and Kenya offered outright support for the Atlantic bluefin ban, while the European Union asked that any action be delayed until May 2011 to provide more time to respond to claims of overfishing.

Japan, which imports 80 percent of Atlantic bluefin, conceded that stocks were in trouble but echoed a growing theme that CITES should have no role in regulating tuna and other marine species.

Japan expressed willingness to accept lower quotas for bluefin tuna but wanted those to come from the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), which currently regulates the trade.

Windspire turbines. Image: Mariah Power

From Green Right Now Reports

Adobe Systems, Incorporated has completed installation of 20 Windspire wind turbines at its San Jose, Calif., headquarters.

“With the installation of the Windspires, we’re adding renewable energy to a long list of green measures Adobe has taken to lessen our environmental impact,” said Randall H. Knox, III, senior director, Global Workplace Solutions, Adobe. “We’ll continue to seek innovative green technology solutions to reduce our energy dependence and inspire others to go green.”

Urban Windspire installation. Image: Mariah Power

Each tower is 30 feet tall, 4 feet wide and weighs 650 pounds. The propeller-free, vertical-axis wind turbine is designed to harness wind power in urban, suburban and rural locations.

The new towers are located on Adobe’s sixth–floor patio, which doubles as a rooftop garden and recreational area above an office parking garage. Adobe’s three office towers create a wind tunnel effect from sustained winds off the Pacific Ocean.

Adobe’s green building efforts have earned the company the U.S. Green Building Council’s highest honors for green practices. Adobe is the first commercial office building to receive the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LEED®-EB Platinum certification for its San Jose headquarters and is the world’s first commercial enterprise to achieve a total of four Platinum certifications under the LEED program.

Since 2001, Adobe estimates it has saved approximately $6.7 million as a result of its energy and sustainability efforts. Those initiatives include energy-efficient lighting, real-time water meters for landscaping and an intelligent control system to help monitor building efficiencies.

Image: NYSERDA

New York State’s Industrial and Process Efficiency program will provide over $100 million over the next two years to help data centers and manufacturers control energy costs and improve competitiveness, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) announced this week.

Funding will go to energy studies and capital improvements designed to increase energy efficiency and reduce waste.

Already, NYSERDA has awarded three companies — Clough Harbour & Associates (Albany), Energy & Resource Solutions (New York), and Willdan Energy Solutions (New York) — approximately $2 million each to identify cost-effective energy savings options and educate businesses on available funding.

“New York is a great place to do business, and our funds will help leverage New York’s benefits as a business location while making the businesses that are here more competitive in the marketplace,” said Francis J. Murray, Jr., President and CEO of NYSERDA.

Last year, NYSERDA invested approximately $4 million to improve energy efficiency in the manufacturing and data center industries. According to the agency, those efforts reduced energy consumption by nearly 41 million kilowatt hours of electricity—the equivalent of supplying nearly 6,300 single family homes with electricity for an entire year.

New York has the nation’s second largest concentration of data centers. Recent studies conducted by Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found that New York data centers spend nearly $600 million per year on energy costs and projected that their energy consumption could double in three to five years.

The U.S. EPA announced Wednesday that it is taking several steps to increase the safety of flea and tick treatments for pets, including requiring better labeling and instructions to prevent misuse. The agency also promises to subject new and existing products to stricter testing.

The EPA found that small dogs are more likely to have an adverse reaction to spot-on flea treatments.

The move comes after hundreds of reports of pets falling ill, or even dying, nationwide after being treated with flea and tick treatments available on the consumer market. The agency reported that it logged more than 44,000 reports of bad reactions to topical flea and tick products in 2008, which was up considerably from the 28,000+ reported in 2007. The reactions included skin irritations, gastrointestinal problems that included vomiting and diarrhea and nervous system effects — trembling, seizures, depression.

Pinpointing the products targeted also is tricky, because there are dozens of flea treatments on the market. For now, the EPA’s review will focus on the “spot-on” treatments in which pet owners dab a small amount of a pesticide onto the pet’s fur to help repel fleas and ticks. While these products might fulfill their mission, they do so while leaving a poisonous coating on our furry friends, and expose people to the same chemicals.

