In Australia the government are introducing an emission trading or cap and trade scheme.  There are major concerns about the level of reduction the government wants to sign up to and also whether it will actually work.

As Australians we do need to take action about carbon reduction.  We are both the most vulnerable continent for feeling the effects of global warming and also we are the worst greenhouse emitters per head than any other country on the planet.  We emit even more than the USA and Canada who are our nearest competitors for this wooden spoon.  This is at least in part due to our huge coal industry.

The head of the Australia Institute’s Think Tank says that the Federal Government’s emissions trading scheme will have too many permits and will not reduce carbon emissions.

The Australia Institute’s executive director, Dr Richard Denniss, said the scheme’s flaws related to the 5 to 15 per cent emissions reduction targets, which he described as ”ridiculously low”, and he said there would be too many permits.  Dr Dennis said that “We won’t achieve the policy goal, which is to reduce emissions.”

Dr Denniss told the Senate that ”[If] we pass this legislation, we’ve got it for the next 10 years. And anyone that’s got a good idea a year later, it’s not going to help. This legislation is designed to not be tinkered with.”

Professor Clive Hamilton, from the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, said the proposed scheme had damaged Australia’s reputation. A reduction target of at least 25 per cent needed to be set if the Government wanted credibility on the world stage.   Australia would be better off taking no policy than the proposed model to the December climate change talks in Copenhagen, he said.

”It not only lowers the ambition of the world community but also excludes Australia from being a forceful player in negotiating … a strong international agreement.”

It is hard to see how exempting large emitters ignoring the 1.9 million small to medium businesses is going to help us reduce our carbon footprint. These same small businesses are currently suffering from financial stress, the business owners and managers are overworked and simply don’t feel able to handle anything new. Many don’t really understand what global warming is about or why it matters. 

We urgently need unambiguous communication so that small to medium businesses accept the reality of the need for change and also how easy it can be to make significant reductions with minimal time input and save money at the same time.

We also need to help low income households reduce their carbon footprint with more efficient heating and cooling and effective public transport.  We should NOT be giving them even more cash hand outs as “compensation” as currently promised by the government.  All households need to come on board and stop wasting power.

We need a clear message that going green applies to all of us, is easy and saves money - just “go for a grumpy walk and just turn it off”.  If every small business and householder just went around each office and home and did this it would be relatively easy for every one to reduce their carbon emissions and their power bill by 15-20%. At present we are told it will be difficult and it only applies to big business.  Such a wrong message - we all need to pull together.

A Brief given to the Victorian Government advises that the state should only bother with green measures if they are more cost-effective than alternatives.  They have been told to rethink programs such as subsidies for solar farms and hybrid car fleets because these will not contribute to any additional emission cuts under the federal scheme.

The Greens have concerns about the cost of emission permits being reduced by the actions of households, councils and governments, hence reducing industry’s incentive to cut emissions. This is more than simply an economic debate. Individuals and households should also be reducing their emissions. Achieving sustainability is a grassroots exercise that involves the entire community, and Australians are becoming aware of the need to remake the economy and society. The momentum must not be lost.

An additional concern is whether the legislation and also the international agreements reached in Copenhagen will be flexible enough to take account of emerging technology.  At present this does not appear to be the case.  Senator Wong, the Minister for Climate Change, rejected spending on biochar, a form of carbon capture in soil research because that is not listed in the protocol.  Thankfully some soil carbon storage research will now be funded in the agriculture budget but that begs the requirement for the legislation to be flexible and allow for new and future technology.

If the ETS cannot deliver real carbon reductions it is really a form of “greenwash” saying we signed Kyoto and have done something before the next election. The big problem is that the government looks ahead 3 years to the next election, Big Biz CEO’s also look to the short term of their contracts and bonuses.  Who looks ahead for our children?

