Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

What is the greenest way to dispose of pet waste? Scoop and flush, or bag and throw in the trash?

Jenifer M.
Vienna

A. Dearest Jenifer,

Flush or toss?The greenest way to dispose of pet waste is to dispose of your pet, I suppose. No pet, no waste! But barring that revolutionary scheme, a few other options present themselves.

You have not said what kind of pet you have, but judging by your reference to scooping, I am going to assume it is a cat. The time-tested advice for felines is to bag and throw away the soiled litter, including poo. If you are on a municipal sewer line, you may be able to flush the feces, but you should check with your town; if you have a septic tank, it's not advised. By the way, when you choose kitty litter, don't buy a brand that contains clay -- you might want to consult our product tester for the best non-clay options.

If you are scooping the waste of a dog or other animal, the same truth applies: bagging is best. It's gross to think about all that pet waste rotting in landfills, but it's a teeny bit less gross than imagining it seeping into our waterways or contaminating our gardens with its pathogens. (Some people compost pet waste, but it must be done very, very carefully -- here are some tips.)

Of course, we hear occasionally about efforts to turn pet poop into power -- I fur-vently hope "they" keep working on this idea, and I'm also very glad that is not my line of work.

Ferretly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I hear a lot about clean coal technology. Is it true that we can use coal in a "clean" way? I don't believe it. Can you please explain this?

Anand
Manhattan

A. Dearest Anand,

You know the expression "go with your gut"? Methinks you should. You don't believe coal can be used in a clean way, and you are right.

It is accurate, however, to say that coal can be used in a cleaner way than it traditionally has. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu and others point out that, since coal is abundant, relatively cheap, and unlikely to disappear from our energy mix any time soon, we should find cleaner ways of feeding our addiction. These include turning coal into a gas before burning it, and capturing and storing carbon dioxide emissions. Here's a fun and colorful clean-coal overview from the BBC.

Will these "cleaner" methods prevent coal from harming our health and polluting our air and water? Will they stop coal companies from blowing the tops off of mountains? Will they keep miners from being trapped and killed underground? Not likely. There's a reason my fellow Grist writer David Roberts calls coal the "enemy of the human race." It is an outmoded, dangerous source of power. We should all lobby our utilities and our representatives to give us better, safer, healthier options.

I wrote a bit more about the clean-coal conundrum last year; you can find my answer here. I also recommend you swing on over to the Department of Energy to get a sense of their plans, and visit iLoveMountains.org for a real, human understanding of where coal actually comes from.

Sequesterly,
Umbra

Q. Hi Umbra,

I am a college student and I'm really involved in and passionate about making my university more sustainable. One of the issues that I am trying to address is our current disposal of mattresses. Every year, my university "disposes" of 1,200 mattresses by incinerating them for energy (people think this is awesome and sustainable -- I wish I was kidding). So, I have been spending endless nights researching a safer alternative for this herd of mattresses. I can't recycle them because it's too damn expensive (about $20,000/yr). I can't donate them because they are ripped and flat -- who wants a holey pancake mattress? I can't Freecycle them because bedbugs are a huge issue in my area and I don't think I can find 1,200 people who want college student mattresses (think about what you did on your mattress back in the day...). So I am asking, I am BEGGING, you for help!

Mattress Maiden
Boston, Mass.

A. Dearest MM,

What I did on my mattress back in the day ... let's see, I slept on it. I read a lot of Aldo Leopold. I sorted my collection of fallen leaves by size and hue. What do you do on your mattress?

Never mind. The real question is, why is it so hard to dispose of mattresses in this country? I'm afraid, dear MM, you have outlined exactly the problem: Mattresses can rarely be donated, especially as bedbug concerns (real or imagined) increase. They take up too much space in landfills, so much in fact that some municipalities will no longer accept them. And though recycling programs are cropping up, they are few, far between, and can be fiscally frustrating.

Still, I think recycling is the best bet. Interestingly, Massachusetts is home to one of the nation's few mattress recyclers, and another outfit is venturing into New England soon. It's amazing what happens to your mattress: the wood is chipped for energy, the steel springs recycled, the cotton and foam used for insulation or other textile needs. I'm not sure which of the many fine Beantown schools you attend, but I see that Tufts and MIT both recycle mattresses. Those schools are dealing with a much smaller quantity than you mention, but you might contact them to find out how they've sprung over any obstacles. (You might also see if your school is retiring too many mattresses too soon.)

Another possible resource: Some schools rely on the help of the Institutional Recycling Network -- you might contact them as well, if you haven't already.

Above all else, it seems to me that the burning of these mattresses is a misguided plan. For one thing, mattresses are treated with chemicals to make them resistant to fire -- so once they are coaxed to go up in smoke, they likely release all sorts of nasty fumes. That's way more squirm-inducing than thinking about the damages that might have resulted from certain collegiate activities.

Stain removerly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Climate Hope: Inspiring 2009 Books for Clean Energy

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

This Friday, don’t just Buy Nothing—use nothing!

Q. Dear Umbra,

Municipal and individual composting operations are gaining steam nationwide. Some obvious benefits include space-saving in landfills, and cheaper and (hopefully) "greener" fertilizer. While I am an avid supporter of composting, I am curious if municipalities with composting facilities could see decreased decomposition rates in their landfills. Do yard and plant scraps even play an integral role in landfill decomposition? Thank you.

Todd
Vancouver

A. Dearest Todd,

Give thanks -- then compost!Since this is Thanksgiving week here in the U.S., a time when we are at our most gluttonous, composting is a timely issue. In fact, I'm putting together a video with tips for getting started -- keep an eye out for it.

In the meantime, your question is an interesting one. Are yard and food scraps the key to quicker decomposition in landfills? The answer is no. In fact, such organic waste is the bane of a landfill operator's existence; it takes up a quarter of the space and is a major source of methane, a greenhouse gas that's twenty times more potent than carbon dioxide. Paper is also a problem: it's another major source of methane, and accounts for about a third of our municipal solid waste.

This is why composting and recycling are so important. Here in the U.S., we are better about "recovering" paper and yard waste than food waste: In 2007, according to the EPA, we recycled 54 percent of our paper and composted 62 percent of yard waste. When it comes to food waste, however, we compost only about 2-3 percent. In fact, we flat-out throw away more than 25 percent of the food we buy. Pigs.

Composting, as you say, frees up space and creates a nice rich fertilizer. Because it reduces methane, it's also a tool in the climate fight. In short, it's a win all around, and we'd be turkeys not to participate.

Caruncly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

We typically try to minimize the impact of our buying decisions. We carefully considered buying some Thai mats, handcrafted by a family the shopkeeper knows. Then she told us that all textiles and furniture, whether organic or not, are all fumigated with methyl bromide before entering the States. It seems no one is talking about this issue -- is it a problem? Are my mats messed up? What about all the cool hemp clothing, is it all contaminated?

(m)Ethyl M.
San Francisco, Calif.

A. Dearest (m)Ethyl,

This here is one of those good news, bad news situations. The good news is, methyl bromide has been banned under the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement that seeks to stop the destruction of the ozone layer. The bad news is, the U.S. keeps getting exemptions that allow it to continue spraying the stuff, though it uses far less than in the past.

Methyl bromide, used primarily as a soil fumigant and on food imports, is toxic and will, as the EPA delicately puts it, "affect not only the target pests it is used against, but non-target organisms as well." That's us! The greatest danger, the agency says, is at the fumigation site itself. After that, the stuff wafts up and gets busy eating ozone.

I cannot say for sure whether your Thai mats and hemp pants have been sprayed with methyl bromide or one of the "safer" alternatives, because imports are subject to a labyrinth of federal regulations that depends upon where they come from, what they're made of, and whether the inspector got a good night's sleep. Sometimes a visual inspection is enough, and finished products are often treated less suspiciously than raw materials. I can tell you that the good people at the Pesticide Action Network are doing consistent, thorough, obsessive work on this topic, and you should definitely check them out.

