Want to feel like a real frontiersman? Are you tired of being oppressed by “The Man”? Do you not even know who “The Man” is referring to? Then you gotta live off the grid! It’s like being a pioneer, only with the Internet and packets of instant Starbucks. It’s a lot of work, but here are 10 reasons it’s awesome.

No Junk Mail

Image Source

Companies can’t mail you crap if you don’t have a registered address. So what if the mailman can’t find you? UPS and FedEx goes anywhere you pay ‘em to. No more circulars, phony timeshare offers or “Urgent News! Must Open!” Salesmen coming to your door? Not a chance! And you’ll never have to look your neighbor’s kid in the eye again and refuse to buy band candy or girl scout cookies.

You’ll Always Be in Fashion

Image Source

Making your own clothes out in the middle of nowhere means never having to apologize for how you dress. Hell, why even wear pants? It’s not like you’ll be living near anyone. If you are, it’ll probably be in a small community where the rules of fashion are either uncared for or invented anew.

If the Apocalypse Comes, You Won’t Notice

Image Source

Let the Rapture scoop up all the Christians. Let nuclear war or the zombies rape the cities of New York and Los Angeles. While civilization goes down like a bitch, you’ll be comfortable and warm out in the middle of nowhere. And once the dust settles and word reaches you of the primitive, radioactive Hellscape, you can return to rule the mutants, being the last person alive to know how to properly stoke a kiln. Class wars, riots, and any kind of societal uprising/turmoil will no longer concern or effect you. Living off the grid can give you a feeling of safety that all the laws in the world cannot.

No Utility Bills

Image Source

Before the first plumbers and his butt crack, God just left water everywhere in these things called “streams” and “creeks” and “rivers”. With a little practice, a fire and a pot, you can make clean drinking water for free. You’ll probably even be able to build a system of pipes that can deliver water straight into your home. Need some electricity to fire up your laptop? Once you master how to hook up a generator to a standing bicycle, you’ll get exercise and all the porn you need to survive. And solar panels get better and better every year; what’s better than getting free energy from the sun? Just be wary that evil corporations may try to infringe on your land and force you to pay for energy from their company. One man, William Williams, faces multiple penalties and fines for cutting down utility lines — that the company planted on his private land!!

The Cops Can’t Find You

Image Source

Living off the grid is especially handy if you also happen to be living a criminal lifestyle. In today’s police state, it’s becoming increasingly harder to obey the law because it infringes on personal lifestyle choices that are irrelevant to the rest of the world. If you’re tired of constantly looking over your back just because you smoke pot, refuse to go to jury duty, don’t want to pay outrageous parking tickets or simply enjoy being naked in your own home, living off the grid may be the right choice for you. Let’s face it, when civilization collapses, it’s probably wise to be somewhere where the last guys with guns can’t find you.

The Law Becomes Very Murky

Image Source

When the cops can’t find you, you can pretty much make up your own rules. It’s kind of like floating in international waters, but without the bad Cruise food and second rate entertainment.

No Insurance Payments

Image Source

If the mail and the cops can’t find you, neither can your insurance company. In fact, why have one? If you get severely injured, you’re just going to die anyways. No sense paying $500 a month so the EMT’s can’t find you. On the up side, if you can build a car or some kind of post apocalyptic facsimile, you can drive it however you want. Helmet, no helmet, seat belt, no seatbelt, brakes, no brakes, on fire, not on fire, it’s all up to you. Just keep in mind that showing up at the hospital without health insurance may be worse than not going at all — oftentimes, the doctors will literally just let you die.

Your Food is Free

Image Source

The woods is like an all-you-can-eat buffet. The food is fresh if you can catch it and you’ll never have to deal with a snooty waiter ever again. If you like salted, smoky meat, off the grid cuisine is right up your alley. At no point will your wife turn to you and say, “Honey, you’d better not eat that, your cholesterol.” She’ll more likely say, “Give me that meat! I haven’t eaten for three days!” Honing your farming skills before moving off the grid is a good idea; you will then be able to harvest your own (completely organic, chemical and modification free) food — which is an incredibly useful skill to have, especially if the rest of the world is plunged into another depression. Growing and catching your own food is also incredibly less wasteful than buying products with unnecessary amounts of paper, plastic, and metal packaging.

