www.strawbalenv.com

Greens Means

Reducing Carbon Footprints

By Shannon Scott

            A carbon footprint is the amount of green house gas produced by our lifestyle choices as we burn fossil fuels in driving, flying, heating, using electricity, buying, and so forth. 

            Carbon footprints are measured in the tons of carbon dioxide we infuse into the atmosphere.  There are two types, direct and indirect. 

            Direct carbon emissions include: home gas, oil, coal, and electricity; private and public transportation; and vacation flights, which add up to approximately 51% of all green house gas emissions.  Indirect emissions include: vehicle manufacture and delivery; residential buildings and furnishings; clothing and personal items; leisure activities; and public, private, and financial service sectors.  These make up the remaining 49% of an individual’s carbon outputs.  

            Those of us who are fortunate enough to live in developed nations contribute more to green house gasses, and consequent global warming, than those living in less developed environments.  In short, the more we have the more damaging our effects are on the environment.  Reducing consumption and conserve energy does a whole lot more than save us money, it saves our environment.

            The following are some ways individuals can reduce carbon footprints. 

Home

ü  When leaving a room, turn electricity off – lights, t.v., computers…

ü  Lower the thermostat by 1 or 2 degrees.  You’ll not only burn less fuel, but realize substantial cost savings.  A small adjustment results in a big impact.

ü  Turn down, or off, heaters when not at home.  If going on vacation during winter, 50 degrees will be plenty good to keep pipes from freezing.  When running off to work, lower thermostats from the typical 68 degrees to 62.  6 degrees lower will save significant amounts of energy.

ü  Lower the water heater by just 1 or 2 degrees.  Most people maintain energy demanding hot water tanks way too high. Better yet, install on-demand, flash hot water systems.  These use far less energy and work more efficiently than behemoth, minimally insulated tanks heaters.

ü  Fill the dishwasher completely before running it, and use it more often than hand washing. 

ü  Install a solar clothes dryer.  That’s right, a clothes line.  Avoid the umbrella style ones.  They don’t hold up well in strong winds.  I ended up taking a cue from the ranch homes I see around here – that very often have 2 inch vertical steel pipes planted 2-3 feet deep in concrete in the ground, with equally stout steel cross pipes attached at the top to form Ts.  These hold up to torrential winds and allow more hanging space for large items like blankets and sheets.

ü  Invest in energy saving light bulbs, fixtures, and appliances.  You may pay an additional cost up front, but these pay off in the long run.  A home design engineer once told me that anyone buying a brand new less expensive or mid-level tract home would be money ahead to immediately get rid of all the appliances – not even sell them, just give them away, and purchasing state of the art energy smart lighting and appliances.  Wow.

ü  Insulate attics and walls well.  R-45-60 in ceilings is great.  Do the best you can within walls. 

ü  Try, if home design and local codes allow, to recycle grey water.  Grey water is water from sinks, showers, washing machines, etc.  This water contains very harmful bacteria, of the type found in black water (toilet flushes), but at lower concentrations.  It smells bad when exposed to air too soon, so care must be given to design grey water recovery with health safety in mind.

Work and Away

ü  Commute with others to work.  Ride share or take public transportation if it’s available.  Of course in our vast rural west locale, this is often not an option.

ü  For short trips, walk or ride a bike.  It’s fun and healthy for you too!

ü  Fly less.  An odd paradox developed as people began to make their homes more energy efficient.  They had more money.  More money meant more leisure flights and cruises which completely negated their carbon foot print savings.  Think before you travel.

ü  Do you wash your linens and towels at home every day?  When staying in a hotel, ask that your linens be washed every 2-3 days.

Consumption

ü  Next time you MUST buy a vehicle, check out diesel engines.  Many can run on biodiesel as well as standard diesel. 

ü  The city of San Francisco has banned the sale of bottled water – since the tap water is perfectly safe and certainly carries less environmental impact that all those plastic bottles – some imported from as far away as France and Fiji!  It’s time we American’s woke up to how truly ridiculous some of our daily practices have been.

ü  Grow your own and/or buy locally.  Home grown or locally grown produce is not only fresher, you know where it came from and what it hasn’t been sprayed with!  It makes no sense to buy apples in midsummer that come from Chile or New Zealand.  Buy foods in season from right here in the U.S.A.  Support local farmers.

ü  Hunt and/or reduce consumption of meat.  Hunting the old fashioned way, on foot, hiking and packing game out, proves great exercise.  Elk, deer, antelope are provide good sources of clean, lean meat, no steroids or antibiotics added.  Hunt for meat, not antlers.  Too much game goes to waste because people don’t like the gamey taste.  Stop killing large males for the racks, and think what’s best in the freezer that you and your family will enjoy eating. 

ü  Buy organic produce. 

ü  Avoid processed foods.  They are often heavily ladened with unhealthy ingredients and way overly packaged.

            To compare and see what your carbon footprint actually is, there are a number a websites that offer carbon footprint calculators.  One fairly good one is:

http://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

            So go forth enjoying and maintaining the outdoors through better, greener living. 

            

Minimizing Construction Waste

www.strawbalenv.com

Green Means

Minimizing Construction Waste

By Shannon Scott

            Good green home designs maximize use of materials and minimize construction waste.  Honing down on scraps means planning well during the design process, not when cutting the first sustainably harvested two-by-four.  Design a home that maximizes every inch of lumber, pipe, concrete, and wiring.  You’ll build green and save money.

