Posted on August 12, 2008 by Gerald Pugliese
.jpg)
I think reducing our carbon footprint is at the forefront of our minds and there are some smaller-scale, realistic steps we can take to help the economy/environment and our health.
I love the idea of trying to eat locally as much as possible. Also, I think many of us could benefit from cutting back on the junk - with the energy cost adding extra incentive. (Cheetos: bad for your arteries AND your planet).
As for eschewing meat... I think I'll just change to fluorescent light bulbs. But seriously, the unrelenting omnivore can be more environmentally friendly by eating locally raised meat, meat with less packaging or simply by cutting back a little.
I think having the awareness that our dietary choices affect our economy and our planet in addition to our own personal health is crucial. If everybody made small changes, we can collectively make a big difference.
.jpg)
There has been some controversy over waterless urinals, notable opponents including the plumber’s union of Philadelphia. However, joint research by Falcon Waterfree Technologies and UCLA, as well as research by other independent bodies, suggests environmental, economical and health benefits beyond saving water include improved hygiene compared to manual flush urinals (although these are uncommon in Japan as most flush urinals use automatic sensors), lower maintenance costs and energy savings leading to reductions in CO2 output.
Waterless urinals generally look and function much like a regular flush urinal and connect to the standard plumbing system. The notable difference is in the use of specially-designed cartridges containing oil-based liquids designed to filter urine and trap odors. As urine is composed of around 96% water and is free of bacteria and viruses, the urine simply passes through the filter and joins the normal waste stream. The filters are recyclable and the liquids are not considered to be harmful to the environment.
Sellafield is home to a nuclear waster processing plant. The waterways are full of weapons-grade plutonium as well as Cobalt-60 which is a known carcinogen. It's not only the local birds that are infected. Norway, 500 miles away, has reported finding radiation levels in their lobsters, shrimps and mussels. Liquid discharges of technetium-99 have increased fifty times over from Shellafield since 1994.
Local authorities have tried scaring the birds away for the toxic ponds with loud noises and they've even tried shooting them but the gulls continue to visit the ponds. It must be the radioactive, 14-eyed fish that keep them coming back for more.
.jpg)
