SAN FRANCISCO REQUIRES THAT EVERYONE COMPOST

Sacramento Bee - San Francisco, renowned for its civic will to save the planet, is now ordering residents and businesses to compost food scraps and biodegradables, or risk fines for not properly sorting their garbage.

That's welcome news for Jepson Prairie Organics, a Dixon-based composting firm that already accepts delivery of 400 tons a day in plate scrapings, greasy cardboard and other sweet-stinking waste from San Francisco eateries and homes.. . .

For some 200 Northern California vineyards that use it, there is something about San Francisco compost and its unique, urban blend of crab shells from Fisherman's Wharf, pasta from North Beach, pupusas from the Mission District and dim sum from Chinatown that nourishes the soil like little else.

Yet the question for San Francisco is whether the new city composting law signed by Mayor Gavin Newsom last month will nourish the city's ecological soul or merely irritate the populace.

The new law gives the city authority to fine residents and small businesses $100 ­ and impose penalties up to $1,000 on big firms and apartment owners ­ if they refuse to segregate leftover fish bones, watermelon rinds and watercress salad into compost bins.

Even in liberal San Francisco, which boasts of recycling 72 percent of its 2.1 million tons of waste a year, a few residents wonder if the law is a case of big compost meets Big Brother. . .

The city, which has had a composting program since the mid-1990s, has achieved voluntary participation from 50 percent of restaurants, 40 percent of single-family homes and 20 percent of apartments.

But the new law, designed to boost those rates by using the threat of citations, is drawing national media attention. . .

"All of a sudden, the headlines were 'Garbage Police: They're coming,' " Newsom mused in a signing ceremony for the law passed on a 9-2 vote by the Board of Supervisors. . .

ALTERNATING STAIR TREADS

Lloyd Alter, Tree Hugger - Alternating tread stairs. . . are a great way to save space and are surprisingly easy to use. Justin at StairPorn found this elegant one in a surprising place: a house built at the Rural Studio of Auburn University, where four students designed and built a house with $10,000 worth of materials and $10,000 worth of labor.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE ENERGY BILL

Rep. Dennis Kucinich - I oppose H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. The reason is simple. It won't address the problem. In fact, it might make the problem worse.

It sets targets that are too weak, especially in the short term, and sets about meeting those targets through Enron-style accounting methods. It gives new life to one of the primary sources of the problem that should be on its way out - coal - by giving it record subsidies. And it is rounded out with massive corporate giveaways at taxpayer expense. There is $60 billion for a single technology which may or may not work, but which enables coal power plants to keep warming the planet at least another 20 years.

Worse, the bill locks us into a framework that will fail. Science tells us that immediately is not soon enough to begin repairing the planet. Waiting another decade or more will virtually guarantee catastrophic levels of warming. But the bill does not require any greenhouse gas reductions beyond current levels until 2030.

There are several aspects of the bill that are problematic.

1. Overall targets are too weak. The bill is predicated on a target atmospheric concentration of 450 parts per million, a target that is arguably justified in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but which is already out of date. Recent science suggests 350 parts per million is necessary to help us avoid the worst effects of global warming.

2. The offsets undercut the emission reductions. Offsets allow polluters to keep polluting; they are rife with fraudulent claims of emissions reduction; they create environmental, social, and economic unintended adverse consequences; and they codify and endorse the idea that polluters do not have to make sacrifices to solve the problem.

3. It kicks the can down the road. By requiring the bulk of the emissions to be carried out in the long term and requiring few reductions in the short term, we are not only failing to take the action when it is needed to address rapid global warming, but we are assuming the long term targets will remain intact.

4. EPA's authority to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the short- to medium-term is rescinded. It is our best defense against a new generation of coal power plants. There is no room for coal as a major energy source in a future with a stable climate.

5. Nuclear power is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out. Nuclear power is far more expensive, has major safety issues including a near release in my own home state in 2002, and there is still no resolution to the waste problem. A recent study by Dr. Mark Cooper showed that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than to generate the same amount of electricity from energy efficiency and renewables.

6. Dirty coal is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out. Coal-based energy destroys entire mountains, kills and injures workers at higher rates than most other occupations, decimates ecologically sensitive wetlands and streams, creates ponds of ash that are so toxic the Department of Homeland Security will not disclose their locations for fear of their potential to become a terrorist weapon, and fouls the air and water with sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and thousands of other toxic compounds that cause asthma, birth defects, learning disabilities, and pulmonary and cardiac problems for starters. In contrast, several times more jobs are yielded by renewable energy investments than comparable coal investments.

