| Friday, July 22, 2005 |  |
| NEWS BYTES | 0 comments |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 06:07 EXXON WANTS TO SAVE THE TIGERS Recognizing Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington, ExxonMobil ran a quarter-page ad on the op-ed page of Monday's New York Times headlined "Saving Tigers." According to Exxon's website, the company has given more than $9 million since 1995 to efforts to save endangered tigers. Exxon has claimed the tiger as its brand mascot since the 1930s. While "preserving the endangered Bengal tiger" did make its way in to an early State Department press release on the summit, India's nuclear industry, the global war on terrorism and foreign investment in India were the dominate themes of the meeting. The agreement to help India further develop its nuclear energy capacity is part of a larger U.S.-India Energy Dialogue that also includes an Oil and Gas Working Group that "will endeavor to strengthen mutual energy security and promote stable energy markets." Several NGOs have targeted ExxonMobil, criticizing the company for violating human rights and destroying the environment. ---------------------------------- INDUSTRY LOBBYIST BLOWS SMOKE FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA ADVOCATES Jim Tozzi, the industry friendly lobbyist who helped create the little-known "Data Quality Act," is offering his assistance to medical marijuana advocates who are using the Act to undermine government claims that marijuana has no accepted medical value. Enacted in 2000, the Data Quality Act has been used by businesses to challenge government reports on such things as climate change and diet. The Los Angeles Times writes that Tozzi's support of medical marijuana "had more than just altruistic motives. Since its inception, the Data Quality Act has been under attack as a weapon of big business, a stealthy way to keep federal agencies tied in knots over what constitutes sound science. Eager to blunt such criticism and dash attempts to thwart his law in Congress, Tozzi has pushed public interest groups to start deploying the act against the bureaucrats." ----------------------------------- COKE'S SWEET INTENTIONS "Coca-Cola will work with Weber Shandwick this fall to promote its new, seemingly selfless, Live It children's fitness campaign in schools across the country." The PR firm will "focus on generating local publicity for schools that participate in the week-long program." Kirsten Witt, Coke's "nutrition communication manager," said the $4 million Live It campaign would not address childhood obesity or encourage students to drink Coke, adding that "the company's logo will not appear on Live It materials." In addition to PR and marketing, Coke is paying for campaign "posters, pedometers, and nutrition education materials along with prizes to offer children who meet the program's exercise goal of walking 10,000 steps in a week." In other sugary news, the Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to require labels on sodas warning about "obesity, tooth decay and diabetes." |
| The Washington Post's Mensa Invitational | 109 comments |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 01:47 The Washington Post's Mensa Invitational once again asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing of one letter, and supply a new definition. Here are this year's [link] winners: 1. Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period. 2. Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an asshole. 3. Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with. 4. Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly. 5. Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future. 6. Foreploy: Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid. 7. Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high. 8. Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it. 9. Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late. 10. Hipatitis: Terminal coolness. 11. Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.) 12. Karmageddon: It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it's like, a serious bummer. 13. Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you. 14. Glibido: All talk and no action. 15. Dopeler effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly. 16. Arachnoleptic fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you've accidentally walked through a spider web. More > |
