Ten years ago, our home improvement projects were focused on reducing allergens (have we mentioned our hairless pets?) But today indoor air polution is a lot more serious than simple dust mites or swapping out the carpet and drapes. Last year while renovating a downstairs bedroom suite for our housemate we learned about No VOC materials. There was a whole lot we didn’t know and in our research we learned the difference between being “enviro-friendly” and being “human-friendly”. From flooring, to paint and even what house plants may help reduce indoor pollution! We tried to take good notes along the way so that we could share what we’ve learned in order to let other people make informed choices about their next DYI.
My husband and I have both sat down several times this past year to write articles for this serious of NO VOCs … but sometimes somethings just don’t get the priority they need in the hopper of life’s musings to actually get enough momentum to get out the door. Sadly our work on Enviro-Friendly materials falls into that list of — too many things … not enough time. I say sadly too because I am watching a set of unfortunate circumstances unfold with a family member who finds herself in the middle of a workplace fubar regarding just this issue.
So even though I can’t provide all the glitzy pictures from our installation of marmoleum, or show the in-depth cost-analysis of being green or demonstrate the importance of the proper underlayment ! I can offer up my notes from the past year for those who have the inclination to take a closer look at these important issues.
Don’t take my word for it .. Google this for yourself. Gather the data … get the facts .. and make prudent choices for yourself and your family.
Let me get the ball rolling for you with a brief definition of terms … No VOC, Low VOC, EDC, Enviro-Friendly, Sustainable Resources, PBCs … it’s a veritable alphabet soup out there when it comes to digesting the reports and slick adverttising geared at today’s enviromentally concious consumer. So here are a few glossary notes before we begin:
“John Chang, who directed the research and whose findings finally were published by the agency in 2001. ‘Certain paints marketed as ‘low VOC’ may still emit significant quantities of air pollutants,’ he concluded.” same source as above.
An Introduction to Indoor Air Quality
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
“Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted as gases from certain solids or liquids. VOCs include a variety of chemicals, some of which may have short- and long-term adverse health effects. Concentrations of many VOCs are consistently higher indoors (up to ten times higher) than outdoors. VOCs are emitted by a wide array of products numbering in the thousands. Examples include: paints and lacquers, paint strippers, cleaning supplies, pesticides, building materials and furnishings, office equipment such as copiers and printers, correction fluids and carbonless copy paper, graphics and craft materials including glues and adhesives, permanent markers, and photographic solutions.
Organic chemicals are widely used as ingredients in household products. Paints, varnishes, and wax all contain organic solvents, as do many cleaning, disinfecting, cosmetic, degreasing, and hobby products. Fuels are made up of organic chemicals. All of these products can release organic compounds while you are using them, and, to some degree, when they are stored.”
“Sources
Household products including: paints, paint strippers, and other solvents; wood preservatives; aerosol sprays; cleansers and disinfectants; moth repellents and air fresheners; stored fuels and automotive products; hobby supplies; dry-cleaned clothing.
Health Effects
Eye, nose, and throat irritation; headaches, loss of coordination, nausea; damage to liver, kidney, and central nervous system. Some organics can cause cancer in animals; some are suspected or known to cause cancer in humans. Key signs or symptoms associated with exposure to VOCs include conjunctival irritation, nose and throat discomfort, headache, allergic skin reaction, dyspnea, declines in serum cholinesterase levels, nausea, emesis, epistaxis, fatigue, dizziness.”
“Studies have found that levels of several organics average 2 to 5 times higher indoors than outdoors. During and for several hours immediately after certain activities, such as paint stripping, levels may be 1,000 times background outdoor levels.”
