Over the past year or so there are more IT companies addressing their client’s requests to become more sustainable. One of those offerings is Carbon Counting Software.

At a most basic level, IT services offered by IBM, SAS, Clear Standards and other are “housekeeping” devices. Companies seem to vary in their emphasis on operations, as some are used as a tool for executive level decision making, while others help cut the tedious work of carbon management. Essentially they all aim to create a product that is easy to use and available online. Heck let’s face it the basic principles of carbon emissions reductions is no secret and if a company creates a policy and invests in the most energy-efficient, low carbon products and trains its staff, it will reduce their carbon output.

However, the new breed of software can be helpful if emission standards are set in the future, and trade-off’s might need to be made. Another plus is that the software connects sustainability with profitability and that mindset will only help their industry across the board.

Like anything else in business these days, to be credible the systems need to be measured and auditable. Suppliers suggest that the way around this issue is to build evolving carbon accounting standards into their software and be clear about emissions factors they are using when extracting energy data. However, like basic accounting- garbage in is garbage out, so the company will ultimately be responsible for the data they put into the system, knowing what buildings to include etc.

What is most interesting is that these new offerings will generate a major tool that could play an increasingly important role in determining the numbers disclosed by companies in their annual report, where reporting may become mandatory. This their profile will rise if sales of their products take off.

As someone who googles a lot of sustainable and “Green” companies, I can tell you the interesting results that come from these searches. Sadly not all of my results hit the mark, despite my best efforts to fine tune my key words. Which made me ponder, how does a Green Company get their organization to stand out in an internet search? What SEO tips can one employ to help their business and their values reach the online community?

The first line of action is how does your company appear in the “positioning” of the search- towards the top of the results or at the bottom? Take a moment and google your company and review the results. You might want to explore at least 3 search engines to accomplish this to see how they can differ in the results.

One of the main decisions about how an eco business markets itself offline & online is whether to lead with the eco/ethical message or position in the same space as other companies. So let’s look at the options.

You can position yourself, from an eco/ethical position (Niched) or get in the “mix” with other similar companies (More competitive) or straddle them both and do a mix of niched and competitive. When considering potential traffic on the web, the “mix” option may be a better one for some organizations.

Seems like we are witnessing what happens when a supposedly “transparent” and eco friendly firm such as what SIGG portrayed to the public and their partners is actually not. Guess SIGG is now “brown” instead of “green” as this latest snafoo is costing them customers and partners.

SIGG finally admitted that their bottles are not as “health friendly” as they have been advertising. Bottles manufactured before August 2008 have liners that contain bisphenal A, a chemical that may adversely affect human health. So now over a year later we are being alerted to this information? However, their bottles have been touted before 2008 as being BPA free etc.

Simran Sith wrote on Huffington Post decrying the company’s lack of transparency on the BPS issue. If you have a SIGG bottle manufactured before August 2008, bring the bottle back to any major retailer and they should exchange it for a new BPA- free model. Sadly, SIGG is not even revealing this information on their website, and would much rather have you pay to return the bottle to them for an exchange. However Simran spoke to SIGG CEO Steve Wasik who confirmed they would allow the exchanges to occur at the stores.

With this news, Patagonia announced today they will terminate all co-branding and marketing efforts with SIGG, Inc. Seems like Patagonia was duped by SIGG, as Patagonia’s VP of Environmental Initiatives Rick Ridgeway stated, “We even arranged for one of the leading scientists on BPA research to come to our company to educate us on the issue. Once we concluded there was basis for concern, we immediately pulled all drinking bottles that contained BPA from our shelves and then searched for a BPA-free bottle. We very clearly asked SIGG if there was BPA in their bottles and their liners, and they clearly said there was not. After conducting such thorough due diligence, we are more than chagrined to see the ad that is appearing in Backpacker, but we also feel that with this explanation our customers will appreciate and understand our position.”

Patagonia is returning all SIGG bottles still on their shelves (even the BPA free versions) for recycling and are searching for a new bottle vendor.

As organizations are scrambling to become more efficient and cutting the “fat” from their budgets, one idea gaining attention is going to three-day weekends. This offering, without decreasing the actual hours worked per week, could not only save money, but also help the environment and public health.

