Content by specific author

Our current agricultural system relies on toxic chemicals and practices that endanger the health of ecosystems, farmers, farmworkers, and our climate. No matter who you are or where you live in the US, this broken system impacts your life, but there’s a better way. 

Regenerative agriculture is the answer to the dual crises of a global climate and a food system that are both becoming increasingly unstable. It’s all about rebuilding soil to capture carbon and, in return, grow healthier food and protect ecosystems. 

Through Green America’s work with consumers and stakeholders from the entire food supply chain, huge amounts of land have been converted to regenerative acreage—and the work is just beginning. Regenerative agriculture points the way forward to a truly green food system that reduces pesticides, increases yields, and supports those working to feed us all. 

Individual Actions

Meaningful action starts with you. These small changes combined have the potential for global impact. 

1. Reduce food waste 

Those moldy leftovers in the back of your fridge have major environmental impacts. Eight percent of global greenhouse gas emissions come from food waste, and in high-income countries like the US, consumers waste over one third of their food. That’s billions of pounds of food—not to mention the packaging, transportation, land, and other resources going to waste. Cutting global food waste in half by 2050 would reduce greenhouse gas emissions the same as running 17 million wind turbines for a year! Buying only what you need and eliminating food waste from your kitchen can save $1,500 for a family of four a year, according to the USDA. 

How can I reduce my food waste? 

• Plan your meals ahead of time to avoid overbuying and impulse purchases. 
• Have go-to “clean out the fridge” recipes and make use of your freezer for items you may not be able to eat in time. 
• Over 50 percent of what we throw away is compostable. Composting captures carbon, filters out stormwater pollutants, and gives scraps a second life feeding the soil rather than contributing to methane emissions in the landfill. Either start your own compost or use a composting service to support green jobs. You can find the how-to knowledge to make your own compost at greenamerica.org/green-living/how-and-what-compost. 

2. Grow a Climate Victory Garden 

It doesn’t matter if you’re a beginner or seasoned expert, whether you have a giant yard to grow in or just a few pots on a sunny windowsill—everyone can garden for the climate. During the WWII era, American gardens grew 40 percent of the country’s fresh fruits and vegetables. We can harness that power of collective action again, this time for the climate. Join over 4,000 gardens already at it, capturing 11,000 tons of carbon and offsetting emissions  equivalent to driving 90 million miles. Register Your Climate Victory Garden on our website.

How can I garden in a way that’s good for the planet?

• Grow ultra-local food in your garden to offset the fossil fuels associated with food from grocery stores that travels an average of 1,500 miles. Growing your own food can save you money too, around $600 per year depending on what you plant. 
• Cover and protect soils with mulch to decrease water use, curb erosion, and capture carbon. 
• Create DIY solutions with household products instead of toxic pesticides.
• Instead of nitrogen-based fertilizers, opt for compost. These practices ensure your safety and could save you around $115/year (on average homeowners, spent on fertilizer, weed killer, and insecticides).  
• Encourage biodiversity by choosing plants for pollinators. Giving bees and butterflies refuge in your garden will benefit your crops and support these important species. 

3. Eliminate Your Lawn

Turf grass is our country’s largest irrigated crop—covering an area larger than the state of New York and demanding millions of tons of toxic fertilizers and pesticides each year. This manicured and over-managed land is devoid of diversity and a major source of water pollution and climate emissions. Just one hour of using a gasoline lawn mower is equal to greenhouse gas emissions of driving 300 miles. 

How to Change Lawns Into Something Better

Plant a low-maintenance meadow instead, which provides pollinator habitat, encourages biodiversity, and captures carbon. Plus, you could save time—the average American spends 70 hours a year maintaining their lawn. Landscape with trees and perennial plants that don’t have to be replanted each year.

4. Buy organic, non-GMO, and regenerative

It matters how our food is grown. When you buy from producers that replenish and restore their lands and surrounding ecosystems, you’re sending a clear message in support of these practices. Organic, non-GMO, and regenerative products are better for the environment, but they’re also better for workers across the food system and the loved ones you’re cooking for. A 2019 study from University of California showed that eating organic food for just a week can reduce the levels of pesticides in the body by 60 percent on average. 

How Purchases Can Create A Better Food System

• Buy less: Reduce your consumption of animal products from concentrated animal feed lots that wreak havoc on local to global ecosystems. Livestock-raising operations account for nearly 15 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions each year, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
• Buy better: Use Regeneration International’s Regenerative Farm Map to help you find meats and dairy products (which have the greatest climate impact) from local regenerative sources. 
• Buy local: Buy from local food co-ops, Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA), farmers markets, and local food hubs. Talk to your farmers about their practices and how they care for their soil, asking what actions they take to mitigate their climate impact. Buying local food isn’t just good for your carbon footprint, it significantly boosts the local economy, as $68 out of every $100 stays in the community when spent at a local business. 

Actions to Take in Your Neighborhood and Community

Every community is unique. Use these suggestions as a springboard to inspire actions you can take beyond your immediate surroundings to grow climate solutions and a better food system. 

Start a community, school, or other publicly-accessible garden to increase local food access and green space. Ask your local grocery stores to carry more organic, non-GMO, and regenerative options. Show your receipts to show that you’re a regular customer. Encourage friends to do the same. 

Engage with local government and green groups that work on issues that could increase your community’s impact like starting a curbside compost program.

Actions to Reach Beyond Your Community

Grassroots action is critical for change, but a healthy climate and food system also depends upon high-level laws, regulations, and corporate compliance. 

• Understand soil health legislation in your state: Around 20 states have existing or proposed soil health legislation that addresses soil’s role in the climate crisis. Look up your state’s status on NerdsForEarth.com and contact your representatives to let them know you support healthy soils legislation. 
• Write a letter to a company: Love the regenerative practices behind Annie’s Organic Mac & Cheese or Patagonia’s cotton tees? Or, have a favorite brand that you think could do better? Let them know! 
• Contact your representative about national-scale bills: There are numerous bills for national-level climate action that need support in all 435 Congressional Districts, and many of these focus on food issues, like the H.R.5861—Agriculture Resilience Act. Find this bill and more at ClimateCrisisPolicy.org. 

The intensity of the 2020 general election exposed the frustration so many Americans feel when our needs go unheard by government and corporations. It also showed the disillusionment we often feel with our political system, as many Americans wondered whether a new presidential administration would truly make a difference when it comes to long-battled systemic issues. Though we are often pitted against each other, many Americans are concerned about the same issues, and there is widespread agreement on the solutions.  In 2019, roughly 70 percent of Americans said the country should focus more on wind energy and over 80 percent said the same for solar, according to a survey by the consulting company Gallup. Another Gallup poll taken in June 2020 showed that 65 percent of Americans supported protests against racial injustice and 61 percent of adults say that economic inequality ought to be a top priority for the government, according to the Pew Research Center.   

Our 35 years of experience in fighting for our fragile planet and all its people tells us that no matter who is in political office, economic action is always crucial.  Our work together is to get the entire economy behind powerful climate solutions, protecting workers, and working for real racial justice. By taking action together in our daily lives, as consumers, investors, and community members, we can make a huge difference in the world.  

Major social change movements including Black Lives Matter, March for Our Lives, the Women’s March, and Me Too were all started by average Americans who were outraged by social injustices.  The leaders profiled in our summer 2020 Green American magazine issue, Communities on the Frontline of the Climate Crisis, are people who saw environmental injustice in their communities and decided to take action to fight fossil fuel companies, food insecurity, government lagging on a Green New Deal, and voter suppression. 

As more and more consumers raise concerns around climate impacts, worker abuses, and the use of toxic chemicals by corporations—and shift their spending to greener products and services—more companies are responding to that pressure by improving their social and environmental records. That progress has a ripple effect on the entire planet. 

Taking Individual Action by Voting With Your Dollar  

In an age of declining brand loyalty, large corporations are attuned to shifts in consumer preferences and it’s these shifts that are driving more non-GMO and organic foods, electric vehicles, non-toxic household and personal care products, and clothing with fewer toxic chemicals and more recycled fibers. This is why one of the biggest individual actions we can take for a truly just and sustainable world is targeting our purchases and investments to green enterprises. That often means not buying things we don’t really need, and when there is something we need, finding a way to get it that can support a local small business, green business, and/or entrepreneurs of color, instead of supporting a big box store or Amazon’s monopoly.  

Growing consumer concern from these campaigns causes companies to fear that their brands will be damaged and will lead to a loss in sales. That’s why companies like Carter’s, Amazon, AT&T, and Verizon take action when consumers call on them to change their operations to address the climate crisis and their use of toxic chemicals. When you join your voices with others, you multiply your impact and though one small signature may not feel like a lot, it shows that a growing number of people are concerned. 

You can also change where you bank and invest. Whether you have a simple checking or savings account at a bank or own stock, have a retirement fund, or other investment accounts, you can make sure that your money is working for the Earth, not against it. Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) are places you can put your money that invests back into local communities unlike big commercial banks (like Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citi, etc), which fund fossil fuel expansion and other dirty industries. However, there are signs that big banks are starting to hear investors and customers. This year, after much pressure from campaigns like Fossil Banks, No Thanks, a coalition action that Green America is a part of, JPMorgan Chase agreed to end new financing of coal and arctic drilling, and to phase out existing financing for coal mining by 2024. Read more about how to use your money to make change on page 8. 

Taking Action in Your Community 

Opening your door (or your laptop) and getting “out there” in your community can make a big difference. We all have a place we can make a difference. Start with organizations or places where you spend the most time or find the most joy—whether that’s a school group, church, block of your neighborhood, book club, office, riverfront, you name it. There will always be ways to make those spaces greener, more equitable, and more just. There are so many ways to make a difference—you could work on environmental issues like water conservation, clean energy use, recycling programs, or composting. You could also work on making your group more socially conscious, just, and equitable by switching banks, making a space or event more accessible, signing a petition together, attending a protest, or otherwise working on a social justice topic that is important to you. Community action does not have to be big to make a big difference, and we can find examples of it across the country. In Detroit, the faith-based environmental organization Hazon started growing “relief gardens” to help those struggling with food insecurity amid COVID-19. By bringing people fertilizers, vegetable seeds, and some basic how-to gardening knowledge, volunteers are putting being a good neighbor into practice. The Climate Victory Gardens sprouting nationwide are also inspiring examples of community climate action that is helping draw-down carbon from the atmosphere and increase access to fresh, quality produce. 

Pressuring Corporations and Governments  

The people who take part in Green America’s campaigns and those of our allies, make a huge difference, and time and time again, Green America’s economic strategy of amplifying consumer voices proves to be effective. Through our Cool It campaign, 100,000 consumers got Walmart to pledge to phase out HFCs by 2040.  That’s progress, but not fast enough, so we’ll be keeping up the pressure on Walmart and urging other grocery stores that are failing on refrigerants to take action too—beginning with a campaign focused on Trader Joe’s launching this December. Additionally, we’re telling Carters to protect factory workers, consumers, and our planet from toxic textiles by adopting a stronger Manufacturing Restricted Substance List (MRSL), calling on the telecoms industry to transition to renewables and recruit more diverse talent into clean energy projects, and as always, continuing to demand that Amazon treat its workers and the planet better. You can learn more about our people-powered green economy campaigns by visiting Our Campaigns. 

Advocating for green local and federal policies is also crucial. In January 2020, Richmond, Virginia’s 4th Circuit of Appeals unanimously denied a permit for the Atlantic Coast pipeline, a project that threatened to slash through natural spaces and harm Indigenous and Black communities in North Carolina and Virginia. Green America and hundreds of other environmental groups supported this effort by amplifying local demands through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) against Dominion Energy. In the 2020 general election, Florida passed an amendment to gradually raise the state’s minimum wage to $15. We are proud to have joined forces with the Fight for $15 coalition to help bring about this victory and look forward to securing more in 2021 with the help of our members, supporters, and allies. 

The pandemic has reshaped many of the ways our society works, from public gatherings to workplace settings. For shareholders, the annual meeting season came at the start of the pandemic, causing last-minute transitions to online formats for public safety—and in this scramble, some companies dodged shareholders by literally muting them.  

Shareholders are partial owners of a company through stocks, which gives them a voice in the direction of a company—this can include ensuring social and environmental responsibility alongside company growth and stability. In March, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released guidance for virtual shareholder meetings.  

A new paper by Dr. Miriam Schwartz of Hebrew University of Jerusalem demonstrates how companies took advantage of the virtual format to minimize shareholders’ collective power. The paper, “How Shifting from In-Person to Virtual Shareholder Meetings Affects Shareholders’ Voice,” examines how companies may be stifling shareholders by limiting the types of questions that can be asked, keeping shareholders muted during online meetings, only offering short time windows for questions, and taking advantage of online communication barriers. 

Dr. Schwartz’s paper compared the 2019 shareholder meeting season to the 2020 virtual season using transcripts and audio recordings from 94 firms in the S&P 500. The research consistently demonstrates that virtual shareholder meetings were significantly shorter than in-person meetings and management spent less time addressing shareholder concerns. 

Typically, during the Q&A portion of in-person meetings, shareholders line up behind a mic to ask their questions. These questions may go over the allotted time frame or may not be relevant to the discussion at hand; regardless, when a person is physically present, it is difficult to ignore their concerns, regardless of relevancy or time limits. In the virtual arena, firms have more power in how a meeting will run, allowing them to evade shareholder concerns and thus, accountability. 

“Overall, what we can see here, is that there is a decrease in the amount of time spent on sharing information with shareholders,” said Dr. Schwartz in a virtual seminar on the paper. 

Dr. Schwartz noted there are several tactics companies used to impose limitations on questions during online shareholder meetings of the 2020 season. 

Muting Shareholders, Literally

The study analyzed questions submitted by two shareholders, John Chevedden and James McRitchie, in conjunction with the transcripts to determine how many submitted questions were answered; out of all the questions submitted to firms, only 36 percent were answered. While companies typically dodge shareholder questions, what is concerning here is the company’s ability to silence participants. 

Additionally, Dr. Schwartz found that companies would misleadingly portray a lack of additional questions during online meetings by stating, “we have addressed all the questions,” or “at this point, it seems there are no further questions, therefore we will conclude the meeting.” When these statements were compared with the number of questions submitted by shareholders to the company, it is clear that company management chose to not answer shareholder questions. Traditionally, in-person meetings make it possible for shareholders to object; however, in the online arena, shareholders are literally muted. 

“[In virtual settings,] the firm has more power in presenting the picture that is convenient for them,” says Dr. Schwartz. 

Additionally, companies would state, without prior notice, that only questions related to the proposals would be addressed, essentially eliminating questions regarding anything else. Eleven companies in the study used this tactic—10 out of 11 did not address any questions during the meeting. 

“[Shareholder meetings are] the one opportunity shareholders have each year to engage in-person with other shareholders and with company representatives,” writes McRitchie in his blog at CorpGov.net. “Virtual-only meetings remove these opportunities. They don’t have to.”

Democratizing Virtual Meetings

Virtual meetings have the potential to improve participation from shareholders by eliminating conflicts, taking less time, and allowing people to tune in from the comfort of their homes—in fact, Dr. Schwartz’s study noted that shareholder attendance increased overall in the online format. However, the key to a democratic process online is allowing shareholders to communicate with each other. 

Not all companies in the study used the virtual format to minimize shareholder voices. One company used a platform called Slido for their meeting, which allowed shareholder questions to be viewed among all participants, not just management. 

“Shareholders could upvote and downvote the questions,” says Dr. Schwartz. “[Firms] could actually see which questions were very interesting for shareholders and which were not.” 

Unlike scenarios where shareholders can ask only send questions in advance or can ask only questions related to proposals, a live polling platform like Slido allowed for a democratic process to understanding shareholder concerns. 

McRitchie believes that chat rooms are the essential function missing from shareholder meetings. Chat rooms would allow shareholders to have genuine conversations with each other, as well as clarify resolutions and company decisions among themselves. Additionally, the company management would gain insight into what shareholders care about. 

“If virtual meetings are to be considered shareholder, instead of incumbent meetings, chat room functions are needed,” states McRitchie. “The discourse between attendees is of critical importance.” 