But it’s just not feeling a little queezy … VOCs have been linked to cancer in both animal studies and in humans. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ied/sfrb/voc-cancer.html
“Over the past 15 years, some chemical classes commonly used in building materials, furnishings, and consumer products have been shown to be endocrine disrupting chemicals—that is they interfere with the action of endogenous hormones. These include PCBs, used in electrical equipment, caulking, paints and surface coatings; chlorinated and brominated flame retardants, used in electronics, furniture, and textiles; pesticides, used to control insects, weeds, and other pests in agriculture, lawn maintenance, and the built environment; phthalates, used in vinyl, plastics, fragrances, and other products; alkylphenols, used in detergents, pesticide formulations, and polystyrene plastics; and parabens, used to preserve products like lotions and sunscreens.”
“Concentrations of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) — found in many everyday products and of concern due to potential health hazards — are higher indoors than outdoors, according to a new study.
But they are equally present, the researchers found, in an urban, low-income community near an oil refinery and in a rural, affluent coastal community without much industry.”
“EDCs can mimic or disrupt the body’s natural hormone system, Rudel says. As a result, they can hamper cell growth and development.
Since the mid-1990s, scientists have been focusing on the study of EDCs, Rudel says, to see how they might affect child development, reproduction, and cancers such as breast and prostate.“
“Tracking EDCs
The researchers found 39 chemicals outdoors and 63 indoors, including phthalates, parabens, PBDE flame retardants, PCBs, and pesticides.
The chemicals are found in such products as detergents, furniture, carpets, electronic equipment, pesticides, cosmetics, and building materials.”
How to Avoid EDCs
Research is ongoing, and until more is known, Rudel says concerned people can take a few measures to reduce potential exposure to the compounds.
Use fewer products overall, such as cleaning products and cosmetics, that contain EDCs.
Avoid fabrics coated with anti-stain chemical.
Avoid use of antibacterial soaps, which contain triclosan, an EDC.
QUICK NOTES:
There’s a lot to digest here. So here are some quick notes that will help:
Look for NO VOC options when remodeling choose LOW VOC only when NO VOC is unavailable.
Enviro-Friendly doesn’t always mean NO VOC (e.g Bamboo flooring is sustainable resourse and better for the planet, but when formaldihyde ink is used to dye the end product it contains VOCs that will gass out in your home.)
What if after you read this article you feel like you are living in Love Canal? Well for starts you can pick up some cheap house plants from your local hard ware store. Take a look at these resources for how common house plants can go a long way to fight indoor air polution.
Some day we may have time to sit down and show you how easy it was to lay marmoleum and how much different it feels to work with NO VOC materials. Seriously you can SLEEP in the room the day you paint! But for now … because it simply seemed important, we wanted to at least plant the seed that this is an important issue for everyone to think about. Do the research for yourself, weigh the benefits and costs and make informed decisions for your next project.
Okay your price may vary of course depending on how much you estimate an old knee high stocking is worth. But by my calculations we are talking about pennies to make this easy DIY thistle feeder for your backyard birds.
Here’s what you’ll need:
1 knee high stocking (or you can cut the leg off of an old stocking that you were going to throw away)
1 chopstick (or a twig would work fine too)
1 lid to a pickle jar the size doesn’t really matter
And thistle seed
Place the pickle jar lid at the bottom of your stocking.
Next, I use a large empty yogurt container to help me hold the stocking in place in order to fill it with thistle.
Pour the thistle into the stocking until it is three to four inches high. Then take a chopstick or twig and push it through the thistle right above the pickle jar lid.
That’s it.
Attach to a tree limb or hang on a hook for your backyard birds.
It took my goldfinches about two weeks before they found the thistle feeder but once they did the word spread all through the neighborhood and now I have a wonderful little flock of happy song birds along with the scrub jays, sparrows and towhees who eat the wild bird seed alongside them in my flat bed tray.
Why spend twenty dollars or more when you can make this easy thistle feeder for only pennies?
