3
www.Planetsave.com
Published on August 8th, 2008
Like this post?
Subscribe to our RSS feed and stay
up to date.
Henry’s
Farm, a local organic farm that brings a wide range of produce every week to
my local farmer’s market, stirred the pot a bit lately when they asked
shoppers to byob, or pay $0.25 for a biodegradable bag to tote their produce
home. BYOB? It stands for Bring Your Own Bag.
Read the rest of this entry »
Published on August 8th, 2008
I
It’s
hard to watch television or browse the internet these days without hearing
regular stories about how celebrities are “going green.” In the past week
alone, I have read or skimmed through stories about how musician Sheryl Crow
is
launching an Eco Fashion Line, actress Pamela Anderson
is building a green hotel, and comedian and actor Will Ferrell will be
the first celebrity to
drive BMW’s new hydrogen car. According to the story, Will Ferrell has
also built a solar-powered environmentally friendly home. Should we care?
Read the rest of this entry »
Tags:
advertising,
al gore,
BMW
hydrogen car,
celebrities,
communication,
conservation social science,
eco homes,
environmentally-friendly products,
George
Foreman,
green celebs,
Lance
Armstrong,
Michael
Stipe, Mike
Myers,
Pamela Anderson,
Sheryl Crow,
solar energy,
solar power,
The Love
Guru,
Theory of Planned Behavior,
Will Ferrell
Published on August 7th, 2008
One of the biggest crises facing the human population is not a complete
shocker. It affects countless nations across our planet, and is continually
getting worse and worse. There are things that we can do, but so many of us
fail to do anything. Governments are worse, prolonging worsening conditions
and human lives in the process.
And no, it’s not global warming. It’s the myriad humanitarian crises that
plague the third world.
That I am writing about it here though, obviously speaks to a link to one
of PlanetSave’s main topics; climate science.
Read the rest of this entry »
Published on August 6th, 2008

Now
that the June 20,
2008 California lightning fires are nearly contained, talk has turned to
salvage logging the burned areas. Two years ago, an
Oregon State University study has called into question the practice of
salvage logging after a fire as a means of promoting forest
rehabilitation and future fire safety, as well as the
US government loses money on these salvage sales. With
Representative Wally Herger already calling for expedited NEPA procedures to
allow unrestricted salvage logging in burn areas, we need to take a hard
look at this practice.Four years ago, a devastating fire spread across my
property. We were told by locals, foresters, loggers, and USDA
conservationists that we needed to log the burned land. We were told that
the bugs would come and ruin the timber anyways and then kill the trees that
had survived. We were told that our property would be in greater fire risk
danger if we did not remove dead timber, and we were encouraged to take out
living trees that were predicted not to survive. The loggers told us we
would make about $60,000 logging 80 acres, but they didn’t tell us that
sawmills automatically lower prices when a fire occurs and it would cost
$40,000 to replant this same land. We proceeded with the expedited timber
harvest plan, only to pull the plug on the salvage operation after 12 acres.
Our property is now the perfect case study of what happens when a burned
area is left alone or salvage logged. In the areas that were logged,
invasive species of brush have grown enthusiastically, and we had to replant
with nursery stock. Natural regeneration was wiped out by the heavy logging
equipment, and this part of our land is a mess. In the areas that were left
alone after the fire, the rate of natural regeneration of mixed conifer
species was incredible and required no replanting and little removal of
invasive weed species. The living trees in the burn that were predicted to
die by the foresters are still living today, and the bugs came and went.
Read the rest of this entry »
Published on August 5th, 2008

Yucca Mountain, “Yes”; transport waste through my state?, “No”; what
Grand Canyon?
It’s hard to tell if Senator McCain’s age is catching up with his memory,
or if he’s just trying to ride a lot of fences when it comes to nuclear
power.
The Sierra Club sent out a
release today, pointing out the Senator’s love affair with nuclear
power, revealed a YouTube clip of McCain saying he would not approve of
shipping 77,000 tons of dangerous nuclear waste through his home state of
Arizona, but felt it would be ok to move it through 44 other states.
With this in mind, let’s examine his stand on drilling for uranium in the
national parks surrounding the Grand Canyon.
Read the rest of this entry »
|