UK residents enjoying record low emissions

May 28, 2020 by  
Filed under Eco, Green

Comments Off on UK residents enjoying record low emissions

By now, almost everybody has heard about record low CO2 emissions brought on by  coronavirus  lockdowns. But new data shows not only that the U.K.’s emissions are the lowest they’ve been since the 1920s, but there’s reason to hope they might not shoot back up to pre-pandemic rates as soon as life returns to quasi-normal. A recent paper published in the scientific journal  Nature Climate Change examined six sectors known for their climate change contributions: electricity  and heat; surface transport; industry; home use; aviation; and public buildings and commerce. They found that surface transport was notably down, partially accounting for why the U.K. cut emissions by 31% during lockdown, compared to a global average of 17%.  “A lot of emissions in the UK come from surface transport – around 30% on average of the country’s total  emissions ,” said Professor Corinne Le Quéré, the paper’s lead author. “It makes up a bigger contribution to total emissions than the average worldwide.” Since the U.K. reached full lockdown, Quéré said, people were forced to stay home and not to drive to work. Mike Childs, Friends of the Earth’s head of policy, reminds us that our problems are far from over. “A 31% emissions drop in April is dramatic, but in the long run it won’t mean anything unless some reductions are made permanent,” Childs told HuffPost UK. “This lockdown moment is a chance to reset our carbon-guzzling economy and rebuild in a way that leaves pollution in the past, to stop climate-wrecking emissions spiking right back up to where they were before, or even higher.” Fortunately, British drivers appreciate the cleaner air and plan to permanently alter their driving style, according to a survey. In the Automobile Association’s poll of 20,000 motorists, half plan to walk more post- pandemic , and 40% aim to drive less. Twenty-five percent of respondents said they planned to work from home more, 25% intend to fly less and 20% to cycle more. The U.K. government plans to spend £250 million on improved infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists. “We have all enjoyed the benefits of cleaner air during lockdown and it is gratifying that the vast majority of drivers want to do their bit to maintain the cleaner air,” said Edmund King, Automobile Association president. “ Walking  and cycling more, coupled with less driving and more working from home, could have a significant effect on both reducing congestion and maintaining cleaner air.” + Nature Climate Change Via HuffPost and BBC

Original post: 
UK residents enjoying record low emissions

Why Silicon Valley is taking a big interest in trees

February 24, 2020 by  
Filed under Business, Green

Comments Off on Why Silicon Valley is taking a big interest in trees

Forest data startups such as Pachama and Silviaterra can help the biggest players in tech tackle their emissions.

Original post:
Why Silicon Valley is taking a big interest in trees

Real Estate Industry Reducing Carbon Emissions

November 6, 2019 by  
Filed under Eco

Comments Off on Real Estate Industry Reducing Carbon Emissions

Commercial buildings account for 39 percent of global carbon emissions. … The post Real Estate Industry Reducing Carbon Emissions appeared first on Earth911.com.

Here is the original post:
Real Estate Industry Reducing Carbon Emissions

Maven Moment: The Old Junkyard

November 6, 2019 by  
Filed under Eco

Comments Off on Maven Moment: The Old Junkyard

When I was young, my sister and I always passed … The post Maven Moment: The Old Junkyard appeared first on Earth911.com.

More here:
Maven Moment: The Old Junkyard

We Earthlings: Gas-Powered Yard Tool CO2 Emissions

October 15, 2019 by  
Filed under Eco

Comments Off on We Earthlings: Gas-Powered Yard Tool CO2 Emissions

Did you know that a gas-powered lawnmower emits 88 pounds … The post We Earthlings: Gas-Powered Yard Tool CO2 Emissions appeared first on Earth911.com.

Continued here:
We Earthlings: Gas-Powered Yard Tool CO2 Emissions

The startup helping Smithfield turn manure into a circular resource

October 2, 2019 by  
Filed under Business, Green

Comments Off on The startup helping Smithfield turn manure into a circular resource

Anuvia Plant Nutrients aims to improve farm yields while reducing the emissions associated with fertilizer.

More here:
The startup helping Smithfield turn manure into a circular resource

Danone cultivates multinational effort to restore biodiversity

October 2, 2019 by  
Filed under Business, Green

Comments Off on Danone cultivates multinational effort to restore biodiversity

What’s at stake: the future of farming.

