Cooking at home can be rewarding and delicious. But how can you reduce the impact your cooking has on the environment? Try "hypercooking"!
-Keep your pots and pans covered when possible. According to green is sexy, simply using a lid can "reduce the energy used by 20-30 percent." Bonus: your cooking gets finished sooner, too.
-Let residual heat finish your food. According to this Food Section article, "One hypercooking technique involves saving energy by turning off the source of the heat before a dish is fully-cooked and relying upon the residual heat to cook the food until it is done." Do this wisely, of course, and within reason. But for most dishes, this works just fine.
-Piggy-back. Are you cooking two dishes in the oven or on the stovetop? Have the other one prepped and ready to put on the heat as soon as the first one finishes. There are a million ways you could use this method. It works really well with pasta and pasta sauce. But it also works well if you are cooking a casserole and plan to serve cookies for dessert, etc. A little planning goes a long way.
30 September 2009
28 September 2009
Bidet vs. Toilet Paper
What's the most environmentally friendly way to clean up after using the toilet? The answer may surprise you.
According to Liz Langley's Alternet article "The Green, Clean Art of Keeping Our 'Rear Ends" Hygenic: What are We Afraid Of?" the most environmentally friendly method is the use of a bidet instead of toilet paper.
Doesn't that use a lot more water than toilet paper? Actually, no. As the article says, "Yes...a bidet uses treated water, an increasingly precious commodity. But it uses less than that utilized in the production of even recycled toilet paper -- and a fraction of the amount consumed by virgin pulp." Wow. Who would have known?
Some bidet units can be as cheap as $100, easy to find at your local hardware store, and simple to attach. On top of being better for the environment, bidets are also more hygienic and effective than using toilet paper.
Check out the Alternet article for more information.
According to Liz Langley's Alternet article "The Green, Clean Art of Keeping Our 'Rear Ends" Hygenic: What are We Afraid Of?" the most environmentally friendly method is the use of a bidet instead of toilet paper.
Doesn't that use a lot more water than toilet paper? Actually, no. As the article says, "Yes...a bidet uses treated water, an increasingly precious commodity. But it uses less than that utilized in the production of even recycled toilet paper -- and a fraction of the amount consumed by virgin pulp." Wow. Who would have known?
Some bidet units can be as cheap as $100, easy to find at your local hardware store, and simple to attach. On top of being better for the environment, bidets are also more hygienic and effective than using toilet paper.
Check out the Alternet article for more information.
11 September 2009
Skin Care Products
Many of the substances that are bad for the environment are also bad for us. Unfortunately, many of the products we use on our skin and bodies contain unhealthy, dangerous chemicals, preservatives, and compounds.
TreeHugger's article Beyond Parabens highlights some of the most common harmful substances that make their way into your skin care products and cosmetics.
-Parabens
-Fragrances
-Polyethylene glycol (PEG)
-Nanoparticles
-Phenoxyethanol
-Triclosan
-Petrolatum/Petroleum jelly
-Quaternium-15
So check out the ingredient lists on your sunscreen, make-up, cologne/perfume, shampoo, lotions, soaps, etc. If you see any of these ingredients, please look them up, in the TreeHugger article or elsewhere, so that you may wisely weigh your options and consider ceasing your use of the products. If you are pregnant or hope to conceive in the future (whether you are male or female), or if a child uses the product with one of these ingredients, pay very close attention.
TreeHugger's article Beyond Parabens highlights some of the most common harmful substances that make their way into your skin care products and cosmetics.
-Parabens
-Fragrances
-Polyethylene glycol (PEG)
-Nanoparticles
-Phenoxyethanol
-Triclosan
-Petrolatum/Petroleum jelly
-Quaternium-15
So check out the ingredient lists on your sunscreen, make-up, cologne/perfume, shampoo, lotions, soaps, etc. If you see any of these ingredients, please look them up, in the TreeHugger article or elsewhere, so that you may wisely weigh your options and consider ceasing your use of the products. If you are pregnant or hope to conceive in the future (whether you are male or female), or if a child uses the product with one of these ingredients, pay very close attention.
Labels:
chemical,
frangrances/dyes,
make-up,
nano,
oil,
paraben,
PEG,
phenoxyethanol,
preservative,
shampoo,
soap,
sunscreen,
Triclosan
05 September 2009
The Media's Fallacy
A recent study shows that America is lagging far behind other countries in our understanding of climate change and the priority we place on working to solve it. Even countries with lots more on their plates -- like Iraq -- recognize the vital importance of this issue.
Scary stuff.
Why is this? One answer has to do with the American news media. They are convinced that every story has two sides. Fine. Multiple viewpoints are important to a free media. However, what happens when the two sides do not hold equal legitimacy but are given equal airtime?
As TreeHugger reports, this practice "gives disproportionate publicity to disreputable studies (if coverage were to accurately reflect the current state of science, there'd be hundreds of stories about studies confirming climate change for every one doubting it) and gives the public the impression there's far more debate over whether climate change is occurring or not. A recent study found that many Americans believed there was still a 'lively debate' amongst the scientific community over both whether climate change is caused by humans, and whether the theory of evolution is valid. In reality, of course, there is no such debate over either."
In other words, we are fighting for the environment in the midst of a population that is truly and deeply confused about the nature of the problem. In addition to our own actions, we must remember to help educate those around us.
Check out TreeHugger's article for more information on these studies and conclusions.
Scary stuff.
Why is this? One answer has to do with the American news media. They are convinced that every story has two sides. Fine. Multiple viewpoints are important to a free media. However, what happens when the two sides do not hold equal legitimacy but are given equal airtime?
As TreeHugger reports, this practice "gives disproportionate publicity to disreputable studies (if coverage were to accurately reflect the current state of science, there'd be hundreds of stories about studies confirming climate change for every one doubting it) and gives the public the impression there's far more debate over whether climate change is occurring or not. A recent study found that many Americans believed there was still a 'lively debate' amongst the scientific community over both whether climate change is caused by humans, and whether the theory of evolution is valid. In reality, of course, there is no such debate over either."
In other words, we are fighting for the environment in the midst of a population that is truly and deeply confused about the nature of the problem. In addition to our own actions, we must remember to help educate those around us.
Check out TreeHugger's article for more information on these studies and conclusions.
Labels:
climate change,
education,
international,
media
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)