Your House is Free

Image Source

If you can build it, you can live in it. The United States is actually a big empty place and Montana has less than seven people per square mile. For a mere couple of thousand dollars of wood and your labor, you can build a house that is at least as good as anyone else’s. You won’t be close to a Starbucks or a Wendy’s, but hey, at least you won’t be near a Starbucks or a Wendy’s.

Lower Taxes

Image Source

Think about all the money you’ve ever paid for taxes. Now imagine that it’s all back in your pocket right now. That’s how much you could have if you live off the grid. What “the Man” can’t find, the Man can’t tax. And with an overhead as low as yours, a $30,000/year gig means you’ll probably have close to $30,000 at the end of that year. If only someone had told Wesley Snipes sooner. This, however, is fraud. The taxes on an off-grid house, though, are significantly less than on any other house.

Due to rising population, climate change, and environmental degradation, natural disasters are increasing in frequency. They are also becoming costlier and deadlier, according to Swiss Re, a reinsurance company. In 2009, natural disasters cost insurers about $110 billion. In 2010, the cost was double that, at $218 billion.

According to the World Bank, there are several factors that affect a country’s vulnerability to natural disasters: its geographic size, the type of disaster, the strength and structure of its economy, and prevailing socioeconomic conditions. In a globalized economy, all these factors, as well as others, also play into how the world’s finances will be affected.

With the recent earthquake in Japan, news agencies, economists, and regular people have all been pondering the economics of natural disasters, and what this means for the future.

2011 — Triple Calamity in Japan

Image Source



It’s still too early to fully comprehend the impact that Japan’s March 11 earthquake and tsunami will have on its national economy, and how that, in turn, will affect the global economy. The area is at risk of seismic activity: a 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck off the coast of Honshu on April 7, rattling residents and relief workers. Also, the world is still waiting to see how the crisis at the Fukushima nuclear power plant will progress. Containing the radioactive material could take months, the plant’s operator’s say. Traces of radiation have been found in a variety of agricultural products, including dairy and spinach, as well as in tap water in Tokyo. With several other nuclear reactors offline as a result of the quake and tsunami, the Tokyo Electric Power Co. has only been able to provide about 75% of their normal kilowatts, resulting in ongoing rolling blackouts in nine of Japan’s prefectures. Japan’s economy is largely export-based, but since the earthquake, manufacturing plants have been forced to shut down. Asian stocks took a dive, with the Nikkei index dropping 6% in a matter of days, though it has climbed steadily in the the three weeks since the quake.

Some economists have been optimistic, pointing at Japan’s quick recovery from the 1995 Kobe earthquake as a model. The earthquake killed over 5,000 people and caused an estimated $100 billion in damages, or roughly 2.5% of Japan’s GDP. Within a year, however, Japan’s economy had more or less recovered, though the Asian stock market took a little longer to rally. Political and financial institutions have taken action to avert a financial meltdown: in the days after the quake, the Bank of Japan announced it would be pumping billions of yen into the economy, as well as giving loans to financial institutions at extremely low interest rates.

Others, like Mohammed A. El-Erian, CEO of the investment company PIMCO, disagree. First, the damage of the March 11 quake and tsunami caused an estimated $200 billion in damage, twice that of the Kobe quake. Japan’s finances are also weaker: despite being the third largest economy in the world, Japan is no longer the economic engine that it once was. Japan’s yearly debt is now twice its GDP, 205%, compared to 85% in 1995. According to El-Erian, “This erodes the flexibility and ultimate effectiveness of fiscal responses.” Also, the ongoing nuclear crisis in Fukushima has rattled confidence in nuclear power, not just in Japan but worldwide as well, driving up prices of renewable energy shares.

It is still too early to see the long-term impact that Japan’s earthquake and nuclear crisis will have. Global commodity prices have been in flux since the disaster: crude oil, of which Japan is a large importer, dropped, while gold and copper prices rose. Agricultural products fell as well, unexpectedly. The crisis has disrupted global supply chains around the world, and Japanese manufacturers still haven’t been able to resume production. 


