Dear EarthTalk: What is the safest way to get a tan?
--Lauren Nivens, Cope, South Carolina

While dermatologists continue to remind us that long-term sun exposure can harm our skin, causing wrinkles, burns and age spots and, more seriously, malignant melanoma and other skin cancers, many people still yearn for that sun-worshipper look. “We encourage people to use self-tanning creams,” says Dr. Robin Ashinoss from New York University’s Medical Center and the American Academy of Dermatology, which can help you find a dermatologist in your area. Creams use di-hydroxyacetone, a compound that binds to and stains dead skin cells, giving you a temporary tan. But beware, self-tanning creams will not protect you from the sun’s harmful ultra violet rays, which stimulate melanoma, change pigment color and damage skin cell DNA.

Using tanning beds is your worst option. People who use tanning beds or tanning lamps face a significantly higher risk of developing common types of skin cancer, according to a recent study published by the National Cancer Institute. Because artificial tanning devices use the same energy source as the sun’s rays--UV radiation--researchers suspect that tanning beds have the same damaging effects as overexposure to the sun. A recent study at Dartmouth College found that people who used a tanning device were 2.5 times more likely to develop basal cell carcinoma than those who avoided them. Basal cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer, arising out of the bottom of the outer skin layer. They were also 1.5 times more susceptible to squamous cell carcinoma, the second most common form of skin cancer, involving tumors that arise in the outer layers of the skin.

Skin cancer is one of the most preventable cancers, yet it is also the most common cancer in the United States, accounting for almost half of all cancers, according to the Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation. “There is no need to be in the sun. The only benefit is that it helps the body to create vitamin D, for healthy bones,” says Dr. Jim Baral of American Dermatology Center and Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City.

CONTACT: American Academy of Dermatology, (888) 462-3376, www.aad.org ; Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation, (800) 227-2732, www.preventcancer.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Is the world running out of oil?
-- Allie Knopf, Kansas City, MO

Many experts say that evidence points to a declining world oil supply. According to renowned petroleum geologist Colin Campbell, who has worked for Texaco, BP, Shell and other major oil companies, world oil discovery peaked in the 1960s, while world production is set to peak about six years from now. Campbell predicts “the onset of a chronic long-term shortage” by 2010.

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. has 22.7 billion barrels of “proven” oil reserves as of January 2004, about 20 percent less than we had in 1990. “Proven” refers to estimated amounts that can be recovered in upcoming years with reasonable certainty. Outside the U.S., nearly two-thirds of the world’s proven oil reserves exist in the 11 countries that make up the Organization of the Petroleum Export Countries (OPEC): Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

The U.S. Geological Survey, which last conducted its World Petroleum Assessment in 2000, estimated that 649 billion barrels of undiscovered oil, and 612 billion barrels of “oil reserve growth,” exist outside the U.S. “Undiscovered” refers to oil located in places that haven't yet been drilled or explored; “oil reserve growth” refers to new discoveries near or in existing oil fields.

These estimates do not include oil sitting in storage facilities, such as the one billion barrel capacity U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, located underground in salt caverns along the Gulf of Mexico coast. It is the world’s largest cache of emergency oil, with a provision of 53 days of import protection.

How much oil do we need anyway? According to the International Energy Outlook, released this year by the EIA, world demand is expected to increase by 1.9 percent annually, from 77 million barrels per day in 2001 to 121 million barrels per day in 2025, with much of the increase projected to occur in the U.S., China and other developing nations in Asia. Over 19 million barrels of oil were consumed per day in the U.S. alone in 2003.

Dr. Nancy Kete, director of the World Resources Institute’s Climate, Energy and Pollution Program, says: “We must face the inescapable fact that the nation’s environment, economy, national security and oil resource base all point to the need for vast investments in energy efficiency and the rapid introduction of new, non-oil energy sources.”

CONTACT: United States Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, (202) 586-8800, http://eia.doe.gov/ ; U.S. Geological Survey, (303) 236-5776, http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/oilgas/wep/ ; World Resources Institute, (202) 729-7600, www.wri.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: What happens to the chemicals in drugs once they are out of our systems? -- Courtney Moschetta, Huntsville, AL

Every time you swallow a pill, some of that medicine follows a circuitous path through your body, down the toilet, through the sewage treatment plant (where if is often resistant to traditional treatments) and into the nearest river or lake, where it is eventually tapped again for the public drinking water supply.

According to Christian Daughton, chief of environmental chemistry at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Environmental Research Laboratory in Las Vegas, new technologies now allow scientists to detect extremely low levels of prescription and over-the-counter drugs, as well as compounds found in personal care products like shampoo and sun screen, in water. In Kansas City alone, more than 40 percent of stream samples analyzed recently by the U.S. Geological Survey had detectable amounts of over-the-counter-drugs like ibuprofen and acetaminophen, antibiotics, and prescription medications for high blood pressure.

While the effects on human health of drug residues in water are not yet a serious concern, new studies show that fish and other aquatic species may be affected, says Daughton. Antibiotics make some species more resistant to pathogens, steroids can cause endocrine disruption that interferes with reproductive processes, and anti-depressants make fish tranquil and more likely to succumb to predation. Considering the large variety of pharmaceuticals on the market today, our water may have a witch’s brew of very small amounts of many different kinds of drugs.

Right now there are no EPA or Food and Drug Administration regulations in place to control levels of residual drugs in water, but some environmental groups concerned with water quality want to see drug disposal policies enacted, new sewage treatment technologies developed, and source reduction efforts on the part of pharmaceutical companies and pharmacies. Daughton envisions a day when drug companies will take responsibility for the life cycle of their products. Instead of flushing your unused prescription drugs down the toilet, you may be able to send them back to the pharmacy or return them to the maker for proper disposal. Such programs already exist in areas of Europe and Canada.

CONTACT: EPA National Environmental Research Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, http://www.epa.gov/nerlesd1/chemistry/pharma/overview.htm ; United States Geological Survey’s Toxic Substances Hydrology Program, http://toxics.usgs.gov/regional/emc.html .

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve heard that Singapore controls the number of cars on its roads. How does this work? -- Karen Abromovich, Trumbull, CT

Nearly 42 million cars were produced worldwide in 2003. More cars, of course, mean more congestion and more air pollution. In response, a handful of regions, including Singapore, are trying to limit the number of cars on the road.

Singapore implemented a “Vehicle Quota System” in 1990. According to the Singapore Land Transport Authority, which administers the program, the number of new vehicles allowed for registration is pre-determined annually, taking into account prevailing traffic conditions and the number of vehicles already on the roads.

The vehicle quota for any given year is administered through a monthly auction of “certificates of entitlement,” which are bid by prospective car owners and must be obtained before their vehicle is allowed on the road. This free market approach sets a relatively high price for a certificate; a quota premium on a car can cost as much as $16,000 in U.S. dollar equivalent. But as a result of the program and its high prices, the number of automobiles in Singapore increased just 22 percent from 1993 to 2003 (from 584,000 cars to 711,000), even though population increased 46 percent during the same time period.