Build Up

            To minimize foundation and roofing materials build a multi-level home rather than one large single story.  Building up is simply less expensive than building broad – you get more square feet for your foundation and roofing investment.  You’ll not only save materials, but you’ll reduce the home’s footprint - the amount of land the building covers.  By creating a smaller footprint a home disrupts less land and reduces its overall environmental impact.  So you’re protecting resources on several fronts.

Minimize Angles and Curves

            Many artful and interesting homes are rid of curves and complex angles.  Every time a corner is added, estimate an additional 3% in cost.  Five extra corners means 15% greater bottom line in materials and labor.  More angles, means more cutting of materials.  More cuts, more waste. 

            Think: Frank Lloyd Wright the deity of clean lines and simple geometric shapes.  A more contemporary designer that follows Wright’s influence, and some hail as the leading residential home designer in the U.S. today, is Sarah Susanka, author of The Not-So-Big House and other books on home design. Wright and Susanka both created inviting, artful, functional spaces without multitudes of complex angles, steep slopes, or rounded anything.  While their homes may realize higher costs per square foot due to first-class finish materials, such as expensive hard woods, their designs don’t waste much of anything anywhere.  Green builders don’t either.

Think Even Numbers

            Generally, think in terms of even numbers when designing.  Odd numbered lengths lend themselves to a bit more waste.  Consider standard dimensional lumber.  Typically, lumber is cut in lengths from 8 feet to 20 feet in 2 feet increments.  So when planning ceiling heights, think 8 ft., 10 ft., 12 ft. etc. depending upon your style and budget.  Don’t decide upon a ceiling that is 9 ft., you’ll be cutting and wasting nearly an entire foot off every framing member that goes up. 

Reuse and Recycle

            Reuse and recycle lumber and other materials when possible.  When or if you build concrete forms out of two-by-sixes, two-by-fours, and plywood take special care of them.   After stripping the forms from the poured foundations and/or slabs scrape off any obvious concrete that may have stuck to the lumber and reuse clean boards elsewhere in framing.  This reduces the total amount of lumber you’ll ultimately need to purchase. 

Estimate Accurately, Order Conservatively

            Order slightly less materials than you need.  As you near completion of a stage and can determine more exactly how many more boards, pipes, or whatever then order the exact number. 

            The exception to this is tile.  When tiling there is a lot of cutting, and often pallets or boxes contain some broken tiles.  The general rule of thumb is to order 10% more.  So when tilingan area that’s 20 feet by 20 feet or 400 square feet, order enough tile to cover 440 square feet.  You likely will have some, but not much, left over and you can always find a decorative use somewhere for excess tile.

Lumber Yard Returns

Should you be long on excess materials make sure the local lumber yard will take back and credit you for what you didn’t use.  Most reputable places will be fine with this since they want repeat business.

Hired Help

            Granted this column is more geared to do-it-yourselfers, but for those hiring carpenters or other construction labor, make sure they have waste reduction in mind.  Often, hired laborers will not take care to plan well, cut precisely, or consider your bottom line philosophies or dime.  Insist that anyone working on your project understands green building methods and materials.  Explain that you are minimizing waste, using select premium sustainable materials, and that anyone working for you must adhere to seeing and following your vision.  They don’t have to share a green mindset, but hired help needs to do the job according to your specifications.  It’s still common to come across a number of building and construction supply professionals that pooh-pooh green building practices.  These too will go the way of the dinosaur as local codes insist more and more on sustainability.

Extra Material

            Recycling any leftover materials will save you money, and avoid adding to already over burdened landfills. 

            One use for plain lumber, not chemically treated, is fire wood.  You might not have a wood stove, but someone near you likely does and would be happy to have the ends and pieces. 

            What might you build down the road?  Are you going to need stakes for gardening?  I still use leftover two-by lumber pieces that are 4 - 8 inches long for placing in the bottom of large planters so not as much dirt is needed to fill them.  Water drains better from the pots and repotting is much easier as hardened potting soil comes out much more easily. 

            When mixing smaller batches of concrete for exterior steps and concrete counter tops, I used any leftover “mud” to make stepping stones for the garden.  Simply, form the concrete into 2” thick patties of the desired shape and size.  They work great for keeping out of the mud when weeding, planting, or watering.

            A little planning and thought goes a long way.  Think green, sustainable, and conservative when designing, you’ll be glad you did.

Buy Quality Windows

http://strawbalenv.com

Green Means

Windows that Perform

By Shannon Scott

Nothing beats a room with a view… unless it’s a room with two different views, through responsibly manufactured, insulated, heat reflective windows.

 When building or remodeling, selecting windows will be one of the most important, energy saving and esthetically pleasing decisions you make.  High performance windows help keep interiors warmer in winter and cooler in summer.  There’s no longer any reason to limit the amount of glass because of excessive heat loss or gain.  So enjoy the views!

The best windows are low thermal emissivity (Low-E) coated, gas-filled, multi-paned, made with solid framing materials.  Look for Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) or Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) labels, which mean wood was sustainably grown and harvested. 

Window design and placement is referred to as fenestration.  National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) stickers on windows verify performance factors.  Some better makes and models are Sierra Pacific, Anderson Eagle, and Marvin Integrity.   

