One of the big risks, the story points out, is mercury poisoning. This may all seem so far removed, but The Oklahoman recently reported on a man in Bryan County who died from apparent mercury poisoning after he used mercury to try to extract gold from circuit boards. Officials said he was poor and desperate for money.

The Guardian’s story says you can get more gold out of computer circuitry than from a hunk of rock.

In Oklahoma City and Midwest City, you can take your old computer parts to a hazardous waste recycling centers that will dispose of them without releasing the potentially toxic components.

John David Sutter

I’m in that position. However, gas prices are making it more and more economical. And my commute is such that it might almost make more economical sense to get the new car.

I did the math yesterday and it appears that I can reduce my gas cost from $60 once a week to a total gas bill of $60 a month. And I suppose I can use that extra $180 a month to pay off a car quicker. And there’s that whole tax incentive thing.

Usually I jump right into doing something to help the environment, but adding a car payment to my monthly bills sort of makes my stomach turn.

What would you do?

Here is a good resource I found in my research.

- Lindsey

A group called SourceWatch has more on the phenomenon.

There’s even an interactive site where you can rate ads based on how greenwashed you find them to be — and find advice about spotting a greenwasher.

As the Guardian writes, a report by the Advertising Standards Agency in Britain showed that greenwashing quadrupled in the past year there.

The group provides a list of things to look for in your quest not to be fooled by companies that would wish to appear green but whose actions may not be as “ecofriendly” as they claim.

Here’s their list:

1. Fluffy language
Words or terms with no clear meaning, e.g. “ecofriendly”.

2. Green products v dirty company
Such as efficient light bulbs made in a factory which pollutes rivers.

3. Suggestive pictures
Green images that indicate an (unjustified) green impact eg flowers blooming from exhaust pipes.

4. Irrelevant claims
Emphasising one tiny green attribute when everything else is “ungreen”.

5. Best in a bad class?
Declaring you are slightly greener than the rest, even if the rest are pretty terrible.

6. When it’s just not credible
“Ecofriendly” cigarettes anyone? “Greening” a dangerous product doesn’t make it safe.

7. Gobbledygook
Jargon and information that only a scientist could check or understand.

8. Imaginary friends
A “label” that looks like third party endorsement … except it is made up by the company itself.

9. No proof
It could be right, but where’s the evidence?

10. Outright lying
Totally fabricated claims or data.

John

The American Lung Association named Pittsburgh, PA, as the No. 1 sootiest city. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that the city has spent years trying to avoid the reputation of being the “Smoky City”:

“According to the association’s annual national report card on air pollution that’s being released today, the five-county Pittsburgh metropolitan area has the worst 24-hour soot levels and the second-worst annual soot level, behind Los Angeles.”

Some believe that it isn’t necessarily that Pittsburgh’s air has decreased in quality, but that Los Angeles’ air has improved - good news for them, bad news for Pittsburgh.

Oklahoma, according to the report, received varying grades from A to F for air quality. Tulsa and Oklahoma counties both received an F grade. Strangely, Cleveland County received an A grade - despite being right by Oklahoma County. I’m not sure how to explain that disparity.

Take a look at The State of the Air report and see what you think.

- Linds

Harrison Ford - who, of course, is coming out with the new Indiana Jones movie very soon - wanted to show the world how terrible the deforestation is and bring it back to the public’s attention. To do so, he decided to do something so very odd to encourage people to think about the pain and effects of the millions of trees cut down yearly.

He got his chest waxed.

Supposedly, this brings home the point of the deep pain and nakedness left by removing trees from their habitats.

Waxing is painful, no doubt, but he’s a real manly man so handled it quite well, apparently!

I’m not sure if this was very misguided or very genius - knowing it would set the blogging world on fire with comments about it.

Well, it got our attention, so it must have worked somewhat!

- Linds

- Lindsey

You’ll notice that southern Oklahoma is now seeing conditions similar to those in mid-Texas in 1990.

A story with the graphic says the standard growing zone map that gardeners often use is 18 years old.

Typically, Oklahoma gardeners are told to plant after April 15.

John David Sutter
Environment Reporter

jsutter@oklahoman.com 

Check them out.

Also know that you can bookmark this site and subscribe to this blog’s RSS feed.

John David Sutter
Environment Reporter

jsutter@oklahoman.com

Get a feel for it just by going to Norman tonight.

The Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History is hosting “Stories from a Changing Planet,” a multi-media presentation about the thousand-year-old ice in the Arctic and Antarctic. There, you’ll hear from ice researchers, geologists, oceanographers, climate scientists, biologists and Arctic residents.

The program starts at 7 p.m. today (April 22).

The experts are on a national tour with stops at science centers and museums around the country.

For more information, visit the museum’s Web site. There are also opportunities for teachers.

John David Sutter
Environment Reporter

jsutter@oklahoman.com

Today is Earth Day!

And what a gloomy day it is!  Completely overcast, raining, humid. It’s the kind of day that makes you change your desktop background to one of those gorgeous beach scenes with palm trees, soft, sandy beaches and blue skies. Sometimes I just sit at my desk and watch the screen saver change from one utopian scene to the next. Productive, I know.

But, if you’re lucky, you’ll be taking a summer vacation soon! And before you head off to paradise, be sure to pack your green sunscreen! I’m not referring to the green-colored zinc sunscreen that graces the noses of so many tourists in the tropics. I’m talking about eco-friendly sunscreens.

 Traditional sunscreens contain chemical UV filters, preservatives and sometimes coloring or scents that can wash off in the water and contaminate pools, oceans, lakes and streams. Some of those chemicals can even survive sewage treatment processes and are released back into the environment.

Researchers at the Polytechnic University in Marche, Italy conducted a study on how sunscreen affects coral reefs in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans. The researchers estimate that 4 to 6,000 metric tons of sunscreen washes off swimmers annually worldwide. The study concludes that even low levels of sunscreen chemicals could promote viral infections that can completely bleach coral in just four days.

Certain eco-parks in Mexico have already banned the use of sun-tan lotions and sunscreens with oils and chemical ingredients because they “damage marine flora and kill fish.”

Eco-friendly sunscreens like MelanSol, an all-natural, antioxidant-rich sunscreen, care chemical free and still provide great protection from UV rays.  Check out http://www.PureSunscreen.com for a complete list of ingredients. Other green sunscreen products can be found at www.pristineplanet.com.

I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to hit the beach. Until then, maybe I’ll put on some of this green sunscreen, just in case. I mean, the fluorescent lights in here are pretty strong, and this screen saver seems to really be doing the trick.

 Lisa