To accomplish that last goal, the Take Back the Tap people might need to do a little more outreach (the wait staff at participating restaurants probably needs to be aware of the campaign to educate customers about it), but otherwise it’s a very cool effort. We’ve been hearing for years about the environmental toll bottled water has on the planet. The Take Back the Tap website drives that point home, noting that 86% of our country’s empty plastic water bottles, or 2 million tons of PET plastic annually, end up in the garbage instead of being recycled, while plastic bottle production requires about 17.6 million barrels of oil each year in the U.S. alone. Given what’s going on in the Gulf of Mexico right now, I think I speak for everyone in this country when I say, ew.

If you still need convincing, the website also mentions that 40% of bottled water out there is nothing but reprocessed tap water, plus bottled water can actually be bad for your health — dangerous chemicals can leach into the water, and as many as a quarter of bottled water brands have tested positive for bacteria or chemical contamination.

An impressive roster of restaurants in California, Colorado, D.C., Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin have taken the Take Back the Tap pledge; visit the campaign’s website to find out if there are any near you. The project also is expanding to college campuses across the country. You can even make an individual pledge to stop drinking bottled water and join the Take Back the Tap movement. You already know it’s the right thing to do, so why not put it in writing?

First, allow me to come clean. While I am no longer considered a spring chicken, my dear mother was married and birthing babies at the tender age of 18. Consequently, even though I am all grown up, she still has plenty of years ahead of her and is not surprisingly pretty “hip” to the times. Unlike my friends, who talk about serious generational gaps existing in their family lines, my mother is definitely dialed into the green scene, happily recycling and repurposing her little heart out as well as buying organic household staples and citing interesting eco-stats for her hardcore greenie daughter to ponder.

Despite her perennially well-intentioned ways, she continues to be a natural resource hog of the highest order when she blows through a zillion gallons of water while hand washing her dishes or scrubbing the counters. I have had that odd role-reversing talk that adult children have with their parents in reminding her in infinitely regurgitated ways that the world isn’t the same as it used to be and that we all have to do our part to conserve. It is endlessly confounding to me that she remembers to use vinegar to cleanse her home (rather than the chemicals that she was a long-term fan of), yet she allows the water to run at a thunderous clip through her faucets while momentarily scratching her head, gazing at a bird through the window or simply just contemplating the meaning of life.

It occurred to me that there must be other individuals in my position who have witnessed the very same perplexingly wasteful water habits and are craving a way to break through their parents’ H₂0 mental block. So, here are a few water preservation tips that I plan to dispense the next time I see my mother. I hope that they will benefit fellow eco-minded children of other chronic water-wasters, too!

1) There’s no such thing as ‘free water’!

Whether a household water supply stems from well or municipal reserves, water-wasters need to be gently (or forcefully) reminded that their H₂0 does not come from an endless supply. My mother ritualistically reminds me that her water bill is practically free, but in the end, it always costs us.

2) If you’re not motivated to conserve water for the planet, do it for your wallet!

Parents are known for dispensing words of wisdom such as “every little bit adds up over time,” so this might be a great opportunity to give them a dose of their own medicine. Show them how much water can literally accumulate by placing a large 5-gallon bucket underneath their faucet and allowing it to drip for one solid hour. In addition to using all of that water that would have run down their drain to hydrate their houseplants and/or landscaping, they can correlate that visual reminder with the savings that will add up in their pocket by conserving water.

3) You AREN’T an old dog… and you CAN learn new tricks!

Here’s a commonsense rule of thumb to follow at all times: Whenever you scrub, leave the faucet on the off position. It’s as simple as that. While you are in “cleaning mode,” there is no reason why you need to run the water unless you are rinsing off a dirty sponge, your hands or piles of dishes.

4) Break the habit by making it harder to ‘rinse and repeat’!

Old habits die hard, eh? Then make it more challenging to turn on the faucet by covering it, placing a piece of wide tape around it, sticking a sock over it… where there’s a will, there’s a way. Whatever you can use to make your water-wasting parent less inclined to follow through on their habit will be well worth the H₂0-preserving outcome. (Let’s just hope that they don’t sneak off and use the bathroom faucet instead!)

To properly examine which practice is more efficient and more eco-friendly, a few elements need to be considered.

