In 1986 the Reagan administration determined, through the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, that it was not necessary to create any new laws for the regulation of biotechnology as these new products did not pose any risk. Yet, the first GE crop, the Flavr Savr tomato, wasn’t approved for cultivation until 1996. The current laws that regulate GE crops and pesticides were established before we could understand the true impact of this technology. This decision set the precedent that GE crops were substantially equivalent to its non-GE counterparts; this bases regulation on the product, not on the process. Substantial equivalence determined that GMO crops are virtually the same as its non-GMO counterparts and therefore pose no substantial risk and should not be treated or regulated differently.

Who is responsible for biotech regulation?

The responsibility of regulating GE crops lies within three different federal agencies; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA is responsible for determining whether or not GE food is safe to consume and does such under the authority granted by the Food Drug and Cosmetics Act(FFDCA). Part of this determination allowed for products to be deemed generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Dating back to 1958, GRAS “is a legal term describing certain food ingredients that are safe enough to enter the market without prior government approval or restrictions.” The GRAS process established streamlined decision making, allowing manufacturers to get their products to market faster and with minimal (if any) oversight.

Who determines GRAS status?

GRAS determination is not made by any federal agency, rather it falls under the decision making of the manufacturer that created the ingredient or product, a blatant conflict of interest. A company determines for itself whether it meets the GRAS standards. With GRAS status, an item requires no prior FDA approval before going to market. Companies can voluntarily submit their GRAS determination for review by the FDA, but are not required. In reviewing GRAS determination, the FDA does not perform any independent research or testing, relying solely on information provided by the company and handpicked relevant published studies. The FDA allows companies to market and use chemicals while under review. The report, Generally Recognized as Secret published by NRDC, found that a shocking number of chemicals had been deemed GRAS and did not participate in the voluntary review process, leaving the FDA with no information or review of the chemicals in question.

In all, the FDA does not determine the safety of new food ingredients and products. GRAS status, which holds that a product has the same structure, function, and composition of food already on the market, is self-determined by biotech companies without consideration for the impacts of its corresponding pesticides.

What else falls under GRAS?

GMOs are not the only GRAS items that are controversial; sweeteners, MSG, and caffeine are all products that were deemed GRAS without consideration for the levels at which they are consumed. These items have infiltrated grocery store shelves leaving consumers with a steady stream of them without true consideration for potential long-term health impacts. Further concern over these regulations is that they contain extremely vague language using words that have no legal definition and can be broadly interpreted, such as qualified experts and adequately safe.

The GRAS process and the hastened approval of a number of new more harmful, GE crops and pesticides raises major concerns and fails to instill much faith in the existing safety regulatory framework. There is a reason teachers don’t let children grade their own exams; so why is the FDA allowing Big Ag and biotech companies to grade themselves, especially when it is at the risk of citizens everywhere?

Feeding The World Without GMOs from Gringo Starr Productions on Vimeo.

One of the most often touted benefits of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or genetically engineered (GE) crops, is that they are essential to feed the world’s growing population. There are currently over 7.5 billion people on this planet and expected to rise to 9.5 billion by 2050. If consumption trends continue, in order to feed that many people, we would need to grow one-third more food. First, let's look at this argument from an agricultural perspective.

The vast majority of GMO crop production does not go towards direct food consumption; rather, it is used for the production of animal feed and ethanol. These are crops engineered to withstand, work in partnership with, and self-generate pesticides. They are not engineered to increase yield or face climate-related challenges to growth, such as drought tolerance. There is one variety of corn has been bred for drought resistance, but it is likely to only be effective in 15 percent of US corn fields and is not effective in severe or extreme drought, which we are expected to have more of in the coming years.

Industrial agriculture isn't the answer. 

Increases in yield from GE crops are a result of a decrease in yield lost to pests from Bt crops, pesticides, and an increase in fertilizer use (made from petroleum, defeating the purpose of ethanol). Unfortunately, growing weed and pest resistance is already decreasing their effectiveness, requiring much more dangerous pesticides and making useless one of the most used organic pesticides, Bt. These minimal increases in yield have come with major externalities, including but not limited to water pollution, pollinator loss, and soil degradation, that put future food security at risk. After decades of attempts, Big Biotech has not been successful in breeding GE seeds that increase yield or reduce water use. Conventional breeding outperforms genetic engineering when it comes to nitrogen use efficiency (the ability for crops to pull nitrogen out of soil, developing a more efficient use of fertilizer, ultimately decreasing the demand for fertilizers) and water use efficiency (WUE).

Overall, conventional breeding is responsible for most of the successful advances in yield. It also happens on a much shorter timeline at a much lower cost. Industry studies show that it takes a minimum of ten years to develop a GE crop and nearly $150 million; whereas conventional crops take only $1 million to develop, improvements WUE and drought resistance naturally occur at an estimated 1 percent each year. While Big Biotech develop GMOs in a lab, farmers are improving traditional crops in the field. Due to this drag rate by the time GE crops are finally released they are actually behind their conventional counterparts.

Conventional crops could also be more effectively bred to work in partnership with the cultural food needs and geographical climate and soil challenges unique to specific regions. Forcing GE crops into developing countries with higher existing biodiversity puts that biodiversity and future food supplies at risk by threatening native species and practices. There are an abundance of types of crop varieties (both already in use and wild) accessible to breeders and growers. It is important that we tap into this vast resource to expand nutrient diversity and accessibility.

The Alternative to GMOs: Agroecology 

Considering the changing climate and increasing pressures on and demand for our scarce resources, expanding the industrialized system of agricultural is not the answer. Agriculture is already one of the largest contributors to climate change. In order to sustainability produce the food we will need, we must support a transition to more regenerative, agroecological methods of farming. Agroecology as a “science is the ‘application of ecological science to the study, design, and management of sustainable agroecosystems.’ As a set of agricultural practices, agroecology seeks ways to enhance agricultural systems by mimicking natural processes, thus creating beneficial biological interactions and synergies among the components of the agroecosystem.”

It is essential to look at the entire system and how plants work with one another and their surrounding climates. Regenerative agriculture works to rebuild soil health and biodiversity; sequestering carbon, preventing soil erosion, protecting water sources, and reducing harmful pesticide and fertilizer runoff in the process. Agroecology is also a much better system of management for small holders and provides a more balanced diet with more nutrient dense crops. Smallholders already produce 70 percent of the world’s food on only 25 percent of the land. More diversified planting is better for soil health and biodiversity and will better handle the challenges presented by climate change and the damage we have already done to our resources.

Lack of Equity + Poverty = Hunger 

Hunger is not an issue of agriculture or food quantity, but one of poverty and equity. There is currently enough food in the world to feed 10 billion people. That means that we actually have an excess of food.

Despite that, there is still a shocking number of people who are hungry, 791 million (the majority of which live in developing nations). More than anything, hunger is a result of poverty. The World Bank estimates that there are over 1 billion poor people in developing countries. Continued hunger leads to continued poverty as those suffering from chronic hunger are unable to perform manual labor (the most common source of income in developing countries) and increase their standard of living. Much of this poverty and hunger is caused by existing economic inequity as a result of current political systems that favor those with higher incomes. The current industrial food system emphasizes the need for countries (regardless of size) to export food crops despite the local demand for basic nutrients. If poverty and livelihoods are not improved it will not matter how much food is produced if the poorest, and in turn hungriest, do not have the financial ability to access it.

At the same time that there is great hunger there is also excessive food waste throughout the world. It is even worse in the western hemisphere; the US alone wastes 40 percent of its food. In western countries, grocery stores throw out a lot of food and will not purchase unattractive produce. Food is wasted simply because it is visually unappealing or goes uneaten. In developing nations food waste is a result of a lack of infrastructure, capital investment, and basic necessities. Lack of access to road ways, storage facilities, and basic refrigeration prevents food access and increases spoilage rates. With proper investment and support these problems could be remedied.

Despite the hunger epidemic we also have an obesity epidemic as a result of poor nutrition, high meat consumption, and increased processed food consumption. Worldwide, most of the expected demand for an increase in food is not based on a baseline need for nutrients, but rather the growing trend of developing countries to adopt the western diet of meat consumption. It takes substantially more calories to produce meat and ultimately results in a number of health challenges. Not only does this require a higher production of animal feed crops, the raising of animals for meat puts a number of stresses on the environment due to the current system of large concentrated and confined animal feeding operations, or CAFOs.

Hunger is an issue of politics and justice.

It is a choice that we make as a nation and as group of developed countries. In order to tackle these problems of access we need to drastically change our food system. We need an international system of agriculture that supports food sovereignty, regenerative agroecological farming practices, and food security on a regional and local level. GMOs are not the answer.

If GMOs are not feeding the world, then what do we do to decrease worldwide hunger? Find out here. 

We all know that climate change is driven by our energy and transportation systems, but we don’t hear as much about how our current food systems also create climate change. However, sustainable agriculture and food systems could be a huge part of the solution instead.

The Problem: Fossil Fuels & Soil Degradation

Currently, modern industrial agriculture uses enormous amounts of fossil fuels – particularly for fertilizers – and degrades the soil so that it doesn’t retain carbon. Energy consumed during fertilizer manufacture was equivalent to 191 billion liters [50.5 billion gallons] of diesel in 2000 and is projected to rise to 277 billion [73.2 billion gallons] in 2030. All of this energy is being used to produce an input that is richer and more nutrient dense when produced naturally, without carbon emissions.

The Solution: Organic Agriculture & Sustainable Practices

There’s a better way to practice agriculture – one that nourishes the soil and sequesters carbon. Modern organic agriculture, which produces yields similar to conventional agriculture, has the potential to sequester enormous amounts of carbon. Organic, sustainable agriculture takes carbon from the atmosphere and puts it back in the soil. The microorganisms in healthy soil convert organic waste into humus, which stores carbon rather than releasing it. These microorganisms also store carbon themselves, because they consume plant sugars, which are made with carbon through photosynthesis.

If 10,000 medium-sized US farms converted to organic farming, the emissions reduction would be equivalent to removing over 1 million cars from the road. If all US croplands became organic, it would increase soil carbon storage by 367 million tons and would cut nitrogen oxide emissions dramatically.

In fact, research from the Rodale Institute demonstrates that if we practiced organic agriculture globally, we would be able to reverse climate change. Rodale Institute created a model of a global carbon sink around the world through a 100 percent transition to organic agriculture. They compared that to the emissions that we had in 2012 globally and found that the world would have been able to sequester 111 percent of 2012 emissions. That’s how powerful organic agriculture could be as a climate change solution, and just one of the reasons we need to move to organic farming as quickly as possible.

To combat the long lasting environmental impacts of industrial agriculture, we need to farm in a way that preserves soil health, removes toxins, and protects the health of farm workers, farmers, and consumers.

Agriculture is the most polluting industry in the world because of the prevalent use of chemical pesticides and herbicides. Overtime, these toxic chemicals not only degrade soil health, but also pollute water supplies and harm the health of surrounding communities. In addition, a majority of US crops are genetically engineered.

Organic farming, and regenerative agriculture in particular, are holistic approaches which do not use chemicals. This approach improves soil health, does not cause toxic run-off, and protects farmworker health.

What Does the Organic Label Mean?

The USDA organic standard is maintained by the government and incorporates policies for maintaining soil fertility and crop nutrient levels, limiting pesticide and fertilizer usage, and preventing overall negative impacts on surrounding environments. Choosing products with the USDA organic label is a trustworthy way to avoid GMOs.

Key Practices of USDA Certified Organic:

• Prohibits use of most chemical/synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.
• Prohibits antibiotic and synthetic hormone use.
• Prohibits GMOs in all aspects of farming and processing.

Family Farms: An Invaluable Part of a Sustainable Agricultural System

Family farmers are farms, often small-scale, that take a holistic approach with concern for the broader and long-term impacts that agriculture has on the environment and community. The current generation of farmers works to ensure the sustainability of natural resources and livelihoods for future generations and surrounding communities.

However, many small-scale and family farms have been squeezed out of business by the consolidated power of corporate agribusiness and a shift to “factory farm” production.

In 2014, Green America began expanding our collaboration with farmers, gardeners, and growers across the US. We are committed to celebrating our nation’s food producers. We work to amplify the voice of the farming community and bridge the gap of communication between farmers, consumers, and policy makers.

Thank you to all those growing our food. We appreciate you

Genetically engineered (GE) crops [more commonly referred to as genetically modified organisms (GMOs)] are crops that have been engineered to produce certain qualities not intrinsic to the plant itself. An organism is inserted with genetic material from a different species to create a new organism not developed in nature or through traditional breeding.

The most common GE crops are developed to be resistant to an herbicide, such as glyphosate, 2,4-D, and/or dicamaba, and engineered with the pesticide Bt to protect against pests (the plant itself produces the Bt toxin).

Concerns with GE Crops: Health, Regulation, and Environment

• Lack of Proper Regulation: Uncertainty of the safety of GE crops due to the lax regulation by the FDA, USDA, and EPA and the lack of unbiased scientific research on the long-term human and environmental health impacts. Several studies conducted by scientists have called into question the safety of consuming GE crops. Further unbiased research regarding health and safety issues is needed.
   
• Destruction of Ecosystems: Majority of GE crops are engineered to work in partnership with a specific herbicide, most commonly glyphosate. Since the crops themselves are engineered to resist the effects of the herbicides, the chemicals are sprayed freely and extensively on the farm negatively impacting surrounding communities and ecosystems.
   
• Eradication of Key Pollinators: Increased use of pesticides has led to a decline in key pollinator species, such as honeybees and monarch butterflies.
   
• Development of Superweeds & Pests: Excessive use of pesticides and herbicides in connection with GE crops has led to superweeds and pests that have developed resistance to the most commonly used pesticides. As a result, farmers and chemical companies are turning to much more toxic pesticides including 2,4-D and diacamba.
   
• Community Health Impact: Both glyphosate and 2,4-D—herbicides used extensively on GE crops—have been deemed probable carcinogens by the World Health Organization and have a major impact on the health of surrounding communities.
   
• Soil Degradation: GE crops encourage mono-cropping, where one large area is grown with the same crop variety year after year. This method of agriculture damages soil health and fertility and quickly depletes nutrients. Poor soil health requires farmers to rely on external inputs such as nitrogen fertilizers produced from fossil fuels. The overuse of nitrogen fertilizers is not only continuing our dependence on oil and perpetuating climate change, but it is also polluting our water ways and creating dead zones void of aquatic life.