Phytosanitarily,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I am planning to reuse my boyfriend's old melamine chest of drawers for our baby's nursery. But since it's a bit low, I would like to build an additional module on top of it to make a changing table of the correct height. My in-laws are currently remodeling their kitchen and have dozens of cabinets I could reuse to build the changing table top. Now I know melamine and particleboard are evil, but is older melamine OK? If their kitchen cabinets are 20 years old, can we assume they have already off-gassed most or all of the formaldehyde they had to off-gas? It makes no sense to throw it all out in the garbage!

Raphaëlle
Montréal

A. Dearest Raphaëlle,

Congratulations on your impending arrival and your commitment to reuse. I can tell already that you are going to raise a wise child.

You're right that melamine, which combines with formaldehyde to make the plastic resin we know, is -- well, tricky, if not outright evil. For a long time it was hailed as the key to a sort of miracle plastic, even an eco-friendly-ish choice, and then it got into our pet food and our baby formula and some of our Halloween candy and it started to seem dangerous and creepy. And then we realized that, like any plastic, melamine could leach chemicals when heated -- in the microwave, for instance. More creepy.

Having said all that, however, I think your particular reuse is a fine idea. We know that you and your boyfriend and your baby are not going to heat or eat the chest of drawers. You are relieving your in-laws, and your landfill, of at least some of the waste from their kitchen-remodeling project. And you are being crafty! Any offgassing should have happened long ago -- it is generally most intense in the first year, and dwindles from there. I say go forth and modul-ify -- and let me know how it goes.

Awwwwly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Q. Dear Umbra,

I've taken to washing my hair less and less often to keep it from drying out. Since I've switched to the "no-'poo" method (baking soda followed by a vinegar rinse) it stays cleaner longer. However, I still take a shower (brief and lukewarm) most days. To keep my curly hair from becoming totally frizzy in the humidity of the shower, I typically cover it with a shower cap. My current cap is wearing out and I'm going to need a new one soon -- but your simple rule of "no vinyl and that's final!" keeps resounding in my head. Every shower cap I've seen is made of vinyl, except for those cheap plastic ones in hotel rooms. What's a girl to do?

Curly Girl
Pittsburgh, Penn.

A. Dearest Curly Girl,

Or a nice felt hat always does the trick.Have you ever noticed that the hair is always greener on the other side of the fence? I know straight-haired gals who would kill to have your tress-related troubles, and I imagine there are days when you wouldn't mind a mane that's a bit more manageable.

I commend you on your shift away from conventional beauty products, which are so often toxic, and on your commitment to a vinyl-free lifestyle. How cockle-warming to see my message sinking in!

I've done a bit of scouring on your behalf, and I think I've found a couple of possible solutions, though they may be difficult to track down. You're certainly right that vinyl is the most common, but I also came across caps made from other, marginally better materials, including nylon and polypropylene. But here is my big discovery: cotton and silk! It seems counterintuitive, but according to reliable sources, these are lovely materials for shower caps. You can buy cute patterned varieties from various places online, with a little looking. Of course, cotton and silk have their own eco-impacts -- so, dearest readers, one of you should create an organic-cotton shower-cap business, stat.

I suppose your other option might be to ... wear a plastic grocery bag over your hair, securing it with clips or a headband? An ingenious reuse for a pesky object.

Tangly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I started a green team at my office and one of our initiatives is reducing energy consumption. The team had recommended turning off the computers at night and when not in use. Seems logical, right? Well, the IT department denied our efforts and recommends keeping computers on 24/7. I'm horrified! The rationale is that turning on and off your computer changes the internal temperature of the equipment and adds to the wear and tear. I need some data to back up our green claim that it is better and safe to shut down the computers. Can you please help?

Nervously awaiting,
Jennifer

A. Dearest Jennifer,

Little-known fact: I actually keep my computer turned off 24 hours a day. I just peek at my inbox over my editor's shoulder, scribble my answers on recycled paper, and make her type them in. Saves boatloads of energy.

Congratulations on the formation of your green team, and condolences on the fact that you have already been strongarmed. I suspect it will not be the last time, as earnest eco-efforts are not always welcomed by those whose habits and patterns they affect.

There are two answers to your question, as far as I see it: a factual one and a philosophical one. The factual answer is, reputable sources including the U.S. Department of Energy say it is A-OK to turn your computer off at night, and that the various "wear and tear" arguments are no longer accurate. (Here is a fact sheet from the Oregon DEQ that, while a bit dated, cites many useful resources you might peruse.) The philosophical answer is, don't ever, ever, ever alienate your IT department. Even for the sake of saving the planet.

I think there may be some middle ground here: more and more computers have a "hibernate" function, which is similar to a sleep function but even, well, sleepier. Talk to your IT people to find out if there's a way to send all the computers happily into hibernation at the end of the day. Yes, they will still use a bit of energy, but far less than if they were left in full on mode, humming along. Other key things to do: turn off your monitor whenever you won't be using it for 15 to 20 minutes. And remember that a screen saver is not an energy-saver; in fact, most screen savers are energy hogs.

Now go buy the IT guys some cookies, and keep up the good work.

RAMly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I am so utterly sick of getting junk mail, is there anything we can do to stop it? In the age of the internet spam, is it really so impossible to just outlaw it? I can swallow deleting junkmail, but I can't swallow how much of it has to be tossed.

Carey S.
Missoula, Mont.

A. Dearest Carey,

In a sense, old-fashioned junk mail is less offensive than spam. After all, when was the last time an envelope arrived at your house promising to enlarge your manhood or sell you cheap Rolex watches?

On the other hand, the sheer mass of junk mail is offensive indeed: each of us in the U.S. receives about 560 pieces a year, according to Co-op America, and all that "direct mail" (that's the nice name for it) adds up to the equivalent of more than 100 million trees. While the bad economy has led to a steep decline in junk mail sent this year, "they" predict a comeback; real mail is still considered more effective for advertising than e-mail, which is too easy to delete.

The good news is, there are steps you can take to slow the stream of junk mail to your home. First of all, avoid entering contests, filling out warranties, and giving your address on forms -- if you must do so, write "do not rent or sell my information" alongside. Go to the Direct Marketing Assocation site to register your preferences, or use a service such as 41pounds.org (which charges $41 for five years of mail stoppage, but promises a more thorough excavation than DMA). To reduce the catalogues that come (and 'tis the season, 'tisn't it?), visit Catalog Choice or contact merchandisers directly. To be removed from the list for credit card offers, call 888-5-OPTOUT. And if you're a business, see this list of tips for junk-mail reduction from our friends here in King County, Washington.

As for outlawing junk mail entirely, it seems unlikely to happen. And various efforts to create a federal "Do Not Mail" list along the lines of the "Do Not Call" list haven't led to much (except for a suspicious industry-led imitation). If you're feeling feisty, and you believe in online petitions, you can sign this petition urging Congress to take action. Otherwise, take the steps above -- and recycle, recycle, recycle.

Papercutly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Q. Dear Umbra,

I know it's a little early, but I had this great idea for a New Year's resolution. Every month in 2010, I pick a certain eco-area of my life and focus on that for a whole month. So far I have: reduce energy consumption; reduce water consumption; reduce material waste; reuse; recycle; volunteerism/activism; eating local. Finally, I think December will be trying to use everything I've learned and put it all together cohesively. However, my list isn't full, and I'm out of ideas. Do you have any suggestions?

Happy Hippie
Alexandria, Va.

A. Dearest HH,

It's never too early to make good resolutions! I bet you are also stocking up on organic, fair-trade chocolate for Valentine's Day. Three cheers for organization.

Personally, I think a better resolution might be to try to spend the year really, seriously improving on one or two of these areas, rather than flitting about from topic to topic. As you well know, you cannot just "reuse" for a month and be done with it. However, I admire the somewhat wackadoodle structure of your list, and I think you've made a great start on it. You have seven good categories, plus your December free-for-all. So here are four more ideas from me to round out your year: go carless for a month; serve as a public information officer on climate change for a month, helping your friends and family and perhaps strangers understand the issue; spend a month weatherizing your house; and spend a month without the TV on. This last step will help you not only reduce your energy consumption, it will help you reconnect with the real world. You could use the time instead to read deeply on the eco-topic of your choice, or to brush up on green classics.

