Zebra 3 Report by Joe Anybody
Monday, 2 March 2009
The Downlow on Plastic Water Bottles
Now Playing: New study finds "Plastic Water Bottles" are not good for the environment
Hello my friendly concerned Z3 Readers,
I just found this tid-bit of information through my email from
"Mother Jones Magazine" here is the URL link:
Your Water Bottle Is One-Quarter Full Of Oil
Still want to drink it? Because the truth is that bottle of water is up to 2,000 times more energy intensive than just turning on the tap. No one really knew that until now.
Researchers at the Pacific Institute in Oakland California ran the numbers and found that bottle production alone wastes 50 million barrels of oil a year (that's 2.5 days of US oil consumption). Add to that energy the energy needed to process the water, label the bottles, fill the bottles, seal the bottles, transport the bottles, cool them prior to sale… well, you get the idea.
Bottom line: Bottled-water drinkers in the US alone in 2007 squandered the equivalent of 32 to 54 million barrels of oil. Triple that number for worldwide use. For perspective, imagine each bottle is one-quarter full of oil.
As reported at Treehugger: Bottled-water drinkers are the new smokers.
Since oil and water don't mix, turn on the tap. Still want a container? Try reusable Nalgene or stainless steel. Not without impact but durable at least. Traveling overseas to the lands-of-unclean waters? Pony up for a Katadyn bottle/filter combination. I can personally attest that this all-in-one system is a miracle worker of good intestinal and environmental health.
Concerned about the one in six humans who must live in the lands-of-unclean waters? Consider tossing a doubloon or two at the LifeStraw people who've found a nifty and inexpensive way to survive deadly water supplies.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 2:05 PM PST
Updated: Monday, 2 March 2009 2:09 PM PST
Friday, 27 June 2008
Look into the sewers - "Wow, I never knew so much about my community"
Now Playing: Does Your City Toke or Do Blow well your sewer pipes no the answer
Z3 Readers here is a Mother Jones article that is interesting if not a (pun) "shitty report" on drugs and poisons that are filling up our sewer systems. The link to the MJ article is here:
In the quest to discover your neighbors' vices, the only data more valuable than Google search records might be the records you leave in your toilet. In cities around the world, scientists have begun to measure concentrations of illegal drugs at sewage treatment plants, hoping to get a sense of what people are sending down the pipes. Results so far indicate that Vegas-goers do more meth than some of their midwestern counterparts, Angelenos outdo the Old World in cocaine use, Londoners fancy heroin more than Italians, and everybody smokes a whole lotta pot.
Clearly, the most obvious place for this information is an online quiz site: "If your city were an illegal drug, which one would it be?" Beyond that, the real-life applications aren't yet clear. Environmentalists are interested in the potential consequences of so many chemicals in the pipes—who wants to find out that, in addition to being filled with prescription drugs, their drinking water is also laced with coke? And no city wants to broadcast that its citizenry is, uh, high (San Diego has already refused researchers access to its sewage). The scientists who conducted the European study (.pdf) think it will be most useful as a real-time data collection tool, not to mention a vast improvement over just asking people how many drugs they do—the study notes that the concentration of cocaine in Milan's sewage suggests that actual use is more than double the reported rate.
Such information could certainly help law enforcement and public health officials improve their approach to combating drug use, but it's easy to see how things could get out of hand. What happens when the DEA shows up at your door with a warrant and a urine sample you didn't know you were giving? You laugh, but the scientist who pioneered this idea believes it would be possible to analyze sewge at the level of "a community, a street, even a house." In that way, studying poop is like studying Google searches— you'll probably find out more about your neighbors than you wanted, or needed, to know.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 12:21 PM PDT
Updated: Friday, 27 June 2008 12:23 PM PDT
Thursday, 31 January 2008
poopey water at your tap .... well its purified ....
Now Playing: Toilet toTap - California Water Systems
It's Time To Drink Toilet Water
Recycling sewage is safe and efficient,
.....so why aren't we doing it?
Posted Friday, Jan. 25, 2008, at 7:33 AM ET
How do you feel about ....Drinking "clean recycled TOILET water?
