Bamboo art is certainly not a new medium.  As far back as ancient China, the bamboo brush was an essential tool to create the flowing beauty of calligraphy and today, the resilient and sturdy bamboo lends itself easily to big ideas and larger-than-life sculptures.

In Seattle, a current piece at the Henry Art Gallery by Cambodian artist Sopheap Pich uses the bamboo native to his country to reflect the tumultuous history also native to his country.  Named “Compound,” the piece resembles the undetonated bombs that still dot the Cambodian landscape, relics left behind by the Khmer Rouge.  Pich’s family escaped Cambodia in 1979 and arrived in the United States in 1984 but after completing a master’s degree at the Art Institute of Chicago, Pich returned to Cambodia in 2002.  Because bamboo and rattan were more affordable than stone and carving tools, Pich chose them as his preferred medium.  Pich slices and boils bamboo strips that are tied with wire into shapes for the pieces.

While not dependent on bamboo as its main medium, the Bamboo Fence Art Festival  currently happening in Taimo First Village, Taiwan, features architectural exhibits, photography and series of literary seminars that center on the history of the culture of military dependence of Taiwainese villages.  The Bamboo Fence refers to the bamboo fences used to separate the military barracks from the general public in the 1950s.

For those looking to own a little bamboo art, Paper Culture has brought bamboo as a medium to the masses.  Known for its commitment to eco-friendliness, Paper Culture has added bamboo art to its menu of 100% recycled paper products.  This is wall art that is easily personalized with names and photographs and will introduce an eco-conscious option to the growing $42 billion market of art and wall décor. 

Says Paper Culture CEO Christopher Wu:   “Our Bamboo Wall Art will make an impact whether customers want wall art for their homes, are searching for a truly unique gift idea, or want to find a distinctive way to professionally display their photography or graphic design.”

For children, there is alphabet animal wall art to help teach the ABCs and for adults, there is the choice to create their own design on bamboo panels by uploading photos and designs to the company’s website. 

Paper Culture chose bamboo for its quality and for its capability to grow up to four feet a day making it a highly renewable resource for any company to choose.  And because bamboo requires no pesticides to grow healthy and strong, there is no pollution involved in harvesting the sturdy plant. 

Paper Culture’s bamboo line is also part of its Million Tree Pledge for which Paper Culture plants a tree for every order.  If only they chose bamboo over traditional hardwoods, they could triple the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere!

Whether you’re admiring the intricate beauty of bamboo architecture or simply wanting to add an eco-friendly and modern option to your home decorating, there is a bamboo art option for everyone.  Enjoy!

Bamboo Art: From Museum Walls To Home Decor is a post from: Green Earth News

Soon Great Britain will have another famous couple to gawk at.  As Prince William and Duchess Catherine settle into married life, the Edinburgh Zoo in Scotland will welcome a breeding pair of giant pandas from China by the end of this year.  Along with Tian Tian and Yang Guan, the zoo will also be receiving the challenge of feeding its new charges.  Mainly, this means supplying nearly 40,000 pounds of bamboo annually.  Much of this will be imported from the Netherlands, but zoo officials have plans to grow some fifteen percent of the needed bamboo on site.

Pandas have highly specialized dietary needs, and the zoo is concerned with seeing that Tian Tian and Yang Guan have the very best quality of bamboo, as well as a consistent supply of several different species.  Naturally their supply cannot come from just anywhere.  Nevertheless, the manager of the zoo’s gardens, Simon Jones, says “we have been overwhelmed by the amount of interest and offers we have received from members of the public wanting to grow and supply bamboo for us.”

I would hate to see all of that public interest go to waste when it could be a terrific opportunity for the region.  Awareness of the commercial and environmental potential of bamboo is certainly growing, but I imagine that for many of those who expressed interest in donating their land and effort to the Edinburgh Zoo their only real concern was with those adorable pandas, and bamboo was just an afterthought.

The zoo’s commitment to growing a portion of that bamboo locally brings into focus the remarkable hardiness of bamboo and the diversity of climates and markets in which it can grow.  No doubt the only reason why the zoo cannot expect to locally source more than fifteen percent of its new pandas’ bamboo is that the requisite growing operations are not established yet, not because a much larger portion of that bamboo couldn’t be grown in Scotland.  And it’s the same for all but the most inhospitable regions.