| New Hybrid Cars Emphasize Horsepower, Not Increased Gas Mileage | 1 comment |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 01:44 Auto Greenwashing: New Hybrid Cars Emphasize Horsepower, Not Increased Gas Mileage July 17, 2005 Hybrid Cars Burning Gas in the Drive for Power By MATTHEW L. WALD WASHINGTON, July 16 - Mark Buford is happy with the Honda Accord hybrid that he bought six months ago, and he has already driven it 13,000 miles. He was determined to buy a hybrid electric car, he said, and this one is clean, "green" and accelerates faster than the nonhybrid version. He just cannot count on it to save much gasoline. Many people concerned with oil consumption, including President Bush and members of Congress, are pointing to hybrids - vehicles with electric motors as well as internal combustion engines - as a way to reduce fuel use and dependence on imported oil. The first ones to reach the market did that; the two-seat Honda Insight, introduced in December 1999, was rated at 70 miles per gallon, and it was followed by the five-seat Toyota Prius, also built for reduced fuel consumption. Those cars have no nonhybrid equivalents. Then came the Civic hybrid, designed to perform almost as well as the original, only using a lot less gasoline. But the pendulum has swung. The 2005 Honda Accord hybrid gets about the same miles per gallon as the basic four-cylinder model, according to a review by Consumer Reports, a car-buyer's guide, and it saves only about two miles a gallon compared with the V-6 model on which it is based. Thanks to the hybrid technology, though, it accelerates better. Hybrid technology, it seems, is being used in much the same way as earlier under-the-hood innovations that increased gasoline efficiency: to satisfy the American appetite for acceleration and bulk. Despite the use of hybrids to achieve better performance with about the same fuel economy, consumers who buy the cars continue to get a tax credit that the Internal Revenue Service allows under a "clean fuels" program that does not take fuel savings into account. And the image of hybrids as fuel-stingy workhorses persists. In a June 15 speech at an energy forum, Mr. Bush proposed a tax credit of up to $4,000 to "encourage people to make right choices in the marketplace that will make us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and to help improve our environment." But some hybrids save hardly any fuel, energy efficiency advocates say. "The new ones are all being used for power," said Kateri Callahan, the president of the Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit advocacy group based here. Hybrids should be encouraged, Ms. Callahan said, because their electric components some day could be useful in an all-electric car, perhaps running on a fuel cell. But she added that the government should be careful about which hybrids it subsidizes through tax benefits. Now, she said, the car companies are "building to the high-end market. They think people want performance." The companies may have sized up their customers pretty well. Mr. Buford, for example, bought his Accord hybrid in January, a month after the model came out, replacing a 2001 Accord coupe. Mr. Buford, a telecommunications analyst at Kraft Foods who works in the Chicago area, said he decided on a hybrid because he wanted to "go green," although he added, "I wasn't willing to make any of the trade-offs normally associated with a hybrid." He said he liked the way that the electric motor on his new car kicked in early during acceleration, at a speed range in which the V-6 gasoline engine is relatively weak. And its emissions of smog-forming pollutants are low, he said. (The Environmental Protection Agency puts the hybrid and nonhybrid Accords in the same emissions category). If sold at list price, the hybrid costs about $3,300 more than the V-6 with no hybrid. Mr. Buford said he was not sure if the gas savings would ever pay for the difference. But in that price range - about $30,000 - many buyers are not looking for a car that is the cheapest to buy or to operate. Mr. Buford said he expected that when he files his taxes next April, the purchase will cut his tax bill by about $600. The tax credit will begin to be phased out in 2006. The Accord hybrid is not alone in using technology for power; the Toyota Highlander and the Lexus RX330, two premium vehicles, both gained horsepower when they were produced as hybrids. When Lexus created a hybrid version of the RX330 it kept the same 3.3-liter engine, but to get across the idea that the hybrid had as much power as a vehicle with a 4-liter engine it named it the RX400h. In the Accord, the mechanism was simple. Honda took the model with the 3.0-liter V-6 engine, which generates 240 horsepower, and added a 16-horsepower electric system. That is in contrast to the Civic, in which Honda pulled out the standard 1.7-liter engine and replaced it with a 1.3-liter engine when it made a hybrid version of the car. Combined with the electric drive, the car's horsepower remained roughly constant. Consumer Reports called the hybrid portion of the Accord a "green turbocharger." The main benefit is in getting from zero to 60 miles per hour in 6.9 seconds, compared with 9.0 seconds for the basic four-cylinder model. A Honda spokesman, Andrew Boyd, said the company already had hybrids that minimize fuel use, notably the Insight, for customers whose top priority was to save gasoline, and the Civic for customers who wanted a car that performs the same but uses less fuel. Performance in the Civic hybrid is slightly lower than the original model, Mr. Boyd said, and as a result it gets 36 miles per gallon instead of 29. Mr. Boyd said the Accord split the benefit between fuel economy and performance. He did not describe its selling point as the ability to save gas, but "the appeal of a hybrid." "The closer you get to the mainstream buyer, fuel economy is still part of the equation, but a smaller part," he said. "In the Accord, people