I found the Original Article here: http://www.slate.com/id/2182758/
Officials in Orange County, Calif., will attend opening ceremonies today for the world's largest water-purification project, among the first "toilet-to-tap" systems in America. The Groundwater Replenishment System is designed to take sewage water straight from bathrooms in places like Costa Mesa, Fullerton, and Newport Beach and—after an initial cleansing treatment—send it through $490 million worth of pipes, filters, and tanks for purification. The water then flows into lakes in nearby Anaheim, where it seeps through clay, sand, and rock into aquifers in the groundwater basin. Months later, it will travel back into the homes of half a million Orange County residents, through their kitchen taps and showerheads.
It's a smart idea, one of the most reliable and affordable hedges against water shortages, and it's not new. For decades, cities throughout the United States have used recycled wastewater for nonpotable needs, like agriculture and landscaping; because the technology already exists, the move to potable uses seems a no-brainer. But the Orange County project is the exception. Studies show that the public hasn't yet warmed to the notion of indirect potable reuse (IPR)—or "toilet-to-tap," as its opponents would have it. Surveys like one taken last year in San Diego show that a majority of us don't want to drink water that once had poop in it, even if it's been cleaned and purified. A public outcry against toilet-to-tap in 2000 forced the city of Los Angeles to shut down a $55 million project that would have provided enough water for 120,000 homes. Similar reluctance among San Diego residents led Mayor Jerry Sanders to veto the city council's approval in November of a pilot program to use recycled water to supplement that city's drinking water. (A similar plan failed once before in 1999.)
But San Diego is in the midst of a severe water crisis. The city imports 90 percent of its water, much of that from the Colorado River, which is drying up. The recent legal decision to protect the ecosystem of the San Joaquin Delta in Northern California—San Diego's second-leading water source—will reduce the amount coming from there as well. Add to that rising population and an ongoing drought, and the situation looks pretty bleak: 3 million people in a region that has enough water, right now, for 10 percent of them.
We don't have enough water where we need it; if we don't learn to deal with drinking toilet water, we're going to be mighty thirsty. Only 2.5 percent of the water on Earth is freshwater, and less than 1 percent of that is usable and renewable. The Ogallala Aquifer—North America's largest, stretching from Texas to South Dakota—is steadily being depleted. And Americans are insatiable water consumers—our water footprint has been estimated to be twice the global average (PDF).
The ocean provides another source of potable water. Large-scale treatment of seawater already occurs in the Middle East, Africa, and in Tampa Bay, Fla. Construction of the largest desalination plant in the western hemisphere is supposed to begin this year in Carlsbad, Calif., which would convert 300 million gallons of seawater into 50 million gallons of drinking water each day. Taking the salt out of ocean water sounds like a good idea, but it's economically and environmentally far more expensive than sewage-water recycling. Orange County water officials estimate desalinated water costs between $800 and $2,000 per acre-foot to produce, while its recycled water runs about $525 per acre-foot. Desalination also uses more energy (and thus produces more greenhouse gas emissions), kills tiny marine organisms that get sucked up into the processing plant, and produces a brine byproduct laced with chemicals that goes back into the ocean.
What desalination doesn't have, though, is the "yuck" factor of recycled sewage water. But seawater, like other sources of nonrecycled water, is at least as yucky as whatever comes through a toilet-to-tap program. When you know how dirty all this water is before treatment, recycling raw sewage doesn't seem like a bad option. Hundreds of millions of tons of sewage are dumped into rivers and oceans, and in that waste are bacteria, hormones, and pharmaceuticals. Runoff from rainwater, watering lawns, or emptying pools is the worst, sending metals, pesticides, and pathogens into lakes, rivers, and the ocean. The water you find near the end of a river system like the Colorado or the Mississippi (which feeds big cities like San Diego and New Orleans) has been in and out of municipal sewers several times.