The Edinburgh Zoo says that it will be developing educational projects with those who have offered help in growing bamboo.  But will those education projects be strictly about pandas and their diet, or will they discuss bamboo in more general terms.  It would be nice if someone would take advantage of the outpouring of interest in the crop to make people and institutions aware of the myriad other applications for which they might still be able to grow it.

If an innovative and panda-loving Scottish entrepreneur has been paying attention to this story, perhaps he will recognize this as an opportunity to source bamboo to be harvested for use in producing viscose textiles, or as a building material, or as food for human beings as well as bamboos.  And maybe then, after a few years when small-scale but consistent bamboo growing operations have been established in the area, Edinburgh will be better-positioned to reduce the carbon footprint of caring for its pandas, by providing even more than fifteen percent of that bamboo on its own.

But even fifteen percent is rather impressive coming from an area that one would probably never think to associate with bamboo growing.  It’s a situation that can be duplicated pretty much anywhere, although it’s not necessary to wait for the adorable pandas first.  In fact, it’s better not to, and much preferable if it the interest in bamboo comes from sincere environmental and economic concerns.  Then, any town that has a zoo and has already started growing bamboo locally will be better prepared if they ever get a pair of their own wonderfully adorable pandas.

Scottish Bamboo: Not Just For Pandas. is a post from: Green Earth News

Last month, I reported that emergent processes might make bamboo a viable source of biofuels as we work toward reducing automobile emissions and our dependence on foreign oil.  Now, in addition to providing a potential alternative means for powering our cars, bamboo is being put forward as a possible material in the actual construction of more environmentally friendly vehicles. 

At least one builder of electric cars is exploring the possibility of using woven bamboo fiber and vegetable resin for the body of cars, in much the same way that bamboo composites are currently used in the production of surfboards. 

Presently, carbon fiber is the most in-demand material among those who are seeking to construct lighter weight cars, which will demonstrate greater fuel-efficiency.  Carbon fiber is much lighter than the more traditional alternatives for automobile bodies, being about half the weight of steel, and thirty percent lighter than aluminum.  Just a ten percent reduction in the overall weight of a car increases its fuel efficiency by over six percent. 

However, even though carbon construction decreases the environmental impact of the car itself, and reduces the associated fuel costs, it is a relatively expensive resource at thirty dollars per kilogram, and actually tends to add to the initial price tag.  Its environmental benefit is not without qualification, either.  At the same time that it can contribute to lower automobile emissions, it produces its own during the production process, with half of the carbon used for fiber production being given off as carbon dioxide. 

Typically, when carbon fiber products reach the end of their life cycle, they are either placed in landfills or they are incinerated, resulting in even more polluting emissions.  It is possible to recycle carbon fiber to avoid this impact, but that alternative requires the building of new infrastructure, which has simply not been widely put in place yet.

Bamboo presents an alternative with more obvious environmental benefits, in addition to which it is less expensive, while being of comparable quality.  The plant grows with amazing speed and converts carbon dioxide into oxygen at a rate faster than trees.  Once harvested, its fibers can be broken down by either a mechanical or chemical process, but it does not require the extremely high heat and precise conditions required for the creation of carbon fiber. 

Carbon fiber enjoys a greater strength-to-width ratio than bamboo, but the latter beats out another alternative material, having twice the strength of an equal weight of fiberglass.  And beyond that, it naturally beats out virtually all of its competitors in terms of ecological friendliness, cost, and sustainability.  As bamboo in general becomes more mainstream and the benefit of increasing its production becomes better recognized, the list of its potential and actual uses will continue to grow.

So in light of this story, add car production to the other emerging uses of this green resource, which already acts as a defense against global warming, makes an excellent building material, and provides the source of high-quality viscose clothing and bedding that’s as soft as cashmere.  When looking for alternative resources as we pursue a greener future, what greater alternative could there be than something with applications to practically all the major aspects of American life?