Original post:
Danone cultivates multinational effort to restore biodiversity

The pros and cons of online versus in-store shopping

June 20, 2019 by  
Filed under Eco, Green

Comments Off on The pros and cons of online versus in-store shopping

In as little as a few clicks and confirmations your online purchase can be at your doorstep in a matter of hours. Online shopping is so simple there is barely enough time to consider the process your order goes through in order to reach its destination, not to mention the cost! It’s easy to condemn Americans’ obsession with online retail as unsustainable over-consumption, but when the numbers are pitted against in-store shopping, online shopping is actually the more eco-friendly option. Think of delivery services as public transportation for your packages, where everyone’s package rides the same bus instead of your personal car. Online shopping Online shopping constitutes one out of every seven purchases around the world, that’s nearly 15 percent of all shopping. The online retail industry is worth over $3.5 trillion, a massive total that rises by 20 percent every year. The average carbon footprint of a package is difficult to calculate because there are huge discrepancies. For example, the time and resources used comparing a local clothing delivery and a refrigerator that travels across the world from China. The advantages In Britain, the average package produces just six ounces of carbon dioxide, which sounds tiny but has to be multiplied by millions of deliveries. Going to the store to pick up your item and back, averaging an estimated 13 miles, produces approximately 144 ounces of carbon dioxide , which is 24 times more than the delivered package. You would have to pick up 24 items in order to break even. According to a researcher and author of Decarbonizing Logistics , even when you consider mis-deliveries and returns, the averages point to online shopping as a more environmentally-friendly option. Nowadays, many popular brands no longer have (or never had) storefronts. The carbon footprint of running a website alone is also drastically less than the energy it takes to power and maintain a building space. The disadvantages The biggest polluter for delivery services is the last mile, and those emissions are multiplied every time the delivery is unsuccessful. Between 12 and 60 percent of all deliveries are unsuccessful on the first try, so they often make a second or third attempt. If they are still unsuccessful, the consumer must drive to a warehouse to pick up the package– negating all benefits in terms of carbon emissions . Furthermore, about one fifth of all products purchased online are returned, which can double the carbon footprint. In-store shopping The advantages Shopping in person partially cuts down on returns because customers are able to touch, see and try on the items before purchasing. This means they are more likely to select something they like and that fits them and avoid the common online practice of buying one item in a few sizes and returning all but one. Additional advantages of in-store shopping lie in the personal choices people make to reduce their carbon footprint. Many people walk or bike to stores, while others utilize public transportation . Although a bus still has a carbon footprint, you technically aren’t adding additional emissions since the bus was simply completing a pre-determined route. Moreover, shoppers tend to purchase more than one item at a time, which minimizes the emissions per item. The disadvantages Depending on the distance the consumer travels and their mode of transportation, online shopping is highly inefficient. In most cases, shoppers drive individually in personal cars to malls or commercial areas. Although shoppers can make personal choices to cut down their emissions, such as carpooling and staying local, research shows these steps still do not compensate for the benefits of online shopping . Related: Over 6000 employees demand Amazon take climate change seriously How to make smarter shopping choices New innovations Delivery services are growing rapidly and getting creative. Amazon is piloting drone deliveries and other companies are experimenting with ground-based robots. New apps and shared economy services are also popping up, like bike courier companies. One innovative app called Roadie is playing with the idea of a package hitchhiking system that connects your package with a delivery already heading in that direction. Slow shopping You’ve heard of slow food , but it turns out that slow deliveries might be more environmentally friendly too. Most people who can afford it opt for speedy deliveries, but this forces retailers to send packages out individually, immediately and sometimes in emptier trucks just in order to meet deadlines. With the wiggle room of a few more days, shippers can bundle items going to a similar location together and reduce the number of trips and emissions. Buy Local If you can walk or bike to the store, that’s a great option. If you have to ship something, check out different retailers and chose the one located closest to you. The less distance your package travels, the lower the carbon footprint. Conspicuous consumption There are a few ways to be a more responsible buyer. If you know a delivery is coming, make sure to be home when the delivery arrives so it does not have to double back. Select slower delivery times when not in a rush and shop more purposefully to avoid returns. Overall, the best way to reduce retail-related emissions is to buy less! Carefully consider what you need and do not buy items that you will barely use. But most importantly, always consider all items before a purchase. Are they necessary? Afterall, an item not purchased has the lowest footprint. Via Ensia Images via StockSnap , HutchRock, kasjanf, RouteXL