To be honest, I know very little behind the science or technology of these reputable brands like Young Living Essential Oils or Auru Cacia who each sell varieties of thieves blend or medieval oil blend. I’ve certainly read up a bit on the legend that has several variants but goes something like … grave robbers during medieval times used an assortment of essential oils to protect themselves from getting the plague. And while there does seem to be some corresponding notes in various old texts
“POUR THIEVES” VINEGAR (cxlviii. £ 99). — Mr. W. G. Bell, in a recent lecture on the Plague, explained this curious name. It appears that during the pestilence four men were caught in the act of robbing the dead. Curious to ascertain how the robbers escaped infection the authorities discovered that the men rubbed their bodies with a mixture of vinegar and spices. An enterprising firm at once placed the remedy on the market under the appropriate name of its first users. Some of these old labels were recently found in the cellars of a firm in the Minories. Dr. Uvedale believed in vinegar poured over a red-hot brick as a plague preventive. (See Robinson’s ‘ History of Enfield,’ i. 1823, p. 121). J. ARDAGH.”
There is hardly a consensus on what these criminals used and much less on an similarity on modern day blends. But there is certainly a lot claims out there with supporting science to the degree that you believe your own Google news. And I would encourage anyone to do their own homework when it comes to alternative healing modalities and see what may be right for your unique body chemistry and circumstances.
For me? I like the way this five essential oil blend smells. And when I use it as one ingredient in my homemade cleaners it makes the house smell fresh!
Here’s the recipe from the video below:
Ingredients:
Lemon Zest from 1 Large Lemon
4 Sprigs Fresh Rosemary
4 Cinnamon Sticks
¼ Cup Whole Cloves
~5 Drops Eucalyptus Essential Oil
Carefully remove just the zest from one large lemon, as this is the part that contains the most essential oil. Place in a pot for the stove with the rosemary, cinnamon and cloves and add about a quart of water. Let the mixture come to a boil and then reduce the heat and simmer for 30 minutes. ALTERNATIVELY: For an energy efficient preparation, simply turn off the heat and let sit covered for two hours. Strain the mixture and place the liquid in a glass jar. Add your five drops of Eucalyptus Oil to the container and cover with a tight fitting lid. You can then add another quart of water to the same pot and re-use your peel and spices for another 2-3 batches.
I keep this concentrate in a mason jar and store it with my other cleaning supplies. Below are a few recipes we use at our house.
General Purpose Cleaner:
Place 2 cups water in an empty (clean!) spray bottle and add ¼ cup of the five oil blend to the bottle. This works well for counter tops, tile, stone floors, marmoleum and sinks.
Glass Cleaner:
Take a bottle of the General Purpose Cleaner (above) and add ¼ cup White Vinegar.
Wood Cleaner/Polish:
Place 2 cups warm water in an small bucket or bowl. Add 3 TBL of the five oil blend, 2 drops of dish soap and 1 tsp of olive oil. I use this on my wood cabinets, tables and wooden banister. It cuts through the dust and grime and leaves the wood shiny with a wonderful clean smell.
Laundry Additive:
I like to add about a half cup to two gallons of our home made liquid laundry detergent. Hey if it kept the plague at bay, it can’t hurt eh?
I’ve been tweaking our family recipe for homemade laundry detergent since I published the powder recipe some time ago. We have a new HE machine now that uses WAY LESS WATER and the powder would not have a chance to dissolve completely during the regular wash cycle.
In this variation I am using Castile Bar Soap which dissolves quickly in a pan on the stove and is decidedly cheaper than the Fels-Naptha Laundry Bar Soap that I had been buying with equally good results.
For folks who can find Borax at their local grocery mart and Washing Soda (which is not the same as Baking Soda!) at one of the discount stores you can make this recipe for just over a penny per load!
Here is an example breakdown:
Cost estimates for buying locally
(prices obtained January 2011)
Borax at KMart = $2.50 for 76 ounces = 3 cents per ounce = 1 cup is 24 cents
Washing Soda at Ace Hardware = $3.79 for 55 ounces = 7 cents per ounce or 1 cup = 56 cents
Castile Soap $1.00 (couldn’t find at a local store but only a buck on the web)
Total cost for 2 Gallons = $1.80
With 128 loads (2 ounces each) the cost = 1½ Pennies per Load!