Sierra Pacific, SFI certified windows are available from Franklin Lumber.  These windows are made here in the west, which minimizes the negative environmental impacts of long-distance distribution, the number one contributor to green house gasses.

National Fenestration Rating Council Performance Factors

            U-factor measures how well a product prevents heat from escaping.  Ratings generally fall between 0.20 and 1.20. The lower the U-factor, the greater a window’s resistance to heat flow and the better its insulating value.  U-factors are dependent upon the type and placement of the Low-E coating.  Some placements reflect heat into a room to prevent heat loss, while others reflect it out to keep interiors cooler.

            Solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) measures how well a product blocks the sun’s heat. The SHGC is the fraction of incident solar radiation admitted through a window, both directly transmitted and absorbed and subsequently released inward.  SHCG is expressed as a number between 0 and 1. The lower a window’s solar heat gain coefficient, the less solar heat it transmits.  The SHGC is also dependent upon Low-E coating, type, and placement.  

            Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design (LEED) gives credits for U-factors and SHGCs of .35 or less.  The smaller the number the better the LEED rating.  

            Visible transmittance (Vt) is an optical property that indicates the amount of visible light transmitted into a room. Vt is expressed as a number between 0 and 1. The higher the Vt, the more light available. 

            Condensation Resistance (CR) measures how well a window resists the formation of condensation. CR is expressed as a number between 1 and 100. A higher number indicates better resistance to condensation.  Quality windows are dry, year round.

Designs

Casement windows have cranks or knobs that turn to open the windows along a vertical plain.  This design captures and directs air flow better than other window styles.  Don’t believe the myth about this style not holding up in strong winds.   Quality windows hold up.

Double-hung windows slide up or down, and often tilt in at an angle to form a horizontal plain.  Some manufactures make at least one of the two pains easily removable for cleaning.  This style doesn’t direct air flow in, but is good for areas with limited space to open or close.

Awning windows are similar to double-hung except there is only one pane and often only one opening option.  An awning window will usually hinge at the top and swing out. 

Fixed, picture, or plate glass windows are windows that don’t open.  Fixed windows are cheaper because there’s no operational hardware.  These can save you money in areas where you already have air flow, or emergency exit windows.  To save money and expand views, combine fixed and opening styles.  Bedrooms must have egress (exit) windows in case of fire, but you can certainly combine an egress with a fixed to maximize a tranquil bedroom view.

 Gliders or sliders are the cheapest models available and there’s a reason for it.  Tracks quickly and easily become dirt filled which makes operation less smooth.  They do not open out either vertically or horizontally to capture air flow guiding it into rooms.  Air flow must be fairly direct in to the windows.  These work well for interior pass through windows, or if space to open is extremely limited.

Non-toxic windows

Avoid vinyl clad windows.  Vinyl releases toxins (off-gasses) urea-formaldehyde a carcinogen, and phthalates found in PVC (poly-vinyl chloride).  Phthalates are carcinogens, can interfere with normal fetal or child development, can harm reproductive health, and are allergens.  

Placement

Windows on at least two sides of every room allow light to enter at different times of the day and change the way a room looks and feels.  Residents are offered views in more than one direction and better ventilation.  Plenty of glass reduces the need for artificial lighting, which further saves energy costs, and lifts spirits by making a home brighter. 

Window heights should be proportionate to room size, and offer views out when standing and sitting. Sills heights approximately 2 ft. above the floor are usually good.   Sill heights above 2 ft. can limit views when seated.   Floor to ceiling windows are grand as long as sills are high enough above exterior grade so that snow loads don’t pile up against glass.

If privacy from neighbors is a concern, don’t reduce glass.  Instead, strategically place trees and shrubs to block unwanted gazes.

When installing windows, caulk well with a low or non-VOC caulk.  Caulking well disallows drafts, creating a tighter building envelop for greater energy efficiency. 

            Glass connects us with the outdoors and helps us feel better when we’re inside.  Everyone enjoys gazing at fall’s orange sunsets, winter’s swirling snows, or summer’s Red Tailed hawks.  Quality windows are not cheap, so budget for them.  Knowing a home is more energy efficient and less toxic affords peace of mind, so install great windows and enjoy the views.

             

Precautionary Principle Legislation

HTTP://STRAWBALENV.COM

Green Means

Precautionary Principle Legislation

By Shannon Scott

           

            Precautionary actions are the foundation of public health, social welfare, and most human conduct.  Hippocrates established the first precautionary principle when he wrote, …first…do no harm.

            We have lived by such adages as An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and Better safe than sorry.  We have speed limits, crosswalks, standards, rules, policies, OSHA, and legislation set forth to protect citizens. Yet when it comes to environmental decisions avoiding harm has been rejected making way for profits over people and damage cleanup, reflected in Get it while you can, and Better to seek forgiveness than ask for permission mindsets. 

            Over the past twenty years scientists, government officials and others have discussed ways to approach environmental problems that affect human, animal, and planet health using the precautionary principle.  But as yet, no U.S. environmental precautionary policies have been established.

          In 1998 a group of leading scientists, government officials (global), labor representatives, lawyers, and environmentally concerned organizations gathered at Frank Lloyd Wright designed Wingspread house in Racine, Wisconsin to discuss the precautionary principle and how it should apply to environmental protection.  The meeting at Wingspread resulted in the Wingspread Principle, some of which is stated here.