Resources

What goes into making a dishwasher? Is your dishwasher made from recycled parts? Was it produced in a sustainable manner? Can your dishwasher be recycled when you are finished with it, or when it is broken beyond repair? (A 1-800-RECYCLING.com search for large household appliances might help you find a place to recycle an old dishwasher.)

Hand washing requires hands, water, soap and a sink. Simple.

Water

The most efficient way to hand wash dishes is by filling your sink with soapy warm water, soaking the dishes and either using a second sink (or bucket/large bowl) with cold water to rinse the dishes. You can use a drying rack, wipe dishes dry or use your dishwasher as a drying rack.

How old is your dishwasher? As a general rule, the older the model, the more water it uses.

The EPA’s water trivia facts (updated in 2007) claims that hand washers use 9 to 20 gallons of water while the average dishwasher uses 9 to 12 gallons of water. Judging by the fact that Energy Star dishwashers must use 5.8 gallons of water or less per cycle to receive certification, these numbers seem fairly accurate. But, since hand washers can have such different ways of washing, it is hard to estimate this figure.

Energy

While hand washing dishes requires energy if you are using hot water, running a dishwasher uses energy to operate and to heat water. To use less energy to heat water, lower your water heater’s temperature a few degrees.

According to a chart from the U.S. Department of Energy, average dishwashers use about 650 kWh (kilowatt hours) per year. Most energy companies charge per kWh.

I calculated my dishwasher’s energy usage to see how it stacked up against the average. Here is the math: P is power, C is current, V is voltage, W is watts, T is time and E is energy.

My dishwasher’s voltage (V): 120 volts

My dishwasher’s current (C): 6.2 amps

My dishwasher’s running time (T): 45 minutes

P = C x V.

P = 744 W, converted to kW: 744/1,000 = 0.744 kW

Energy = power x time

T = 45 min., converted to hours: 45/60 = 0.75 h

E = 0.744 x 0.75 = 0.558 kWh

My dishwasher uses about 0.558 kWh during each cycle. If I run my dishwasher every other day (about 182 times a year), that’s about 102 kWh per year.

How much does yours use? (Come on, it’s not that hard!)

Each case is different

Those that are hand washing while keeping the water running are clearly using more water than a dishwasher would use. If you wash dishes in a sink full of soapy water, you could be using less water than your dishwasher. Many factors must be taken into consideration to compare the environmental impacts of the two options, including how often you’re washing dishes by hand, whether you pre-rinse dishes before loading them into the dishwasher, whether you’re running a full load, whether your dishwasher itself is sustainable (or more so than most) and whether you are using the heated dry option on your dishwasher.

If you wash dishes by hand twice a day but only run your dishwasher once every three days, it might be more efficient for you to use your dishwasher, unless of course you scrub and rinse each dish thoroughly before loading. It is best to examine your personal practices; each household has different needs, different equipment and different values. The hand washing versus dishwashing feud cannot be answered in terms of black and white.

(Semi-)conclusion

Although comparing hand washing and dishwashing is difficult, I am sure we can agree on several things to stay more efficient and more eco-friendly. If you do use the dishwasher, make sure you always run a full load, skip the heated dry option and air dry dishes, refrain from needless pre-rinsing and try to upgrade to a more efficient model (if you have not already). Just try and use less. Try using fewer items in general, such as reusing your cups throughout the day or wiping breadcrumbs off the plate that only carried a sandwich and popping it back in the cabinet.

Our idea is simple: to reuse old T-shirts and transform them into story-telling artifacts that become more valuable as they get older — Re-Shirts. Re-Shirts represent a unique worldwide economic experiment. An overwhelming 1.2 million brand new T-shirts are sold every day in the U.S. alone. Each cotton T-shirt consumes up to 10,000 liters of water during production. This is not helping the worldwide water crisis, not to mention the landfills T-shirts are disposed of within months of being bought off the rack.

A Re-Shirt is a previously owned T-shirt with an engaging story that will get to live forever at Re-Shirt.net. Someone donates their shirt and tells us its story, we give it its very own orange Re-Shirt Label, a serial number and an online home with its picture and story, and begin its new registered life as a Re-Shirt. Every future owner can now document the experiences they have with their Re-Shirt online and continue the story of that Re-Shirt. The older the Re-Shirt gets, the more valuable it becomes, as the stories that get told by the people who own it add to its fascinating history.