Bamboo Fuel, Now Bamboo Cars is a post from: Green Earth News

Anyone who reads this site regularly should have a sense of the tremendous versatility of bamboo.  It is already used for food, medicine, decorative gardening, the construction of homes and flooring, furniture and other goods, and for clothing textiles.  In time we may also be able to add biofuel to the list of its common uses.  The idea is not new, and existing methods of extracting biofuels have been considered for application to bamboo, but the process of converting bamboo cellulose into liquid fuel is difficult to execute efficiently because of the extraordinary density of the plant.  However, new research from Mississippi State University may hold clues for how scientists can learn to more easily break down bamboo, and thus more efficiently extract biofuels from all other cellulose sources.

This new data comes, fittingly enough, from the first thing that most of us associated with bamboo: the giant panda.  The fecal matter of two pandas from the Memphis zoo has been studied by university biochemists in an effort to understand the process by which their stomachs so efficiently break down bamboo.  As virtually anyone ought to know, giant panda diets consist almost entirely of bamboo, and so their bodies are designed to break it down very thoroughly in a short period of time in order to extract nutrition from the woody stalks.

The researchers have analyzed the bacterial content of the pandas’ waste and found twelve species of bacteria that aid in the digestive process.  These appear to be similar to bacteria found inside of termites, which allow them to consume wood.  The next step of the study is to attempt to isolate and reproduce in a lab the digestive enzymes of these bacteria.  If the researchers are successful, the manufactured enzymes could be used in a new, much cheaper and more efficient process for converting bamboo and other woody plants into biofuels.

If such a process were to emerge, it would be highly preferable to current sources of biofuel production.  Presently, fuels such as ethanol are generally derived from food crops like corn, and this alternate use has resulted in increased food prices and threats to worldwide food security.  Not only would bamboo and other non-food sources of biofuels reduce or eliminate these negative consequences of present production, they would provide a source that is more quickly replaced and potentially much easier and less costly to produce.  The tremendous rate of bamboo growth means a steady supply of the crop, whatever its use, and stands dedicated to biofuel production would be able to be harvested virtually continuously for that purpose.  Additionally, the ability of bamboo to grow in a vast diversity of regions means that as a fuel source it would be widely available and would generally prevent situations of foreign dependence and regional fuel shortages.

The enzymes that could make all of this possible may well prove to have other uses, as well.  Bamboo already yields a soft, moisture resistant, and antimicrobial textile for clothing, but the current process for extraction of viscose fiber requires the use of caustic chemical agents.  While the vast majority of these are captured and recycled, the existing process is not perfect and since bamboo is such an ideal green resource in most respects, it calls for substantial improvement.  If the digestive enzymes that are currently under study can be reproduced and utilized to full effect, it could also present a purely organic alternative to the chemical process of extracting viscose from bamboo.  Then, in addition to being an all-around better textile, viscose from bamboo would move from having very little environmental impact to practically none.

The demand for bamboo in all of its various uses is growing in Western countries, just as it should be.  And with news indicating that the versatility of bamboo is growing as well, and its production processes becoming more efficient and environmentally friendly, the future of bamboo looks increasingly bright.  And by extension, so does the future of a greener world.

Bamboo: Biofuel For The Future is a post from: Green Earth News

Now that an East Coast earthquake has actually damaged the historic Washington Monument, we all have reason to be more acutely aware of the potential danger from the kinds of natural disasters that seem comparatively rare in most regions, but that we know from the news can be spectacularly devastating.  Knowing what we do about the amount of damage that serious earthquakes can cause, we should be equally aware of what can be done to minimize some of that damage.  Using bamboo as a principle or supplementary building material in appropriate structures is an especially notable example of such attainable solutions.

On average, there are about seventeen large earthquakes a year, which typically result in serious loss of life and property, and consequently high costs of repair.  The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco Bay area damaged 23,000 homes, making for an average cost of between $25,000 and $35,000 each.  Between damage to private homes and other property, the total cost of that quake amounted to $5.6 billion.  The 1994 quake in Northridge, California resulted in nearly triple that cost and damaged 46,000 homes.  On the other side of the Pacific, the 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan exceeded even that cost ten times over, costing $150 billion dollars.  Estimates of the cost of Japan’s March 11^th earthquake reach as high as more than double that figure.

