Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Deciphering the US Organic Label

Wednesday, July 8th, 2009
Image linked from http://www.organic.org

Image linked from http://www.organic.org

Lately, people have begun to question the worth of the ‘organic’ label as more and more questionable items are added to the list of acceptable items.  This is largely due to pressures from big business.  Consumers want organic goods (the dollar signs prove it), so if more items can be termed ‘organic’, then businesses make more money.  It is our job as consumers to make sure politicians don’t cave into the lobbying efforts of industry.

Read the full Washington Post article here.

Now, the Organic Trade Association (OTA) has refuted this article on AllGov.com and on their website.  However, I just can’t fully trust the OTA.  Despite their name, which leads one to believe they are true supporters of the organic movement, really this is primarily a business association, the exact businesses that want more synthetic ingredients to be labeled as okay to put into organic fare so they can make more money.

In the meantime, what does the USDA’s organic label really mean?

“100% Organic” – must show an ingredient list, the name & address of the handler, and the name & seal of the organic certifier.  These products are what we think of when we see any kind of organic label.  In other words, they should contain no synthetics, pesticides, or genetically modified substances.

“USDA Organic” – must contain at least 95% organic products.  The non-organic ingredients must be on an approved list (which is growing all the time to include more items).  The label must identify both organic and non-organic ingredients, and the name of the organic certifier.

“Made with Organic” – must contain at least 70% organic ingredients.  The label must identify both organic and non-organic ingredients, and the name of the organic certifier.

When was the last time you saw a label saying 100% Organic?  Were you paying attention?  Probably not, because so long as the label says the word ‘organic’, we assume that means one-hundred percent.  Next time, take a closer look.

REFERENCES:
Washington Post Article Disputing Integrity of Organic Label
Can USDA Approved Labels be Trusted?
Organic Trade Association Website
Deciphering the Organic Label

Five Feasible Renewable Energy Sources

Saturday, May 9th, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) — President Barack Obama has made no secret of his desire to develop a “green economy” that includes renewable energy projects meant to benefit the environment. He has said that part of the economic recovery in the U.S. will come from money for, and jobs created by, renewable energy projects. Around the world, politicians, businesses and scientists are developing the technology that could improve the cost-efficiency of renewable energy. One would expect that — over time — the costs associated with renewable energy would go down. With fossil fuels, costs can only go up as the un-renewable sources dwindle and become more scarce even as demand rises. Here are 5 feasible renewable energy sources that could be developed to help meet world energy needs:

5 Feasible Renewable Energy Sources

Creating a ‘green economy’ is a solid government policy, but we need to do more as a people to lower our energy consumption.  That is not a task for government (after all, no one really wants a total nanny state), but a goal of culture.  We need to pull from island cultures, who in general tend to abhor waste.  Earth is an island, in that it has limited resources and we all have to share to make it work.

World’s First Solar-Powered City Planned In Florida

Monday, April 13th, 2009

New Florida City To Run On Solar Power

(PhysOrg.com) — A new Florida city, Babcock Ranch, will power 19,500 homes by solar power and cost the average customer’s monthly bill an additional 31 cents. This will be the first city on earth powered by zero-emission solar energy.

I looked into this deal, seems like there was a touch of wrangling with some local environmental groups who put this deal down to urban sprawl.  Remember, this was a family run ‘ranch’ which included both prairie and wetlands.  Florida stepped in to save a huge chunk of the land for conservation, while the rest is being developed into this city.  How is the presence of all these people going to affect nearby wildlife (i.e. the Florida panther)?  Will Florida continue to preserve this land in its natural state or will the area soon be whittled away under the pressures of population growth and development?

And how above-board were the plans for this city?  Is anyone aware how much money Kitson & Partners paid to political figures?  I know they were listed as one of the top ten contributors to Democrat Tim Mahoney’s 2008 campaign.  They also gave a more modest donation to Republican Connie Mack in 2007.  I checked into the history of this land deal, and very strongly recommend reading the article Dueling On The Ranch put out in the spring of 2006. Kitson is not the innovative green messiah you would think if you only read his press releases.  It ended with Sierra club filing a lawsuit against the company, which was eventually settled.  This land deal also has the heavy support of ‘eco-friendly’ Gov. Charlie Crist (who seems to have 2010 Senate ambitions).  Gov. Crist also has a history of questionable campaign contributions.  Of course, so does just about everyone.

My official word of warning:  Remember that the business of being green in the U.S. is also ‘big-money business’.  I’m not saying this is a bad idea, but we must be ever vigilant to ensure that the ‘green’ benefits we see include more than just the color of money.

REFERENCES:
http://www.kitsonpartners.com/index.htm
http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Tim_Mahoney
Sierra, Kitson settle ranch lawsuit
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Sunshine-State-plans-world39s-first.5163102.jp
Sum of questionable contributions to Crist in ’06 may rise
http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2009/04/09/1