Readers, any other ideas for HH? Or resolutions of your own? Please share in the comments section below.

Resolvedly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I was recently appalled when my 9-year-old son came home from school and related that his teacher had denounced human-caused climate change to the class. I immediately searched for the Grist link I once saw that listed scientists (and academic institutions) who believe otherwise. Unfortunately that link appears to be missing. If not for Grist, where can I find such a list? How should I deal with this situation?

A very worried mother stewing in the climate change pot,

Cate J.
Whitefish, Mont.

A. Dearest Cate,

Just the facts ... please?This really boils my butter. Let me direct you and others to our thorough series on "How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic," which refutes various attempts to debunk the science -- it includes a list of some of the scientific organizations that agree about anthropogenic climate change. I'm not sure if it's the list you had in mind, but it should help. And here is a letter sent in late October to every U.S. senator from the country's leading scientific organizations, confirming that research has shown climate change is primarily human caused.

You might also point your child's teacher to the U.S. EPA's resource page for students and educators, or print out the agency's climate FAQ. It is called, notably, "Back to Basics." Because at this point in time, this is basic information: our current climate problem is caused by human activity.

Does this teacher also suggest that gravity may be false and the moon is made of cheese? If he or she insists on continuing to plant seeds of doubt in young minds about scientifically solid information, I would not hesitate to take your concerns to a higher authority.

Factily,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

I am looking for advice about purchasing the best low-flow and/or dual-flush toilet to replace my current one, which I've been told needs a complete replacement due to its age and inability to flush sufficiently. I've heard some use a very low amount of water, but that can often translate into a lack of, well, doing their duty. I'm having a hard time navigating all the brands and claims to fame. Help me wash it all away!

Erica
Portland, Ore.

A. Dearest Erica,

This notion that low-flow toilets are somehow not powerful enough to do their duty lingers on, despite being largely false. It's true that the first generation of low-flows lacked a little oomph, but at this point the major manufacturers have figured out how to keep things moving. And it's worth making the switch: toilets can use up to 30 percent of all our household water. A low-flow toilet uses just 1.6 gallons per flush compared to an older model's three or more gallons, while a high-efficiency model uses a measly 1.28 gpf. Dual-flush toilets, which are my favorite option but tend to be more expensive, usually use less than a gallon for liquid waste and about 1.6 for solid waste.

To be honest, I think if you identify your price range and go with one of the major manufacturers, you'll be fine. But if you are really in the mood to dork out, the California Urban Water Conservation Council has done some extremely thorough "maximum performance" testing, and makes various PDFs available that sort the results by performance, by manufacturer, and so forth. The EPA also offers a list of high-efficiency toilets that have earned its WaterSense seal, as good an endorsement as we currently have. Good luck.

Whooshily,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

In your last column, you talked about what people can do in the weeks leading up to the Copenhagen summit. I wanted to share a site called www.hopenhagen.org that is working on that very issue. There is a useful Facebook application that is associated that has a myriad of actions for just that audience: change out a lightbulb, turn down your water heater, etc.! Is there any way you can write a bit about it in the next post in response to the question? Thanks!

Mary
Santa Cruz, Calif.

A. Dearest Mary,

I think you just have. Thank you for adding to our resources.

Hopily,
Umbra

Related Links:

State of the Climate Movement: Can fasting and asceticism save the world?

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

I am worried that your hotness may be contributing to global warming. I'm not sure what can be done to fix this.

O Zone

A. Dearest O,

You are making me blush. But I am using your letter as a springboard to report some exciting news: In an effort to make my operations more energy-efficient, I am combining my previous twice-weekly column into one weekly, multi-question column. Experts say the shift will result in 26 fewer milligrams of carbon emitted each week. I'll also be popping up in other places on Grist during the week now, and asking you dearest readers for more input. So keep the questions, suggestions, and blush-inducing compliments coming -- we'll lick this climate thing yet.

Efficiently,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

What is the most effective thing each of us can do over the next six weeks to help stop global warming?

Ned T.
Columbia, Md.

A. Dearest Ned,

I assume your six-week timeframe is pinned on the Copenhagen climate conference, to which we are all looking with bright eyes and big hopes. My advice for the interim is two-pronged: first, pledge to make one change in your own life that will reduce your energy use. Because I'm getting in the holiday spirit, I'll even say changing one light bulb counts, though I'd like to see you take some bigger steps as well. Second, but only because I couldn't blurt both ideas at once: Contact your representatives and senators. Tell them you support the passage of strong climate legislation, and tell them Obama would be insane not to go to Copenhagen. Tell them if they don't do something about climate change immediately, you are going to distribute photographs of them in compromising positions. We all know you don't possess any such photographs, but that sort of threat will always send a shiver down a politician's spine. When it comes to the climate crisis, we are no longer above such maneuvers.

Shiveringly,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

Do you have any recommendations on how to make the annual corporate 'gift basket' sustainable, yet memorable?

Erin K.
Portland, Ore.

A. Dearest Erin,

Want not, waste not.Good for you for thinking about how to make this consumption-y tradition more sustainable. The obvious choice, of course, would be to forgo the gift basket entirely. Can you get away with that at your company? Why not send your supporters and customers a gift certificate for a nice meal, instead, or donate to a worthy non-profit organization in their name. It seems to me that, in an age when 83 percent of people report receiving gifts they don't want, the corporate gift basket has run its course. However, if you absolutely must dole out tangible items, see if you can draw any inspiration from our list of creative green gift basket ideas. If all else fails and a more traditional basket is required, make sure you are thoughtful about choosing local, sustainable products. You live in a land of good cheese, beer, and wine, so it shouldn't be hard.

Scroogily,
Umbra

Q. Dear Umbra,

Can I recycle my receipts? I'm worried that the type of paper they're printed on will contaminate the regular paper I'm recycling.

BadRabbit
Richmond, Va.

A. Dearest Bad,

What a good question as we approach Holiday Shopping Madness. I can say with nearly 100 percent confidence that you cannot recycle your receipts -- at least, those printed on thermal paper, which is the sort of shiny, sheeny paper that faxes used to arrive on. (Remember faxes?) However, as with all such "can I recycle this or that" questions, I'll advise you to doublecheck with your municipality. Two more things on the receipt front, one creepy, one promising. The creepy one is that some receipts are coated with BPA, the estrogen-mimicking chemical found in baby bottles and can linings. At present, the best advice for avoiding this form of BPA exposure seems to be to decline receipts when you can, and wash your hands after handling them when you can't. Now for the more promising news: I've been hearing about a business model in which you, the customer, can associate your debit card with an e-mail account and request digital receipts, so instead of ending up with a pocket full of non-recyclable thermal paper, you end up with an inbox full instead. Many people seem to be trying this notion, but I have not located one good, central resource that's figured out how to get it up and running -- readers, any insights?

Totally,
Umbra

Related Links:

State of the Climate Movement: Can fasting and asceticism save the world?

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ray Anderson set out to make his business sustainable long before green was the flavor of the month.  Reading Paul Hawken's The Ecology of Commerce in 1994 literally changed his life, inspiring him to overhaul his carpet company, Interface, and aim for zero waste and zero environmental impact.  Now, with his new book Confessions of a Radical Industrialist, he wants to spur other business leaders to "climb Mount Sustainability." 

Anderson recently dropped by the Grist office and we asked him how his own ascent is going so far. 

-----

Q. You've been working for the last 15 years to make your company sustainable. What do you know that other companies need to know?

A. Well, it's hard. It's the work of a lifetime. It takes an awful lot of patience and stick-to-itiveness.

We're 15 years into a 26-year journey -- that's how long we calculate it will take us to get to a zero footprint, taking nothing from the earth that's not naturally, rampantly renewable and doing no harm to the biosphere.

