Environment, Organics, Fair Trade & Recycling at Big Green Purse

Do Your Kids Think Saving Energy Is Important? Enter Contest by May 31.

Team ENERGY STAR, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's program to help kids and families understand why saving energy is important, has launched a contest to encourage kids to tell us in their own worlds why energy efficiency makes a difference.

To enter, all kids need to do is share their stories on the Team ENERGY STAR web page. The "story" can be told in words, pictures, video, slides, animation, drawings...the sky's (almost) the limit! The deadline for entering is May 31.

EPA and ENERGY STAR will recognize those who tell the best, most inspiring stories with a variety of energy-efficient electronic prizes from LG, including:

·      Smart phones

·      Feature phones

·      27 inch LED televisions

·      Computer monitors

·      MP3 Docking Stations

 PLUS: YOUR CHILD'S NAME IN LIGHTS

Winners’ names and photos will be broadcast on LG’s billboard in New York's Times Square in conjunction with a Twitter Party on June 7, #TeamENERGYSTAR.

Go to the Team ENERGY STAR website now to get more details and encourage your kids to share their story! (http://www.energystar.gov/team)

Vote on Tuesday. Your Life Depends on It.

Tuesday, November 6, ELECTION DAY, is the most important day of this year, and maybe of this century.

That may sound extreme - until you consider the utter devastation Super Storm Sandy has caused in New  Jersey, New York, and in many communities along America's East Coast, including in my own backyard. Storms like Sandy, hurricanes like Katrina in the Gulf Coast, the spread of poison ivy and dengue fever in many parts of the U.S., are all part of the same extreme weather conditions we're experiencing nationwide - and will continue to experience unless we make a national commitment to reduce our use of the coal, oil, and other fossil fuels 

On Tuesday, as I write here, we have a choice. We can either elect a President and legislators who support strategies that will reduce our dependence on coal, oil and other fossil fuels that, when burned, emit the carbon dioxide that is wreaking havoc on our climate. Or we can vote for candidates who refuse to acknowledge that climate change is real and requires immediate action.

In this first-ever Green Moms election carnival, many women who regularly blog about environmental health and safety have come together to raise awareness about why it's so important that we all vote on Tuesday. In many states, President Barack Obama, who advocates strong policies to stop climate change, is running neck and neck with challenger Mitt Romney, who heretofore has rejected the need for national policies to stop climate disruption. Please read these important posts and share them as widely as you can.

VOTE TO STOP MORE SANDY's

I am Voting for Barack Obama because We are Greener than We were Four Years Ago.

Are we “greener” than we were four years ago?

 Yes, we are, and Barack Obama deserves a lot of the credit.

 Despite strident anti-environmental opponents on Capitol Hill, President Obama has managed to use the power of his office – deployed primarily through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of the Interior – to make our air and water cleaner, to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, to protect our public lands, and to attack the climate change that causes extreme weather events like Hurricane Sandy.

Is his job done? Not by a long shot. But are we making progress? Definitely. I’m supporting the President for a second term because I think he offers our best hope in this election to continue to make progress in the future. 

This all became extremely clear to me earlier this week, as Hurricane Sandy was ripping away part of my roof. While I huddled in my basement listening to the terrifying wind and the torrential rain, I found myself getting mad, not just about what it would cost me to repair the damage, but about the reasons behind this catastrophic storm. Meteorologists, scientists, environmentalists, public health professionals, concerned citizens, and yes, President Obama, have all made the link between burning fossil fuels like coal and oil and extreme weather events like Sandy, let alone Hurricane Katrina and many others. And they’ve tried to throw the weight of their various offices behind solutions that would help wean us from fossil fuels.  

 Meanwhile, conservative forces in Congress and many state houses around the country have blocked legislation that would reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and opposed efforts to increase energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Bolstered by their conservative colleagues on Capitol Hill and pressured by Tea Party activists, Republican challenger Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, his running mate, have dismissed climate change, have literally said they “love” coal, and would strive to cripple the EPA if they were elected to office.

 Maybe to some people, this is just “talk.” But as someone who has worked in Washington, D.C. to promote environmental protection during the Carter years, the Reagan years, the Bush 1 years, the Clinton years, the Bush 2 years, and now the last four years of the Obama Administration, I can say, and say unequivocally, that environmental policy consistently fares worse under Republican administrations than under Democratic ones. As Sandy has shown, the planet very much faces a climate change tipping point. Obama is on one side, Romney on the other. For me, siding with Obama is a no brainer.

Has Obama accomplished nearly enough? No.

 Do I wish more change had happened? Of course.

 But we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Women Leave Rio+20 Motivated to Galvanize Sustainability Around Family Planning and Reproductive Rights

There is a direct correlation between access to voluntary family planning, women’s empowerment and environmental sustainability. And though the official delegates to last week’s “Earth Summit” tried to water it down, thousands of grassroots activists (left) made it one of the biggest issues to rock Rio+20, as the event was also called.

Why? Because ensuring that women have full reproductive rights creates one of the most desirable “two-fers” on the planet. Complete access to voluntary family planning is among the quickest, simplest, and most affordable ways to improve women’s quality of life. It is also one of the most direct, immediate and cost-effective ways to reduce climate change. In fact, studies show that slowing population growth by giving women access to the contraception they already want could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by between 8 and 15 percent [PDF] — roughly equivalent to ending all tropical deforestation.

Women took these issues to Rio because more than 200 million women in the U.S. and around the world cannot choose whether or when to have a baby, simply because they don’t have access to voluntary family planning. Groups like the Global Fund for Women and International Planned Parenthood Federation spent several days last week making their case, button-holing delegates, meeting with celebrities, blogging and Tweeting, and protesting in the streets.

In the end, as Grist reported, the Rio+20 outcome document – though 49 pages long and consisting of 23,917 words – mentions women in less than 0.01 percent of the entire text. And only two of the 283 sections addressed women’s needs for family planning. Of the seven priority areas of discussion at the summit, none included language endorsing the idea that access to contraception is a basic human right. In fact, language to that effect was specifically removed from earlier drafts of Earth Summit recommendations, primarily at the insistence of the Vatican, which interprets endorsement of reproductive “rights” as endorsement of abortion.

Earth Summit Delegates Refuse to Recognize Women's Reproductive Rights

At Rio+20, the "Earth Summit" taking place in Brazil, the slogan is "The Future We Want."

What "We" are they talking about?

Certainly not the more than 200 million women in the U.S. and many developing countries who lack access to voluntary family planning. That has become abundantly clear as the summit prepares to wrap up without including either family planning or a broader agenda for gender equality, sexual and reproductive health, and women’s empowerment in the primary summit agreements.

This refusal to acknowledge reproductive rights as a core tenet of sustainability is outrageous. It also flies in the face of previous UN conferences that supported family planning for a host of human and environmental rights. Indeed, the International Conference on Population and Development  (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994 was a watershed moment when women’s rights advocates, demographers and 179 governments came together to design a new model for development that made the empowerment and health of women and girls a  top priority. Cairo transformed a term that few people knew—reproductive rights—into a concept recognized around the world.  The ICPD not only affirmed the right of every girl and woman to quality sexual and reproductive health care and freedom from discrimination, it underscored its centrality towards achieving a harmonious and sustainable environment.