Bags hold an important place in our lives. They are sometimes referred to as the best personal carriers. They are made of various stuffs like cotton, synthetic, leather and so. But when it comes to general usage like for shopping, the names of two types of bags viz. plastic made and paper made bags come to our intellect. Both are fine, but the question is, which one is the best suited to our requirements. Lets discuss the peculiarities related with the two.

You might be thinking that paper bags are not as durable as those made of plastic. Also, we see that the latter are more commonly used than the former one. But, do you know plastic is a stuff which is really hazardous to the environment. It takes thousands of year to decompose. If burnt, it emits poisonous gases which again pollutes the environment. If buried in the ground, it makes the soil infertile. If thrown in the sea, it pollutes the sea water and proves to be a threat for the life of the sea creatures. One can imagine, how hazardous is plastic to our planet.

This perilous nature of plastic had forced the governments of many cities of the world to put a ban on the use of poly-bags, which are a major source of plastic pollution. Few cities of the world in which these polythene carriers are either completely or partially banned include San Francisco, New York, Texas, Germany, Dhaka, China, Kenya and Ireland to name a few. Even the government of Delhi had issued guidelines against the use of polythene. However, later on the government changed its decision to completely ban the polythene, due to some reasons. Government suggested the manufacturers to set up the recycling units on the basis of “polluter pays principles”. But the government has not completely given up the plan to ban these polythene carriers, it is in the pipeline.

In this context, paper bags are the best option. No doubt, they are unconventional, but they are eco-friendly and easy to recycle. Nowadays, there are various types of paper made bags available in the market. They are not only good looking, but also have ample of space to carry goods and are quite durable. The handmade paper bags available nowadays are designed to suit specific requirements which include carrying gifts, carrying wine, shopping etc. There is a separate bag to serve each purpose. Although, multipurpose bags are also made from paper. They are proving to be the best substitute for plastic or polythene carriers in the modern context.

Now, as we have told you every significant fact related to plastic and paper bags, It’s upon you which one to choose. The hazardous and non-disposable polythene, or the environment friendly and elegant paper bags.

Even with the economy cooling, “Green” products remain — well — if not hot, still very warm.

In a report released in February ‘09, market research firm Mintel predicts 19% growth for eco-friendly products through 2013, even though the current economic downturn is expected to negatively impact sales through this year.

But “Green” can mean a lot of different things to different people. And that produces some understandable confusion for consumers as to what is truly “Green” and what is instead “Greenwashed”.

[Greenwashing is when companies over-hype the positive environmental impact of their products or policies. Tsk-tsk.]

Each and every day we review green deals and giveaways before posting them online to ensure the products being promoted are indeed eco-friendly. Some are easy to assess, like a sweepstakes for a Prius. But many times, the green aspect of a product is not as clear-cut as it is for a hybrid car.

To help us determine what’s green and what’s not, we looked to criteria established by trusted non-profits, such as Green America, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Consumer Reports, and compiled the following rules-of-thumb:

1) Above all, use common sense. Ask yourself …

• Is the product friendly to the planet?
• Does it help save energy on the road and at home; conserve water; support organic and sustainable farming?
• Is it nontoxic, recycled, cruelty-free and/or fair-trade?

2) Look for Certifications/Associations

Is the product certified or does the manufacturer have a membership association? Here is just a small sample of the many, many green certifications and associations out there. Consumer Reports “Greener Choices” website has a terrific Eco-label section which can help you sift through the meaning and relative significance of various labels.

• Household Products — Green Seal; Certified Biodegradable
• Cosmetics — Leaping Bunny; Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Signatory
• Food — Organic Certification; Marine Stewardship Council; Certified Humane Raised and Handled
• Wood — Forest Stewardship Council
• Green Business Practices — Green America Approved

3) Read the Ingredient List

If a company or product doesn’t have certification/membership affiliations, is there some way for consumers to evaluate their green claim? For example, products that claim to be natural should include a complete ingredient list.

4) Is the Product Fair Trade Certified?