Read more:
The pros and cons of online versus in-store shopping

Study shows meal kits are more sustainable than grocery shopping

April 25, 2019 by  
Filed under Eco, Green

Comments Off on Study shows meal kits are more sustainable than grocery shopping

Meal kit delivery companies eliminate the weekly rush to the grocery store, making meal preparation easier than ever, but are they good for the environment? While some may dismiss these services as being wasteful, a new study reveals that they are actually more eco-friendly than you might think. Researchers compared ingredients commonly used in meal kit deliveries to their grocery store counterparts and found they have a much smaller carbon footprint. According to NPR , meals prepared with ingredients purchased from local grocery stores create around 33 percent more emissions than a meal that comes delivered to your doorstep. “Folks are really focused on the plastics and packaging in meal kits,” University of Michigan’s Shellie Miller explained. “That’s important, but it’s not the full story.” Related: 5 simple ways to reduce your food waste right now Overall, food production makes up around 19 to 29 percent of harmful emissions every year. Plastics are used to keep food preserved, but they actually contribute less to carbon emissions than the production process itself. A good majority of the carbon footprint is related to food waste , a category in which meal kits excel at minimizing. The biggest question, of course, is whether or not the carbon savings offset the plastic use. In the new study, which was published in the peer-reviewed journal, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, researchers subscribed to a meal kit delivery service and purchased the same ingredients they received at a local grocery store. They discovered that they used all of the food provided in the meal kit, producing next to no waste . They were forced to buy larger quantities from the store for each meal, resulting in much larger amounts of food waste, even after accounting for leftovers. While meal kits produce less food waste, they do come with a number of concerns. Plastic waste , mostly from packaging, is one of the biggest issues. It is also difficult to determine how much pollution and energy goes into the shipping process, though most meal kits are sent without using specialty resources. On the whole, researchers hope that the study encourages people to look into where they get their food and consider environmental impacts. Which meal kit services are the best, both in terms of the environment and your budget? There are many meal kit options on the market, each with its own pros and cons. Here are some of the most common services. Sun Basket Sun Basket promises quality in its ingredients over anything else. All of the produce you receive is organic while the meats are free of harmful antibiotics and hormones. You can also select a wide variety of meals based on your diet. For example, Sun Basket offers plans for vegan , paleo, pescatarian and vegetarian diets. Sun Basket offers a two-person plan at $72 a week or a four-person kit for $88. The company delivers all across the United Stations, except for Hawaii, Montana, Alaska and portions of New Mexico. Blue Apron Blue Apron is one of the most popular meal kit delivery services in the country. The company ships you a box every week with fresh ingredients , all of them pre-measured for specific dishes. The company does have a vegetarian option, and its plans start at $56 a month, making it one of the more affordable services out there. Blue Apron delivers all across the contiguous United States, and you can always skip or pause your subscription as needed. Home Chef Home Chef offers a variety of dishes that cater to your every need. You can pick from a dozen different meals and tailor them to fit any dietary restrictions. This includes avoiding nuts, soy, dairy , meats and wheat. The company’s website also features some DIY cooking instructions, which are a great resource if you are not accustomed to cooking at home. When it comes to cost, Home Chef comes in at around $10 a serving. If you pick a plan above $45 a month, then shipping is free. Home Chef delivers nationwide. HelloFresh HelloFresh is another popular meal kit. The company ships you pre-measured ingredients every week, complete with easy-to-follow recipes. You can choose between three weekly options that feed anywhere between two and four people. There are also vegetarian plans that feature three different recipes each week. HelloFresh delivers across the nation and only uses recyclable packaging in the shipping process. Plans with HelloFresh run around $9 a serving for two people and $7 for a family. Gobble Gobble works very similar to Blue Apron in that it does all the meal prep for you — marinating, cutting, peeling — so that you can have a home-cooked meal is around 15 minutes. This is a great service if you have a large family and not enough time to fully prepare meals every day. Like the other companies on this list, Gobble offers a variety of dietary options, including gluten-free, low carb, vegetarian and dairy-free. Gobble’s prices are a little steeper at $71 a week, though its family deals are better. This meal kit delivery service is available across the nation and even comes with a breakfast plan. Via NPR Images via Pixabay ( 1 , 2 )

Read the original: 
Study shows meal kits are more sustainable than grocery shopping

Researchers rush to link toxic chemical to health concerns

April 24, 2019 by  
Filed under Green

Comments Off on Researchers rush to link toxic chemical to health concerns

A new trend in research reflects a growing concern about the health impacts of a commonly used toxic chemical substance called PFAs (per- and polyfluoralkyl substances). The family of chemicals is pervasive in heat and water-resistant technologies– and is now found in soil, drinking water and even in human blood. “Essentially everyone has these compounds in our blood,” Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences told NPR . Related: Researchers find weedkiller ingredient Glyphosate in name brand beer and wine PFAs are valued for their resistant qualities and used in a variety of items, including food wrappers, umbrellas, tents, carpets and firefighting foams. PFAs are also used in important emerging and lifesaving technologies, including pacemakers, defibrillators, low-emission automobiles and solar panels . However, the same qualities that makes them attractive to manufacturers and consumers are also what wreaks havoc in the environment. Nicknamed the “forever chemical ” the substances have been found in lakes, rivers and drinking water reserves. Recent research also links the contaminant with serious health concerns. The first study to link PFAs to human health was conducted in 2005, when researchers discovered a connection between PFA emissions and health problems among communities in West Virginia and Ohio, such as kidney cancer and thyroid disease. Since then, there has been growing interest and funding among researchers to further explore this critical connection. Another study indicates that prevalence of PFA in the body may make people resistant to vaccines. No limits: unchecked chemical emissions The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for setting limitations on potential toxic chemical use and emissions, but rarely conducts studies on new chemicals until a public health concern has been raised. Currently, there is no U.S. law that prohibits the sale of a new chemicals or mandates preliminary research on health impacts.  Even after health problems have been noticed, studies require long-term analysis to prove linkages and are often too slow to prevent serious consequences. Although the science of exactly how the toxic chemicals impact human cells is not fully understood, it is clear there is a connection between their abundance in the environment and problematic health symptoms. As a result, some states have decided to develop limits for PFA prevalence in drinking water , opting to seriously consider the warnings from initial studies in order to protect current and future generations. Via NPR Image via Shutterstock

View post:
Researchers rush to link toxic chemical to health concerns

Next Page »

Bad Behavior has blocked 2003 access attempts in the last 7 days.