Tuesday, January 1, 2008

ORGANIC is Banned


Mairi Beautyman over at Tree Hugger had a great point, something to think about in 2008. She noted that you better think twice before tossing 'organic' into a sentence. The word is one of 19 words or phrases on Lake Superior State University's annual List of Words Banished from the Queen's English for Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness.
"['Organic' is] overused and misused to describe not only food, but computer products or human behavior, and often used when describing something as 'natural,' says a quote on the university's Web site (attributed to Crystal Giordano of Brooklyn, New York).
After seeing it refer to bottled water and pancake batter in a spray can, we're going to have to agree.

Other words and phrases on the list: Perfect storm; waterboarding; wordsmith; back in the day; and sweet. via ::Yahoo News Also see ::USDA Waters Down Organic Standards

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Surfer Stops Supperferry


Superferry Hits Human Blockade in Kauai

I found this story interesting and worth reporting. This story was posted by By: Mari-Ela David on KHNL KAUAI (KHNL)

- After leaving Honolulu Harbor on its first official journey out to sea, the Superferry gets a nasty welcome from protestors on Kauai. Once the vessel arrived in Kauai around 6:00 p.m. Sunday, angry words rippled through the waters at Nawiliwili Harbor, as protestors temporarily blocked the Alakai from docking.

Some protestors swam and surfed towards the vessel, determined to block the giant ship's path.
For safety reasons, the Coast Guard stepped in and stopped the Superferry from docking, leaving 500 passengers stuck on the ship for at least an hour.

Participating in the protest were some of Kauai's leaders. "I'm really disappointed and utterly shocked that the owners are not willing to follow the law to stop their operations," says Kauai County Councilmember Joann Yukimura. Critics say the Superferry is breaking the law.

The Supreme Court ruled the Superferry must provide an environmental assessment. The debate between supporters and opponents is whether or not that ruling means the Superferry can still operate while the assessment is being conducted.

Among Superferry supporters is the State Administration. "Governor Lingle, and the Department of Transportation - I'm very disappointed that they're not respecting the decision that just came down by the Hawaii Supreme Court and I would hope that they would honor that so we can move forward and resolve this very difficult and complicated situation," says Senator Gary Hooser.

But Superferry officials say they are well within the legal lines. In a statement, Hawaii Superferry says "We are extremely disappointed for the passengers who were booked on the voyage to Kauai...we are sorry to see that minority dissident groups have chosen to oppose a service that the people of Hawaii have overwhelmingly embraced."

The Superferry finally docked around 7 pm Sunday.

Witnesses say protestors laid down in front of cars as the crew tried to unload the vehicles off Nawiliwili Harbor. At that point, they say the Superferry boarded passengers back on the ship.
The vessel is scheduled to arrive at Honolulu Harbor around 11:00 p.m. Sunday.

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, August 19, 2007

SAVE TRESTLES


The Transportation Corridor Agency is seeking to build an extension to the existing 241 Toll Road. The proposed Foothill Transportation Corridor South (FTC-South) is a sixteen-mile long toll road highway that would connect the current terminus of the 241 Toll Road to Interstate 5. The TCA is proposing six alignments for this project; four of which run directly through and along San Mateo Creek. If constructed, not only would this project directly threaten the world class surf break at and around Trestles (including Uppers, Lowers, Middles, Church and Cottons), the project would also result in the obliteration of Southern California?s last remaining pristine coastal watershed and substantially degrade habitat that is critical for the survival of at least seven endangered species, including the Southern Steelhead trout.


Wave Degradation

* This project would require substantial grading of the terrain and millions of yards of hard reinforcement (steel, concrete and other materials), that will alter the natural sediment flow through San Mateo Creek,, which supplies sand to the Trestles surf breaks.

* According to the Transportation Corridor Agency?s own engineering consultants, losses in sedimentation flow would cause ?substantial degradation to surfing resources,? which will likely result in significant degradation to the wave quality at Lower Trestles and nearby breaks (including Uppers, Middles, Cottons and Church).

Water Quality

* A recent scientific report demonstrates that when over 10 percent of a watershed is paved there are significant water quality and ecosystem impacts.

* Similar projects have resulted in generating significant increases of oils, heavy metals and other toxins. Given the proximity of the project to the watershed, this project would result in a decrease of water quality for Trestles and the surrounding breaks.

* The TCA?s assertion that they can mitigate for this run-off is dubious. The initial mitigation systems that were installed on the nearby RT73 Toll Road failed, and had to be replaced at tax-payer expense. All mitigation efforts are ineffective during large rain events.