            The release and use of toxic substances, resource exploitation, and physical alterations of the environment have had substantial unintended consequences on human health and the environment. Some of these concerns are high rates of learning deficiencies, asthma, cancer, birth defects and species extinctions; along with global climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion; and worldwide contamination with toxic substances and nuclear materials.
            We believe existing environmental regulations and other decisions, particularly those based on risk assessment, have failed to adequately protect human health and the environment, as well as the larger system of which humans are but a part.
            We believe there is compelling evidence that damage to humans and the worldwide environment is of such magnitude and seriousness that new principles for conducting human activities are necessary.
            While we realize that human activities may involve hazards, people must proceed more carefully than has been the case in recent history. Corporations, government entities, organizations, communities, scientists and other individuals must adopt a precautionary approach to all human endeavors.
            Therefore it is necessary to implement the Precautionary Principle: Where an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.
            In this context the proponent of an activity, rather than the public bears the burden of proof.
            The process of applying the Precautionary Principle must be open, informed and democratic, and must include potentially affected parties. It must also involve an examination of the full range of alternatives, including no action.

The recommended precautionary action has four parts:

1.     People have a duty to take anticipatory action to prevent harm.  In other words, if an individual or business has an inkling that some harm may come, they have an obligation to prevent it.

2.      The burden of proof of the harmlessness of a new technology, process, activity, or chemical lies with the proponents, not with the general public.  Damages suits have not deterred bad corporate behavior since all too often profit margins have already accounted for potential damages.  Before a product, chemical, or method can be used corporations must be able to prove it will cause no harm.

3.     Before using a new technology, process, or chemical, or starting a new activity, people have an obligation to examine a full range of alternatives, which in some cases may include the alternative of zero action.

4.     Decisions applying the precautionary principle must be "open, informed, and democratic" and "must include affected parties."  Corporations will be required to sit at the table with all potentially affected parties and their representatives.

            These principles have shaped environmental and public health policy in Europe and more recently in Canada.  In the US, the Science and Health Foundation (SEH) has been its leading proponent.  So why hasn’t preventing environmental degradation, in light or by prescription of the preventive principle been legislated to protect our ecosystems, greater public good, and long term economy?

            Given legislators’ reliance on lobbyists’ clients’ campaign donations, precautionary legislation would not be supported.  Any legislation that would insist on businesses first proving that their chemicals, processes, or technologies do no harm to either humans or any element of our environment would cost the companies money.  Board members and various chief executives don’t like to wait for profits to materialize.  Just like we have become a fast food nation, we are also a quick profit at the expense of the greater good nation. 

            To establish precautionary policy legislation, the public must make demands upon and reduce spending to corporations and their holdings that oppose it.  

            Before supporting any legislation ask: Will this protect and preserve our lands, waters, and people?  Is this legislation precautionary for the good of our nation’s human, environmental and economic health?  If answers are emphatically, yes, then it’s likely that proposed legislation will protect the national, common good.

           

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.  

Straw Bale Myths and Facts

HTTP://STRAWBALENV.COM

Green Means

Straw Bale Myths and Facts

By Shannon Scott

            Most of the e-mails I receive regard questions about straw bale home construction.  Here are some myths, facts, and a wee bit of local information.

Myth:  Straw bale homes are cheaper to build than other types of constructed homes.

Fact:  Straw bale homes cost the same per square foot as any other low, mid, or high end home depending upon architectural style, labor costs, and finish materials.  We saved a bundle on our straw bale home by: a) keeping the design simple; b) doing all the labor ourselves with absolutely zero hired help; and c) shopping wisely for all materials. 

Myth:  Straw bale homes are easier to build than conventional stick frame or other standard construction homes.

Fact:  Straw bale homes are equally as difficult or challenging to build as any other home.  Construction and carpentry skills are still needed for foundations, windows, plumbing, electrical, roofing, etc.

Myth:  A straw bale home’s thicker walls make it cheaper to operate, heat and cool, compared to a conventional home.

Fact:  A straw bale home might be cheaper to operate than a conventional home depending upon passive solar design considerations, quality of construction, ceiling /attic insulation, window quality, and heat source used to heat the home.  While straw bale homes do offer increased wall insulation which certainly contribute to a home’s overall comfort, the ceiling is where insulation matters most.  Insulate the heck out of ceilings with fire coded green, earth friendly insulation.

Myth:  People love to work on straw bale homes, so if I decide to build one it will turn out to be a fun communal event with friends and neighbors stacking bales.

Fact:  Yeah, right.  Stacking bales is work like any other construction aspect.  Don’t expect a myriad of friends to come out to a building site and work for free – especially if they themselves have day jobs or are retired and getting on in years.  Stacking bales is the easiest segment of construction – super easy.  Don’t let fear of the unknown catalyze you into hiring one of these on-line or advertised straw bale builders who will bring a happy crew (all paying him/her) to come out to your site and stack bales.  You can’t control quality (tightness of newly tied or stacked bales) and there’s no guarantee as to how much work will actually get done.  Stacking is relatively fun compared to other construction tasks, however it is dusty and if you have allergies wear a protective mask and glasses.  If trepidation stalls you from wanting to jump in and stack bales, e-mail me, I’m happy to help.

Myth:  It’s difficult to obtain building permits for straw bale homes.