2005 — Hurricane Katrina, and rebuilding New Orleans

Image Source

Even before Katrina made landfall, New Orleans had many problems. Crime rates were extremely high, nearly eight times than national average. Gang warfare and drug-dealing were endemic to the poor, mostly-black neighborhoods in New Orleans east. Poverty rates in New Orleans were more than twice that of the national average, and even higher in certain areas: the Lower Ninth Ward had a pre-Katrina poverty rate of 36%. The Industrial Revolution had passed by New Orleans like a ship in the night. The economy was mostly based on the service and tourism sectors, which only offered low-paying and transient jobs. Only 7% of people living in the Lower Ninth Ward had a college degree, and 40% had not even graduated from high school.

In the days leading up to Katrina, there was a chain of failures that started among city leaders and went all the way to the White House. Prior to Katrina’s landfall, officials in the city and in the capitol of Baton Rouge were sluggish to act, and dragged their feet in preparing for the storm. On August 27th, a voluntary evacuation was ordered. In the morning of August 28th, it was upgraded to a mandatory evacuation. For the many people in New Orleans without the means or mode of transportation, for the elderly and disabled, the order went unnoticed. Even for those who could leave, the choice to stay and ride out the storm was tempting: thousands of people were still in the city when Katrina hit.

Katrina made landfall on August 29, 2005. Two days later, 80% of New Orleans was flooded, with water breaching the levees in more than 50 places. Parts of the city were under as much as 15 feet of water. Katrina’s estimated death toll was 1,826; about 1,400 of these deaths occurred in New Orleans, where people were stranded by the flooding. The National Hurricane Center estimated that Katrina caused about $81 billion dollars in property damage alone. It was weeks before the city was even inhabitable, and thousands chose not to return to the city. Before the hurricane, the US census estimated there were about 454,000 living in metropolitan New Orleans. Only this year has New Orleans recently surpassed 350,000 citizens. There are still large stretches of abandoned streets, with empty lots and deserted houses. The racial demographics of the city has changed as well; fewer blacks have returned to New Orleans, and fewer young people.

The Journal of Economic Perspectives has estimated that the total financial cost of Hurricane Katrina at about $156 billion dollars. The hurricane, besides devastating people all along the Gulf Coast, disrupted oil production and refinement, destroying several offshore oil platforms and pipelines. Gas prices across the world were temporarily driven up. Its effects on small business owners were also devastating, destroying almost 60% of them. Over 18,000 businesses across Louisiana permanently closed their doors after the 2005 hurricane season. Long before the recession, New Orleans lost an estimated 70,000 jobs. The tourist industry took an understandable hit: the number of visitors to the city has still not reached pre-Katrina numbers. For a long time, the only business sector that saw any growth was the construction industry, which was kept busy with the city’s hurry-up-and-wait reconstruction. Efforts to rebuild were also hampered by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill last spring, and the global recession.

In New Orleans, where rents were historically cheap, housing costs have skyrocketed. Low-income housing areas took the worst damage from Katrina, and little has been done to alleviate rising rents. The issue is a hot topic in the city and the surrounding parishes, bound up in class and racial tensions. Homelessness is a persistent problem. Crime rates have remained higher than the national average, and the city’s infrastructure has still not completely recovered. Food security remains an issue for poor residents, with many having to choose between paying their bills and buying the month’s groceries.

Still, despite the ongoing discouragement, some in New Orleans are optimistic. The Brookings Institute, an independent research organization, put together a report called “The New Orleans Index At Five”. The report finds that, despite numerous setbacks, New Orleans could be on its way to building a city that is “a healthier, more resilient region.” There are currently efforts in place to overhaul the city’s justice, health care, and education systems. There is also a movement to restore areas of the city to natural coastal wetlands, which could act as a buffer to future storms. With continued effort, particularly in the areas of poverty and housing relief, New Orleans could be a success story. 
 


2004 — Lessons from the Indian Ocean Tsunami

Image Source

The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami is one of the deadliest disasters in recorded history. Deathtoll estimates have ranged from 230,000 to 300,000. Entire communities were wiped out, whole families washed away. In some ways, it was also the first global disaster. Fourteen different countries were affected, in Asia and Africa; victims came from all over the globe, as popular tourist destinations were among those devastated by the waves.