That worries environmental advocates. Last year, the Natural Resources Defense Council reviewed the safety of treated tick and flea pet collars, finding that the level of residue on the animal was higher than what the EPA had projected when greenlighting these products.

Today’s acknowledgment by the government agency that flea and tick treatments can cause health effects “serves as a reminder that just because they’re in stores, does not mean they’re safe,” said Miriam Rotkin-Ellman, an NRDC scientist who’s been following this issue.

For more details about some of these ill effects, you can read Rotkin-Ellman’s blog, which includes tips for safer ways of dealing with pet pests. (Wash, wash, wash those dogs vigorously with soap and water; vacuum well and often if fleas are an issue in your area.)

Manufacturers, however, insist that the current line of consumer products are safe, if used correctly.

According to Georgia-based Merial Ltd., the maker of the Frontline tick and flea treatment, the vast majority of negative reactions to these products are “minor.” The Associated Press quoted the company as saying in a statement: “The number of adverse events reported for FRONTLINE has remained consistently low since the product’s introduction in 1996.”

The AP also quoted an official with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who said that most adverse reactions involve skin irritations and upset stomach (on pets, that is).

Expect to hear more on this issue.

In the meantime, the EPA advises pet owners to:

• Read labels carefully and follow all labeling “before exposing your pet to a pesticide.”

• Consult your veterinarian before using any pesticide on “weak, aged, medicated, sick, pregnant or nursing pets, or on pets that have previously shown signs of sensitivity to pesticide products”.

• Be sure not to use dog flea treatment on cats.

The EPA noted in its announcement that it has found that exposing cats to flea treatments intended for dogs is “a concern” and also that small dogs tend to be disproportionately negatively affected by these products. Regulators hope to find out more such useful information by improving “market surveillance” of flea treatments. The agency also will be requiring more reporting of post-sale adverse effects (presumably from veterinarians or manufacturers) so it can better evaluate the incidence of negative health effects.

You can read more on the EPA’s study of flea and tick treatments at the agency’s website.

A new study involving scientists from 13 organizations, universities and research institutions concludes that forest protection offers one of the most effective, practical, and immediate strategies to combat climate change.

The study, “Indigenous Lands, Protected Areas, and Slowing Climate Change,” was published in PLoS Biology, a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and makes specific recommendations for incorporating protected areas into overall strategies to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses from deforestation and degradation.

The report cites analyses showing that since 2002, deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon has been 7 to 11 times lower inside of indigenous lands and other protected areas than elsewhere. The authors say simulation models suggest that protected areas established between 2003 and 2007 could prevent an estimated area of 100,000 square miles of deforestation through 2050. That would roughly the size of the state of Colorado and represent enough carbon to equal a third of the world’s annual CO2 emissions.

“Deforestation leads to about 15 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, more than all the cars, trucks, trains, ships, and planes on earth. If we fail to reduce it, we’ll fail to stabilize our climate,” Taylor Ricketts, director of World Wildlife Fund’s science program and lead author of the study, said in a statement. “Our paper emphasizes that creating and strengthening indigenous lands and other protected areas can offer an effective means to cut emissions while garnering numerous additional benefits for local people and wildlife.”

The study “reinforces the wisdom behind global investments in protected areas,” says Gustavo A.B. da Fonseca, co-author of the study and Team Leader Natural Resources of the Global Environment Facility. “In addition to protecting globally important species and ecosystems, the 2,302 protected areas supported by the GEF alone span over 634 million hectares and together store an impressive 30 billion tons of CO2″

In addition, the study estimates that the cost of creating and better managing protected areas is lower than many other options to reduce emissions from deforestation.

This map shows carbon stocks and potential emissions of selected forest protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon. (Image: World Wildlife Fund)

AT&T said today it will have a tree planted in honor of each customer who opts in to paperless billing – up to 1 million trees in 2010. The program, which will be operated in conjunction with the Arbor Day Foundation, is open to customers of  AT&T residential home phone, AT&T U-verse TV, broadband and wireless customers nationwide.