Fair trade certification ensures not only that the producer of a good is paid a fair price but also that social and environmental standards are met during production of that good. Many companies may claim their products are fair trade, but you should double check to see whether the product has actual certification from a fair trade labeling organization. In the U.S., that organization is TransFair USA (though at this time, they only certify agricultural products, like coffee and tea.)

5) Is the Product Vegan or Vegetarian?

According to a report by U.N. climate experts, animal production is responsible for 18 per cent of all greenhouse emissions, most of it emitted in the form of methane from belching cattle. Yes, that’s right — gassy cows. So shifting your purchases to vegetarian or vegan products — not only food, but items such as shoes and beauty products — can mean fewer burping Bessies and less harm to the environment.

Shoppers looking to go green are welcome to use these rules of thumb as a starting point when trying to evaluate the “greenness” of product. But in order to become true green consumers, there is no substitute for first-hand knowledge. We highly encourage shoppers to become as educated as possible on what is and isn’t considered green these days, and how they can evaluate green claims. Be forewarned — trying to decipher what’s green is not a perfect science, but the non-profits mentioned above are excellent places to start your coursework. Good luck!

Report Links:

Mintel Finds Fewer Americans Interested in Going “Green” During Recession (Feb 09)
Livestock a major threat to environment (Nov 06)

Plasma Gasification Plant (PGP) projects are being developed by at least five gas plasma technology companies, and there are real benefits to be obtained from this technology for the destruction of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).

There is some debate still whether the process has been demonstrated to be a vaible technology which can be reliably operated by our waste management companies at reasonable cost and in compliance with all emissions regulations. However, the consensus seems to be largely in acceptance now that the technology is largely proven and inherently cleaner than incineration.

Although, gasification is used as a power generating technology, and gas plasma plants do provide a power feed-in to the local power grid, it should be realised by all that the purpose of selecting plasma gasification is currently that of achieving maximum waste mass destruction. The intent of the PGP is primarily to provide an efficent and clean method of dispoing of large quantities of residual MSW. Plasma gasification, although it does produce energy from waste is not primarliy an Energy from Waste (EfW) or Waste to Energy technology. There are other better proven, more efficient, and potentially always also cheaper ways to produce Energy from Waste, such as incineration.

PGPs suffer a high sacrificial load from the use of power at the electrodes to generate the plasma, and energy is also expended before the MSW reaches the plasma zone in the gasifier in chopping up and ensuring that the particle size of the waste is quite small. For this reason they do expend a large proportion of the power generated just in maintaining their own internal power demand.

However, as a waste destruction method producing an inert residue without creating at the same time high levels of toxic gaseous emissions the gas plasma process excels according to reports made to date. It has every reason to be cleaner as well because the reactions which take place in the plasma state take place so quickly and completely that the toxic organic chemicals produced in other combustion processes simply don’t get a change to be produced.

For a waste management process PGP therefore holds a very good prospect of adoption, as it is a process which is very efficient at diverting waste away from landfill, and thus scores highly among local authority waste disposal engineers who are constantly seeking to comply with regulations to reduce the amount of organic waste sent to landfill.

The PGP process however, also holds another merit and that is that it is being viewed more favourably by the public than incineration, and one main reason for that would be its clean emissions record when compared with incinerators historically.

Throughout Europe the requirement for BMW to be reduced by ever larger percentages necessitates the use of new technology to achieve this high rate of waste diversion, even after high recycling has also been achieved.

Look out for a plasma gasification plant appearing in a district near you soon, and look favourably upon it!

Residential solid trash, also called urban solid waste and municipal solid garbage, is refuse that normally comes from households. It is either in solid or semisolid form. There are five general categories of solid garbage that include:

1) Biodegradable waste: food and kitchen
2) Recyclable material: paper, glass, bottles, cans, metals, and certain plastics.
3) Stagnant rubbish : construction, dirt, rocks, and debris.
4) Assorted waste: clothing, plastics,etc.
5) Household hazardous waste: toxic such as paints, chemicals, light bulbs, spray cans, fertilizer and pesticide containers, batteries,etc.