The financial impact of the tsunami varied by country. Fishing and tourist industries were the hardest hit. Smaller countries like the Maldives and Sri Lanka, in particular, were dependent on tourist revenues. The tsunami destroyed many resorts, as well as infrastructure like roads and railways. Overall, however, the macroeconomic effect of the tsunami was minimal. Tourism has rebounded in many of the affected areas, with well-intentioned foreigners eager to support affected countries.

The most interesting economic lessons from the tsunami are actually about foreign aid. Governments, corporations, NGOs, and private individuals worldwide pledged donations to help relief efforts. Initial estimates of aid pledges totaled close to $10 billion. Unfortunately, the number of donors, in some ways, worked against the victims of the tsunami. Coordinating relief efforts was a logistical nightmare. Smaller countries such as Sri Lanka and Indonesia, which were the worst hit by the tsunami, were ill-prepared to deal with receiving and distributing aid, and international organizations were often at odds. Some of the “lateral aid” that came in, such as foodstuffs and clothing, was quite useless to survivors in some countries, despite being given in good will. The Foreign Minister in Sri Lanka even reported receiving a container full of teddy bears.

Two years on, it was apparent that relief had still not reached some of those who needed it most. Much of the money that was pledged for reconstruction efforts had not been spent: less than 50% of some government’s donations, in fact. The majority of those who had been rendered homeless in the four worst-off countries — Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Maldives, and Thailand — had still not been moved into permanent housing.

There has also been misuse of relief and reconstruction funds, as corruption and internal conflict took its toll. In Sri Lanka, donations were diverted into funding the conflict between the government and the Tamil Tigers, a violent separatist group, which was only resolved in May of 2009. There have also been accusations of country’s tourist boards misusing aid in Tamil Nadu and Kerala, trying to court tourists instead of helping coastal communities rebuild.

2010 — Repeating mistakes in Haiti

Image Source

Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, ranking 145th out 169 countries on the Human Development Index. It has a violent history. For much of the twentieth century, Haiti was ruled by the father and son dictators, “Papa Doc” and “Baby Doc” Duvalier, who created the death squads that were responsible for the deaths of thousands of Haitians. Baby Doc’s ouster in 1986 led to a period of upheaval that lasted until the mid-90’s, when the UN intervened to restore a fragile peace. In the years since, Haiti has still been characterized by human rights abuses, fraudulent elections, and overwhelming poverty.

As a small, densely-populated, and economically fragile country, Haiti is extremely vulnerable to natural disasters. When a 7.1 magnitude struck 16 miles from the capitol of Port-Au-Prince, the effects were devastating. The estimated death toll was 300,000, with over a million homeless, and hundreds of thousands of buildings destroyed. Like in the 2004 tsunami, the global financial impact of this disaster was negligible, though it devastated local Haitian economies. Also like the 2004 tsunami, the lessons it offers from its deadlocked relief efforts are of more interesting to this post.

Rather than learning from the mistakes and missteps of the 2004 Asian tsunami, the international community seems bent on repeating them in Haiti. Immediately following the earthquake, donations and aid pledges poured in: individual, corporate, and governmental aid totaled close to 3.5 billion. Yet Haiti has made little progress in its recovery, beset by setbacks at almost turn. Power struggles and rivalry prompted criticism as the international media covered stories on squabbling agencies. When the US took over the Port-Au-Prince airport, for instance, it created a bottleneck that made it harder for other countries’ donations and relief workers to get through. A group of missionaries was arrested for child trafficking, after illegally trying to take a group of “orphans” across the Dominican border. In October, foreign aid workers caused a cholera outbreak, resulting in over 3,000 deaths, and prompting anti-UN riots.

One year later, little of the promised aid has been delivered, less than 10% according to the U.N. In addition, there are funding gaps in necessary areas like debris removal and school building. Very little of the rubble has been cleared, and most of Haiti’s homeless are still living in camps, where violent incidents and sexual assaults are increasing. No reconstruction has actually begun. “Haitians want to get back to work and provide for their families,” said <Roland Van Hauwermeiren, country director of international aid organization Oxfam. “They aren’t asking for charity, but for a chance to be part of the process to rebuild their own country. After going through so much last year, Haitians deserve that chance.” 
 