With a track record like that, and with at-risk regions becoming more densely populated over time, nothing can entirely stop very large earthquakes from being costly or deadly, but careful engineering has prevented recent earthquakes in industrialized nations from being as catastrophic as they might have been, and yet there is more that can be done.  One might assume that part of the process of engineering earthquake-proof structures would be placing emphasis on highly modern materials like rebar and plastics.  Certainly, the structures that tend to survive large quakes are recognizably modern, but natural or unconventional products can also be utilized in extremely durable home construction, and in ways that offer the same benefits both to impoverished third-world communities without the benefit of high-cost, manufactured construction materials and to private, first-world homeowners with an interest in a greener but equally effective alternative.

Earthquakes in Colombia and Costa Rica have demonstrated that houses constructed of bamboo are capable of surviving disasters that caused more modern houses to collapse.  Given that bamboo is extremely flexible but also extremely strong, having a tensile strength comparable to that of steel, it is an ideal support material to resist damage from earthquakes.  In the hands of skilled designers, these properties can be utilized to construct homes that are both inexpensive enough to be made available to impoverished communities and durable enough to withstand even the most extreme earthquakes.  In 2007, Colorado State University performed shake tests on houses in which bamboo had been used in place of rebar at their bases, and found them to withstand forces exceeding what would register as a 10.0 on the Richter scale.  In a further bit of environmental friendliness, those houses utilized recycled tires for shock absorption.  They were designed specifically for Indonesian aid and cost less than $1,000 each.

Of course, with a higher price tag in a more affluent nation, the same beneficial aspects of bamboo construction can be applied to making homes that are durable, damage-resistant, and cost-effective, but also aesthetically pleasing.  If you think that a house made with natural, traditional building materials has to look pre-modern in order to be earthquake-proof, that’s simply not the case.  It can be better in every way: environmentally, structurally, and visually.

Earthquake Proof Bamboo Homes is a post from: Green Earth News

Trader Joe’s has come under fire recently over accusations that the trendy grocery store is habitually wasting food.  The chorus of public outcry from a recent documentary film showing workers dumping large quantities of salvageable food into dumpsters.  I must say, I feel for the big company in this case, not because I would for even a moment defend their practice, but because I think Trader Joe’s was awfully unfortunate to have a camera lens somehow come to focus squarely on one of its stores.  I know that this problem is in no way limited to a few offending corporations, and everybody that’s protesting Trader Joe’s ought to know that too.  Who could not be aware that wastefulness is an endemic problem stretching across vast swaths of American society?

It can be particularly horrifying when it is a corporate policy and the damage done by those policies is not limited to discarded food.  When I worked for a large corporate retailer, I was once called in along with virtually every other employee to help clean up after a minor fire had broken out in the store.  The fire had been limited to a cell phone kiosk, and there was no real damage elsewhere in the store, but the building had filled with smoke, coating most of the merchandise with soot, which everyone had to meticulously dust off while the store remained closed for a day.  Along the way, a manager called me to the center of the store where there were racks of clothing and I found my superior pulling armfuls of winter coats off of hangers and dumping them into a large, wheeled plastic bin generally used for trash and recyclable cardboard.  When I arrived, she pointed to a full bin and instructed me that it was to be taken to the back room and emptied into the trash compactor.

I was stunned.  These coats were completely undamaged.  It seemed that the reason for their being discarded was simply that they had taken on the smell of smoke and were thus no longer saleable.  But the fact remained that as sources of warmth they were still entirely useable.  It was the beginning of winter in a rather cold climate, and these coats – dozens upon dozens of them – could have been used to outfit homeless people for three excruciating months of harsh weather.  They could very well have kept people alive.

I feebly protested, but then wheeled the bin to the back and did as I was told, feeling sick with myself all the while.  Upon returning the empty bin to the center of the store and finding another full bin waiting for me, I lodged my complaint with the person who had assigned me this task and explained to her that if she wanted someone to continue discarding merchandise that could better be donated to charity she’d have to find someone else as I considered it unethical and would not be a party to it.  She nodded agreeably, but explained that she herself had no choice in the matter, that company policy dictated that all uninsured losses must be thrown in the garbage.  She seemed vaguely remorseful of that fact, but not enough so that she would take any pains to contravene the policy.  Interestingly, hers was the least agreeable response I got.  I explained what was going on to absolutely everybody I encountered in the store for the rest of that evening and every one of them expressed disgust on par with my own.  Ostensibly, all of us together comprised a meaningful part of the company and yet the company was willing to do something that perhaps no individual part of it would have found conscionable.  As the saying goes, sometimes none of us is as dumb as all of us.