GE crops are not part of a sustainable system of agriculture. In order to sustain our soil and food supply, we must move to a regenerative system of agriculture, with its basis in the principles of organics. This means moving away from destructive chemical inputs such as pesticides and synthetic fertilizers and moving towards systems that work in tune with the natural biology of soil and the environment. We actively engage with members of Congress, federal regulating agencies, and companies to open up the dialogue on the necessary steps towards a more sustainable food landscape. We are committed to educating consumers, like you, around the impacts of GE crops and industrial agriculture and the steps that we can all take to protect and improve our food and the environment.

What To Look For

Look for these seals to ensure that the food you're eating does not contain genetically engineered ingredients.

What To Avoid: Genetically Engineered Crops & Ingredients

These are the genetically engineered crops that are currently on the market: corn, soy, alfalfa, canola, cotton, papaya, sugar beets, zucchini and yellow summer squash.

In the US, GMOs are in as much as 80 percent of conventional processed food. The following product ingredients are likely derived GE crops: Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Citric Acid, Dextrose, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High-Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sodium Ascorbate, Sodium Citrate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Yeast Products, and many more.

Green America's GMO Inside campaign is working to get GMOs and toxins out of our food. We've had a number of recent victories including Campbell’s offering Goldfish and soups with organic ingredients, Hershey removing GE sugar from its Kisses and chocolate bars, Hellmann’s launching a non-GMO mayo, and Similac introducing three non-GMO baby formulas.

Despite a love of football, Suzan Shown Harjo has attended exactly one of her home team’s NFL games, back in 1974. The team was the Washington Redsk--s. [Editor’s note: Green America has made it our policy not to print this racial slur in its entirety. From here on, we will use the term “R-word.”]

Harjo—a poet, writer, lecturer, and policy advocate who has helped Native Peoples protect sacred places and recover more than one million acres of land—recalls one fan who was seated behind her and her husband saying of the couple, “I think they’re [R-words].”

She gently replied, “No, I’m Cheyenne and Muscogee, and he’s Muscogee.”

But the odd fan behavior continued. The couple heard people whispering behind them to “look at the [R-words]” or “look at the Indians,” and some even started petting their long hair, asking others to “look at this [R-word] hair.”

The game hadn’t even started.

“We had to get up and leave,” she says. “That is the real effect of objectification—where you take away a person’s humanity and are just touching them in inappropriate ways.”

As part of building a socially just economy, Green America joins Harjo and other tribal activists in calling for an end to the use of all stereotyped mascots and team names—starting with the R-word as the worst example. Whether you’re a sports fan or not, you can use your economic power as a potential purchaser of sports tickets and team logowear—as well as a customer or shareholder of corporate team sponsors—to discourage the use of racial slurs and caricatures.

A Slur with Tragic Origins

While some sports fans dismiss concern over use of the R-word as a case of political correctness going too far, the vast majority of Native Americans feel this word is tremendously painful, given its tragic history, the fact that it is a dictionary-defined “racial slur,” and the manner in which it ignores their cultural heritage and contributions.

Washington football team owner Dan Snyder has maintained that the R-word name is a point of honor that celebrates William “Lone Star” Dietz, the team’s first coach, whom they claim was Sioux.

They are mistaken, says Harjo. FBI documents show that Dietz was a German-American who stole the name of James One Star, an actual Sioux man, hoping to both avoid being drafted into WWI and to cash in on famed athlete Jim Thorpe’s fan base. He even went so far as to write letters to One Star’s sister pretending to be James, as she testified at Dietz’s draft-evasion trial.

But even if you ignore the Dietz connection, the R-word itself has truly shocking origins. Harjo says that even near the turn of the 20th century, bounty hunters traversed the country killing Native Americans and bringing in “their bloody red skins,” or scalps, as proof. And while Western films would lead us to think that “scalp” solely means the skin on the top of one’s head, Harjo says it was also often the genitalia.

“They were paid on a sliding scale—so much for a man, so much for a woman, so much for a child,” she says. “The only way they’d know gender or age was from the genitalia.”

And so, the people who were being killed became known by a word that their murderers saw as descriptive of their sole value—one describing the skins that they could rip away and sell.

“This is the worst word that we can be called in the English language,” she says. “This is the N-word for us.”

The Effects on Native Youth

While the R-word may be the worst example, all Indigenous stereotypes used as team names or mascots—from the Cleveland Indians to the Seminole High School Chieftains—contribute to an epidemic of depersonalizing and reductive behavior that many say is especially harmful to Native youth.

Photo by Vincent Schilling @VincentSchilling
Dahkota Brown was elected a 2013 Champion for Change by the Center for Native American Youth for his work with Native students.

A new report from the Center for American Progress (CAP) found that “these team names and mascots can establish an unwelcome and hostile learning environment for [American Indian/Alaska Native] AI/AN students.” The report also says these mascots “directly [result] in lower self-esteem and mental health” for these young people. And, says the report, studies show that these mascots “undermine the educational experience of all students, particularly those with little or no contact with indigenous and AI/AN people.”

The American Psychological Association concurs, calling for “the immediate retirement” of these team names and mascots in 2005 for all of the reasons stated in the CAP study.

Dahkota Franklin Kicking Bear Brown, a 15-year-old Wilton Miwok, knows these reasons firsthand. He says that while growing up, he always dreaded the days when his school plays their arch-rival—the Calaveras [R-words].

Brown describes the Calaveras sideline routines as featuring “a war-bonnet clad warrior on top of the announcer booth who does the stereotypical Indian drumbeat after every touchdown, fans throwing tomahawk chops,” and “cheerleaders in skimpy outfits resembling traditional buckskin outfits.”

Worst of all, he said in a speech for the Center for American Progress that went viral online this spring, “By having a racial slur of a name, Calaveras has granted all schools that they go against the right to mock and make fun of Native Americans. ... I’ve heard my friends yell ‘Kill the [R-words]!’ or ‘Send them on the Trail of Tears!’”

While some have argued that using a team name like the Chiefs or the Indians is meant to “honor” Native Americans, too often schools fail to respectfully celebrate their Native students’ individual cultural heritage.

As reported by the Indian Country Today Media Network, one egregious case was that of Seminole High School in Seminole County, OK, which uses a headdress-wearing mascot to represent its Chieftains teams. Last spring, 25 senior students at the school, who were members of the Seminole, Creek, Choctaw, and Chickasaw nations, received eagle feathers from their tribal leaders to honor their impending graduation. The students tied the feathers to their graduation caps, some adding tribal beads as well—only to be ordered by the school not to wear them. (At least one student, Kaden Tiger, wore his anyway.)

“Native youth have the highest dropout rate, the lowest graduation rate, the highest suicide rate among any ethnicity,” says Brown. “I think it is tied in part to these mascots. Our teens see these images, and it gives this false sense that we’re savages. These teens lose their cultural identity and don’t feel they fit in anywhere.”

When he was just in eighth grade, moved by “friends and cousins I saw who were on the verge of dropping out,” Brown took matters into his own hands. He started a nonprofit called NERDS (Native Education Raising Dedicated Students), which provides peer-to-peer tutoring and mentoring for Native students in seven California chapters with more to come nationwide.

“A lot of what I hear from the students is that these Native mascots really do have an effect on their lives an their self-esteem,” says Brown.

A Victory in the (Trademark) Courts

The tide of public opinion does seem to be turning against the use of stereotyped Native team names and mascots. In the 1960s, the National Indian Youth Council, Native students, and supporters attempted to persuade the University of Oklahoma to retire its mascot “Little Red,” which it did in 1970. At that time, there were more than 3,000 similar mascots at K-12 and post-secondary schools. Today, there are just over 900.

One recent victory may make it more difficult for teams to profit from merchandising if their name or logo is a Native stereotype. In 1992, Harjo and others filed a request with the US Patent and Trade Office’s Trademark, Trial, and Appeal Board (TTAB), asking it to cancel the six federal trademark licenses owned by Pro Football, Inc.—the corporation headed by Dan Snyder that owns the Washington NFL team—because the R-word is “disparaging to Native Americans.”

After two separate filings (due to the first being dismissed on appeal on a technicality by a DC District Appeals Court), TTAB agreed to cancel the six trademarks in June.
Pro Football filed an appeal in August, and it may legally keep its trademarks for now. But with people like President Obama and Hillary Clinton speaking out against the name, and high-profile news sources like the Seattle Times refusing to print the R-word, it’s clear that public sentiment is shifting. If Washington changes its name, others may follow.

Beyond Political Correctness

When Green America contacted the Washington team, it sent this statement: “Thanks for your interest on this. We appreciate and respect your opinion, like everyone’s. We will consider it as we move forward.”

They and other teams with similar names will undoubtedly have to do more than consider such opinions if they hear from enough unhappy potential ticket-holders. Take action today:

• Speak out. Talk to people, write letters to the editor, and take to social media to argue for change. Harjo says that social media has given a powerful shot in the arm to the campaign against offensive mascots, unifying and amplifying the voices of concerned citizens.
• Write to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and your favorite team’s owner. Harjo notes that all teams share in revenues generated from the R-word, so they have a right to ask the Washington team to change its name. She hopes the NFL owners will one day unite against the R-word, much as NBA owners stood against the racist remarks made last spring by Los Angeles Clippers owner Don Sterling, whom the NBA ultimately forced to sell the team.
• Call, e-mail, and boycott FedEx. The delivery company sponsors FedExField, home base for the Washington team. The Native Voice Network (NVN) recently launched a campaign demanding that FedEx revoke its sponsorship from the team and the field.
  “Anheuser-Busch and Budweiser immediately pulled their sponsorships from the L.A. Clippers” after Sterling’s racist remarks went public, says NVN’s Chrissie Castro. “And yet the corporate sponsors of the Washington team continue to stay silent."
  NVN is asking people to share the social media memes they are creating for the campaign. You can also sign a petition on NVN’s website and participate in their national call-in days to FedEx.
  As for why FedEx continues to sponsor the team, the company had this to say: “FedEx has a long-standing, binding, contractual commitment with [Pro] Football, Inc. ... Under the agreement, FedExField not only hosts the Washington [R-words] but is home to many other civic and community activities and a variety of ... events. We are proud of our sponsorship of the field and its positive impact on the community and defer questions regarding the name of the team to the franchise owner.”Unmoved by this argument, NVN is asking people to boycott using FedEx until it takes responsibility.
• Counteract spin with meaningful contributions. In an effort to stir up good publicity in Indian Country, the Washington football franchise recently launched the Original Americans Foundation to “address the urgent challenges” on US reservations. Foundation representatives offered to pay in full for a skate park for the Quechan tribe in Yuma, AZ. The offer was turned down.
  “We will not align ourselves with an organization to simply become a statistic in their fight for name acceptance in Native communities,” said tribal representative Kenrick Escalanti in a press statement. “We’re stronger than that, and we know bribe money when we see it.”
• To support real efforts to lift up tribal communities, donate to Native-run efforts like those in the box below.

A Civil Right

Harjo isn’t asking Washington football fans to boycott their team, stressing that it’s perfectly okay to “support the team and hate the name.”

And while people often ask why she doesn’t have something more important to worry about, she would like them to realize that this issue is important: Any stereotyped mascot “is a symbol, and symbols come out of attitudes, create attitudes, and lead to actions,” she says.

NVN’s Castro agrees, calling the fight against these mascots “an important civil rights issue.” She says: “We have a right not to be discriminated against. When we show up to public events, everybody should have a right to feel safe, but we don’t when we hear people saying, ‘Kill the Indians!’ [The country] can and should be doing better.”

Making the case for recycled paper

From protecting forests to curbing climate, recycled paper use is essential for sustainability. With the below reports produced by Green America and our allied organizations, we make the case for using recycled paper, including the many ways it benefits the environment. We also share how you can better your recycling practices at home and work to help the entire system.

How does using recycled paper help the environment and climate?

Recycled paper use saves resources and reduces the paper industry's impact on the planet.
Using 100% recycled copy paper instead of 100% virgin fiber paper saves:

• 100% of the trees,
• 31% of the energy,
• 53% of the water, and produces
• 39% less solid waste.
   Read more about the benefits of recycled paper from the Environmental Paper Network...

If you don't recycle your used paper and instead throw it into the trash, it goes where all trash goes -- to the landfill. The EPA cites landfills as the single largest source of methane emissions to the atmosphere, and has identified the decomposition of paper as among the most significant sources of landfill methane. A potent gas with 21 times the heat-trapping power of CO2, methane is a major contributor to global climate change.
Find the answers to all your recycled paper questions in Environmental Defense's Q&A sheet...

How can publishers make a difference?

In the United States we use enough paper in a single day to fill the 838 miles of the Library of Congress nearly FIVE times. By using recycled fiber paper, publishers can ensure that existing paper gets a longer life. By reducing your paper usage and choosing recycled paper for what you do buy, you can lessen your environmental footprint.
Esker shows more jaw-dropping comparisons to our paper use here...

Too often, publishers are told that recycled paper is not the best environmental choice for their magazines. This only makes sense if there is a scarcity of recovered paper and we are forced to allocate our limited supply to only certain paper grades, however there are millions of tons of paper that we could be collecting for reuse. Printing and writing papers have the most intensive manufacturing process of nearly all paper types. Including recycled content in magazine-grade paper has a very significant and important role in reducing environmental impacts of paper production. 
Read more in our Green in All Grades report...

We are helping universities use recycled paper for their alumni magazines in our One Million Trees campaign. We are collecting stories from universities already using better paper, including Washington State University. "Moving to 100% recycled stock was daunting at first, but we couldn't be more pleased with the outcome of our magazine on recycled paper." 
Read our interview with Washington State University Alumni Magazine on their switch...
 

How can you help?

Have you added these tips into your recycling practices? These are especially important to do if your city uses single stream (co-mingled) recycling bins.
Check these Tips for Using the Blue Bin...

When considering a new paper or wood product for purchase, the best way to help is to first think through the original R's: reduce and reuse (they come before recycle!). Make sure that you truly need this product and if you do, then look for products made with recycled content. 
Learn how to spot better paper products here...

Back to the Vote With Your Dollar Toolkit

Everyone has the power to reduce pressure placed on forests worldwide. By choosing recycled paper, you are voting with your dollars for a cleaner and healthier planet. You can look for environmentally responsible magazines and only buy recycled and FSC-certified paper for your homes and offices.

1.Recycled Content

Like many people, you might see “Recycled” on a product and assume that it’s a high quality recycled product, unfortunately most countries do not have strict rules for how much recycled content a product needs to put “recycled” on their label. This can vary anywhere between 5% all the way to 100%. Look for any indication of the percentage of recycled content on the product package, the higher the better!

2. Next Step

Post-consumer content: This means that the product has used material that was previously consumed as a product – like a newspaper or box. We consider this to be the better choice of the two, since it has completed an entire life cycle of consumption before making its way to you! 

Pre-consumer content: This means the product was made from waste produced by some type of manufacturing process. Some products are a mix of these two types of content, just make sure to check the label or review the product online.