2010/2011 — Droughts, floods, and drought in China

Image Source

2010 set records was the hottest year in one of the hottest decades in history. Climate change, exacerbated by the effects of El Niño, sparked off a series of global heat waves. In Pakistan, temperatures rose to 128.3 Fahrenheit on May 26, the highest temperature seen in Asia. Russia was beset by a series of wildfires, wiping out crops and forests, and blanketing cities in smog. People across Europe had to be hospitalized for heat stroke and dehydration as air-conditioning failed to bring relief.

In China, several southwestern provinces began to see a major drought in the spring, the worst in close to a century. Tens of millions of people faced water shortages, wild fires, and crop failures. Many people living in rural villages had no choice but to leave their homes, as wells and reservoirs ran dry. The government even resorted to cloud-seeding in an effort to relieve the parched provinces. Dust storms choked the northern provinces, causing hazardous conditions in cities across the Asian continent.

The drought caused an estimated $3.5 million dollars in immediate damage, both to agriculture and to the country’s hydroelectric sector. There are also other uncounted, but still very real costs from the drought: drought can lower the overall productivity of land due to erosion and topsoil loss. It can reduce livestock herds and yields. According to some flooding and landslides, with almost 200 more missing. Before the end of the summer, the death toll would rise into the thousands. 15 million people were evacuated, and over a million homes destroyed. 13.5 million hectares of crops were affected by floodwaters, with at least 2 million completely destroyed. By August, direct damage from the floods was estimated at $41 billion.

Altogether, 2010’s drought and flooding has cost China about $75 billion. In 2011, fears of another drought, this time affecting the northern wheat-producing regions, fanned fears of a worldwide food crisis, and drove global grain prices up. The Chinese government spent nearly $15 billion in direct relief and subsidies to farmers, trying to keep the region from buckling under pressure. So far, China has spent an average of $35 billion a year since 2004 counteracting the effects of extreme weather, and the numbers are increasing each year. As climate change increases the likelihood of natural disasters, will China’s drought-flood-drought become a pattern, and will it slow the economic powerhouse’s growth? Time will tell.

Well, they are, and they aren’t. Depending on the computer that you have, you might find that you can recycle the majority of its parts. Other models, however, are more difficult to recycle. E-waste, in fact, has become a serious concern. According to the United Nations, the world pitches between 20 and 50 million tons of electronic waste every year.

Before you start thinking of your laptop as the world’s savior from pollution, dig into the facts to find out what percentage of your computer is truly recyclable.

Does Your Battery’s Life Go On and On and On…?

Like most other rechargeable batteries, your laptop’s power source is recyclable. That means its life will go on and on, without leaking dangerous chemicals into a landfill. In fact, many states have established laws that require people to recycle their nickel cadmium, lead, and small, sealed lead acid batteries.

Want more good news? It’s extremely easy to recycle your laptop’s old battery. Call2Recycle has drop off locations throughout North America, and they don’t charge anything for the service. Just take your battery to the nearest drop off location, say so long, and wait to meet up with your old battery in another life.

Are Motherboards Kind to Mother Earth?

A good motherboard is essential to your laptop’s performance. But, what happens when the motherboard goes kaput? Motherboards contain precious metals, such as gold and copper, which refiners are more than happy to take off your hands. The question, though, is whether they will bother refining the rest of your motherboard’s materials.

Ideally, the recycler would salvage every piece of recyclable material in the motherboard. The reality, though, is that a lot of companies don’t do that. Instead, they crush the motherboard into smithereens, and then use a magnet to pull the valuable metals out. Some even melt the whole thing down (plastic, metal, and all), so that they can skim precious metals from the goop.

This essentially means that motherboards are highly recyclable. Whether or not they get recycled depends on you and the recycler you choose.

Ashes to Ashes, Plastic to Plastic

You might have purchased your current laptop because of its performance and price. Chances are, though, that you were somewhat swayed by its sense of style. A cool looking computer will hold your attention better than an ugly one.

Today’s laptop chassis are made from a variety of materials, including metals and plastics. Can you recycle them? Again, that largely depends on what type of product you have.

