| Dear
EarthTalk:
What kinds of home improvements could I do that would
make my house healthier and more environmentally friendly?
-- Elizabeth Bram, via e-mail
Most
homes are not lacking in ways they can be healthier for family
and kinder to the environment. For one, indoor air quality
is a serious problem affecting millions of homes. Studies
show that air within homes can be more seriously polluted
than the air outdoors--even in the largest and most industrialized
cities.
According
to Glenn Haege, a master handyman who hosts a national radio
show on home repair, as our homes and apartments have become
more energy efficient and airtight, “humidity levels
from cooking and breathing tend to increase, causing mold
and mildew.” Harmful chemicals, he says, from construction
materials, insulation, furniture, carpeting, padding, paints,
solvents and household cleaners, drawn by this moist atmosphere,
combine to contaminate the indoor air which then stays trapped
inside.
The
first step in remedying this problem is to test your indoor
air. Pure Air and Envirologix, among others, sell inexpensive
and easy-to-use indoor-air quality testing kits. Once you
get an idea of the contaminants floating around your home,
you can get to work replacing the offending sources accordingly.
Green superstores such as the Environmental Home Center, Green
Building Supply and Oikos offer a wealth of greener and healthier
building supplies and materials. Also, BuildingGreen.com offers
a free online “GreenSpec” database with detailed
listings for over 2,000 environmentally preferable building
products.
Materials
outside the home can also contribute to health problems. One
example is pressure-treated lumber, which contains a form
of cyanide to keep pests away. Kids who play on backyard jungle
gyms and decks made of such material can develop rashes and
skin infections. Cedar wood is a naturally pest-resistant
alternative that, while more expensive, is a kinder-gentler
option that will stand the test of time.
Other
ways to green-up the home include replacing traditional incandescent
light bulbs with more energy-efficient compact fluorescents,
as well as switching out conventional hot water heaters in
favor of solar or on-demand tankless versions. And for saving
on water, replacing traditional showerheads and toilets with
pressurized low-flow alternatives can save gallons per day
while generating cost savings on utility bills. Likewise,
capturing rainwater and shower “gray-water” to
irrigate the garden is another smart move.
Do-it-yourselfers
can find hundreds of websites offering tips on green building
and repair. Glenn Haege’s MasterHandyman.com and NaturalHandyMan.com
both offer a plethora of articles and links and are good resources
if you’re looking to improve your own handy skills while
staying true to your green ideals. Two helpful books are:
Green Remodeling by David Johnston and Kim Master; and Green
Building Materials: A Guide to Product Selection and Specification
by Ross Spiegel and Dru Meadows. For less handy homeowners,
finding a handyman well versed in green building issues might
be a better way to go. The Natural Handyman Network offers
a free online search tool that should offer some promising
leads.
CONTACTS: MasterHandyman.com, www.masterhandyman.com;
BuildingGreen.com, www.buildinggreen.com;
Envirologix, www.envirologix.com;
Environmental Home Center, www.environmentalhomecenter.com;
Green Building Supply, www.greenbuildingsupply.com;
Oikos, www.oikos.com; The
Natural Handyman Network, www.naturalhandyman.com.
PHOTO
COURTESY OF GETTY IMAGES
Hundreds
of websites offer tips on environmentally friendly building
and repair. For less handy homeowners, a referral from the
Natural Handyman Network can set you on your way to a healthier
and greener home.
Dear EarthTalk:
What do you think of those “waste to energy”
plants used by cities to generate power? -- Christine
Ramadhin, Queens, NY
Waste-to-energy (WtE) facilities, which generate power by
burning trash, have been in widespread operation in the U.S.
and Europe since the 1970s and are considered by environmental
advocates to be a mixed blessing. On the one hand they get
rid of garbage without adding to already-stressed landfills
and with the added benefit of contributing electricity to
the power grid. On the other hand, they do generate toxic
pollution, usually as a result of burning vinyl and plastics.
WtE facilities
evolved out of basic incinerator technology that simply burns
trash and reduces it to ash and smoke. Waste-to-energy plants
instead use the garbage to fire a huge boiler. When the garbage
“fuel” is burned, it releases heat that turns
water into steam. The high-pressure steam turns the blades
of a turbine generator to produce electricity.
In the U.S. and
Europe, environmental laws regulate WtE plants, typically
requiring them to use various anti-pollution devices to keep
both harmful gases and particulate pollution (fine bits of
dust, soot and other solid materials) out of the air. However,
the particles captured are then mixed with the ash that is
removed from the bottom of the waste-to-energy plant’s
furnace when it is cleaned. Environmentalists contend that
this toxic ash, which can include dangerous heavy metals,
may actually present more of an environmental problem than
the airborne emissions themselves, as it usually ends up in
landfills where it can leak into and contaminate soil and
groundwater.
According to Greenpeace
International, WtE facilities are also among the largest sources
of dioxin emissions in industrialized countries. Dioxin is
a by-product of burning polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and other
plastics, and has been linked to cancer and other health problems.
Greenpeace advocates for phasing out WtE facilities in favor
of improving recycling rates that reduce the waste stream
in the first place.
Currently about
600 WtE facilities are in operation around the world. According
to the National Solid Wastes Management Association, an industry
trade group, the United States is home to 98 such plants operating
in 29 states. These facilities manage about 13 percent of
America’s total trash output. In Canada, where landfill
space is more abundant, WtE has failed to catch on, with only
a few such facilities across the country. WtE has caught on
more so in smaller technologically advanced countries such
as Japan, Sweden, Denmark, France and Switzerland, where landfill
space is at a premium.
Recent improvements
in the energy efficiency and environmental impact of WtE facilities
means that the technology promises to play a larger role globally
in years to come, especially as crowded developing countries
start to jump on the bandwagon.
CONTACTS:
National Solid Wastes Management Association, www.nswma.org/;
Greenpeace Incineration Campaign, www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/incineration.
|
A
SYNDICATED COLUMN ONLY ON AMERICAJR.COM
|