Better Paper Pro-tip: Make sure to not be fooled by just the term ‘recyclable’. This just means that the product can be recycled, but doesn’t signal any recycled content in the product. It's better to look for actual recycled content.

3. Certification

There are a few different certifications to look for when buying a paper product. We advise on seeking out the FSC seal (Forest Stewardship Council). The FSC certified forestry products that use sustainably-harvested wood fibers. If the product you are buying has virgin (non-recycled) fibers in it, make sure it is FSC certified.

4. Bleaching

Most paper requires bleaching, and chlorine bleaching creates very toxic chemicals and is bad for the environment. Find paper that is PCF (processed chlorine free) for recycled paper or is labeled TCF (totally chlorine free) for virgin fiber products.

Back to the Vote With Your Dollar Toolkit

Yes! Magazine ·

Printing on 100% post-consumer recycled paper, Yes! Magazine has shown a strong commitment to the environment, and has a loyal following of readers who appreciate that the company reflects their sustainable values.

Dirt Rag 

This mountain biking publication has committed to using 90% recycled paper.

Modern Cat ·

This magazine, as well as Modern Dog, prints on an FSC certified stock with 30% recycled content and vegetable based inks.

Natural Health 

Since 2005, this magazine has been committed to better paper. An average issue uses 63,000 pounds of 10% post-consumer recycled paper, saving thousands of trees.

MORE LEADERS IN THE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY

• Adelphi University Magazine offers Adelphi University alumni worldwide the opportunity to read about events at the university.
• The Ark features photography and stories on Nature Conservancy of Canada's leading-edge conservation and stewardship work.
• Audubon Magazine inspires readers to conserve the natural world through explanatory journalism and vibrant photography.
• Bay Nature educates the people of the Bay Area about, and celebrates the beauty of, the surrounding natural world.
• British Columbia Teachers' Federation magazine informs the 41,000 public school teachers in British Columbia, Canada.
• Colby Magazine is the semiannual alumni publication of Colby College in Maine.
• Green American Magazine is Green America's magazine dedicated to discussing the economic benefit of environmental practice for everyday Americans.
• KIWI is dedicated to helping parents raise their children the healthiest way possible.
• Modern Dog is the lifestyle magazine for modern dogs and their companions.
• National Green Pages is the directory for products and services for people and the planet.
• National Wildlife, NWF's award-winning, full-color nature magazine.
• Natural Awakenings has been printed on recycled paper since its inception 17 years ago.
• Optimum Wellness magazine celebrates not just food, but family, friends, relationship, Spirit, and connection.
• Organic Spa Magazine is a lifestyle magazine promoting the marriage of spa and wellness with your sustainable and organic lifestyle.
• Phi Kappa Tau: The Laurel is the print magazine published each year by the Phi Kappa Tau Foundation.
• The Progressive Populist reports on issues of interest to workers, small-business owners and family farmers and ranchers.
• Russian Life is a 50-year-old bimonthly magazine covering Russian culture, history, business, society and travel.
• Washington Gardener magazine is a gardening publication published specifically for Washington DC and its suburbs.
• Yes! Magazine highlights positive stories of a transformation toward a more just, sustainable, and compassionate world.

What we mean by "better paper"

Better Paper refers to paper with a cleaner, greener, more efficient paper production process at every stage - including pulping, paper-making, printing, distribution and recycling.  Green America's Better Paper Project has helped hundreds of publishers choose better paper by developing smart purchasing policies to ensure the use of recycled and FSC certified papers. Consumers have made it clear: they want sustainable products from companies that reflect their values. Your company must consider environmental and social impacts to remain relevant in today's market (we also think it's just the right thing to do).

Far too many magazines in the US contain most of the “brand-risk” ingredients instead of the better paper ingredients. The good news is that doesn’t have to be the case. There are many different environmentally-responsible paper options on the market from a variety of different paper mills, merchants and printers.  Publishers have an opportunity to create the market for ever-increasing rates of recycled paper.

Click here to receive free copies of our publisher resource kit and our Green In All Grades Report.
 

Nearly 50% of all trees harvested in North America are turned into some type of paper product. Using post-consumer recycled paper reduces the need to log forests. Additionally, the paper industry consumes much more than just our forests. Producing paper from virgin fiber is both energy and water intensive, and releases significant amounts of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere. Using recycled paper measurably reduces these impacts.

Every ton of recycled fiber displacing a ton of virgin fiber saves:

Using recycled paper is the most important step in reducing a publication’s ecological footprint. Paper accounts for approximately over one quarter of the solid waste clogging up U.S. landfills, and while recycling has increased in years past, recovery of printing and writing grades of paper remain extremely low. 

We lend our expertise to create an environmental stewardship policy that illustrates a long-term vision for sustainable publishing, articulating key principles and demonstrating a commitment to environmental stewardship. Publishers that factor sustainability into their core business strategies are well positioned to take advantage of emerging opportunities in the radically changing market environment. Developing a sustainable, strategic paper policy set you up to grow profitably, and the Better Paper Project can assist you every step of the way!

Publisher Responses

The Green America Better Paper Project helps publishers cut through the clutter in order to understand the environmentally beneficial paper options available.

  - Bryan Welch, CEO, Ogden Publications

The Better Paper Project helped us attain our wish to publish a greener magazine by providing the information needed to fit our magazine and budget… As a magazine publisher, we consider them a valuable resource in helping to protect our forests and planet.

 - Sita Stuhlmiller, Editor, Light of Consciousness: Journal of Spiritual Awakening
 

Green America’s Better Paper Project director… agreed to guide us through the thicket of rules, paper suppliers, and acronyms we’d need to learn about to go green.

    - James Shaheen, Editor & Publisher, Tricycle

Carbon capture and storage uses existing technology on new power plants or retrofits old power plants in order to capture up to 90% of carbon dioxide produced in the combustion of fossil fuels. The CO2 is then transported by pipeline or ship where it can be injected into underground geological formations for long term storage (1).

Carbon capture and storage is not a viable option for both environmental and economic reasons.

• Building and retrofitting plants with carbon capture technology, and constructing the transport infrastructure, like ships and pipelines, represents a huge cost investment that could be better spent on clean energy.

• Carbon capture technology exacts an “energy penalty” of 25-40% on power plants, meaning that more coal must be burned to keep up the same rate of energy production (2).

• Since the demand for coal from each plant will be higher, more coal will have to be mined and shipped, increasing the public health and environmental costs associated with coal mining.

• Storing CO2 underground can acidify aquifers, which can cause leaching of heavy metals into groundwater (3).

• Injection of CO2 into geologic formations can cause fracturing, which could cause earthquakes or release large quantities of stored CO2 into the atmosphere (4).

(1) "What Is CCS?" – The Carbon Capture & Storage Association (CCSA). Web. 20 Sept. 2016.

(2) Supekar, Sarang D., and Steven J. Skerlos. "Reassessing the Efficiency Penalty from Carbon Capture in Coal-Fired Power Plants." Environmental Science & Technology Environ. Sci. Technol. 49.20 (2015): 12576-2584. Web.

(3) "IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage." Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2005. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.

(4) Renard, F., E. Gundersen, R. Hellmann, M. Collombet, and Y. Le Guen. "Numerical Modeling of the Effect of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration on the Rate of Pressure Solution Creep in Limestone: Preliminary Results." Oil & Gas Science and Technology - Rev. IFP Oil & Gas Science and Technology 60.2 (2005): 381-99. Web.

While some policymakers support "clean coal," coal can never be clean. It is harmful to both people and the planet. Here are a dozen reasons why.

Coal Contributes to Climate Change

The burning of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, increasing levels of CO2 and other gasses, trapping heat, and contributing to global climate change.

• Coal combustion releases the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O) during combustion. Coal power plants release more greenhouse gases per unit of energy produced than any other electricity source (1).

• Coal supplies around 33% of the energy used for electricity in the United States, which makes coal-fired power plants a prime target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions (2). (Coal use for electricity is declining, by 2018 the electricity energy share for coal has fallen to 27%).

• Luckily, coal power plants are closing down throughout the U.S. as the fuel becomes less profitable due to state and federal regulations, an aging fleet, and competition from other sectors such as natural gas, wind, and solar (3).

• The coal mining process releases methane, which is 87 more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2 over a 20 year period (4).

• Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies have been marketed as a way to address climate emissions from burning coal, by pumping CO2 produced through burning coal underground instead of into the air. However, the technology is extremely expensive, and even if the carbon can be sequestered, the coal-fired plant will still result in destructive coal mining as well as toxic coal ash as a byproduct.

Coal Creates Local Air Pollution

Air pollution is another side-effect of fossil fuel use. Air pollution is generally more regional than the effects of carbon dioxide, and can have devastating impacts on local populations and ecosystems.

• Coal combustion releases sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which react with water and oxygen to form acid rain. Acid rain corrodes buildings and structures and acidifies freshwater environments, damaging aquatic ecosystems (5).

• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react to form ground-level ozone, or smog. Smog can cause a variety of respiratory and cardiovascular effects and is especially dangerous to the elderly, young children, and people with asthma (6).

• Fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) is released into the air in the form of fly ash. This particulate matter gets lodged in the lungs when inhaled and increases the risk for pulmonary diseases, including lung cancer (7).

Coal is Devastating for Water Pollution

Like air pollution, water pollution is another more localized effect of fossil fuel use. Water is usually polluted during the process of extraction or in the handling of waste products. Water pollution can also have devastating impacts on human health and the environment.

• Coal-fired power plants account for 41% of anthropogenic (human-caused) mercury emissions, which can travel long distances before being deposited in soil or water. Mercury accumulates in food-chains and can reach very high levels in many types of fish that are consumed by humans. Mercury is highly toxic and is especially dangerous to children (8).

• Coal combustion waste contains many toxic chemicals and heavy metals, which are known to cause birth defects, reproductive disorders, neurological damage, learning disabilities, kidney disease, and diabetes (9).

• This waste is often stored in large impoundment ponds. Massive spills from breaches in these ponds are documented, and many ponds are currently classified as “high hazard” by the EPA. This means they are at risk to spill and cause significant property damage, environmental damage, injuries, and deaths (9).

• Under certain conditions, impoundment ponds are also known to leach contaminants like arsenic into the soil and groundwater, potentially poisoning freshwater sources (10).

(1) “Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coeffecients.” EIA.gov U.S. Energy Information Administration. Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Aug. 2016.

(2) “Frequently Asked Questions.” EIA.gov. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Apr. 2016. Web. 23 Aug. 2016.

(3) "Impact of EPA’s Regulatory Assault on Power Plants." IER.org Institute for Energy Research, June 2012. Web. 23 Aug. 2016

(4) "Overview of Greenhouse Gases." EPA.gov. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 23 Aug. 2016.

(5) “What is Acid Rain?” EPA.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 2016. Web. 23 Aug. 2016

(6) “Health Effects of Ozone Pollution.” EPA.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 23 Aug. 2016

(7) “Coal Ash Basics." EPA.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. June 2016. Web. 23 Aug. 2016

(8) Trasande, Leonardo, Philip J. Landrigan, and Clyde Schechter. "Public Health and Economic Consequences of Methyl Mercury Toxicity to the Developing Brain." Environmental Health Perspectives 113.5 (2005): 590-96.

(9) "Coming Clean: What the EPA Knows About the Dangers of Coal Ash." The Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice. May 2009. Web. 24 Aug. 2016.

(10) Clean Air Task Force. Dirty Air, Dirty Power: Mortality and Health Damage Due to Air Pollution from Power Plants. June 2004. Web. 24 Aug. 2016.

Natural gas has been promoted as a so-called “transition fuel,” the bridge to renewable energy. Combustion of natural gas emits about half as much carbon as coal, so it has been touted as a potential bridge between an economy that runs mostly on coal and one that runs entirely on renewables.

Despite the fact that natural gas burns cleaner than coal, there are several good reasons why we should focus on renewables and why investment in transition fuels impedes progress:

1. Economic resources are better spent on efficiency and renewable energy. The resources and technology exist to move towards 100% renewable energy. Extra investment in this technology only makes it better and cheaper.
2. Investing in a transition fuel is a dead end. The money spent on natural gas power facilities and infrastructure takes decades to recuperate. Companies would need to use these facilities for their full lifetimes, delaying the switch to renewables for far too long.
3. Investment in natural gas does not incentivize a move to renewable energy. Stakeholders will be actively opposed to laws and regulations that promote clean power at the expense of natural gas companies.
4. Energy companies want to export natural gas from the U.S. overseas and are currently building export facilities on the U.S. coasts. The exporting of natural gas will cause increased investment in pipeline infrastructure, increase natural gas fracking in the U.S., expose communities to the potential for catastrophic leaks or explosions, and slow the transition to renewable energy worldwide.

Green America’s role:

Green America is opposed to natural gas fracking, the building of new natural gas infrastructure, and natural gas exports. Working with our allies, we have mobilized our business and individual members to oppose natural gas fracking at the state level, supported increased federal regulation of natural gas wells to reduce leaks, and opposed export facilities on both coasts. (link to blog posts)

What you can do:

Take action with Green America to oppose natural gas and dirty energy.

Adopt clean energy sources for your electricity, install solar power at home, and increase your energy efficiency at home.

Contact Earthshade Natural Window Fashions: Website | YouTube

If you have conventional window shades, they could be making you sick. C.W. Swanson originally worked for a major window fashions dealer. While on a service call, he realized that the older vinyl shades he was working on still gave off the same strong chemical odors years after installation that the new shades he installed day after day emitted. The persistent smell made him curious, so he started researching. He discovered that vinyl, also known as polyvinyl chloride or PVC, is highly toxic throughout its lifecycle. Making and incinerating vinyl at disposal generates carcinogenic dioxin, and vinyl often releases hormone-disrupting phthalates during use.

Even fabric shades could have toxicity issues, he found, since companies may treat both fabric and vinyl shades with chemicals to repel water, mold, sun-bleaching, and stains. Manufacturers may add toxic heavy metals, untested nano-finishes, and carcinogenic formaldehyde to their products, along with chemical fungicides and UV protectants.

“[I discovered the] emerging ties between basic household items, indoor air quality, and quality of health or life,” says Swanson, who was very surprised to discover that such commonplace items could cause severe health problems.

Swanson says that in his experience, many retailers do not know the origins of or ingredients in the treatments used on the materials they receive from manufacturers. Plus, he says, “Import and trade laws often add another level of potential exposure [to chemicals] through often-required fumigation of certain raw materials.” Raw materials such as woods, bamboo, reeds, grasses, etc. are often fumigated for insects, molds, and mildews when they are imported to the US.