Last year London began implementing a “Congestion Pricing System,” which is being touted as the new international model for transportation reform, according to Walter Hook, executive director of the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy. Between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. there is an extra charge to drive on certain downtown roads. Exemptions exist for taxis, emergency vehicles and other special classes of cars, including alternative energy vehicles. Traffic is monitored by camera, and violators risk fines starting at 78 pounds ($140 U.S.). The British government hopes to cut congestion downtown--where traffic speeds now average three miles an hour--and raise 130 million pounds ($230 million U.S.) per year in the process. A similar system has been in place in Trondheim, Norway for at least 10 years.

Could such systems ever work in the U.S.? Michelle Ernst, senior analyst at the Surface Transportation Policy Project, which advocates for alternative transportation choices, is doubtful, saying that Americans are too attached to their cars, and at present public transportation in many areas is not convenient. “If a system similar to Singapore’s were to be implemented in the U.S., a likely candidate would be New York City, where there is a well developed dense urban core. But that’s a long way off,” says Ernst. “Mayor Bloomberg was interested, but found it politically unfeasible.”

CONTACT: Singapore Land Transport Authority, +011 1800 - 2255 582, www.lta.gov.sg; Institute for Transportation & Development Policy, (212) 629-8001, www.itdp.org ; London City Hall, +011 020 7983-4000, www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/index.jsp ; Surface Transportation Policy Project, (202) 466-2636, www.transact.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Are hybrid buses in my city really helping to reduce air pollution? --Jennifer Cross, New York, NY

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, 20 percent of U.S. air pollution comes from diesel buses--and many of them are concentrated in cities. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently runs a program called Clean School Bus USA, an effort to reduce both children’s exposure to diesel exhaust and the amount of air pollution created by diesel school buses. The EPA has also recently passed tougher standards for all diesel-powered vehicles, but they won't go into effect until 2006. In the meantime, many cities are still trying to meet federal Clean Air Act rules, especially given rising rates of asthma, particularly in children. One of the ways cities can clean up their air is by employing alternatives to traditional diesel engines for both public and school buses.

“Retrofitting” (modifying) older buses, which includes adapting them to use cleaner-burning fuels and incorporating pollution controls, can reduce emissions, but hybrid buses offer increased benefits. A Department of Energy study reports that hybrid buses, which combine a diesel engine with an electric motor, outperform regular diesel buses in a variety of categories, offering 10 percent higher fuel economy, 19 percent lower carbon dioxide emissions and a whopping 97 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions. John Powell, executive director of the Advanced Transportation Technology Institute, sees the dual-fueled hybrids as the optimal choice with the most benefits. Hybrids have already been successfully introduced in New York City, New Jersey, Connecticut, Minnesota, Washington state and Toronto, Canada.

However, many environmentalists would like to do away with using diesel fuel altogether: “Replacing diesel buses with those fueled with natural gas or electricity will help to provide important health protections for people with lung disease,” says Bonnie Holmes-Gen, assistant vice president for government relations with the American Lung Association of California. Some cities, like Boston, already run compressed natural gas buses. Still others are looking into blending hydrogen with natural gas to create a low-emission fuel for buses called “hythane.” Whatever the alternatives, putting pressure on your local transit authority to buy hybrid vehicles or burn cleaner fuels will result in cleaner air for everyone.

CONTACTS: Natural Resources Defense Council, (212) 727-2700, www.nrdc.org ; EPA’s Clean School Bus USA, http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus /; Advanced Transportation Technology Institute, (423) 622-3884, www.atti-info.org ; American Lung Association of California, (510) 638-LUNG, www.californialung.org

***************************************************************
Dear EarthTalk: There are so many juices labeled “natural.” Which ones are most healthful? --Zenas Lu, Boston, Mass.

The most healthful juice you can drink is made fresh, right before you drink it, from (preferably) organic fruits and vegetables with nothing added. The beneficial enzymes, vitamins and minerals are at their peak, and some health practitioners say that the water that comes from inside fruits and vegetables is the purest kind. When juices are packaged and pasteurized, they lose some of their nutritional value. Juices pack a nutritional punch, and are a good way to get part of your daily requirement of fruits and veggies. The American Dietetic Association calls orange juice a “nutrition powerhouse.”

Obviously we don't always have the time or money to drink fresh juice, and that’s when bottled juices are a good choice over soda or sugary iced teas. But buyer beware: Widely popular commercial “fruit drinks,” with little to no real fruit juice, are largely artificially colored sugar water and contain minimal amounts of fruit juice.

According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), many fruit “drinks,” “beverages,” “ades” and “cocktails” are nothing more than non-carbonated soda pop. Fruitopia “Real Fruit Beverage” and Sunny Delight “Real Fruit Beverage,” for example, contain only five percent juice. V8 “Splash” is about 25 percent juice and 75 percent sugar-water. CSPI says that, while Fruitopia has “100% vitamin C per serving” in flavors like Strawberry Passion Awareness, the product contains only about five percent strawberry juice and 95 percent high-fructose corn syrup. Similarly, Mystic Mango Mania Fruit Drink has mangoes pictured all over the label, but the product doesn't contain any mango, except perhaps a small amount included in the “natural flavors.” You’re getting roughly three percent white grape juice and 97 percent sugar water. The health website Lifeclinic.com argues that juice in such limited amounts does not have any health benefit.

Reading labels is the best way to ensure you are buying what’s best for you. If you’re buying off the shelf, try to avoid juices with artificial ingredients or preservatives and, quite simply, anything with less than 100 percent juice. Also, if you are watching your weight, many bottled juices can be high in calories, owing to natural fruit sugars. Drink water and eat whole fruit, which has fiber along with all the nutritional benefits.

CONTACTS: American Dietetic Association, (800) 877-1600, www.eatright.org ; Center for Science in the Public Interest, (202) 332-9110, www.cspinet.org  Lifeclinic.com (800)543-2850, www.lifeclinic.com 

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: What are some ways to maintain a “green” swimming pool?
--Jim Humphey, North Andover, MA

The primary health and environmental drawbacks to swimming pools are water waste, energy waste and overuse of chlorine. Chlorine is very irritating to the eyes and skin, and can trigger breathing difficulties by also “stinging” the sensitive tissue of the lungs. The chemical’s effects in a swimming pool are heightened when it comes into contact with sweat or urine. In fact, a recent Belgian study found a possible link between childhood asthma and exposure to chlorine byproducts in indoor pools.

Zodiac Pool offers a system called Nature2 that doesn't do away with chlorine entirely but does greatly decrease the amount needed. It makes use of silver and copper to destroy bacteria and algae. Silver is a bactericide whose properties have long been known. Copper kills algae. When used together, they reduce chlorine needs by 90 percent. Another product, from ChlorFree, combines silver and copper with zinc, activated carbon and other non-invasive materials to sanitize and control algae and bacteria, and also greatly reduces the need for chlorine.