The virtual format is far from perfect—shareholders may also experience issues like lack of access to high speed internet and computer illiteracy. While virtual meetings have a great deal to improve on before they can support shareholders in the same capacity as in-person meetings, the paper recommends that companies should make audio recordings and transcripts public to allow transparency around the information shared during meetings.

Additionally, disclosing the number of questions submitted, as well as the content of those questions, can help shareholders identify if there is simply a lack of concerns or if the company is purposefully withholding information. 
For the 2021 season, some company guidelines may choose to return to in-person meetings which follow CDC recommendations and some may continue virtually. It is also likely that most companies will adopt a hybrid model, where shareholders can attend in-person or virtually. 

Every year, Green America encourages many shareholders to vote on resolutions that advance social, environmental, and sustainable governance. We are co-sponsors of As You Sow’s 2020 Proxy Preview, a publication that provides samples of key resolutions facing corporate America. Stay tuned for 2021’s Proxy Preview and learn more about investing with your values at our Guide to Socially Responsible Investing and Better Banking at greenamerica.org/gsri. 

Small businesses across the US were hit hard by the coronavirus, but Black-owned businesses felt it the most. Black-owned businesses shut down at a rate more than double of white-owned businesses, according to a new report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The pandemic exposed all sorts of inequities in our society, but the connections between physical and economic health may be one of the most profound. Structural racism in the US extends beyond policing and facilitates economic deficiencies through racist laws like redlining and hiring discrimination.  

In the same way we cannot shop our way into environmental health, we cannot shop our way into racial justice. But we can use our collective power to show corporations what our values are. So here are six reasons, beyond the damage of the pandemic, to buy from Black-owned businesses—your purchasing power will help: 

1. Close the Racial Wealth Gap

Beyond enslavement, we can trace the origins of today’s racial wealth gap to Jim Crow-era practices like redlining, job discrimination, and exclusionary legislation, which segregated Black Americans from higher paying jobs and home ownership opportunities that ultimately prevented wealth building. For example, while the 1935 Social Security Act is heralded as one of the nation’s first social safety nets, it largely left out Black citizens, as it didn’t cover domestic and agricultural workers, nor menial low-wage or off-the-books jobs without payroll information.  

As of 2020, African American families held 4% of the country's household wealth, compared to white families holding 84% of that wealth, and one in five Black households have zero or negative net worth according to the Federal Reserve. If current trends continue, $0 will be the median wealth for Black families by 2053, according to a 2017 report by Prosperity Now and the Institute for Policy Studies.

Small businesses and entrepreneurs have always been wealth builders in our society. By supporting Black-owned businesses, Green Americans can create more opportunities for meaningful savings, property ownership, credit building, and generational wealth.

2. Strengthen Local Economies

When small businesses flourish, so do their communities. A 2017 study by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition found that banks were twice as likely to provide business loans to white applicants than Black ones. This makes it harder for Black Americans and other entrepreneurs of color to start businesses or get them off the ground. 

Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of US economic growth, so imagine what directing some of that spending power to Black-owned businesses across the country can do. When compared to national chain stores, local businesses circulate three times as much money back into the local economy, according to the nonprofit Project Equity. Successful businesses can also attract community investors which may provide banking services, loans, and promote financial literacy—all things that build economic strength.

3. Foster Job Creation

While unemployment skyrocketed for nearly all sectors in the US economy at the start of the pandemic, by April, more than half of the adult Black population was unemployed. Black-owned businesses are geographically concentrated in their communities; therefore, when public health crises affect the community, small businesses are deeply affected too. However, during economic recovery, Black-owned business owners are essential to financial stability, as they are likely to hire and provide job opportunities within their communities. 

Many Black American business owners self-fund their businesses as a result of the lack of loan opportunities and to avoid racist, predatory lending practices. This makes it hard for Black entrepreneurs to grow and expand their companies beyond their communities. 

4. Bring Access to Communities

Some Black-owned businesses are created to service specific needs that are often overlooked by mainstream retailers, whether they be for haircare, apparel, or toys. Green companies like the cosmetic manufacturer SMB Essentials {GBN} provide make up products for people of all skin tones. When you support Black-owned businesses, you get products that promote this kind of accessibility. Plus, you avoid spending money at companies that may exploit Black culture for profit, which brings us to another point: 

5. Hold other Companies Accountable

During the summer of 2020, companies across sectors issued statements in support of Black communities. Many of these statements were meaningless recognitions of the struggle of Black Americans and companies’ so-called commitments to Black Lives Matter without addressing the company’s own racist policies, practices, or business models. 

For example, Jeff Bezos wrote an Instagram post in support of Black communities, yet Amazon has partnered with more than a thousand police departments across the country through its Ring Doorbell Initiative. This initiative has created a widespread surveillance network across the country, which disproportionately misidentifies Black Americans. 

Companies publicly “supporting” minorities yet keeping systems of injustice intact suppresses the structural change that the Black Lives Matter movement demands. Whether it’s Gucci’s sweater design resembling blackface or Facebook’s hiring diversity problem, African Americans and other minorities often bear the brunt of corporate discrimination. 

When you choose a Black-owned business over problematic companies, you vote with your dollar to hold companies accountable. Further down the road, you empower successful minority-owned businesses to implement equitable policies.

6. Visibility and Representation in the Green Economy

The prosperity of a green economy depends on embracing true diversity. The green movement has historically and presently wrestled with a lack of diversity in its activism and representation, but Green Americans can change this. 

Bringing attention to Black- and minority-owned businesses demonstrates that the green movement is everybody’s movement. When minority-owned businesses have a financial platform to stand on, they inspire more people to join the green economy. 

How to Support Black-Owned Businesses

You can find minority-owned businesses that are socially and environmentally responsible on Greenpages.org, our database of certified members of the Green Business Network®. At officialblackwallstreet.com/directory, you can also search for businesses by city, state, and product category and WeBuyBlack.com is an online store that offers a wide selection of products, all sourced from Black vendors. 

Beyond buying, writing positive product reviews and spotlighting businesses using your social media accounts can also give them a major boost. If you know a business owner, make sure they know about grant opportunities through organizations like the Minority Business Development Agency and Foundation for Business Equity.

To learn more about ways to take economic action in support of Black communities, visit greenamerica.org/blog/7-actions-support-black-communities-spending-and-investing.

Updated February 2023.

**********************************************************************************

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.

**********************************************************************************

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.

**********************************************************************************

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.

The intensity of the 2020 general election exposed the frustration so many Americans feel when our needs go unheard by government and corporations. It also showed the disillusionment we often feel with our political system, as many Americans wondered whether a new presidential administration would truly make a difference. Though we are often pitted against each other, many Americans are concerned about the same issues, and there is widespread agreement on the solutions. Our 35 years of experience in fighting for our fragile planet and all its people tells us that no matter who is in political office, economic action is always crucial. By taking action together in our daily lives, as consumers, investors, and community members, we can make a huge difference in the world, from wherever we are.

Around the world, people garden for food, fun, and their wellbeing. But this pastime can be pricey. Plus, buying a lot of gardening supplies generates more climate-altering greenhouse gas emissions and causes other negative environmental impacts. Luckily, with a little planning and creativity, you can grow veggies, fruits, and other plants without breaking the bank or burdening the Earth.

Use free seeds

The easiest place to get seeds without paying a cent is likely your kitchen. Simply eat the produce you want to plant and collect the seeds, whether that’s tomatoes from your fridge or coriander from your spice cabinet. Spread them apart to dry and regularly turn them in a non-plastic container with good air circulation. You can also save seeds from the garden for next year.

Connect with local and virtual groups that promote seed sharing, such as seed libraries or the Great American Seed Swap/Trade Project. You can even request seeds as presents to make gift shopping straightforward for friends and family! Just ask for organic seeds in paper packets from local companies.

Save on soil

Soil is often one of the largest gardening expenses, but it doesn’t have to be that way. If you have access to soil in a yard, use that and supplement with compost or sheet mulching to boost organic matter. Otherwise, ask local garden clubs or farms for ideas.

If you must buy, choose organic and avoid peat because of its climate impacts. Many garden stores sell soil by the cubic yard, which is cheaper and more ecofriendly than plastic bags of soil. If you can’t transport that much by yourself, some garden centers and landscaping businesses will deliver.

Transform trash into planters

The great thing about container gardening is that it works well even in spaces as tiny as a Manhattan studio, and it can be cheap. All you need to begin are durable reusable containers to plant in, preferably ones that have drainage holes or those you can add drainage holes to with a drill or pair of scissors.

Scavenge your recycling bin for small containers to fill with soil and start seeds. Look around your home for buckets, kitchenware, old wooden drawers, or even rainboots that could take on a second life in the garden. Check if anyone you know is getting rid of items that could function as planters and watch out for promising discarded stuff like pallets on the streets. Search your local thrift shop, Freecycle, or Craigslist. Who knows, one day you might even chance upon actual terracotta pots or garden planters!

Take advantage of rain and efficient watering

Harvest rainwater to care for your plants, keep your utility bill down, and conserve water. Plants prefer rainwater, which contains less chlorine, provides more nutrients, and has an ideal pH compared to tap water, which could all mean fewer costly inputs. Be aware of what your roof is made of before using this water on edible plants as certain materials could contaminate the water.

Place a barrel or anything big and sturdy under a gutter to store the rainwater, even a trashcan or cooler. Then either dip into the barrel with your watering can or build a simple DIY barrel with hose for larger vessels. Create a soaker hose by poking holes in a regular old garden hose. It takes just a few minutes and delivers water directly to your plant, saving time and water.

Limit spending on tools

Forget the fancy tools and stick to the gardening basics. All you really need is a rake and a small shovel or garden fork. Consider purchasing them used or repurpose kitchen and other household items.

Alternatively, pool funds with pals, relatives, neighbors, or gardening club members to acquire shared equipment—even during COVID, you can safely share tools if you clean them before use. A government agency or nonprofit near you might loan out tools, too. For instance, Berkeley, CA and Washington, DC both lend at no charge to residents. Find a tool lending library in your area, or start one.

Compost organic waste

Composting is a key method of regenerative agriculture and Climate Victory Gardening that turns seemingly useless organic matter into food for your plants and soil. This enables you to replace store-bought fertilizers, reduce landfill methane emissions, and draw down carbon into the soil.

Start an effortless compost pile by heaping kitchen and yard scraps outside your house and leaving them to decompose. Throw in paper, cardboard, grass clippings, leaves, fruit and vegetable scraps, and coffee grounds. If you prefer something that’s a bit prettier and generates compost faster, you can build a holding bin out of recycled wood or old pallets. If you don’t have a yard, you can still compost via municipal programs that, in some areas, can even lower your waste collection bill.

These steps will set you on the right track to produce your own food, foster healthier soils, sequester carbon, and protect the environment — all for practically no cost!

Make sure your frugal garden is on the Climate Victory Gardens map!

Climate & Refrigerants: 

• Submit annual greenhouse gas emission data, including hydrofluorocarbon emissions, to the Carbon Disclosure Project and share science-based targets to reach carbon neutral operations.  
• Commit to a companywide average refrigerant leak rate of below 10 percent and report annual progress on a public platform.  
• Commit to phase out HFCs from all operations and facilities by 2030 and publish progress towards goal each year.  
• Commit to only using HFC-free systems in all new stores or facilities and use only zero or near-zero GWP refrigerants.  
• Issue a detailed annual sustainability report listing progress on the above goals and other methods to increase energy efficiency of Trader Joe’s refrigeration systems.  

Labor & Cocoa: 

• Increased transparency; publicly disclose the first and second tiers of its chocolate supply chain.  
• Require all cocoa suppliers sourcing out of West Africa to be using a Child Labor Monitoring and Remediation System (CLMRS). 
• Issue an annual sustainability report (not a blog post), describing how it is supporting a sustainable chocolate industry and what indicators are used to measure success of their efforts.  
• Increase compensation for cocoa farmers and disclose how Trader Joe’s is supporting efforts to pay cocoa farmers a living income. 
• Support the call for US and EU mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence regulation.   
• Commit to no deforestation by 2022 throughout the entire supply chain and develop a robust agroforestry policy, particularly for those areas deforested due to industry practices, including where cocoa is grown in West Africa.  
• Respect all workers’ rights from those in your stores to those at the end of the supply chain. This includes stopping any anti-union behavior or union busting. Ensure all workers in the supply chain have proper PPE, hazard pay, and paid sick leave in the time of COVID-19 and thereafter.  

In July, multiple businesses signed onto the Stop Hate for Profit Campaign to take a stand against hate and bigotry on social media platforms. The campaign targeted Facebook, which has a history of failing to effectively stop the spread of misinformation, fake news, and hate speech.

The Stop Hate for Profit coalition is led by prominent civil rights groups including Color of Change, NAACP, Common Sense, ADL, Free Press, Mozilla, LULAC, Sleeping Giants, and National Hispanic Media Center. During the July ad pause, over 1,200 advertisers pledged not to spend ad dollars on the platform throughout the month of July, from Coca-Cola to Patagonia and Unilever. The boycott would not sink Facebook, but it certainly caught the attention of the company which makes the bulk of its revenue from advertising. Last year alone, Facebook made nearly $70 billion from ad revenue.

“What we have done differently this time is to go directly to big advertisers who also have not been able to get changes from the platform: advertisers who see their ads on Facebook showing up next to white supremacist and white nationalist content and who have watched as Mark Zuckerberg has seen himself too powerful to have to listen,” said Rashad Robinson, president of Color of Change, in an interview with the Guardian.

Green America’s Green Business Network took part in the July ad pause on behalf of our community of small businesses. At our core, Green America believes in harnessing the economic power of consumers, investors, and businesses to create a socially just and environmentally sustainable society. Just as we vote with our dollars for companies we trust, we withhold our dollars from bad actors to demand accountability. As a part of the coalition of businesses, nonprofits, and consumers that comprise the Stop Hate for Profit coalition, we continue to strive for civil rights and environmental sustainability for all people.

As a result of the July ad pause, Facebook conceded to several long-standing demands from civil rights groups: the company announced the creation of a senior role to oversee civil rights; it established a dedicated team to analyze racial bias in the algorithm; it publicly released a civil rights audit that informed policy decisions that were “setbacks for civil rights” and committed to a new independent audit, and it has begun to take long-overdue action against hateful movements on the platform. These concessions are important steps forward but are not nearly enough.

While Facebook fell short of the demands, other social media platforms stepped up their anti-racism efforts. Twitter took strong action against conspiracy theories that have led to real-life violence; Reddit removed over two thousand hate-filled subreddits, and YouTube took action against white supremacists on their platform. These social media companies are continuing to sit at the table with the Stop Hate for Profit campaign to actively address misinformation, hate, and harassment, as well as protect democracy and the civil rights of its users.

The Stop Hate for Profit campaign is ongoing and continues to pressure Facebook and other social media platforms. The list of recommended next steps includes actions on accountability, decency, and support for users. You can take action with us by reading the full list of demands and signing the petition to tell Facebook to stop hate for profit.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – December XX, 2020 -- After two decades of failed interventions across the cocoa sector, cocoa farming communities are still battling the effects of poverty, child labor and deforestation. That is the key finding of the 2020 Cocoa Barometer report published today. 

The report finds that the industry continues to rely on vague rhetoric and voluntary programs that fall far short of the mark, and is a rallying cry for civil society organizations (CSOs) and governments to move into legal measures and mandatory compliance for industry. 

Antonie C. Fountain, Cocoa Barometer co-author said “As a biennial review of sustainability in the cocoa sector, the 2020 Cocoa Barometer report provides stark details of how little positive impact current and past interventions are having for the farmers at the beginning of the supply chain. Twenty years into rhetoric, the challenges on the ground remain as large as ever. Poverty is still the daily reality for virtually all West African cocoa farmer families, child labor remains rife and old growth forests continue to be cleared to make way for cocoa production.”

Now is an important window of opportunity to move towards justice, as momentum for change is gathering across different stakeholders. Thanks to campaigning by CSOs, the last two years have seen an increasing number of chocolate companies asking for regulation; significant global actors like the EU are committed to putting legislation in place; and the world’s two largest producers of cocoa, Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana, have formed a cartel to drive up the price for cocoa farmers.