Q. How long did it take your company to recoup the investment that you initially made?

A. No time. From day one, we were ahead of the game. Tackling waste -- that's where the low-hanging fruit is. We declared war on waste: only zero is acceptable. Doing everything right the first time, every time, including making no scrap and no off-quality. When we measured ourselves against that kind of perfection, we found 10 percent of the sales dollar going down the drain as waste, most of it considered allowable, expected.

Fifteen years later, we're only halfway there. But we've saved over $400 million, which has more than financed everything else that we've done -- the R&D, the capital expenditures, the process changes, employee training, the whole ball of wax.

Q. Is that a technique that's replicable?

A. Yes. We ought to be doing this anyway in business. When you set that bar at zero, that's a stretch, but it's easy to understand.

Q. Are there things you thought would be easy to do that have turned out to be really difficult?

A. The technologies didn't exist and we didn't know what it was going to take to create them. We couldn't have done it by ourselves. We didn't know how long it would take to get suppliers involved, or get new inventors inventing things that we'd never heard of. So there was a big mystery about it all.

But we had a clear vision and that was the main thing. Climb that mountain clear to the top.

Ray Anderson. 

Q. In the whole lifecycle of your products, what was the hardest aspect to get within that sustainable margin? Transportation?

A. No, transportation is miniscule in the grand scheme. The important thing is the technologies for recycling. Today they have been invented and we're increasing recycled content. Like 35 percent now of our raw material comes from used products, post-consumer recycling. At the time I wrote the book, I think it was 28 percent, so it's moved up since.

Q. You're not turning plastic bottles into carpet -- you're turning old carpet into new carpet, right?

A. Yeah, the ideal product is our own product from 20 years ago. And we're also recycling other carpet manufacturers' carpets too.

Q. As a business leader, what do you want to see Congress do about climate change?

A. Put a price on carbon. I'd prefer to see it done through tax shifts, taxing bad things instead of good things. A shift in those taxes even in a revenue-neutral way that just puts a price on carbon so that an honest market can then work. Today it's a dishonest market, blind as a bat, just stumbling around ignoring the externalities.

Q. As you've made sustainability core to your business, have you gotten new customers through that effort? 

A. Yes. There was a survey done of commercial interior designers three or four years ago, who very heavily influence our marketplace, and 91 percent said they preferred recycled content.  Not just accepted it, but preferred it. Today it's probably even higher than that.

It was that community, interior designers, who were asking us the question 15 years ago: "What's your company doing for the environment?"  So when we began to actually do something, they began to embrace us for what we were doing. The goodwill of the marketplace is amazing. 

If you had to state the pure dollar-and-cents business case for sustainability, our cost is down, not up -- the waste-elimination effort alone has more than paid for all the rest of this. Our products are the best they've ever been. Biomimicry has had a huge influence; it's a wellspring of innovation. Our people are galvanized around a shared higher purpose. You can't beat it for attracting people and motivating people. And the goodwill of the marketplace is just astonishing. What else is there that underlies shareholder value but cost and products and people and market? That's it. It's a better business model without doubt.

Q. Do you think the business community at large is capable of a shift to sustainability?

A. They will either do it or be superseded by those who do. The industrial system that operates today is undermining the basis of the industrial system; it's committing suicide because nature is that undergirding factor. There's no business that can operate without air and water and food and energy and materials and climate regulation and ultraviolet radiation shields and pollination and seed dispersal and distribution. All of those are supplied by nature. If we kill nature, we will certainly kill the economy. When somebody sits down and tries to figure out the value of nature, it's very simple: Whatever the economic GDP is today, that's the value of nature, because none of it would exist without that undergirding.

Q. Are there examples of other businesses you've influenced?

A. I claim some credit for Wal-Mart. They sent two teams to our factory in Lagrange, Ga. -- one lead by Mike Duke, who is the president/CEO now, and one lead by Doug McMillon, who is now the No. 2 man. Each of them came and spent the day there understanding what we were talking about and what we were doing. They went away satisfied that it's doable, which was a huge hurdle for them to get over before they went to 60,000 suppliers and said, "You gotta do this too." I think that was a hurdle that we helped them clear. Since then they've been going gangbusters.

Q. So what's next for you?

A. We've got the rest of this mountain to climb.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

We must save all the energy we can!At the broadest level, everything we can do to address climate change/national security/energy balance of trade and just about any other meaningful social question associated with our energy use falls into one of three categories:

1. Use less downstream energy.  Turn down the thermostat, ride your bike to work, move to a smaller home, etc.

2. Switch upstream fuels.  Favor coal in the name of national security.  Favor nuclear in the name of CO2.  Favor wind in the name of green jobs.  Etc.

3. Use less upstream energy.  Insulate your home, build CHP plants, recycle your plastic and aluminum waste, etc.

All three have a critical role to play, but note that only the third creates social benefits and can be guaranteed to increase our overall standard of living.  In the famous Amory Lovins-ism, no one gives a damn about how much coal, oil or gas they use - they care about how hot their shower is and how cold their beer. 

Ergo, we ought to make maximal use of anything that fits into that third bucket as a matter of public policy.  Which raises the question: how big is that third bucket?  Or, framed another way: how much energy does the U.S. currently waste?  Any increase in our efficiency of energy conversion (from upstream fuel to downstream energy) is implicitly a reduction in our energy waste.  Tell me how much we waste and you will tell me the maximum size of that third bucket.

How Much do we Consume?

As it turns out, there's very little good data on how much energy we waste.  DOE estimates that we use about 100 quadrillion btus ("quads") of primary energy per year.  But they too often present that data in charts like this one that seem to assume a perfectly efficient economy.  As that great philosopher Homer Simpson said, "In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"  And I'm pretty sure thermo says that you can't get 100 percent of the energy you put in out in a useful form. DOE charts to the contrary notwithstanding...

Nonetheless, this does bound our analysis.  If we put 100 quads of primary energy in, we must get 100 quads out somewhere. At the very least, it implies that there can't be more than 100 quads of wasted energy presently available in the system.

Solid Waste

EPA estimates that the average American produces 1,130 lbs of trash per year.  At 4,500 btu/lb and just over 307 million people, that's 1.6 quads of energy in our trash.  Add in 6.5 million metric tons of solid waste in our sewage per year at 10,000 btu/dry ton and that's another 0.1 quads.  So in total, all our solid waste is about 1.7 quads of total energy waste, or 1.7 percent of all our primary energy use. 

Industrial Waste

Lawrence Berkeley National Lab has estimated that the US could produce 96 GW of electric power from energy that is currently wasted by the US industrial sector.  (This waste includes a host of different materials, from paper sludge to waste heat.)  RED's internal analysis suggests that this may be conservative, but let's use the LBNL data.  Assuming 25 percent fuel-to-power generation efficiency (and assuming further that this represents 100 percent of all energy wasted by the US industrial sector, and not simply the economically recoverable/LBNL-identifiable fraction) that works out to an additional 11.4 quads. 

Power Generation Waste

In 2008, we generated 3,806,611 GWh from fossil-fired thermal power plants.  Those plants, on average, operate at 33 percent fuel efficiency, meaning that for every 1 unit of electric power generated, 2 units of waste heat were thrown away in cooling towers, rivers and streams.  That's 2 x 3,806,611 GWh of wasted heat, or 26.4 quads up in smoke.

Transportation Waste

The total US transportation sector uses some 28.6 quads of fuel per year.  For rather obvious reasons, there's not a lot of good data on how much of that goes out the tailpipe vs. a more productive use.  But conservatively, let's assume that we get 30 percent of the useful energy out of that fuel (this is considerably higher than a passenger car over normal driving cycles, but probably low for rail, shipping and long-haul trucking on an efficiency per ton-mile basis.)  Clearly, this is the least accurate of the numbers, but even at 30 percent, that implies an additional waste of 0.7 x 28.6 or 20 quads of waste, going into tail pipe exhaust, hot brakes, burnt tires, etc.