Re-Shirts provide a way to cut down on the number of new T-shirts needed by reusing shirts that may otherwise end up in a landfill.

Because Re-Shirts have a story and a life of their own, people want to hang on to them. The longer they circulate, the more interesting their history becomes. We want to be a part of the solution for the global water crisis by raising the funds to solve it, so we will donate a part of the proceeds to address the water crisis.

To donate a T-shirt, buy a Re-Shirt or simply read about the amazing stories behind our Re-Shirts, learn about Re-Shirt at re-shirt.net. Maritza Schäfer is the CEO of Re-Shirt.

One inch of rain on a 1,000-square-foot roof will yield around 600 gallons of water. According to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the state receives 54 inches of rainfall annually. Most of this rainwater is not harnessed, and it is left to fall off roofs and wash dirt and chemicals like pesticides and fertilizers into sewers, local ponds, rivers and waterways.

In South Florida, the University of Florida’s extension campus is offering rain barrel workshops to aid residents in conserving water and making rain barrel systems in their own back yards. The workshops cost $45 to attend, and the price includes not only the class, but also a rain barrel and a hose bibb. If you don’t want the supplies, you can pay $10 just for the class. There is usually a workshop held once a month at the Coral Gables Farmers Market.

If you can’t afford to attend a class on rain barrels or just don’t have the time, there are other ways to learn to conserve water safely. Bloggers Carol Buie-Jackson and Jay Jackson of North Carolina own the blog Smell Like Dirt, which posts many sustainable gardening, composting and water reuse tips for green-thumbed environmentalists. Carol’s rain barrel video shows gardeners how to convert their rain gutters into water-saving tools.

According to Miami-Dade’s website, it is best to water your outdoor plants in the early morning, between 5 and 8 a.m. If you water your plants when it’s hot and sunny out, a lot of the water you use will evaporate before plants can take it in. The county’s website also has good tips on environmentally friendly landscaping, including reducing storm water runoff, protecting natural waterfronts and water efficiency.

You don’t have to live in Florida to enjoy rain barrel classes and the benefits of collecting your own water. Many other cities offer rain barrel classes. Chicago’s Department of Environment website gives detailed instructions on building rain barrels for environmentally conscious gardening. Chicago Botanic Garden held a rain barrel painting competition in September 2009 for children ages 8 to 18. Lincoln, NE, residents can take a rain barrel class at Southeast Community College for $49 and all supplies are provided. In Santa Fe, NM, if you purchase a rain barrel, you can get a rebate from the government. In Dallas, residents can attend a rain barrel class for $40, which includes the rain barrel supplies.

You know the routine. Every morning the majority of us wake up, stretch, get out of bed, grab whatever we consider “breakfast” to eat, and then… the almighty shower. After this warm, secluded sanctuary invigorates us, we step out, get dressed and rush off to work. Day in and day out, this is the routine for most Americans.

But, what if I told you that part of your morning routine is to be altered? What if I told you that part of this waking, cleansing, getting-ready-so-you-can-face-the-day ritual might be, in fact, illegal? Well that could be the case. Sorry, America.

Other than taking away your habitual cup of coffee, which enables you to stay awake on the irrefutably long drive to the office (no matter how long or short it really is), there is nothing you could change that would enrage most Americans more than limiting their showering abilities. What’s more enjoyable than being blasted with warm water in a completely isolated setting to prepare for the day ahead? For exactly this reason, companies like Watermark Designs, a manufacturer of high-powered, “luxury” showerheads, build showerheads that “will blast bathers with 8 gallons per minute through 55 jets” according to a Seattle Times article. “Nowadays, spa-style showers are the rage in upscale bathrooms,” the article continues. In our contemporary times, it seems that creating an in-home spa might be as integral to the American dream as the white picket fence. How many double-showerhead, body-jet-riddled water chambers have you seen or heard about with envy? Unfortunately, such appliances in our homes are putting out more water than is legally allowed. According to Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), many of the luxurious and powerful showerheads are actually illegal, since various state and federal regulations only allow as much as 2.5 gallons of water used per minute.