In addition, he says, “most of the third-party rating systems [for window coverings] fail to test products under the true operating circumstances such as sunlight,” he says, noting that heat and light can cause certain chemicals to offgas from some window-covering materials.

So in 1999, Swanson decided to put his research skills toward finding nontoxic window covering alternatives, and he founded Earthshade Natural Window Fashions.

While at a trade show, he met with a man representing a family with three generations of experience in fabric weaving and creating textile products by hand. The two joined together to make Earthshade the natural and chemically sensitive company it is today.

Earthshade Natural Window Fashions has three lines of shades: HappyShades Roman shades, SafeShades roller shades, and Better-Blinds mini- and Venetian blinds. All are low-emission or synthetic-chemical-free.

The company creates HappyShades Roman shades from natural materials, including untreated grasses, reeds, bamboo, and other fibers. It sources these materials from as close to where they will be woven together as possible, directly from farms or small villages in places like Central and South America and Vietnam. Earthshade often works with the indigenous populations of these areas, sometimes creating new sources of income by buying strong, untreated grasses whose only purpose previously was to control erosion.

As a testament to their all-natural make-up, all HappyShades products are compostable when they reach they end of their service life.

“The compostability at the end of the service life is truly a remarkable achievement, as there is no other shading product in the world (We look for others on a regular basis!) that has been tested for compostability,” claims Swanson.

The SafeShades line came into existence after years of the company being asked by green-minded architects to create less-toxic roller shades for schools, hospitals, airports, and other places. SafeShades roller shades come in varieties for light blocking, heat reduction, privacy, insulation, noise reduction, and more. SafeShades are made from polyester, recycled polyester, or a mixture of polyester and cotton. Polyester is an easy-to-clean fabric and lasts for many years, making it practical for schools and hospitals.

The reason Earthshade held out against roller shades for so long was due to the high emissions from conventional roller-shade polyesters.

“Today, all the fabrics we use average many hundreds of parts per million lower in emissions than anything else that’s out there,” says Swanson.

Earthshade also makes mini and Venetian Better-Blinds using recycled aluminum and “minimal plastic”. The slats for Better-Blinds are uncoated.

95 percent of the HappyShades and 50 percent of the Safe-Shades line is suitable for people with chemical sensitives.

Since Earthshade is committed to making its products last a long time, it will send customers replacement parts or walk them through do-it-yourself repair procedures to keep its window coverings in working order. But Swanson is quick to promise that Earthshade products don’t often need repairs.

Selling products through select retailers in seven states or via online mail-order, in a “highly personable and detailed manner,” Earthshade Natural Window Fashions has stayed true to its mission of providing window treatments that are as unique and safe as possible. And that comes from being authentic, which Swanson highly values.

“We want to be transparent,” he says. “We want to tell people what something is rather than what it’s not because we feel people deserve at least a basic level of respect. So authenticity, absolutely.

Contact Calvert Foundation

Many people view investing solely as the hustle and bustle of Wall Street at peak frenzy. Or, perhaps as the result of a ribbon-cutting ceremony in which someone who donated an unfathomable amount of money gleefully smiles in front of a building bearing his or her name. Investing, at its extremes, is those things—but Calvert Foundation m operates on a different model. It aims to channel investment dollars to organizations addressing real needs in low- and middle-income areas.

Calvert Foundation began when the founders of Calvert Investments, a pioneering socially responsible mutual fund company, decided to see if they could find a way to funnel more capital into low-income areas across the US and around the world, and joined with the Ford, MacArthur, and Mott Foundations to make it happen, says Calvert Foundation vice president of investment partnerships, Justin Conway.

As Conway recalls, “From day one, it was, ‘How can we create a financial institution that has a real social justice mission and is able to get this capital to work in communities?’”

So in 1995, they set up Calvert Foundation as a nonprofit investment firm to help bridge the gap between those who want their money to be a part of something good and the organizations doing the good.

Calvert Foundation is a certified community development financial institution (CDFI), which aims to use its investments to economically lift up low- and middle-income areas through community investing.

Community investing is a socially responsible investing strategy that puts investor dollars into building up areas that are often underserved by traditional banks. Community investing dollars may provide fair loans for low-income people to buy a home, start a business, or obtain a college education, enabling them to lift themselves up economically.

Since 1995, over 15,000 investors have invested over $1 billion into Calvert Foundation to support hundreds of sustainable-development nonprofits and social enterprises on the ground in 60 countries and throughout the US. Calvert Foundation disperses the money as loans to advance local solutions to critical challenges in their communities.

The Foundation’s flagship investment vehicle is the Community Investment Note, and its key benefit is that it makes community investing easy: People may invest in the Note for as little as $20 online and through their brokerage accounts.

Investors may choose the cause they want to support— from women’s empowerment to affordable housing—as well as a number of domestic and international places. They can choose their investment term (from 1-10 years) and how much interest their Note will earn (from 0-3 percent). Since the foundation’s inception, over 13,000 people have invested in the Notes.

“It’s one of the ways where individuals with as little as 20 dollars and institutions that are investing tens of millions of dollars can, through our risk-mitigated structure, have a high impact in low-income communities,” says Conway.

For example, investments in the Note supported a loan to IFF, a Midwestern CDFI, which then assisted Beyond Housing, a nonprofit working to build affordable housing, strengthen health and human services, and build community engagement in Pagedale, MO, a low-wealth community of color near St. Louis. Overseas, Note investors helped Healthpoint Services, a sustainable social business enterprise in India’s Punjab region, provide low-cost clean water, wireless Internet access, and health care to those in poverty.

Conway says that the Foundation lowers investor risk by investing in a diverse pool of carefully vetted community development institutions and having layers of reserves to protect against losses. To date, Calvert Foundation boasts a 100 percent repayment rate to Note investors.

The Foundation has created a number of investing opportunities, including its Ours to Own program and its Women Investing in Women Initiative (WIN-WIN).

Launched in 2014, Ours to Own allows investors to support unmet needs in cities they care about, including Denver and Minneapolis, with more cities to be added in the future.

Says Conway, “We wanted to provide a vehicle for people in larger cities in the US to support local organizations and projects there … and that’s been a real success.”

In 2012, Calvert Foundation started the WIN-WIN program to help people invest in and support organizations and projects in the US and internationally that empower women and girls, says Conway. Investments into WIN-WIN have already been instrumental in building a new center for Girls Inc. in downtown Oakland, for example.

Conway, whose first job out of college was with Green America’s Community Investing program, says that investors can rest assured that their money has a positive impact when invested through Calvert Foundation: “I get to work directly with investors and financial advisors, and I get to see the money move.”

And, he says, it moves from vastly different sources, because the Notes’ low minimum investment means that people from a variety of financial backgrounds, as well as organizations and nonprofits that want to support great causes, can get involved.

“Whether it’s a foundation trying to figure out how to do its first program-related investments, or an individual who says, ‘Hey, I’m thinking about how my dollars can have more purpose,’ Calvert Foundation is [a powerful] way to do it,” he says.

Shireen has served as Director of Digital Communications, Online Communications Manager, Food Campaigns Coordinator, Senior Web Developer, and Sustainable Business Standards Committee Member for Green America.

Take action with Green America's campaigns:

Darden—the parent company of Olive Garden, Yard House, LongHorn Steakhouse, and other franchises—has over 1,500 franchise locations, employs 150,000 people, and serves more than 320 million meals per year. It’s the largest sit-down restaurant company in the world. With incredible brand recognition comes incredible power: The company can move the restaurant industry in a more sustainable direction by improving the way it treats workers and procures food.

That’s why Green America, in coalition with 15 allied organizations, has launched the Good Food Now campaign, to demand that Darden adopt better practices. The Good Food Now campaign calls for Darden to improve its labor practices and source 20 percent of its purchases under environmental, health, labor, and animal-welfare criteria aligned with the Good Food Purchasing Policy created by the Los Angeles Food Policy Council. For example, the campaign asks Darden to build its menus around local and regional food. At present, the chain does not have a local food policy. Consequently, since 70 percent of America’s fruit and nuts and 55 percent of its vegetables come from California, the almonds that top a salad at an Olive Garden in New York may have traveled 3,000 miles to end up on that plate.

“By purchasing food that’s traveled across the continent, restaurants are increasing the food’s environmental and climate impact,” says Anna Meyer, food campaigns manager at Green America. “If Darden committed to local and organic purchasing, it could decrease its carbon footprint and boost local economies.”

Darden also needs to improve its treatment of workers. The federal minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13 an hour. Though Darden restaurants meet the federal minimum, that doesn’t mean its workers earn enough to make ends meet. Nationally, the median annual income for tipped workers is under $15,000, which puts them just above the federal poverty line and below what a person making the $7.25 federal minimum wage for hourly work would earn.

Plus, some 60 percent of Darden’s employees are part-time. Chain restaurants often aim to keep their staff at part-time to avoid a legal obligation to provide health insurance, sick leave, and other essential benefits.

“It’s time for Darden restaurants and other big chains to step it up,” says Meyer. “They have the power to effect change through buying local and organic food and ending worker exploitation.”

Tell Darden to be more accountable to workers and the planet: Take action at Good-food-now.com.

Terms and Conditions

Please read this Terms and Conditions of Use Agreement before accessing the Website.

This Terms and Conditions of Use Agreement (this "Agreement") sets the standards of use of Green America's website, and access to the www.greenamerica.org website (the "Web site") for general users, Members of Green America, Members of the Green Business Network at Green America ("GBN", "we", "us", or "our") and other audiences of Green America. By using the Website, you agree to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If you do not agree to the terms and conditions of this Agreement you should immediately cease all usage of the Web site. We reserve the right, at any time, to modify, alter, amend, or update this Agreement without prior notice. Modifications will become effective immediately upon being posted on the Web site. Your continued use of the Web site and the services offered on the Web site after modifications or updates are posted constitutes an acknowledgement and acceptance by you of this Agreement and its amendments, modifications, or updates.

Application of Website

This Agreement shall apply to all users or subscribers of and visitors to the Web site, including users who contribute content, information, or other materials or services on the Web site as well as Members.

Subscription/GBN Members

In order to access certain parts of the Web site, you will be required to subscribe for our services and create a GBN account, thereby becoming a GBN Member (a "Member"). As a Member, you acknowledge and agree that:

(a) you will provide accurate and complete information when creating and/or updating your account;

(b) you are solely responsible for any activity that occurs on your account and you must keep your login information secure;

(c) when completing your assessment and making any updates to your account (including updating the initiatives you have completed) you will provide accurate and factually correct information;

(g) as part of our efforts to ensure compliance with our services and the accuracy of information provided to us, we reserve the right to review the overall progression of a company's performance in social and environmental responsibility based on Green America's strict standards. Upon meeting requirements, a business must undergo a review by Green America's Standards Committee in order to attain the appropriate Seal;

(h) you are subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and

(i) we reserve the right to discontinue and/or revoke your GBN membership as a result of (1) your breach of any of the foregoing, (2) your insolvency, bankruptcy, or assignment for the benefit of creditors, and (3) a review that demonstrates you have provided inaccurate or incorrect information regarding the initiatives that have been completed and complied with.

(j) we reserve the right to revoke your use of the Green America Green Business Seal of Approval at our sole discretion, at any time, for any reason including but not limited to (1) a failure on your part to pay membership dues in a timely manner; (2) complaints about your business practices (including but not limited to customer fraud or performance misrepresentations) or violation of social and environmental principles of membership (including but not limited to such actions as sourcing products made with forced child labor or engaging in discriminatory hiring practices); (3) failure to achieve minimum standards of social and/or environmental performance in GreenGain to qualify for continued participation a special Green America program, such as Green Festivals.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, please notify us immediately of unauthorized use of your GBN account by emailing us at info@greenamerica.org.

Privacy Policy

We respect the privacy of the users, subscribers, Members, and visitors to the Web site. 

Copyright and Trademark Information

All content included or available to end users on the Web site, including text, graphics, images and illustrations is © Green America, with all rights reserved, or is the property of Green America and/or third parties protected by intellectual property rights. All source code related to operation and production of the Web site is © Green America, with all rights reserved, or is the property of Green America and/or third parties protected by intellectual property rights. Any use of materials on the Web site, including reproduction for purposes other than those noted herein, modification, distribution, or replication, any form of data extraction or data mining, or other commercial exploitation of any kind without our prior written permission is strictly prohibited. You agree that you will not use any robot, spider, or other automatic device, or manual process to monitor or copy our web pages or the information contained therein without our prior written permission.

Green Business Network is a proprietary mark of Green America registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Our trademarks, including the aforementioned, may not be used in connection with any product or service that is not provided by us, in any manner that is likely to cause confusion among customers, or in any manner that disparages or discredits us.

All trademarks not owned by us and displayed on the Web site are trademarks of their respective owners, and constitute neither an endorsement nor a recommendation of such owner. In addition, such use of trademarks or links to the Web sites of third parties is not intended to imply, directly or indirectly, that those third parties endorse or have any affiliation with us.

Modifications and Interruption of Service

We reserve the right to modify or discontinue our services with or without notice to you. We shall not be liable to you or any third party should we exercise our right to modify or discontinue our services and/or the Web site. You acknowledge and accept that we do not guarantee continuous, uninterrupted or secure access to the Web site and operation of the Web site may be interfered with or adversely affected by numerous factors or circumstances outside of our control.

Third-Party Sites

The Web site may include links to other sites on the Internet that are owned and operated by online merchants and other third parties. You acknowledge that we are not responsible for the availability of, or the content located on or through, any third-party site. You should contact the site administrator or webmaster for those third-party sites if you have any concerns regarding such links or the content located on such sites. Your use of those third-party sites is subject to the terms of use and privacy policies of each site and we are not responsible therein. We encourage you to review the privacy policies of such third-party sites.

Disclaimer of Warranties

The website and the information and content provided through it are provided by us on an "as is" and on an "as available" basis. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, regarding the use or the results of the website in terms of its correctness, accuracy, reliability, or otherwise. We shall have no liability for any interruptions in the use of the website. To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, we disclaim all warranties of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to any warranties of title, implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, and warranties of non-infringement. You expressly agree that use of the website, including all content, data, or information distributed by, downloaded or accessed from or through the website, is at your sole risk. We assume no responsibility for and make no warranty or representation as to the accuracy, currency, completeness, reliability, or usefulness of the information or content of the website, including without limitation, the estimated environmental and social impact, the cost savings, the ease of implementation, and the overall rating system of initiatives. Some jurisdictions do not allow the exclusion of certain warranties, therefore some of the above warranties may not be applicable.