According to the National Sanitation Foundation, another substitute for chlorine is ozone, which is made from oxygen and does not degrade into harmful chlorinated byproducts in a swimming pool. The Chlorine-Free Products Association recently endorsed an ozone-only public pool built for the city of Fairhope, Alabama. The pool has been operating successfully since construction without the need for harmful additives. Ozone systems for residential pools are slowly becoming available. Sunshine Pool Products makes one that, according to owner Richard Barnes, should enable a completely chlorine-free environment if installed properly and at the right size for the size of the pool.

Pool owners can save energy while still maintaining a pristine pool by using a timer to shut off the pump for at least 12 hours of the day. To hold in heat during the night, always use a pool cover, as almost all of a pool’s heat loss occurs at the surface. By employing a bubble cover (sometimes called a solar cover), outdoor pools can also gain heat, by absorbing 75 to 85 percent of the solar energy striking the pool surface. A pool cover can also reduce water loss by 30 to 50 percent--and reducing water loss also reduces the amount of chemical water treatment required.

Besides that, the easiest way to save energy is to lower the thermostat on your pool’s heater (if it has one) so that it heats the pool no higher than a minimally comfortable temperature. Every one-degree reduction in temperature can cut your energy use by between five and 10 percent.

CONTACTS: Zodiac Pool, Inc., (800) 937-7873, www.nature2.com   ChlorFree, (506) 665-0896, www.chlorfree.net ; Sunshine Pool Products, (801) 728-4520, www.sunshinepool.com ; National Sanitation Foundation, (800) NSF-MARK, www.nsf.org   Chlorine-Free Products Association, (847) 658-6104, www.chlorinefreeproducts.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: What on Earth is this “Slow Food” movement I keep hearing about? -- Robert Davey, Bridgeport, CT

Carlo Petrini, an Italian, founded the international “Slow Food” movement in 1989 in response to the opening of a McDonald’s at the Spanish Steps in Rome. Its head offices are in Piedmont, in the north of Italy. More than half of the organization’s membership is in Italy, but the organization boasts more than 77,000 members in 48 countries, including the United States, which claims 74 local chapters. There are currently chapters in Washington, D.C., New York City, Los Angeles and New Orleans, and also in smaller places like Fargo, North Dakota and Small Green Island, Washington.

The main thrust of Slow Food is to preserve and encourage traditional foods, beverages and recipes that are “endangered by McNuggets and Monsanto,” Petrini says, referring to both our obsession with unhealthy fast food and the increasing and uncertain role of biotechnology. “It’s a union of education, politics, environment and sensual pleasure,” says Petrini. The goal: The propagation of leisurely, more epicurean eating habits, and a more enlightened and patient approach to life in general.

“Slow Food is an international movement dedicated to saving the regional cuisines and products of the world,” says Patrick Martins, president of Slow Food USA. “It could be style: barbecue, cajun, creole, organic…anything that’s fallen by the wayside due to our industrial food culture.” Slow Food’s primary focus is on saving endangered ways of life that revolve around the stomach. For Slow Food, animals and plants are threatened, but so are recipes, harvesting methods and production techniques.

Slow Food calls its local chapters “convivia.” Members organize food and wine events and other initiatives to create “conviviality” and promote the cause. According to Marsha Weiner, who leads the 200-member Washington, D.C. chapter, “Each chapter is very different and independent. Here in D.C. we organize farm visits, hands-on demonstrations with chefs in their kitchens, lectures and social events.”

The 16-member State College, Pennsylvania chapter organizes potluck dinners, lectures and educational trips. Says co-leader Anne Quinncorr, “Mass-produced food had the good intention of getting more affordable food to the greatest number of people. But, there was no foresight given to environmental impact. A peach grown by a small-scale suburban farmer may be a bit more expensive, but it tastes like a peach and when you buy it you’re keeping that farmer in business and fighting urban sprawl.”

Slow Food advocates are settling in for a long struggle, but they say victory will eventually be theirs. On the day fast food dies, says Martins, “We will raise a glass of organic wine and say good riddance.”

CONTACT: Slow Food USA, (212) 965-5640, www.slowfoodusa.org ; Slow Food (main office), www.slowfood.com

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Are there toothpastes on the market that don't contain chemicals or artificial sweeteners? -- Jeffrey Moss, Westport, CT

Most conventional toothpastes use saccharin as a sweetener. Although it has not been proven that saccharin causes cancer in humans, many studies have linked it to cancer in laboratory animals, and some experts, including Dr. Samuel Epstein of the University of Illinois Medical Center and the Center for Science in the Public Interest, recommend that consumers avoid it.

Fluoride has also come under fire in recent years because of its suspected ties to bone cancer, hip fractures and fluorosis, white spots and blotching on teeth caused by excessive ingestion of fluoride. Although the American Dental Association (ADA) strongly endorses fluoride-containing products, claiming they are safe and effective for cavity prevention, some experts argue that if fluoride can damage tooth-forming cells, as in fluorisis, then other harm to the body may also occur.

Triclosan is the most often used antibacterial agent in toothpaste. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers triclosan a pesticide and a chlorophenol, part of a class of chemicals thought to cause cancer in humans. Sodium lauryl/laureth sulfate, a foaming agent, and sorbitol are two other oral hygiene ingredients whose safety has been questioned. And most so-called “whitening” toothpastes use sodium or potassium hydroxides, also known as lye, considered a poison by the Food and Drug Administration.

For many years the alternatives to mass-market toothpastes were plain baking soda or bad-tasting pastes that most adults disliked and kids refused to use. There are many new pastes on the market now that, if somewhat less sweet-tasting than those with saccharin, taste great--and the dental establishment is warming up to them.

The ADA has awarded its seal to Tom’s of Maine, which makes a large variety of natural-ingredient toothpastes. And the Journal of Clinical Dentistry found that Herbal Toothpaste and Gum Therapy from The Natural Dentist outperformed Colgate’s Total in reducing gingivitis and teeth stains. The Natural Dentist makes pastes and gels in a variety of flavors that contain sodium laureth sulfate, but don't use artificial sweeteners, preservatives or dyes. Peelu Toothpaste, which comes in Spearmint, Cinnamon and Peppermint flavors, uses peelu, a vegetable fiber, as an abrasive and glycerine as a cleanser, rather than a synthetic detergent. Weleda makes toothpaste free of saccharin and sodium lauryl sulfate. Its Pink Toothpaste with Myrrh contains nine essential oils for gum health, and its Children’s Tooth Gel is made especially for young teeth.

For consumers who wish to avoid fluoride, Tom’s of Maine makes fluoride-free natural toothpaste for adults and children. Tom’s also makes a whitening toothpaste that uses silica; Jason Natural Products makes one that uses both silica and bamboo powder.

CONTACTS: Center for Science in the Public Interest, (202) 332-9110, www.cspinet.org ; American Dental Association, (312) 440-2500, www.ada.org ; Tom’s of Maine, (800) 367-8667, www.tomsofmaine.com ; The Natural Dentist, (201) 944-0123, www.thenaturaldentist.com ; Peelu Toothpaste, (888) 543-9294, www.bytheplanet.com/Products/Peelu/Peelu.htm;Weleda, (800) 265-2615, www.usa.weleda.com ; Jason Natural Products, 877-JASON-01, www.jason-natural.com

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve heard that human population is actually shrinking because of a global “birth dearth.” Is this true? -- Lindsay Ellis

There is indeed a population shortfall trend developing in Western Europe, Russia and Japan. In Ireland, for instance, families have an average of 1.8 children today, slightly below the “replacement level” of two children per couple. Couples in Italy, Germany and Spain have just 1.2 to 1.3 children each. The average fertility rate in Europe is 1.45. Both Russia and Japan are at 1.3.