This idea is being piloted in many states and companies across the country. While I was hoping to say the trend began as an effort to help the environment, as necessity is always the mother of invention, the economic downturn was the real reason it has been receiving such favorable notice. Companies realized they could close on Fridays and save money without having to reduce weekly hours.

It also aiding companies in a corporate responsibility perspective, as they strive to address some of the needs brought forward by employees in the last 5 years; environmental issues, commuting pressures as well as work-family balance.

Utah has already taken the 4 day workweek plunge- 17,000 of state employees since last August are working the 4 day work week. In their offices, there no longer a need to turn on the lights for three days, or clean buildings on fridays etc. Electric bills have dropped over the summer, thanks to less air-conditioning. As of late May the state has saved $1.8 million. Not pocket change by any means.

Employees surveyed on the 4 day work week love it- with 82 % wanting to stay the course. The shift in hours for their Monday- Thursday commute is off peak, so they have a better commute on the days they do come into the office.

An interim report released by the Utah state government in February projected a drop of at least 6,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually from Friday building shutdowns. If reductions in greenhouse gases from commuting are included, the state would check the generation of at least 12,000 metric tons of CO2—the equivalent of taking about 2,300 cars off the road for one year.

Recently PepsiCo, which owns the Tropicana brand, calculated that the equivalent of 3.75 pounds of carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere for each half-gallon carton of orange juice it produces. As they tracked the carbon footprint to the consumers breakfast table it revealed that the biggest single source of greenhouse gas emissions turned out to be the act of growing oranges, not transportation or production.

Orange groves use nitrogen fertilizer, which requires natural gas to make. It can turn into a potent greenhouse gas when it is spread on fields. PepsiCo undertook this step as they are among one of the first companies to provide consumers with an absolute number for a products carbon footprint. The result of this study has revealed to PepsiCo the effort they will need to find ways to grow oranges using less carbon.

PepsiCo’s experience is a harbinger of the complexities other companies may face as they come under pressure to calculate their emission of carbon dioxide, a number known as a carbon footprint, and eventually to lower it.

“The main thing is helping us figure out where the carbon is in the chain,” said Neil Campbell, president of Tropicana North America, a division of PepsiCo. While acknowledging that protocols for measuring greenhouse emissions are far from perfect, Mr. Campbell said, “you can end up doing nothing if you let that stop you.”

PepsiCo, a manufacturer of soda, salty snacks and cereal based in Purchase, N.Y., is among a growing number of companies that hope to get ahead of potential government mandates and curb their energy use as prices and long-term supply grow less certain.

They also want to promote supposedly low-carbon products to consumers anxious about rising global temperatures; such labeling has already appeared in Europe.

A Brazilian conservation group has found a way to get people talking about how to conserve water. By running cartoonlike television ads to urge people to urinate in the shower thus saving water from not flushing the toilet.

This daring and darling ad has been posted on facebook and is getting many hits on u-tube, which is causing some to balk at this notion of letting loose in the shower.

Seems to be making the impact (or even more) that was intended as people are talking about it worldwide, and sending it to their friends- thus helping to get out the message that flushing one less time a day can save more than 1,150 gallons of water over the course of the year.

Back in June, IBM took the steps to form a “Green Sigma Coalition” in the quest to partner with metering, monitoring, automation, and communication software leaders for “Green” Solutions.

This industry alliance with key leaders will provide smart solutions for energy, water, waste and greenhouse gas management. The charter members of the “Green Sigma” are: Johnson Controls, Honeywell Building Solutions, ABB, Eaton, Cisco, Siemens Building Technologies Division, Schneider Electric and SAP. These members will work with IBM to integrate their products and services with IBM’s Green Sigma solution.

This in turn, will allow companies using these combined solutions to better understand energy and water usage, waste, and greenhouse gas emissions across their business operations and make changes to improve efficiency, reduce consumption and waste, and lower environmental impact.

IBM realized that as organizations work to create a greener, smarter planet, this can’t be accomplished in silo’s. Working together and bringing the strength of each organization to bare, this coalition can create solutions the world needs to conserve resources and address climate change, quicker than if they would try to accomplish this task alone.

These new relationships support IBM’s “smarter planet” initiative, which envisions a world where everything is instrumented, interconnected and intelligent.