I imagine that a great many of the activists campaigning against Trader Joes are doing so because they want to feel good about their social impact but don’t want to stop shopping there.  Trader Joe’s is in a tough position because their clientele is more likely to have an activist bent than many of their competitors’, but that fact is determined more by their merchandise and market position than by their corporate practices.  And the unfortunate fact is that that activist bent in individual shoppers is not necessarily indicative of their unimpeachable social and environmental practices.  I’m certain that a number of those who are now pumping their fists in front of the entrance to Trader Joe’s formerly didn’t think twice about purchasing merchandise from their shelves that was packaged in multiple layers of plastic, or about throwing away clothing just because it was last season, or about taking a bag of trash to the curb every single week.

I don’t for a moment expect anyone to be flawless, whether an individual or a corporation.  I do expect each of us to push ourselves and the whole of society around us in a positive direction.  I am pleased to see people making an effort to see that Trader Joe’s reforms its wasteful practices.  However, I also think it’s important that we don’t pigeonhole our activism, and that we avoid making the mistake of seeing problems as minute and specific when in fact they are bigger than all of us.  Focusing too narrowly on a social or environmental ill can not only prevent one from seeing the bigger picture, it can prevent one from seeing one’s own place in the picture.  I fear that some people who are directing their outcry against Trader Joe’s think that we live in a society that has some wasteful stores when in fact we just live in a wasteful society.

The social and environmental progress that we should rightly be looking for is at the end of a long uphill battle, and while protesting newly realized acts of irresponsibility is an important step in that direction, it is imperative that such realizations act as general eye openers and make a person more carefully consider what corporate practices one may have been enabling with one’s purchasing power, what better alternatives there might have been, and what one is doing personally that might be similarly damaging, albeit in a much, much lesser degree.

Change starts at the level of the individual.  Part of the individual’s role is to push larger entities in the right direction, but some of that work is done by leading by example.  The consumer should be aware that there’s harm done by the things that a store never gets the chance to dismissively throw out, because it is taken off their shelves and becomes trash in the homes of many, many private individuals.  Consequently, the consumer should strive to limit consumption and stick to packaging and other materials that can be recycled or will be sure to biodegrade.  He should also work to find and support products made from green sources and in environmentally sustainable ways, as well as buying and using products that are durable and high quality and less likely to quickly make their way to the garbage bin.

Bamboo is one key resource that has the potential to help curtail global warming, while providing an extremely multifaceted resource and the potential for much economic growth through domestic growth, harvest, and manufacture.  Among the excellent products that can be derived from it is viscose clothing, a highly durable alternative to cotton, which is terribly common in landfills just as well as American homes.  By supporting this sustainable resource and making available some of its derivative products in a responsible way, Green Earth Bamboo hopes to do its part in reducing waste, promoting good environmental practices, and building a better world.

Throughout American society, we all have a part to play, and we all can learn from one another as we try to do better for our world, improving our lifestyles as individuals and agitating for more forward-thinking corporate practices.  And we should never wait until a documentary lens is turned upon us or the establishments we patronize before we decide that something – and something big – needs to change.

Trader Joe’s Is An Average Joe When It Comes To Waste In America. is a post from: Green Earth News

I don’t think anyone doubts that something needs to be done about the national debt.  But it’s a shame that the political establishment seems to be incapable of pursuing a solution that takes a balanced, rational approach, which utilizes both fair tax reform and measured, broad-based spending cuts.  Instead, the less reasonable voices on the left emphasize tax increases while effectively ignoring the necessity of sacrifices to government programs, while the Republican Party refuses to negotiate on any tax increases whatsoever and seems to be content to make drastic, slash-and-burn-style budget cuts that are focused purely on advancing their own political ends.

In keeping with that approach, the Republican-dominated House Appropriations Committee recently released its proposed budget plan for the environment, which on Friday passed the House subcommittee on Interior and the Environment.  The plan includes $1.8 billion dollars in cuts to the EPA, and other cuts to related agencies.  Of course, with a national debt in excess of $14 trillion, $1.8 billion is a drop in the bucket, and it would be short-sighted of me to complain about such measures without being able to give a thorough accounting of what alternative cuts could be made instead.  But what bothers me about this budget plan, and about Republican approaches to the debt in general, is not the quantity of any given cut, but rather the hypocrisy and political opportunism that it demonstrates.