“Coming out on the day that the legal case against Cargill and Nestle for child slavery in their supply chains is being heard at the US Supreme Court, the severity of ongoing problems described in the Barometer remains dire, as does the need for solutions outlined in the report,” said Todd Larsen, Executive Co-Director of Green America.

The report finds that the last two decades of interventions have failed for three main reasons.

• Regulatory efforts have only been voluntary, not mandatory, meaning that across the sector, actors are failing to do what they need to. Within the multitude of government-driven covenants, national multi-stakeholder platforms and sector-wide collaborations, there are no penalties for non-compliance nor enforcement to meet targets. Ironically, however, those at the bottom – cocoa farmers often living below the poverty line – do lose their sustainable cocoa certification if they do not comply. Whilst we’ve seen a significant increase in regulatory processes and commitments to due diligence, they are limited without accountability, transparency and equitable enforcement.

• The underlying problems that exacerbate extreme poverty – including low cocoa prices, lack of infrastructure, and no transparency and accountability as you move higher in the supply chain – remain unchallenged and unsolved. There needs to be recognition that in its current form, the business model for high yields of cocoa means poverty for farmers and excessive profit for chocolate manufacturers. It’s time this changed.

• Efforts to solve complex issues of injustice and unsustainability in the cocoa sector have not given farmers and CSO a seat at the table.  Instead of inviting farmers and civic society to take a respected seat at the decision-making table, problems have been assessed using a top-down industry-based approach. This serves the interests of industry and government, rather than the producer farmers and their communities.

The report makes three key recommendations:

• Regulation that regulates companies, rather than penalizing the farmers. Recognizing that bad farming is not the problem, but rather a symptom of a deeply unfair system, the report advocates for systems change and regulation that creates an enabling environment. Current forms of certification and farm-based standards increase pressure on farmers: instead, we need laws that hold the powerful accountable, rather than laws which demand that farmers change. Compliance criteria are imbalanced and need restructuring so that companies are held accountable to due diligence systems.

• Effective partnerships between producer and consumer countries. If the answer is creating an enabling environment, we need partnership agreements between producer and consumer countries that facilitate and finance this. Processes that set partnerships in motion should be inclusive and deliberative, ensuring that civil society and farmer groups have a respected voice at decision-making tables.

• Deliver on a fair price for farmers. The single biggest positive impact for farmers and incentive for farming sustainably is delivering a fair price for the cocoa they produce. Cocoa and chocolate companies must find ways to redistribute value along the supply chain so that farmers are guaranteed a living income.

Sandra Sarkwah, Coordinator for the Ghana Civil-Society Cocoa Platform (GCCP), supports the publication of the Cocoa Barometer 2020 and said, “Efforts of sector players to change the story of farmers keep on beating about the bush when evidence presents to us the plight of farmers: low income from their hard work is a major threat to cocoa sustainability” she said. “Processors, chocolate manufacturing companies and retailers who earn a large chunk from the value chain must be fair to farmers by paying a living income and this must reach the farmer”. As recommended in the report, Sarkwah confirms “this will require the efforts of various actors, including civil society organisations in both producing and consuming countries, as well as strong farmer cooperatives to demand transparency and accountability for effective delivery of pricing policies for better farm gate prices for farmers”.

The full 2020 Cocoa Barometer report can be read here: www.cocoabarometer.org

ABOUT THE BAROMETER

The  Cocoa  Barometer  is published biennially by a global consortium of civil society actors;  ABVV/Horval, Be Slavery Free, European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT), Fair World Project, Fern, Green America, Hivos, INKOTA-netzwerk, International Labor Rights Forum, Mighty Earth, Oxfam America, Oxfam-Wereldwinkels, Rikolto, Solidaridad, Südwind Institut, Tropenbos International.

Editor’s note only:

The 2020 Cocoa Barometer, an Executive Summary, an FAQ, separate infographics and photographs of cocoa production can be found at https://www.voicenetwork.eu/press/

Media contact:

Antonie Fountain

antonie@voicenetwork.eu

Mob:(+31)06 242 765 17

In the US, Max Karlin

mkarlin@hastingsgroup.com

(703) 276-3255

Editor’s note only:

The 2020 Cocoa Barometer, an Executive Summary, an FAQ, separate infographics and photographs of cocoa production can be found at https://www.voicenetwork.eu/press/

The numbers are in! Professionally managed assets in the U.S. using socially responsible investing (SRI) strategies continue to grow rapidly. According to the US SIF Foundation’s newly released 2020 Report on Sustainable and Responsible Investing Trends, SRI assets now total $17 trillion – a 42% increase since 2018.

This means that one third of all professionally managed investments are now involved in SRI.

In 1995, the first year of the biennial Trends Report, SRI assets totaled only $639 billion.

What is socially responsible investing?

SRI investments take into account the social and environmental impacts of companies and include issues like climate impacts, gender and racial equality, human rights, and labor issues. SRI investing works to create greater corporate responsibility, which can also lead to competitive returns.

Despite recent attacks on socially responsible investing by the Securities & Exchange Commission and the Department of Labor, individual and institutional investors are increasingly seeking to align their investment decisions with their values or missions while meeting their financial goals.

In tracking the growth of SRI, the report examines the integration of environmental, social and corporate governance criteria in investment decision-making; the assets involved in the filing of shareholder resolutions; and community development investments that support economic uplift in marginalized regions.

Highlights of the report include:

• The top 5 issues of concern to institutional investors (such as pension funds, foundations, hospitals, faith-based institutions, insurance companies, and educational institutions) are:
  • Terrorism/Repressive Regimes
  • Climate Change
  • Tobacco
  • Board of Director Issues
  • Sustainable Natural Resources & Agriculture
• The top 5 issues of concern to money managers are:
  • Climate Change
  • Anti-Corruption
  • Board of Director Issues
  • Sustainable Natural Resources & Agriculture
  • Executive Compensation
• The highest number of shareholder resolutions filed between 2018-2020 addressed corporate political activity – both political contributions and lobbying. Shareholder resolutions allow all investors in a company to cast votes that encourage management to take action on a specific issue.
• The next most popular shareholder issues were fair labor practices and equal employment opportunity and climate change issues.
• Community investing assets rose to $266 billion, growing 44% between 2018 -2020. This includes community development banks, credit unions, and loan funds. Assets in community development credit unions are the largest part of the community investing field.

Investors are also responding to major current events. Investors surveyed on the impacts of COVID-19 and SRI trends going forward felt that SRI would continue to grow and that the current pandemic may increase interest in investment strategies that take environmental, social, and corporate governance issues into account. Investors also predicted increased attention to racial and gender equity issues and to the climate crisis.

Investors will likely continue to respond to the police murder of George Floyd and to the broader injustices it has made more visible. Through public statements, support for Black views and insights in corporate engagements, the inclusion of racial justice issues in the investment process, investing in under-served communities, and other actions, socially responsible investors will continue to use the power of their assets to build a better world.

Green America has many resources on socially responsible investing and better banking.

Use the power of your dollar for people and the planet today! Visit:

• Green America’s Finance Campaign for background information
• Get a Better Bank to find community development banks and credit unions and other green options
• Shareholder Action to learn about proxy voting and more
• Fossil Fuel Divestment for investment products & services that avoid fossil fuels
• Financial Planners & Advisors Certified by Green America’s Green Business Network to help you invest to meet your needs and support your values

If you have enough money to open a bank account, you can become a social investor today!

Guest blog by Green Business Network member Decent Exposures, Inc.

Background: In 1986, sustainable business Decent Exposures® began manufacturing the Original Un-Bra, designed by women, for women, with your comfort in mind. Since then, we’ve been successfully fitting women of all sizes, from 30AA to 60L, and every size in between. Over the years, we have expanded our product line to include front closure bras, nursing bras, swimwear, every day and activewear clothing, as well as baby items and accessories, all made from the same high-quality fabrics we use to make our bras and underwear.

Social responsibility is important to us. We use recycled materials for packaging whenever possible, limit our use of plastic, and pass on large fabric scraps to be re-purposed or recycled. We buy organic fabric whenever possible, all of which is made in the USA. In 2016 we were one of 10 finalists for Green America’s People and Planet Award for ethical apparel supply chains. All our products are made in our Seattle office, where most of our employees have been with us for over 20 years. They are paid well above minimum wage, with excellent benefits, and are truly valued for the excellent work they do. We have never bought or sold our mailing lists, as we know quality products and customer satisfaction are the best ways to generate business.

Making the Pivot: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, our production crew used disposable face masks to keep them from breathing in fabric dust. When we needed to order more in early March, there was such a limited supply that we decided to design our own reusable/washable, organic cotton, latex-free masks.  Within a week, we had created 2 styles:  a pleated style, similar to the disposable masks, as well as a more deluxe, fitted version, with extra room around the nose. Guess it's true - necessity IS the mother of invention!

As a small manufacturer in Seattle, WA, we were able to quickly respond to what was needed and now offer for sale publicly:

• Pleated masks, pleated masks with a slit at the top for a filter, and the more fitted, deluxe style
• Kids sizes in each style – just smaller versions for kids under 10 years old
• Fabric ear loops instead of elastic ear loops, for those with elastic sensitivities
• Behind the Head elastic option which works well for those with hearing aids

We had never considered making face masks but pivoting quickly helped our company stay open when our governor issued a Stay Home, Stay Safe mandate in April and all non-essential businesses were closed. As facemasks were and are definitely essential, we were able to remain busy the whole month of April exclusively making facemasks. We have sold over 10,000 masks and have donated over 3500 masks to local food banks and other essential workers.

Our facemasks are available in over 20 organic cotton colors and are a wonderful way for us to use up some fabric scraps created while we make our usual products.

Good News: It’s been fulfilling being able to help with the pandemic in some way, and we’re grateful to our customers who recommended us to their friends and families as the need for face masks became clear.

Trader Joe’s Practices Harm People and the Planet

Trader Joe's has a bad history of leaking dangerous climate pollutants and not disclosing the labor practices in its chocolate supply chains. And the company doesn’t even report how it plans to address these serious issues.

That’s why Green America and the Environmental Investigation Agency have teamed up to hold Trader Joe’s accountable.

We’re telling Trader Joe’s to stop emitting climate-damaging refrigerant gases in all stores and to support efforts to end child labor in its Trader Joe's chocolate.

And we’re urging the company to up its transparency across the board.

Tell Trader Joe's: Don't Discount Our Future!
 

Trader Joe's Damage to the Climate

Trader Joe’s refrigeration is leaking super-pollutant gases that accelerate the climate crisis. It received the lowest score on the Environmental Investigation Agency’s Climate-Friendly Supermarket Scorecard.

In 2016, Trader Joe’s settled with the US EPA and DOJ for violating the Clean Air Act by leaking refrigerants. But there’s no sign that Trader Joe’s has made progress to reduce leak rates or adopt sustainable, climate-friendly refrigerants.

Refrigerants are a major source of climate-damaging emissions. Refrigerant leaks from US supermarkets alone emit 45 million tons of greenhouse gases every year - the equivalent of 9.5 million cars on the road.

Is there Child Labor in Trader Joe's Chocolate?

As for labor, Trader Joe’s received one of the worst scores on Green America’s retailer chocolate scorecard; the company shares very little about what it’s doing to address child labor in its supply chains or rampant deforestation that is caused by the chocolate it profits off.

There are over one million children in West Africa experiencing child labor in cocoa growing; 24% of child laborers are exposed to harmful pesticides that jeopardize their health and the environment; cocoa farmers make less than $1 per day.

It is unacceptable for any company profiting off chocolate to not have a publicly available plan to end child labor and injustices in the chocolate supply chain!

Holding Trader Joe's Accountable

While refrigerants and cocoa sourcing are quite different issues, Trader Joe's inaction on both shows an inexcusable and troubling disregard for people and the planet.

Most companies are becoming MORE transparent, but Trader Joe’s shares next to no information with the public about its sourcing and operations.

Some of the largest and smallest supermarkets provide greater disclosure than Trader Joe’s – leaving no excuse for Trader Joe’s lack of transparency. 

Take Action 

• Sign and share our petition telling Trader Joe’s to increase transparency and only use practices that are sustainable and just for people and the planet. 
• Contact Trader Joe's directly and ask them to be more transparent, address child labor in cocoa, and cut their emissions.
• Investigate your local store's refrigerants in four quick steps.
• Shop from small, ethical chocolate brands prioritizing people and the planet.
• Tell the world's largest chocolate companies to step it up on addressing child labor, deforestation, farmer poverty, and rapidly reducing pesticide usages.

When it comes to caring for your garden, weed management is a priority. These pesky plants can deplete precious nutrients from the soil and take up prime real estate. They can be tedious to control and lead to lower harvests. But weeds aren’t always troublesome—many common weeds can play beneficial roles in your garden and even end up on your plate.

What is a weed?

A weed is any plant that grows in an undesired location—a carrot growing in a bed of kale could be considered a weed. But, it’s the invasive and noxious weeds like crabgrass and thistle that come to mind for most. 

Managing common weeds in your Climate Victory Garden

Climate Victory Gardening rules out the use of synthetic herbicides while building nutrient-rich soil—a perfect combination for weeds that requires gardeners to be creative and consider a more holistic perspective of the role of weeds in the garden. 

Organic weed control methods include applying mulch to suppress plant growth, soil solarization, DIY natural weed killers like salt and vinegar, and of course, pulling weeds by hand. But, before you remove weeds, be aware of their potential benefits to the ecosystem and your garden.

Left in the garden, noninvasive weeds can help cover and protect exposed soil, reducing the loss of rich topsoil from wind and water erosion—weeds are always better than bare soil. Their roots can decrease soil compaction and support underground carbon-sequestering microbes. Weeds can be indicative of soil health and help you troubleshoot issues in the garden. Before they go to seed, some weeds can be composted.

Another reason to embrace weeds in your garden? Many are edible and can be highly nutritious. Eating weeds is economical and ensures these home-grown nutrients don’t go to waste. So, the next time you see a weed, think twice before removing it. These tasty plants might just become a staple on your dinner table!

Common Edible Weeds

Dandelion has antioxidant and anti-inflammatory medicinal properties. The entire plant is edible and has a slight bitter taste that increases as the plant matures. Add raw young dandelion leaves to salad or cook in stir-fries and soups. Flowers can be used to make dandelion wine and flower jam or eaten fresh as a garnish. Roast the root and steep in hot water to make a coffee substitute. 

1 cup of cooked dandelion greens contains approximately:

• 40% of the DV for Vitamin A
• 21% of the DV for Vitamin C
• 17% of the DV for Vitamin E

Lambsquarter has a mild and slightly salty flavor. The leaves, stem, flowers, and seeds can all be eaten young, but avoid mature plants because they contain oxalic acid that accumulates with age. Add young raw leaves and flowers to salads or prepare similar to spinach.

1 cup of cooked lambsquarters contains approximately:

• 43% of the DV for Vitamin A
• 41% of the DV for Vitamin C
• 20% of the DV for Calcium

Purslane leaves, flower buds, and stems can be eaten raw, pickled, or cooked. The plant’s sour taste makes it a flavor-enhancing addition to salads or stir-fries. Purslane has a crisp yet mucilaginous texture similar to prickly pear cactus.

1 cup of cooked purslane is high in omega-3s and antioxidants and contains approximately:

• 13% of the DV for Vitamin C
• 12% of the DV for Potassium
• 12% of the DV for Vitamin A

Stinging nettle may seem intimidating to eat but has been used for centuries to treat muscle and joint pain and alleviate allergies. It has an earthy and grassy flavor and must be cooked to destroy its stinging properties. Wear gloves while harvesting and prepare with caution! Cook the leaves, stems, and roots as you would spinach, and add to soups, pastas, or casseroles. Dry leaves and flowers and steep in hot water to make herbal tea.

1 cup of blanched stinging nettles contains approximately:

• 60% of the DV for Vitamin A
• 33% of the DV for Calcium
• 22% of the DV for Dietary Fiber

Don’t stop with these four examples, as there are likely other edible weeds in and around your garden.