will pay all kinds of money for more performance. We can deliver that performance, but in addition, with better fuel economy." Hybrid technology seems to be heading the way of earlier technologies, which got more work out of a gallon of gasoline, like four valves per cylinder and variable valve timing, that have been used in the end to make cars accelerate faster, rather than to hold them steady in performance and to cut fuel consumption. Daniel A. Lashof, a car expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, "The horsepower wars have really gotten out of control in the last few years." Acceleration is one indication of horsepower. According to the E.P.A., the average new vehicle accelerates from zero to 60 m.p.h. in under 10 seconds, down from 14 seconds in the early 1980's. The average weight has increased by about 750 pounds in the same period. If cars in the 2004 model year had the same weight and acceleration as cars did in 1987, according to the agency, they would get 20 percent better gas mileage. Consumer Reports, in an article published in May, found that in actual on-the-road conditions the Accord hybrid averaged 25 m.p.g., versus 24 m.p.g. for the 4-cylinder model and 23 m.p.g. for the nonhybrid V-6. The E.P.A. figures show a larger benefit for the hybrid, but the agency's fuel economy figures are considered by many to be inaccurate because they do not reflect the way cars are actually driven. The two-miles-per-gallon increase over the V-6, about 8 percent, is still significant, and federal tax rules, which are based on cost and not mileage benefit achieved, still give an Accord hybrid buyer a substantial subsidy. But 8 percent is not in the range that would make a substantial dent in American oil consumption. If every car in the country were converted to a hybrid with that improved mileage, the gain would be swallowed up in three to four years by growth in driving demand. Mr. Buford said he got just what he wanted from the Accord, a hybrid with no sacrifices. "I wasn't prepared to give up anything to 'go green' - not performance, amenities, or space," he said. Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company More > |
| City of Seattle Starts Down Long Road of Producing "Zero Waste" for its Landfill | 10 comments |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 01:42 City of Seattle Starts Down Long Road of Producing "Zero Waste" for its Landfills Monday, July 18, 2005 By DEBERA CARLTON HARRELL SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER The city of Seattle is talking trash. Moving beyond recycling to preventing garbage itself as the next generation of social and civic responsibility, Seattle Public Utilities is launching an initiative called Wasteless in Seattle. With the long-term goal of "zero waste," the city hopes to drastically reduce the need for landfills and to lower disposal, transportation and energy costs. Through various programs, including mandatory recycling and fines for violators beginning in January, the city is urging its employees, residents and businesses to rethink how they dispose of everything from egg shells to electronics. "We're going to have to make use of the landfills on the east side of the mountains for the foreseeable future, but we're darned if we're not going to get massive amounts of waste reduced from that flow," said City Councilman Jim Compton, chairman of the Utilities and Technology Committee. Which is where the trash talk comes in. Garbage prevention is far more than recycling, city officials say. It is a comprehensive strategy that includes a "triple bottom line" -- environmental and public-health considerations as well as economic ones. "Recycling is throwing something away that can be made into a different product, but waste prevention means not making the waste in the first place" said Chris Luboff, solid-waste planning supervisor for Seattle Public Utilities. "We're trying to broaden that concept." Luboff said the city's budget, approved late last year, includes an extra $400,000 a year for waste prevention. Meet with Seattle Public Utilities officials, and they will show you paper-free PowerPoint presentations of garbage-free programs. Copy machines are now set to default to double-sided copies on recycled paper. After all, each year the city of Seattle uses a heap of paper higher than Mount Rainier, said Jetta Antonakos, head of the utility's new paper-waste-reduction effort called "paper cuts." The city wants more electronic documents and presentations and fewer multiple copies of large reports. Then there is "product stewardship," which is an effort to encourage manufacturers to take more environmental responsibility for their products and to create materials that cause fewer disposal problems. The effort includes "take-back" programs being developed for computer monitors, furniture and possibly even prescription drugs. The utility is also moving toward more "green purchasing" -- buying non-toxic window cleaners, janitorial supplies and "environmentally preferable" electronics. Increasingly, "if someone wants to sell a product to us, they have to go through a screening process," Antonakos said. "In the old days, garbage was mostly organics, then