Editorial

The Obama administration has proposed a FY 2012 budget of $8.973 billion for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—a 13 percent decrease—as part of its effort to cut federal spending.

“As millions of families are cutting back and spending less, they expect the same good fiscal sense out of their government. That is why this budget reflects the tough choices needed for our nation’s short- and long-term fiscal health—and allows EPA to maintain its fundamental mission of protecting human health and the environment,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson.

Some key 2012 budget initiatives include:
• $350 million for projects strategically chosen to target the most significant threats to people’s health in the Great Lakes ecosystem.

• $2.5 billion—a decrease of $947 million—combined for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs). EPA will continue to work with states and communities to enhance their capacity to provide clean water and safe drinking water to Americans. Federal dollars provided through SRFs will help spur efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water infrastructure.

• $1.2 billion for the Superfund program to support cleanup at hazardous waste sites. While EPA will be exploring efficiencies in the program, the $70 million reduction to Superfund programs will slow the pace of new projects and completion of projects.

• A $27.5 million increase in enforcement and compliance, to be used for the latest e-reporting and monitoring tools. EPA will increase oversight and inspections at high risk chemical and oil facilities in order to protect Americans’ health.

• $16.1 million more to reduce chemical risks, increase the pace of chemical hazard assessments and provide the public with greater access to chemical information so they can make better informed decisions about their health.

• $1.2 billion for state and tribal grants—an overall increase of $84.9 million. This funding will help communities take steps to meet the pollution standards EPA has developed under the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.

• An additional $46 million for regulatory efforts to reduce greenhouse gas pollution and implement GHG reporting requirements under the Clean Air Act.

• $67.4 million to support EPA’s efforts to clean up America’s great water bodies, specifically the Chesapeake Bay. This water body serves as an economic engine for an entire region of the country, and millions of Americans rely on it for access to clean, safe water.

• $584 million to support research and innovation into new and emerging environmental science. This includes a $24.7 million increase to Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants to ensure that EPA is using the best science to protect our air, water and land.

For more information on EPA’s proposed FY2012 budget, visit:

http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/annualplan/fy2012.html

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates as much as 30 percent of the energy used in a typical office is wasted. Imagine if you could put 30 percent of your energy bill in your bottom line instead of the utility’s pocket! If you pay $2500 a month for power now, you would save $750 per month if you could cut out the waste.

One of the first energy draining culprits to consider is your office hardware. Your PCs and peripherals, printers, and copiers need only be turned on during office hours. In addition, even when these units are off, they still can be drawing energy. This is called the “vampire effect,” because your equipment sucks energy and savings. Plug your equipment into Eco-surges to truly turn them off and kill the vampire effect.

As with homes, ensure that your office space is properly insulated. Consider turning down the thermostat a few more degrees in winter–everyone looks good in a sweater, after all–and up a degree or two in summer. There are more intricate ways to save. Energy audits are a quick and long-lasting means of obtaining verifiable savings. Try contacting your local utility for an audit.

If you rent, talk to your landlord about saving energy. It’s in his best interest to keep costs to a minimum and retain you as a tenant.

Do you provide bottled water for your employees? Time to get back to the tap. Invest in a 4-stage or higher reverse osmosis system. Bottled water is expensive, and there is no proof that it is any safer than tap. Transporting it via dirty diesel and unsterilized plastic is not a cost-effective nor environmentally friendly solution. Within a few months, the new water filtration system will pay for itself.

Don’t overlook the energy saving potential in your company fleet or vehicles. With the average price of gasoline now over $3.00 per gallon and heading ever higher, it’s time to outwit and outmaneuver that oligarchy called OPEC. Experiment by using a trial version of fleet software to help manage, maintain, and cut your fuel costs. We’ve all heard of carpooling, but what about delivery- pooling? How many times have you sent just a single box/pallet or two on a delivery?  Consider halving your delivery schedule and pass the costs savings on to your customers. At a time when everyone else is being surcharged for fuel, your customers can receive rebates.

For 2011, let’s implement conservation solutions and benefit from the savings.

For far too long, skiers worldwide have generally accepted the fact that construction of a ski resort can have a significant impact on the environment.