Limitation of Liability

We shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, and in particular we shall not be liable for any compensatory, special, direct, indirect, consequential, punitive, or incidental damages, or damages for lost profits, loss of revenue, loss of data, loss of or damage to property, or loss of use, arising out of or related to the website or the information contained in it, whether such damages arise in contract, negligence, tort, under statute, in equity, at law, or otherwise, even if we have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Some jurisdictions do not allow for the limitation or exclusion of liability for incidental or consequential damages, therefore some of the above limitations are inapplicable.

Indemnification

You agree to indemnify and hold us, our parent company, any subsidiaries, affiliates, managers, members, officers and/or employees, harmless from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, made by any third party due to or arising out of your use of the Website and our services, the violation of this Agreement, or infringement by you, or other use of our services using your computer, of any intellectual property or any other right of any person or entity.

Disclaimer Regarding Accuracy of Vendor Information

Green America contains links to other websites, including websites that sell products and services. Green America does not warrant or guarantee in any way that prices, shipping costs, taxes, products or descriptions, or any other content on the Websites is accurate, complete, reliable, current or error-free. Site content is provided for informational purposes only and Green America shall have no liability for inaccuracy or incompleteness in product or service content, user ratings or commentary, or other content on the Website. If there is any discrepancy between information on the Websites and information on a merchant's or service provider's site, the information on the merchant's or service provider's site shall govern.

Governing Jurisdiction/Trial by Jury

This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the District of Columbia as they apply to agreements made and solely performed therein. You irrevocably consent and waive all objection to personal jurisdiction and venue in the state and federal courts located in the District of Columbia, USA, and you shall not commence or prosecute any suit or action except in the foregoing courts. Each of the parties hereto knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally waives any rights it may have to a trial by jury in respect of any litigation based hereon, or arising out of, under, or in connection with, this agreement, or any course of conduct, course of dealing or statements (whether verbal or written) relating to the foregoing. This provision is a material inducement for the parties hereto to enter into this agreement.

Compliance with Laws

You assume all knowledge of applicable law and are responsible for compliance with any such laws. You may not use the Website or our services in any way that violates applicable local, state, federal, or international laws, regulations, statutes, or other government requirements. You further agree not to transmit any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, federal, or national law or regulation.

Notification of Claimed Copyright Infringement

Pursuant to Section 5.12(c) of the Copyright Revision Act, as enacted through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we designate the following as our agent for receipt of notifications of claimed copyright infringement:

Green America 
1612 K Street, Suite 600 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
contact@greenamerica.org

Other Terms

If any provision of this Agreement shall be unlawful, void, or unenforceable for any reason, the other provisions (and any partially-enforceable provision) shall not be affected thereby and shall remain valid and enforceable to the maximum possible extent. You agree that this Agreement and any other agreements referenced herein may be assigned by us, in our sole discretion, to a third party in the event of a sale, merger, or acquisition. This Agreement shall apply in addition to, and shall not be superseded by, any other written agreement between us in relation to your participation as a subscriber to our services. You agree that by accepting this Agreement, you are consenting to the use and disclosure of your personally identifiable information and other practices.

The following Web sites are operated by Green America, located at 1612 K Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20006. Our telephone number is (202)872-5307.

For many eco-warriors, it's important to live the lifestyle of eco eating. Whether that's committing to Meatless Mondays or dabbling with pescatarianism, the importance of buying organic always rings through.

The organic label is a great way to ensure your food is coming from farms that do not use GMOs (genetically modified organisms) and harsh chemical pesticides and fertilizers. It is becoming increasingly common to see foods with this label not just at Whole Foods and natural food stores but at any grocery store in your area. You may already be buying organic food whenever possible, but is there an even better option?

The answer is a resounding yes.

While buying organic is important (and the best choice by far at the supermarket), buying locally grown food from farmer’s markets in your community can be a superior choice for a number of reasons. Here are our top 9! Provided that the farms you buy from locally minimize the use of harsh chemicals like pesticides and fertilizers and use sustainable practices, they will beat out grocery store organic every time. These farms may or may not be certified organic but by asking a few simple questions you can learn a lot about their commitment to sustainability. Read on and find out how frequenting your local farmer’s market can benefit the environment, the community, and your health.

1. Flavor

Ethically speaking, we want a lot from our food but at the end of the day food needs to actually taste good. Once you do a side-by-side flavor comparison of a store-bought organic tomato and a juicy heirloom tomato from your local farmers’ market you may never step foot into a grocery store again. Shipping food across the country which often arrives in your kitchen four to seven days after it was picked can really affect flavor and freshness negatively. The produce at farmer’s markets is typically harvested the day before the market, giving you the freshest and tastiest fruits and vegetables possible. An added bonus, you’re more likely to get your picky kids to eat their vegetables when they are filled with flavor.

2. Nutrition

Along the same lines, as flavor is lost throughout the shipping journey, nutrition can be lost too. Additionally, foods that are often shipped before they are ripe (like tomatoes) never develop their full nutrient content. The bright alluring colors you see of the vegetables arranged on farmer’s market stands are a great indicator of their high nutrient densities. Bolster your health and immunity as winter cold season wraps up with a rainbow of produce from your local farmer’s market!

3. Supporting Local Farmers

Buying local supports the people who work hard in your community and are committed to sustainable agriculture. Organic food is undoubtedly grown with better practices than conventional agriculture, but the label does allow for farming on a more industrial scale which can include mono-cropping.

You can use your money to support smaller, diversified vegetable operations that foster soil health and encourage biodiversity on their land. The farmer’s market is a great opportunity to have a face-to-face conversation with your farmer and see what their practices are like, what inputs they use, and how they strategize with sustainability in mind. You may find that there are farmers in your area who are not certified organic but whose practices exceed the ecological requirements for the certification.

4. Environmental Benefits

In addition to supporting your wonderful local farmers’ sustainable practices, cutting out shipping emissions is sure to help lower your carbon footprint. Produce in grocery stores is shipped an average of 1,500 miles to get to consumers whereas farmer’s market produce arrives from farms which are unlikely to be over 100 miles away. Furthermore, the packaging waste in grocery stores can be avoided at farmer’s markets, especially if you come prepared with reusable bags.

5. Ethical eating

While organic certified brands have better animal welfare standards than their conventional counterparts, they are not perfect. The organic certification requires that animals have access to outdoor pasture but does not specify requirements for size or duration of that access.  The Farmer’s market is a great place to find farmers raising animals for meat and eggs in ways that are both environmentally sustainable and ethically responsible. Ask farmers about the size of the pasture animals are contained in and how long they are given access to pasture. Questions about the animals’ diet and use of antibiotics will also give you an idea of their standard of care. If you truly want to see where animals are being raised, many farms participating in markets will be happy to have you drop by for a farm visit!

6. Educational opportunities

It’s important to know where your food comes from, and the best source to learn from is the people who grow it! Don’t be afraid to ask questions about vegetable varieties you may not have seen before, growing methods, and how to use different vegetables. Farmers have pride in and are usually happy to talk about their work. Many farmer’s market stands also have literature and signage about topics ranging from seasonality to cooking and recipes. Use the farmer’s market as a classroom in your sustainable food education.

7. Eating seasonally

Your local grocery stores purchase food from across the country so that people can eat tomatoes, zucchini, and peppers in the middle of winter when these foods are unable to be grown locally. While having access to these delicious foods year round seems great, there is a lot to be said for eating locally and seasonally. After being shipped long distances, these foods are never as flavorful or nutritious as they were when first picked. Eating seasonally gives you a chance to take a break from foods when they are out of season and then become excited when they are available in their best form. A seasonal diet also helps you branch out and try foods that are in season which you may not have previously considered.

8. Diversify your diet

Farmer's markets offer a wealth of produce that you usually won’t find at grocery stores. From heirloom varieties to produce that doesn’t ship well or is regionally specific to your area, you will find new and interesting fruits and vegetables to try each week. Farmers often have suggestions for how to best use these foods that they will share with you. The internet is also a great resource to find recipes and nutritional information for these unique and exciting varieties.

9. Have fun!

Aside from all its numerous benefits, the farmer’s market is simply a fun weekend activity! Especially with spring approaching, spending the day outdoors taking in the inviting sights and smells of the farmer’s market is an amazing way to spend time with friends and family. Find a farmer’s market in your area today and go above and beyond organic, you won’t want to go back!

Read about more eco eating tips, challenges, and fun facts at GreenAmerica.org/good-food.

From 1964 to 1992, the oil giant Texaco extracted billions of barrels of oil from the Amazonian rainforests of Ecuador. During that time, the company dumped more than 16 billion gallons of toxic, carcinogenic wastewater into the waterways that Indigenous communities used for drinking and bathing. The widespread contamination caused an epidemic of cancer, miscarriages, and other severe health problems.

Rebecca Adamson (right) with members of the Goba people of the Lower Zambezi in Zambia.

Beginning in 1993, Texaco became embroiled in a seemingly endless battle with local Indigenous tribes seeking reparations. Ownership of Texaco passed to Chevron in 2001, and in 2011, Chevron was ordered by a provincial Ecuadorian judge to pay US$19 billion to the Indigenous communities affected by Texaco’s operations. Chevron has so far refused to pay the settlement.

The Ecuadorian tribes have responded by filing lawsuits to seize Chevron assets in Ecuador, Brazil, Canada, and Argentina until the $19 billion is paid. As a result, in October 2012, an Ecuadorian court froze US$200 million worth of Chevron Corporation’s assets in the country. And in November, an Argentine court froze up to US$19 billion of Chevron’s assets in Argentina.

Chevron’s stock price has plummeted since the October ruling, falling well below its fellow oil and gas conglomerates. A letter signed by investors holding US$580 billion worth of Chevron stock states that the Ecuador case has led them “to question whether the company’s leadership can properly manage the array of environmental and human rights challenges and risks that it faces.”

In the letter, the shareholders acknowledge that Chevron’s reputation with the public has been significantly damaged by the Amazon case, and request a meeting “to discuss how the company will protect its reputation and shareholder value moving forward.”

With both court and public opinion worldwide shifting in favor of Indigenous rights and associated environmental issues, companies are facing critical damage to their reputations and bottom lines if they do not bring their policies in line with the interests of Indigenous Peoples.

As in the case of Chevron, the pressure to change is coming increasingly from organized shareholder activists. By using your shareholder power, in partnership with the Indigenous rights movement, you can help reshape the business model of entire industries to respect, to cooperate with, and ultimately to benefit Indigenous Peoples—and the social and environmental justice they fight for.

The Risks of Ignoring Indigenous Rights

Chevron is not the first company to ignore the rights of local Indigenous communities when operating on their lands. Of the 28 major oil, gas, and mining companies operating in Indigenous territory around the world, only five have policies that explicitly commit to acquiring the “Free, Prior, and Informed Consent” (FPIC) of local communities before planning any operations on their lands, according to a study by Oxfam America.

But, like Chevron, those companies that do not adhere to FPIC guidelines are beginning to pay the price.

In 2012, for example, Talisman Energy became the fifth oil company to withdraw operations from Block 64 of the Peruvian Amazon because of resistance from the Achuar and other communities affected by its operations.

“We are the owners and the original people of this land,” Peas Peas Ayui, the president of the National Achuar Federation of Peru, told Amazon Watch. “No outside person or company may enter our territory by force, without consultation and without asking us.”

Through a growing number of court cases at both the national and international levels, Indigenous communities are successfully obstructing the progress and completion of massive projects. A federal judge in Brazil recently ruled that local Indigenous communities had not been properly consulted in the construction of Norte Energia’s Bel Monte dam.

The ruling resulted in the temporary halting of construction on the dam and may threaten the completion of the US$18.5 billion project.

Failure to acquire FPIC at the very beginning of a drilling or mining project not only threatens operations, it can result in crippling reputational damage and loss of investor confidence.

During a recent FPIC panel convened by Oxfam, Dr. Chris Anderson, the Americas director for Communities & Social Performance at the Rio Tinto Limited mining company, answered plainly the question of why investors are demanding that FPIC be integrated into project planning: “When you don’t adequately consult with a community and they don’t want an aspect of your project, you just simply don’t have a project, and therefore you may not have a business,” he said.

Shareholders for Indigenous Communities

As a shareholder, you are uniquely positioned to bring about big changes in the global market by investing in the right companies and influencing those companies to adopt policies that respect Indigenous rights.

Investors have three main ways of supporting the rights of Indigenous Peoples:

1) Screen your stocks. Ask your investment manager whether your investments take into account the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Don’t forget to ask about your 401(k) or other retirement fund. You can provide your investment manager with First Peoples Worldwide’s Indigenous Peoples Investment Guidelines [PDF], as well as this article, which s/he can use to assess how companies deal with Indigenous Peoples. An advisor specializing in socially responsible investing (SRI) has access to research data that can help you invest in companies with best practices.

For example, the Ethical Investment Research Service, a research provider that focuses on SRI, has identified 250 large-cap companies that have high to medium risk exposure to Indigenous Peoples. EIRIS offers this list to investment managers as a tool to serve their clients, so if your manager isn’t using this product already, suggest that s/he do so.

2) Be a shareholder activist. As a shareholder, you have a great deal of influence in helping lagging companies develop better practices.

In 2009, shareholders successfully steered the policies of one of the world’s largest gold producers toward improved Indigenous rights policies. Newmont Mining shareholders initially filed a resolution calling for an independent “global review and evaluation of the company’s policies and practices relating to existing and potential opposition from local communities to our company’s operations, and the steps taken to reduce such opposition.” But through ongoing dialogue with company leadership, the shareholders advocating for the review convinced the company to support it, and Newmont itself ultimately asked shareholders to support the resolution. That year, 92 percent of Newmont Mining’s shareholders voted for the resolution, and the company’s Community Relations Review is now a critical part of Newmont’s operations planning worldwide.

As an individual stockholder, you have the opportunity to vote via your annual proxy ballot to support all resolutions calling for better Indigenous Peoples policies. The Interfaith Center for Corporate Responsibility maintains a list of all the resolutions affecting Indigenous Peoples that are filed each year.

Keep in mind that if you own mutual funds, fund managers vote your proxies for you. Ask your mutual fund managers how they vote on Indigenous rights—if you don’t like their answers, it may be time to look for another mutual fund, preferably an SRI fund.

Perhaps more important than voting proxies is to engage with the companies you invest in. Ask your investment managers how they handle corporate engagement, and encourage them to represent your concerns when interacting with companies. You can also write a letter to the CEO or board and ask questions about how the company maintains transparency and addresses shareholders’ concerns about Indigenous rights. Most companies can be contacted through their investor relations websites.