Fact:  Obtaining a building permit for a straw bale home is the same for any other structure.  The blue prints have to meet structural standards for safety.  Just because you’ve decided to use straw to insulate walls means little.  You still have a standard type foundation, load bearing and shear strength elements to support walls and roof, standard wiring, and standard plumbing.  Once you’ve designed your home to scale – floor plans and exterior elevations - take the sketches to a structural engineer to have blue prints made.  A structural engineer will ensure quality foundation, structural, and roof specifications in keeping with the local building codes.  Of course you can always pay an engineer from the beginning to help design your home, but this will cost a little more. 

Myth:  It’s nearly impossible to get construction loans for straw bale homes.

Fact:  The recent home financial fiasco nationwide has made home buying/building money a little tighter, but construction goes on.  There’s no difference in construction loans for straw bale or stick built homes for the same reasons I noted above for building permits.  Don’t even mention to a potential lender that the home is straw bale as it really doesn’t matter to them as long as blue prints yield building permits.  Remember, the bales are simply wall insulation, all other construction aspects – foundations, plumbing, electrical, roofs – are standard.

Myth:  It’s easy to find a contractor who will build a straw bale home.

Fact:  Straw bale home builders who will do a job from foundation to roof are non-existent to extremely rare.  There are plenty of regional carpenters or builders who have jumped on the green building or straw bale band wagon to organize crews to stack bales and maybe show a home owner-builder how to plaster, but they don’t do site excavation, foundations, wiring, plumbing, or roofing. 

            You will likely have to act as your own general contractor, which is relatively easy, and either do the work yourself or hire subcontractors such as a concrete crew, electrician, and plumber for appropriate stages. 

Myth:  Our local county insists that you have a licensed contractor sign off on your blue prints, thus negating the option of building one’s own home with one’s own hands.

Fact:  You can sign off as the builder, electrician, plumber or whatever as long as blue prints and each phase of construction pass inspection.  The county is concerned with ensuring safety and legal standards, not putting money in contractor’s pockets.

            Building a straw bale home is extremely rewarding and likely one of the most creative and challenging projects you’ll take on.  Don’t be daunted by lack of information or frozen by fear of the unknown.  Ask.  Take a leap.  We built our home ourselves over a three year period and it’s fabulous.  A little know how and being willing to take small risks go a long way towards success.  Fear not, venture forth!

            If you have questions about straw bale homes or green, energy efficient building e-mail me.  I’m happy to help.

I will be offering two separate one day green building seminars on July 28^th and 30^th at Great Basin College in Elko.  For information or to sign up contact the Community Education Department at the College.

           

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.

Sustainable Is Profitable

HTTP://STRAWBALENV.COM

Green Means

Sustainability Is Profitable

By Shannon Scott

              Green is fast becoming America’s new gold.  Developing nations – especially China - pay big money for crops from U.S. farm lands.  For human health and national economic longevity it’s important to protect, sustain, and conserve our soils and waters wisely. 

            According to U.S. Census Bureau data, in 2010 the U.S. imported 120,000 tons of food; but we exported 195,000 tons.  While our trade deficit with China appears agonizingly imbalanced, the Chinese rely on U.S. and Canadian farmers to supply livestock silage, soy beans, and other foods, making farmers and food corporations flush with cash. 

            Feeding over a billion Chinese and millions of citizens from other developing nations who have increasing incomes and who insist on clean, safe food supplies bolsters demand for first world food stuffs and livestock feed makes the future bright for western farmers – provided land is farmed sustainably and healthily.  The U.S.’s trading strength relies on quality, not quantity.  China produces enough soy beans to feed itself.  What is lacking are uncontaminated soils, fresh water supplies, and environmental and food safety standards.  This is the global market niche the U.S. is poised to fill.  

            The farm economy realized $11.2 billion from China in 2009 and upwards of $14 billion in 2010.  China produces its own soybeans and cotton, but is a leading importer of the two crops.  China will import over $4 billion worth of U.S. soy beans this year alone.  In Iowa, exports to China, mostly farm goods, rose over 1,200 percent from 2000 to 2012.

            The U.S. and Canada have set global standards for high quality, safe food production – and can now ratchet up farm practices and food processing even higher by legislating sustainable land and water use practices and rigid organic food standards. 

            Some economists suggest that the current windfall for U.S. and Canadian farmers may be short lived if Beijing decides to subsidize their own rural farms.  Yet, harmful industrial wastes, lack of consumer health and safety measures, and notorious corruption at all levels will continue to taint China’s domestic and foreign markets.  Toxic soils, filthy air, and contaminated water yield dangerous food products.  Emerging middle class consumers around the globe want safe foods and that means obtaining them from western sources with exacting sustainability standards.

            Developing nations’ citizens are forking over cash for quality products..  Products stamped “Made in China” radiate a message of low quality, short longevity, weak safety, and exploited labor practices; whereas, “Made in the U.S.A.”, and other first world nations’ products, more often than not, emanate quality, value, often sustainability, and humane, fair wage working conditions.  Wal Mart’s profits in the U.S. continue to decline because American’s are no longer sucked in to paying hard earned dollars for cheap, inferior products. 