Consider what happens when a ski resort is built: Trees are cleared to make way for the ski slopes, thus disrupting wildlife habits and vegetation and altering natural watersheds. Cars driving to the resort area create pollution, as does equipment used to make snow, maintain the slopes or mow grass during summer months, not to mention heating buildings during cold winters. In some cases, factories that make clothing and equipment for skiing could be located nearby, and they create even more pollution.

It comes as no surprise then that ski resorts are quickly becoming examples of how an industry can build green initiatives into its operations and make a significant difference in reducing its carbon footprint.

So much so, that a group called the Ski Area Citizens’ Coalition has been formed to rate and survey ski resorts based on criteria from local conservation groups and the U.S. Forest Service.

The emphasis for ski resorts has been to have general conservation and environment-friendly policies and procedures in place, specifically for habitat protection, watershed protection and addressing climate change.

The coalition looks at all aspects of a ski resort operation, from recycling to future plans – and sometimes those future plans don’t sit well. It is generally believed that smaller ski resorts grade better than those that are constantly expanding, because that expansion is sure to affect the environment.

Some ski resorts have been on board with energy savings for many years. Aspen Ski Country in Colorado has one of the largest solar-power systems in the industry, which has been in place since 1997. It also fuels its trail-grooming machines with biodiesel fuel.

Park City Mountain Resort in Utah has reported that it uses renewable energy to power chair lifts and has purchased more efficient snow-making equipment, while also cutting back on its snowmobile fleet.

In a gesture that proves no conservation policy is too small to make a difference, the resort also has been using recycled paper for its trail maps and began using regular dishes rather than disposable ones in all of its lodges.

Other examples for resorts come in the form of using biofuel from recycled cooking oil to power shuttles, and using non-petroleum-based cleaners for all housekeeping.

As more ski resorts take hold of these conservation methods, skiers across the world will be able to say they participate in a sport trying to make an environmental difference.

If the conservation and “green” movement is going to take hold as a routine aspect of American life, it stands to reason that our nation’s universities and college campuses are going to be the breeding ground for such knowledge.

The research and innovation taking place in labs and classrooms at institutions of higher learning is a key – but many universities are also becoming visible examples of what can be done by establishing their own green policies and campus sustainability projects.

This can be seen in obvious ways, whether by the construction of a green roof on a campus building, or the placement of recycled materials to create walkway tiles, or the strategic planting of trees and shrubs for landscaping that reduces water runoff. These types of small projects become visible examples as a classroom “lab” that stress the importance of environmental issues for students.

But a Campus Sustainability Project (CSP) takes everything a step further and is created to develop an online database of environmental management data, policies, and programs for an entire campus. It is a way to conduct research on sustainability in higher education and provide educators and students with resources to help achieve campus sustainability.

One such example is taking place at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, where the university has completed many retrofitting projects throughout its buildings. One campus building provides a perfect example, as it was constructed in the late 1960’s as a guesthouse for prestigious visitors. It currently houses campus offices. Building construction techniques from 50 years ago, coupled with a different use from the building’s original intent, ultimately results in a building design that wastes energy. A project to decrease electric costs at this building cut power usage in half.

A major energy consumer in buildings is the heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems, which result in older appliances needing to be retrofitted.

Through projects such as these, it has been learned that a key component to cope with inefficient equipment is to incorporate a geothermal heat pump in the building. The heat pump will deliver heated or cooled water year round for a fraction of the actual cost of heating and cooling. Zone dampers can also be implemented in a building to effectively divide it into different climate zones while reducing heating and cooling overlapping.

Lighting of a building can also be assessed, usually revealing that some light fixtures are still incandescent. Those incandescent light bulbs can be replaced with compact fluorescent lamps. This replacement not only is easy and inexpensive, but also pays for itself fairly quickly.

In older buildings on our nation’s campuses, it will also become common to retrofit archaic appliances, improve attic insulation and seal any leaks in ducts.

The end result will be our nation’s campuses being the prime example of conservation, while emphasizing to young minds what “going green” really means.

Taking those white shirts or suits, or delicate dresses, to the dry cleaners has been a standard routine of daily life for decades. How would we get that wine spill off of our sport coat without the neighborhood dry cleaners business?