Cities and towns generally contracts out solid garbage removal services. They will submit bids, assess each bid, and recommend a company. The rubbish company will bill the city or town. These companies are privately owned so if a person has a lot of waste after a project such as home renovation, they can hire a garbage removal company to remove the refuse.

Because of environmental regulations and a growing demand for a cleaner environment, junk companies are now performing the following services:

Recycling Programs: Curbside recycling is usually available to all residential customers. Customers will separate their recyclables according to paper and plastics for curbside pick up. Depending on the contract, this is normally done every two weeks. There can be special recycling programs such as Christmas tree recycling. The trees are then made into mulch. Other special programs a town or city can offer are Spring and Fall Clean Ups. They are designed to encourage residents to get rid of large amounts of garbage.

Hazardous Materials: Every year, millions of people accumulate such hazardous waste products as batteries, paints and stains, cleansers and polishes, motor oil, antifreeze, pesticides and herbicides,etc. These are dangerous to the environment, people, and animals. A rubbish removal service is trained to remove these products safely and responsibly. They will sort and categorize the hazardous materials before storing them in containment units. The contracted hazardous waste hauler packs the items in drums and sends them to hazardous rubbish incinerator or other treatment facility for proper disposal. Some materials, such as used motor oil, lead-acid batteries and antifreeze, are recycled.

Compost Services: Many cities and towns offer a compost service. They will provide compost bins for people to place such items as kitchen food garbage, newspaper, and other items that can be composted. A contracted junk removal company will pick up the compost left on residential curb sides.

Energy Recovery Plants: Plants that convert rubbish to energy are popping up all over the country. These plants burn garbage to heat water which produces steam in much the same way power plants burn coal, oil, natural gas, or wood. The steam can cause a turbine to produce electricity. Junk removal companies that have energy recovery plants in their area will make use of these services.

Special Handling waste Removal Services: Cities and towns will have a contracted service to remove large items such as tires, air conditioners, household appliances, and construction debris. Tires are sent to a recycling or recovery facility and household appliances, after chlorofluorocarbon gas removal, are taken to recycling stations.

Individual Contracted waste Removal Services: There are situations where a person has too much waste to be removed by a city or town removal service. They will then enlist the services of a private company. They are trained and certified to dispose of waste, compost, and recycle residential goods. For a nominal fee, a company will come to your home and remove all of your excess trash.

Because of growing environmental concerns, most companies dispose of waste in ways that will have the least environmental impact. You will feel good knowing that you are doing your part to protect and conserve the environment.

A lot goes into making new products; energy, fuel, non organic materials and more. If we buy more items used, we will use less of the things that contribute to hurting God’s planet. Plus, we are being good stewards by making the most of everything we buy and use!

Some things we can buy used:

* movies. what’s the difference, really. used is cheaper, the same and better for the planet.

* music. see above.

* clothes. thrift stores can save you tons of money as well.

* books. buy them used or go to the library.

* cars. how used is up to you.

* furniture and appliances. garage sales and eBay are great places to start.

* homes. old houses are cool anyway.

* household items. there are many items you can pick up at a local good will or garage sale that are just as nice as going to the store and buying new.

* electronics. just be careful and always try it our before you buy.

* bikes. have you ever seen the price tag for a new bike recently. yikes! buy used and ride the bike as often as you can instead of driving. Double green for your trouble! lol.

* video games and systems. places like game stop are great. you can buy used, beat the game and then trade it in for another used game. too cool, right?

* toys. obviously clean and good condition are key here. if you look you can find some goodies. i have found a lot of cute items that my kids love.

As you can see, there are many ways we can help contribute to being good stewards of God’s planet. Including, buying used and spending our money wisely!