Total Identifiable Waste

Add those all up and we've got 100 quads of primary energy and 60 quads of waste energy.  For all the reasons noted above, the waste energy is probably much higher, but even at this level, it is a massive opportunity.  Recovering just half of this total would reduce every issue associated with fossil fuel use by one third with no detriment to our standard of living.  Getting this waste out of the system ought to be a priority of our national energy and environmental policy.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

I just got married and received a lot of presents in the mail. I recycled/reused all the boxes, but I'm still stuck with a LOT of bubble wrap and sealed air. Is there a place where I can take these rolls of plastic to be recycled?

Johnny
Washington, D.C.

A. Dearest Johnny,

Congratulations and best wishes for a long and happy marriage. You may wish to retain a portion of the bubble wrap for use during periods of marital fragility.

I have several ideas on the recycling of said wrap, which boil down to this: Find a place to recycle it. Find a place that will reuse it. Or reuse it yourself.

mollypop via flickrNormally, as you may know, I defer to your local recycling service for such questions. The D.C. recycle website is silent on the matter of bubbles and sealed air, though they adamantly refuse packing peanuts. They do accept a variety of plastics, including plastic bags, so you should call them and see if they accept deflated sealed air -- which, after all, is a clean plastic film not unlike a plastic bag and is even made from the same material, polyethylene.

Most of us have made the egregious error of using "bubble wrap" to refer to all air cellular cushioning material. Only the trademarked (and presumably vastly superior) Bubble Wrap manufactured by the Sealed Air Corporation deserves the name. Or so the Sealed Air Corporation says. You see, air cellular cushioning material is made by heating and extruding polyethylene beads out of a tube until they form two layers of film. One layer of film is then wrapped around a holey drum. Air sucks the film into the drum, forming the future bubbles, and the second layer of film is laminated on top to seal the deal. The SA Corp uses a secret other layer of lamination to stop air leakage in the bubbles, rendering competitors' products inferior. True Bubble Wrap might also make the most satisfying popping sound -- I cannot say.

If you cannot find a local bubble wrap recycling business (use the internet and Earth 911), you can often ship bubbles and puffy sacks back to the manufacturer. You might also try your luck with shipping facilities like The UPS Store and its ilk, museums that might need bubble wrap to protect works of art, or sites such as Craigslist and Freecycle. One man's dilemma is another's treasure find.

One other thing you might consider is finding uses for the bubble wrap around your home. Put "recycle bubble wrap" into Google and you will find all manner of interesting suggestions, from the sensible (use it between walls and furniture for protection) to the downright silly (wrap your feet in it for winter warmth).

Poppingly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Islam is green by nature, and Ramadan offers a chance to make a big impact.Shawna AyoubAfter my grandfather had a stroke, the doctor said he might not walk again. He also said that getting him to challenge himself -- to give walking a true try -- was critical to his physical and emotional recovery. My grandfather took his first steps only a week after the near total paralysis of his left side.

While he never regained his easy gait, he also never let his slow, strained shuffle hinder him. Mornings, he made ten laps back and forth on the Lebanese mountain road outside the gates of his house. When I visited Lebanon, I walked with him, helping him stoop and clear the trash -- plastic bags, Pepsi bottles, paper, cigarette butts -- that passersby had tossed out their windows onto the road. It was close to the time Jiddo died that I learned clearing the roads wasn't so much a physical exercise as a spiritual one.

The responsibility Muslims hold in man's divinely bestowed role as the world's vicegerents extends to the planet's health. We know that removing litter from the road is considered an Islamic charity (Sahih AlJumea). We also know that God loves those who do not waste (Qur'an 7:31). In fact, Muslims are specifically commanded to eat fruit in its season and refrain from wasting the goods from this earth (6:141). Multiple examples from the life of the Prophet Muhammad (ahadith), peace and blessings be on him, instruct us to conserve water, avoid overeating, and care for animals and plants in need.

Islam is by its nature a "green" religion -- and Ramadan, the Islamic month during which fasting is prescribed for all able Muslims, offers a chance for the 1.2 billion of us worldwide to make a huge and hugely positive environmental impact.

There is more to a Ramadan fast than abstention from food, drink, and sex during the daylight hours. An Islamic fast also requires the participant to refrain from angry activities and discourse, and good deeds are strongly encouraged. The standard for good deeds is that they be charitable in nature, such as feeding the poor and taking care of orphans. Ramadan is capped off with a community-oriented feasting day called Eid al Fitr during which an obligatory tax (zakat) is collected that is redistributed to the needy.

While there is no disputing the social and economic value of feeding the hungry and nursing the sick during this holy month, it is just as important that we remember to take care of the world for which we are the inheritors.

Simply by not overeating before or after our fast, we can contribute to global health -- and our own. In a recent article for the Washington Post, Zafar Nomani, professor emeritus of human nutrition and foods at West Virginia University, noted that, "During Ramadan, research has shown that the basal metabolism of fasting subjects slows down. A person can stay healthy and active during Ramadan consuming a diet that is less than the normal amount of calories or food intake but balanced in nutrients."

Even if only 50 percent of the estimated 7 million Muslims living in the United States fast during Ramadan, if that fast eliminates our weekly cheeseburger (or meat and rice equivalent) and we do not over consume to compensate for a missed meal, that means the American Muslim community could reduce U.S. CO2 output by 60,900 metric tons during Ramadan alone. That's the equivalent annual CO2 output of 6,090 SUVs!

Further, we often pay attention to how our meat is slaughtered with little or no regard to how it was raised. Many local farms allow us to do our own slaughtering on their premises. This gives us a choice come Eid, when ritual animal sacrifices are made and the meat shared out to our neighbors and the poor. We can elect to purchase our animals (and vegetables) from farms that use sustainable agricultural methods. We may pay a slight premium, but isn't it worth it if, when we go before God on the Last Day, among our deeds it will be recorded that we chose from the animals that were responsibly and compassionately raised to offer as our sacrifice?

Go ahead -- start small.Shawna AyoubWhat else can you do? Begin with the next fast-breaking dinner (iftaar) you host or attend. Collect recyclables such as soda cans and plastic bottles and drop them off at your local recycling center. Choose reusable dishes instead of disposables. If you're attending a nightly community dinner at a mosque, set up a dishwashing schedule that will let your Muslim brothers and sisters rake in the blessings by pitching in once a week.

While you're at it, set up a Freecycle-style program for Eid gifts that allows community members to exchange goods or gently used toys. Not only will you save money that can later be donated to the poor, you will avoid buying new items that can be toxic for the planet and for your health. Encourage your community to get educated and organized in order to contribute, perhaps by planting an organic vegetable garden on the mosque lawn.

If you aren't fasting or have no local community, you can still chip in. Walk to the mosque for prayers (and gain rewards) or carpool when you travel. Consider putting in some time at a soup kitchen or homeless shelter. You could even donate some of your time to the Humane Society. You can join groups such as Green Ramadan that have popped up online with the goal of a global green effort for one month each year.

Like my grandfather, we can all do our part in a small way. Each individual act is like a pebble in a pond that sends out ten ripples. Who knows how far those miniature waves will reach or what good they may carry?

Ramadan is a month of hyperawareness achieved through the challenges of the body in order to strengthen the soul. Every good deed is one that contributes to this renewal. And each one can contribute to the renewal of our planet, too, whether your efforts are individual or communal.

There are still plenty of blessed days left this Ramadan. Challenge yourself and strengthen your soul, and by doing so, earn the rewards of the next life. Make this Ramadan your greenest ever.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

When was the last time you looked up something in the phone book? What did you do the last time you got a free phone book dropped off on your doorstep--did you recycle it? If you're like most people these days, your answers to those questions are probably "I don't remember" and "No."