While the Republican budget plan makes deep cuts to programs and agencies of genuine value to the environment, it also restores $55 million dollars in oil and gas subsidies, thus essentially advancing the notion that sacrifices need only be made on the other side of the aisle, and that given cuts can be used to pay for increased spending on conservative interests.  The proposal also tries to use the debt crisis to advance these interests by including a number of riders in the bills, including sections that create a one-year prohibition on regulations of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources, prevent the EPA from expanding storm water discharge requirements, and restrict regulation of formaldehyde.

For all the loud talk about the importance of reducing the debt, I think that very few people are invested in that as a primary concern, as opposed to using it as leverage to promote their own pre-existing aims.  Making the wrong cuts, or making deeper cuts than are prudent to particular areas of the budget threatens to do more harm than may be done by an outstanding debt.  And drastic, across-the-board cuts to environmental spending have the potential to curtail significant progress that is currently being made.

The day after the release of the GOP budget proposal, it was reported that global investment in green energy had reached a record high last year.  The Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2011 report was commissioned by the UN Environment Program.  Its executive director, Achim Steiner has said, “The combination of government target-setting, policy support and stimulus funding is underpinning the renewable industry’s rise and bringing the much needed transformation of our global energy system within reach.”

But now regressive elements of society and the political system stand ready to reverse this progress, in large part by exploiting fears over financial hardship in order to cut vast amounts of forward-thinking spending while pouring a little more into the defense of the status quo.  Despite the overall gains in green investment last year, spending is falling off in some projects and some areas of the world, and 2010 marked the first year in which developing nations spent more on investment in renewables than did wealthier, post-industrial countries.  The United States’ largest creditor, China, spent the most on such projects, increasing their total investment by 28% over 2009, up to $48.9 billion.  This should give pause to anyone who is worried about the national debt, the future of America’s economy in the global marketplace, and the rise of China as a competitor.  By increasing its investments in green technology, China threatens to have a more modern infrastructure than that which some of the political forces in the U.S. cling to.  And their green developments are likely to come complete with new jobs, more innovation, and a recognizable downward trend in the costs of new energy production as development and investment increases.  All these things could be lost to the immediate future of America if we follow the trend of eschewing environmental concerns in favor of retaining our unsustainable old way of doing things.  That is the trend that is supported by the Republican budget for the environment, and by far too much of conservative thinking overall.

On that point, China is far outpacing our investment in the future, but what the United States and Europe still have over China is a democratic society, and public pressure grounded in earnest public awareness can push our nation’s political will back in the direction that both welcomes a balance of interests in efforts to reduce the debt and promotes the crucial future impacts of sound environmental policy.  Through political activism, lifestyle, and personal spending, you can create the demand for an American future that is both environmentally and financially responsible and sustainable.  Tell your Congressional representatives that you won’t stand for slash-and-burn tactics that try to reduce the debt without a bit of well-reasoned analysis.  Derive your personal energy needs from green sources to whatever extent possible, and government policy will shift increasingly away from fossil fuels and toward emergent, in-demand technologies.  And consider buying goods made with the most sustainable, environmentally friendly materials, like bamboo, so that these have a greater presence in the market in the near future.  This sort of consumer support for future development can reduce prices not only of the materials you choose to buy, but of their competitors as well, and providing a greater diversity of resources for building and for clothing and other consumer goods also provides the potential to create jobs and lower production costs.

No matter what the fears and uncertainties of the regressive elements of society and the political system, a green society need never be seen as being at odds with a society that is economically secure.

National Debt Fears And Anti-Environmental Trends is a post from: Green Earth News

Did you take your children to a Fourth of July parade yesterday?  According to one recent study, if you did, you’ve increased their odds of turning out to be Republicans later in life.  According to the study’s authors, political scientist David Yanagizawa-Drott and economist Andreas Madestam, attending an Independence Day parade before the age of eighteen makes you two percent more likely to identify as Republican in adulthood  and four percent more likely to vote Republican by the age of forty.