But dry cleaners are also entering the era of heightened awareness of everything “green” and, as such, are getting closer scrutiny regarding claims of “green” or “organic” dry cleaning.

There is no regulation of the dry cleaning business in regards to what qualifies them as more “green” than others, or if the term “organic” is rightfully justified.

Still, alternatives to the use of perc (perchlorol-ethylene) as a major cleaning agent are being considered. Good Housekeeping magazine recently reported that about 85 percent of dry cleaners use perc, which, while safe for the customer wearing the clothes, is strictly regulated because if it is not handled properly it can become a toxic pollutant and dangerous to those who work at a dry cleaners business.

A federal law has called for the phasing out of perc being used at dry cleaners located in residential buildings by the year 2020. With this sort of reasoning becoming more widespread, it is likely we’ll see cleaning businesses moving toward safer alternatives.

Of those, a liquid CO2 cleaning process already deemed safe by the EPA, may come into more use. Because it reuses most of its CO2, it is not considered as a dangerous greenhouse gas contributor.

A new cleanser called Green Earth, which is a liquid silicone, makes claims to degrade to sand, CO2 and water, but the EPA has to give this product further study.

Wet cleaning is always a possible alternative, but it does have those age-old problems of discoloring or shrinking some fabrics. It is likely that those in the cleaning business will come up with ways for wet cleaning to avoid some of those pitfalls.

It also is likely that dry cleaners will begin to use hydrocarbon solvents because they can easily be used in current perc machines. Because they are petroleum-based, hydrocarbon solvents must also be handled with extreme care, but the EPA views them as products that are engineered to biodegrade much faster than perc.

Consumers will certainly continue to measure the progress of dry cleaners “going green” simply on the basis of how well the alternative processes clean their clothes.

In reviews by magazines and consumer watchdogs, Green Earth has been getting praise as a good cleaner for the usual culprits – coffee, lipstick and oil stains. CO2 cleaning is generally considered the least likely to shrink your clothes, while the wet cleaners continue to struggle with that ornery lipstick, oil and ink.

Perc is generally considered the best for oil and lipstick stains, but not always reliable on ink and wine, while the perc alternative hydrocarbon has been considered the best for stains on wool products. But with cotton clothing, the hydrocarbon cleaner doesn’t fare as well.

Recyclers and developers across the country are teaming up in an effort to recycle an item that has been piling up in our landfills for decades. Tons of asphalt shingles, a petroleum-based product, have been going into landfills during new home construction or after demolition or re-roofing of older homes and businesses.

A movement to keep roof shingles out of the waste stream has been catching on, and its effectiveness can be illustrated by a Grand Rapids, Mich., company, Crutchall Resource Recycling, which ground up 30,000 tons of shingles in only three months last summer.

In areas of the country in which building homes was robust before the economic downturn, it is estimated that 70,000 to 100,000 tons of shingles could end up in a single county’s landfills in just one year.

The Northeast Recycling Council estimates that approximately two-thirds of the roofing shingles in the United States are made of asphalt. With discarded asphalt shingles taking up landfill space and polluting the environment by releasing carcinogenic hydrocarbons into the ground, the recycling companies turned to a logical use for ground up shingles – repairing or paving roads as part of the asphalt hot mix.

Developers with a reputation for smooth roads in their subdivisions are starting to use recycled shingles to create “green” streets. A subdivision called Tall Oaks in Elgin, Ill., recently had eight miles of roads constructed with recycled shingles through developer Wyndham Deerpoint Homes.

In addition to using recycled shingles, the “green” roads also are designed to last longer while reducing the amount of asphalt, sand and oil normally needed for paving.

Consumers can help with this cause by making sure their roofing company has a recycling program, or letting it be known that they would like to donate used shingles to environmentally-conscious builders who are able to roof certain homes with used shingles.

Heritage Environmental Services has shingle recycling drop-off locations in seven cities, pushing the practice as a much less expensive alternative than paying the fees to dump them in landfills.

Because shingles are made up of concrete and bitumen — the black, oily material, or tar, that is a naturally-occurring byproduct of decomposed organic materials — environmentalists aren’t able to pinpoint exactly how long it would take for a shingle to decompose in a landfill.