Metal chassis are almost always recyclable. If yours is made of aluminum, then you can just drop it off at any recycling plant. Alloys are often a little more complicated, so find an electronics recycler that will know the proper method for your specific type of metal.

It’s a little harder to determine whether plastic laptop chassis are recyclable. Apple and Dell use recyclable plastics, but that doesn’t mean that all manufacturers do. (Apple and Dell will also use old chassis to refurbish damaged computers). If you’re worried about your impact on the environment, then find out whether you can recycle the chassis before you make your next purchase.

The Future: Nothing but Green Fields and Blue Streams

It’s okay to get angry when you think about computer parts filling a landfill. Use that anger as motivation to let laptop manufacturers know you want a better option. In addition to putting your money where your conscience is by purchasing green laptops, you can encourage companies to build laptops that use 100% recyclable parts.

Impossible, you say? You’re obviously not a graduate student at Stanford University. A group of students there recently build a fully recyclable laptop. They call it the Bloom laptop.

Not only is the Bloom made of 100% recyclable parts, but the average user can take it apart in two minutes. That allows them to remove certain parts without chucking the whole computer. It’s very modular, so users can customize it to suit their specific needs.

You can learn more about the Bloom by watching this YouTube video. In it, Aaron Engle-Hall, the project’s manager, also explains that it is difficult to recycle many computer parts because they use so many different types of materials.

When you have plastics and various metals soldered together, it becomes nearly impossible to separate them for recycling. Engle-Hall’s team solved that problem, and they won the 2010 October Autodesk Inventor of the Month award for their efforts.

Recycle Your Entire Laptop Today

Of course, it will be years before the Bloom, or something like it, hits retail store shelves. In the meantime, you can recycle your entire laptop by passing it on to someone else. As long as your laptop still works, someone could use it.
Sure, it might not have the latest video processor and the speakers sound like the world’s grubbiest Grateful Dead bootleg, but there are plenty of people who would love to use it.

After removing all of your personal information from the laptop, you can donate it to your local thrift store. Organizations such as Computers with Causes and Recycles.org can also help you keep landfills less full and improve someone’s life by giving your old laptop to someone in need.

CONCLUSION

Even if your laptop has completely died, you can still find creative ways to use its individual components. Artists have made jewelry out of computer memory, keys, and circuit boards. You could even turn those old parts into new Christmas tree ornaments.

Get creative, and find unique ways to recycle parts so that they don’t end up in a landfill.

Image Credits:

http://www.battery-locator.com/images/COMPAQ-Presario-R3000-Battery.jpg

http://news.discovery.com/tech/2010/07/06/recycled-computer-278×225.jpg

In a blow to environmentalists, California voted down a ban on single-use plastic grocery and pharmacy bags starting in 2012, followed by convenience and liquor store bags in 2013. The move would have stopped Californians from using roughly 19 billion bags per year. From the CS Monitor:

The plastics industry is working hard to defeat the measure. “This bill is bad for the economy and bad for the environment,” says Keith Christman, managing director of plastic markets at the American Chemistry Council (ACC), which is heading the opposition.

The loss-of-jobs complaint is offset by the opportunity for small companies to create reusable bags, says Environmental Defense Fund senior analyst Wade Crowfoot. Christman counters that the majority of reusable bags are already made more cheaply elsewhere, whereas plastic bags are made in the US.

I have no sympathy for the industry on this one. According to this source, plastic bags make up 10% of the debris that washes up on the US coastline. They kill 200 different kinds of species, thanks to ingestion and suffocation. They use oil: One estimate says China will save 37 million barrels of oil a year by banning free plastic bags. Another, by the Australian government, says that “The amount of petroleum used to make a plastic bag would drive a car about 11 metres.” Polyethylene, from which the bags are produced, is a suspected carcinogen. Too boot, plastic bags are terribly inefficient to recycle.

That’s a heck of an impact for a product that’s easy to replace with a reusable alternative. Still, California lawmakers concluded the ban would infringe on personal choice (ABC):

California lawmakers rejected a bill late Tuesday night that would have made the state the first in the nation to ban all plastic shopping bags. Opponents of the bill argued that the ban went too far to regulate personal choice. Republicans and some Democrats opposed the bill, saying it would have added an extra financial burden on consumers and businesses already facing tough times.