You could be justified in having serious doubts about these conclusions.  After all, it seems somewhat unlikely that the effect of such a minute experience upon attitudes that develop so much later could be reliably measured on a broad scale.  On the other hand, Fourth of July celebrations certainly have the potential to leave an impression on young children.  I remember them rather well from my own childhood, and the appeal of dazzling fireworks and patriotic sing-a-longs was so strong that I recall having a distinct sense of loss as I grew up and my patriotism diminished and was supplanted by a more measured, intellectual appreciation of the ideals and history behind all the waving flags and military-themed parade floats.

Regardless of the veracity of the claim that such holiday spectacles can actually influence a child’s developing political attitudes, I think the researchers are quite right when they say that “the political Right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century.”  However, I’d like it if we started drawing a distinction between “patriotism” and “jingoism.”  I think it’s the latter that is better represented by typically conservative or Republican attitudes toward love of country.  And I think that my and my fellow liberals’ admiration of what this country represents, and our eagerness to push it towards constant social and ideological improvement counts every bit as much as patriotism.

What the conservative point of view has over us is spectacle.  Parades and fireworks are uniquely attention-grabbing, and the average onlooker doesn’t much care about the environmental responsibility that’s on display if the American flags are printed on bamboo fabric and hung on bamboo poles.  That could very well be the case, though, and it would go very far towards showing that love of environment and love of country can go hand in hand.  But as it stands, whether one causes the other or not, it is fairly clear that conservative Republican points of view and the sort of patriotism that you wear on your sleeve and put on display at Independence Day tend to go hand-in-hand.

It doesn’t have to be that way, and it is a shame that the people who attend Fourth of July parades with more enthusiasm and regularity might also be more inclined to oppose restrictions on carbon emissions, drive gas guzzlers, and consume environmentally unsustainable goods.  It seems to me that if you love your country, you ought to have its future best interests at heart, but in too many people’s minds, “looking forward” seems to be rejected as synonymous with “looking down on.”  The future benefits of social and environmental reform are not as eye-catching or easily apprehended as the imagery of flags and military regalia and patriotic celebrations.  There aren’t parades for wind farms, solar panels, electric cars, and bamboo like there are for America as an image that represents nothing but itself.  Maybe there should be.  Maybe there should be floats dedicated to what could be as well as what is, and then perhaps children would be more likely to grow up understanding that the two do not have to be at odds.

Patriotism, Independence Day And Progress is a post from: Green Earth News

After two weeks of negotiations, the Bonn climate talks ended on Friday and made effectively no progress on efforts to curtail global warming.  Participants in the talks are giving credit to all parties for making progress on various technical issues, but the most prominent and crucially important areas of discussion have come to naught, with no agreement on standards for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions or financing of future initiatives.  The future of the Kyoto protocol is very much uncertain, as well, despite having been ratified years ago by virtually every country on the globe, with only the U.S. having a stated intention not to sign.

Naturally, the United States is being harshly criticized for allegedly blocking progress at these most recent talks by refusing to negotiate its insufficient goals on pollution reduction or to back up earlier financial commitments.  The European Union is not winning much praise either, and its reduction goals are also identified by some as being far below where they should be.

Of course, it is easy to understand why the industrialized nations would be hedging their bets in current talks, given the perilous state of the economy.  If financing is an aspect of the discussion, it suggests that moving forward on global warming policy demands economic sacrifices that we cannot afford to make right now.  But the fact is that what we really can’t afford is to not commit to progress on reducing and reversing greenhouse gas emissions.  And as we and many others within the environmentalist movement have repeatedly made efforts to emphasize, transitions to greener societies can create jobs, capital, and investment opportunities.  The threat of economic instability is not a valid explanation for a failure to act on global warming; it is only an excuse used to manufacture justification for a lack of the will to take the lead, to effect change, and to change the status quo.

According to the ambassador from Bolivia, Pablo Solon, “The developed countries are not moving.  The problem we face is that we are on a path to [warming of] 4-5C.  That is the reality.  That worries us very much.”   And of course there is good reason for worry, considering that global warming of just one degree Celsius could result in arctic ice thawing completely for half of each year, resulting in severe drought and desertification in key areas of the world, including the American west.  Speaking of the failure to move forward on avoiding such dire ecological impacts, Solon is correct to say, “The problem is the lack of ambition.”