We’ve all read the stories about how municipal water systems in the United States are contaminated with toxins such as  lead, mercury, copper and even bacteria. In some parts of the country, stories of raw sewage leaks into fresh water supplies have made the news. And, people have reacted by drinking expensive bottled water as a supposedly healthier alternative to ordinary, inexpensive tap water.

City Water Supplies Are Safe

Of course, the truth about the safety of the nation’s municipal water supplies has finally come forth - drinking water from household taps virtually anywhere in the country is safe, pure and incredibly inexpensive. And, we’re learning that bottled water isn’t as healthy for us as we first thought. 

Get Off The Bottle

First there’s the plastic container, or bottle itself.  That convenient, plastic water bottle we’ve gotten used to carrying around is made from plastic material that contains cancer-producing toxins called phthalates.  These toxins actually leach into the water in the plastic bottle and accumulate in our bloodstreams.  Studies show that the concentrations of phthalates in our systems are increasing with each generation, mainly as a result of drinking water bottled in toxic plastic containers. 

Plastic is Hardly Boidegradable

These plastic bottles aren’t biodegradable.  Plastic throw-aways now represent at least 25% of the contents of our landfills.  And plastics won’t break down for around 10,000 years - some plastics can take even longer to degrade.  So our healthy-water myth has turned into a big health hazard.  What can people do?

A Nice and Effective Alternative

Fortunately, there are many easy and inexpensive alternatives to our drinking water challenges.You can easily install a simple charcoal-type filter system on your kitchen faucet. These inexpensive filters can remove up to 99.9% of heavy metals and other toxins that may (or mostly may not) be present in your city’s drinking water. And you can now buy a portable water filtration system that’s as convenient as your old plastic sports bottle, but the bottle is not made of toxic materials.

Cheap Filter Removes Most Contaminants

The filters that can be attached to your kitchen faucet are cheap (generally under $50) can be found at most hardware stores, reduce chlorine and heavy metals, and generally make your tap water taste better.  For example, the Brita system costs about $20 - 40 for a starter set, and $20 for each replacement filter.  It will filter about 100 gallons of drinking water and lasts for about 4 months.

Portable Filtration is the “Wave” of The Future

For about the same price, you can now get a 16 ounce portable water filtration system from Back to the Tap, which actually filters as you drink.  It uses a number 4 LDPE plastic bottle, which is the kind of plastic that doesn’t normally leach phthalates.  The filters are replaceable, and you can refill anywhere with plain tap water.  It can be refilled about 300 times, and that’s 300 disposable plastic bottles you’re not throwing into already full landfills.

Going green does take some conscious thought and careful planning, but it’s getting easier every day to go green.  In this case, you will be rewarded with better health and less plastic in landfills - and more money in your wallet.  Remember - bottled water costs MUCH more than gasoline, per gallon. So, save your health and the environment and tons of cash - by drinking water from your own household tap!

Landfill in the UK is becoming a huge problem. With the drop in the price of recycled products, the issue is what to do with all of the waste that we produce. The breakdown of waste in landfill sites creates huge amounts of the greenhouse gas methane. There are also many products that will not breakdown and will remain in the environment for ever with the potential to contaminate water supplies.

Traid, a charity specializing in the recycling of textiles reports that 900,000 tons of shoes and clothing are thrown away each year in the UK. Only 200,000 tons per year are recycled and the rest is dumped in landfill. The government estimates that similar amounts of between 550,000 and 900,000 tons of textiles are thrown away each year.

In addition to the problems of waste and landfill in the UK, there is also the consideration of the energy used and waste generated by the manufacture and distribution of clothing and textiles. Growth of cotton uses a huge amount of chemical pesticides and environmentally damaging cultivation methods. The manufacture of man made fabrics also has a huge environmental impact with. Demand for polyester the most widely used synthetic fabric has almost doubled in the last 15 years. The manufacture of polyester uses large amounts of crude oil and an energy-intensive process. It releases emissions including volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, and acid gases such as hydrogen chloride, all of which can cause health problems for workers by causing or aggravating respiratory disease.