When foraging for edible weeds, avoid harvesting from areas contaminated with environmental pollutants, agrochemicals, and animal feces. As with all plants, be careful to consume only the parts known to be edible. Many plant species look similar to these edible weeds but may be poisonous or inedible. Be sure to do your research and correctly identify the weeds in your garden by using mobile phone apps like Seek by iNaturalist or PlantSnap. If you’re still unsure whether a plant is edible, it’s best to not consume it and let the weed serve other purposes in your garden!

This is a former Green America campaign, and progress was made! Thousands of Green Americans wrote to Disney about labor abuses in its supply chain, and Disney responded by taking steps to address abuses in certain factories. Together, we moved Disney and we can hold other massive corporations accountable too.

In June, 2016, China Labor Watch issued a report entitled “The Dark World of Disney” that found appalling labor conditions at two of Disney’s supplier factories in China. Workers in the factories worked 11-hour days for the equivalent of $1.32 US dollars per hour, and were required to work overtime. They were exposed to toxic chemicals without protection or any training in how to handle them. Workers slept in overcrowded dormitories with unsanitary facilities and fed substandard food.

After that report came out and thousands of Green Americans wrote to Disney, the company responded that it dropped one of the suppliers and is pushing the other to improve. But, in November, 2016, China Labor Watch issued a new report documenting yet another Disney supplier factory where employees are working 100 overtime hours per month, are exposed to toxins, and are forced to sign away their rights when they join the company. Investigations of Disney factories revealing multiple abuses now go back 15 years! The company has had ample time to require factories to comply with its code of conduct and all local laws. Yet, time and again, abuses are found at Disney contractors.

Despite the progress made years ago, there are reports that labor abuses are still occurring in Disney’s supply chain and the supply chains of other major toy companies. If you would like to reach out to Disney directly, here are some tips to write an effective letter to companies.

Shop from Green Businesses! Green America's certified Green Businesses are working to create an economy that works for people and the planet and have excellent options for toys.

Skip the big name toy companies and shop second-hand! This helps to keep toys out of landfills. Toycycle is one example where you can find toys that are new to you AND sell toys that you may be ready to part with.

The minimum wage in Bangladesh's garment industry is equal to just US$67 a month. This wage has been fixed since 2013 and is not due to be reviewed for at least another year. Meanwhile the cost of living has increased dramatically: over 6% per year since 2013. Workers who already couldn't cover basic expenses on these low wages are now struggling even harder to survive.

In December, with no other route for raising their frustrations and demands, workers at dozens of factories held peaceful walk-outs and demonstrations for a higher wage. Instead of agreeing to pay a living wage, or even to bring forward a wage review, factory owners brought unsubstantiated criminal charges against dozens of labor leaders and garment workers.

At least 34 activists and workers have been arrested, and as of February 20, five of them still remain in police custody or jail. Some have received threats of torture or death.

Many are being charged under a section of law that has already been removed from the statutes. These charges also include hundreds of "unnamed" workers, allowing factory owners to simply add workers they see as troublemakers to the list whenever they wish. Over 1500 workers have been reportedly dismissed from their jobs and potentially blacklisted from future garment work.

Please sign the petition to call on brands whose clothes are made at the factories behind the complaints to take immediate action for the dismissal of the falsified charges and the release of the jailed activists and workers!

This petition will be delivered to H&M, Gap Inc (owns Banana Republic and Old Navy), Inditex (owns Zara and Bershka), and VF (owns 30 brands including North Face, Jansport, and Lee), which source from the factories pressing the charges.

While no court ruling or monetary sum could undo the hardships faced by thousands of garment workers and their families after the 2013 building collapse in Dhaka, Bangladesh, two recent events help to bring some justice to victims.

First, on June 1, 2015, Police in Bangladesh charged 41 people with murder over the collapse of the Rana Plaza garment factory complex, including several owners of the factories inside. The trial is set to begin June 28.

Then, on June 10, the Rana Plaza Trust Fund reached its goal of $30 million to compensate injured workers and the children of workers who died in the garment factory collapse more than two years ago. In all, 1,138 people lost their lives, and more than 2,500 were injured.

The Rana Plaza Trust Fund was established by the International Labor Organization (ILO) to collect money to cover loss of income and medical expenses for Rana Plaza victims and their families, some 5,000 claimants.

Brands who manufactured in Rana Plaza, as well as brands who manufactured elsewhere in Bangladesh, were asked to contribute to the fund, based on their size, and involvement in Bangladesh. This was not the first building catastrophe in the Bangladeshi garment sector, and Rana Plaza was far from unique in the way that it was run.

As the two year anniversary of the collapse—and fund deadline—approached, consumer pressure on brands that were slow to contribute mounted.

Green America worked with allies like the International Labor Rights Forum and The Clean Clothes Campaign to pressure Walmart ($482 billion in annual sales), Inditex (owner of Zara) ($18.9 billion), JCPenney ($11.9 billion), Mango ($4.5 billion), The Children’s Place ($1.8 billion), and United Colors of Benetton ($1.6 billion) to contribute, or increase their contribution, to the fund.

In response to pressure, both The Children’s Place and Inditex increased their contributions to compensate victims. The Clean Clothes Campaign maintains a list of which brands contributed what.

After reaching this goal, Kalpona Akter, executive director of the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity, shared with The Guardian, “In comparison to the loss of families and victims, compensation doesn’t really alter anything,” Akter says. “But it will still help at least to send these kids to school and to put food on the table for these families. I want to thank every single person who was involved in this campaign, everyone who sent even one sentence to a brand and asked for compensation for these families.”

Thank you to all Green Americans who joined us in putting pressure on clothing brands.

The problem of forced child labor and human trafficking on West African cocoa farms has been known problem since roughly 2000, when a number of investigative reports came out exposing the severity of this issue. These reports spurred a reaction among policy makers and businesses, though for nearly a decade work to reduce the incidences in labor abuse in the sector seemed fragmented and stalled.

However, in the past four years there are clear signs of progress. Consumer awareness of child labor in the cocoa farming sector continues to grow, and with it, an ardent demand for chocolate made without child labor. Green America and many allies have helped hundreds of thousands of consumers communicate their concerns about child labor to the largest chocolate manufacturers, and raised awareness of fair trade certified and direct trade chocolate as well.

Companies big and small have responded to this demand. Smaller fair trade companies like Divine Chocolate and Equal Exchange have been able to expand their markets and their offerings in order to send more money back to the farming communities they work with. Ben and Jerry’s announced that all their ingredients, not just cocoa, would be fair trade by the end of this year, and larger companies like Hershey and Mars have committed to source only certified cocoa by the year two thousand and twenty.

How all this progress in the marketplace translates to progress on the ground for farmers is the question that is addressed in a new report out today: The Fairness Gap: Farmer Incomes and Root Cause Solutions to Ending Child Labor in the Cocoa Growing Sector. Also in the report are recommendations for all actors in the sector.

Key report findings include::

• Many cocoa farming families in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire make around the international poverty line of $2 per day, but with large families, this amounts to roughly 40 cents per person.
• Low earnings make it difficult for farmers to pay hired laborers to harvest the crop at the legally required minimum wage, fueling the need for child labor and, especially in Côte d’Ivoire, the trafficking of casual workers (including children) from neighboring Mali and Burkina Faso.
• The majority of cocoa farmers are isolated geographically and must rely on a vast network of middlemen to transport their beans. Farmers also lack price information and negotiating power.
• The average age of cocoa farmers is increasing as younger people seek alternative means of income. This also increases the need for casual workers, who are even more marginalized.
• Company efforts to improve working conditions, schools, and supply certification are getting mixed reviews due to a failure to address the underlying poverty problem in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire.

The full report can be read on the International Labor Rights Forum’s website.

Cooperative Fund of New England Expands Clean Energy

Launched in April of 2010, Energía, LLC is bringing energy efficiency to western Massachusetts.

As a service provider for both residential and commercial properties, Energía has spent the last year and a half saving energy and saving money for its clients, by conducting energy audits and installing numerous energy upgrades, such as high-performance insulation, ENERGY STAR appliances, energy-efficient light fixtures, thermostat controls, and more.

The first year of business was a great success. So, bolstered with a line of credit from the Cooperative Fund of New England, Energía has been able to expand in 2011 to include renewable energy installations like solar hot water heaters and solar photovoltaics. The company has also been able to expand its services to larger clients, such as local universities like Mount Holyoke, Smith College, and Williams College.

The Energia team working on an insulation upgrade project at Mt. Holyoke College.

“By drawing off the line I had with them already, we’ve been able to bring on our third crew of workers,” says Tom Rossmassler, president of Energía, who notes that the expansion means four new jobs for the Holyoke area.

What’s more, Energía’s structure means that the new workers have more than just a job. Via the internal Workers Trust program, after six months Energía’s employees become eligible for company profit-sharing and for participation in governance with board representation.

With such an innovative and people-focused company structure, and a company mission that benefits the local community by diminishing local reliance on fossil fuels, Energía easily fulfills the vision of community-development lenders like the Cooperative Fund of New England.

Going Solar at the Workplace

Dr. David Shuman, veterinarian and pet care specialist, has always had a commitment to green principles at his Santa Cruz, California animal hospital.

Inside his facility, all light fixtures and screw-in light bulbs are fluorescent, the toilets are low-flow (with flow restrictors on sinks and shower heads), and his staff maintains a commitment to recycling and minimizing waste. Visitors to the animal hospital’s blog can find access to such green resources as biodegradable bags for pet waste and eco-friendly methods for getting rid of fleas.

However, there was one green step for his business that always seemed cost-prohibitive and out of reach: going solar at work.

That was before Dr. Shuman discovered his local community credit union’s solar-power loan program. The Santa Cruz Community Credit Union (SCCCU) offers 100-percent financing for the installation of solar energy for commercial property over a term of 15 years. When Dr. Shuman balanced the financing terms offered by SCCCU against the energy savings on his electricity bill that the solar panels would bring, taking out a loan with SCCCU just made good business sense.

photo courtesy of Joop Rubens and the Santa Cruz Community Credit Union

“My hospital’s electric bills have dropped from about $440 a month to about $65 a month,” says Dr. Shuman. “It can only be a guess because prices change, but using today’s electricity rates, it will take about twelve years or so for the savings to pay for the panels themselves, and to close out the loan.”

Meanwhile, the city of Santa Cruz can breathe easier with one more business choosing cleaner, greener power, over dirty fossil fuels. What’s more, the SCCCU loan helped direct more business to local solar installation company Independent Energy Systems, supporting good, local, green jobs.

“Joel Kaufman and his team at Independent solar were A+ to work with,” says Dr. Shuman. “My customers have noticed the installation, of course, and I was very surprised at how many clients have said something. I’ve even had pedestrians walking by the hospital stop in to ask about them. I actively refer anyone interested to Independent Energy.”

In addition to the solar power loans, SCCCU also offers energy-efficiency loans, up to $10,000 for business to purchase energy-efficient appliances and lighting, window replacements, water-saving or low-flow sprinkler systems, and drought resistant or ecological landscaping, or for waste-reduction, recycling, and composting.

It’s all a part of SCCCU’s commitment to “develop new loan products that promote energy efficiency and a clean environment for our members and our community,” says Frank Nuciforo, director of lending for SCCCU. In 2010, the credit union loaned more than $200,000 to local residents and businesses for going solar, for investing in energy efficiency, or for electric or hybrid cars.

Sergio Nuñez de Arco aspires to become the quinoa king, and he’s well on his way. The company he started, one of New Resource Bank’s first customers, rocketed from $635,000 in revenues in 2007 to more than $9.2 million and a 33 percent U.S. market share in 2010, says Nuñez de Arco.

Driven by a vision of promoting sustainable agriculture and raising farmer incomes his native Bolivia, Nuñez de Arco hopes to capture the majority of the U.S. market for quinoa by 2012 with a product that’s 100 percent organic and 100 percent fair trade. A member of the Fair Trade Federation since December 2010, Andean Naturals’ products are also certified by Fair Trade USA.

The relationship with New Resource is essential to the company’s success, Nuñez de Arco says. Not only does the company draw on a line of credit, it needs frequent, complex wire transfers to go through flawlessly. What surprised him somewhat, he adds, is that the bank “did not take it easy on us just because we’re trying to do good. They had a very solid way of analyzing the financials, cost structure and profitability, and telling us, ‘If you want to get to this level, here’s what you have to do.’ I feel like they want our company to be successful.”

Nuñez de Arco helping with the quinoa harvest. (Profile & photo courtesy New Resource Bank)

Quinoa, a complete-protein, gluten-free “grain” (it’s really a seed), has been cultivated in the Andes for thousands of years. Andean Naturals is making it more accessible in the United States by reducing risk for U.S. food purveyors. The company, which has offices in Foster City, California, and La Paz, Bolivia, buys directly from local farm cooperatives and processors, paying them an 8 percent premium for meeting its Royal Quinoa cultivation guidelines. It then sells the crop to leading US food companies. Most quinoa we find today on shelves can be traced back to Bolivia.

“We see ourselves as a bridge between the farm and the U.S. market,” says Nuñez de Arco. “There are risks in importing directly—language barriers, shipments that are not well cleaned, late shipments. With us, customers don’t have to worry about when the container will get there, and we stand by the quality. We’re also transparent about prices, including how much the farmer gets. All this makes it easier for U.S. food companies to incorporate quinoa into their products.”

Organic certified cocoa from Ghana.

Five years ago, if you wanted to buy an organic chocolate bar, you would have had a hard time finding one with cocoa from anywhere in West Africa. Despite the fact that the region is the largest producer of cocoa in the world, providing raw cocoa to companies like Hershey, Mars and Cadbury, it simply did not have organic certified cocoa farms. In Ghana, for example, which supplies roughly 30% of the world’s cocoa, the government long reserved the right to apply pesticides on all cocoa farms in the country to prevent plant diseases they feared could threaten the entire harvest. And, while fair trade production—which limits the use of certain chemicals—launched in Ghana in 1995, organic was still an impossibility for almost two decades.

Recently, however, things have started to change, and several industrious Ghanaian farmers are producing some of the first organic certified cocoa in in the country. Late last year I had the chance to visit Ghana for a series of meetings focused on boosting farmer incomes—an issue we’ve advocated for at Green America for years. At the meetings I was able to meet dozens of cocoa farmers from throughout West Africa. Many of these men and women had produced cocoa their whole lives, and came from long lines of cocoa farmers—so they were experts.

Farmer Francis Otu explaining cocoa production.

Francis Otu is one of the farmers I met. Francis has been cocoa farming for a long time, but started using organic methods in 2006. He is a member of Cocoa Organic Farmers Association (COFA). Located in the Brong Densuso area of Ghana’s Eastern Region, COFA is the first organization producing organic cocoa in Ghana. COFA has four communities (clusters of farms) owned by over 600 different members. Even though Francis started using organic insect repellents in 2006, such as neem, it was not until more recently the government blocked off COFA’s communities from regular pesticide treatments. Combined, members of COFA own 1250 acres of land, which equates to roughly 950 football fields that are no longer being treated with chemicals.

Cocoa pods up close.

Cocoa farming, organic or not, is intense work. Unlike large-scale farms here in the United States that sprawl for acres and rely on machines, cocoa farms are typically are very small, just 3 to 5 acres, and must be harvested by hand. At first glance, the farms don’t seem like farms at all, but forests. On the farm I visited during my visit, the cocoa trees were well spread out; their branches created a cool and quiet canopy for all of us standing below, and the ground was covered in dead leaves. These leaves, which I initially imagined had fallen randomly, were actually part of the farmers’ pest-prevention measures, staving off weeds from growing in the ground.

Francis is passionate about organic farming and using no synthetic chemicals. When I asked why, he stated, “because it is healthier for me, as the farmer, for my land, and for the consumers in Europe who buy my cocoa.” After the three year transition period required to obtain organic certification, he can also make more money. “It’s very difficult to make a living as a cocoa farmer, but as an organic farmer it’s a little better. I make a premium of 20 cedi per bag I sell.” (roughly $5).

Inspecting fermenting cocoa beans.