It almost seems like an oxy moron- exposing the “warts” of an industry; however Chipotle is doing just that by sponsoring free screenings of the documentary “Food Inc.” Which is an expose of the American food industry.

Now Chipotle is no “major offender” and is quite progressive in the “fast food” arena as the Mexican Grill claims to serve more naturally raised meat than any other restaurant in the world, while also 35% of its beans are organic. But as many organizations know, a sustainable path is just that, a journey towards a goal and no company is “perfect”. However, while many are touting the “path” and marketing that effort, not many marketers would shine a spotlight on potential weak points.

“There is something very authentic about allowing your brand to become vulnerable in this way,” argues Andrea Learned in a post at the Daily Fix blog. “By inviting its customers to see the ugly truth, Chipotle is walking its talk of a responsible and healthy food movement.”

She believes the strategy works for two reasons:

• Chipotle acknowledges- and embraces- the fact that it’s on a journey toward a greater goal. The restaurant’s customers will likely appreciate the companu’s honest self-assessment and realistic ambitions. “Consumers don’t trust an ‘all and perfectly done’ proclamation, because that is truly impossible,” notes Learned.
• The company earns credibility from its unique position as industry educator. Chipotle’s right-brained audience wants to do its research before making a purchase. “Any brand that helps in this process will be duly rewarded,” she says.

“Authenticity actually can’t happen without vulnerability, scary as that sounds,” say Learned. But a risk worth taking.

No, your not reading an environmentalists to-do list, this statement above is the Mission statement of Patagonia the clothing company, which is a pure eco driven statement. Yvon Chouinard is the founder of Patagonia. He started the business selling piton’s out of his car in 1957 and along the path he has always defined his bottom line not as Wall Street has done so, but with the realization that everything his business did had an effect- mostly negative- on the environment. Which is why his newfound mission statement reflects a more urgent need for change.

Yvon is quite the hands on CEO, as he doesn’t sit in an office and dictate; he travels the planet, just like the folks who utilize his equipment and clothing, and his employees that source the materials for his clothing/equipment. As he looks around the planet in the past 20 plus years he can see a clear impact on how we are destroying the planet. He now realizes that Patagonia, the business, “exists to put into practice all the things that smart people are saying we have to do not only to save the planet but to save the economy.”

Yvon goes on to say, and this statement has been mirrored by other sustainability gurus, that in a broad sense “we need to work on the causes rather than the symptoms. You can throw money all day at symptomatic things, and you are not going to solve the problem.”

Check out Patagonia’s website- www.patagonia.com The content is getting more rich in environmental awareness plus if you want to see an effective example of a eco-philanthropic effort, Patagonia’s One Percent for the Planet, is a program put in place back in 1985 where companies, like Patagonia give back 1% of their sales to environmental charities. One percent recently hit the 1000^th member mark and has given back $42 million to more than 1,700 groups. Yvon does not acknowledge this as a “Philanthropic” effort, but just a cost of doing business. He feels that every business is a polluter, and if they are not using nonrenewable resources, then they should “tax themselves”.

Kleenex, one of the world’s largest producers of home paper products, announced this morning that it will abide by the higher levels of the Forest Stewardship Council regarding the use of the fiber in the manufacture of its products.

Allen Hershkowitz, the paper expert at NRDC, has a lot to say about this half- arsed effort on his blog-

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ahershkowitz/kimberlyclarks_products_remain.html

The reason for this "baby step" rating is that the new policy is to ensure that 40% of its North American fiber is either recycled or certified by FSC and to use recycled content for 25% of its products company-wide. This does not guarantee that Kimberly- Clark will in fact increase recycled content in any of its at-home products, most of which do not currently contain any recycled content at all.

So kudo’s for the baby step, seems about time they took one- but do I smell some “Green washing” here? Many competing at-home tissue products, found on the same shelf as Cottonelle and Kleenex have already found pathways to success while incorporating high levels of recycled content, which alas has these competitors’ giant steps ahead of Kimberly Clark on the sustainability path.