Whatever winds up in lakes and rivers used for drinking is cleaned and disinfected along with the rest of our water supply. Still, a recent analysis of San Diego's drinking water found several contaminants, including ibuprofen, the bug repellent DEET, and the anti-anxiety drug meprobamate. No treatment system will ever be 100-percent reliable, and skeptics who worry that pathogens in sewage water will make it past treatment and into our drinking water should worry about all drinking water, not just the water in a toilet-to-tap program. The fact is, supertreated wastewater is clean enough to drink right after treatment. It's been used safely this way (in a process known as direct potable reuse) for years in the African nation of Namibia. The EPA has conducted research in Denver and San Diego on the safety of direct potable reuse and found recycled water is often of better quality than existing drinking water. And although putting water into the ground, rivers, or lakes provides some additional filtering and more opportunities for monitoring quality, the benefits of doing it that way are largely psychological. In its 2004 report (PDF) on the topic, the EPA concluded that Americans perceive this water to be "laundered" as it moves through the ground or other bodies of water, even though in some instances, according to the report, "quality may actually be degraded as it passes through the environment."
Despite the public's concerns, a few U.S. cities have already started to use recycled wastewater to augment drinking water. In El Paso, Texas, indirect potable reuse supplies 40 percent of the city's drinking water; in Fairfax, Va., it supplies 5 percent. Unless we discover a new source of clean, potable water, we're going to have to consider projects like these to make wastewater a reusable resource. The upfront costs for getting a system in place and educating the public may be steep, but it would save us the expense—both economic and environmental—of finding another river or lake from which we can divert water.Eilene Zimmerman is a San Diego-based journalist who writes about business and political and environmental issues. Her work appears in the
New York Times, the
San Francisco Chronicle,
Fortune Small Business, Salon.com,
Christian Science Monitor, and other publications.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 7:03 PM PST
Updated: Monday, 4 February 2008 4:06 PM PST
Saturday, 31 March 2007
So finally the ball is bouncing .... but there is some spin on it
Now Playing: Corn Shortage? Farmers for food or fuel or ....both?
Seems to be some questions on availability
Here is the article on Cnet:
There are 114 ethanol distilleries in operation across the country which produce ethanol from corn. Production is projected to exceed 6 billion gallons this year compared with 4.89 billion gallons in 2006, and some 3 billion gallons in capacity will be added in 2007, the group said.
U.S. farmers plan to cash in on the fuel ethanol boom by planting the largest area of corn in 63 years, potentially yielding a record crop and calming fears that renewable fuels will steal grain needed for food and feed, the federal government said Friday
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 7:18 PM PDT
Tuesday, 23 January 2007
Once Upon a Time a Few Old Ladies Sat In A Tree
Now Playing: Old Trees & Old Ladies
Former Mayor up a Tree
On the UC Berkeley campus, there is a grove of old oak trees which is now in jeopardy. The UCB regents are planning to cut the trees to expand the university's sport stadium. They will have a difficult time, though, as a tree sit is in progress. Within the last few days, three women "of a certain age" have joined in the protest. Former mayor Shirley Dean is 71 years old. She is joined by 86 year old Betty Olds and 90 year old Sylvia McLaughlin. The women have a long history of working in the city government and on environmental issues.
They are not about to quit now. READ More on Indy Media HERE
Then I read the following over on the site "wwwsavetheoaks.com"
"Three of the most respected and enduring civic leaders in the city of Berkeley took to the trees on Monday morning in support of the ongoing Memorial Oak Grove protest ......."
Set For January 23 2007
The injunction hearing is set for Tuesday January 23rd. If an injunction is granted, it would forbid UC Berkeley from beginning work on the proposed projects until after the 4 lawsuits against them can be heard in court. If an injunction is NOT granted then the university could try to cut down the oak trees and begin construction before the current lawsuits can reach the courts.
At this time their are now four suits against the UC expansion plans. The plaintiffs are - an Oaks coalition that includes the California Oak Foundation - the City of Berkeley - the Panoramic Hill Association - and the Save Tightwad Hill group.
Complete article here at: SAVE THE OAKS.COM
SIGN THE PETITION HERE (its easy to do)
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 9:51 PM PST
Updated: Friday, 26 January 2007 10:44 PM PST
Sunday, 21 January 2007
Jatropha seeds = Biodiesel Fuel
Now Playing: India is activly cultivating a plant called Jatropha for fuel
India's Big Plans for
Researchers are developing new
for cultivating a plant called
Jatropha seeds, when crushed, produce large quantities of an oil that can easily be converted to bio diesel that performs at levels close to that of conventional diesel oil. In fact, a hectare of jatropha produces 1,892 liters of fuel, which is better than rapeseed and far better than soybean or corn, according to data gathered by the Global Petroleum Club, an energy networking organization funded by the private-equity firm Forrest Equity Management.