Keith Christman of the American Chemistry Council said that more than 500 organizations and companies were against the ban. He said groups were concerned about the cost the ban on plastic bags would put on working families, specifically $1 billion per year to buy paper bags.

I’m not sure these guys give a flying squirrel about the working poor, but nice rhetoric, I guess. This reminds me of something I heard on a David Cross comedy routine: “Americans have a long and proud history of voting against their own best interests.” Here we go again.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit focused on environmental advocacy, has released its fourth annual Sunscreen Guide. This guide measures the safeness and efficacy of sunscreens. This year, EWG found that only 8% of the 1,400 sunscreens they tested is good to use.

EWG claims that sunscreens exaggerate SPF claims. They also add toxic ingredients like a skin-tumor causing form of Vitamin A and hormone disruptor oxybenzone. Here’s what the EWC found:

Products with high SPF ratings sell a false sense of security because most people using them stay out in the sun longer, still get burned (which increases risk of skin cancer) and subject their skin to large amounts of UVA radiation, the type of sunlight that does not burn but is believed responsible for considerable skin damage and cancer. High SPF products, which protect against sunburn, often provide very little protection against UVA radiation.

Some blame falls on the FDA, which has yet to finalize regulations for sunscreens promised since 1978. FDA officials estimate that the regulations may be issued next October – but even then, they are expected to give manufacturers at least a year, and possibly longer, to comply with the new rules. That means the first federally regulated sunscreens won’t go on store shelves before the summer of 2012.

If you want safe sunscreen, head to the natural products section of your grocery store. The EWG said that mineral sunscreens by brands including Badger, Jason, Desert Essence, and Soleo Organics were safest. If slathering ground up titanium dioxide on your skin doesn’t appeal to you, the EWG also recommended some non-mineral sunscreens by Bullfrog, Coppertone, and others. Meanwhile, many popular products by big brands like Neutrogena and Banana Boat make their don’t-buy list. See their full set of recommendations here.

BP CEO Tony Hayward has admitted that BP made mistakes early on in dealing with the Gulf Coast oil spill. But he defended BP’s overall response to the crisis. The Guardian has more:

…in a bullish interview with the Guardian at BP’s crisis centre in Houston, Hayward promised that BP would “fix” the disaster, which is on course to eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill as the worst US oil spill in history. Hayward said that BP was “increasingly confident” that progress was being made in trying to find ways to seal the faulty blow-out preventer, which failed to shut down the well, and stem the flow of oil.

(Hayward) admitted that BP had made mistakes in its early response to the crisis. BP initially refused to compensate fishermen who were unable to produce written proof of their normal earnings even though most keep no such record. He also said BP had made a mistake when fishermen signing up to help with the relief effort were required to sign agreements limiting their receipt of any future damages from BP. “It was a bit bumpy to get it going. We made a few little mistakes early on.”

BP’s Alaska and Texas City disasters set the stage for the previous CEO, John Browne, to be shown the door. I doubt Hayward’s job is as safe as he claims.

BP has spend $450 million on the oil spill so far, according to the Wall Street Journal–and it still hasn’t figured out a workable solution. Let’s hope the company works out its kinks quickly.

April 22 is Earth Day 2010. Many companies want to inspire you to go green by offering tempting deals, discounts, and freebies. We compiled a list of every deal we could find below.

Starbucks: Free coffee if you bring your travel mug.

Babies ‘R’ Us: 25% off all the clothes you can fit into a reusable tote (with this coupon).

Burt’s Bees: Free Head-to-Toe Starter Kit if you spend $50 online.

Hanes will plant a tree in your honor and send you a free T-shirt if you buy three of their products.

The Disney Store: Free baseball cap for bringing in 6 empty soda cans or plastic water bottles.

The BBC: Download part of the Planet Earth series for free on iTunes, until April 26.

Safeway: Buy 2, get 1 free on Safeway’s Bright Green line.

Origins: Bring your empty container of skin care for them to recycle, and receive a container of Origin’s chemical-free cleanser.