Cocoa pricing is always a little confusing. In Ghana, COCOBOD, the government’s central cocoa marketing branch, sets the price of cocoa each year. For this growing season, the price was increased to 420 GH¢ per 64kg bag, or $105. Francis and his peers then earn $110 per bag. From conversations I had with several of the farmers attending the conference, it seems 1 acre of land can yield about 4 bags per year, which for most farming families would equate to only $1680 annually. The Cocoa Barometer found that most cocoa farmers in Ghana and their children live on just $0.86 per day, well below the global poverty line of $1.25/day. Child labor, a symptom of extreme poverty, has been a known problem in West African cocoa fields for more than a decade. In a 2015 survey, Tulane University, commissioned by the US Department of Labor, found that more than 2 million children in Ghana and Cote D’Ivoire work in hazardous conditions growing cocoa, such as burning fields, applying agrochemicals, carrying heavy loads, and not attending school.

After the cocoa pods are picked, and the beans inside fermented, they are laid out to dry in the sun.

While organic certified cocoa does command a higher price than conventional, if there is no buyer interested in organic, the cocoa will be sold as conventional. Francis explained that though he started using organic methods nearly a decade ago, earning certification and finding buyers took many years. Right now, COFA sells its cocoa to a Swiss chocolate manufacturer, but still has no US buyers. When I asked what would help Francis and his peers most he said, “more direct relationships with buyers so that we can make long-term investments in our farms and maintain quality.”

Globally, organic cocoa production is still a minute portion of all cocoa sold. The ICCO estimates that just 15,000 tons of more than 300 million tons is grown under organic conditions, or .05%. And less than 30% of this cocoa comes from West Africa, according to the FAO. However, the emergence of organic cocoa in Ghana could not come at a better a time. Consumer demand for organic products is growing at a strong pace, cocoa included. According to Euromonitor International, global organic chocolate sales were estimated to have nearly doubled from $171 million in 2002 to $304 million in 2005.

Francis pointing out one of his cocoa trees.

The purpose for my visit to Ghana was to learn from farmers what challenges they face and what it would take to make cocoa farming a long-term, profitable livelihood for farmers. Cocoa farmers throughout West Africa live in extreme poverty—malnutrition, remote homes, no access to schools, and no regular income–despite the world’s voracious consumption of chocolate. At the meetings, Francis declared to all of us that “just like a cocoa tree needs nutrients like water and sunlight to survive, so too do cocoa farmers. If cocoa farmers can not earn a decent income for their work, there will be no chocolate.” For our part as consumers, we have a delicious job to do—buy and eat more organic and fair trade certified cocoa, to support all the men and women who pick each and every pod.

Check out our Chocolate Scorecard to find organic and fair trade chocolates, and to find out which companies are lagging behind.

Photos by Emilie Schoots and Elizabeth O’Connell.

Student guest workers protest outside a Times Square McDonalds back in March, accusing the company of refusing to pay its workers overtime and wage theft.

Despite the promise of certain legal rights to safe, healthy, and fair work conditions, sweatshops and slavery still exist here in the United States. As exposed in last month’s issue of The Green American, “Fair Labor at Home,” in fleeing from terrible working conditions in their native countries, many immigrants are flung from the frying pan into the fire. Seeing their precarious financial or legal situation, certain unscrupulous employers will sometimes lure desperate immigrants into their employment with promises of a better life, only to subject them to the very conditions many were trying to escape in the first place.

While in very sad cases employers use economic coercion, threats of deportation, or physical force to exploit their workers, part of the battle is knowing your rights as a worker. After all, how can you know when your rights are being violated and thus be incited to action, if you weren’t aware you had rights in the first place?

So whether you’re just touching down on American soil for the first time or have never left it, it’s important to get acquainted with your legal rights. That’s why we here at Green America have compiled a short list of some of your most fundamental rights as a worker.

A quick caveat: The information provided in this post does not constitute legal advice. It is merely a list of certain legal rights and certain resources that can describe your rights more in full. It is my hope that this post will serve as a simpler alternative to the labyrinth of links and pages that is the Department of Labor’s website.

Minimum Wage

There’s a federal minimum wage ($7.25/hour) and your state’s minimum wage (varies) — employees are entitled to the higher of the two. However, there are certain industries (agriculture, industries where tipping is prevalent, etc.) and positions (internships mostly) where it is legal for employers to pay their employees less than minimum wage. Some of these exceptions will be covered below.

Overtime for Hourly Workers

According to Federal labor law, when an employee works over 40 hours in a single week, s/he is owed a minimum of 1.5 times regular pay for every additional hour worked over 40. The week “need not coincide with the calendar week, but may begin on any day and at any hour of the day.” Federal law does not permit averaging of hours over two or more weeks.

Employees are not automatically entitled to overtime pay for work on Saturdays, Sundays, holidays, or regular days of rest. Overtime is about the hours worked in a given week, so as long as the 40 hours plus is worked within a seven day window, the exact days worked doesn’t matter – be it Veterans’ Day, Christmas, or the day of your mother’s funeral.

Keep in mind that many professions are exempt from receiving overtime so make sure to check if you qualify before you go busting any doors down.

Overtime for Salaried Workers

If you make less than $23,600 ($455/week) you automatically qualify for overtime — even if you work in an industry that does not typically allot overtime rates. If your employer cuts your pay when you miss part of the work day, you’re not exempt. However, if neither of the aforementioned criteria applies to you, you may still merit overtime (unless of course you work in an exempt field).

Meal Breaks

There are no federal mandates requiring that employers allot their employees meal breaks during the workday, only state laws. However, not every state has bothered to enact regulations. Only 20 states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia — require that employers to provide some sort of break for meals. Click here for a rundown of your state’s regulations if you’re lucky enough to work in an aforementioned state.

Miscellaneous Breaks

The outlook is even bleaker when it comes to breaks before and after lunch. A paltry nine states — California, Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington – require that employers give their workers’ intermittent “rest” periods throughout the workday.

Sick Leave

According to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), in order to merit sick leave you must (1) have worked for your employer for at least 1,250 hours over the last 12 months; and (2) work at a location where there are at least 50 employees employed by your employer within 75 miles.

Those who do qualify are allowed up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave for the birth or adoption of a child or for the serious illness of the employee or their spouse, child or parent.

But if the FMLA doesn’t apply to you, don’t give up hope! Many local governments have enacted their own regulations regarding sick leave.

Minimum Wages for Tipped Employees

Some states allow an employer to pay their employee less than minimum wage when the remaining portion can be made up in tips. For example, in North Carolina an employer can pay a waiter, bartender, or hotel maid as little as $2.13/hr as long as they make more than $20 in tips a month. For a full list of wages by state, check out the DOL’s website.

Filing a Complaint

Think one of your rights has been violated? For wage violation employees may find out how to file a complaint by contacting the local Wage and Hour Division office or by calling the program’s toll-free help line at 1-866-4USWAGE (1-866-487-9243). “In addition, an employee may file a private suit, generally for the previous two years of back pay (three years in the case of a willful violation) and an equal amount as liquidated damages, plus attorney’s fees and court costs.”

For safely or environmental violations, workers or their representatives may file a complaint or request that an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspect their workplace if they believe there is a serious hazard or that their employer is not following OSHA standards via fax, email, or telephone.

Protection for Whistle Blowers

The OSHA will withhold the identity of the whistle blower if requested by the worker. Thanks to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, it is illegal for an employer to fire, demote, transfer, deny a raise, or discriminate in any way against a worker for filing a complaint or using other OSHA rights. Remedies can include job reinstatement and payment of back wages.

Still have questions? Interested in something I didn’t cover? The Department of Labor’s website offers a more comprehensive account of workers’ rights. The AFL-CIO is also a great resource

Yesterday in partnership with Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour and the activism arm of the Nation, Green America and China Labor Watch launched a petition to improve worker health and safety for Apple employees in the factories that make Apple products.

Apple was quick to respond to our campaign, in a statement shared with Computer World, however, their statement falls far short of meeting the demands of the campaign.

First, we are calling for the elimination of the most dangerous chemicals used to make Apple products. Two dangerous chemicals known to be used by Apple include benzene and n-hexane, but there are more. Thousands of chemicals can be involved in making one electronic device, many of which are newly developed and not sufficiently tested. Apple does not disclose the list of chemicals used at its supplier factories. Transparency will be the first step in eliminating the most dangerous chemicals, removing them is next.

Apple pointed out it has led the industry in removing other dangerous chemicals from its products, but its statement did not include benzene or n-hexane. Nor did it indicate that Apple had removed toxic chemicals from the processes of making the parts–simply the final products themselves.

In cases where workers are still exposed to dangerous chemicals, workers must be provided with proper training and protective gear. In China, the legal minimum requirement for health and safety training is 24 hours. Apple’s new EHS training program provides no evidence that trainings will be enforced for workers at supplier factories, only that management will be trained. Additionally, China Labor Watch has issued reports revealing that at one of Apple’s main assembly factories, safety trainings were sometimes only 10 minutes long.

Secondly, we are calling on Apple to ensure that all workers who have been injured are receiving appropriate care. At present, Apple has no mechanism to track worker health and safety at its supplier factories, and therefore has no idea of the pervasiveness of occupational illnesses. Tracking will be the first step, but to be a leader, Apple should ensure that any worker who has become ill making iPhones is receiving proper diagnosis, can access appropriate care, and can afford the care he or she needs. The current process for Apple employees to receive occupational diagnosis and access treatment is bureaucratic, time-consuming, and the care is not sufficient. Apple needs to step in to expedite this process. For workers that have already become ill, sometimes gravely, time is of the essence.

It’s true that Apple has led in its industry, which is why Apple can and should be the first tech company to take this next step for workers.

Additional reforms Apple should take to protect the workers making its products include:

• Disclose the chemicals used in products and to make products at supplier and assembly factories, and a mitigation plan for all chemicals considered to be dangerous
• Disclose incidences of worker injuries and illness
• Require all supplier and assembly factories to conduct pre-hire and post-resignation health exams, while at the same time ensuring that workers are not tested for pregnancy or discriminated against for other diseases like hepatitis B or HIV.
• Disclose all manager safety trainings (including the training content), audit results, inspection results, and steps it took to resolve problems. (Including locations of inspections.)
• Disclose inspection/audit findings to the public

Until this information is public, it’s difficult for consumers to trust what Apple says it is doing. Greater transparency is the first step towards worker safety, and it must be followed by action.

People interested in joining us to push Apple to protect workers and move towards true sustainable manufacturing should sign our petition to the Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook

This short documentary, Who Pays the Price? The Human Cost of Electronics, reveals the worker health and safety abuses and hazards of the electronics industry in China, profiling workers poisoned by chemicals and their struggle for compensation. The film is made by filmmakers Heather White & Lynn Zhang.

Thousands of young people in China enter export factories to make the West's favorite electronic gadgets, only to find they have contracted occupational diseases or worse, leukemia, by the age of 25.

Are you thinking about breaking up with your mega-bank? By switching to a smaller, community bank or credit union, you are choosing to support the green economy by placing your money in the hands of ethical institutions. Joining a green bank is one of the biggest ways you can vote with your dollars, but it is also a major decision. Here are answers to some of the most frequently asked questions we receive when people shift to greener financing, with thanks to This! Is What We Did for answers to some questions.

NGOs and news outlets in the West first shined a light on the issue of child labor and extreme poverty among cocoa farming communities in West Africa in the early 2000s. Since then, major chocolate companies, and the chocolate buying public, have become aware of these ongoing problems.

Yet despite this awareness, and many promises by the chocolate industry to address the problem of child labor, a report released in July 2015 commissioned by the United Stated Department of Labor showed that hazardous child labor in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire is a growing problem. The report found over 2.1 million children across both countries to be conducting hazardous tasks to harvest cocoa. A 2016 exposé in Fortune magazine brought renewed attention to the sustainability efforts of the biggest chocolate industry players.

Companies Are Increasingly Using Certifications

Starting in 2009, several companies began to make commitments to ethically certify their cocoa, as a means to trace their supply chain and deliver farmers a slightly higher price per ton—an important step to addressing one of child labor’s root causes: poverty.

Cocoa certification in West Africa, through Fair Trade International, Fair Trade USA, Utz Certified, or Rainforest Alliance, has led to some improvements for the farmers involved, but certified cocoa still only represents a fraction of the 3.5 million tons of cocoa sold worldwide. Additionally, in terms of impact, not all certifications deliver the same benefits to farmers. Only the Fair Trade certifications guarantee a minimum price to farmers, as well as a guaranteed premium payment of $200 USD per ton, and even that alone is not enough to lift farmers and their families out of poverty.

Moving Beyond Certification

In addition to certification, some chocolate manufacturers have launched their own programs to attempt to prevent child labor in their supply chains. Simultaneously, these chocolate companies are looking to avoid the looming cocoa shortage, as some analysts predict cocoa demand could outgrow supply by 2020. To ensure the future supply of cocoa, most companies have launched sustainability and productivity projects; however very few address child labor specifically. While productivity trainings to increase farmers’ yields seem like a logical argument to increase farmer incomes, this approach often does not take into account additional labor needed to harvest the extra crop—whether that’s in the form of hired day laborers, or children or women working without pay.

In order to tackle the persistent problem of child labor in the cocoa sector it must be addressed head-on, through community-based child labor monitoring and remediation systems. This means that any program touted to be fighting child labor must not only be educating farmers about the problems of child labor, but also regularly looking for child labor. That’s the monitoring part. When child labor is identified there must be clear and swift procedures to ensure the child is removed from harm and appropriate authorities are notified. That’s remediation. Offending farmers must establish a plan and timeline to correct this behavior. If the problem is not corrected a responsible company should choose to cease working with this farmer. Fair Trade International certification includes a child labor monitoring and remediation program. And Nestle, in partnership with the International Cocoa Initiative (ICI), is rolling out a community-based child labor and remediation program, with a goal of covering all its farmers by the end of 2016.

Learn More:

Our 2017 Chocolate Scorecard grades chocolate companies on their products by assessing their certifications and, when applicable, their progress on commitments to becoming 100% sustainable. Although Fair Trade certifications alone are not enough to eradicate child labor in the field, they are still helpful tools for consumers to make ethical purchases. This scorecard can help you choose consciously as you purchase your next chocolate treat, and more importantly, can help you raise your voice to the world’s largest chocolate brands, to let them know you expect your favorite chocolates to be made without child labor.

Take Action:

Although not one of the top chocolate companies globally, Godiva is found in many American malls and convenience stores. Unlike their larger competitors, however, Godiva has not made any significant commitments to address child labor in their supply chain. Sign our petition to Godiva calling on the company to stop lagging behind its competitors in preventing child labor in its cocoa.

Looking for Better Chocolate Options?

While the major chocolate companies still have work to do to address child labor in their supply chains, many smaller brands already offer fair trade chocolate options—which means they have long-term, direct relationships with their farmers and guarantee a minimum price. Check out these brands.

Want a hot finance tip? Save more money. A lot more. When you save, and then invest your savings, you are creating the future.

The more you invest in affordable housing, education, community, health care, and environmental protection, the more our shared future will manifest these values.

And the more you channel your investments away from pollution, guns, tobacco, and sweatshop labor, the healthier and more equitable our world will be.

Divest from Climate Change

Learn how to pull your money out of fossil fuel companies and invest in a clean energy future.

Further Discover ...

• The basics about socially responsible investing
• How your savings and checking accounts can build healthy communities
• How to demand corporate accountability through shareholder activism
• How to retire with one million dollars in a just and sustainable world

Mutual Fund Performance Chart

Check out the latest in Socially Responsible Mutual Funds that are members of our Green Business Network and US SIF - The Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment (the association for socially responsible investment professionals and institutions). Socially responsible funds use multiple strategies to promote corporate responsibility, including social and environmental screening, shareholder action, and voting their proxies.

For decades, American companies have legally been allowed to import goods made with child or slave labor —mainly due to a loophole in federal regulations. A bill being sent to President Obama’s desk may finally close that loophole for good.

The Tariff Act of 1930 bars imports into the US that are made with slave, indentured, or convict labor. However, it contains a loophole allowing companies to import goods—like cocoa made by child slaves in Côte d’Ivoire or shrimp caught by enslaved fishermen aboard Thai ships— without penalty, provided those goods aren’t available in the US in sufficient quantities to meet demand.

Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) authored an amendment to the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 that would finally close this slave-labor loophole. The US Senate voted 75-20 to pass the bill, including the Wyden-Brown amendment.

A similar bill passed the House last year, and President Obama plans to sign the bill into law next week.

“My friend Senator Brown … and I believe that in 2016 and beyond, Congress cannot allow for the perpetrators of slave or child labor to have any place in the American economy,” Sen. Wyden said in a Senate floor speech just before the bill’s passage. “So the old system that leaves the door open to child or slave labor if it’s used to make a product that isn’t made here in the US—that system absolutely must end, and it will.”

Liz Jardim, Green America’s campaigns director, says that fair-labor organizations have long been working to close this “criminal” gap in import regulations. Green America and our allies submitted official comments to the US Department of Labor (DOL) asking for the closure of this loophole and for the DOL to begin requiring companies to prove that products they import were not made with forced labor.

“The Senate voting to close this loophole is very welcome news,” she says. “We are hopeful that once the President signs this bill into law, the impacts it will have on removing forced labor from global supply chains could lead to major improvements for enslaved workers all over the world.”

US retailers still need to hear from us: Sign Green America’s petitions demanding that Costco stop buying shrimp caught by slaves on Thai boats and that Godiva stop buying cocoa grown using child labor.

For the latest news from our Fair Labor campaign, sign up for Green America’s e-mail newsletter.

As our Skip the Slip campaign reports, in the US, over 3 million trees and 9 billion gallons of water are used each year for paper receipts, producing over 4 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions and 302 million pounds of solid waste (from paper production and disposal). The majority of thermal paper receipts are coated with BPA or BPS, posing health risks to workers and customers.

Our Skip the Slip campaign urges businesses to improve receipt practices as one way to cut unnecessary waste. Changes can be made using a variety of solutions as we recognize that every company, from family-owned, local food trucks to large corporations with thousands of stores, will have different needs for receipts based on available technology and customer preference. Our two campaign goals are to see paper receipts become an opt-in process rather than opt-out, and for better paper to be used for those customers wanting a paper slip.

Digital receipts are a part of this solution, and we want to address the valid questions surrounding them:

Proof of purchase

Sometimes a customer is asked to show proof of purchase while leaving the store. Green Americans have raised concerns that if the receipt is digital, a shopper would need to produce the evidence on their phone or the employee will need to check the system to confirm purchase. This may sound cumbersome and would suggest anything but a modern, efficient way to make a purchase.

We urge companies to first consider why certain individuals are being asked to prove legitimacy of their purchases, and not permit staff to profile customers based on racist stereotypes and prejudices, which are too often cause for suspicion of customers. Beyond this, we advise companies that require proof of purchase for all customers leaving the store to incorporate a system for this in transitioning to digital receipts, such as applying a sticker to items to signal purchase.

Negative impacts of digital

This is an issue we have written about and taken on through several campaigns at Green America. It is necessary to highlight the impacts of digital, both the environmental costs of powering data centers and producing electronic items, as well as the social costs of unsafe working conditions for those who make digital products and the disposal of used electronics in developing countries.

However, we believe in a two-part solution. 1) Individuals should strive to reduce consumption of energy, generally, and 2) companies should choose to power their networks and data centers on clean, renewable energy.

Estimates show the carbon footprint of an average email (as how you would receive a digital receipt) is 4 grams of CO2, and an average year of emails totals 300 pounds of CO2 per person. This takes into account the power for data centers and the energy the computer itself uses to send, filter, and read emails. A mature tree can absorb 21,772 grams of CO2 per year. This would suggest one tree can accommodate the emissions of over 70 individuals emailing every year. All this to say, while reducing energy consumption is essential, we must demand companies that use huge amounts of energy to commit to using renewable sources and keep natural forests intact by curbing products which necessitate their removal.

Security concerns or IRS requirements

Another worry is of digital receipts causing trouble with the IRS if your taxes are audited. However, electronic receipts have been allowed to serve as documentary evidence since 1997. As long as it has the vendor name, address, transaction date, and amounts, you’re all set.

While people should choose the filing system that works best for them, there are notable potential issues with relying solely on paper receipts. They can be misplaced, lost in a fire or flood, affected by mold, or even become ripped and faded, rendering them useless.

Many people already scan paper receipts to have digital copies to avoid these situations, however it’s key for the digital copy to be clear and legible. This is an area where digital receipts excel above the other options. In the case of an IRS audit, a digital folder of receipts you can easily print is faster and more secure than sorting through hundreds of paper receipts gathered in a box.

Lack of access to computers and smartphones

Based on a Pew survey, 13 percent of Americans do not have access to or choose not to use the internet. Digital receipts might not be the best answer for these individuals, however this leads us to a key component of the Skip the Slip campaign: make paper receipts an opt-in process.

At present, paper receipts are something you receive automatically and you usually have to ask to opt out (ideally, before it prints, to reduce waste). Green America wants to see paper receipts as an opt-in, so the default will be no receipt, but customers who wish to have one can request a copy to be printed on safer, recyclable paper and given to them at the end of the transaction.

For the sake of employee and customer health, companies must end their use of thermal receipt paper coated in BPA or BPS, which are endocrine-disrupting substances and are absorbed when we touch receipts. We want better paper options for customers who need or choose a hard copy of a receipt. As part of our campaign, we urge companies to use phenol-free paper alternatives along with offering digital receipts for customers who prefer paperless options.

The following letter can be used as a model to explain to your megabank why you have broken-off your relationship with them. After you have closed your account, be sure to send a letter to your megabank informing it why you have left. The letter can be sent to the CEO. Contact information for the CEOs and addresses of the largest banks in the nation can be found below.

Edit to reflect your experience.

Dear (Name of your mega-bank or its CEO):

After (number) years as an account holder, I have closed my checking account / savings account / credit card with (name of bank).

Taking this step has been on my mind for some time. The economic crash of 2008, and the shameful role of the largest banks in driving that collapse, as well as ongoing predatory practices have prompted me to take action.

The continued bankrolling of fossil fuel project driving the climate crisis has strengthened my resolve to switch to a better bank. The nine largest US banks have financed fossil fuels by over $2 trillion since the Paris Agreement. These banks have done nothing to stop the money pipeline to extinction.

I want you to know that I am no longer going to be part of financial institutions that profit at the expense of the majority through unfair fees and especially at the expense of economically marginalized communities and individuals through predatory practices.

I am no longer going to be part of financial institutions that don’t know me and don’t care about my specific needs and questions. I am no longer going to be part of financial institutions that pay their top executives exorbitant salaries – and bonuses – while their clients face foreclosure and economic hardship that could largely have been prevented.

I am no longer going to be part of financial institutions that invest in fossil fuels or fossil fuel infrastructure while the need to be move to renewable energy becomes increasingly dire each day. I am no longer going to be part of financial institutions that are not lending to the small businesses that are the engines of jobs and innovation for our economy.

It is with a sense of pride in what our country and financial system can do, that I am now meeting my household’s banking needs with a Community Development Financial Institution. I now have a smaller community development bank /credit union that works to know me and my circumstances.

My new financial institution is dedicated to the economic uplift of struggling communities, not to extracting profit from those in need. My new bank / credit union is helping me play the constructive role I want to play in making economic well-being a reality for more Americans. I can now tell my family / friends / children about the good that my deposits are doing. I only wish that this had always been the case.

In closing, there are steps that (name of bank) could take to improve its impact on people and the planet, especially your role in financing the fossil fuel industry. I urge you to join other banks, investment firms, and corporations in:

* Inventorying and disclosing your Scope 1, 2, and 3 greenhouse gas emissions immediately.

* Committing to cut your financed carbon emissions in half by 2030 and to zero by 2050, in line with climate science, and creating concrete step-by-step plans and programs to meet these goals.

* Creating fossil-fuel-free banking products to meet consumer demand.

Thank you for considering these important and timely actions.

Sincerely yours,

(Your Name and Contact information)

Back to the Food Labels Guide

FairTrade International/FairTrade America

• Certified by third-party inspector FLOCERT, which regularly audits participants.
• This certification ensures a fair price is paid to smallholder farmers and a Fair Trade premium is paid, which goes towards the development of the local community.
• Crops are raised sustainably without GMOs, pesticide use is reduced though standards are not as strict as organic.
• FairTrade International only certifies cooperatives.
• FairTrade certified products are mostly food items (coffee, tea, chocolate, bananas, rice etc.).
• Has stringent regulations for the ingredient contents within a FairTrade product, if an ingredient is available under the FairTrade standard it cannot be substituted for a conventional variety.

Fair Trade USA

• Certified by SCS Global Services (SCS) a third-party independent verifier which enforces standards and compliance criteria developed by Fair Trade USA.
• Ensures products (most commonly coffee, chocolate, bananas, tea, and sugar) are produced free of forced labor or poor working conditions.
• Establishes a minimum price for goods, so smallholder farmers do not fall prey to market fluctuations.
• Allows for the certification of large farms or plantations as well as corporate owned farms and/or plantations.
• Allows for the use of non-Fair Trade ingredients within a product despite the existence of a Fair Trade version.

Fair for Life

• Certified by the Institute of Marketecology (IMO), an independent third-party certification, which specializes in international inspections of environmental and social standards.
• This product certification is based on a non-product-specific standard. Food and non-food products alike from raw materials to the finished product can be certified. Fair for Life also certifies entire companies.
• Ensures fair and positive practices between producers and the companies that purchase from them.

Sustainably Grown Certified

• Certified by SCS Global Services, a third-party organization that provides environmental and sustainability verification, certification, auditing, testing, and standards development. 
• This certification addresses a broad range of environmental, social, and economic sustainability issues pertaining to crop production. (Note: this standard does not address animal husbandry or welfare). 
• Specific environmental protection issues addressed include production system parameters, soil and water resources, air quality, climate change, ecosystem protection, energy efficiency, and waste management. 
• Social responsibility requirements cover work agreements, wages and benefits, working hours, child labor, non-discrimination and freedom of association, human resource management, health and safety, and community relations. 
• Economic sustainability issues addressed include business accounting and reporting, continuity and resilience, community economic engagement, and product quality and safety. 

How we rated the labels

1. First, we considered whether the label evaluates a practice that could lead to measurable benefits. For example, organic labels are certifying practices that prohibit the use of synthetic chemicals and therefore seek to reduce impacts on the environment and human health. This leads to measurable benefits. By contrast, “farm fresh” is meaningless since it does not define practices that create any measurable benefits.

2. We then looked at whether the label represents a legal or regulatory standard that is clearly defined. For example, the USDA organic standards are clearly defined by the USDA, and those standards are publicly available. By contrast, the words “naturally raised” are not regulated, and are meaningless.

3. We then considered whether the standards set forth by the label are subjected to third-party certification or audit. The use of an outside certifier and/or auditor helps to prevent greenwashing that can easily occur with self-regulated labeling.

Labels that received the highest marks from Green America (4 to 5 stars) are those that scored the highest on the criteria above.

Clean Energy Credit Union CD

Clean Energy CDs have a positive impact on our environment and economy by helping other Credit Union members afford to use clean energy.

Self Help Credit Union CD

This CD includes investment in renewable energy projects and businesses as well as energy efficient affordable homes.

Green America assumes no legal or financial responsibility for the practices, products, or services of any businesses listed. Please read all materials carefully prior to investing.

Back to Financial Products & Services

Here are some answers to common questions about this campaign.

We are focusing on these companies due to the significant impact the telecommunications industry has on our global greenhouse gas emissions, and the public statements AT&T and Verizon have released about the urgency of climate change. Despite their public statements, in 2016, a mere 1.26% of AT&T's energy comes from renewable sources, and that is largely from natural gas. Thanks to the Hang Up On Fossil Fuels campaign and the tens of thousands of consumers who have voiced their concerns, in 2018 AT&T signed contracts to purchase 520 MW of power from two wind farms in Oklahoma and Texas. This takes AT&T's use of renewable energy from less than 2% to 20%. Verizon is still using less than 2% renewable energy, has issues no targets for reducing total emissions, and lacks transparency regarding its energy usage.   AT&T and Verizon both rely heavily on "energy intensity" as the key metric of progress for their energy use. This is measured by the amount of energy required per unit, or capita, and the lowering of energy intensity can occur through improving equipment or processes. Essentially, both companies are using less energy per unit of data, so while the demands of their customers for data has grown dramatically, overall energy usage by both companies has grown more slowly, which is a good thing.   The problem with solely using this metric to demonstrate increasing sustainability is that it provides very little to no information on the impacts of energy being used overall by a company for its power. In the case of these telecommunications giants, they are reducing growth of their electricity use, but energy use is still growing, and almost all of the millions of megawatts they use is coming from fossil fuels.      

Some tech companies like Google and Apple committed to running on 100% renewables several years ago and are happy to flaunt their progress to the public. AT&T and Verizon are each other’s number one competitors in the US, and up until 2018 have shown a similar lack of commitment to renewables.  In February 2018, AT&T took an important step forward by agreeing to purchase 520 MW of power from two wind farms in Oklahoma and Texas. Prior to T-mobile's announcement of 100% renewable energy by 2021, Sprint had been the leader in renewables. The company was awarded by Carbon Disclosure Project in 2015 for performance leadership. It has set goals to reduce GHG emissions by 20%, reduce electricity use by 20%, reduce GHG intensity by 75%.         

When Robert Haley was a kid growing up in the ’60s, he collected Coke bottles for a nickel or dime.

Today, Haley is the Zero Waste Manager for the San Francisco Department of the Environment and he recycles a lot more than just bottles and cans. After working for both the nonprofit and for-profit sectors, Haley realized the government sector was where he could effect the most change.

“I work in this field because it feels good,” he says. “It’s part of my being, the way I want to live.”

In his job, Haley has helped develop a comprehensive recycling program for San Francisco with goals of 75 percent landfill diversion by 2010 and zero waste by 2020.

“It’s an ideal,” he says. “We may not ever get to 100 percent zero waste, but we’d like to get as close as possible.”

And while colored bins and progressive legislation push San Francisco residents to improve their waste management practices, Haley’s own recycling habits have become “almost an obsession,” he said.

“In my office, I don’t have a trash can,” notes Haley, who says he hasn’t thrown away so much as a staple in 13 years. He has a ten-pound ball of staples on his desk “the size of a grapefruit.” Haley and his partner Rachel recycle and compost about 99 percent of the waste that comes into their house.

The zero-waste lifestyle all begins with what he buys.

“I only like to food shop. Occasionally I have to buy clothes, but I really think about whether I need something, if it has toxics in it, and how it is packaged,” he says.

Haley resoles his shoes when they wear out and has become accustomed to telling people he doesn’t need a paper bag or napkin when they offer him one. At the cleaners, Haley takes off the bag from his clothes and hands it back right there.

“If I accumulate extra hangers, I take them back,” Haley says. “I don’t take any waste home.”

Amidst rising concerns about climate change, Haley says he sees the momentum picking up, but worries about whether there’s sufficient political will to catalyze change. Even so, he remains idealistic.

“You should try to do some good while you’re here, leave the world a little better,” he says. “I’m going to do whatever I can do.”

The dairy industry isn’t what it once was: bucolic imagery of red barns and a few cows roaming the grass-covered hills. The industry has become a thing of the past; more concerned with profit and efficiency than the cows themselves. Dairy production is located in only a few states with 86 percent of the milk supply produced on only 26 percent of the farms. While Dean Foods controls 40 percent of all fluid milk sales in the US, some of the largest producers of dairy worldwide are companies such as Nestlé and Kraft, known for their questionable ethics and concerning environmental practices. Due to consolidation, the majority of dairy cows are raised in large concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) linked to issues of animal welfare and public and environmental health.

Animal Welfare 

The modern cow’s diet is a direct result of the consolidation of the dairy industry and the CAFO lifestyle. When you drink a glass of milk there is a good chance that unbeknownst to you, you are consuming a product heavily reliant on genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Soy and corn are not only the top crops grown in the US, but they are also majorly genetically engineered (GE) with 90 percent of corn, 93 percent of soy, and 90 percent of cottonseed being GMO. These crops are turned into many hidden additives that result in 70% of processed foods containing GMOs, and are widely used in the dairy industry as feed. With such large numbers in a herd and no access to grazing, dairy cows consume a diet of mostly GE corn and soy. Currently over 35 percent of GE corn becomes animal feed. GE crops require numerous inputs such as herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers, not to mention large quantities of water, making dairy feed an extremely resource-intensive crop. Cows were not intended to live on a diet of corn and soy; these feeding practices cause numerous severe health issues and digestive problems.