came the modern era with plastics and bottles and tin cans, which are relatively easy to recycle," Luboff said. "But now, we have more complicated, combination products like cell phones and computers, with cathode-ray tubes, lead in the glass, toxics in the plastic and other hazardous materials." Seattle, which became a national recycling leader 15 years ago, is also embarking on an aggressive program to reach a goal of diverting 60 percent of garbage from landfills by recycling. Now that percentage is less than 40 percent. On July 1, many North End businesses such as restaurants were given new containers to encourage recycling; South End businesses will begin the program Aug. 1. Since April, residents have been converting to 90-gallon containers under a new mandatory recycling program. As of January, fines will be levied against those who throw away such things as paper and cans, which should be recycled. "Taking environmental and health concerns into consideration has prompted us to look at everything, including waste, differently," said Julie Vorhes, solid-waste planner for Seattle Public Utilities. "For example, a triple-bottom line asks, 'What's the difference in pollution and health impacts of using biodiesel instead of diesel?' " Vorhes said costs are hard to pinpoint because the effort is so new. "We can say that recycling saves money," she said. "But waste prevention is a different animal. We're not just asking the question about economics." Luboff said it costs the city to collect and inspect recycled materials and to promote programs, but if customers can divert 40 to 60 percent of material from landfills, the city would save $2 million a year. Some programs, developed in the past few years, are growing -- and showing promise. Use-It-Again Seattle, a program featuring community "garage sales" throughout the city, allows residents to drop off and pick up items free (no electronics, appliances, couches or mattresses). The effort recycled 60 tons of metal last year, and an estimated 221 tons of materials were reused and diverted from landfills. Another initiative, the Take-It-Back Network, saw about 600 tons of computers monitors and other components returned in 2004 to participating retail stores. There are also consortiums that will intercept items that shouldn't go in landfills, such as the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Coalition. A city "green building" program, aimed at recycling, water and energy conservation and waste prevention, is also reaping results, city officials say. In 11 city projects last year, nearly 57,000 tons -- or $560,000 worth -- of salvaged or reused materials were kept out of landfills. "That's a big recapture," Luboff said, noting that the city -- taxpayers -- ultimately must pay for everything thrown away. FOR MORE INFORMATION Call Seattle Public Utilities at 206-684-3000 or visit www.seattle.gov/html/CITIZEN/utility.htm P-I reporter Debera Carlton Harrell can be reached at 206-448-8326 or deberaharrell@seattlepi.com. © 1998-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer More > |
| Challenges of Buying Local & Organic Indian Country | 0 comments |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 01:40 Challenges of Buying Local & Organic Indian Country Organic food is a healthy deal © Indian Country Today July 19, 2005. All Rights Reserved Posted: July 19, 2005 by: Jean Johnson / Indian Country Today Analysis PORTLAND, Ore. - Liz Woody, member of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs and director of the indigenous leadership program at Portland's Ecotrust, sent a message recently about tribal salmon sales down at the Ecotrust building. ''Bring cash and a decent size cooler or cooler bag. The market goes from 4 - 8 p.m. in the Ecotrust parking lot on NW 10th Avenue, between Irving and Johnson. You will be glad that you did,'' she wrote. It came as a surprise, though, when an organic farmer and regular seller at one of the city's Saturday farmer's markets fired back a stern missive. ''I've supported the tribal catches for years, but where are the Indians when it comes time to buy local and organic at my stand? There's one Indian woman that buys my stuff regularly and that's it. It gets old having the deal go one way when we're all after the same thing - living gently on the earth and freeing ourselves from bondage to the corporations. Yes, it costs more, but the tribal fishers aren't shy about getting $4/pound for their fish.'' The point is worth considering. Why is there a perception among at least some buy-local folks that they aren't getting the quid pro quo from their tribal friends that they think fair? Money, of course, is the obvious conclusion. Most the folks at the farmer's markets look fairly affluent - or at least middle class. Regular customer Bob Smith said it is ''spendy'' to buy organic from local growers. ''It costs me from $25 to $30 each week on fresh vegetables, but then I eat a lot of beans and steam my own whole grains so it balances out, money-wise. Also, I can't remember the last time I bought anything packaged or processed. As far as I'm concerned, if people would get off the ''Capri Sun routine'' and quit sucking down soda pop, they'd