WhitePages, an online directory service, recently released the results of a survey it conducted indicating that only 15.9 percent of U.S. adults recycle their old or unwanted phone books, and that U.S. citizens are largely unaware of the environmental impact of printing and delivering so many phone books (five million trees cut down every year!). WhitePages is sponsoring a "Ban the Phone Book" initiative to encourage the creation of "opt-in" programs, wherein citizens would only receive a phone book if they requested one. In the survey, 81 percent of respondents said they'd support such a program. Many states currently require phone companies to provide phone books to all landline subscribers, even as the internet threatens to make physical phone books obsolete.

Some states and phone companies already have "opt-out" programs, similar to do-not-call registries for telemarketers, allowing subscribers to indicate that they don't wish the receive the phone book. Proponents of "opt-in" programs, however, say that they're easier for consumers and more effective in reducing waste. Cincinnati Bell started an opt-in program earlier this year, bringing their White Pages online and only providing the printed version to customers who ask for it. In Florida, AT&T plans to test out an opt-in program for its White Pages in four cities this fall. The company is considering a similar program in Missouri's metropolitan areas as well.

If your area doesn't have opt-in or opt-out programs yet, you can lobby your local government or landline provider, while in the meantime making sure to recycle the unwanted phone books that get dumped on your doorstep.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

Photo: Ryan Eilders via FlickrDuring their 2008 summer tour, the Dave Matthews Band encouraged 160,000 fans to carpool, diverted 8,000 cubic yards of waste from the landfill, employed 550 volunteers to educate fans, and reduced their carbon footprint by almost 8.5 million pounds of CO2 (through eco-efforts and offsets).

This year, they are continuing that commitment with their So Much to Save campaign. Fans who recycle a can (or ten) at a Dave Matthews Band show this summer will receive a download code for the exclusive So Much to Save 2009 album featuring songs from the band and supporting acts from their tour like The Avett Brothers, Gomez, Umphrey's McGee, and others.

Not planning to attend a show? No problem. The free download is also available to fans who take the So Much to Save pledge committing to at least one of the following eco-actions:

So make the commitment today -- I know you're already reading Grist, so why not sign up to stay informed inbox-style? All the kids are doing it.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

Daniel plants showy fleabane, a prairie flower native to the Pacific Northwest, at the Stafford Creek Corrections Center.Photo: Sarah van Schagen

Rows and rows of small yellow cylinders fill the greenhouse where Daniel works steadily, beads of sweat forming on his round, bald head as he places tiny seeds in each container. He is planting showy fleabane, an endangered variety of prairie groundcover that will eventually produce purple-petaled blooms worthy of their moniker.

His work is part of a federally funded prairie restoration project, an effort to repair the native grasslands of the Pacific Northwest in areas like Fort Lewis, Wash. But Daniel, who asked that his last name not be used, is not your average horticulturalist. For one thing, his greenhouse is on the grounds of a maximum security prison.

Daniel, as well as many of the men tending seedlings around him, is part of the Sustainable Prisons Project at the Stafford Creek Corrections Center in western Washington. The program is a partnership between Evergreen State University and several state correctional facilities that allows offenders to opt in to sustainability-related work projects.

Jason Chandler plants Walla Walla Sweet Onions in the organic garden at Stafford Creek Corrections Center.Photo: Sarah van SchagenThe liberal-arts university/state penitentiary partnership may sound like an odd pairing -- the Evergreen alumni magazine likened it to Maya Angelou dating Dick Cheney -- but so far, both parties consider the relationship a success. The scientists get cheap (and eager) labor, while the offenders get the opportunity to participate in meaningful work.

One inmate participating in the pilot program at the Cedar Creek Corrections Center was the senior author of a peer-reviewed paper about the project in an international sustainability journal, and upon his release began pursuing a Ph.D. in biochemistry.

"What I care about is that [the offenders] are exposed to what we can offer in the way of science, the wonder of nature, of thinking critically," says Nalini Nadkarni, the Evergreen ecologist who helped establish the Sustainable Prisons Project. "Those are all things that when they get back out into society, they will carry with them ... increas[ing] the scientific literacy of our country, and perhaps even more important ... the civic engagement that they have with society."

The tasks vary across the four prisons that are now part of the sustainability project (administrators hope eventually to expand it statewide), and include tending to organic gardens that provide fresh produce for the kitchen, separating recyclables from the waste stream, beekeeping, and minding composting worms.

The offenders can also participate in a variety of conservation efforts like the prairie restoration, a project being led by The Nature Conservancy. They are also helping breed endangered spotted Oregon frogs and "farm" mosses for the horticultural trade (which aids in preventing unsustainable harvesting from old-growth forests).

Photo: Sarah van SchagenAll of the offenders involved in the program get specialized training and guidance from scientists and other educators working with the corrections centers.

That green-collar job training is key, says Doug Raines, the man behind Stafford Creek's new beekeeping operation. He knows there are lots of valid reasons to keep bees -- honey production, pollination, protection from colony collapse -- but he does it to provide job opportunities.

"If I can get one guy a job and he doesn't come back, then I have paid for everything that we have done, and that's my reason for having the bees," Raines says. "It's one more avenue for employment when they get out of here."

The offenders aren't the only ones at the correctional facilities who are benefitting from the project, though. The sustainability efforts are also saving money -- a valuable incentive in an economy that has seen significant cuts to the state's Department of Corrections budget.

When the Cedar Creek facility began to tap out its water supplies, efficiency upgrades like low-flow toilets and showers and a rainwater catchment system helped save 250,000 gallons of water in the summer alone. And the gardening, composting, and recycling efforts are saving the facilities thousands of dollars every year.

"[Correctional facilities] are essentially small cities running 24/7," says Sustainable Prisons Project Manager Jeff Muse. "If we can make them more sustainable, not only will it save money, save natural resources, and save lives, but it would be an example for all kinds of other institutions, such as military bases, summer camps, hospitals, and schools."

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

Apparently I have a confession to make: I was, until this time, unaware of the fascinating depth of the world of paper napkins.

Word.osde8info via flickrTo begin with, there was my discovery that there are “lunch napkins”—the square, scratchy kind—and “dinner napkins,” the comparatively elegant, rectangular, softer kind. Seriously? I’d never noted this distinction at the store, let alone honoring it at my dinner (I mean lunch) table.

More to the point, there are my newfound feelings of confusion over my lifelong paper-napkin use. Do I, like the average American, really use 2,200 paper napkins a year? Could I, along with my fellow Americans, use one less napkin a day and save a billion pounds of tree-killing, chlorine-bleached napkins from heading to the landfills? Should I invest in bamboo cloth and PVC-free rings and join the ranks of virtuous wipers who reuse their napkins for several days?

The cloth vs. disposable debate has a certain ring of familiarity to it, and your leanings will depend upon squeamishness, upbringing, and other factors. If you are among those who use disposable napkins regularly or occasionally, this great offense can be somewhat ameliorated by buying those made from recycled paper. But do the suckers work?

I found six brands of lunch napkins and put them through a series of tests. First there were the everyday encounters: pizza grease, grape jam, maple syrup, spilled water. Then there were the wet and dry strength tests. Then there were the in-a-pinch tests: How did the napkin perform as an ersatz rag for stove cleaning? Mirror polishing? Nose blowing?

Here’s what I found:

Scott Naturals by Kimberly-Clark
Eco-claim: A “sensible blend” of 80 percent recycled fiber
Price/quantity: $4.29/400 one-ply napkins
Cute slogan: “Green done right”

Just a few months ago, the launch of the Scott Naturals line incurred the wrath of activists including Forest Ethics’ Ginger Cassady, who wrote a scathing op-ed right here on ye olde Grist. But last week’s news of sustainable commitments by parent company Kimberly-Clark has given treehuggers new hope. Still, this product is the least impressive of the lot, in eco-terms: with a comparatively piddling 80 percent recycled fiber and a pretty flimsy feel, it’s more pretender than contender. It did rank among the most absorbent in these tests, but loses major points for scratchiness.