The will to change must come first.  All the rest follows after that.  But so far, these talks and the others that preceded it have demonstrated little more than a will to bicker and point fingers.  This is the ongoing tragedy of global warming inaction.  There is no sense in constantly asking and arguing over the questions of who should be moving first to reduce their emissions, or who should be financing renewable energies and sustainable resources.  These questions don’t much matter, because the answer is obvious: everybody should be doing their part.  Everybody ought to be doing whatever they can, whether it’s a country that is the largest polluter or the smallest, the richest or the poorest.

What is needed, above all, is will.  But the will of nations, particularly in a democratic society, comes from the will of its people, so put pressure on your government to take up the cause of curtailing global warming, not because it’s expedient or because a course of action has been unanimously agreed upon by all nations, but because it’s the right thing to do.  And in the meantime, the ubiquitous responsibility to do whatever one can applies to private individuals as much as it does governments.  So while you’re waiting for the leaders of the world to stop talking and start acting, you should go on doing both.  Do what you can to reduce your carbon footprint by driving fuel efficient or hybrid cars, by going solar, by planting trees, and so on.  Also, visit our online store, use sustainable materials where including bamboo clothing and bamboo sheets.  Bamboo provides more sustainable resources for your life while supporting a crop that could do wonders for carbon sequestration and be important to our collective efforts once everyone finally recognizes the importance of working to counteract global warming.

Global Warming And The Kyoto Protocol: Countries Lack Will And Funding To Lead The Charge. is a post from: Green Earth News

Over the course of the past decade, cotton production in the United States has decreased substantially.  Consequently, American distributors and retailers are increasingly dependent on foreign crops and cotton prices stand to fluctuate in accordance with the activity of foreign markets, the policies of foreign governments, and the effects of foreign weather and disasters.  Presently, cotton prices have been driven up in large part because of widespread flooding in Asian cotton-growing nations.

Meanwhile, what is left of the cotton industry in America is not faring well as harsh domestic weather, exacerbated by global climate change, has caused some of the crop to fail.  Despite 1.5 million more acres of cotton being planted this year than last, the estimate for crop output is one million bales lower than the total for last year.  The result is that cotton prices have reached a 150-year high, and clothing prices, having already risen 3.5% over the last year, are expected to increase 20% by the end of the summer.

Against the backdrop of these changes, it may be highly prudent to shift attention to alternative crops for the production of clothing in coming years.  Bamboo clothing provides an excellent alternative to cotton clothing, in that high quality bamboo fabric is even softer than cotton, as well as having the additional benefits of being anti-microbial and not holding onto moisture from perspiration.  But apart from providing a great material for clothing, bamboo can prove to be a terrific replacement or supplement for what might be an outmoded cotton crop.

Bamboo is both fast-growing and durable.  The crop is not easily damaged by flood, and given its properties and growing patterns, bamboo is a multi-purpose agroforestry crop that does not demand excessive financial risk on the part of farmers.  Clearly, American farmers are already moving well away from cotton production.  Accepting bamboo as an alternative can allow farmers to grow another cash crop in close proximity, while still producing a material that, in addition to a multitude of other uses, will never leave clothing manufacturers short on a supply of domestic materials.

As it stands, cotton is still cheaper than some of its less popular alternatives, but more than anything else this is a function of that difference in popularity.  Cotton remains our default choice for clothing manufacturing, but its natural availability and popularity among the consumer will not continue to be matched by popularity among growers, especially if extreme weather continues to reduce the odds of a successful cotton harvest.

With such extreme weather being driven on by climate change, it is also important that our agricultural options in the future take into account the need for greenhouse gas reductions.  And in addition to being profitable, multifaceted, and desirable, bamboo stands to remove more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than trees, while being eminently useful as a domestic crop, and much quicker to grow back once cut down.

Amidst the challenges of environmental degradation, economic concerns for American farmers, and pressure from foreign markets the prevalence of cotton appears to be waning.  At the same time, bamboo is an emerging market, with U.S. companies beginning to provide domestic supplies of raw bamboo, and viscose from bamboo providing higher quality, more environmentally and economically sustainable alternatives to the too-limited options that American consumers have been used to for so long.

For more on the benefits of bamboo, visit Green Earth News section on Bamboo & The Environment.

Bamboo: A Necessary Alternative To Cotton is a post from: Green Earth News