But it’s simply not true that world population is shrinking, because these trends are overcompensated for by the very rapid population increases taking place in the world’s poor and least-developed countries. According to the United Nations, population growth in less-developed countries is growing at an annual rate of 1.46 percent, nearly six times faster that the .25 percent growth taking place in the most heavily industrialized regions of the world.

We are currently adding 77 million people to the globe annually, with 21 percent of that increase coming from India, 12 percent from China and five percent from Pakistan. Three countries, Bangladesh, Nigeria and the United States each contribute four percent of the world’s annual growth. In the U.S., where the average fertility rate was 2.05 in 2002, population growth is due largely to immigration.

From 6.3 billion people on the planet today, the United Nations projects we will grow to 8.9 billion by the year 2050. Half of that projected increase will occur in just eight countries, seven of them in Africa and Asia. It is interesting to consider that it took all of human history until 1800 for world population to reach its first billion; from there the second billion took only until 1930. Now, just 75 years later, we've passed the six billion mark.

Many environmentalists feel that human population growth is the most important environmental issue of all. The sheer number of people added to the planet each year easily erodes the “per capita” gains made by conservation measures. Globally, the population growth-induced accelerated loss of forestland results in a reduced ability for ecosystems to absorb the also-increasing carbon dioxide emissions that exacerbate global warming. Further, the expansion of human activity and associated loss of habitat are the leading causes of the unprecedented extinctions of plant and animal species worldwide.

In the United States, we lose two acres of farmland every minute, according to the American Farmland Trust, and a serious water shortage is developing nationwide, with aquifers once considered inexhaustible now drying up. In poor countries, population growth exacts its toll in the form of abject poverty and chronic food and water scarcity.

CONTACTS: United Nations Population Fund, www.unfpa.org, Population Action International, (202) 557-3400, www.populationaction.org, American Farmland Trust, (202) 331-7300, www.farmland.org;National Audubon Society Population and Habitat Program, (800) 659-2622, www.audubonpopulation.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I want to garden this spring without using chemicals. Are there any safe, non-toxic garden herbicides? --D. Muller, Jackson, MS

There are now several natural herbicides on the market. One of the most effective natural ingredients is corn gluten meal, a yellow powder that is a waste product of the corn milling process. While the meal has been used in dog, fish and other animal foods for years, it has only recently been marketed as a natural herbicide. As researchers at Iowa State University’s (ISU) Horticulture Department discovered, the material naturally inhibits the growth of seeds’ initial root systems, while doing no harm to already established plants.

ISU researchers say that once vegetables or flowers have their first true leaves, corn gluten meal can be safely and effectively applied to kill weeds. ISU scientists also note that, because corn gluten meal is high in nitrogen, it is beneficial to surrounding plants, doubling as a fertilizer.

It has been reported that corn gluten meal is particularly effective against dandelions, pigweed, crabgrass, plantain and curly dock. ISU scientists suggest an application rate of 20 pounds per 1,000 square feet and they say the product remains effective for five to six weeks. Researchers say that corn gluten meal should be applied to lawns about three to five weeks before weeds begin to grow.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Pesticide Programs urges people to decrease the amount of chemical herbicides used to battle weeds. There are already more than 865 active ingredients registered for use in pesticides, herbicides and fungicides. About 350 pesticide products, including herbicides, are used on the foods we eat and to ward off pests from our homes and pets. But pesticides and herbicides often contain toxic substances that are harmful to human and ecological health.

ChemFree+ is one brand of herbicide that uses corn gluten meal. Available from Chem Free Lawns, it is advertised as both a natural weed control and fertilizer for lawns and gardens, harmless to people, pets, groundwater, insects and soil microorganisms. Comparable products include Dynaweed, from the American Natural Products Company, and “A-Maize-N,” from Planet Natural.

CONTACT: Chem Free Lawns, (952) 473-2127, www.chemfreelawns.com ; American Natural Products Company, (800) 221-7645; www.americanatural.com ; Planet Natural, (800) 289-6656; www.planetnatural.com ; Iowa State University’s Horticulture Department, (515) 294-2751, www.hort.iastate.edu ; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, (703) 305-5440, www.epa.gov/pesticides .

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: What are PCBs, and how do they harm the environment?
--Dale Roach, Waterford, MI

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are various man-made mixtures of chlorinated compounds that were first made by the Swann Chemical Company back in 1880. PCBs were once considered a “miracle product” for manufacturers because of their water insolubility, high tolerance for heat, and chemical stability. This led to their widespread use in the making of products such as inks, dyes, paints, adhesives, carbonless papers, lubricants, flame-retardants, surface coatings and sealants, and industrial fluids.

As early as 1936, the harmful effects and health risks of PCBs were known, and today they are well documented. PCBs cause cancer in studies using animals, and are therefore classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as probable human carcinogens. PCBs also cause liver, kidney and nervous system disorders, as well as developmental and reproductive abnormalities.

Most insidious is that PCBs increase in concentration as much as 1,000-fold as they move up the food chain. This “bioaccumulation” is of special concern in areas where wildlife and humans consume PCB-contaminated fish. Because of such harmful effects, the EPA banned PCBs in 1977, but PCB problems are far from over.

In one highly publicized case, two General Electric (GE) plants in upstate New York dumped 1.3 million pounds of PCBs into New York’s Hudson River between 1947 and 1977. Although the dumping ceased more than 25 years ago and concentrations have declined since, they have stabilized at levels that are significantly higher than those considered safe for human consumption of fish. According to Riverkeeper, a New York-based environmental organization, large quantities of PCBs remain concentrated in sediment in northern portions of the Hudson, and are found in fish and wildlife throughout the river’s ecosystem.

Forty so-called PCB "hot spots” have been identified in a six-mile stretch directly downstream from the two GE plants, and in February 2002 the EPA decided to proceed with a comprehensive cleanup of the Hudson River. The plan calls for removing 100,000 pounds of PCB contaminated sediments from the Upper Hudson River by dredging, a plan that will cost GE $460 million. GE has contested the ruling, arguing that its efforts should be limited to conducting the design of the cleanup, estimated at approximately $30 million, and preventing additional PCB contamination.

PCBs from GE have also contaminated the Housatonic River in Massachusetts and Connecticut, leading to its listing by the group American Rivers as one of “America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2004.”

CONTACTS: Environmental Protection Agency, (202) 260-1876, www.epa.gov/pbt/pcbs.htm ; Hudson Riverkeeper, (800) 21-RIVER, www.riverkeeper.org ; General Electric, (203) 373-3476, www.ge.com ; American Rivers, (202) 347-7550, www.amrivers.org .