            Food companies realize the consumer demand trend for organic and purer foods.   When there’s billions to be had, corporate giants buy out the little guys, maximize profits, corner markets, and make stock holders happy.  Kraft, Pepsico, Heinz, Kellogg, M&M Mars, Cargill, ConAgra and others have been buying up organic brands as soon as smaller companies agree to sell.  Kellogg owns Bear Naked, Kashi and more.     PepsiCo owns Naked Juice.  Unfortunately as soon as the small guys sell out, product quality declines.  Maximizing food product profits means adding cheap, non- or low nutritive filler ingredients and pressuring organic or sustainable farmers to adulterate practices for higher yields so the food processors can obtain cheaper raw materials.  

            Corporate representatives seated on organic quality control boards have voted for herbicide acceptance (which failed fortunately) and regularly meet to decide which ingredients should be allowed in organic products.  Carrageenan, a seaweed-derived thickener and controversial healthwise, and synthetic inositol, manufactured as a chemical have made their way by the National Organic Standards Board.  Corporations, like in many other areas, have corrupted the organic food market. 

            With corporate giants steeped in the organic market and China beating down their doors with freighters full of cash, food quality controls and farming standards are at extreme risk for corruption and consequent deterioration.  Without stringent land-use and product quality safeguards the U.S. farm and food economy windfall will be short lived.  

            As long as U.S. farm lands are sustainably managed and foods minimally processed, and as long as farmers, food companies, and government inspectors have the highest integrity and reliability, agricultural and food products stamped, “Product of U.S.A” will be the world’s best and in constant demand.

            As individuals and collectively, U.S. consumers influence and establish buying and lifestyle trends worldwide.  We advanced green and organic products’ markets and must see to it that rigorous standards are maintained, not adulterated by foreign purchasing powers.  Read labels.  Shop wisely.  Buy sustainable products that help to bolster America’s economic future.   Going green is the new gold standard for food and product consumption – and with the right policies and regulations the U.S. will end up with the Midas touch.

           

           

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.  

Why Buy Organic?

HTTP://STRAWBALENV.COM

Green Means

Why Buy Organic

By Shannon Scott

            What’s the difference between conventional and organic farming?

            Organic farming practices encourage soil and water conservation, reduce pollution, and avoid harmful chemicals like weed killers.

             Organic farming utilizes more sophisticated, time honored crop rotations and mulching to control weeds and maintain soil quality.  Soil integrity and quality proves critical to farm longevity.  The following chart, from the Mayo Clinic website, lists key difference between conventional and organic farming

Conventional	Organic
Apply chemical fertilizers to promote plant growth.	Apply natural fertilizers, such as manure or compost, to feed soil and plants.
Spray insecticides to reduce pests and disease.	Use beneficial insects and birds, mating disruption or traps to reduce pests and disease.
Use herbicides to manage weeds.	Rotate crops, till, hand weed or mulch to manage weeds.
Give animals antibiotics, growth hormones and medications to prevent disease and spur growth.	Give animals organic feed and allow them access to the outdoors. Use preventive measures — such as rotational grazing, a balanced diet and clean housing — to help minimize disease.

            I know many who naysay when it comes to buying organic products.  They argue that a person is more likely to get food poisoning from organic produce, it’s a waste of the extra money, there’s no difference in nutritional value, you can’t tell the taste difference, products might not really be organic, and so forth. 

            There’s no research or evidence that organic foods are more likely to cause food poisoning, except maybe when it comes to raw milk versus pasteurized.  Beef and poultry cause most food poisoning outbreaks, more often than not caused by poor cleanliness standards in processing and negligence in preparation.  Organic isn’t an issue.  If there is a decision between risking food poisoning from organic food versus cancer, neurological disorders or other chemical caused illnesses from non-organic heavy herbicide/pesticide loads, I’ll take organic.

            Any food can become contaminated in the production and preparation process.  Meat and poultry top the food poisoning lists, as well as eggs, shell fish, and some produce like lettuce.  Let’s face it, most food poisoning comes from contaminated processing and handling.  Slaughter houses don’t have pristine cleanliness records, nor do mass handled, mass produced anything.  Organics are as safe or safer to eat than most mass market foods – so chow down.

            Organic foods prove to be much better values than alternative choices.  With organics, a consumer is getting real food with nutritional merit, not red and yellow dyes, excessive fillers, and artificial additives that most of us cannot even pronounce.  You pay for food, not artificial ingredients. 

            Given what we know about chemical fertilizers and herbicides degrading farmland, that the science regarding long term human environmental health of genetically modified crops is not in yet, and that non-organic processed foods have so many harmful artificial filler ingredients, organic foods also appear to be of lasting value for our farmland’s future.

            Regarding whether or not organic food is more nutritious, one of the largest studies comparing organic and conventional nutritional values, conducted by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine over a 50 year period, from 1958 to 2008, concluded primarily that,  “Conventionally produced crops have significantly higher nitrogen levels”, no doubt due to intense chemical fertilizers. “Organically produced crops had significantly higher phosphorus and acidity.”  These results don’t seem to tell us a lot regarding vitamins and more common essential human minerals, so it’s safe to say that data is inconclusive.  Other major studies have shown that organic produce tests higher in micronutrients and antioxidants than non-organic.

            Sadly, it’s true, foods labeled organic, might not really be organic.  It’s up us consumers to be savvy shoppers, scrutinize labels and inform ourselves on what to look for when shopping so we don’t get scammed.

            The U.S. Department of Agriculture establishes standards and certifications for organic food products.  These standards regulate how foods are grown, handled, and processed.