According to PayItGreen, if a million customers switch to paperless billing, this would help to save 400,000 pounds of paper, avoid 6 million pounds of greenhouse gases, and prevent 4 million gallons of wastewater from discharging into lakes, streams, and rivers in a year. And, according to the EPA, planting 1 million trees can absorb more than 1 million tons of carbon dioxide, can provide oxygen for up to 4 million people to breathe in a day and can forest more than 1,400 acres of land.

AT&T said customers can opt in to paperless billing and activate the tree planting by going online to www.att.com/paperfree and following the instructions. After enrolling, customers can choose to have a tree planted where there is the greatest need — or they can choose between regions of the U.S. that have various needs for reforestation, such as helping provide clean drinking water in California or protecting rare birds in Michigan.

“The trees planted by AT&T will help clean the air and drinking water for millions of Americans, restore habitat for wildlife and restore our nation’s forests for future generations to enjoy,” John Rosenow, chief executive and founder of the Arbor Day Foundation, said in a statement.

AT&T also accepts wireless devices for recycling in all 2,000-plus of its retail locations. Working with customers and other channels, AT&T estimates it will collect roughly 14 million wireless devices for recycling by the end of 2011, which is the equivalent of keeping more than 920 tons of primary materials and more than 13 tons of toxic waste out of landfills.

“We encourage all of our customers to make the switch to paperless billing with us this year,” Philip Bienert, vice president of ATT.COM, said in a statement. “Whether they care about conserving natural resources, supporting reforestation, enjoying the convenience of reducing the amount of mail they receive each month – or all of these things – we’re offering them a simple way to make a difference with just a few clicks of the mouse or taps of the smartphone.”

Does knitting make you yawn, think of your grandmother or the smell of snow-soggy wool mittens drying on the kitchen radiator? Newsflash: Knitting’s gone organic, political, subversive, has even entered the realm of “High Art”. There’s knitting on buses. No, not people in buses knitting; buses that are covered with knitting. We’ll get to that.

Going organic with your knitting does take commitment

Want to go organic with your knitting? Read Ann Budd’s newest book Knitting Green: Conversations and Earth Friendly Projects, due out in April from Interweave Press. The book proved to be quite an eye-opener for me, a long-time knitter and fiber artist.  I’ve always regarded knitting, along with quilting as one of the original “green” pursuits because it’s done primarily with natural fibers which for the most part come from the earth, in the case of cotton, and from life in the case of wool and silk.

Since one of the book’s essays reminds us of “the sense of continuity inherent in practicing such an ancient art”,  it’s easy to regard this ancient art,  not to mention oneself, as pure and virtuous using these natural elements to create warm, functional, pretty things.

But other essays in the book, such as “The Gray of Green” and “The Meaning of Organic” really pulled this writer’s head out of the sand in terms of what the term “organic” actually means.  It seems that in order to process cotton there are quite a few non-earth-friendly things that must go on. The same goes for wool and silk. I never imagined how many silk worms give their lives to produce one pound of fine silk – about 2,600! PETA alert! For more on wool production, sheep farmer and knitwear designer Kristin Nicholas’ essay “Ode to Sheep”, is not to be missed.

Like so many things worth doing in this life, going organic takes a certain level of commitment (and maybe a little whining) and yet its collective and cumulative benefits are irrefutable. It really does take a village Hillary, and this book clearly embraces the concepts of our interdependence and oneness. Since timing is everything it seems important to note that going organic costs more too, which makes sense once one understands the rigor involved in rendering yarn organic, but it’s a tough sell in this economy. And don’t forget about all the tempting value-priced synthetics at the big box craft stores, and natural yarns dyed in jaw-dropping-but-not-eco-friendly colorways found in those upscale fiber shops which can entice even the most virtuous of yarn divas.

The book includes a variety of patterns for items knitted using earth-friendly fibers, such as a drop-in-the washer bag knit from hemp designed to hold “soap nuts”,  a substitute for phosphate-laden laundry detergent. Don’t miss the lovely lace tunic pattern knitted up in a yarn named “Allegoro”, after Mr. Global Warming himself, and a Kimono knitted with a silk yarn made from the ever-versatile soy, which the editors tell us is as soft as cashmere. Sign me up.