Environmental Damage from the Toll Road

* The walk in at Trestles is half the experience. The area is home to numerous native plant and animal species, including several endangered species. This area would be profoundly impacted by such a massive project essentially cutting the San Mateo Creek watershed in half.

* The FTC-South will run directly through San Onofre Beach State Park. This 2028 acre park the 5th most visited park in the California State Parks system.

* The San Mateo Creek Watershed is one of the last large coastal open spaces in Southern California The FTC-South will forever change this last vestige of coastal wilderness, including profound compromises to the Donna O?Neill Land Conservancy.

Lies

THE PROJECT DOESN?T MAKE SENSE TO BEGIN WITH...

It Provides No Traffic Relief

* TCA claims that the FTC-South will provide relief of traffic congestion along Interstate 5 in fact contradict their own FTC-South traffic projections that rely on cannibalizing San Diego County bound traffic from the I-15 and feeding that Inland Empire traffic to the I-5 via the toll roads.

* FTC-South would be built through undeveloped land, which would promote development, and ultimately bring forth new traffic from urbanization.

* FTC-South will increase, not decrease traffic on the 1-5 stretch in south San Clemente where the proposed toll road will merge with 1-5, which is already at over-capacity along this stretch. Northern San Diego County will also be affected by potentially severe increases in traffic congestion.

Expense

* The FTC-South is expected to cost close to $1 billion (nearly $53 million a mile). Currently the plan is to fund the project by non-recourse bonds, as well as development impact fees that are already being added to real estate sales in Southern Orange County.

*Contrary to TCA claims, these projects are NOT SELF FUNDED! According to an October 10, 2005 article in the Orange County Register, the nearby RT73 Toll Road is ?financially struggling? and ?faces not being able to make its debt payments in about nine years.?

SUPPORT THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION IN ITS FIGHT TO SAVE TRESTLES!

* The dramatic decreases in water quality, degradation to the wave quality at Trestles, destruction of the San Onofre State Beach Park and some of the last open space in Southern California, and harm to endangered and threatened species
are costs not worth the questionable benefits of this extremely expensive toll road.

* Surfers, swimmers and other ocean enthusiasts enjoy the waters and waves of Trestles year round. There is no other place like it in California or the world. Please join in our efforts to Save Trestles for our children and future generations.

TAKE ACTION

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

Cancer Update from Johns Hopkins

A friend of mine sent this to me in an email. This is probably old news to most of you. But just in case you still own a microwave, you should probably take note of this.

No plastic containers in micro !

No water bottles in freezer.

No plastic wrap in microwave...

A dioxin chemical causes cancer, especially breast cancer.

Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don't freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic. Recently, Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital , was on a TV program to explain this health hazard. He talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us. He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers... This especially applies to foods that contain fat. He said that the combination of fat, high heat, and plastics releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body... Instead, he recommends using glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramic containers for heating food...

You get the same results, only without the dioxin. So such things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed from the container and heated in something else. Paper isn't bad but you don't know what is in the paper. It's just safer to use tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc. He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons...

Also, he pointed out that plastic
wrap, such as Saran, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food.

Cover food with a paper towel instead. This is an article that should be sent to anyone important in your life!

 

Labels: , ,

Saturday, May 5, 2007

Refuse to Buy Uzbekistan Cotton

White Gold - The True Cost of Cotton


Love your new shirt - know how the cotton was grown?

Over two thirds of the world's cotton - used in the clothes we all wear - is grown in developing countries and the former Soviet Union.

Valued at US$35 billion a year, global cotton production should be improving lives but this "white gold" all too often brings misery to millions.

Forced child labour, heavy pesticide use and environmental degradation are all rife in cotton production, but most people are still in the dark about the full story behind the clothes we wear and how they are produced.

Unless you have made a positive choice and are wearing certified organic or fairly traded cotton, you won't know it from the label.

The Environmental Justice Foundation is leading an international campaign to end human rights and environmental abuses in cotton production, and to promote organic and fairly traded cotton.

Read the reports, watch the award-winning short film and then TAKE ACTION so you can Pick Your Cotton Carefully.

Watch "White Gold - The True Cost of Cotton"

EJF Campaigns:

* to raise public awareness of the conditions under which cotton is produced

* to press retailers to ensure they only sell "clean cotton"

* for an EU regulation on forced child labour, and for cotton products
to show the country of origin of the cotton on the label

TAKE ACTION

Labels: ,