The case for reforming TSCA (Toxic Substance Control Act) has become stronger and stronger year after year. It has never been so evident than in the last three months. The Environmental Working Group’s scientific studies showed we “host” a synthetic chemical cocktail – many of them known to lead to acute and chronic illnesses – a situation that poses a health and safety risk to pregnant women, the development of fetus and children, proving that TSCA does not adequately protect us from toxic chemicals. The Safer Chemicals Healthy Families coalition  – gathering health care professionals, professional organizations, businesses, environmentalists and local officials – in a new report has put an estimate to the cost associated to caring for people affected by illnesses linked to chemical exposure. Continue Reading »

“Climate Colonialism”: a new term that is here to stay. During the climate negotiations in Copenhagen last December, some developing nations claim that the draft agreement would allow people in developed countries to emit twice as much carbon per head than those in poorer countries, who have not caused the rise in emissions. Angelika Navarro, Bolivian Ambassador to the UN “  “We think that 20 per cent of the population have created a crisis for humanity. They have a historic responsibility for more than two thirds of emissions and more than 90 per cent of the increase in temperature. We think there is a climate debt they owe to all humanity and to Mother Earth.”

Is the term here to stay? Most certainly, at least in history.

Have developing nations any chance of succeeding in their demands? No one is stopping them as long as they self-finance their development, which for the poorest nations is almost impossible as they depend too much on the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund which channel funds for investments.

The Clean Development Mechanism fails short of offering a country like Bolivia who emits 1.2 tons of CO2 per capita (compared to US’ 19.1) and has seen its glaciers receding dramatically, a source of investment for developing clean infrastructure (to our knowledge, only 2 projects have been funded through CDM: hydropower and reforestation projects).

Finally, if a country like Bolivia can eventually survive and even adapt to global temperature rising by 2 degrees, it is not the case of many African nations that will face rising temperature of 3.5 degrees causing droughts, famines, flash floods and millions of climate refugees. Island nations will simply disappear, and coral reefs will become extinct by 2025 causing a cataclysm in the food chain.

Sustainability Business Services are booming re: the very lucrative services designed to support – adding some value along the way – our entering into a sustainable society. Is it good or is it bad? Continue Reading »

#10 – Greenwashing is now a familiar word. It can be described as a deceptive marketing tactic aimed at promoting a product or an organization based on unproven or unmerited environmental claims. In March 2009 TerraChoice revealed that “98% of products committed at least one of the sins of greenwashing”. Although the environmental consulting firm identified seven sins, we condensed them into three, which in our opinion are the most used and also represent the worst type of greenwashing. These practices are perversely dangerous, as they tend to add confusion and mistrust about green claims. Continue Reading »

We’ve compiled the 10 most critical events of 2009 that will shape 2010 and beyond. We’ll be uploading one every other day (or one a day if we can keep up).

No one can argue that 2009 has been a difficult year for everyone, but it also brought significant change in our quest for a more responsible world.

So stay tune and come back for more …

#10: Greenwashing, mother of all green marketing sins.

Not surprisingly Green Age’s 2009 top 3 personalities have made the headlines for the right reasons. The months preceding Copenhagen have brought the spotlights on many individuals and organizations, but no one had been more expected than President Barack Obama. Some have been disappointed by his position, more by the lack of concrete results, and to sum up this year’s climate talk “We do not have the fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement that millions around the world hoped the world leaders gathered in Copenhagen would deliver. They are not done yet, and neither are we.” posts 350.org on their web site. As important this event was, let’s not forget there is a life outside climate change negotiations; organizations and individuals that have made a real difference in advancing the cause of a cleaner and a safer world, conservationists, scientists and activists alike have helped push environmental and health issues one (at least) step further. So without any delays, here is our top 3:

#3: The Climate Change Activists. Copenhagen and environmental talks could not have been the same without them, they are at the heart and soul of the contestation movement, and although they some times have made the headlines for the wrong reasons, it would be silly to ignore their roles in telling the world what was really happening in Copenhagen: tcktcktck, 350.org, avaaz.org, Union of Concerned Scientists and so many more that have rallied millions of people under the banner “A Fair, ambitious and bidding agreement now”. Keep the beat up, people! and so many more that have rallied millions of people under the banner “A Fair, ambitious and bidding agreement now”. Keep the beat up, people!

#2: Ken Cook, without a moment of hesitation is the environmentalist who, in our humble opinion, can contribute the most to environmental and health protective reforms. His non-profit, Environmental Working Group that he started with Richard Wiles in 1993, has raised to become one of the most respected voice in the green community through acute analyses. This year alone, EWG’s work in toxic chemicals in umbilical cord and many children products, school clening supplies, farm subsidies and water pollutions have helped change the conversation and speed the ban of some of the most harmful chemicals. He was also named ultimate green game changer by Huffington Post.

#1: And the winner is … President Barack Obama. We can’t think of anyone who has had more impact on the green and sustainable scene since Al Gore and the release of the Inconvenient Truth in 2006. President Obama did not wait long before pushing green initiatives. Even before taking office, he and his staff met with hundreds of NGOs, green and cleantech professionals. Immediately after moving to the White House, (and we’re going to cite our friends from Grist.com) “he appointed the greenest Cabinet ever, chock-full of top-notch scientists and long-time climate advocates. His administration has made massive green stimulus investments, set EPA moving forward to regulate CO2 and chemical policy reform, pushed green jobs, promoted eco-friendly retrofits, established new fuel-economy rules and efficiency standards, launched national retrofit programs, delayed mining and drilling permits, set new energy standards and goals for all federal departments, created a White House garden and farmers market, and oh so much more”. Unfortunately he has deliver more mountaintop-removal permits than his predecessor – although he plans to make it more constraining; we’re still waiting for him to take a position in regards to GMOs and conventional biofuels; and – but that is not very fair to charge him for this – he has not been able to impose (or convince) the Houses and the world of the necessity to adopt and implement drastic measures to curb the world’s CO2 emissions. But hey, in less than a year, he has done more than the last 3 presidents combined.