            Any organic product must be USDA certified, and is usually labeled as such. Only producers who sell less than $5,000 per year are exempt, yet still required to follow guidelines.

            Foods that are completely organic, such as fruits, can carry the USDA Organic.  Products certified 95% or more organic can display the USDA seal.

            Products that contain a minimum of 70% organic ingredients may be labeled “made with organic ingredients” but will not have the USDA seal.  Anything less than 70% cannot be labeled organic at all, but may be labeled as containing organic ingredients.

            In short, organics are better for the environment and human health than alternative products.  Jim Riddle, the University of Minnesota Outreach Coordinator, has an excellent slide presentation on why we should support organic growers and products, steeped with science resources from soil preservation to nutrition the presentation can be found at: http://swroc.cfans.umn.edu/prod/groups/cfans/@pub/@cfans/@swroc/documents/asset/cfans_asset_366337.pdf

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.

But, Is It Really Organic?

Green Means

But Is It Really Organic?

By Shannon Scott

            Farmers, consumers, organic food processors, and certification boards worked hard to establish high standards for healthy foods grown from safe soils.  Now the hard work is in jeopardy due to corporate influence.  We have to question, whether or not the products we are buying are truly organic. 

            PepsiCo, Kraft, General Mills, ConAgra and other multinational food companies have jumped into the organics market challenging sustainable farming methods and degrading organic food quality.  Now consumers must question whether or not products labeled organic really are. 

            The Department of Agriculture proposed regulations for the organic industry in 1997 and established them in 2002.  In between these years, big companies acted fast, buying out small organic brands from Honest Tea to Cascadian Farm.  Heinz and Hain together bought 19 organic brands.

            The $30 billion per year organic food market has demand far exceeding supply.  Sustainable farming methods and organic growers do not produce the abundance needed to fully stock huge commercial food processors.  So what’s a company to do? 

            Cheat.  Big food corporations fudge the truth to consumers to maximize profits. They’re landing seats on quality control and regulatory boards adulterating organic growing, processing, and qualification standards.  If big food companies can legally change, for labeling and advertising purposes, what the word organic means, they can increase the number of alleged organic products on store shelves. 

            This is one way corporations exploit successful, well known product names and maximize profits.  Some organic food industry leaders with integrity, like Eden Foods, are saying that the Certified Organic label has become fraudulent – and they’re right. 

            This dark side of our free market with slack regulations and little consumer oversight exemplifies legal corruption, but this one has dangerous consequences as it concerns human health and welfare, preserving farm lands, and the U.S.’s economic future.

            The Organic Foods Act mandates a control board consisting of four farmers, three conservationists, three consumer representatives, a scientist, a retailer, a certification agent and two representatives of companies that process organic food.  Yet filling seats with corporate voices, rather than independent ones, allays protections established by the law.  Many of the controlling board seats now are questionably filled by corporate representatives donning guises of farmers and consumers.

            The former agriculture secretary, Mike Johanns, appointed a General Mills executive, Katrina Heinze, to serve as a consumer representative on the board in December 2005.  Advocates and independent organic consumers bleated so loudly that Heinze resigned in February 2006, but to no real consequence.  She was reseated later that year when Johanns appointed her to the seat designated by law for an expert in toxicology, ecology or biochemistry.  Heinze has degrees in chemistry.  

            In late May organic food industry giants met to decide which questionable ingredients should be allowed in organic products.  Ingredients like carrageenan, a seaweed-derived thickener with a controversial health record. Or synthetic inositol, which is manufactured using chemical processes.  Ms. Heinze, from General Mills, did not excuse herself from voting to add DHA to the list of acceptable non-organic ingredients since its manufacturer sometimes uses technology licensed from General Mills.  Go figure.

            More than 250 nonorganic substances are on the list of acceptable additives, up from 77 in 2002.  Six board members, voted for adding ammonium nonanoate, an herbicide, to the accepted organic list in December.  Those votes came from General Mills, Campbell’s Soup, Organic Valley, Whole Foods Market and Earthbound Farms.  Fortunately, votes against adding the herbicide prevailed. 

            In 2006, the U.S. Department of Agriculture determined that synthetic additives in organic baby formula violated federal standards and must be banned from products labeled USDA Organic.  Synthetic additives can be found in 90% of organic baby formula.  Synthetic is not organic.  Allowing synthetics into organic foods is green washing, misleading the consumer. 

            When  a product is labeled USDA Organic or Certified Organic consumers should trust that what they’re buying has been grown sustainably without pesticides, herbicides, genetic modification, and been processed with all 100% pure, safe organic ingredients – no fillers.  We want real food, not stuff made in a laboratory in New Jersey.

            Big companies, corrupting the organic food business, bank on consumer ignorance, inattention, and our general trust in labeling.  Buyers beware.  Read labels carefully.

            The following is a list of food companies I generally trust, that have not succumbed to corporate buy outs and the consequent degradation in quality.  I’ve listed a few of their more popular items and where they can be had locally.  This list is by no means exhaustive or exclusive; there are many additional quality brands with integrity.  And of course the best way to get the last laugh on big food companies is to grow your own, and cook from scratch – plant a garden and tool around in the kitchen – healthy activities that feed the soul.