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Do urban gardens significantly contribute to our food supply?
-- Wayne Chow, New York, NY

The United Nations Development Program estimates that urban gardens, like the ones springing up all over New York City and Seattle, provide 15 percent of the world’s food supply. In the U.S., they are also creating sorely needed jobs in neglected neighborhoods and introducing concrete-raised children to the wonders of nature. Gardens bolster community pride and eliminate some of the environmental problems of modern agribusiness such as heavy use of pesticides and pollution from long-distance transportation.

Town planners, who may worry that constituents will be offended by manure and dirt, often view urban agriculture suspiciously. However, there are many examples of successful urban gardens. Hong Kong, one of the world’s most densely populated cities, produces about half of its vegetables in urban gardens. In Moscow, nearly 65 percent of families engage in some kind of food production. In Cuba, according to the Institute for Food and Development Policy (also known as Food First), urban gardens play a crucial role in feeding the country’s citizens. Havana, where nearly 20 percent of Cuba's population lives, is home to over 8,000 community gardens, which are cultivated by more than 30,000 people and cover nearly 30 percent of the available land.

Back in the U.S., South Central Los Angeles’ “Food from the ‘Hood” program has brought attention to the potential of its embattled Crenshaw district, while providing college funds for the high school students who maintain organic gardens. San Francisco’s Fresh Start Farms employs homeless families to grow produce, which is then sold to local restaurants. Even some U.S. prisons have now started urban gardens, which can be on rooftops as well as on the ground.

CONTACT: Food from the ‘Hood, (888) 601-FOOD, www.foodfromthehood.com ; Fresh Start Farms, (415) 487-9778, www.grass-roots.org/usa/fresh.shtml , Institute for Food and Development Policy, (510) 654-4400, www.foodfirst.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: How much of our waste in the U.S. is recycled compared to what is “disposed of”? Who keeps track of this? --Anita Knight, Wheaton, IL

Roughly 30 percent of the trash generated in the United States is recovered and recycled or composted. About 14 percent is incinerated, and 56 percent ends up buried in landfills, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Municipal Solid Waste.

The EPA reports on a wide variety of solid wastes, including paper and cardboard, glass, metals, plastics, rubber, leather, textiles, wood, food, yard trimmings and inorganic wastes from residents, businesses and institutions. The agency has witnessed the amount of waste produced in the U.S. rapidly increase over the past four decades.

The EPA’s last study, conducted in 2001, estimated that 229 million tons of wastes were produced that year, or approximately 4.4 pounds per person per day. That’s a 260 percent increase in tonnage from the 88 million tons of waste produced in 1960, which was about 2.7 pounds per person per day. Bearing in mind that U.S. population was 179 million in 1960 but is 292 million now (a 60% increase), it means that not only are there more Americans now--Americans are wasting more.

But there are some positive trends: In 1960, only 6.3 percent of total U.S. waste was recycled, only a fifth of what is being recycled today. And in a more recent years’ comparison, some 68 million tons of waste were recycled or composted in 2001, compared to 34 million tons just 10 years earlier.

There has also been forward movement in paper recycling. According to the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI), we are well on our way toward recovering 50 percent of all paper used. More paper is now recovered in the U.S. than is sent to landfills.

There’s progress, say recycling advocates, but not enough: “I think that for certain materials--glass, plastic, and aluminum--we have not made much headway in the past few years,” says Pat Franklin, executive director of the Container Recycling Institute. “The recycling rate for all containers has declined over the past eight years, partly because the financial incentive to recycle aluminum cans has not increased with inflation,” she says.

CONTACT: The U.S. EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, (800) 424-9346, www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/index.htm ; Container Recycling Institute, (703) 276-9800, www.container-recycling.org ; TAPPI, (800) 332-8686, www.tappi.org .

***************************************************************
Dear EarthTalk: I’ve been hearing that wind power is going to play a significant role in our energy future. What’s the story? -- Dorothy Raffman, Norwalk, CT

Wind energy is zero-emissions energy, a renewable resource that many environmentalists and alternative energy proponents feel is one of our last, best hopes for staving off devastating climate change. According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), the average wind turbine can prevent the emission of 1,500 tons of carbon dioxide each year.

Globally, wind energy has grown 500 percent since 1997. In 2003, 8,133 megawatts of wind-generating capacity were installed worldwide, according to a recent joint announcement from AWEA and the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). This brought the world’s total wind power generating capacity to 39,294 megawatts, enough to power 19 million European households, according to EWEA. World wind leaders include Germany, the U.S., Spain, Austria and India, each with more than 1,000 megawatts. A number of other countries, including the Netherlands, Italy, Japan and Great Britain, are nearing the 1,000-megawatt mark.

In the United States, there are now wind energy installations in almost every state west of the Mississippi, and in many Northeastern states. California leads with more than 2,000 megawatts of installed wind energy, followed by Texas with nearly 1,300 megawatts. In total there were nearly 6,400 megawatts of wind power in the United States as of January 2004, enough to power 1.6 million U.S. homes, and up 50 percent from the installed capacity in the U.S. at the end of 2001, says AWEA.

Offshore wind has enormous growth potential as well. Germany, for instance, recently finalized an agreement to build a 350-megawatt project (with 70 five-megawatt turbines) anchored on the ocean floor off the island of Rügen. Here in the United States, in Massachusetts, the Cape Wind Project hopes to construct a $700 million, 420-megawatt, 130-windmill development that would stretch for five miles off Cape Cod, though it has drawn opposition from some residents, as has the German project, for fears that it will be an eyesore and could harm migrating birds.

CONTACTS: American Wind Energy Association, (202) 383-2500, www.awea.org European Wind Energy Association, +32 2 546 1940, www.ewea.org ; Cape Wind Project, 617-904-3100, www.capewind.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Which are better for the environment, disposable or cloth diapers? -- Barbara Fritts, White Lake, MI

The “disposable versus cloth” debate has raged among environmentalists for years. Non-degradable disposable diapers can sit for decades, even centuries, in landfills and require thousands of tons of plastic and hundreds of thousands of trees to manufacture. However, the water and chemicals used to clean cloth diapers, and the fossil fuels diaper services consume to transport them, suggest that their relative environmental impact could be a wash.

However, modern advances in water- and energy-efficiency in washing machines and dryers have reduced the environmental impact of diaper laundering. Concerned parents should also consider the issue of sewage. The urine and feces in disposable diapers enter landfills untreated, possibly contaminating the ground water supply. Whether cloth diaper waste is flushed down the toilet or removed in the washing machine, that dirty water will enter a sewer system and, most likely, a wastewater treatment plant.

Also, John Shiffert, executive director of the National Association of Diaper Services (NADS), points out that the chlorine byproduct dioxin, a carcinogen, has been found in trace amounts in disposables.

Those concerned about the environment who want the convenience of disposables can try Nature Boy and Girl, which makes a competitively priced, cornstarch-based diaper that can be composted. Using flushable cloth diaper liners, made by Tiny Tush and other companies, means only the thinnest--and messiest--part gets thrown away. Parents who want to use cloth diapers can hire a cleaning service to do the dirty work. Their numbers have rebounded in recent years. Check the yellow pages, or contact NADS to locate a service in your area.