What if you can’t find the items at your local stores?
Frankly, because of my own chronic illness and inability to get out and shop, I buy the bulk of our groceries and household products online and I still save money over buying commercial detergents.
Cost estimates for buying online
(prices obtained January 2011)
1 bar of soap ($3.35 on Amazon eligable for free prime shipping )
1 cup of borax ($12 for 76 ounces from Amazon … eligable for free prime shipping cost of 16 cents per ounce or $1.28 for 1 cup)
1 cup of washing soda ( $9.99 for 55 ounces from Amazon eligable for free prime shipping — about 18 cents per ounce for a total of about $1.44 cents for one cup)
Total cost for 2 Gallons = $6.07
With 128 loads (2 ounces each) the cost ~ $0.05 Pennies per Load!
Only a thin nickle a load even if you had to buy everything online.
But does it work?
Well that depends on what your criteria is. It certainly works well for my husband and I because we put a high value on eco-friendly and when you are on a fixed income cost savings are key. So yes, it saves money and it is better for the environment with no harsh chemicals, dyes, fragrances or new plastic bottles each time we buy detergent.
Does it get clothes just as clean as commercial stain-lifting — de-greasing — whitening products? Nope, that is not my experience. But none of us are working on a farm and we don’t have really small children smashing tomato-puree into their clothes. So it works just fine for us.
Place unwrapped bar of castile soap in a pot on the stove and add 8 cups of water. Bring to a boil and then simmer on low heat for about 15 minutes stirring occasionally until the bar is completely dissolved.
In a large bucket (we use an old five gallon paint drum), add the solution from the stove and mix with one cup each Borax and Washing Soda. Stir gently until the powders are dissolved.
Add 1½ galons of water to the bucket (24 cups) and stir again.
When I was little, one of my favorite toys aside from my Etch A Sketch® was a plastic potholder maker. I would spend hours weaving scraps of fabric on this small toy loom. Yeah, this is what passed for entertainment in the 60′s and 70′s before social networking became our most cherished hobby.
As I looked at my dwindling supply of store bought pot holders that had decidedly seen better days and considered whether I should darn the thread barren places or bite the bullet and buy something NEW (gasp!) oven mitts, I remembered how easy it was to make potholders as a child and became inspired to make my own make-shift loom.
My husband is the king of frugal and our garage has so many spare parts it would make MacGyver proud. So it was easy to find some old wood strips to use as my frame. With a hand saw and plastic miter box I cut four equal lengths of 2 inch wood strips (I made two looms that day, one was 12 inches and one 8 inches in order to have two sizes for my potholders.) A staple gun made fast work of fastening the sides together at the corners.
I tapped finishing nails into the boards at half in intervals making sure I had the same number of pegs on each of the four sides.
For material, I used scraps from old tee shirts, leggings and other cotton interlock or stretch material. I measured a strip that was twice as long as my loom and doubled it over. With my sewing machine, I made a stretch straight stitch along the unfinished hem until I had one long “tube” of fabric.
Next, I carefully cut the fabric into one half inch strips to use for my weaving.
To set up the loom, place one fabric loop on each of the pegs running in one direction.
Then take the first peg in the opposite direction and slowly weave it over and under each of the planks. Start your next weave on the opposite pattern, for instance if you began on an OVER cast, then place this next loop UNDER to start your run.
When you are finished filling up all the nails you need to finish the edges, by carefully taking off ONE LOOP at a time and threading the next loop into it. That is to say you take one of the edges off, hold open the loop with one hand and then carefully slip the next loop off and insert that loop through the open loop you are holding. Once through, you open up that loop and start again with the next loop on the loom.
When you come to the last loop, you can tie a knot in the last ring to secure all of the edges in place. Saved a few dollars and passed down a family tradition to my own kids.