Upscale bathrooms aren’t the only locations that might be overdue on their water consumption. Even those of us who aren’t blessed with manmade waterfalls in our homes are still reluctant to leave the blissful shower, where hot water and time seem endless, and our job and the day feel too near at hand. Even with a showerhead that allows the highest legal output of water, a 10-minute shower results in 25 gallons used. Not too shabby, since the same timeframe using the Watermark design results in 80 gallons down the drain. But, this only looks good when compared to the water-hogging, top-of-the-line products. A 10-minute shower tends to be the average length for most Americans according to Ezone @rticles, an online publication. This indicates that 25 gallons per shower should be the maximum water used every morning while adhering to standards and legal limits.

However, this might be easier said than done. A recent Wall Street Journal article tells us that even the greenest of environmentally conscious consumers is unwilling to compromise on their morning routine. They assert that, “of all the water wasters in the house, the shower is among the hardest to tame, because people go to extraordinary lengths to protect it.” New technologies are even being considered that mix air pressure with water output in order to make bathers feel the desired pressure of a high-powered shower while utilizing less water.

The morning is the hardest time for most people and the monotony of waking up and commuting to work is made bearable by the simple joys of caffeine and showers. So, if the benefit to the environment isn’t enough to shorten the showering process or convince you to buy a more efficient faucet, remember the energy savings that come along with such conservation. And, maybe have another cup of coffee.

For more information on water conservation, click here.

Poorer parts of the country, and the world, are facing serious shortages that frivolous habits such as excessive showers and needlessly running faucets aren’t helping, according to some shocking statistics. The news is nothing new.

In 2003, BBC News online correspondent Alex Kirby researched what she called a “global water crisis.” BBC was so adamant about getting the message across as an urgent and dire one that the news outlet dared to make a statement with a loaded headline: “If you want to induce mental meltdown, the statistics of the worsening global water crisis are a surefire winner.”

According to the story, the problems surrounding water include shortages, illnesses and overuse by the richest countries.

Two-fifths of the world’s people deal with water shortages, half of all hospital cases are for waterborne diseases and people in rich countries use 10 times more water than countries with weaker economies. Where is most of the water going? Seventy percent is going to agriculture, 22% to industry and 8% to domestic use, such as showering and toilet flushing.

When looking at the numbers, one might zero in on agriculture.

But, cutting back on agricultural watering would be more detrimental than good, according to a comment in response to Kirby’s article. Using an argument that less water would mean less production, Neal Lang of Boca Raton, FL, argued that cutting back agriculture would mean a food shortage.

“Ask yourself, if the U.S. cut back on its agricultural production, how many more millions of Africans would starve to death this year,” Lang wrote. “The only way to consistently provide potable water to rural communities in the developing countries is through private sector initiatives.”

Though the domestic daily use of water accounts for 8% of all water usage, the amount is still substantial enough that cutbacks by people can make a big difference, according to a conservation campaign, Water — Use it Wisely. Providing tips, facts and resources, the site, www.wateruseitwisely.com, includes a long list of suggestions for direct water-saving strategies in an entry titled “100(+) Ways to Conserve.”

From waiting to do laundry and washing dishes until using a full load, up to 1,000 gallons per month are saved per household. Here are a few more eye-poppers directly from the list:

• Number 23: Shorten your shower by a minute or two and you’ll save up to 150 gallons per month.
• Number 75: Drop your tissue in the trash instead of flushing it and save water every time.
• Number 100: Turn off the water while you shave and save up to 300 gallons a month.

Despite differing views, there seems to be one shared desire: abundance of resources. To keep that, conservation must be a key component in society’s habits. Theodore Roosevelt spoke out about the importance of conservation back in 1907.

“The conservation of natural resources is the fundamental problem, Roosevelt said. “Unless we solve that problem, it will avail us little to solve all others.”

The idea of conservation, including that of water, is nothing new. Even though Roosevelt mentioned it 102 years ago, it still rings true that what needs to be done in lieu of conservation efforts is everything; the earth’s sustainability may just depend on it.

What it gave her was amusement, but what it gives me now is a questioning of my memory; I am curious to know what on earth got me so fired up.

So, nearly 18 years later, I simply typed, “Save the Whales” into Google. The pages of answers stunned me almost as much as this technology would have stunned my parents back in 1991.