3) Invest in Indigenous communities. According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the territories of Indigenous Peoples comprise up to 24 percent of the Earth’s land surface, yet these areas harbor 80 percent of the world’s remaining healthy ecosystems. This is not a coincidence. Indigenous practices have been protecting and preserving the natural environment since long before the advent of the modern economy. Indigenous economies are based on taking only what is needed from the land and sharing it equally, ensuring a strong, sustainable and equitable society in which everyone has enough not only to live, but to thrive. There are dozens of community development financial institutions (CDFIs) that work directly with Indigenous communities to create local entrepreneurs, homeowners, and tribal businesses, as well as to develop the infrastructure and knowledge that lead to solid and culturally appropriate governance, legal systems, commercial practices, and community-focused financial management.

The Lakota Funds (lakotafunds.org), for example, are considered one of the grandmothers of the community investment industry. Since their inception in 1986, these community development loan funds have loaned over $6 million, resulting in the creation of 1,235 jobs and nearly 450 businesses on or near the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. According to a recent study, the Funds have raised the real per capita income of Shannon County residents consistently and significantly throughout a 20-year study period. From their basis in traditional Native values, the Funds have served as the model for connecting capital markets to low-income areas.

By buying shares in Native CDFIs like the Lakota Funds, you are investing in the growth of Indigenous economies and strengthening the capacity of Indigenous communities for self-governance.

Looking Ahead

If Indigenous Peoples can secure their rights to FPIC, a new precedent will be set for all communities fighting for the right to sovereignty. The shifts that are taking place in the business models of global corporations, and the way they see their social responsibilities, will have lasting impacts on the world’s major industries.

With dedication from shareholders, communities, NGOs, and companies alike, the future global economy will be more equitable, more sustainable, and ultimately more profitable.

Uloop: By Danielle Wirsansky March 22, 2017

Formerly Co-op America, the Green America organization has become one of the country’s leaders in establishing a green economy. Since its inception in 1982, its mission has remained to be to “provide economic strategies and practical tools for businesses and individuals to solve today’s social and environmental problems.” They do so by providing sustainable opportunities to cut down on paper waste and provide alternatives.

As of March 21, they have rolled out their latest project, called “One Million Trees,” in which they encourage the magazines of higher education institutions to adopt greener practices, particularly using recycled paper for their publications, like alumni magazines.

According to a recent press release, Beth Porter, the director of Green America’s Better Paper Project, said the following:

“The impact of losing one million trees a year is just too much for alumni magazines that could look every bit as good using recycled paper. Universities across the country have a chance to greatly influence recycled paper demand by printing their alumni magazines with better paper that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and lessens impacts on forests. If you are a college graduate, please consider calling your university’s alumni office to tell them you want your alma mater to switch to recycled paper.”

The impact such a change could make if instituted by universities across the nation is enormous. Statistics show that the tens of millions of alumni magazines waste enough energy to power a small town for an entire year. If universities committed to using 100% recycled paper in their publications, a million trees, enough water to fill 700 Olympic sized pools, and more would be saved each year. By decreasing the use of virgin paper, endangered forests, climate change, and polluted local communities with paper production companies will gain relief.

“Americans are increasingly asking businesses and institutions to take active steps to support the environment,” said Todd Larsen, executive co-director of Green America. “We’ve heard from thousands of college and university graduates who are asking their universities to use recycled paper in their magazines. As university students are increasingly urging their schools to reduce their environmental footprint, switching to recycled papers is a great way for schools to lower their carbon, water, and forest impacts.”

Participating universities can commit to better paper practices and to the One Million Trees campaign by using a minimum of 30 percent recycled papers for their publications and using Forestry Stewardship Council-certified fiber for any new paper materials that might be required

Contact Better World Club

If you belong to AAA, the popular roadside-assistance and travel insurance program, you may inadvertently be supporting Big Oil, more roads, and fewer bikes on those roads.

AAA sits at the forefront of the highway lobby, a group of automobile-, cement-, oil-, and tire-interest groups that advocate for the construction of more roads and against safety and infrastructure provisions for other forms of travel (like bike lanes and sidewalks). Better World Club m , founded by boyhood friends Mitch Rofsky and Todd Silberman, is an eco-friendly auto club offering the same services (and more!) as AAA, backed by green values.

Through its network of more than 40,000 service providers, Better World Club (BWC) provides nationwide 24/7 roadside assistance. In addition, BWC boasts a one-of-a-kind bicycle roadside assistance program for cyclists.

Because Better World Club is not part of the highway lobby, BWC members can rest assured that their money is not contributing to causes they do not agree with. The company makes a point of supporting efforts to regulate auto emissions and develop mass transit and bike-friendly cities and towns.

Additionally, BWC is committed to donating one percent of its yearly revenue to environmental and climate-related issues while still maintaining prices that are competitive with AAA and other auto clubs. In addition, it offers discounts for hybrid vehicle owners. BWC will match local AAA rates for drivers looking to switch and will waive the new membership sign-up fee for those leaving AAA.

BWC, a carbon-neutral company, also offers access to hotel and car-rental savings, maps, trip-routing, and travel protections at comparable rates to AAA—all while staying true to its green values.

Helping sustainable and purpose-driven companies achieve their online business goals

Contact Red Sequoia: Website | Facebook | Twitter

Ben Schulkin’s commitment to an environmentally conscious lifestyle began in college with Gaia, a campus environmental advocacy group he participated in as he studied to become a web developer. Through Gaia, he’d learned how and why to offset his carbon footprint, which translated in adulthood to prioritizing clean energy to power his home, as well as growing a portion of his family’s food through micro gardening. It also motivated him to start his own green web-design agency after graduation.

“Originally, I was looking for a way to leverage my technical knowledge and web development background while providing benefit to the environment as well. This desire is what led me to create Red Sequoia,” says Schulkin, who founded the company in 2008.

Red Sequoia provides green web design and helps clients reach their target audiences through online marketing initiatives.

Most people do not think of the web-design industry as one with a particularly high environmental burden. However, Schulkin explains, large-scale server farms, or the data centers that host websites, are often powered by burning significant amounts of coal, and they require extensive cooling systems that also use copious amounts of energy.

With traditional web-hosting methods amassing large carbon footprints, Schulkin and his colleagues searched for greener options for their clients. At present, all of Red Sequoia’s websites utilize DreamHost, a web-hosting company that is entirely carbon neutral as a result of investing in US-based renewable energy projects through carbon offsets.

Also, Red Sequoia is a virtual company with no central offices, so there are a number of inherent efficiencies. It does not have employees commuting to work and does not have to power, heat, and cool an office space. The two major home offices, Schulkin’s and web project manager Nathan Coffey’s, are powered by Ethical Electric m ,a company that provides wind and solar electricity to consumers across the country via their existing utility.

Red Sequoia’s commitment to creating positive environmental change draws clients of similar ethics. Recently, for example, Red Sequoia took on an account for the Great Swamp Watershed Association, a nonprofit committed to protecting its local watershed.

“We could design websites for anybody,” says Schulkin. However, “more than 70 percent of our clients are focused on making positive social and environmental change.By working with them, we are helping them to achieve their goals. And by doing that, we’re helping the community and the environment.”

Ever wonder why the tomatoes you buy at the grocery store just don’t measure up to the more unique-looking ones you find at the farmer’s market? Or why the tomato slices served at restaurants don’t taste all that tomato-y? There is a complex history behind why this is, but it has a lot to do with shipping food across the country so we can eat produce that is not currently in season.

As anyone who has squeezed a tomato knows, tomatoes are soft and yielding. This consistency makes them difficult to ship, as they are often damaged in the process. To combat this problem, tomatoes are typically picked and shipped while still firm and green (before they are ripe.) They are gassed with ethylene before being sold in supermarkets to give them the red color consumers expect.

While this process works very well for shipping tomatoes long distances and keeping them visibly appealing, the most important part is lost along the way--flavor. Tomatoes don’t develop their delicious, acidic flavor fully until they ripen. Halting that process to allow for shipping completely strips tomatoes of their rich taste.

Surely by now someone could’ve innovated a solution to this problem? Well, some have tried. The Flavr Savr tomato was genetically engineered (GE) and introduced to the public by Calgene in 1994. Scientists turned off the softening gene so that this variety of tomato could be picked ripe and then transported easily. It also remained red and fresh-looking off the vine for a month or more while natural tomatoes left out for the same period of time would shrivel and rot. Monsanto bought the patent for these tomatoes and stopped selling them after rats fed GMO potatoes developed gut lesions and public opinion of GMOs plummeted. As a result, GE tomatoes are not currently sold in grocery stores.

People continue to use technology to try to put flavor back into grocery store tomatoes. According to Modern Farmer, researchers have sequenced the genomes of nearly 400 different varieties of tomatoes and used a consumer panel to determine which genes make for the tastiest tomato. The final result? 13 chemical compounds scientists believe can be used in plant crossbreeding to create universally delicious tomatoes.

It is great that these scientists plan to use traditional breeding methods rather than genetic engineering, but is this really the solution? Sequencing genomes and attempting to create a genetically perfect tomato seems like a complicated Band-Aid for the actual problem: the way that we grow and distribute tomatoes. Wouldn’t it be so much simpler to eat delicious, locally grown tomatoes only while they are in season?

If limiting your enjoyment of delicious, fresh tomatoes to their growing season (which varies depending on where you live) seems like a hardship, there are solutions:

1. Grow your own!

If you’re willing to put in some work and have space available in your backyard or community, there are a variety of tips and tricks to stretching tomato season to its limits. Among these tips are experimenting with different varieties, using blanket covers to warm crops when the temperature drops, and growing cherry tomatoes indoors in the winter. A greenhouse or hoop house can also provide you with a bounty of tomatoes in almost any temperature.

2. Find a farmer

You can do some research online or ask around at the farmer’s market to see if any farmers in your area are    already employing these techniques and can sell you the end product. Make sure to talk to farmers about their growing practices and ensure they do not use harmful chemical pesticides and fertilizers. They may be certified organic or adhere to organic methods but not have a certification.

3. Preserve

 It is also possible to enjoy tomatoes when they are unavailable fresh by preserving them or buying them preserved in sauces and pastes or in canned form. When purchasing, make sure to look for the organic certification. Conventionally grown tomatoes are covered in pesticides, several of which are likely carcinogens.

Ultimately, eating locally and seasonally has so many benefits to the environment and your community that waiting out the colder months sans tomatoes is worth it. Eating seasonally can be exciting, with anticipation building towards the end of each season for the specific foods the next season will bring in their freshest and most enjoyable forms. Focusing your diet on what is currently in season may also cause you to branch out and try some new foods and recipes you may have never enjoyed otherwise. Give it a try and you may never have to experience the mealy texture and cardboard-like taste of a grocery store tomato again!

Contact Bella Luna Toys: Website | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube

Early childhood teacher, author, and mother Sarah Baldwin wants to change the way we think about how children play in the 21st century. Baldwin is the owner of Bella Luna Toys, an online and retail store that offers simple, beautifully made toys such as wooden animals, dress-up clothing, puppets, and games that are reminiscent of a time before four year-olds had iPhones.

Baldwin bought Bella Luna Toys in 2009, when it was a smaller online store. By 2015, she’d also opened up a retail shop in Rockland, ME, and had grown the business to over $1 million.

“I was ready to make a change in my life, so I resigned from my teaching job,” says Baldwin. “Almost as soon as I did, I received a newsletter about this website that was for sale that sold Waldorf toys and crafts— these were toys that I knew well and was passionate about. I was excited to introduce them to new parents.”

“Waldorf toys” refer the the types of toys that are used in Waldorf education. Waldorf schools encourage children to engage in free play with natural materials to help cultivate their intellectual and creative abilities.

Baldwin says Waldorf toys should be “open ended” and “leave a lot to the imagination.” Consequently, none of Bella Luna’s toys are electronic, nor are they very intricate.

“My goal is to help shape future generations and raise creative thinkers, rather than just passive consumers seeing other people’s ideas.”
—Sarah Baldwin, Bella Luna Toys

They also lack the plastics and toxins often found in conventional toys. Baldwin avoids plastic toys because some types of plastic, such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) can be harmful after long-term use because they contain hormone-disrupting phthalates. Other toys can contain lead, arsenic, and cadmium, all of are harmful if they are ingested.

Baldwin has one guiding principle when deciding what toys to sell at Bella Luna: “I don’t buy a toy I would not give to my own children or to my students, even if I know that it is a popular toy, and it will sell.”

Instead, she buys toys that are made with natural materials such as wood, cotton, and wool, with nontoxic finishes and vegetable dyes. Some are even 100 percent organic. All are built to last—and be handed down to future generations.

Baldwin also screens suppliers for ethical production, and she seeks out fair trade toys, ensuring fair wages and healthy working conditions for workers. In addition, Baldwin buys green electricity for the retail shop and uses carbon-neutral shipping.

“Studies confirm that imaginative play in early childhood leads to creative thinking later in life. My goal is to help shape future generations of creative thinkers, rather than generations of passive consumers seeing other people’s ideas,” says Baldwin.

“I had a vision that Bella Luna Toys wouldn’t just be an e-commerce site—it would be a platform to promote the importance of play, and preserve the childhood right to play.”

Trash from old buildings gets a second life—while creating jobs

Contact Community Forklift: Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube

Imagine a bulldozer shattering a house and violently shoving it into a jagged pile of crumbling refuse. The force of this collision releases a spray of toxic dust into the air, which later settles on the surrounding neighborhood.

The crushed and tangled pieces from this demolished building will be buried in a landfill, where they will slowly decompose for centuries. It’s not a healthy image—for the surrounding communities or for the planet.

This type of demolition is the leading method of removing condemned or unwanted buildings from a city’s landscape. In fact, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, building debris comprises almost 40 percent of the country’s solid waste.

Fortunately, there is a less wasteful alternative to demolition: deconstruction. Workers carefully disassemble buildings so materials remain intact—separating hazardous parts from pieces that can be reused. And deconstruction creates more jobs than demolition, because multiple workers are needed to perform a variety of specialized tasks.

Since 2005, Community Forklift has promoted deconstruction in the Washington, DC, area. By collecting, donating, and reselling salvaged building materials and appliances, this nonprofit has diverted $12 million worth of building materials away from landfills since its founding.

“There’s so much [used] building material out there that there could be a reuse store for every Home Depot,” says marketing and outreach director Ruthie Mundell. “[Americans are] so proud of ourselves for recycling soda cans, but we need to be recycling houses, too, because [they’re] such a huge part of the waste stream.”

Community Forklift is a project of the DC-based nonprofit, Sustainable Community Initiatives (SCI), which runs job-training and community-improvement projects that benefit the environment.

About 12 years ago, the people behind SCI hired instructors to train local job seekers in deconstruction and won a bid to take apart some old cottages in DC. The deconstruction project turned a profit by selling the cottages’ recovered maple flooring, earning enough money to compensate the instructors and the trainees.