My homemade hot packs provide much needed pain relief throughout the day. Whether I use one from the freezer or microwave a couple to soothe my shoulders, these small satchels of healing grains and pulses are always close at hand. They make an heartfelt gift for family and friends and can be as simple to make as putting a knot in an old sock filled with rice, or placing a finishing hem on a scrap of fabric filled with left over lentils.
You can use a few drops of essential oils or even a tiny bit of vanilla extract or a few coffee beans if that suits your senses. In the slide show below I have some examples of how to combine various beans and rice for unique combinations that can relax your mind and body.
Depending on your own personal preference you may enjoy the feel of a whole bean, like navy or kidney. Or you might prefer the touch of tiny grains of rice. Lentils hold heat very well and sometimes you can find very cheap split peas on sale in bulk at the super market. You can even use a variety of grains that you have left over in your pantry. I often like to add a few special items in each of my packs — Two halves of a split pea inside a rice packet can often be a symbolic metaphor for some part of our healing journey that we want to affirm. Or sometimes I will place nine small beans inside for a bit of feng shui good luck.
The color you choose to make your hot pack may also provide you with another way to warm yourself. An old pair of jeans makes for an excellent and sturdy hot pack. While a soft tee shirt feels nice to the touch and may have cellular memories that make you smile. In the photos below, I used a variety of fabric scraps as well as different fillings.
To assemble the hot pack, turn your two fabric scraps inside out and sew along three edges and partly up the fourth edge until you have a gap that is 2-3 inchs. This will be the hole you need to fill the grains. Turn the casing right side up and get your fillings ready.
For ease of pouring, I place my grains or beans inside a large plastic yogurt container. And if I am scenting my hot pack I will place a few drops of essential oils directly on top of the rice (or beans) before I fill the fabric.
I use a makeshift funnel by rolling a sturdy piece of paper and placing it into the two inch gap in the fabric and then carefully pour the scented grains and pulses into the pouch until it is about 2/3rds of the way to the top.
To finish it off, I fold the remaining raw edges over and hand stitch the last two inches.
Here are my notes from the packets I made last year that were pictured below just as an idea of the different combinations of scents you may want to consider.
Bay and Sage with Split Pea and White Rice and Brown Rice
Sweet Orange 9 drops, Lavender 5 drops / (9) Split Pea in white rice
Lemon and Peppermint oils in brown rice with one yellow split pea
Lavender – 1 pinto bean in brown rice
Lemon Grass ; Lavender ; Sage (small pinto beans)
Eucalyptus ; Bay / All Split Pea
White and Brown Rice (2) Split Pea – Eucalyptus
Lavender with Lentils
Lime and Eucalyptus with brown rice and (2) Split Pea
Lemon ; Sweet Orange ; Clove in brown rice with (9) Split Pea
Ginger and Peppermint with white rice and (9) Split Pea
Lavender and Sage with white rice and (9) split pea
Eucalyptus; peppermint – Split pea and brown rice and white rice
Lemon and Clove with white rice
Ylang Ylang in small beans
When I give these as gifts, I always include a note about what grains I used and the name of the oils that I specially selected for them. You should also add a note about using CAUTION while heating these in the microwave. All ovens are different and you should stop and check your hot pack after 30 seconds and then ever 15 seconds there after until you can determine how long is safe to heat one in your oven at home.
At four pages, the Executive Summary is rather long given the body of the article is only 10 pages in length – with less than six of those being text. Nonetheless it does provide a concise summary of the main findings.
“The data yield three clear conclusions:
Oil dependence[1] affects all states, but some drivers are hit harder economically than others.
The trends in oil vulnerability over the past couple of years are not encouraging—drivers in every state were more vulnerable in 2008 than they were in 2006.
While some states are pioneering solutions and many are taking some action, a fair number of states are still taking few (if any) of the steps listed in this report to reduce their oil dependence.” Page 4.
Before looking at these I must warn you that I have a very insightful grandmother. She has made several valuable contributions to this post.