Organic milk is one step in the right direction, though it is not the end all be all. Organic ensures that dairy cows are not given any hormones or antibiotics, but does not ensure the quality of their living conditions and the diversity of their diets. An organic cow is not necessarily grass-fed and vice versa. The USDA definition of grass-fed is very limited and only refers to the type of feed given to cattle and has nothing to do with living conditions and antibiotic usage. Organic doesn’t always mean local or small producer either; many of the environmental issues associated with dairy are a result of consolidation and organic doesn’t remedy this problem. As described above, corporate dairy consolidation is a trend likely to continue.

When it comes to dairy cows there is one key thing to remember: in order for a cow to produce milk it must first produce a calf (usually through artificial insemination). Every year farm operators impregnate dairy cows so they can spend the year continually lactating and then start the cycle again. Throughout the process of impregnation and lactation, cows live in extremely crowded and unnatural conditions, such as standing on concrete floors surrounded by their own urine and feces, without access to pasture. Once industrial dairy cows have completed their 4-5 prime years of production they are culled from the herd and sold off as hamburger meat (despite the fact that a healthy cow can produce milk for 15-20 years). In industrialized dairy production, calves are seen more as a byproduct of milk production rather than as actual living beings. Immediately after birth they are taken from their mothers; and bull calves are either killed, sent to veal-producing facilities, or raised for hamburger. Therefore, the conventional dairy industry directly supports the production and consumption of conventional meat.

Public and Environmental Health 

Factory farms pose a number of risks to both people and the environment. As a response to crowded and unsanitary living conditions, cows are often given daily doses of antibiotics via feed or injection to prevent the spread of disease and spur growth. The overuse of antibiotics for non-therapeutic purposes has resulted in the prevalence of a number of antibiotic-resistant (AR) bacteria. These “superbugs” can transfer from animals to humans through contact with animals, contact with infected meat, and the consumption of crops that have been fertilized with manure from feedlots. AR bacteria pose such a great risk due to their ability to horizontally transfer genes to other bacteria that factory farms serve as breeding grounds for life-threatening AR genes to enter the world. According to the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) 2013 Threat Report on Antimicrobial Resistance, of the 2 million people who contact AR diseases each year, 23,000 of them result in death. A number of these infections and deaths could be prevented if animal agriculture did not use 80 percent of our antibiotics supply to compensate for poor living conditions.

In order to maintain and even increase the already high levels of milk production, dairy cows often receive hormones. The most common hormone is recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), a genetically engineered synthetic hormone developed by Monsanto. This hormone results in increased cases of infections among the cows leading to a greater need for antibiotics. The EU and Canada prohibit the use of rBGH due to major human health concerns including a connection to various forms of cancer and its likely impacts on reproductive health. Savvy companies such as Chipotle have already transitioned to sourcing hormone-free dairy products, and it’s time that other companies follow suit.

Along with animal health risks from factory farms, this type of concentrated agriculture results in a number of unmeasured environmental externalities. A large number of cattle contained in one area, without access to pasture, creates vast amounts of consolidated animal waste and methane emissions. A report published by the CDC  voices concerns over the environmental and health impacts of CAFOs (farms with 500 or more cows). Animals produce 3-20 times more waste that humans every year. Cattle manure and gases result in high levels of greenhouse gases, a drastic impact to ambient air quality and is a major contributor to climate change. Not only is dairy production extremely water intensive with producers using up to 150 gallons of water per cow per day, the waste can leach into ground and surface water polluting numerous ecosystems and water sources. Such environmental hazards pose a constant and direct risk to communities within a close vicinity to a facility. One region cannot contain the harmful impacts; therefore, ecosystems and communities far and wide are at risk.

Steps Toward Change 

It is easy to lose sight of what milk really is and what it takes to produce it. By opening up the discussion on the impacts of the dairy industry, we are creating a space for conversation and change. Many dairies are incorporating organics and grass-fed principles and it is time they become the norm rather than the exception. How do we do this? Companies such as Dean Foods and Starbucks have massive purchasing power and require such large quantities of a product that they have the ability to create a tidal wave of change and drastically improve our food system. We need to hold them accountable. In 2014, Chobani announced three organic yogurt flavors coming soon, along with a commitment to work with farmers on transition strategies toward a GMO-free and organic milk supply and to explore what 21st century sustainable dairy operations can entail. When consumers band together by encouraging companies to set higher standards and make more ethical decisions in their supply chains, things begin to change.

For the last few years, Green America has been working to educate consumers of the long-term implications and harm posed by genetic engineering (GE). Together we have made great strides in pushing companies to shift away from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and towards organics.

But the biotechnology industry is at it again, this time with gene-edited crops. Gene-editing is an offshoot of genetic engineering, using more recently developed technology, such as CRISPR. This technology allows scientists to target specific traits and either remove or rearrange them.

Here's why this is concerning, and why it is definitely not the answer to fixing our conventional agriculture system.

Twenty years ago GE technology was promoted as the golden ticket that would increase yields, decrease pesticide usage, and all together promote a more sustainable and profitable system of agriculture. So far it has failed to live up to these promises. Gene-editing is being promoted in the same way.

Whether or not you believe the science of genetic engineering itself has merit, the system of agriculture that it promotes is extremely unsustainable and continues to be one of the largest contributors to climate change. With genetic engineering we have seen the mass propagation of monocropping and the overuse of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. The mass use of gene-editing technology will further our dependence on these toxic chemicals. So far gene-editing companies are focused first on developing herbicide-resistant varieties, with some attention to drought. This is a similar development trajectory taken by those behind GE crops, and after 20 years we have yet to see any improvements in drought tolerance, water-use efficiency, or energy-use efficiency. Additionally, the crops engineered for herbicide-resistance resulted in the unfortunate and unintended creation of herbicide-resistant superbugs and superweeds.

Waiting to act to lessen the impacts of agriculture on climate change is not an option. In order to mitigate conventional agriculture’s negative impacts we need to be moving away from the idea of magical fixes. There are a number of changes that can be made right away that will make a huge difference, such as crop rotation, using composted material (manure and food waste), and cover cropping. All of these are a much better solution than waiting to see how gene-editing technology plays out over the next ten years.

There is still a great deal that scientists still do not understand when it comes to genomes and how they interact with one another, which raises serious concerns for the unintended consequences of gene-editing. So far the federal government has failed to see any sort of distinction between this technology and conventional breeding techniques and at this point has decided to allow it to go unregulated.

This technology is not limited to the editing of plant DNA. Gene-editing has huge ethical and moral implications as scientists around the world are working to see how this technique can be used on animals and humans. Scientists in China recently bred gene-edited monkeys and have made the first alterations to human embryos. Consumers and many scientists are calling for a ban on this technology until further research can be done and the ethical implications are weighed.

In reality, gene-editing is genetic engineering 2.0. If left unchecked it will sneak its way onto every grocery store shelf. In this area, a more precautionary approach is a must.

Gene-editing using CRISPR technology is already on the horizon for wheat, one of the world’s most important food crops. Sign the petition to stop the development of GE wheat, including by methods derived from gene-editing.

Back to the Vote With Your Dollar Toolkit

A recent report by the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing found that 84% of individual investors – including 99% of GenZ and 97% of Millennials – are interested in sustainable investing. Yet many people have few to no climate-safe options in their retirement plan, which represents most people’s largest investment. 

Our new free guide from Green America and Social(k) shows both employers and employees how to add more socially responsible fund options to their workplace retirement plan.  

Plan for a Better Future explains: 

• Why socially responsible retirement plans are a key part of the green economy. 
• Why employers should offer responsible funds in their retirement benefits. 
• Where both employers and employees can learn more about socially responsible investing.  

DOWNLOAD THE GUIDE 

The section for employers, written by Social(k), walks company leaders through how to start a retirement plan if they don’t already have one, how to add responsible options to an existing plan, and typical fee structures for both. Starting a responsible 401K plan is easier than ever and provides an employee benefit of lasting value. 

10 Steps to a Responsible Retirement Plan 

The section for employees, written by Green America, goes over how to bring socially responsible investment options to your company in 10 steps. 

1. Educate yourself about socially responsible investing.  

2. Identify co-workers who share your interest. 

3. Form a group to discuss your goals, needs, and questions. 

4. Evaluate the options in your employer’s current retirement plan. 

5. Schedule an introductory meeting with your HR person. Raise the issue, assess receptivity, and answer questions. 

6. Find data on responsible investing and identify potential fund options and plan advisors. 

7. Share what you’ve learned with your HR person and find out your employer’s decision-making process. 

8. Invite experts and advisors on socially responsible investing to speak to your employer as needed. 

9. If your employer is receptive, work with them on next steps to add responsible options to your retirement plan. 

10. If your employer is not immediately receptive, don’t give up. Continue to educate employees and find out when to bring it up again. 

The Plan for a Better Future guide includes a sample employee questionnaire, a fact sheet on socially and environmentally responsible investing, and lots of resources for where to learn more.  

DOWNLOAD THE GUIDE 

By pursuing socially responsible investments: 

• Employees can align their financial goals with their social and environmental priorities. 
• Employers can align their benefits package with the values of their company/organization and their employees – and strengthen employee morale and retention by offering a more robust benefits package. 

Download your FREE copy of Plan for a Better Future: How to Add Socially & Environmentally Responsible Investment Options to an Employer’s Retirement Plan. 

Your investments make a difference for people and the planet! Socially responsible investing is key to a greener economy and cleaner finances. 

Back to the Vote With Your Dollar Toolkit

Carter’s is the nation’s largest baby and children clothing company and boasts that it sells 10 items of clothing for every kid born in the U.S. But, while Carter’s is a leader in sales, it is a laggard in disclosing which chemicals are in its clothing. That’s a big concern, because the textile industry uses thousands of chemicals, and many of them are toxic.

We're asking Carter's to adopt a strong, public chemical management policy that will protect workers and consumers, starting by disclosing what chemicals are being used in its supply chain. We also want Carter's to develop plans to restrict/replace the most toxic chemicals with safer alternatives, and we want Carter's to publicly report on its timeline and progress. Join us by calling on Carter’s via social media or phone!

The Problem with Carter's

In the apparel industry, there isn't widespread transparency on what chemicals are being used - nor their effects on human health and the environment. Workers work with these chemicals - and are not always provided with adequate safety protection, exposing them to increased risks of diseases. Over 8,000 chemicals are used to turn raw materials into textiles. Currently:

• Approximately 20% of industrial water pollution comes from textile manufacturing. 
• Textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of water globally. 
• The fashion industry alone emits 10% of global carbon emissions, more than all international flights and maritime shipping. 
• 43 million tons of chemicals are used in textile production every year. 

Meanwhile, rivers - that communities rely on - in manufacturing countries are heavily polluted, becoming so toxic that they cannot sustain wildlife. And once clothes hit our stores, residual chemicals can affect consumer health too. Odor-wicking, anti-wrinkle, flame resistant - our clothes are treated with chemicals to make them this way.

The Solution

Better and transparent chemical management policies! Workers should not be risking their lives to make our clothes. Environments and communities should not be polluted to satisfy our shopping needs. And clean clothes should be readily accessible to all consumers, not just those who can afford to pay a premium on clothing. That's why Green America is calling on major American apparel companies to clean up their act and remove Toxic Textiles from their supply chain. 

Take Action

We're calling on companies, starting with Carter's, to adopt strong chemical management policies, starting by disclosing what chemicals they're using to make our clothes - and their plans for restricting and replacing the most toxic chemicals. To start, Carter's needs to adopt a strong public Manufacturer's Restricted Substances List (MRSL) to protect workers and communities and a Restricted Substances List (RSL) to protect consumers.  And once that happens, we'll keep pushing them to continue adopting policies that protect workers, the environment, and consumers.

Send Carter’s the message that we need to know what toxic chemicals we are being exposed to on Twitter and Facebook:                                     

Paste the below message in your Facebook status or on Twitter:

@Carters, you need to be transparent about toxic chemicals – share an RSL & MRSL with customers now! As a customer I want to #lovecarters, but you need to ditch #toxictextiles with @GreenAmerica today: https://www.greenamerica.org/2019-toxic-textiles-scorecard

Or contact Carter’s on Facebook Messenger.  

Call the Customer Line

Call: 888-782-9548

*Once the menu is presented to you, press 4 to contact corporate customer affairs.

"Hello, my name is _______ and I'm a Carter’s customer. I am very concerned about the chemicals that Carter’s is exposing my child [or grandchildren, niece/nephew, or just children] and workers to. The toxic chemicals may have lasting, negative effects on not just children, but workers and their communities, and I deserve to know what is being used.

I am joining Green America in asking Carter’s to be transparent and disclose its restricted substances list and its manufacturing restricted substances list, if there is one.  Carter's customers deserve to know what toxic chemicals may be in their children's clothes and what Carter's is doing to eliminate those toxins. Thank you and have a great day." 

Sustainability: it’s not a word usually associated with the fashion industry, yet one that consumers are increasingly seeing more when we go shopping. But is sustainability just the next “trend” in fashion - or something that companies are actually moving towards?

Currently:

• Approximately 20% of industrial water pollution comes from textile manufacturing. 
• Textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of water globally. 
• The fashion industry alone emits 10% of global carbon emissions, more than all international flights and maritime shipping. 
• 43 million tons of chemicals are used in textile production every year. 

Green America's new report explores a variety of environmental and social challenges in the fashion industry in this report and looked at 14 major American apparel companies frequently found in shopping malls to see what, if anything, they are doing to address these issues in their supply chains. We reached out to companies with detailed surveys, read corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports when available, and reviewed corporate websites. Our partner, Fashion FWD, also contributed to this report. 

See the full report here.

Some of our key findings include:

• Large commitments without concrete plans, metrics, or timelines: Companies often say that they have a policy addressing an environmental or labor issue without going into detail about what they are doing to measure their progress or achieve their goal.

• Transparency is improving but mostly still lacking: four companies (Target, VF (which owns The North Face and Jansport), Nike, and Gap) identify chemicals used in their supply chains through a Manufacturing Restricted Substances List (MRSL), and an Restricted Substances List (RSL), while three companies (Ascena Retail, The Children’s Place, Urban Outfitters) rely on an RSL as their chemical management policy. An MRSL restricts chemicals used in the manufacturing process, while an RSL restricts what chemicals can be found in the final consumer product. Meanwhile, six companies (Target, VF, Nike, Gap, Ascena, Abercrombie & Fitch) list factories that they source from.

• Token sustainability initiatives and brands: Companies are increasingly incorporating sustainability efforts into their policies, but often will use one policy that addresses an issue in some detail or produce a line of clothes made a little more sustainably to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability when in reality, they are not addressing most issues in their supply chains.

• Leaders and laggards overall: While none of the major brands are true leaders in the field, Green America identified the following companies as having better environmental and labor practices – Target, VF, Nike -- and several companies that were clearly laggards – Carter’s, J.Crew, Forever 21.

Overall, we found that companies are starting to move in the right direction, but much more has to be done to fully address the scope of the environmental and social challenges in textile supply chains.

Read more about the scorecard here.

Consumer interest in reducing waste and consumption has led to increase in in-store recycling programs and the rise of the secondhand market. While the solutions are not always perfect, they are steps in the right direction.

When consumers want something, the markets listen – and we must continue to demand more of companies.

Read the full report Toxic Textiles.

When you invest your money in community banks, you create enormous positive impacts in your community. 

When you deposit money to a bank, it does not simply sit there. It goes to work in investments or loans that help the bank make money. Most banks don’t tell their customers what companies they invest in—it could be fossil fuels, agribusiness, anything.

New Resource Bank, which opened its doors in California’s Bay Area in 2006, provides loans primarily to socially responsible individuals and companies.