have enough to buy their food responsibly. To me that means going local, in season, and organic.'' The New York Times ran an article in October 2004 on the California strawberry industry and its use of the ozone-depleting chemical methyl bromide. ''Planting time is near in John Steinbeck's old haunts. A fork on the back of a tanker-tractor dips 12 inches down into the soil and emits a gaseous cocktail to kill any fungus or microorganism that could threaten next spring's strawberries. Mexican workers, wearing antiseptic white suits but no face masks, follow close behind, tamping down the white plastic sheeting that covers the loamy fields. They are fumigating Will Garroutte's strawberry fields with methyl bromide, a pesticide so witheringly effective it is a farmer's dream. But it is not an environmentalist's.'' While it's true that strawberries, along with tomatoes and peppers, are some of the most heavily dosed commodities we eat, the writer's description of the ''gaseous cocktail'' - a biocide that kills every living thing in the ground - leaves a haunting, graphic reminder of how we have relinquished the growing of our food to large producers. More, it underscores attitudes about using highly toxic pesticides and fertilizers that permeate the agricultural sector. Clearly this is not the kind of behavior that tribal values support. Could it be that part of the problem lies in the marketing? The packaging? The convenience? The appearance of large, unblemished fruits and vegetables stacked up to appeal to the eye in the stores? But any way you slice it, it's a problem. Moms and dads in Indian country are busy to the hilt seeing that the kids have what they need. Getting out on Saturday morning to buy local might not even be possible for the 40 percent of the tribal population living on reservations. But now that the question has been raised, it might be something to ponder. Gathering roots and berries and such is certainly one way to stay connected to the land and its rhythms in a respectful way. Buying local and organic just might be another. |
| Cocoa Beans from Chocolate from Slave Labor Plantations in Africa | 4 comments |
| 22 Jul 2005 @ 01:39 DM, Nestle & Cargill Sued for Sourcing Cocoa Beans for Chocolate from Slave Labor Plantations in Africa THE AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER July 19, 2005, Issue #414 Monitoring Corporate Agribusiness From a Public Interest Perspective ADM, CARGILL AND NESTLE SUED TO END TRAFFICING, TORTURE AND FORCED CHILD LABOR ON AFRICAN COCOA FARMS GINA KEATING, REUTERS: A human rights group has sued three U.S. companies in federal court in Los Angeles to force them to step up efforts to end child labor on African farms that supply cocoa beans used to make chocolate products. The International Labor Right Fund filed suit on behalf of former child laborers against Nestle, Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM) and privately held Cargill Inc. on Thursday claiming the companies are involved in trafficking, torture and forced labor of Mali children who were enslaved to work on Ivory Coast farms. The lawsuit comes soon after U.S. and European chocolate and cocoa industry missed a July 1 deadline imposed by federal law for adopting protocols to eliminate child labor from the West African cocoa supply chain. U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, one of the protocol's authors, said earlier this month he was disappointed that the industry had been unable to certify that its chocolate products were not made with child labor but was satisfied it was "committed to moving forward." In a statement, the International Labor Rights Fund blasted the industry for dragging its feet and refusing "to exchange a small portion of its massive profits to ensure sufficient return for farmers and workers." Representatives for Archer Daniels Midland of Decatur, Illinois, one of world's largest agricultural processing companies, and Cargill, an agricultural products and services provider, had no comment on the lawsuit. A Nestle spokeswoman also would not comment on the lawsuit, but said the company was working with the International Cocoa Initiative foundation created by the Harkin-Engel protocol. "Obviously we strongly believe it is important to make sure that cocoa is grown responsibly without abusive labor practices," Nestle spokeswoman Barb Skoog said. The lawsuit claims the Mali children were beaten and forced to work 12 to 14 hours a day with no pay and little food or sleep. The three main plaintiffs said they were ages 12 to 14 when were taken from their homes, but the lawsuit covers "thousands" of children who were allegedly enslaved from 1996 until the present to work in the Ivory Coast region. The claims were brought under the Alien Tort Claims Act, which has recently been used by human rights groups to sue multinational corporations for violations of international law in countries outside the United States. Similar lawsuits were brought against Unocal Corp by villagers who claimed they were enslaved by Myanmar's military government to work on a pipeline for Unocal and other entities. Settlements in those cases were finalized earlier this year. [ July 16, 2005 More > |