The first of the three findings is of the “tell me something my grandmother doesn’t know” variety. If you asked my grandmother if it was true, she would say “of course, it’s obvious. You don’t need to spend time and money to do a study to prove that.” Yes, pretty much all drivers buy gasoline, drivers in some states have more income than others, and therefore some drivers spend a higher percentage of their income on gasoline than others. While this is a simplification (income differences are not the only factor), it means the conclusion is not a surprise. However, what is impressive is that the drivers in some states spend less than 4% of their income for gasoline while the drivers in some other states spend over 8%. That’s a factor of two and quite noticeable in the household budget. That there should be a difference is obvious. That it should be that large is less so. This raised one of my grandmother’s eye brows.
The second finding also is not a surprise. The price of gasoline has been going up steeply while personal income has increased only slightly. Ergo, the percentage of income devoted to gasoline has increased. While again the true dynamics are more complex, the finding is not. However, it is noteworthy that this effect is occurring for drivers in all 50 states, as the authors note. 50 out of 50 might surprise most anyone. Another eye brow raised.
And, the third finding also is not a surprise. Some states are taking steps to reduce oil dependency and others are taking fewer or no steps. Yes, states do different things. While not surprising, this finding, or rather the supporting data, offer the opportunity to investigate interrelationships between oil dependency, state actions, and possible impacts over time, past, present and future.[2] My grandmother thought this might be interesting to investigate.
The rest of the Executive Summary is mostly cut and paste from the paper per se so let’s move on.
Chapter 1, “Oil Vulnerability Rankings: Who Is Hardest Hit?
This chapter begins with some common but important facts:
the US has about 2% of the known oil reserves but consumes about 25% of the annual world production. I would like to add that the US population is less than 5% of the world population. Even if there were no supply constraints on oil, these numbers would tend to come into rough alignment over time. With supply constraints, they will need to come into alignment sooner.
our annual supply of oil increasingly is coming from countries that are “politically unstable or unfriendly”. Since 96% of our transportation is based on oil, this unstable supply poses a potential threat to our transportation system and consequently to our economic system.
our current oil based transportation system creates roughly 1/3 of the US CO2 emissions. One third. That is a very large contribution to global warming, not for producing anything, but for moving people and things around.
Within this context of a need to become less dependent on oil, the authors calculate the per cent of a driver’s personal income spent on gasoline for each state. This represents their Oil Vulnerability. The larger the per cent of their income they spend on gasoline, the more vulnerable they are to supply constraints or price increases. Naturally, some states’ residents are more vulnerable than others – they mention the South and South Central as being the most vulnerable while New England and the Mid-Atlantic are least vulnerable.[3] More importantly, they indicate that the situation is getting worse for all drivers. While in a third of the states the drivers did become less vulnerable from 2007 to 2008, the other two thirds did not. Further, drivers in all states were more vulnerable in 2008 than in 2006.[4] So, although drivers in some states made a little progress in reducing their vulnerability in 2008, they are still more vulnerable than they were in 2006.
OK, what can we do with these data/findings? Mostly, this chapter just alerts us to this vulnerability and that it is a growing problem. This prompts us to ask how to get out of this situation that “empties our citizens’ wallets and threatens our national security, economy, and environment”. A future post.
Chapter 2, Breaking Our Addiction: Solutions to Oil Dependence
Some states are taking initiatives to reduce their drivers’ oil vulnerability. The authors divide these initiatives into four categories:
1) Clean Vehicles and Efficient Use: providing incentives to purchase hybrid automobiles, establishing vehicle Green House Gas emission restrictions, setting emission standards for state fleets, and placing restrictions on idling.
2) Research and Development: providing funds to investigate clean fuels and vehicles.
4) Smart Growth and Public Transit: developing plans for growth and development, supporting public transit, and establishing targets for reducing vehicle-miles traveled.
Besides more detailed descriptions of the items in each of these categories, the authors provide a table indicating which states have undertaken each of these efforts. They also create a rank ordering of the states by combining all their initiatives to reduce oil vulnerability. This provides a valuable indication of which states are taking action to reduce their drivers’ oil vulnerability and which are taking a more “laissez-faire” approach.