FYI- most sustainable tissue products are the ones with the highest possible levels of post consumer recycled content. Recently Scott has taken steps with their Scott’s Naturals Line that offers a 40% recycled fiber in it’s at-home offering. While it is quite the scratchy endeavor, I am convinced these products can only improve and the amount of tree's saved by the use of 1 roll of paper is staggering- If every household in the United States replaced just one roll of virgin fiber toilet paper (500 sheets) with 100% recycled ones, we could save 423,900 trees in a year!

Marcal takes it one step further with 100% premium recycled paper products that are hypoallergenic, virtually lint free, and whitened without chlorine bleaching.

Yes we are aware of Green Forest and Seventh Generation and other companies- but they started their product lifecycle with sustainability in mind, whereas Kimberly Clark, Marcal and Scott have had to adopt a “Green” approach, and re-engineer their product offering- much harder to accomplish.

For a list of paper products that utilize recycled content check out this link:

http://www.nrdc.org/land/forests/gtissue.asp

As I further my work on understanding what makes a company successfully implement a sustainability plan and what factors lead to an unsuccessful sustainability effort, it is almost as though that famous book of the ‘80’s keeps emerging in my mind “All I really needed to learn I learned in Kindergarten”.

Well frankly, as someone who has taken leadership coaching courses, and participated in coaching top level HR leaders, I can tell you as I listened to their issues and situations; somehow communication seemed to be at the root of most of the problems.

Now as I move ahead and learn more about the keys to a successful sustainability plan, while like most things in life, there is really no “silver bullet” , however there is one component that needs to be in place and that is the ability to communicate. Now, not just those up on the soap box preaching the green gospel, but debate, and discussion and pure unhampered feedback.

History has proven that leaders who consistently tell without taking into account feedback get one of two things;

A bunch of “yes sir” subservient followers doing as they are told, marching to one drumbeat.

Or a frustrated group of people who are negatively disposed to much of what they are asked to do.

In the former case the organization loses the capacity to think, and frankly your organizations competitive edge is the human capitol and the innovations they can surface to help your organization not just survive but to thrive and grow and change.

In the latter case the organization has a back biting, destructive and secretive culture that takes years to move away from. Many companies suffer from these two ailments when powerful leaders suppress debate.

So how does this tie back to sustainability planning? A Sustainability plan is like a chameleon in any organization and needs the value of the people in the company to make it work. What works at Subaru might not work at Ford. However, if a business leader comes in and tries to “push” the Green agenda without the proper forum for everyone to express their concerns, or even their input as to how to make it happen etc, then this Green Agenda competes with the other “mission critical” items any management will have already clogging their “to do“list and never get the attention it rightfully deserves.

So, the relationship with good communication and successful sustainability plans are the observation that too many sustainability initiatives fail because of the lack of basic communication inside the organization about how the strategy will work, how it will improve performance, and what role each person should play. I thank Adam Werbach for covering this aspect in his new book- “Strategy for Sustainability”.

In past blog posts I mentioned the need for companies to evaluate or measure their sustainability efforts, both as it relates to the Supply Chain as well as their business and their business partners. Well I must have rubbed the magic lamp as an anonymous “genie” was so kind as to send along an online extensive survey that measures all aspects of a business’ impact on society and the environment.

Yes, you read it right, a free tool called the “B Survey” that assess’ your company’s impact in each of it’s stakeholders and not only that- helps you to improve your social and environmental performance using the tools and best practices embedded in the survey.

Pretty not so bad eh? Take it for a spin- survey.bcorporation.net/register.php

And please peruse the rest of the website, which is chock full of information around companies that are taking the “Green Challenge”.

Organizational Purchasing has really evolved over the last decade. I can recall from 10 years ago when I was selling Oracle e-procurement solutions how purchasing was an administrative function handled by paper pushers, and gate keepers hell bent on getting a good deal. Well procurment is having it's day in the sun as it is evolving into a true strategic role within the Supply Chain of any company.

But let’s face it, the world is “flatter” now, and with a global economy more of the norm, the importance of quality, cost, and delivery has also changed. Well we are on the verge of another “shift” into a procurement world where on-time delivery and lower prices won’t help an organization perpetuate growth and expansion unless there is some intelligence tying it back to a strategy for long term sustainability.

In an interesting perspective, procurement can be an excellent place to help an organization adopt more sustainable methods in a more strategic fashion. It's the first course offered in many Sustainability Certification courses. However, since procurement has been elevated into a strategic role, it has every ability to influence the sustainability and carbon footprint of an organization through multiple channels.