7. The $60 billion allocated for carbon capture and sequestration is triple the amount of money for basic research and development in the bill. We should be pressuring China, India and Russia to slow and stop their power plants now instead of enabling their perpetuation. We cannot create that pressure while spending unprecedented amounts on a single technology that may or may not work. . .

8. Carbon markets can and will be manipulated using the same Wall Street sleights of hand that brought us the financial crisis.

9. It is regressive. Free allocations doled out with the intent of blunting the effects on those of modest means will pale in comparison to the allocations that go to polluters and special interests. The financial benefits of offsets and unlimited banking also tend to accrue to large corporations. And of course, the trillion dollar carbon derivatives market will help Wall Street investors. Much of the benefits designed to assist consumers are passed through coal companies and other large corporations, on whom we will rely to pass on the savings.

STUDY: SEX FOUND MAIN CAUSE OF POPULATION GROWTH

Optimum Population Trust - Sex, not religious or cultural beliefs or the quest for economic security, is what increases family size and drives world population growth, according to one of the UK's leading authorities on family planning.

Conventional economic wisdom, which says that couples in poorer societies actively plan to have large families to compensate for high child mortality, to provide labour, and to care for parents in their old age, is wrong, Professor John Guillebaud will tell a conference on sustainable population today.

Economists overlook the fact that sexual intercourse is more frequent than the minimum needed for intentional conceptions, and that half of pregnancies worldwide are unplanned. Moreover, demand for contraception increases when it is available, irrespective of a society's wealth or child survival rates.

"Having a large rather than a small family is less of a planned decision than an automatic outcome of human sexuality," Prof. Guillebaud will say. "For a fertile couple, nothing is easier.". . .

Many environmentalists argue that greener lifestyles, and reducing consumption, are the key to solving environmental challenges such as climate change. However, Dr. Martin Desvaux will disclose details of research showing that even with an 80 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050, the UK will be able to sustain only 37 million people. This will make the UK "extremely vulnerable in an uncertain world", he will argue. The UK's population, currently 61 million, is projected to rise to 77 million by 2050.

Even if Britain's population could be capped at 70 million, as suggested by the immigration minister, Phil Woolas, last year, there would still be up to 33 million too many people in the UK for long-term sustainability, according to Dr. Desvaux.

The conference will also hear that despite the likelihood of a world population crash as a consequence of inaction on overpopulation, 21 European countries are trying to raise their birth rates.

Prof. Guillebaud will argue that in both rich and poor countries, "something active needs to be done to separate sex from conception - namely, contraception. . .

RECYCLING CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

Metaefficient - For "D.I.Y."ers, using recycled construction products is a great way to reduce raw material consumption and lessen stress on landfills. But for retailers, the "Re I. Y." trend (Re-use It Yourself) is taking the idea a step further, giving unused building products a new lease on life.

The idea of reusing building materials is certainly nothing new, and in the past it was a trend borne of simple necessity. Ancient cave dwellers and frontier settlers alike had to use the materials available to them, or else do without. But in the age of global shipping and super-size home-improvement stores, many consumers don't think twice about where their building supplies come from, or where they go after a project is complete. According to a recent Buildings magazine article, construction and demolition projects account for up to 30% of the US waste stream . . .

Here in the US, Habitat for Humanity operates a nationwide retail chain called ReStore, which sells both used building supplies and new, surplus products left over when projects are completed. Items may be donated by contractors, or even provided by other retailers. ReStore outlets also support their local Habitat for Humanity affiliates, and some of the most successful locations generate enough funding to finance the construction of 10 new houses each year.

MIXED REVIEWS ON CASH FOR CLUNKERS

Tree Hugger - There's plenty of debate as to whether there's anything green about the Cash for Clunkers program that just passed the Senate, and is on the way to the White House to be signed into law. The law will allow owners of "clunkers", or old, emissions-spewing vehicles, to receive up to $4,500 when they trade it in for a new, more fuel efficient vehicle. The bill will allegedly curb emissions while boosting the auto industry. But will it work?