This is a descriptive study, but potentially a very interesting descriptive study. The authors describe the various steps some states are taking. However, they do not provide evidence suggesting that these steps are effective or suggesting the magnitude of the effects we might expect in the future if they do prove effective. Of course, some of these steps are of the type my grandmother might recommend. If a state provides incentives for people to purchase “clean” cars, then some people will purchase them and their consumption of gasoline should go down. But does consumption go down more than in states that don’t provide incentives? These and similar questions are left unaddressed.
Chapter 3, “Conclusion: States Must Take Action and the Federal Government Must Lead”
Calling this Chapter a “Conclusion” is a bit of a stretch. While it deals with the appropriate topic, oil vulnerability, the exhortations are not the direct result of the data they present. They have presented data to describe the problem. They have presented data to describe some actions which might be potential solutions. However, they don’t use the data to suggest any answers. The title of the Conclusion is actually a bit amusing. In 2008 they presented very similar data (and even very similar concluding comments), but then the title for the Conclusion was “States Must Take the Lead in Reducing Oil Dependence”. Interesting.
Nonetheless, the recommendations are not unreasonable. The states have an economic problem they need to address for their citizens. The oil based transportation system is consuming more and more of their citizens’ income. The “states must take action” to reduce this growing economic issue. Similarly, some citizens are concerned about the impact of green house gases (GHG) on their health and the environment. This also suggests states should take action. Some states are, but arguably more should because it is in the best interests of their citizens (including their pocket books).
At the federal level, the same rational applies to the economic, health and environmental impacts on citizens. In addition, the federal government has concerns about the security implications as well as potential obligations to the other countries of the world for environmental impacts. These require it to take steps, to lead if you will, perhaps in the ways the authors suggest. It also could (should?) play a facilitative role for the states. Where there are common federal and state goals (e.g., to reduce GHG), then the federal government could provide “incentives” (or penalties) for states to take steps to reach these common goals. Ideally, these should not be mandates on how to achieve the goals, but the goals should be very concrete. States are different and how they might best reach a goal also might be different. Instead the federal government could provide a basket of options that have been proven effective by some states and support states choosing from the basket.
As the authors suggest, the federal government must also put in place policies and incentives to deal with the national scope of many problems. For example, a “cap and trade” policy would help address national GHG emissions and address cross state border pollution that no state alone could address. Similarly the authors suggest development of a national transportation policy which would exceed the authority of any single state. Most importantly this would help states plan for the future.
As my grandmother might say, the data as presented provide little reason to follow their “conclusions”. However, common sense might. In future posts we’ll see if the data also suggest support for some of the conclusions.
[1]The authors use the terms “oil vulnerability”, “oil addiction”, “oil dependence” and similar ones to refer to the percentage of income a driver spends on gasoline. As the percentage increases the driver becomes more vulnerable. We will use the term oil vulnerability.
[2] The authors did not take advantage of this opportunity, but we shall in a future post.
[3] They provide no supporting analysis. The implicit “drivers in poor states are more vulnerable” also is worth investigating.
[4] Although they present no statistical analysis, they do present the raw data as support which looks convincing. However, because they change the source of their data for gasoline consumption, the findings for 2008 are not comparable to 2007 and 2006.
Ten years ago, our home improvement projects were focused on reducing allergens (have we mentioned our hairless pets?) But today indoor air polution is a lot more serious than simple dust mites or swapping out the carpet and drapes. Last year while renovating a downstairs bedroom suite for our housemate we learned about No VOC materials. There was a whole lot we didn’t know and in our research we learned the difference between being “enviro-friendly” and being “human-friendly”. From flooring, to paint and even what house plants may help reduce indoor pollution! We tried to take good notes along the way so that we could share what we’ve learned in order to let other people make informed choices about their next DYI.