Please read this short informing Full Article
((( FULL ARTICLE HERE )))
Zebra 3 readers, I didn't know anything about this plant until I read this article today. So from what I see it looks like it could turn into a good harty reliable sustainable source of fuel? When I first looked up this plant I seen a plant with red berries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha Then in looking further I seen this 2nd article, and a picture of the green berries. The second article refers to the (same) plant but I think it is describing the bio fuel potintial more directly, and in this case, Jatropa in India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha_in_india
(quote from Wikipedia)
Jatropha in India, refers to India's interest in the succulent plant Jatropha as a renewable energy source. Jatropha cultivation has been selected by the government of India as a method of providing an alternative fuel source for the coming years. Large plots of waste land have been selected for Jatropha cultivation. This will provide much needed employment to the rural poor of India and also provide a means for India to attain energy independence. Businesses are also seeing the planting of Jatropha as a good business opportunity.
Another link on Jatropha --> http://www.biodieseltoday.com/whyjatropha.htm
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 10:57 AM PST
Updated: Sunday, 21 January 2007 11:57 AM PST
Tuesday, 9 January 2007
Greenpeace right on the ass of a apple
Now Playing: Dont stop the ebb and flow of the capitalist ways and means
So looks like GREENPEACE is on
to start acting GREEN
At first I headed into this article slightly skeptical, the more I read the more I liked the concept and the public pressure. Ya know it is too bad it takes ACTIVISM to get business's and corporations and even the government to act. They would be status quo and not do a damn thing if the dang activists were not there EXPOSING and badgering them.
(here is the link) --> http://www.greenpeace.org/apple/itox.html
The whole activism pressure is a sheer use of using energy for a positive effect. What gets me is the universal acceptance that as long as "profits" were to be made "GET OUT OF THE WAY" ...it appears to me that the sole purpose of most peoples respect for life and freedom entail and actually really is all about the money.
It looks more and more to me like the "way we all live on this planet together, the power and control centers around profits above all else....No morals.
Get out of the way, commerce and profits are coming through.
Don't stop the ebb and flow of the capitalist ways and means.
So you can send a comment by snail mail or call at the main office Apple 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino, CA 95014 408.996.1010 }
And tell Steve Jobs @ Apple, to do the green thing and start acting responsible. I am going to send my printed letter (since I don't see a email address) What is amazing is that many other electronic company's are all ready doing this 'Green Thing'.
In fact this list below amazes me as I read how as the band wagon gets rolling but .....Apple seems to put profits before good green sense and there concern for the world (so far)
Here is 50 Greenpeace Activists at Apple Computer with Green Lights shining on the building, thus lighting it up green and raising the question ....Why is Apple not Being Green?
Click For Photos
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 11:34 PM PST
Updated: Wednesday, 10 January 2007 12:35 AM PST
Monday, 6 November 2006
Wednesday, 21 June 2006
Report Show That Nationial Parks Use Is Declining
Now Playing: Who want to Go Outside if the Neocons are running Loose?
A report from the National Conservancy found on Zdnet ( (HERE)
) is showing in a recent study, that per capita visits to national parks have been declining for years. National park visitation data starting in 1930 peaked in 1987 at 1.2 visits per person per year. But by 2003 it had declined by about 25 percent to 0.9 visits per person per year, said Oliver Pergams, an ecologist at the University of Illinois who analyzed the data for the study.
So they tested more than two-dozen possible explanations for these noted trends and they found out that 98 percent of the drop in national park visits was explained by video games, movie rentals, going out to movies, Internet use and rising fuel prices. Family income and aging were ruled out.
So the conclusion is the burgeoning use of electronic media is the main cause of not getting to the outdoors.
Ummm huh? Well I do know that Joe Anybody is not arguing this case very much. I can see it in my self that’s why. But I see it as a catch-22 in kind of way.
Of course I think in my case it is the out of control SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS OUR COUNTRY IS IN
and the decline of civil and human rights that is keeping me glued to my keyboard and monitor. If the US weren’t swirling down the toilet faster than I can grab more toilet paper, I would be inclined to get outside a little more often.