Depends on which goal you're considering when you ask. The law is billed as green because it's predicated on getting people to drive cleaner, more fuel efficient cars; which will theoretically reduce the emissions of the cars on the road. But it fails to take a few factors into consideration on the green front, like whether it will be encouraging people to buy brand new cars when their current model still runs fine, "clunker" though it may qualify to be, and the amount of pollution it will take to build all such new cars to meet the increased demand.

Add to that the fact that the fuel efficiency improvements one must meet to get the discount are pretty weak, and you've got yourself one barely green bill.

Consumers will get $4,500 vouchers if the new car they are buying gets 10 miles-a-gallon better gas mileage than the model they are trading in. For light trucks, the improvement must be 5 mpg better than the older model, and for large light trucks, 2 mpg.

Yes, you can get a $4,500 discount for getting a new truck that's only 2 mpg more efficient than your old one. Still, an estimated 75% of car emissions come from the oldest, nastiest, clunkiest models out there--the bill could nonetheless cut off some of those emissions.

So if the bill's not exactly green, will it achieve it's other, and, let's be honest here, primary goal; which is of course to bolster sales for the dreadfully slumping auto industry?

Consumers may not be as interested in the program as they expect once they read "the fine print," said Jeremy Anwyl, chief executive officer of research firm Edmunds.com in Santa Monica, California.

If the value of their used car is greater than the $3,500 or $4,500 voucher, it wouldn't make financial sense for consumers to do a trade-in for the discount, Anwyl said.

That means that you'd have to both have a running car worth less that 4 grand or so, and also be in the market for a brand new, more fuel efficient vehicle. Though there are certainly people out there who fit that bill, but it seems to be aimed at the more affluent--lower income people who buy their 'new' cars used may be left out in the cold.

CLIMATE CHANGE ALREADY AFFECTING COUNTRY

Daily Climate - The Obama Administration released a report showing climate disruption is already leaving deep imprints on every sector of the environment and that the consequences of these changes will grow steadily worse in coming decades.

The 196-page report . . . finds that global warming has touched every corner: Heavier downpours, strengthened heat waves, altered river flows and extended growing seasons. . .

For instance, since 1900 global average temperatures have risen 1.5 degrees (F) and are expected to rise another 2 degrees given emissions already in the atmosphere but not yet reflected in slow-moving climate systems.

Yet temperatures are rising faster over land than over the ocean and more during the winter than any other season. The result, according to scientists, is that winter temperatures across the Great Plains and Midwest are now some 7 degrees warmer than historical norms.

And that means a reduction in Great Lakes ice cover, which leads to more evaporation, lower water levels and consequent impacts on shipping, infrastructure, beaches and ecosystems.

Meanwhile the Caribbean and Southeast will see increases in wind, rain and storm surges. California and the Southwest will see drier summers. All will see impacts to human health, water supply, agriculture and other aspects of society, the report's authors concluded.

In Chicago, for instance, annual heat-related deaths per six million people could rise from less than 200 that the city saw in the mid-1970s to almost 700 one generation from now.

In the Northwest, the spring snow pack has already declined 25 percent over the past 40 to 70 years. It will likely shrink another 40 percent by the 2040s, the report said, seriously stressing water supplies, agricultural production and hydropower. . .

SUSTAIN YOURSELF: VIDEO CONFERENCING

Tree Hugger - Videoconferencing is enjoying a revival of sorts in Scandinavia. As bandwidth gets better, HD videoconferencing is emerging and companies are being forced to take a harder look at travel policies and carbon impacts. Telia, Sweden's now-privatized telephone company, said it saves 70 million crowns (more than $10 million) a year by its green travel and meeting policy. And the Swedish Road Administration said it has made 50 percent of its major meetings videoconferences.

The first step to a green travel policy is determining whether a meeting is actually even necessary. Telia's travel has dropped 30 percent since implementing its policy.

High-definition videoconferencing is now being designed so that participants really feel that their co-workers are sitting across the table from them. These fancy videoconference rooms, from vendors such as Cisco and Tandberg, can cost from between $200,000 and $450,000 per room. . .

But videoconferencing can also be less upscale - a late-model standard Apple laptop with barely any additions can get the job done.

Stats and surveys

Tree Hugger - According to CIO Insight Research's Mobility Survey: "51 percent of CIOs and other senior IT leaders surveyed said their companies discourage fulltime telecommuting. An equal number of the 237 respondents-24 percent each-said their firms encourage fulltime telecommuting or remain neutral."