Knitting Green also suggests that those who are looking, and not finding, organic knitwear in the stores, should consider homemade.  “More and more yarn companies are rolling out 100% organic yarns…. Fashionistas who aren’t happy with the choices for organic knitwear available in stores should pick up the needles and walk into a yarn shop,” writes Budd.

Knitting as political activism

Anyone familiar with the crafts movement knows that knitting has enjoyed a colossal renaissance over the past several years among fiber aficionados, with creative souls discovering community, functionality, meditation, and even political activism. Would you like to see that bus covered in knitting, or vividly-colored scarves wrapped around the necks of Presidential statues as a way to raise money for the homeless? Then check out Yarn Bombing: Improving the urban landscape one stitch at a time by Mandy Moore and Leanne Prain to learn about the “Graffiti Knitting” phenomenon, a not-so-traditional, downright in-your-face kind of knitting practice.

Or Google Betsy Greer, who coined the term “Craftivism” and wrote her master’s thesis on knitting (why didn’t I think of that?)  According to Faythe Levine, coauthor of the book, Handmade Nation (and director of the documentary by the same name), Greer’s 2008 book Knitting for Good!: A Guide to Creating Personal, Social, and Political Change Stitch by Stitch “provides a platform for progressive, forward-thinking knitters and non-knitters alike who are interested in the idea that creativity can be a positive way to change the world we live in. It is chock-full of motivation, ideas, and inspiration to get you going or to keep you on the path you are already on.”

Suffice it to say, knitting: you’ve come a long way, baby!

Copyright © 2010 Green Right Now | Distributed by GRN Network

Image: Governors' Wind Energy Coalition

While there is no shortage of hot air swirling around various plans to harness wind energy to power our homes and businesses, a group of United States governors has hammered out a plan and is ready to take it all the way to the top.

On Tuesday, Iowa Governor Chet Culver and Rhode Island Governor Donald L. Carcieri released Great Expectations: U.S. Wind Energy Development, the Governors’ Wind Energy Coalition’s 2010 Recommendations. Culver and Carcieri are the chair and vice chair of the 29-state organization, which is attempting to shape a national policy to make wind power both viable and cost-effective.

The group formed over a year ago and began work on recommendations in December. The next step: Lobbying efforts to get a bill into Congress and on to President Barack Obama’s desk as soon as possible.

“We need all the clean and cost-effective resources we can generate. And we will only get there if we work together,” Culver said during a press conference called in conjunction with the report’s release. “Continued uncertainty will potentially cause the nation to surrender the industry to other countries. If China gets the job of supplying the U.S. wind industry, (jobs) could be lost forever.

“The good news is that we have increased wind generation dramatically over the past few years, but continued growth hinges on a more stable market. Given the immense advantages wind power provides to industry, consumers and the environment, it is clear that Congress must pass a strong federal renewable electricity policy so investors, developers and state policy makers are working together to achieve a common goal.”

Among the recommendations in the report:

• Adopt a renewable electricity standard (Known as  a RES, it sets benchmarks for the nation to reach a certain level of clean energy production by specific dates. Many believe that having a strong RES is the only way that clean energy technology can promise lenders and investors a measure of security, to show that the industry will not be buffeted by politics in the coming years.)
• Develop new interstate electric transmission system infrastructure as needed to provide access to premier renewable energy resources both on-shore and offshore
• Fully support coastal, deep water, and offshore wind energy technology and transmission research and development
• Streamline permitting processes for both offshore and on-shore wind energy development projects
• Expand the U.S. Department of Energy’s work with the states and the wind industry to accelerate innovation
• Extend the Treasury Department Grant Program in lieu of the Investment Tax Credit — providing immediate capital, and adopt a long-term renewable energy production tax credit with provisions to broaden the pool of eligible investors

“These recommendations could not be more timely,” Carcieri said. “Congressional action on the energy bill seems to have stalled. It is our hope that these recommendations — and the national bipartisan consensus they represent — will advance the energy deliberations now under way in Congress.”