Green Purchasing fundamentals need to align with systems policies and procedures that support green purchasing practices and organization Sustainability. There needs to be clear Business Drivers for Green Purchasing Practices, and the ability to measure these to determine the impact to overall Sustainability Strategies in an organization.

In the next few blog posts I plan on expanding upon this procurement strategy, offering examples of organizations who are in the process as well as those who are further along the path. Subaru has an excellent cradle to grave approach and my research on their efforts was very rewarding. Herman Miller is the pinnacle; with such a great short term and long term plan, offering inspiration for any company to adopt a green plan.

I welcome everyone to comment and help add to the discussion which helps bring awareness of this concept further along and makes it more viable to companies large and small.

We need a Green Revolution, and these strategic tactics can help renew our organizations and thus our country and help us move ahead if we chose to see this as an opportunity.

Take the Green Challenge…….

I recently saw an article how in this current recession, green is the new “black”. No, we are not seeing rooftops laced with solar panels, and there is not a gaggle of hybrids clogging the highways, nor is there a firm shift away from meat eating occurring.

However, lack is always a motivator in adopting some green energy conserving ways, and this is the response we are seeing right now.

With unemployment numbers creeping up, and folks taking pay furloughs, it doesn’t take much for people to adopt less wasteful ways and as we are seeing less consumption of material goods, hence the lack luster retail numbers each month.

So while I am clapping my mini clap with excitement that consumers seem to be using less plastic bags and adopting minor energy saving steps, Leanne Krueger- Braneky of the Greater Philadelphia Sustainable Business Network cautions, that whatever green buying is the direct result of recessionary “pain” which could be short lived, as the average US consumer has a pretty short memory, thus a pretty short window of change.

As we explored in past blog posts relative to “Sustainability” and if I apply Adam Werbach’s Sustainable litmus test- (Must have a Social, Economic, Environmental, Cultural component) this effort is not sustainable, over the long term. Yes, some folks have changed and will not go back to the ways of the past, however, once the economy improves and people have the money to spend, and security in their job, then will they NOT buy/consume/conserve? Will they be so open to take those “green” actions to preserve the environment, which oh by the way is energy efficient etc?

Which brings me to the latest program “Cash for Clunkers” that is getting a lot of press these days. Turn in your older fuel guzzling car for an up to $4500 refund on a new gas efficient vehicle. While this is jump starting auto sales, and the car dealers are all high fiving this program, I have a friend who traded in an old gas guzzling mini van for a Ford Escape (not the hybrid) that get’s 18 MPG. Sure the older vehicle had a greater carbon impact than the Escape, but this program is being motivated by money and is not sustainable for the future.

My desire is that we can get some leadership in the government and corporate America to help produce “real” sustainable programs that can benefit our country moving forward. This effort should help fuel long term business opportunities and innovation versus these short term stimulus jolts that might benefit some short term, but not make a huge impact to many of our citizen’s long term. Being sustainable, is thriving in perpetuity, as Adam’s so notes in his book, and can a cash for clunker program accomplish that?

Let's face it, Americans discard roughly 2.25 million tons of computer, printers, cell phones and other electronics. Seems like the new I-phone comes out and people run buck wild to the apple store to grab the next hot number, but sadly 82% of these once coveted gadgets end up in landfills. If you want to make a difference in your workplace, look to see if your organization has a recycling program in place for electronics. The majority of the electronic devices can be reused or recycled and your program can also include personal electronics from your employee’s homes, so your reach can extend beyond your company, and into the homes of every employee.

There are some exceptions so review the following to better understand what can and cannot be recycled. Sometimes electronics are cast away not because they do not work, but because there is a replacement or a faster etc model. I see this with cellphones and lap tops all the time, however, devices that are still working might be able to be given to someone in need, so this allows the device to be reused versus being recycled- Reusing a device is the highest form of recycling. There are many rotary clubs and other organizations that take cell phones and other electronics that are still functional. Free-cycling sites are another avenue, as they are typically local sites that offer ‘free” products to folks willing to come pick them up. You could post items in bulk and have folks stop by to pick up at specific hours. The National Center for Electronics Recycling, a non-profit group based in West Virginia has a website where you can find more information about drop-off centers- www.electronicrecycling.org. mygreenelectronics.org allows searches by zip code and is sponsored by the Consumer Electronics Association.