365 Everyday Value by Whole Foods
Eco-claims: 100 percent recycled paper (80 percent post-consumer content), whitened without chlorine bleach, fragrance free
Price/quantity: $2.99/250 one-ply napkins
Cute slogan: None

As usual, we’ve included the 365 “brand” in this lineup, even though it’s secretly someone else’s brand in Whole Foods’ packaging. That’s how private-label products work, friends! In this case, I’m fairly certain the secret brand is Marcal (see below), judging by the identical pattern, performance, and price point. Would these do as everyday table napkins? Absolutely. Do they hold up under heavy-duty oven-cleaning and strength tests? Not hardly.

Green Forest by Planet Inc.
Eco-claims: 100 percent recycled paper (minimum 90 percent post-consumer content), whitened without chlorine, unscented
Price/quantity: $3.69/250 one-ply napkins
Cute slogan: “Soft on nature”

The curious history of this brand wends from its creation at a small Wisconsin paper company to near-demise under the Georgia-Pacific umbrella to rescue by “Planet Inc.” in 2005. Methinks, based on pattern and performance, that these too are a private-label version, this time of Seventh Generation’s product*. [Apparently methought wrong; click on the asterisk for details.] Unlike that company, Green Forest uses a reclosable bag and boasts of a “special partnership” with River Network. Performance-wise, the napkins were strong, although they crumbled a bit under pressure. They’re on the softer side of the spectrum, which is sweet on the schnozz.

Small Steps by Marcal
Eco-claims: 100 percent premium recycled paper, whitened without chlorine bleaching, no dye or fragrance added
Price/quantity: $2.99/250 one-ply napkins
Cute slogan: “A small, easy step to a greener Earth”

Based in New Jersey, Marcal says it’s been “saving trees since 1950” by making paper from recycled paper. The company has gotten super PR-savvy of late, rebranding its napkins, TP, tissues, and paper towels as “Small Steps” products and encouraging customers to “help us save 1 million trees” (a ticker on its website counts more than 21 million trees saved since 2000—three cheers for underpromising and overdelivering!). While these napkins would be fine for everyday use, they did not hold up as well in strength tests. However, I give Marcal extra points for its reusable drawstring package.

Full Circle Foods Paper Napkins
Eco-claim: 100 percent recycled paper (80 percent post-consumer content), whitened without chlorine bleach
Price/quantity: $2.99/300 one-ply napkins
Cute slogan: “Return to a natural way of living”

At first blush, these napkins struck me as the weakest of the bunch. They were softer than the others, and seemed thinner—they almost felt like a facial tissue or toilet paper. But damned if they didn’t perform like a champ. They handled maple syrup, grape jam, and pizza grease with aplomb, scored up there with eco-faker Scott’s on absorbency, and held their own in a drip test too. Give me a reusable package, and I’d be in lunch-napkin heaven.

Seventh Generation Recycled Napkins
Eco-claims: 100 percent recycled paper (80 percent minimum post-consumer content), whitened without chlorine bleach, free of dyes and fragrances; this recycled paper product helps fight global warming; saves natural resources, reduces pollution
Price/quantity: $3.69/250 one-ply
Cute slogan: “In our every deliberation ...”—you know the drill

The grandpappy of green household products scores fairly well in the napkin department—commendably strong when both wet and dry, they left the least residue when wiping maple syrup and were bearably soft on the nose. But they landed on the weak side when pressed into oven-cleaning service, and felt a bit drippier than some of the others.

The Bottom Line: Full Circle wiped away the competition, based on performance, softness, and strength. While the Seventh Generation/Green Forest* version fared slightly better than the Small Steps/365 version, any of them would make a fine table napkin. And all are better than Scott’s Unnaturals, which uses less recycled content and is bleached with chlorine; it’ll be interesting to see whether Kimberly-Clark greens up this product over the next few years in light of its new sustainability commitments.

*The public affairs manager from Planet, Inc., contacted me after publication to clarify that Green Forest is “absolutely not” a sub-brand or private-label version of Seventh Generation and that the companies are in fact competitors.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

I've been noticing lately a lot of "green" businesses and restaurants in my area using compostable plastics, usually made of corn, if I recall correctly. I can't compost (I know, I know, but I live in a tiny apartment on the third floor with no porch or yard), and I was wondering if you could tell us any more about this plastic. Should I recycle it, or throw it away? What to do?

Becky B.
Jamaica Plain, Mass.

A. Dearest Becky,

Corn plastic = not fantastic.USDA.govDoes anyone find pictures of food appetizing? Right now I'm looking at a picture of some artistically arranged marinated olives in a bio-plastic deli container. I love olives. These are just repulsive. Perhaps the key to weight loss is photos of food.

I have a bit of scandale for you with these compostable plastic containers. The clear plastic #7 (which really just means "other") cups and deli containers are made with PLA, which is usually a corn derivative but could also come from cane sugar. I was all ready to dork out on the science of PLA, polylactic acid, but then I read this: "Instead, lactic acid is oligomerized and then catalytically dimerized to make the cyclic lactide monomer." The weather is too nice to spend time unraveling those polymers. Suffice to say they bacterially ferment the corn, then do all sorts of other stuff to stabilize it and turn it into a plastic. They can then make cups, fabrics, upholstery ... but who are "they"?

PLA is manufactured by agribiz giant Cargill at a plant in Blair, Nebraska. Cargill is a major player in the genetically modified corn market, is apparently the world's largest grain handler, and operates its PLA product division under the name NatureWorks. The long and short of it is that this "green" plastic is made from GMO corn by one of the largest private companies in the United States, one with a terrible track record on environmental issues. Here is a useful overview of the Cargill-corn plastic connection that our own Tom Philpott penned a few years back. There are actual mini-scandals regarding Cargill and PLA, such as them trying to make a partnership with Patagonia for a PLA fleece. Somehow they neglected to mention the GMO corn behind the whole product.

So when we use these cups, we are supporting GMO crops and industrial ag. And we are not necessarily creating less waste; yes, the cups are biodegradable, but only in commercial composting facilities or other composts that reach 150 degrees with 90 percent humidity. So even if you composted in your apartment -- which you could! -- you likely would not have the right conditions. And there are problems with recycling corn plastic too -- check with your friendly JP recyclers to see what they prefer. In the end, these cups can be equal to some products made from oil-based plastic: you just throw them out.

The only lifecycle assessment I could find was obviously pro-Cargill, so I can't say how much petroleum it takes to make them. But I can say that products from conventional corn, a petroleum-intensive crop, are not the magic bullet. The magic bullet is to bring your own cup (on your bike, of course).

Polylactically,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Only about a fifth of the plastic water bottles purchased in the United States are recycled.Courtesy producers of TAPPED.Tapped, a new documentary about the bottled water industry from director Stephanie Soechtig and the producers of Who Killed the Electric Car?, is a pretty damning look at how consumers have been tricked into spending too much money on water packaged in plastic and quite often not as clean as what's available from the faucet.

I knew bottled water sucks, but I didn't know it sucks this much. Not only is it a clear waste of resources (only 20 percent of plastic water bottles used in the United States are recycled, and far too many of the rest probably end up in the Pacific Garbage Patch), it's an incredible waste of money for consumers, who pay more than the price of gasoline for water that's marketed as "pure," but in reality is largely unregulated, full of harmful toxins like BPA, and far less safe for drinking than free tap water. (In fact, 40 percent of the time, bottled water is nothing but municipal tap water, freed from the government oversight that keeps it safe.)

Tapped, which began a one-week run at the IFC Center in New York on Friday, traces the evolution of bottled water from its hoity-toity Perrier days to its present ubiquity, and succeeds at making the industry reps look like total jerks. A few too many mid-interview cutaways to Soechtig looking concerned came off as a little journalistically self-important, but Tapped does a solid job of covering every aspect of this damaging industry and inspiring more outrage than despair. It features interviews with the likes of Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin and Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), not to mention some footage of Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) tearing into an FDA rep at a government hearing.

I will never look at bottled water with anything less than loathing from now on.