Alvarado St. Bakery – terrific breads and tortillas – Raley’s

Amy’s Kitchen – quality, organic frozen meals and other items – Raley’s and other grocery retailers

Cliff Bar and Co. – energy bars, fruit snacks – available at many grocery retailers

Eden Organic Foods – all organic, whole grains, fours,  BPA-free canned beans, oils, vinegars, and other items – available at many grocery retailers

Lundberg Family Farms - rice and rice products – Raley’s, Costco, and others

Nature’s Path Foods – cereals, breakfast items, breads – Raley’s and other retailers

Newman’s Own Organics – snack foods, dried fruits, pet foods, tea – available at most grocery retailers

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.

HTTP://STRAWBALENV.COM

Green Means

Sustainably Produced in the USA

By Shannon Scott

           

            Several months ago China’s vice president, Xi Jinping, poised to become president next year, visited Iowa farms, met with Iowa’s governor, and toured the Port of L.A.  This diplomacy lent the impression that China will continue importing American food crops keeping American farmers and farm corporations flush with cash -  temporarily.

            All nations want food independence, to not be beholden to foreign lands to feed their people.  China doesn’t want our soy beans.  They want how we farm.  This means selling advanced biochemically engineered crops, farming strategies, and state of the art equipment technologies that took companies like Monsanto and John Deere decades to develop. 

            Chinese officials are negotiating with big AG companies to export U.S. farm methods to China.  This will increase cash windfalls to North American agricultural company giants as they secure deals to take current widely used farming techniques abroad.  Once the Chinese increase per acre yield, and implement better food safety measures to avoid toxins and poisons that have resulted in numerous illnesses and deaths, deals for U.S. and Canadian food crops will be fewer.

            America’s state of the art super yields may seem idyllic to developing nations, but they are not suitable for human, environmental, and economic health.  We know how chemicals like Round Up created super weeds, caused human health problems, broke down soils, and made farms increasingly dependent upon super chemicals in order to grow anything at all.  Instead of being dependent upon crop imports, China will become dependent upon chemical and equipment imports. 

            In the midterm, China may increase production, but with the country’s contaminated soils, limited water, and heavily polluted air, crops will remain unsafe.  Consumer demand for foods grown in the U.S. and Canada will continue – as long as consumers here, who firmly grasp the largest purchasing power in the world, demand sustainably grown, unadulterated food crops. 

            Increasing numbers of middle class and affluent domestic and global consumers prefer foods grown, harvested, and processed with health and sustainability in mind.  If we, U.S. consumers, support sustainable agricultural methods, organic or nearly organically grown foods, we will control and dictate the global market on premium, safe foods while ensuring that foods we eat are top quality. 

            Farmers will plant what yields the highest profits, and currently that’s corn and soy for the commodities market, dictated currently by China.  Our buying power can start to change this.

            Our first prudent step is to stop buying Chilean grapes, South African pears, and other imported produce.  Buying local and regional food crops in season will keep the money here in the U.S. and encourage farmers to plant more of what we want, what Americans actually eat.  Apples are only fresh in fall and winter, come spring and summer check the labels – they’re likely coming from New Zealand or elsewhere.

            U.S. farmland has supplied the world with incomparable amounts of food, sheltered wildlife, supplied scenic vistas and open space, helped air quality (provided that chemicals were minimized), and improved nearby living conditions.  We must get back to the land of past decades in order to save soil and produce food high quality safe foods for our domestic market, and to set a global standard.  The best is always in demand. 

            So what’s imperative to save our farmlands and our economic future? 

·       Rewrite the Farm Bill so that agricultural giants who are currently subsidized to grow commodities for the foreign market no longer get huge amounts of our tax dollars.  The 2008 Farm Bill, due to be rewritten this year, has provided $4.9 billion per year with most of it going to big agricultural operations, like Cargill  and ADM (Archer Daniels Midland) the largest grain producer in the world and whose earnings annually are in the tens of billions. Very little money actually gets to small farms.

·       Instead of farm subsidies that promote industrial farming tailored to emergent nations, let’s increase funding for programs that support local and regional food production.  Let’s subsidize what we want to eat, not what sells abroad. 

·       Agricultural colleges must receive funding to study the impacts of locally produced foods on local and regional economies, human health, and the environment.  It’s important for us to stay firmly abreast and ahead in agricultural science.

·       Avoid buying foreign grown, imported produce.  Why buy apples and pears from South America or grapes from Chile?  Eat seasonally available foods grown in the U.S., Canada, or Mexico: apples, potatoes, and squash in the fall and winter; leaf crops, berries, and beets in spring and summer. 

·       Congress should remove barriers in commodity subsidies that bar farmers from planting fruits and vegetables.  We don’t eat enough of the foods the USDA recommends for optimal health – more fruits, more vegetables, not sugar beets for high sugar, highly processed foods.

·       Congress and the USDA must improve federal crop insurance policies for healthy-food farms – not those that exist to produce high fructose corn syrup, and other non-healthy food additives.

·       Congress should expand small scale lending programs to farmers who sell to local and regional markets, not internationally.

·       We can make farmers’ markets common in every community, supporting standards and guidelines for produce and processed foods sold.   

·       Most importantly, buy in ways that support human, national, and planet health.  Not everything has to, or must, be organic, but if it’s “Product of the USA” this will give us a strong start. 

Shannon Scott is a green home owner, designer, and builder.  She and her husband live in northwestern Nevada in a straw bale home they designed and built without hired help.