However, the trainees could not put their new skills to use, because DC had no outlets to sell salvaged materials from construction sites.

So SCI, along with a handful of other local environmental groups, founded Community Forklift to address this need. They didn’t go into the deconstruction business themselves, but rented a warehouse and hired employees to pick up donated cast-off materials from homes and construction sites.

“The concept of … building-material reuse just makes so much sense,” says Mundell. “Not only are we not sending things to the landfill, [but] more important than that is the fact that we’re reducing consumption and demand for virgin material. It’s really only the last few generations [that] we’ve become so wasteful.”

The founders chose the name “Community Forklift” because the organization lifts up the community by selling materials at 25 to 75 percent below their retail prices, lending or donating materials to local nonprofits, and through its HELP (spell this acronym out here) program, distributing items to needy families at no cost.

Last year, Community Forklift gave away nearly $50,000 worth of supplies. Contractors also get a lift as low-cost materials enable them to keep projects affordable. The Community Forklift warehouse itself also provides green jobs for 45 employees.

Community Forklift commonly receives donations that include kitchen cabinets, sinks, doors, windows, lumber, tools, and vintage furniture. Because it serves the bustling DC metro area, it also obtains many eccentric donations. Each year the Folklife Festival donates its banners, which are often reused as tarps. Recently, the Architects of the Capitol brought in a large amount of vintage ashtrays, which a local artist made a unique glass wall out of.

The warehouse also gets strange objects from production companies that pitch films to the Discovery Channel, ranging from a wooden jail cell to a pillar etched with Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Community Forklift also paves the way for creative and exotic reuse projects: Last summer, a couple built a backyard gazebo out of old doors and window sashes. In addition, many of DC’s newer shops and restaurants contain vintage or unique items from the warehouse.

“[In some areas], every other business has used our materials to add some character to their space,” says Mundell. “It’s so fun to feel like we’re part of the fabric of the city now.”

Because 80 percent of customers hear about Community Forklift through a friend, the business hosts several events each year to showcase its merchandise while educating customers about the benefits of deconstruction and reuse.

In winter of 2013, Community Forklift won Green America’s $5,000 People and Planet Award, which goes to businesses that help their employees, communities, and the environment.

Would you like cleaner clothes, a cozier home, lower utility bills, and to be a leader in curbing climate change? Then consider replacing your old appliances with new, energy efficient appliances. The US consumes nearly one million dollars worth of energy every minute, according to the Department of Energy (DOE). By choosing high-efficiency appliances over conventional models, last year’s US consumers saved $12 billion on utility bills and avoided greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 23 million cars. Get in on the energy savings with the strategic appliance advice we’ve gathered for you here.

When to Replace and Recycle

When your old reliables break down, replacing them with the most efficient models is a top priority. You’ll see lower energy bills and reduce your global warming emissions.

Plus, you’ll get the best advantages of new technologies. Though they can cost more up front, energy efficient appliances will save you enough in utility costs that they’ll often pay for themselves in a short time. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), efficient appliances use ten to 50 percent less energy and water than standard models.

If you have old working appliances, use the guidelines we offer in this article to consider replacing them with new, technologically advanced energy-efficient models.

In all cases, make sure you recycle, rather than donate, your old appliances, so you retire energy-guzzling models. Stores that sell and install new appliances often have recycling services. The EPA has a online resource on responsible appliance disposal. Or enter your zip code at Earth911 to find a recycling site near you.

Look for ENERGY STAR

In 1992, EPA introduced ENERGY STAR, a voluntary labeling program to help consumers easily find the most energy-efficient products to protect the environment and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. EPA partners with the DOE to evaluate appliances, office equipment, lighting, home electronics, and even homes and office buildings for the Energy Star label.

The Energy Star label means that a product meets or exceeds strict energy-efficiency guidelines established by the EPA and DOE—so you’ll always find it on the most efficient washing machines, refrigerators, dishwashers, and heating and cooling units. It’s important to remember that not all Energy Star appliances are of equal efficiency, so you should still compare models. To meet international targets for curbing climate change, make it your goal to choose appliances that save at least 25 percent in energy consumption over your current models.

Cooling and Heating

The air conditioning and heating unit in your house can use up to one-half of total home energy consumption. Cutting your energy use here, therefore, is one of the most effective ways to reduce your home’s ecological footprint.

Swapping old cooling and heating systems for ENERGY STAR models can cut annual energy costs by 20 percent or more. Efficient models allow you to program the system to the minimum amount of energy you need to cool or heat a room at different times of day.

Central air conditioners (ACs) are rated according to their seasonal energy-efficiency ratio (SEER), which is the cooling output divided by the power input. Basically, a higher SEER means a more efficient air conditioner. Most AC units range from a SEER rating of 6 to 18. As of 2020, Federal regulations as of 2016 state that homes in Northern states must have at least a 13 SEER rating, while households in the Southeast and Southwest must have a rating of 14 SEER or higher. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recommends a SEER rating of at 14.5 for cooler or 15 for hot climates.

Most US homes are heated with a furnace or boiler. ENERGY STAR furnaces have an annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE) rating of 90 percent or greater, making them about 15 percent more efficient than standard models. The most efficient boilers have an AFUE rating of 85 percent or greater. (If you have another type of heating system, visit www.energystar.gov to see what you should look for.)

• When to replace: If your heating and cooling units are old, worn out, or inefficient, you should replace them with high-efficiency models—especially if you use one or the other nearly every day. Your system technician or an energy auditor (available through your local utility) can help you evaluate your existing system and decide whether to replace it.
• Efficiency Tips: Most people buy AC units that are unnecessarily large for their homes; visit www.energystar.gov to find what size unit your home needs. Choose “zone heating and cooling” to heat or cool only the rooms you’re using. Use a programmable thermostat. Get your systems tuned up according to manufacturer guidelines. And plug and seal all leaks in your home.

Refrigerators

In most homes, the refrigerator is the biggest energy-depleting kitchen appliance. More than a third of fridges in use in the US are more than 10 years old, costing the 70 million people who own them $4.4 billion a year in energy costs. Energy-efficient refrigerators have highly efficient compressors, improved insulation, and more precise temperature and defrost mechanisms to lower energy consumption.

• When to replace: If you bought your fridge before 1993, replace it as soon as possible. A new ENERGY STAR refrigerator with automatic defrost and a top-mounted freezer uses 300-500 kWh per year, whereas one from before 1993 uses 1,539 kWh per year and one from before 2000 uses 1,031 kWh per year. Replacing your energy guzzler with an efficient model will also keep 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere each year.
• Efficiency Tips: Position your refrigerator away from a heat source, like an oven, dishwasher, or direct sunlight. Keep the condenser coils clean. Check that the refrigerator door seals airtight. If you can program the temperature, set your refrigerator between 35° and 38°F and your freezer at 0°F. Pack your refrigerator and freezer to maximum capacity.

Chest Freezers

If you have a top-loading deep freezer in your home it could be costing you too. Average chest freezers from before 1993 use 985 kWh per year and ones from before 2000 use 680 kWh per year, compared to the 100-300 kWh per year efficiency of modern freezers.

• When to replace: If you bought your freezer before 1993, replace it as soon as possible. A new ENERGY STAR freezer could save you the energy per year mentioned above, plus you could keep more than 1,000 lbs of CO2 out of the atmosphere, or 10,000 lbs out of the atmosphere if you properly recycle your old model.
• Efficiency Tips: Like a fridge, position your freezer away from heat, but even better if you can position it in a cold spot, like a garage in a cooler climate, or the basement. Keep the condenser coils clean. Check that the refrigerator door seals airtight. A full freezer is more efficient than an empty one, so load it up.

Washing Machines

Washing clothes makes up 14 percent of the average US household’s energy usage, according to the DOE. According to the EPA, American families do an average of 400 loads of laundry per year. An efficient washer expends 25 percent less energy than a standard washer and uses about 10 fewer gallons, or 45 percent less water per load. In addition, efficient washers are gentler on clothes, leading to less wear-and-tear.

• When to replace: The ACEEE recommends replacing clothes washers older than ten years with Energy Star models after 2007. Water utility companies often offer rebates for high-efficiency models, so contact your utility company to save even more. If you have a regular washing machine that's more than 10 years old, you're spending about $210 a year more than you would if you had a more efficient model.
• Extra efficiency Tips: Wash full loads. Clothes washers are most efficient when they operate completely full. Also, use cold water—hot water washes add $60 a year to your energy bill. Choose a high spin cycle speed to reduce drying time.

Clothes Dryers

Dryers use an incredible amount of energy-- in an average home, it uses 35 percent of energy expended on appliances (including your fridge, washing machine, and dishwasher), the most of any of the other three. Energy-efficient dryers use 20 percent less energy than conventional, and do so using technology that can sense when laundry is dry, and special cycles that can reduce the need for ironing (double win!).

• When to replace: Replace your dryer when your old model is no longer working properly. ENERGY STAR did not start rating dryers until 2015 so the most efficient models are state of the art and brand new.
• Efficiency Tips: Use sensor drying instead of timed drying if your machine has that option-- over-drying clothes is a huge waste of heat. Long cycles on low heat use less energy than short cycles on high-heat, so use low heat when possible. Washing clothes efficiently will make drying them even more efficient because they are less wet when they come out of the washer, meaning the dryer has less work to do overall. So, if it's possible for you, get an energy-efficient washer-dryer set. And of course, air-drying clothes whenever possible will save you money and save your clothes.

Dishwashers

Energy-Star-qualified dishwashers need 25 percent less energy than federal minimum standard dishwashers and save $100 and 3,870 gallons of water over its lifetime. An efficient dishwasher needs very little water to clean dirty dishes. Many new dishwashers include a soil-sensor to adjust water use depending on the degree of dirtiness in each load.

• When to replace: Dishwashers should be replaced approximately every 10–15 years—sooner if your family cooks at home and runs the dishwasher daily.
• Efficiency Tips: According to the DOE, recent studies show that most new dishwashers clean dirty dishes without pre-rinsing in the sink, so avoid this water-wasting step. Most of the energy that dishwashers consume comes from heating water, so turn down the temperature of your water heater to 120°F. You could also consider installing a solar water heater. See our Real Green article on solar water heaters. Whenever possible, don’t use the heat-dry, rinse-hold, or pre-rinse features.

Taxes and Savings on Energy Efficient Appliances

The following tips will help you save even more money and energy with your new appliances:

• Service and maintain your appliances, which can save you three to 10 percent on your annual energy bills.
• Take advantage of tax rebates for energy efficient appliances.
• Unplug small household appliances—or better yet, plug them all into one power strip and then switch off the power strip. Small household appliances that require a direct current, like televisions and microwaves, can leak electricity even when they’re turned off. The average US house leaks 50 watts of power from these appliances, adding up to $3 billion in wasted energy costs annually.

Every action taken at home can add up to a lot of benefits for the Earth and your pocketbook. When shopping for new appliances, always look for the most energy efficient models.

Everyone knows Oreo— “America’s favorite” (GMO-filled) cookie, but you may not have heard of Mondelez, the company that makes Oreos. Recently, however, Mondelez seems to be taking steps to repair their image and venture into producing healthier, non-GMO (genetically modified organism) containing options.

After three years of declining sales and “activist pressure,” (Thanks GMOInsiders!) Mondelez, maker of Ritz crackers, Triscuits, and Cadbury chocolate, has decided it’s time for a change.  Mondelez will be launching a new product line this July of packaged crackers and snack bars called Vea. Vea products will be non-GMO project verified and contain no trans fats and no artificial ingredients, colors, or flavors.

We at GMOInside commend Mondelez for developing products that are non-GMO verified and contain no artificial ingredients. We are also excited about their decision to removed GMO’s from Triscuits. We must, however, question why Mondelez has not yet committed to removing GMOs from its other leading products like Oreos.

Mondelez CEO Irene Rosenfeld recently stated, "We're actively working to revamp existing products and introduce new ones that are aligned with today's definition of well-being," But why leave Oreos out? This revamping should extend to Oreos, one of their most well-known products, which are sold in more than 100 countries worldwide in numbers of over 70 million a day.

The high fructose corn syrup, beet sugar, and soy lecithin in Oreos all come from GE (genetically engineered) crops. This raises alarms for both health and environmental concerns, as GE crops allow more widespread use of toxic chemicals like glyphosate. Glyphosate is a probable carcinogen and a pollutant and its widespread usage has also led to the development of superweeds.

While we would like to thank Mondelez for its important shift in focus to more health-conscious, natural food, we will continue to push the company to go further and remove GMOs from its most popular products, starting with Oreos.

Take action and urge Mondelez to remove GMO ingredients from Oreo cookies. Thank you for staying informed and taking a stand!

Bloomberg, Jonathan Crawford and Jennifer A. Dlouhy, March 8, 2017

President Donald Trump plans to nominate Jones Day attorney Kevin McIntyre as chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an agency charged with overseeing the nation’s power grid and deciding on multibillion-dollar energy projects, people familiar with the situation said.

Trump also plans to name Neil Chatterjee, senior energy adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, as a member of the commission, said people with knowledge of the picks, asking not to be identified because the information isn’t public. The nominations are subject to confirmation by the Senate.

A new commissioner would restore the quorum that the energy agency needs to make decisions on major energy proposals such as interstate gas pipelines and utility mergers. The commission lost that quorum in February when its former chairman Norman Bay resigned.

The White House and energy commission declined to comment. McIntyre and Chatterjee didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Waiting for Confirmation

At Jones Day, McIntyre represents companies in cases involving energy markets, utility and oil and gas pipeline regulations, according to the firm’s website. His areas of focus include compliance and enforcement, energy trading, competition issues and energy exports, the website shows.

Chatterjee is no stranger to the energy commission. He’s served as an architect of major energy and environmental policy in the Senate, helping to coordinate attacks against Obama’s Clean Power Plan that requires electricity generators to cut carbon-dioxide emissions. Before joining McConnell’s office, he worked for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

Trump’s nominees may be in for a long wait before the appointment takes effect. The confirmation process could take two to three months, according to Brandon Barnes, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence.

A coalition of more than 130 groups vowed to oppose any nominees, accusing the commission of rubber stamping pipelines and ignoring the potential impact on the environment.

“It is imperative that all Americans voice their opposition to business as usual at FERC and oppose any Trump nominees to the agency,” Todd Larsen, executive co-director of Green America, one of the groups involved, said by email.

Before Bay’s departure last month, the commission rushed to decide on a number of projects including Williams Cos.’s $3 billion Atlantic Sunrise gas expansion project and Energy Transfer Partners LP’s $4.2 billion Rover gas pipeline, both in the Northeast. It also delegated more authority to its staff to help with day-to-day operations.