Heck at the rate of global warming and environmental decay due to abuse and neglect we may all soon be living “inside” anyway.
So what is a little conditioning to acclimate my self to living my life in a bubble? Where my escape into Nature will hopefully never soon enough be a website with pictures and sounds. The days are screaming toward us, and our saving politician's are blindly leading us out of the woods and into a controlled police state of laws based on terror and fear.
The researchers in this study mentions "this shift would not bode well for the future of biodiversity conservation.” I bet it wont. Unfortunatly it is a point that wont be taken seriously with this administration that is for sure.Yet for me this is a compound problem the way I see it affecting my life. In that the politics and destruction of “my world” by the Neocon and Governmental Thieves, Greedy Corporation, and Imperialist Military and Police State Jack Booted Thugs is prompting me to stay inside and read up on these Out-of-Control-Hooligans.
I can’t be going for a walk in the woods while the world and the constitution has been Highjacked.
So as the Nature Conservancy President Steve McCormick points it out, the study is suggesting Americans and their children in particular are losing their connection to the natural world
. "When children choose TVs over trees, they lose touch with the physical world outside and the fundamental connection of those places to our daily lives,"
I agree but while I am fishing and skipping stones in my beautiful countries back yard
, the fox is in the Hen house and our country is being railroaded by the Neocon’s. I cant be walking through the park while this is going on!I just can’t!
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 6:47 PM PDT
Updated: Wednesday, 21 June 2006 9:40 PM PDT
Friday, 9 June 2006
I Hate to bother you --> An Inconvenient Truth is upon us all
Now Playing: Global Warming Is Gonna Kill Us All
Global warming is real.
It is caused by human activity.
Mankind and its governments must begin immediate action to halt and reverse it.
It is our duty to our grandchildrens, children.
If we sit around and do squat this world and the civilizations on it will perish.
Watch this new Movie!
And Get off your Ass and
****** SAVE THIS PLANET ******
Al Gore has a new film out which is titled:
"An Inconvenient Truth"
A short movie trailer of it is --> HERE!
I read the following on this site of Movie Reviewer: Roger Ebert
The primary man-made cause of global warming is the burning of fossil fuels. We are taking energy stored over hundreds of millions of years in the form of coal, gas and oil, and releasing it suddenly. This causes global warming, and there is a pass-along effect. Since glaciers and snow reflect sunlight but sea water absorbs it, the more the ice melts, the more of the sun's energy is retained by the sea.
Gore says that although there is "100 percent agreement" among scientists, a database search of newspaper and magazine articles shows that 57 percent question the fact of global warming, while 43 percent support it. These figures are the result, he says, of a disinformation campaign started in the 1990s by the energy industries to "reposition global warming as a debate." It is the same strategy used for years by the defenders of tobacco. (end quote)
yet over at the website of the:
where I read that they are saying it is a
"deeply scary documentary" and
"The issue of global warming is clearly one that is close to Gore's heart, as he took to the road after his failed presidential bid on an international lecture circuit to raise awareness and inspire action on the near-crisis levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the havoc they are already wreaking on the planet.
Essentially a filming of Gore's polished, straightforward, and compelling lecture, Truth is pretty much the slickest, best-produced classroom filmstrip you'll see at the local indie movie theater" and "Gore claims that he is not trying to scare us, but I'm not buying it, what with the profoundly disturbing truth of his statistics and images. He certainly scared the crap out of me."
wow it didn't take this movie which I have not seen to have this issue scare the crap out of me!
This has been on my worry scale for the past 10 years.
While all the activist and "environmentalist" have been throwing their bodies literally in front of these Global Machines for years now.
I am appalled at the lack of concern and priority that this issue commands not only from our so-called-Leaders, but by the apathy and neglect buy the common average joe anybody.
Wake Up or Die! Ya you bet it sounds scary.
Lets just hope that Al's new film and some of us that "care" can change the world......
TO PROLONG LIFE AND CIVILIZATION!
Somebody needs too, since our President could care less
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 12:46 PM PDT
Updated: Friday, 9 June 2006 1:20 PM PDT
Newer | Latest | Older