Another option is to bring smaller electronics back to big chain stores, such as Best Buy and Staples, who allow you to drop off most electronics for recycling. Also earth911.com is a public-private partnership which lets you search for recycling locations by type of electronic and address.

Items such as TV’s and computer monitors can be classified as hazardous by the federal government, which is why some places might not accept them for recycling. Cathode ray tubes have a decent amount of lead in them and they can leach over time. Batteries also contain heavy metals which are very bad for the environment, so make sure they are disposed of properly as well. RadioShack, Best Buy, Home Depot and Lowes all participate in a national recycling program for rechargeable batteries. Regular alkaline batteries don’t have an easy process to recycle so sadly they still end up in the landfill. Which makes a good point for a business to purchase re-chargeable batteries versus alkaline. By doing so you can make sure there are NO batteries from the business ending up in a landfill.

Check with some of your technology vendors as more are offering free recycling, such as Apple, Dell, Samsung, Sony and IBM. For example, IBM makes it easy and economical for a business to recycle 1 to 250 pieces of IBM and non-IBM equipment. IBM Asset Recovery Solutions now offers a recycling service for assets without market value in accordance with applicable United States federal, state, and local laws.

So as you move forward in your quest to adhere to the three "R"'s Reduce, Re-use, Recycle, make sure you incorporate your electronics into the plan, which might involve bringing up this goal to your vendor when you purchase new equipment. Those that support this effort are more inclined to even extend that "cradle to grave" approach to their manufacturing, so the components might be able to be re-used some day and as such would have a value for the manufacturer to reclaim them.

I have recently been reading Adam Werbach’s Strategy for Sustainability, which has incited me to explore the meaning of Sustainability. In the introduction he mentions how the word Sustainability has become widely used in reference to environmental concerns, and how it is sadly getting over used.

The Webster Dictionary defines sustainable as: of, relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged. If you google the word you will receive 29 million responses and as I perused the first few pages of offerings most are relative to environmental and green references- from a B-B or B-C perspective.

However what is more troubling is the many forms this word is taking on beyond the actual meaning/reference in a quasi form of “Green washing” which is defined as expressions of environmentalist concerns especially as a cover for products, policies, or activities.

We have all seen examples of this sort of thing, as a company touts their “Green Eco Friendly” line, yet their business operates as anything but Green, and they don’t even take the proper steps to improve their practices.

However, as we see “green and sustainable” becoming more a part of our everyday consumer and business language, will it water down the actions needed to help companies/ people be truly sustainable?

Adam identifies 4 coequal components of true sustainability which are:

Social- Actions and conditions that affect all members of society

Economic- Actions that effect how people and business meet their economic needs – securing water, etc

Environmental- actions and conditions that affect the earth’s ecology- preservation of natural resources

Cultural- Actions through which communities manifest their identity and cultivate tradition from generation to generation.

His litmus test is if the plan etc fulfills theses components then it is a “true” sustainable offering/effort. It is sad that we have to look behind the “Green” curtain to make sure it is compliant, however as an optimist- is taking one “Green” step forward, (sans the green washing) maybe with recycling etc still making an effort, and maybe once an organization or person takes this first “Green Step” subsequent steps will follow- and lead them down the path towards true sustainability? Time will tell……

Summer is here, and with the hot temperatures, refreshment from water is crucial to hydrating after some of the 90 degree days we have been experiencing. However, I am sure you have all read about the “controversy” regarding bottled water- in that it is not environmentally friendly, between the cost to transport, the fossil fuels used to get it from the “spring” to your grocery store and those plastic water bottles that end up loading up our land fills.

So what is a true “Green” approach to water?

First, we should recognize that we are very grateful to have so many water choices, when many countries struggle with safe clean water. But the Net-Net is that Bottled water is not “green” for many reasons. Plastic water bottles generate 30 billion single serve bottles a year and only 20% of that is ever recycled. However, with the choices available to us- is tap water the way to go? Are the areas well’s reliable? What about Municipal water? Which options are the best and/or “Greenest” for us in the area?