CONTACT: National Association of Diaper Services (NADS), (610) 971-4850, www.diapernet.com ; Nature Boy and Girl, (425) 771-1339, www.natureboyandgirl.com ; Tiny Tush, (608) 356-2500, www.tinytush.com

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I heard that sea turtles are developing cancerous tumors at an alarming rate. What’s going on? -- Brendon Hunt, New York, NY

Sea turtles have long endured the pressures of hunting, intensive fishing practices and habitat degradation, including loss of nesting beaches due to human encroachment. In the last 20 years, marine turtles have also been the victims of a deadly tumor called Fibropapilloma, a bulbous growth that primarily affects the skin but also appears in the turtles’ mouths, on their eyes and on internal organs.

The tumors can grow as large as a head of cauliflower, making it difficult for the animals to swim and find food. Internally, they can constrict the lungs and heart and affect the kidneys. In the 1980s, the disease began to reach epidemic proportions in shallow, near-shore waters off Hawaii, Florida and Barbados. The disease is now also present in Australia and the Pacific coasts of Mexico and Costa Rica.

The tumors have mostly been found on both young and adult green turtles, but have recently showed up on the Loggerhead, Hawksbill and Olive Ridley species. Sue Schaf of Florida’s Turtle Hospital, which treats and performs surgery on afflicted turtles, says, “We were seeing 50 percent of green turtles with tumors, but now it is closer to 70 percent and getting worse.” In Hawaii, some 60 percent of the turtles are affected.

While progress is being made to understand Fibropapilloma, scientists are still puzzled as to what is causing the tumors. Their high prevalence in marine habitats near areas of heavy human use would lead one to believe that some form of pollution is the cause, such as runoff from fertilizer or farm waste, but research has been inconclusive. Some scientists speculate that a virus might be giving turtles the disease. Other marine experts blame the tumors on global warming, with increased water temperatures weakening the turtles’ immune systems.

CONTACT: Turtle Hospital, (305) 743-6509, www.turtlehospital.org ; Florida Marine Research Institute, (727) 896-8626, www.floridamarine.org ; National Marine Fisheries Service, www.nmfs.noaa.gov

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Are there prepared lunches comparable to Oscar Mayer “Lunchables” that are healthier and more environmentally friendly?
-- Carla Bahun, Marietta, GA

Oscar Mayer’s Lunchables are a hit with youngsters because of their bright packaging and fun-to-eat snacks. However, like much of the junk food marketed to children today, behind those colorful boxes and tasty treats lies a spectrum of potential health disasters. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) offers 10 tips in creating a nutritional lunch, and one of them is “Don’t send Lunchables,” because the snacks derive “two-thirds of their calories from fat and sugar.”

CSPI also includes Lunchables among their list of the “Top 10 Foods to Avoid” because, “It would be hard to invent a worse food than these combos of heavily processed meat, artery-clogging cheese and mostly-white-flour crackers. The regular (non-lowfat) line averages 5 1/2 teaspoons of fat (that’s 60 percent of calories) and 1,734 milligrams of sodium.”

Moreover, Lunchables’ form of attractive packaging is environmentally unfriendly. It consists of a plastic tray cut into various compartments, which is then sealed with a transparent and flexible film. This tray is then placed in an outer cardboard box. All this makes it very difficult to recycle, so much so that the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group (MASSPIRG) gave Lunchables a “Lifetime Waste Maker Achievement Award” in 1999

Currently, as there are not many known alternatives to such prepared foods, CSPI suggests packing one’s own lunch and snacks, which would be more environmentally friendly and far healthier for your children. If your kids insist on Lunchable-style meals, a simple alternative would be to whip up your own collection of healthy, low-fat snack replacements. In addition, CSPI offers tips on preparing a healthy lunch, such as leaving out the cheese altogether (or using low fat of fat-free cheese), adding vegetables to sandwiches, using low-fat crackers, using whole-grain bread instead of white bread, including fruit or juice (100% juice only), and using one percent or fat-free milk.

CONTACT: Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), (202) 332-9110, www.cspinet.org ; Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group (MASSPIRG), 617-292-4800, www.masspirg.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Why are environmentalists trying to get snowmobiles banned from national parks? Deborah Beck, Ketchum, ID

According to the San Francisco, California-based Bluewater Network, which wants to ban snowmobile use in national parks, 250,000 snowmobiles are operated in America’s park system each year, with some 60,000 snowmobiles zooming through Yellowstone National Park alone. Counting all snowmobile usage nationally, in and out of national parks, about 2.3 million take to the powder every year.

The main issue is the vehicle’s two-stroke engine, which is a major polluter. According to Bluewater, the air pollution from these dirty machines is so bad that some Yellowstone Park Rangers now wear respirators to protect themselves. Further, these engines dump 25-30 percent of their fuel unburned out the tailpipe onto vegetation and soil and into the water and air. According to Katy Rexford, Public Lands Associate for Bluewater, snowmobiles dump more than 100,000 gallons of fuel and 2,500 gallons of oil into Yellowstone’s ecosystem every year. Banning two-stroke engines in favor of four-stroke engines would make snowmobiles 80 percent cleaner, says Rexford.

But switching to four-stroke engines will not greatly affect the noise pollution. The piercing noise of snowmobiles is also at issue; studies have shown that snowmobiles can be heard 90 percent of the time in Yellowstone, thus destroying natural soundscapes and diminishing opportunities for more contemplative forms of recreation.

Another issue is their impact on wildlife: Canadian scientists found that the noise from snowmobiles disturbs animals up to 1,250 feet away. Even when restricted to approved and maintained trails, snowmobiles can push bison, wolves, elk, moose and bald eagles out of their preferred habitats.

CONTACT: Bluewater Network, (415) 544-0790, www.bluewaternetwork.org

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: Does eye mascara contain toxic ingredients?
Amber Galt, Madison, WI

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified many modern skin care, hair care and cosmetics ingredients as hazardous. Such ingredients can be absorbed into the body through the skin, and may be loaded with potential irritants, carcinogens, neurotoxins or hormone disrupters. The potential health problems associated with brand-name cosmetics are many and varied.

Some cosmetics companies throw petroleum distillates, shellac and other preservatives into the pot when stewing up a batch of lash thickener, says Kim Erickson in her book Drop-Dead Gorgeous: Protecting Yourself from the Hidden Dangers of Cosmetics. Ingredients like shellac and quaternium-22 can induce allergies; others, such as phenylmercuric acetate, may cause skin irritation and blisters. Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricts the use of phenylmercuric acetate, a mercury derivative, cosmetic manufacturers are not required to register with the FDA.

Eye products sometimes contain kohl, which is made of heavy metals such as antimony and lead. Also called al-kahl, kajal or surma, this color additive has been linked to lead poisoning in children and is not approved for cosmetic use in the U.S. However, the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) warns it can be found in imported mascaras.