The site that stood out came up first, straight from the source: www.savethewhales.org, and next to it was “10 Ways You Can Save Marine Life Every Day.” The very first prompt made my memory of my first grade teacher much clearer. I remember that she had told us that we were now a group dedicated to saving the whales, and that meant that we needed to know that we were polluting in our own front yards. Filtered through a 6-year-old’s brain, the message was most likely word for word what the Save the Whales site stated:

“Did you know? Storm water pollution (urban runoff) is the leading cause of water pollution nationwide? Pollutants such as motor oil, antifreeze, detergents, litter, paints, pesticides, pet waste and copper (from brake pads) are flushed off the streets and into storm drains, which lead straight to rivers, creeks and oceans.”

The second item on the list? Call a group or classroom into action. And so, the 6-year-olds took it upon themselves to save the whales because Mrs. Teacher said that it was a good idea. And, she was right. But, was she effective? If my remembering to look it up 18 years later is any indication, her impact falls in very well with our current environmentally conscious efforts; the effectiveness is measured over a long period of time. Like drops in a bucket, one person after another chooses a cause, tells their peers, friends or, in my case, students, and the message spreads. That sounds like a worthy cause to me.

As for actually saving any whales? Well, time will tell, but I definitely saved motor oil from being carelessly washed down the drain that day in 1991. It seems a very fitting moment for a 6-year-old who went on to write for an environmentally focused website. Hey, it was a start.

Could the next war be powered by potatoes? The U.S. military is exploring bio-batteries and fuel cells as part of its overall commitment to transformational energy, particularly portable power. To help kick-start the effort, the Department of Defense is soliciting bids for cutting edge bio-battery and fuel cell development through its Small Business Innovation Research grant program. That could mean just about anything for a fuel source, from sugar to potatoes, vodka or beer. Stay tuned for more: the deadline for submitting SBIR proposals is June 17.

U.S. Military Transforming Its Energy Strategy

From solar installations at army bases to high efficiency LED lighting systems for the Navy, the U.S. military has been hopscotching over the civilian world when it comes to investing in sustainability. It is fully committed to a long term transformational energy strategy. Alternative energy is just one piece of the puzzle. Another piece is the development of high-efficiency, lightweight portable power systems that will replace conventional batteries.

The U.S. Military Needs New Batteries

As the Defense Reduction Threat Agency describes it, the logistical footprint of portable power is in lockstep with the U.S. military’s carbon bootprint. Conventional batteries are unsustainable from both points of view. They’re an operational dead end for the dismounted soldier of the future, who is increasingly reliant on power-hungry communications and surveillance equipment in addition to armor and weaponry. Transporting heavy batteries to and around the field is just the beginning of the problem for DRTA, which states that the “acquisition, storage, distribution, and disposal of over a hundred different battery types poses an enormous logistical challenge.”

Bio-Based Batteries and Fuel Cells

Now, about those potatoes. As any grade school scientist can tell you, an ordinary potato can power a small electronic device. In fact, Sony has been developing a bio-based fuel cell that runs on sugar, and vodka bio-batteries run on similar principles. The big picture emerges from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The OSD has included Biological-Based Energy Storage and Generation Technologies in its list of topics for proposals under this year’s Small Business Innovation and Research grant program. The agency cites transforming the way we generate, distribute, and store power as the key to a “revolutionary” advantage in tomorrow’s wars. To achieve that, we need batteries and fuel cells that are “more efficient, compact, safe, and cost effective.”

The U.S. military envisions an energy future for itself that is safer and more sustainable. So, how about the rest of us? It will be interesting to see what contributions our fossil fuel industries can make to this national defense priority, especially concerning our safety. I suppose hiring a PR firm is a good first step.

By NATHANIAL GRONEWOLD and GREENWIRE

There’s growing concern that the United States’ conversion last weekend from analog to digital television broadcasting will exacerbate a national e-waste problem and fuel the smuggling of cathode ray tubes to the developing world.

The digital transition, coupled with the popularity of newer flat-screen TVs, could see millions of sets heading to landfills or loosely regulated recycling facilities over the next few years, experts say. The reason, they say, is the growth of high-definition channels that will remain off-limits to old TVs, even those with digital converter boxes.