Walgreens: A free printer cartridge refill on April 22 with a coupon. Also, 22% off select green items.

CVS: $1 off every fourth visit if you have a reusable bag with a green bag tote on it–and an ExtraCare card.

Wegmans will give a free reusable bag to customers who come in with used plastic bags on April 24.

Amazon is having an Earth Day Sale with 30% or more off products.

National Parks are offering free entrance during the week of Earth Day.

Pottery Barn Kids: Kids receive a free plant at 11am and 3pm on April 22.

Sports Authority, the Body Shop, Timberland, Better World Books, Shoes.com: Coupon Sherpa has Earth Day coupons for all these stores.

GoodGuide, a consumer group, claims to have found dangerous levels of antimony, a metalloid toxic to humans in in large amounts, in a study. GoodGuide found higher-than-normal levels of antimony on the hair and nose of the Mr. Squiggles Zhu Zhu pet. The Baltimore Sun has more:

…the toy’s maker, St. Louis-based Cepia LLC, insisted in a statement that its product is safe and has passed rigorous testing. The company said it was contacting GoodGuide to share its testing data and determine how the report was founded.

Antimony was measured at 93 parts per million in the hamster’s fur and at 106 parts per million in its nose. Both readings exceed the allowable level of 60 parts per million, said O’Rourke, an associate professor of environmental science at the University of California, Berkeley.

According to the Christian Science Monitor,

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 limits antimony to no more than 60 parts per million. Good Guide says it found 93 ppm in Mr. Squiggles’ fur and 103 in its nose.

There’s no recall in the works (yet), although there has been speculation. There are various reports of the study being faulty. For example, in this Consumerist post, commenters state the following:

- Only one Zhu Zhu pet came in over the limit of antimony, and that pet was only 10% over the limit.
- The US FDA standard is for soluble antimony. The test that GoodGuide gave the Zhu Zhu pet only measured total antimony, not soluble.
- GoodGuide only tested three toys, a small sample of total production.
- Your kid basically has to eat a several Zhu Zhu hamsters to feel the effects of the antimony.

Prognosis? Wait this one out.

In the spirit of the soon-to-be phased out Cash for Clunkers program, Americans have a new incentive to get rid of inefficient resource-suckers. This time it’s appliances. According to American Public Media’s Alisa Roth, Congress included $300 million in the stimulus package this year to use as rebates for consumers who buy new, more energy-efficient appliances.

Unlike the Cash for Clunkers program, you don’t actually have to turn in your old refrigerator or washing machine to receive the incentive. When you buy a new appliance with an Energy Star rating, the EPA and the Energy Department’s highest rating, you can get up to $200 back. Looks like the appliance lobby worked a little harder than the auto industry lobby for this program. Here’s to wishing I owned some GE stock.

Like Cash for Clunkers, Roth says this benefits both he environment and the economy.

So one part is getting people to upgrade to more energy-efficient machines. And the other is to stimulate the economy by encouraging people to buy expensive stuff.

The program should begin in late fall.

I have some old shoes that are letting water in through the sole. This is causing me to have to dry my socks out several times a day, thus using electricity for the dryer. I need new shoes. Do you think my stimulus is coming soon?

Image Credit: infrogmation, Flickr

Today’s USDA crop report, which forecasts this fall’s harvest, estimated that the US soybean crop will be the largest ever. The corn crop will be the second-largest in history. Reuters has more:

(These) mammoth harvests…will deflate an ethanol-fueled price boom, the government said. The Agriculture Department estimated the soybean crop at 3.199 billion bushels, corn at 12.761 billion bushels, wheat at 2.184 billion bushels and cotton at 13.21 million bales weighing 480 lbs each.

The August crop report is often regarded as the most significant USDA report of the year, reflecting the U.S. position as the largest corn and soybean exporter in the world. It is the first forecast of the fall harvest and is based on field surveys and interviews of 28,000 growers.

Overall, the data is mixed, according to Agriculture Online, which claims that “floor traders say the USDA data will be negative for corn prices, positive for soybeans.” It also means that more farmers will sign up for the 2008 farm bill’s ACRE program, which guarantees more revenue in situations where prices fall.