Perhaps the most dangerous ingredient found in mascara is not meant to be included--bacteria. According to Dr. Andrew Weil, author of Eight Weeks to Optimum Health, airborne bacteria rush into the bottle every time you open it. Preservatives break down over time, losing their ability to prevent bacterial growth that can cause infection and, in rare cases, temporary or even permanent blindness. Doctors and beauty experts recommend replacing mascara every three months, no matter how much is left. Throw it out sooner if it develops an unusual texture or odor.

CONTACT: CFSAN Cosmetics Program, www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cos-toc.html   Dr. Andrew Weil, www.drweil.com

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: How many of our rainforests are protected around the world?
--Adriano Adamson Paiva, Bahia, Brazil

Determining how much rainforest land is protected worldwide depends on how you define “rainforest.” Researchers at the Worldwatch Institute in Washington, DC have identified three different types of rainforests. There are about 4.2 million square miles of tropical moist forest, of which just eight percent is protected, and 76,000 square miles of tropical mangrove forest, of which only nine percent is protected. And only five percent of the 300,000 square miles of the third type, tropical dry forest, is protected. And many of these forests are protected only on paper; in practice, they may not necessarily be safe from oil drilling, wood harvesting, cattle grazing and myriad other destructive uses.

Scientists and policymakers at the Switzerland-based World Conservation Union (IUCN) estimate that there are 44,000 “protected areas” worldwide, covering over 13 million square kilometers--an area equivalent to the landmass of India and China combined. These areas, which include rainforests but which can also be agricultural lands, national parks, reserves, forested land, marine sanctuaries and more, cover about 10 percent of the Earth’s surface.

While the IUCN has documented more than 1,388 words or terms used to describe a “protected area,” national park designation remains a common way to secure the future existence of a natural resource like a rainforest. Tumucumaque National Park in the Brazilian Amazon is the world’s largest protected tropical rainforest, covering 24,135 square kilometers.

CONTACTS: The World Conservation Union, +41 (22) 999-0001; www.iucn.org ; Worldwatch Institute, (202) 452-1999, www.worldwatch.org ; Rainforest Alliance, www.rainforest-alliance.org ; Rainforest Action Network, (415) 398-4404, www.ran.org .

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I have been searching for an environmentally friendly way to repel moles from my home without killing or harming them. Any suggestions?
-- Elizabeth Powell, Marion, OH

Having moles in your yard is not necessarily detrimental. According to Bill Adler, author of Outwitting Critters: A Humane Guide for Confronting Devious Animals and Winning, moles eat destructive creatures like Japanese beetles and grubs, and aerate the soil by tunneling, thus bringing subsoil close to the surface. Moles themselves do not eat plant matter. Most likely, plant damage is done by the vegetarian vole, or by mice.

However, mole-tunneling activity can cause significant cosmetic damage to a well-manicured lawn. There are some mole-friendly ways to urge them to take their digging elsewhere. Gardens Alive! makes an eco-friendly spray called Mole-Gopher Med Repellent. Made from castor oil that you apply directly into mole holes about once every two months, the product releases a harmless smell that annoys moles, encouraging them to leave. One-pint bottles are good for a 5,000-square-foot application ($17).

Critter-Repellent.com offers Shake Away, a 100-percent natural pellet treated with a mixture of bobcat, coyote and fox urine that will also deter rodents from your yard: $15 for a 20-ounce bottle.

A physical barrier to try: Surround a cherished garden with an underground barrier of compacted soil and stones about one foot wide and two feet deep. A one-foot-high fence will prevent the moles from walking over the barrier.

CONTACTS: Gardens Alive!, (513) 354-1482, www.gardensalive.com ; Critter-Repellent.com, (866) 802-8837, www.critter-repellent.com .

**************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: What is the environmental impact of America’s consumer buying habits? -- Jenni Perez, Los Angeles, CA

Your next-door neighbor just bought a Hummer. That long-untouched parcel of land around the corner just became home to a new strip mall. And on your short bicycle trip to the office you count dozens of discarded soda cans and bottled water containers with pretty nature scenes on them. Back home, your kid’s floor and closet are littered with CDs, video game cartridges, $150 sneakers and bean-filled toys. Indeed, a recent Time/CNN poll found that 80 percent of people think children are more spoiled today than the kids of 10 or 15 years ago. Arguably, the adults may be, too.

The nonprofit Center for a New American Dream, whose stated mission is to “help Americans consume responsibly to protect the environment, enhance quality of life and promote social justice,” says that America’s growing obsession with acquisition is taking a heavy toll on the environment. According to the group’s president, Betsy Taylor, the U.S. consumes more energy, water, paper, steel and meat per capita than any other country, so much so that at least four additional planets would be needed to provide the American lifestyle if every person on Earth were to demand it. Meanwhile, forests are being lost at an alarming rate, farmlands and wetlands are being engulfed by development, plant and animal species are disappearing and our air and water continue to be threatened by pollution.

Participants of New Dream’s web-based Turn the Tide program follow “nine little actions” to try to reduce their personal impact on the environment, including skipping car trips, eating one less beef meal a week, reducing water use and installing energy-efficient light bulbs. The program enables participants to track the positive impact of their actions--and see the cumulative impact of all of the program’s participants across North America. CNAD estimates that for every 1,000 people who pursue the program for one year, 48.5 million gallons of water and 170 trees are saved and 4 million pounds of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere are prevented.

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve heard that conventional lice treatments contain toxic chemicals. Are safer, more natural alternatives available? -- Dwayne Newton, Charleston, SC

The National Pediculosis Association (NPA) advises consumers to be cautious with conventional lice treatments, including shampoos and lotions, since they contain toxic, and in some cases carcinogenic, pesticides. The NPA says that people with epilepsy, asthma, brain tumors, cancer or AIDS, and pregnant or nursing women, should completely avoid any chemical lice medications. Further, the NPA is calling on the medical community to address the current “resistance crisis” of lice becoming increasingly resistant to pesticide treatments.

Fortunately, several pesticide-free alternative products are now available that help get rid of lice and nits (lice eggs) safely and effectively. The NPA endorses a comb called the LiceMeister (around $10), which has closely spaced, stainless steel teeth that glide easily through hair, collecting lice and nits. The comb is safe but the process is quite time consuming as it works best when used daily during infestation and regularly thereafter. Well-In-Hand Herbals’ Non-Toxic Nit Kit ($18.99) includes an easy-to-use herbal formula that smothers and kills lice. This product, which won’t dry hair out, is made from olive, canola and essential oils and has a fresh, natural scent. The Nit Kit also comes with a fine-toothed metal comb and 5x magnifier to help find the unwanted insects.

CONTACTS: National Pediculosis Association, (781) 449-NITS, www.headlice.org ; Well-In-Hand, (434) 384-7774, www.wellinhand.com .

***************************************************************

Dear EarthTalk: How do I recycle or safely dispose of used batteries?
--Tom Shamrell, Brattleboro, VT

Unfortunately, most of the more than 750 million alkaline batteries sold each year to power our cameras, flashlights and Discmans are landfilled and incinerated, not recycled. The chemicals in these batteries--particularly cadmium--present a major health hazard if they leak from their corroded metal jackets. Cadmium is a probable human carcinogen, and it can also affect kidney and lung function.