The most common answer, it appears, is “forever.”

Who hasn’t endured the frustration that Clark Griswold experienced when his holiday lights display in “National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation” wouldn’t turn on?

It may not be that dramatic for most of us, and more likely, it’s only the occasional string of Christmas lights that don’t work either before, during or after the holiday display season.

And what has happened to that string of Christmas lights for the past several decades? Into the garbage and eventually into our landfills.

In the past two years, the movement to provide recycling for used Christmas lights has picked up a lot of momentum. It appears it will become even more common in years to come, especially as consumers discard old incandescent lights for energy-saving LED strings.

Tons of worn-out lights have cluttered landfills, and environmentalists point out that the plastic wiring common with holiday lights could take thousands of years to decompose. Animal lovers say a string of lights in a landfill can choke or entangle a small animal as easily as the plastic rings used on six-packs of soda.

As we now enter the age of recycling the lights that at one time made the holidays bright in large or small displays at our homes, businesses or on our community streets and parks, there is finally an alternative to just tossing them out.

Consider that a company such as Elgin Recycling Inc., servicing about 24 communities in northern Illinois with a Christmas lights recycling program, collected 9,949 pounds of used lights in its first year with only 12 communities involved, it is not hard to imagine what a nationwide effort could accomplish.

Many recycling firms or scrap collecting companies across the country are making recycling bins available at various community locations for used Christmas lights. Home Depot stores collect lights for a couple of weeks during the holiday seasons, and various community organizations or colleges are getting involved in providing the service.

What happens to your old lights once you drop them in a recycling container for pickup?

Generally, the lights will be processed and any material that cannot be recycled (i.e. loose bulbs) is discarded. When hundreds of light sets have been collected, a recycling company will take them to a recycling facility for shredding. Afterward, the pieces are processed and sorted into the various components that make up the lights (pvc, glass, copper).

In the recycling market, the chances of finding a buyer and future uses for the recycle materials are enhanced when something is being recycled in volume.

The sheer volume of holiday lights throughout the world provides hope that our landfills will be far less cluttered and a use for the plastics and glass will be more practical because of the quantities available.

You might think your employees do their best because they need the paycheck. They probably DO need the paycheck, but an awful lot of slackers collect a paycheck and don’t care a lick about the work they do to earn it. Those aren’t the kind of employees you want. You want employees who care about your mission, and who come to work because they believe it’s a great place to work. How do you get your employees to focus on more than greenbacks? By focusing your business on the other kind of green – environmentalism.

A recent survey of over 4,000 people by the recruitment job site MonsterTRAK found that 80 percent of young professionals are interested in securing a job that has a positive impact on the environment. And 90 percent of the respondents said they would rather work for an environmentally friendly employer.

Consider how those statistics affect your recruitment. If 90 percent of your prospective employees would rather work for a green company, being green is going to make filling your openings much easier. If you’re competing with the other reprographics shop in town for the latest computer school graduate – or the experienced sign maker who just moved to town – you want every advantage you can have. Being green is a big one.

Why do your employees care? Because they want to feel that their work – even if it has nothing directly to do with the environment – is helping in some small way. If your firm is green, your employees will be proud to be part of the organization.

“Your company may produce widgets, but if you are socially responsible and contribute to the community, and you’re environmentally responsible and among the leaders in your industry at helping or protecting the environment, then people identify with that. It makes them want to stay a part of the company,” wrote Frank Alix, CEO of Powerspan Corp., in an essay titled Better Business Practices for a Better Environment.

A 2007 survey by Kenexa Research Institute backed up this idea. The survey looked at companies with strong “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) initiatives, which include environmental aspects, and found that employees were happier and stayed longer at companies with those programs.

“An organization’s CSR efforts also positively affect an employee’s personal outlook of the future, satisfaction with their job and confidence in the company’s future,” Kenexa reports.“Employees who rate their organization as having a strong CSR culture outscored those who view their company’s CSR activities as weak on each of these key indicators. Furthermore, employees who work in a strong CSR culture are more favorable toward their colleagues’ willingness to do the very best for the organization, and have more favorable views of their company’s ability to motivate people to work hard and put in extra effort.”