The irony about bottled water is that while it is more expensive than gasoline- up to $12 dollars a gallon, on comparison- it is not always superior to tap water. Cities must filter and disinfect tap, which comes from surface water. No federal filtration or disinfection requirements exist for bottled water. So is your 3 dollar bottle of water superior to tap? In most cases, no. And that holds true in this area.

However, most of the folks in the New Hope/ Solebury area do NOT have “city water” and utilize well water- how does that compare? I asked my neighbor geologist Dr. Peter Brussock about the water quality in the area, and how he felt it compared to “City” water or even bottled water. His comment was that if your desire is to limit your carbon footprint, then using your own tap water addresses this goal. The cost per gallon of typical well or even municipal water is the most economic and greenest approach by far.

Municipal water is highly regulated and these standards have large margins of safety to protect the average person as well as those who might be most sensitive to chemicals/minerals. Should you still have a “chlorine” aroma to your water straight from the tap, letting the water de-gas; by simply filling a pitcher of water and letting it sit for 24 hours will address that easily.

The benefits of well water are higher mineral content, which is better for you. However, realize that some minerals- mercury, lead, cadmium, and arsenic- are naturally occurring, and can be found everywhere. If you have a “mineral” taste and wish to filter some of that from your water- a simple carbon filter like a Brita will help to address that concern. The benefits of a carbon filter would be- improved taste of coffee, increased detergent performance and also improvement in your bath products- shampoos etc.

Dr Brussock also suggested checking out the National Groundwater Association website

www.ngwa.org which has plenty of information about water. So for the “Green” water alternative- pass on the bottled water and fill up your Sigg reusable water bottle with “tap” water and enjoy the great outdoors!

Slow Food is an idea, a way of living and a way of eating. It is a global, grassroots movement with thousands of members around the world that link the pleasure of food with a commitment to community and the environment. It was founded in 1989 to counteract fast food and fast life, the disappearance of local food traditions and people’s dwindling interest in the food they eat, where it comes from, how it tastes and how our food choices affect the rest of the world.

To do that, Slow Food brings together pleasure and responsibility, and makes them inseparable.

Slow Food Members are:

• Raising public awareness, improving access and encouraging the enjoyment of foods that are local, seasonal and sustainably grown
• Caring for the land and protecting biodiversity for today's communities and future generations
• Performing educational outreach within their communities and working with children in schools and through public programs
• Identifying, promoting and protecting fruits, vegetables, grains, animal breeds, wild foods and cooking traditions at risk of disappearance
• Advocating for farmers and artisans who grow, produce, market, prepare and serve wholesome food
• Promoting the celebration of food as a cornerstone of pleasure, culture and community

Take advantage of the summer crops, dine at a restaurant that utilizes local produce and food in their menu. Help expand the awareness of Slow Food Establishments, Please Post any Dining Establishments that you are aware meet this criteria; the food is usually outstanding, and we help everyone on the “food chain” by patronizing their establishments.

So I have had this love affair with bicycle transportation since viewing the lovely bikes in Copenhagen and realizing that it is a primary mode of transport for some. Nothing is more lovely to witness than folks biking to work, carrying their groceries back home or beating the stop and go traffic by pedaling right by. Don’t get me wrong I love driving my car, but sometimes I want to savor those drives versus the chauffeuring and chore it can tend to become. However, after a week in Cape May one summer with a cruiser at my disposal and morning rides along the beach, I fell in love again with a bike. My husband subsequently purchased a baby blue “Cruiser” for my birthday and I love to pedal about the tow path with my bike basket in front going to and fro.

Last month was Bike to Work month, now I work from my house, but I understand the concept and set the intention to pedal as much as possible, until the flat tire.

In any event, while my bicycle aspirations are set on hold until the flat is fixed, I wanted to see if the raising gas prices and increasing costs to maintain cars etc would create a “Peddling Revolution” such as Jeff Mapes wrote about in his book- “Peddling Revolution: How Cyclists are Changing American Cities”.

Yes I see more spandex clad bicyclists in my area, but not many of the commuting to work type. I guess as I glance over the street/road infrastructure in my area we are really not safely set up to accommodate bicycle transport as a means of transportation. No shoulders on the road, and no bike paths= not much of a safe incentive to cycle.