Second hand clothing is becoming more popular as people begin to recognise the real costs of fast fashion. Consumers are becoming more aware of their buying choices and ways that they can help the environment.

Finally, there is one more great reason to recycle second hand clothing. Just because you are fed up with a piece of clothing or it does not fit you nay more, it does not mean that it has no worth. You can make sure that the worth of your second hand clothing is realized by swapping it at a swishing party on a clothes swapping website, selling it or donating it to your favorite charity.

Antarctic Peninsula has been experiencing warming trends for over 40 years with an increase of 2-3 C, thus correlating with lower sea ice conditions in the Amundsen Sea and Bellinghausen Sea. Warming temperatures around the Antarctic Peninsula is changing the dynamics of the ecosystem. The rise in atmospheric temperature is causing increasing in melting of freshwater glaciers and ice shelves. Fresh water emerging into the sea counteracts the salinity within a regional area. Changes identified are;

• Decrease in sea water salinity up to 60 miles offshore
• Lower sea ice
• Decreased krill population
• Increased salp (open ocean tunicate that is reminiscent of a jelly-fish) population
• Increase in cryptophytes (single cell phytoplankton algae)
• Decrease in diatom phytoplankton
• Increase in carbon sequestering in deep ocean sinks
• Decrease in carbon availability in the food chain

The Antarctic Krill (Euphausia superba), a small shrimp like crustacean is the most important zooplankton species associated with the sea ice and plays a crucial role in the Antarctic food web. On a regional basis the amount of krill appear to be declining in the southern ocean. There are definitely lower trends in krill population during lower sea ice years around Antarctica. Part of the rational for the population decline is that ice algae rely on the sea ice for protection and growth. The krill need the sea ice in order to feed on the algae and phytoplankton.

Krill occur in groups or large swarms. They are less than 3 inches in size and feed primarily on phytoplankton and sea ice algae. Krill filter diatom phytoplankton out of the water column and scrape algae from the sea ice. Apart from frequenting the sea ice to feed, krill in particular juveniles, seek protection from predators in the many nooks and crannies formed by the deformed sea ice floes. Krill is the staple food of many fish, birds and mammals in the Southern Ocean. The biomass of Antarctic krill is considered to be larger than that of the earth’s human population.

Sea- ice algae utilizes atmospheric carbon dioxide for its energy source, the same as plants do on land. Krill diet of the sea-ice algae and phytoplankton is essential for converting the carbon for use in higher animals such as fish, birds, and whales. This carbon conversion is a very critical role in predatory nutrition. Additionally krill do eliminate some of the silica from the diatom shells and carbon in sticky balls that sinks nearly two miles into the deep ocean. These cold, deep waters are able to contain carbon dioxide and prevent the gas from rising to the surface, thus immobilizing carbon that is not passed into the food chain.

In recent years there have been increases in algae phytoplankton called cryptophytes. Mark Moline, California Polytechnic State University, states that the cryptophyte population correlates with warmer temperatures and lower salinity waters that are produced by the melting of the freshwater glacier. Cryptophytes measure around 2 mm, while other plankton in the Antarctic waters are much larger and measure 15 to 270 mm. Along with the increase in cryptophyte population an increase in salp, a pelagic tunicate, population has also occurred. There are differences between salps and krill. Salps feeding efficiency is capable of grazing on smaller food sources less than 4mm, whereas, the Antarctic Krill efficiency declines on any food less than 20 mm. The salps compete with krill for the phytoplankton and thus decrease the krill population. Additionally the salps feed on krill larvae, which also cause a decline in krill numbers.