Geothermal Energy Association Executive Director Karl Gawell recently announced the findings of new industry reports that show the geothermal industry will soon add thousands of jobs as dozens of new clean geothermal power plants come online or enter advanced stages of development.

The GEA report—“Green Jobs through Geothermal Energy”—found that the federal stimulus, tax incentives and strong state renewable standards continue to fuel the growth in geothermal power and job creation. The full benefits of the stimulus to the geothermal industry have yet to be realized. About 95 percent of the projects receiving ARRA funding are either less than 50 percent complete or have yet to break ground.

“Recovery Act funding is going to make a huge difference over the next year to push projects to completion and create more jobs. The majority of the ARRA investment will really start to pay dividends for the economy in 2011,” said Gawell.

GEA anticipates that 2011 will be a high-point of geothermal activity in the U.S. under the stimulus legislation. Approximately 500 to 700 Megawatts of power projects will enter their final construction phase in 2011, adding 3,000 construction jobs, primarily in Nevada and California.

ARRA also appears to have drawn a diverse group into the geothermal sector. Almost half of the Geothermal Technologies Program awards from the stimulus went to non-industry entities such as colleges and universities; cities, counties, and other state and local institutions; tribal entities; and the Department of Energy’s National Labs.

As more geothermal industry jobs are being created, a number of colleges and universities across the country are emerging with undergraduate, graduate, and certification programs related to geothermal. GEA also compiled the “U.S. Geothermal Education and Training Guide” that details 22 undergraduate and graduate programs at U.S. colleges and universities. Additionally, 31 schools have research opportunities in geothermal studies available to students.

“To keep creating jobs in the geothermal industry, we must keep getting talented individuals coming into the industry. The programs at these leading schools will develop the next generation of geothermal professionals,” Gawell said.

For more information, visit http://www.geo-energy.org/.

Money is tight these days, so it would stand to reason that most people would be anxious to embrace lifestyle changes that cut costs, such as incorporating “green” appliances and other devices in their homes to save energy. But many fear that going green can carry a high price tag, which is true in some cases. If you own an older home, “green” upgrades could call for an initial upfront cost that doesn’t fit in the budget.

The practical approach would be to consider those eco-conscious ideas that don’t cost much money and start to reap the benefit to your wallet and family budget immediately. How about something as simple as installing dimmer switches, especially if you haven’t made the switch away from incandescent light bulbs. Dimmer switches, which don’t cost much more than $10, will extend the life of your light bulbs and trim energy costs.

Outdoor lighting fixtures that use motion sensors obviously save energy costs. Likewise, sensors are a good idea in places where we tend to leave lights on and forget about them, in our basements and guest rooms.

The programmable thermostat is another item that has been around for years and has proven to save as much as $200 a year off heating and air-conditioning expenses. For about $50, it pays for itself after just a few months.

How many of us have an insulating blanket on our hot water heaters? The U. S. Dept. of Energy reports that having this item, which costs about $20, can lower water-heating costs by nearly 10 percent.

But what do you pay to heat your water? A good way to find out is by adding a $15 plug-load monitor, which can go into any outlet in which you plug in an appliance. The monitor provides information about how much power is being used out of that appliance, as well as the periods of time it is used the most. Knowing this information can help in determining when to turn certain devices off, or get a programmable monitor that can lower power at certain times.

Ceiling fans can be found in most houses these days. If we operate them in a clockwise fashion during the winter in order to push warmer air down, and reverse the motion during the summer to circulate cool air, it will translate to lower energy costs.

Another simple household trick that costs very little is to make sure weather stripping around doors and windows is stable. A roll of weather stripping would be about $7 spent for up to 15 percent savings in heating and cooling costs. And how about our precious resource of water? You can reduce water usage by replacing the aerators, at about $5 each, on your faucets.

And then there’s the old standbys that are hopefully becoming lifestyle habits: wash clothes in cold water; clean the lint screen on your dryer regularly; dust off the coils behind the refrigerator; turn off your computers at night; and unplug electronics and appliances when they are not being used.