E-waste watchdogs say electronics recyclers are already reporting a big influx of older televisions, especially in states where governments have instituted comprehensive recycling rules. Old TV sets hold large quantities of cadmium, lead and chemicals used to make plastics and other materials flame resistant.

“Both Washington and Oregon implemented their statewide e-waste programs in January, and they are both seeing more than half their volume in TVs,” said Barbara Kyle, national coordinator at the Electronics TakeBack Coalition. Washington state is reportedly collecting more than 3 million pounds of old televisions a month, she said.

U.S. EPA estimates that there were almost 100 million old televisions in storage across the United States at the end of 2007. Though the nation is not likely to see a massive rush of old TVs inundating landfills or recyclers immediately, the volume of waste is expected to increase substantially over the next few years as consumers turn to newer, HD-ready sets and demand for older models declines.

“It’s people’s nature to hang onto working electronics, thinking they can find someone to give them to,” said Kyle. “Some of those TVs in storage may have been donated by now, but the millions that are still there will become trash soon as people realize that no one is going to want their old analog TV, even if it’s working.”

Though electronics recyclers are noticing a jump in TVs landing in their yards, officials at Goodwill Industries say they have so far seen no similar boost in donations of old televisions, a sign that consumers may increasingly be seeing their old boxy sets as trash. Lauren Lawson, a media relations manager at Goodwill, said its stores have not been reporting larger numbers of television donations.

“We were actually one of the nonprofit partners for the DTV coalition,” playing a role instead in helping get the message of the coming of digital TV to poorer households, Lawson said.

Seattle-based Basel Action Network (BAN), an organization pushing for the United States to ratify the Basel Convention on international hazardous waste shipment, estimates that at least one in four households will get rid of an old TV this year following the digital transition. That could come out to some 28 million cathode ray tubes — each containing roughly 5 pounds of lead on average, depending on the screen size — ending up in the waste stream.

Much of this waste will be recycled domestically. But Sarah Westervelt, a BAN official, said some 80 percent will actually be shipped abroad for processing in China and Africa, in violation of provisions of the Basel treaty that ban the shipment of toxic waste from the rich countries to poor ones.

“Exports are not quantified because the U.S. has not ratified the Basel Convention, and therefore we are not controlling or monitoring our exports,” Westervelt said.

BAN has traced a lot of the electronic waste from the United States — including old desktop computers, laptops, printers, televisions and more — to a rough processing facility in Guiyu, China, and has produced documentaries on the unfortunate community there. Activists say residents there suffer some of the highest dioxin and lead poisoning in the world as they work through the e-waste in an uncontrolled and highly unsafe manner.

City-organized recycling events provide some of the greatest volumes of e-waste exports, BAN says, as municipal governments facing budget constraints cannot pay for processing and seek out vendors willing to collect the material for free.

“The only folks who are able to do this for free, from everything that we have learned over eight years of doing this work, are people who are exporting it,” said Westervelt. “Otherwise, you end up with mercury and leaded glass and materials that you have to pay downstream vendors to manage responsibly.”

Complacent EPA?

Kyle and others complain that EPA has so far remained complacent about the possibility that the digital transition will see a flood of toxic televisions to landfills or unsafe processing zones in the Third World.

Last week, EPA issued a statement urging consumers who toss out their sets in favor of newer models to “recycle their unwanted TVs, which recovers valuable materials from the circuit boards, metal wiring, leaded glass and plastics.” The agency encouraged people to contact local hazardous waste authorities to find out how best to dispose of the old sets. But public information released by EPA ahead of the digital transition makes no mention of concerns over e-waste exports to the developing world.

EPA has stepped up controls on illegal e-waste exports after a 2008 report by the Government Accountability Office chided the agency for lax enforcement. Earlier this month, EPA filed a complaint against EarthEcycle for its alleged unauthorized export of hazardous cathode ray tubes.

EarthEcycle had collected the materials from recycling events held in the Pittsburgh area for the Humane Society and Make-a-Wish Foundation and exported the e-waste to Vietnam. The nonprofits apparently knew that much of the waste would be shipped abroad. EarthEcycle President Jeff Nixon recently told a local television station that his company had done nothing wrong, insisting that all the exported waste was headed for proper recycling facilities and should not end up in dumps.