The warming trend in the Antarctic Peninsula is showing a pattern of increasing cryptophytes over other phytoplankton and the increase in the salp. This influence is due to the low sea ice and the lowering of the salinity in the seawater. Salps and cryptophytes do better in the lower salinity, while the krill and other plankton are unable to tolerate the increased freshwater regime from the glacier ice melts. This selectivity gives preference to the salps as the dominant species while decreasing krill abundance. During lower sea ice seasons the density of krill declines while the salp population increases.

Carbon sequestering into the deep ocean from the algae and phytoplankton occur by both the salp and krill. Both species eliminate the atmospheric carbon received from the primary producing algae by producing fecal pellets by the salps and sticky balls by the krill, thereby, reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The salps though sequester more carbon into the cold deep ocean than the krill. However, the krill provides the most efficient pathway for carbon transfer up into the food chain. The cryptophyte dominated waters are less efficient in the food chain due to increased feeding by salps and the difficulty of the krill to utilize the cryptophytes as a food source. Migration patterns by penguins are changing, in part due to the changing krill population. Krill is a mainstay diet for penguins, and if the krill population changes, many other ecological changes occur with it.

We’ve all read the stories about how municipal water systems in the United States are contaminated with toxins such as  lead, mercury, copper and even bacteria. In some parts of the country, stories of raw sewage leaks into fresh water supplies have made the news. And, people have reacted by drinking expensive bottled water as a supposedly healthier alternative to ordinary, inexpensive tap water.

City Water Supplies Are Safe

Of course, the truth about the safety of the nation’s municipal water supplies has finally come forth - drinking water from household taps virtually anywhere in the country is safe, pure and incredibly inexpensive. And, we’re learning that bottled water isn’t as healthy for us as we first thought. 

Get Off The Bottle

First there’s the plastic container, or bottle itself.  That convenient, plastic water bottle we’ve gotten used to carrying around is made from plastic material that contains cancer-producing toxins called phthalates.  These toxins actually leach into the water in the plastic bottle and accumulate in our bloodstreams.  Studies show that the concentrations of phthalates in our systems are increasing with each generation, mainly as a result of drinking water bottled in toxic plastic containers. 

Plastic is Hardly Boidegradable

These plastic bottles aren’t biodegradable.  Plastic throw-aways now represent at least 25% of the contents of our landfills.  And plastics won’t break down for around 10,000 years - some plastics can take even longer to degrade.  So our healthy-water myth has turned into a big health hazard.  What can people do?

A Nice and Effective Alternative

Fortunately, there are many easy and inexpensive alternatives to our drinking water challenges.You can easily install a simple charcoal-type filter system on your kitchen faucet. These inexpensive filters can remove up to 99.9% of heavy metals and other toxins that may (or mostly may not) be present in your city’s drinking water. And you can now buy a portable water filtration system that’s as convenient as your old plastic sports bottle, but the bottle is not made of toxic materials.

Cheap Filter Removes Most Contaminants

The filters that can be attached to your kitchen faucet are cheap (generally under $50) can be found at most hardware stores, reduce chlorine and heavy metals, and generally make your tap water taste better.  For example, the Brita system costs about $20 - 40 for a starter set, and $20 for each replacement filter.  It will filter about 100 gallons of drinking water and lasts for about 4 months.

Portable Filtration is the “Wave” of The Future

For about the same price, you can now get a 16 ounce portable water filtration system from Back to the Tap, which actually filters as you drink.  It uses a number 4 LDPE plastic bottle, which is the kind of plastic that doesn’t normally leach phthalates.  The filters are replaceable, and you can refill anywhere with plain tap water.  It can be refilled about 300 times, and that’s 300 disposable plastic bottles you’re not throwing into already full landfills.

Going green does take some conscious thought and careful planning, but it’s getting easier every day to go green.  In this case, you will be rewarded with better health and less plastic in landfills - and more money in your wallet.  Remember - bottled water costs MUCH more than gasoline, per gallon. So, save your health and the environment and tons of cash - by drinking water from your own household tap!