“We were founded with a very different triple-bottom-line mission to not only value profit, but [also] the environment and society. No one of those three is more important than any other,” says Stephanie Meade, the bank’s director of marketing and culture.

Initially, to get business off the ground—and to weather the 2008 financial crisis—it also granted loans to real estate-companies, small businesses, and individuals who didn’t necessarily share the bank’s mission.

However, as more and more socially responsible companies popped up and looked to responsible banks for funding, New Resource Bank hit its stride and began growing by 15 to 20 percent per year. The small bank that once had 14 employees and $40 million in assets is now celebrating its 10th anniversary, with 48 employees and over $300 million in assets. It just opened a loan office in Boulder, Colorado. (In 2018, New Resource Bank was acquired by Amalgamated Bank, which has committed to maintaining the bank's commitments to social and environmental responsibility.)

Today, 89 percent of its loans support sustainable businesses, nonprofits, green real estate, clean energy, and organic and natural products. Before receiving a loan, companies applying must fill out an impact assessment, including their mission and values.

“We believe that companies that are socially and environmentally responsible are better companies, are stronger companies, and hopefully will be more profitable and less risky companies,” says Meade.

One of the many success stories that New Resource Bank has supported through loans and advising since 2014 is Old Skool Café, a nonprofit jazz-themed supper club started by a former juvenile corrections officer. The restaurant trains and employs at-risk youth ages 16-22 in its San Francisco location. The young people learn to run events, the kitchen, dinner service, and musical performances. 

The café’s founder, Teresa Goines, came up with the idea after the gang-prevention group she ran lost its funding. She funded Old Skool herself for six years but cashed out her retirement, savings, and inheritance to do so. With financial assistance from
an ongoing community grant, she could afford to rent a space for the restaurant from a church. But when the space went up for sale, she only had funding for about half of the $550,000 purchase price. A friend referred Goines to New Resource Bank, and she was able to secure a real-estate loan for the rest of the money.

“We love what [Old Skool does],” says Skyler Webster, the New Resource banker who works with the café. “They’re right here in the community, and they’re giving at-risk youth a real path.”

But New Resource isn’t just trying to “preach to the choir,” as Meade puts it. The bank will work with companies all over the spectrum of social and environmental commitment, so all can grow into green champions. The bank offers free events, online resources, and networking opportunities for clients to improve as sustainable businesses. Every year, borrowers retake the assessment to gauge their progress.

Individual account-holders have to be in California. New Resource will work with companies from around the country who need loans, or individuals across the US who are looking to open an impact CD, in which the money you invest is loaned out to high-impact nonprofits, organic- and natural-product companies, and clean-energy companies while you earn interest.

Wherever you live, Meade thinks it’s important to find a bank that shares your values. “I just encourage people to make sure their values line up in all aspects of their lives, not just in certain ones, like buying organic food,” says Meade. “Where you bank actually reflects your values in a lot stronger of a way than you’d think it would, because finance and banking is the foundation of our economy. Banks determine what businesses get funding to grow and thrive.”

Through the purchases you make, and those you choose to avoid, you have the power to create an economy where child labor and sweatshops cease to exist. And your voice, together with the voices of others, can help encourage companies here and abroad to ensure that all workers are paid fairly and treated with respect.

By taking one or more of the steps outlined below, you can make a real difference to end sweatshops.

1. Demand sweatshop-free products where you shop

Ask companies you do business with to ensure that no sweatshop or forced child labor is used in the manufacturing of the products they sell. The next time you go shopping for clothes, shoes, or household items, take a minute to fill out a customer comment card and ask the company to work with their suppliers to make sure that workers are paid a living wage and treated fairly. Or visit the company's web site and send a message online.

Check out the apparel category in our Sweat-Free Guide.

2. Buy union-made, local, and secondhand

For clothing and household items, check out your local secondhand or consignment stores. When buying new clothing, look for the union label on the clothing you buy, or make your purchases from the socially responsible businesses listed in on GreenPages.org.

3. Buy Fair Trade

Fair Trade is an economic system that ensures healthy working conditions, self-determination, and fair wages for workers. When you purchase Fair Trade products, you help ensure a sustainable livelihood for farmers and workers. Look for coffee, tea, chocolate/cocoa, bananas, mangoes, pineapples and other fresh fruit bearing the Fair Trade Certified™ label. If your supermarket or local health food store doesn't stock fair trade products, ask them to do so and explain why. At restaurants, suggest the addition of Fair Trade Certified™ coffee and tea to the menu. Also Fair Trade Certified sugar is now available as well.

You can also buy crafts, clothing, jewelry, and other household and gift items from companies that belong to the Fair Trade Federation (FTF).

FTF members are also members of Green America's Green Business Network™ and are listed on GreenPages.org.

Learn more about fair trade.

4. Ask questions

If you are unsure about whether or not a company is working to transform the factories that make their products into places where people are paid a living wage and treated fairly, then ask.

Use our "Consumer Checklist" below to help you write a letter or send an email to a company asking about their sourcing practices. If the company does not have good answers for these questions, it is not doing enough to stop sweatshops.

• Does your store know how the workers who made this product were treated?
• Do you have a list of all the factories around the world that make your products? Does it include the wages and working conditions in each factory? Can you provide me with a copy of it?
• Does your store guarantee that the workers who made this product were paid a living wage, enough to support their families?
• Does your store have a code of conduct that protects human rights and forbids child labor and unsafe conditions in all the factories that make the products you sell? How do you enforce these rules? Are your factories monitored by independent, third-party sources?
• Are you providing development programs in the communities where your workers live? Are you working with others in your industry to apply meaningful labels so consumers can know that exploited labor was not used to make your product?

5. Mobilize at your workplace, school, or in your community

Encourage local businesses to source sweatshop-free products. Work with your coworkers to ensure that the company t-shirts are sweat-free. Work with members of your faith community to develop a sweatshop-free purchasing policy. If you are a student or affiliated with a university, demand that your institution buy items such as uniforms, sporting equipment, and other goods from companies that monitor conditions along the supply chain and guard against employee abuse at all stages of production.

Get a free copy of Green America's Guide to Ending Sweatshops to help you with your efforts. Bulk pricing is available. Call (800) 584-7336 or email info@greenamerica.org to order. 

6. Use shareholder clout to end sweatshops

If you own stock in individual companies, check the proxy ballots that you get in the mail and be sure to vote in support of any shareholder resolutions that require the company to improve its labor policies.

Also, if you put money into mutual funds, your investments can still work to improve the way companies treat their employees. Some mutual funds refuse to invest in companies that demonstrate indifference to workers' welfare, while others engage in the practice of shareholder action to get companies in which they invest to improve their labor practices. Over the past few years, mutual funds such as Calvert and Domini Social Investments have been working to get companies such as Dillard's and Wal-Mart to adopt policies designed to ensure that their products aren't being made under sweatshop conditions.

To find a mutual fund that screens out companies with bad labor practices or engages in shareholder advocacy, consult the financial planning section of Green America's Green Pages.org. You can also order a copy of Green America's Guide to Shareholder Action for a small fee. Call 1-800-58-GREEN.

Learn more about shareholder action.

7. Educate Others

Let the people around you know what they can do to put an end to sweatshops. Send an email to your friends letting them know about this online resource.

One way to spread the word is by giving your friends and family gift memberships to Green America. They'll receive a free copy of the GreenPages.org with their membership to help put them on the road to sweatshop-free purchasing.

Learn how you can find sweatshop-free and fair trade products.

Fewer ESG resolutions in 2025

The 2025 shareholder resolution season was scaled back from previous years. Shareholders filed 355 environmental, social, and governance proposals as of February 21, 2025 – 34% less than the 536 such proposals in 2024.  

Why was the number of shareholder resolutions down this year?  

• Shareholders who filed resolutions in previous years decided not to file this year until they could assess the direction of the new Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 

• The change in presidential administration has dramatically shifted policy at the SEC, which is excluding many more proposals now than in previous years. 

• More companies engaged in dialogue with shareholders to avoid the need to vote on resolutions that could draw attention given the current political attacks on DEI and climate. 

Still, there were many important shareholder resolutions to vote on in 2025, including: 

• 85 proposals that address climate change 

• 77 proposals on corporate political influence 

• 52 proposals on environmental management 

• 37 proposals on human rights 

• 36 proposals on diversity at work 

If you own company stock directly (not in a mutual fund), we urge you to vote your values on the company's resolutions.  

Below you will find a list of 2025 shareholder resolutions as of February 21, grouped by company name and by issue.  

Read your proxy ballots carefully and cast your votes to reflect your values. Here are quick tips on how to read a proxy ballot. 

Please note that each company's proxy ballot may not exactly match the shareholder resolutions we list here. This list is based on Proxy Preview, which is published in March. Often companies challenge shareholder resolutions at the SEC, or a resolution may be withdrawn by its sponsor. If that occurs after Proxy Preview goes to print, you may not see that resolution listed on the company's proxy ballot.

Definitions

Here are definitions of key abbreviations and terms you’ll see in our short descriptions of the shareholder resolutions: 

• GHG = greenhouse gas 

• Net-zero GHG emissions = “net zero means cutting greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions to as close to zero as possible, with any remaining emissions re-absorbed from the atmosphere, by oceans and forests for instance” – United Nations 

• Paris-compliant = Ensuring that actions support the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. U.N. Climate Change; The Paris Agreement 

• Scope 3 = “….emissions a company is responsible for outside of its own walls—from the goods it purchases to the disposal of the products it sells? In fact, the majority of total corporate emissions come from Scope 3 sources,…” Greenhouse Gas Protocol 

• ILO Labor Standards = International Labor Standards; United National International Labor Standards 

Thanks to As You Sow, Empowered Venture Partners, and Proxy Impact, publishers of the 2025 Proxy Preview, for assistance in compiling the lists below that provide a sample of some of the key resolutions facing Corporate America. 

Green America is proud to co-sponsor the 2025 Proxy Preview -- download your free copy for information on important shareholder resolutions trends and upcoming votes. 

As a share owner, you are a part owner of the company, and voting your proxy is an important responsibility.

Learn about your shareholder rights! Shareholder Proposals: An Essential Investor Right, by the Shareholder Rights Group, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility and US SIF, catalogues the role of shareholder resolutions in creating a powerful platform for challenging and improving corporate policies, practices, performance and impacts, and in surfacing investor perspectives on material issues. 

Thank you for voting your values! Post this “I'm voting” badge on social media and let people know you're proud to raise your voice on important issues as a shareholder. Click to share to Facebook or Twitter.

New app makes rocking your proxy votes easy! Learn about As You Vote from our allies at As Your Sow, with an individual investor app on the iconik platform.

Green America is not an investment adviser nor do we provide financial planning, legal, or tax advice. Nothing in our communications or materials shall constitute or be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or investment recommendations.

There is a new glow for nuclear energy. With the growing energy needs of artificial intelligence, major tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon are looking to nuclear energy – including everything from re-opening Three 3-mile island to building smaller nuclear plants around the country – to provide low-carbon energy. But nuclear fission power is not a climate solution. It may produce lower-carbon energy, but this energy still comes with a great deal of risk. 

Solar power, wind power, geothermal power, and aggressive energy efficiency are climate solutions that are safer, cheaper, faster, more secure, and less wasteful than nuclear energy. Our country needs a massive influx of investment in these solutions if we are to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, enjoy energy security, jump-start our economy, create jobs, and work to lead the world in development of clean energy. 

Here are 10 reasons why nuclear energy is a bad idea: 

1. Nuclear waste:

 The waste generated by nuclear reactors remains radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years and needs to be kept contained for one million years. Currently, there are no long-term storage solutions for radioactive waste, and most is stored in temporary, above-ground facilities. These facilities are running out of storage space, so the nuclear industry is turning to other types of storage that are more costly and potentially less safe.  

2. Nuclear proliferation:

There is great concern that the development of nuclear energy programs increases the likelihood of proliferation of nuclear weapons. As nuclear fuel and technologies become globally available, the risk of these technologies falling into the wrong hands is increasingly present. To avoid weapons proliferation, it is important that countries with high levels of corruption and instability be discouraged from creating nuclear programs, and the US should be a leader in nonproliferation by not pushing for more nuclear power at home. 

3. National security

Nuclear power plants are a potential target for terrorist operations. An attack could cause major explosions, putting population centers at risk, as well as ejecting dangerous radioactive material into the atmosphere and surrounding region. Nuclear research facilities, uranium enrichment plants, and uranium mines are also potentially at risk for attacks that could cause widespread contamination with radioactive material. 

4. Accidents

In addition to the risks posed by terrorist attacks, human error and natural disasters can lead to dangerous and costly accidents. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine led to the deaths of 30 employees in the initial explosion and caused a variety of negative health effects on thousands of people across Russia and Eastern Europe. A massive tsunami bypassed the safety mechanisms of power plants in Fukushima Japan in 2011, causing three nuclear meltdowns, resulting in the release of radioactive materials into the surrounding area. In both disasters, hundreds of thousands were relocated, millions of dollars spent, and the radiation-related deaths are being evaluated to this day. Cancer rates among populations living in proximity to Chernobyl, especially among children, rose significantly in the years after the accidents. 

5. Impacts on Local Communities and Ecosystems

Nuclear power plants, which use enormous amounts of water as a coolant, increase the temperatures of local water bodies, which can harm local ecosystems and kill aquatic wildlife.  Also, with climate change creating increasing water shortages, nuclear power plants are at risk of temporary shut downs since without water they can’t be cooled.  In addition to the significant risk of cancer associated with fallout from nuclear disasters, studies also show increased risk for those who reside near a nuclear power plant, especially for childhood cancers such as leukemia. Workers in the nuclear industry are also exposed to higher-than-normal levels of radiation, and as a result are at a higher risk of death from cancer.  

6. Energy production

The 440 nuclear power plants currently in existence provide about 9% of the world’s energy. Studies show that in order to meet current and future energy needs, the nuclear sector would have to scale up to around 14,500 plants. Uranium, the fuel for nuclear reactors, is energy-intensive to mine, and deposits discovered in the future are likely to be harder to get to. As a result, much of the net energy created would be offset by the energy input required to build and decommission plants and to mine and process uranium ore.  

7. Not enough sites

Scaling up to 14,500 nuclear plants isn’t possible simply due to the limitation of feasible sites. Nuclear plants need to be located near a source of water for cooling, and there aren’t enough locations in the world that are safe from droughts, flooding, hurricanes, earthquakes, or other potential disasters that could trigger a nuclear accident. The increase in extreme weather events predicted by climate models only compounds this risk. 

8. Cost

Unlike renewables, which are now the cheapest energy sources, nuclear costs are on the rise, and many plants are being shut down or in danger of being shut down for economic reasons. Initial capital costs, fuel, and maintenance costs are much higher for nuclear plants than wind and solar, and nuclear projects tend to suffer cost overruns and construction delays. For example, the recently constructed Vogtle nuclear plants in Georgia came online 7 years late and $17 billion over budget. The price of renewable energy has fallen significantly over the past decade, and it is projected to continue to fall. 

9. Competition with renewables

Investment in nuclear plants, security, mining infrastructure, etc. draws funding away from investment in cleaner sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal. Financing for renewable energy is relatively  scarce, as compared to fossil fuels, and threatened by political headwinds, and increasing nuclear capacity will only add to the competition for funding. 

10. Energy dependence of poor countries

Going down the nuclear route would mean that poor countries, that don't have the financial resources to invest in and develop nuclear power, would become reliant on rich, technologically advanced nations. Alternatively, poor nations without experience in the building and maintaining of nuclear plants may decide to build them anyway. Countries with a history of nuclear power use have learned the importance of regulation, oversight, and investment in safety when it comes to nuclear. Dr. Peter Bradford of Vermont Law, a former member of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, writes, "A world more reliant on nuclear power would involve many plants in countries that have little experience with nuclear energy, no regulatory background in the field and some questionable records on quality control, safety and corruption." The U.S. should lead by example and encourage poor countries to invest in safe renewable energy technology. 

Conclusion

Nuclear energy is not the answer to the climate crisis. Energy efficiency, solar and wind power are the real climate solutions. 

Ready to take action? Demand corporations rapidly scale up the use of renewable energy that advances energy justice in the US and abroad.