An independent agency within the U.S. Energy Department, the commission typically has five members who serve five-year terms. Acting chairman Cheryl LaFleur, a Democrat and former utility executive, has been on the commission since 2010. The only other commissioner is Colette Honorable.

Members of the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation protest the deadly working conditions that led to the Rana Plaza building collapse in 2013. / Photo from the International Labor Rights Forum

Label-scouting consumers will have noticed a trend in the last several years: fewer “Made in China” tags on clothes on store shelves and an increase in tags from Bangladesh. Bangladesh is now home to factories producing clothes for some of the biggest clothing labels in the world, like Gap, H&M, and Walmart. Garments now account for 80 percent of Bangladesh’s exports, and the industry employs about 4 million people, according to the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters’ Association.

But the manufacturing boom in the country comes with a heavy price for workers. Since 2006, preventable accidents have plagued garment factories in Bangladesh, according to the Clean Clothes Campaign.

The problem was brought into the international spotlight after a fire at the Tazreen Fashions factory in 2012 killed 112 people; a resulting government inquiry accused the factory’s owner of “unpardonable negligence,” which included storing large amounts of flammable materials in unsafe conditions, and reports that mid-level managers insisted that workers on some floors continue working despite alarms indicating a fire had broken out.

But the tragedy of the Tazreen fire was soon followed by an even more devastating event when the eight-story Rana Plaza building collapsed in April of 2013, killing over 1,000 people and injuring 2,500 more.

Workers had noticed dangerous cracks in the building the day before the collapse, and the building was evacuated. However, workers from the garment factories that took up the upper floors were ordered back to their posts the following day, assured by supervisors that the building was safe. Over 3,000 garment workers were in the building when it fell.

Investors around the world have a huge role to play in urging clothing retailers and brands to ensure that Rana Plaza is the last avoidable major tragedy in Bangladesh garment factories.

The Bangladesh Accord

As calls for major reforms in Bangladesh have become more urgent, investors are pressuring companies to commit to improving conditions for garment workers by signing on to the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety.

Created in May 2013, the Accord is a legally binding agreement among Bangladeshi and international trade unions and international clothing companies. The Accord aims to address all aspects of fire and building safety during a period of five years in factories that supply garments to Accord signatories.

More than 190 apparel brands from over 20 countries have signed onto the Bangladesh Accord, along with two global trade unions and eight Bangladesh trade unions. However, the vast majority are European companies, with US businesses largely absent—only 20 US corporations have signed on, including American Eagle Outfitters and Fruit of the Loom.

Companies that sign on to the Accord agree to work with manufacturers to ensure independent safety inspections and prompt repairs and renovations, as well as to provide pay to workers if they have to stop working due to dangerous conditions. Accord-member companies commit to staying in Bangladesh for at least two years, giving them a real stake in the long-term process to improve safety in garment factories.

“The Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety is a critical initiative,” says Green America executive co-director Fran Teplitz. “No one should have to endure the suffering, loss of life, and risks that garment workers face every day in Bangladesh.”

Shareholders Support the Accord

Immediately after the Rana Plaza collapse, the Interfaith Center for Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) provided critical leadership, circulating an investor statement calling for clothing companies to sign on to the Bangladesh Accord. The ICCR Bangladesh statement is currently supported by over 200 investment companies and organizations, representing over $3.1 trillion in investor assets.

ICCR is a coalition of faith-based organizations and pension funds that use their collective shareholder power to pressure companies on social and environmental issues.

“From an investment point of view, it’s about risk analysis,” says David Schilling, senior program director at ICCR. “If companies don’t have policies and practices to address the health and safety of workers where they source products, their whole enterprise is vulnerable to reputational risk from major disasters like Rana Plaza.”

Schilling notes that the issue is attracting investors who are new to socially responsible investing. “We’re working with members of ICCR ... but have also combined forces with larger pension and asset managements firms that may not have had a long-standing interest in human rights issues,” he says. “Rana Plaza galvanized, and maybe accelerated, the movement of social analysts in firms to look more carefully at human rights criteria.”

The Accord vs. The Alliance

Rather than signing onto the Accord, 26 North American companies, including Gap, VF, and Walmart, founded the Bangladesh Alliance. While the Alliance aims to work toward improving worker safety in Bangladesh, critics say it’s much weaker than the Accord.

On the surface, the Accord and the Alliance may seem similar. The Accord conducts health and safety inspections at 1600 Bangladesh garment factories that do business with its 190 members, and the Alliance is doing the same at the more than 580 factories patronized by its 26 members (with some overlap between the two groups).

Both the Alliance and the Accord claim their standards are legally binding. Both publish data about factories, including inspection reports and remediation plans.

However, human-rights leaders are asking companies to prioritize the Accord, which they say is more comprehensive and more transparent than the Alliance, and which gives workers a much stronger stake.

Specifically, the Accord was developed by worker unions and labor rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs), in collaboration with apparel companies, says Liana Foxvog, director of organizing and communications at the International Labor Rights Forum. Bangladeshi worker unions have equal representation to brands on the Accord’s steering committee.

In contrast, the Alliance was created by retailers and has a majority of corporate managers and factory owners on its board of directors, with no worker unions.

“I think both Alliance and Accord have thorough inspections,” says Schilling. “[But the Accord] is the one with close ties with workers on the factory floor.”

The Accord is also a legally binding contract, and companies that sign it can be taken to court if they do not adhere to its provisions. While the Alliance claims to be legally binding, Theresa Haas of the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) says most of the provisions are voluntary. “Brands and retailers can walk away at any time with little to no consequences; they are not legally obligated to follow through with many of the promises they made [after Rana Plaza],” she says.

For example, the WRC notes that the Alliance agreement contains language exempting members from being obligated to participate in key recommended programs, such as a loan program to help factories finance repairs. A similar program is mandatory for Accord signers.

“The Alliance lacks both the transparency and the avenues necessary to enable workers to have a voice for safety on the job,” says Foxvog. “It’s modeled on the same voluntary, confidential ‘corporate social responsibility’ programming that failed to prevent at least 1,138 deaths and many more injuries at Rana Plaza.”

Investors Take Action

Green America, ICCR, and allied organizations continue to put pressure on US retailers that have failed to sign on to the Accord, including Gap, VF, and Walmart. (All are Alliance members.)

While many social and environmental issues come to companies in the form of shareholder resolutions, Schilling does not expect to see demands to join the Bangladesh Accord come to companies this way.

“We’re seeing a change in approach,” he says. “Instead of making demands for third-party monitoring through shareholder resolutions, as we’ve done in the past, we are instead engaging in dialogue with companies to support the multi-stakeholder approach of the Bangladesh Accord.”

Likewise, many socially responsible investment firms have established relationships with retailers working in Bangladesh, and they are engaging in dialogue with them on worker health and safety.

“Trillium and its investor partners engaged numerous companies that contract with factories in Bangladesh to join the Bangladesh Accord,” says Susan Baker, vice-president of shareholder advocacy at Trillium Asset Management. Baker says that Trillium also urges companies that have joined the Alliance to publicly disclose their efforts to help Bangladesh workers and Rana Plaza victims, as well as their supplier factory locations.

Those efforts bore fruit in 2014, when Target became “the first general merchandise retailer to publish a full list of its registered factories,” says Baker.

“Target is responding to its customers growing interest in what is in the products they buy, as well as where they come from,” says Baker.

Supporting Rana Plaza Victims

ICCR is now mustering investors to call on garment companies doing business in Bangladesh to donate to the Rana Plaza Arrangement, a trust fund to provide compensation to Rana Plaza victims.

In 2013, Bangladeshi NGOs, unions, and the government, as well as industry representatives, created the Arrangement. Victims file claims, and a group of independent commissioners decides on the compensation they receive.

Activists are urging companies with ties to Rana Plaza, like Walmart and Benetton, to make a significant donation. Some donors are publicly disclosed.

The Arrangement currently has collected $21 million for Rana Plaza survivors, says Haas. Unfortunately, the estimated amount needed to fairly compensate all victims is $30 million, so the fund is $9 million short.

A group of institutional investors in 12 different countries have signed onto the ICCR investor statement asking garment companies to participate in the Rana Plaza trust fund, as well as to ensure worker health and safety by committing to the Bangladesh Accord’s level of transparency in inspections, remediation, and outcomes.

What You Can Do

Whether you have investments in individual companies or mutual funds, you can support the cause of making factories safer in Bangladesh and compensating Rana Plaza victims.

“Individual investors can make a difference by looking at their portfolios,” says Schilling. If a clothing company you hold stock in has not signed onto the Accord, send a letter requesting that it do so, he says. “Companies do pay attention to what they hear from individual investors.”

If you have holdings in companies that have signed on, let them know you appreciate their leadership.

In addition, says Baker, “Ask companies that are involved in the Accord or the Alliance to report publicly on the commitments they agreed to. ... And press companies to disclose registered factory lists.”

Also, investing through socially responsible investment companies ensures that your money is going toward engagement with corporations about human rights and other important issues. Along with Trillium, Calvert Investments and Domini Social Investments support the Accord and are using their economic clout to urge companies to sign on.

Right now, you can urge clothing companies to the Rana Plaza Arrangement trust fund for victims of the factory collapse. A list of publicly disclosed donors, including a handful of garment brands, is available on the site.

Update: In June 2015, several events brought some justice to Bangladeshi workers and families of and workers.

Take Action:

Learn about all our actions.

Become a Member: 

Join Green America today.

Connect:

Sign up for our newsletter.

Other Ways to Give:

Give a gift membership, join a leadership forum, and more.

For Green Businesses:

Grow your business and change the world.

People & Planet Award:

Nominate a business or vote today.

Job Title:    Executive Assistant

Salary:             $20,000 - $22,000

Benefits:         medical, dental, sick days, holidays, vacation, flexible schedule

Type:               Part-time, 16 hours per week, Monday - Thursday

Supervisor:     Executive Co-director

To apply:        Send cover letter and resume to execassist@greenamerica.org Applications will be accepted until the position is filled.

Green America is a nonprofit organization dedicated to creating a socially just and environmentally sustainable society by harnessing economic power for positive change.  Our unique approach involves working with consumers, investors, and businesses to advance the green economy. 

This position plays a crucial role in the organization by assisting the Executive Team (the President/CEO and the two Executive Co-directors). The Executive Team is responsible for managing the organization in coordination with department directors and the board of directors.

Responsibilities:

The primary responsibility is to assist the CEO/President and Executive Co-Directors in their duties.  Tasks will vary from week to week and include the following:

• Travel: (when safe to do so). Book travel arrangements for the CEO/President, use loyalty programs and credit card points to save costs.  Travel includes – Flights, buses, trains, hotels, rental cars, taxies and directions. Register CEO/President for needed conferences, submit and follow up on reimbursements requests for travel appearances where appropriate. Change travel arrangements when weather and schedule necessitate, working to get refunds and travel credit whenever possible. Work with the Development Department to schedule meetings with local donors well in advance of the trip.
• Expenses: Collect the CEO/President’s receipts and code them each month; process reimbursements as needed.
• Reports: Help the Executive Team with the development and finalization of board reports and Operating Plan reports.  This includes collecting information from different departments and committees, doing report lay-out, and editing final drafts in Microsoft Word or Power point.
• Staff/Board Meetings: Schedule all-staff meetings and board meetings (virtual and physical, when in-person meetings are possible again); provide online access. Organize and coordinate logistics, including renting meeting rooms and planning meals as needed.
• Scheduling: Primary responsibility for managing and updating the CEO/President’s schedule. Work with external individuals (and their executive assistants) to schedule appointments for the CEO/President.  This includes keeping track of the CEO/President’s external board, travel, and personal commitments and getting the appointments on the calendar, noting time zone differences.
• Executive Communications: Answer questions about the CEO/President’s calendar and availability. Follow-up on correspondence. Rapidly flag any key issues to the executive team. Maintain CEO-related documents.
• Development: Work with the Development Team to schedule meetings between the CEO/President and major donors accordingly.
• Board: Serve as a board liaison. Work with the CEO/President and the Executive Co-directors to schedule and organize board meetings, organize board documents, prepare for all meetings, including renting space and catering as needed. Collect conflict of interest statements annually. Keep Board of Directors Contact Sheet updated. Submit reimbursement requests for board member travel expenses. Answer questions from board members.
• New Hires: Create and manage job postings for all new positions. Research job announcement platforms to ensure openings are seen by diverse applicants. Upon hiring, remove job postings. Add or remove staff credit cards as needed.
• Staff Anniversaries, Special Acknowledgements: Using online platforms, create digital acknowledgements to express thanks, or other messages as needed.
• Organizational Culture: Organize events for interns and help coordinate staff "fun" days.
• Administrative Support as Needed: Provide administrative support as needed and as approved by the executive team.
• Special Projects: Support special projects as approved by the executive team.

Responsibilities of all Green America Staff

• Participate in general staff meetings, the annual Operating Plan & Budget process.
• Serve on special teams or committees as time permits.
• Other duties as time permits.

Qualifications:

• Sound judgment and diplomatic manner and communication style
• Excellent speaking and writing skills
• Highly organized and able to keep priorities on track and meet deadlines; ability to multi-task
• Strong attention to detail
• Mastery of Microsoft office suite with experience creating presentations, spreadsheets, and professional documents
• Excellent people skills and a cooperative and collaborative mindset
• Experience with nonprofit organization a plus
• Must be able to work both collaboratively and independently
• Must be a problem solver with a strong sense of initiative and personal responsibility

Green America is an equal opportunity employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without discrimination regarding: actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, related medical conditions, breastfeeding, or reproductive health disorders), age (18 years of age or older), marital status (including domestic partnership and parenthood), personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, political affiliation, citizenship status, credit information or any other characteristic protected by federal, state or local laws. Harassment on the basis of a protected characteristic is included as a form of discrimination and is strictly prohibited.

We certify businesses that are committed to using business as a platform for social change. Discover what makes a business green »

Green America’s Green Business Certification ensures that companies operate according to these general standards:

• They operate a “values-based” social enterprise according to principles of social justice and environmental sustainability (values statement must be featured on website);
• They are environmentally responsible in the way they run their operations and facilities (view green office/facility standards), and in how they source raw materials, manufacture products, and market them;
• They are currently selling products or services when applying for Green Business Certification (completed website with all products/services listed);

All companies seeking Green Business Certification must meet Green America’s standards for all businesses, and also meet or exceed all required standards in their industry. Explore our standards in nearly 40 industries below, or learn more about our Certification and the requirements for all businesses.

We'd love to add you to this page. See job openings here.

Thanks to our staff, interns, volunteers and consultants who participated with the website redesign June 2016 - June 2017.