So my hope is that the folks in the city planning and transportation universe realize that there are people who want this option. Mapes book provides details to how cities from Amsterdam to Paris to New York have developed policies encouraging cycling in recent decades and how other towns are beginning to make way for bikes. All this information is great ammunition for those of us would like our community’s to adopt more bike friendly options.

Check into your local community, biking is a great option and cuts down on the Co2 in your community while also suppressing traffic while raising the community’s level of general fitness as biking performs a function (commuting to work) as well as exercise. Who knows with our auto industry in peril, maybe we will become more of a Bike Country versus the Car Culture of the past few decades. Get your local government and urban planners on the “bike bus” and help make the idea of cheap, effortless transportation a viable option for one and all!

I recently saw a poll that was conducted by an independent research group in Britain that used the "Happy Planet Index," which seeks countries with the most content, or essentially the “Happiest place in the world”. Their research found a small Latin American County – Costa Rica, that beat out such heavyweights as the US and Canada and other larger more “developed” countries the world over. What they found as they conducted their research was that Costa Rica was a country with a goal of building a new economy, “centered on people and the environment”.

This aggressive goal- which the country takes quite seriously, is the secret to why they posses the most content people in the world. The index takes into consideration the ecological footprint and life expectancy of the countries, and Costa Rica stood out like a diamond amongst some smoggy rocks. As you review the study, you can’t help but to realize the impact a “greener” lifestyle can have on a community/country.

Costa Rica is a small country located between Nicaragua and Panama, and with no army of its own, is renowned for its peace making efforts, as the President of Costa Rica Oscar Arias Sanchez won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1987 for trying to help end civil wars in neighboring countries. So rather than funneling funds for a defense budget, they can use those dollars to increase literacy as it is one of the most literate countries in Latin America, while they also work to preserve their natural resources.

This beautiful country has some incredible natural resources- cloud forests, rain forests, lakes and volcanoes plus not just one but two beautiful coasts with pristine beaches, and so many varieties of birds, you’d think you were in a jungle Shangri-la.

I believe Costa Rica is an excellent model of the positive impact leading a “balanced” economy can have for the population; one that is centered on its people and the environment, and what the effect of this new economy can do for the people in that country.

Better health; life expectancy is 78 years old in Costa Rica

Better Health means lower health care costs due to lack of “diseases of developed countries”, obesity, heart disease etc

More opportunity; Costa Rica has the lowest unemployment rate of Latin America at 4.8 %

Smaller Ecological Footprint- the county narrowly fails to achieve the goal of consuming its fair share of the earth’s natural resources and strives to continue to improve

More Social Imagination- with no army and vast untouched but protected natural resources, the people of Costa Rica have been inventive in how they create opportunity without exploiting their resources.

As the US embarks on a new healthcare plan as well as addressing climate change, this study is an example of how these two issues go hand in hand and the impact it can have on the lifestyles and subsequent health of a country.

Costa Ricans have a saying “Pura Vida” which means Pure Life, maybe the US needs to adapt a similar mantra- such as “Pure Health” and work towards a smaller ecological footprint- as the “health” of our economy could benefit, as well as the “health” of our country.

H&M announced an increase by 50% in their use of organic cotton for 2009. In the past they have been offering up jeans, t-shirts, dresses and maternity wear. Moving into 2009, they will be also be using polyester recycled from PET bottles and recycled fabric remnants, as well as recycled cotton from production fabric remnants.

The line will include shirts, t-shirts, blouses, skirts, and dresses. The men’s line will have organic or recycled suits, shirts and sweaters. The youth of kids collection will offer t-shirts, pants, shorts skirts, vest jeans and more.   And for those of us tired of seeing such a HUGE difference in price for green clothing, Henne’s is keeping the price, with t-shirts @ $15.00 and dresses under $50.00, which might be a few more $$ than their basic line, but still competitive in the Green Fashion marketplace. H&M has been producing eco friendly baby clothes since 2005, so this was just a “natural” step for them. Plus the pieces looks very chic, thanks H&M, we hope to see more innovative green pieces from you in the near future. All this and some select accessories and H&M is really pushing the green envelope in their line.