But there is hope, since when asked how their company's policy has changed over the past 3 years, 34% said that it's more positive against 8% replying it was more negative for full-time telecommuting, and for part-time telecommuting, the figures are 46% vs. 5%.

"In a poll of 1,500 technology workers, 37 percent said they would accept a salary cut [of up to 10%] if they could work from home, according to Dice Holdings."

Telecommuting Could Save Billions of Gallons of Gasoline According to Telework Exchange, "f white-collar employees who feel they could do their jobs from home began to telework twice a week, the United States could conserve 9.7 billion gallons of gasoline and save $38.2 billion a year." These calculations are based on 50 miles roundtrips in vehicles getting 24 miles per gallon, with gasoline at $3.94/gallon.

A WIND TURBINE FOR YOUR HOME

Got2begreen - Michigan-based Earthtronics is giving the eco-minded one less excuse to rely on fossil-fuel based power. The company will begin selling a Honeywell rooftop turbine at ACE Hardware stores in the fall. The retailer has more than 4,000 stores in the United States. The price for the 2-kilowatt spinner is a bit high, at $4,500, and installation can set you back as much as $1,500, the company estimates. But the devices are eligible for a 30-percent federal tax credit and can offset as much as 18 percent of a home's electricity use. They also work in wind as wimpy as 2 mph.

Honeywell - By practically eliminating mechanical resistance and drag, the Honeywell Wind Turbine creates significant power (2000 kWh/yr) operating in a greater range of wind speeds (2-45 mph) than traditional wind turbines. . . . The Honeywell Wind Turbine's Power Blade System creates energy at the blade tips, rather than the complicated central gear of a traditional turbine. . . The turbine's installed cost is approximately 1/3 of the cost of traditional turbines with a lower installed cost per kWh than any turbine on the market. Adding to the value are federal and state rebates covering anywhere from 30% to 100% of the overall cost.

SUSTAIN YOURSELF: GOCYCLE ELECTRIC BIKE

Helen Pidd, Guardian, UK - Here is my report of a very happy weekend roadtesting the gocycle, a brand new, very sleek electric bike that distinguishes itself from most of its competitors by looking quite cool. The brainchild of an ex-car designer, the gocycle . . . works just like an ordinary bike, except that when you can't be faffed pedaling or you simply want to show off, you press and hold the red button on the left of the handlebars. Then, after a little delay, you speed off into the sunset. This is especially fun when going up hills, as your fellow road users will be baffled at how effortlessly you are climbing while they huff and puff. For full bamboozlement you need to be doing a bit of token pedaling, otherwise you'll give the game away. The faster you were going when you pressed the button, the faster you will be propelled, though it's not supposed to take you much above 15mph.

The manufacturers claim you can get up to 20 miles out of the battery, depending on how often you press the power button. I reckon mine only started running out of juice when I had done at least that distance, and that's with a lot of exhibitionistic button pressing. . .

When the battery does die, the electric assist becomes increasingly sluggish, but the bicycle still functions perfectly well as an ordinary machine. You recharge the bike by attaching it to a battery pack (which is slightly smaller and lighter than a brick) and plugging into the mains. It takes three hours to get back to its old self. The whole process is easy – unless, like me, you live in a second floor flat and have to lug this weighty beast up several flights of stairs to the nearest plug point.

PENGUINS: BY THEIR POOP YOU SHALL KNOW THEM

Guardian, UK - Stretches of excrement-stained ice that are so large they are visible from space have helped scientists to locate 10 newly discovered emperor penguin colonies in Antarctica.

Researchers at the British Antarctic Survey have used satellite images, created to survey the sea ice around Antarctica's coast, to identify emperor penguin colonies using the huge tell-tale reddish-brown patches the birds leave behind. . .

By studying the images, the scientists discovered that guano stains are reliable indicators of the birds' presence. "We can't see actual penguins on the satellite maps because the resolution isn't good enough. But during the breeding season the birds stay at a colony for eight months. The ice gets pretty dirty and it's the guano stains that we can see," said Fretwell.

Emperor penguins spend a considerable part of their lives at sea. During the Antarctic winter when temperatures can drop to -50°C they return to their colonies to breed. . . . They are the least common Antarctic penguin, with an estimated 200,000 breeding pairs.