Several states, including Maine, Vermont and Florida, have passed legislation prohibiting incineration and landfilling of mercury-containing and lead-acid batteries, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Product Stewardship. Regardless of your home state’s attitude on batteries, you should contact your town’s solid waste office to see if there are any planned Hazardous Waste Collection Days. Batteries awaiting recycling should be stored separately from other hazardous materials in a cool and dry area.

Or take advantage of some of the increasingly popular national battery recycling programs. Since 1989, 13 states have adopted laws (including battery labeling requirements) to encourage the collection and recycling of used rechargeable batteries. In 1996, Congress passed the Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act, which helps facilitate the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation’s (RBRC) nationwide take back program. According to RBRC, some rechargeable batteries can go through 1,000 cycles. RBRC recycles million of batteries each year, collecting used batteries from more than 30,000 depositories in the U.S. and Canada, many at large retailers such as Home Depot, Best Buy and Target. The RBRC collects only nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal hydride, lithium ion and small sealed-lead batteries.

The Big Green Box battery-recycling program provides consumers, companies and government agencies with a simple method for recycling both batteries and portable electronic devices (cellphones, cameras, calculators and laptops) without having to drive to a recycling center. You prepay for a sturdy cardboard box (the consumer version is $58) that will hold up to 40 pounds of recyclables. The cost of the box includes all shipping, handling and recycling fees. You keep the box handy, filling it with old batteries and equipment as you go--and simply ship it to The Big Green Box address when it’s full.

CONTACTS: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Product Stewardship, Office of Solid Waste, (800) 424-9346, www.epa.gov/epr/products/batteries.html ; Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation, (678) 419-9990, www.rbrc.org ; The Big Green Box, (714) 879-2067, www.biggreenbox.com

***************************************************************
Dear EarthTalk: Where can one recycle computer equipment that is out of date or broken and not worth upgrading or fixing? --Kenneth Rapp, Toms River, NJ

According to the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, 315 million computers are expected to become obsolete by the end of 2004. Given the lightening speed of computer technology, some environmental groups estimate the average lifespan of a computer is only three years. A discarded computer reeks of environmental hazards. Not only will plastic components sit in landfills for hundreds of years, toxic materials are used to create computers, including lead used in monitors.

Instead of throwing your old computer away, consider donating it to one of many re-use programs or recycling programs throughout the country. The California-based Computer Recycling Center (CRC) began collecting used computers in 1991, and they claim to have diverted six million pounds of computer waste from landfills in 2002 alone. If you’re computer is still functional, CRC’s Computers & Education program takes computer donations and provides refurbished computers to public schools, and community non-profits. CRC is a local program, so if you can’t drop off your old machine, you’ll have to pay for shipping. Look for recycling programs in your community. Brokers like American Computer Exchange in Georgia are national programs that will take your hardware for trade on a newer model.

It is becoming more common for computer manufacturers to have their own recycling programs. Hewlett-Packard’s (HP) Planet Partners recycling service will pickup, transport, and recycle any brand of computer equipment or HP printing supplies. As an incentive to recycle, HP will give you $50 towards the purchase of a new product when you return old computer products to the company. HP’s recycling facilities processes more than three million pounds of used equipment each month.

Ink cartridges and disk use both generate significant waste. HP’s Planet Partners LaserJet Supplies Program has helped recycle more than 39 million HP LaserJet cartridges worldwide since 1992, which equates to approximately 50,000 tons of material diverted from landfill. GreenDisk, a Washington State-based company that recycles used disks, estimates that more than 10 billion old disks and CDs will need a resting place over the next five years. GreenDisk's Personal Electronics Program helps individuals, businesses, and government agencies recycle small amounts of electronic waste, including CDs, diskettes, videos, inkjet and toner cartridges, and cell phones. You’ll receive a “Certificate of Destruction” that guarantees your intellectual property has been destroyed, and all physical materials have been disposed of in an environmentally responsible manner.

CONTACTS: Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, (408) 287-6707, www.svtc.org ; Computer Recycling Center, (707) 570-1600, http://www.crc.org/ ; American Computer Exchange, (404) 250-0050, www.amcoex.com ; Hewlett-Packard, 800-752-0900, www.hp.com/hpinfo/globalcitizenship/environment/recycle ; GreenDisk Services, (800) 305-3475, www.greendisk.com .

***************************************************************
PAST QUESTIONS : FOR ANSWERS REFER EARTH TALK

Dear EarthTalk: How do sewer treatment plants threaten estuaries?
--Jean T. Castagno, Old Saybrook, CT

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve heard that there were only two curbside recycling programs in the country in the early 1970s. Where were they and how many are there now? --Bonnie Emerick, Chicago, IL

Dear EarthTalk: I’ve heard I should avoid buying wood products made from “old-growth timber.” What does that refer to, and how can I tell if something is made from old-growth wood? --Anna Hunt, Sierra Madre, CA

Does drinking hard water result in an unhealthy buildup of minerals in the body over time? Should I use a water softener? --Sunny Mullis, Sturgis, SD

I still have asbestos siding on my house and want to remove it. How do I do so and dispose of it properly? -- Marian Masters, Bowerston, OH

What ever happened to the Adopt-A-Rainforest programs that were so popular in the early 1990s? -- Chris Marlowe, Scotch Plains, NJ

Can the mercury contained in some seafood harm a developing fetus?-Midge Wilson, Utica, NY

What flooring materials reduce indoor air quality problems?
-Allen R. Linoski, Royal Oak, MI

I remember hearing years ago that the world’s frogs were in peril. How are they doing today? - Omar Khan, Columbus, IN

How does overexposure to arsenic occur, and what are its health hazards? - Cheryl Timm, Santa Fe, NM

Overall, how does the U.S. measure up to other developed nations in terms of environmental responsibility? -Lauren, Long Beach, CA

Are the materials used in athletic shoes environmentally harmful?
--Margaret Southgate, Hamilton, New Zealand

How serious is the risk of contracting Alzheimer’s disease from using antiperspirants that contain aluminum? -- Susan DeBacker, Boulder, CO

What is “Biodiesel” fuel?” -- Tom Morgan, Baltimore, MD

What are the health effects of cat litter on people and pets?
--Andy and Taeja Klukas, Maple Grove, MN

I’ve heard that cotton is more environmentally friendly than synthetic fabrics. But what is the ecological impact of cotton? -- Christina Wong, Salt Lake City, UT

What exactly is the “Superfund” law?
-- Jill Horn, Bozeman, MT

Do bird feeders prevent birds from migrating in the winter?
Melissa Hildebrant, New Haven, CT

How do I know if what I am buying is genuinely organic?
--Michael Faber, Acton, MA

Are digital cameras more environmentally friendly than traditional cameras? --Ann Veddern, Mason, Ohio

World Environment

Green Notes
-Hole in Ozone?
-Ban Plastic!
Earthquakes
Cyclones
Sacred Trees

Paid Advertisement