Watch the trailer:

The film's website lists where you can see it in the theater. So far, it will be screened in a smattering of cities on the East and West costs. There's also a Facebook page for the film.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Ask Umbra on trash, toxics, and tots

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

About a year ago I made the whole body switch to organic and all-natural shampoos, body lotions, makeup, etc. In an attempt to stop my packrat-like habits, I want to know, what do I do with all of my old chemical-laden bottles and tubes? I can't bare to just throw them in the garbage knowing that I could have recycled the plastic bottles, but if I recycle the bottles, that means I will have to pour the contents down the drain which flows into our lake affecting the wildlife--the reason why I switched to all natural in the first place! Please help!

Frettingly,
Carlee S.
Niagara Falls, ON

A. Dearest Carlee,

I'm supposed to be relaxing!Also Dearest Many Others with Confusing Trash Around the House. I have filled a 42-gallon trash bag with recent letters about vexing unwanted items: cosmetics, pill bottles, cookware, shampoo, floppy discs ... fortunately for me, my trash bag is digital, and seems to vaporize when I hit the happy button.

For non-virtual objects, however, I wish you all to follow some very basic steps. The first step is to admit that you are powerless to prevent accumulation of a certain amount of garbage, no matter how earnest your intentions. Then we get to skip the fearless moral inventory and go straight to making an inventory of which items it is possible to recycle or reuse.

There are two main substeps at this point. One is contacting your local trash management information source and finding out if your particular garbage is toxic, recyclable, collected by a local agency, etc. Many agencies have an annual or more-frequent household hazardous waste collection day, and some accept cosmetics and the like. The second thing you can do is search on the internet for people recycling your item; perhaps someone wants old VHS tapes, and if you are willing to ship them to Iowa, the problem is solved.

If you make these efforts and are thwarted, then feel free to move on to the next step: Throwing things out. In your case, Carlee, it is better to throw the tubes and bottles out than to pour their contents down the drain. Better still would be to use the products up. You could use them as intended (one more wash with the last dribs of your old shampoo will not be the end of the world), or find a new purpose for them at a site like AltUse. And then you can recycle your containers.

But people, listen: We will have garbage. Unless it is electronic, officially toxic or hazardous, or recyclable, we will need to throw it out. The only way to have fewer things to throw out is to bring fewer things into our lives. We must do the best we can at that, and accept that we are not perfect, or we will go insane. I am going to now model this behavior and throw out all the letters about throwing things out.

Valiantly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Hi Umbra,

I'm in the book business, and there are many who try and make sure books never make it to landfills and are donated to worthy causes. However, I have been wondering for some time about the environmental impact of such authors as Danielle Steel, Nora Roberts, and Tom Clancy, whose books quickly become worthless, and how they feel about their environmental impact, and what if anything they are doing to improve the clearcutting they might be causing? Just a thought.

Joe Hoppe
Austin, Tex.

A. Dearest Joe,

Is this misplaced blame? They are in the book business, you are also in the book business. They write books, you sell or collect or ship or edit or in some other way earn your living off of books. Like it or not, you and Danielle Steel have a mutual interest in the success of and continued circulation of books. And you also share a mutual responsibility for urging the book industry to be more eco-minded.

Your plots are delicious, but your eco-impacts suspicious.justin via flickrI looked into the authors you mentioned whose books "quickly become worthless." All three have engaged in various philanthropic causes, mostly involving children's health. I don't see any obvious messages about clearcutting coming from them, although Nora Roberts has done a bit of donating to Defenders of Wildlife. And Tom Clancy wrote Rainbow Six, involving terrorist environmentalists! From the Wikipedia summary: "After living in sealed redoubts ... and protected by the secret 'B' vaccine, they will come out to rebuild the world in an environmentally friendly way."

Sounds exciting! What may be more exciting, in light of your question, is some of the progress the book industry is making. The industry, like all others, contributes to global warming and other environmental problems. Glancing over at our friend the Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA database, we find that for every million wholesale dollars of book printing, 717 MT of CO2 equivalent are produced. We also know that 30 million trees are used to make books sold in the U.S. each year.

So what are some of the steps publishers are taking? Random House, which publishes Steel's novels, has committed to increasing its use of recycled paper from 3 percent to 30 percent by 2010. Penguin, which publishes Clancy's and Roberts' work, has an even more substantial-seeming green effort, which includes using FSC-certified paper, publishing work by environmental-minded authors, partnering with various green groups, and taking concrete steps to green its in-house business. Then, of course, we have electronic publishing, which is taking the trees out of the equation; as I have written before, e-books may be the greener option -- and your authors have made their work available in that format.

That is good news. But more to the point, I do not share your concern about the obsolescence of popular literature. I'd particularly like to direct you away from the idea that bestselling mainstream books quickly become "worthless." There is a reason that Steel and her ilk have sold millions and millions of books: People like to read them. Not just once, but again and again. My small window into vacation homes, library book sales, airplane and bus reading, shows that it is these very books that are repeatedly proving their worth. Perhaps not monetarily -- and maybe this is where your gripe comes in -- but certainly as reading material. It's the intellectual stuff that weighs down the table at a yard sale.

I say not to worry. Unlike many other manufactured objects -- cell phones spring to mind -- books are endlessly reused. Paperbacks have two great benefits: they are easily recyclable alongside old phonebooks. And they are highly portable. After all, no one is going to take their leatherbound copy of The Mill on the Floss to the beach.

Relaxedly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

Send your question to Umbra!

Q. Dear Umbra,

I will be moving soon, and a friend suggested buying cheap but durable plastic storage bins with lids as an alternative to traditional moving boxes (or whatever empty boxes I can find from local stores). The idea is appealing, especially for a lot of stuff that I typically keep stored in closets or my basement, because I wouldn't have to unpack when I get to my new home. But I'm sure there has to be an alternative to plastic when it comes to storage bins. What are the alternatives for lidded storage containers?

Thanks,
Jules

A. Dearest Jules,

Continuing on our moving theme, we hold back the tears as we think about boxes. As I mentioned earlier this week, quite a bit has changed in the three years since I last investigated green moving, so soon I will write about actual self-titled "green movers." Boxes are thrilling, though, and get to be first.

Kilroy was here ... till he moved.tew via flickrThere's nothing wrong with the old box from a local store. It's reuse, after all. Liquor boxes are about the same size as an officially purposed book box. As long as you don't mind a colorful assortment in your closet or basement, you could still happily not-unpack them. The problem comes when you want any kind of larger box for equally large people to heft in to a moving truck.

With reuse in mind, I briefly scanned Craigslist, and turned up scads of free moving boxes proffered by folks who have done all their unpacking and either are generous or can't deal with the recycling part. Other online classifieds should provide a similar pool of opportunity for reusing. If you are the last user of a box and the cardboard has been reduced to pulp, you can lay it on the lawn and plant a garden.

Plastic storage bins are a good option for moving and for storage. But they aren't as cheap as cardboard boxes. The only free plastic lidded containers I can think of are the five-gallon food service buckets one can obtain from a restaurant or church retreat center kitchen. There are only so many objects one can pack into a cylinder. I briefly looked for other lidded storage containers for you, but they seem few, far between, heavy, metal, and kind of silly. Cute canvas or steel containers are available, but too small for your needs. Wicker baskets seem too flimsy. All the East Coast rain must be sogging my brain, because I'm going to say that plastic bins are a pretty good idea. Especially if (drumroll) you can rent them!

Leading me to the only potential revelation of today's column. A few companies are making a go of renting plastic moving tubs. A few have a national profile; one I found is in southern California, one is more nationwide-ish. But I started looking more closely, and in several cities local moving firms were renting plastic tubs. Let your fingers do the walking. This may be a win-win solution. You get a durable crate, and so do 400 other people. You do still have to unpack at the end, but perhaps this will be a useful lesson in reducing what you own and owning what you need.

By the way, I also found cardboard boxes for rent, which is apparently also a fairly common offering. I'm not sure this is any better than Craigslist.

Best of luck, and lift with your knees.

Movingly,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo