Earth Day Network

Looking for a job? If you are, you’re probably looking in all the wrong places. It’s pretty well-known that “green” jobs are becoming more and more popular socially, but these jobs are also the professions of the future.

While many corporations have been forced to eliminate positions and lay off hundreds of people at once, the renewable energy industry has continued to grow. Not only has this industry flourished, but it has also more than doubled the national rate when it comes to adding job possibilities to the economy. To put this into perspective, the overall job growth average between 1998 and 2007 was 3.7 percent; in the renewable energy industry, it was 9.1 percent. With this information, the government has said it will provide billions to further renewable energy growth.

Although “green” jobs may not be the most high-paying jobs out there, they seem to be the most promising. Feedback from individuals who have shifted from the auto industry to areas such as hydropower are aware of this drop in salary, but they have also noted that these industries are moving in the right direction – Earth Day Network published an op-ed on this topic months ago. So if you’re out there job hunting, get on the green track to help the environment and to help yourself.

For more information, visit MSNBC’s article.

The TV – a new discovery in the way of energy use reduction. Who would have thought that a television could provide a means to further the use of solar power? Apparently TVs can be employed for other purposes than indulgent entertainment.

The thin covering on flat screen TVs that protects the appliance from moisture may just be the latest breakthrough in solar energy; this film can be used to create contemporary solar panels that are easier to install and pay for than the original version of solar panels. Traditional solar panels that have been installed on rooftops up until now are extremely rigid and do not cover some hard-to-reach areas. Unlike their predecessors however, these new, flexible solar panels – known as building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPVs) – will not only make more efficient use of unused rooftop energy resources, but will also be relatively less expensive and last for over 20 years.

Alternative energy sources are becoming increasingly valued. Many people have been hesitant to invest in solar panels, but this innovation would put their nerves at ease: Not only will BIPVs help reduce our impact on the environment, but they will also be a cheaper option than previous solar panels. In today’s economy, both of these features are incredibly important. Although they are still in the works, flexible solar panels are anxiously awaited.

For more information, check out http://www.enn.com/energy/article/40029.

A classic pastime and a noble cause are coming together to create an environmentally-friendly stadium for the New York Jets and Giants in the very near future. With the extensive audience that sports events attract, something like this is long overdue.

Partnering with the EPA, the New Meadowlands Stadium Company has agreed to construct and operate the New Meadowlands Stadium along environmentally aware guidelines by incorporating ‘green’ materials and practices into this project. A few of the expectations for this stadium are to significantly reduce water use and greatly increase recycling, resulting in reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 1.68 million metric tons.

With so many people becoming environmentally active, this stadium will represent the culmination of their efforts, and serve as a stepping stone to even greater accomplishments. The New Meadowlands Stadium can also be used as a means to reach the masses that haven’t yet embarked on the environmental movement. This ‘green’ stadium is a great way to further environmental work and to reach those who still may not be convinced of the importance of preserving the environment.

Who would have thought that something as beneficial-sounding as the federal school lunch program, which provides lunch to low-income children, would be a culprit in the childhood obesity epidemic?  Many experts believe it could be.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture runs the school lunch program, providing free or reduced price lunches to kids living near the poverty level by sending schools surplus commodities it buys up from U.S. agri-businesses.  But in addition to feeding poor kids, the USDA’s other goal in the program is providing price support to farmers and agri-business who can’t sell enough of their products.  As new White House chef Sam Kass points out, these disparate allegiances create a problem:  what’s good for farmers is not necessarily good for kids.  Excess commodities tend to be mostly meat-, potato- and corn-based products.  Processed into hamburger patties, French fries and frozen pizzas, these surplus foods are then shipped to schools whose students qualify for free or reduced price lunches. 

Some 30 million kids across America get lunch- and sometimes breakfast- from this program.  But demographically, these are mostly the same kids – those from families living near the poverty level – where rates of obesity have climbed to alarming percentages.  The percentage of obese U.S. children and teens doubled between 1971 and 2006, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but they are disproportionately found in low income communities. Teens in poor communities are twice as likely to be obese as teens in their national peer group, according to Douglas Besharov, a scholar in social welfare issues with the American Enterprise Institute.  Could there be a link – and a solution to be sought after?  What if these kids could also get locally-grown, green, leafy vegetables and fruits on their lunch trays? 

Advocates of locally-grown whole foods are starting to step forward and talk about changing what foods are made available to school children. Some of these advocates are in high places:  First Lady Michelle Obama recently planted a vegetable garden on the White House lawn, saying she wants to show children where locally grown vegetables come from.  Presidential chef Sam Kass is a proponent of greening up the school lunch program and has convened meetings on the subject.  The New America Foundation says that 70 percent of schools receiving federal school lunch assistance do not meet even the loose nutrition requirements the government sets for serving this food. 

The moment is ripe for harvesting change. This year, Congress will vote on reauthorizing the Child Nutrition and WIC Act, which not only governs the federal school lunch program but also set nutritional standards for all foods sold in schools.  The last reauthorization in 2004 brought significant improvements such as requiring schools to have wellness programs.  But more surely needs to be done to green up the cafeteria tray.  The Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee began hearings on reauthorization. For every advocate of healthy foods testifying before the Senate committee there was also a representative of agri-business or food companies whose primary interest is not losing the school market.  A lot is at stake – to both parties.

We need a Green Food Corps to make sure this moment is not lost, to make sure that locally-grown, leafy green vegetables and fruits find their way to our nation’s schools.

The National Parent Teacher Association told the Senate committee on March 31 that it wants to see five changes in the Child Nutrition Act. Among them, said NPTA chief executive Byron Garrett, are to requiring “the development of best practices for the processing of USDA commodities,” to more closely align with the government’s own 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans statement about nutritious foods needed. Secondly, the National PTA and a slew of other groups want the Child Nutrition Act to set national nutrition standards “for school foods sold outside of the school meals programs,” so that chips and soda sold in vending machines don’t undermine efforts to nourish kids with what is sold on the lunch line.

Looking for a house? Keep in mind the three rules of real estate: location, location, location.

Good location is typically thought of as a safe community with good public schools. New data, however, confirms that where you live has a direct effect on how long you live.

According to a team from Brigham Young and Harvard universities, reducing air pollution has extended average life expectancy by five months for urban residents in dozens of U.S. cities over the past two decades. Average life expectancy improved 2.72 years (with five months of that increase attributed to cleaner air). However, the improvements were especially high in the District of Columbia, where residents are living roughly three years longer—most likely because of the profound reductions in particulate matter made in the region. This evidence that extensive clean-up efforts are worth the up-front investment can help environmentalists breathe easy.  

Though the study represents the first time researchers have documented, conclusively, a link between air quality and longevity, urban air quality is no newcomer to the national stage: Earth Day Network released its own Urban Environment Report in 2007. The Report ranked 72 U.S. cities according to more than 200 environmental, health, and quality of life indicators. It also introduced, for the first time, a “Vulnerable Population Index” (VPI) which factors in each city’s susceptibility to an expanded list of environmental challenges based on the percentage of its population that is most at risk.

To link to the Washington Post Article, click here

To check out Earth Day Network’s Urban Environment Report, click here 

Recently, The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) and the Presidential Climate Action Project (PCAP), a two-year initiative of the University of Colorado School of Public Affairs, hosted a briefing to discuss the challenges that the 44^th President of the United States, Barack Obama, will need to face when he takes office on January 20^th 2009. Not only the new Administration but also Congress will need an action plan to address the economic, social and environmental impacts of Climate Change.

The conveners of the briefing released a 100 Days Action Plan that recommends practical and achievable actions to immediately curb global warming; halt emissions growth by 2015; implement a national cap and trade program; invest heavily in energy efficiency research and development; and strike an agreement with China to move toward sustainable practices. Martha Coven of the Center for Budget Policy Priorities explained how well-designed climate change policies can provide sufficient revenue to both cushion the impact on vulnerable households and meet other legitimate public needs, such as expanded research on alternative energy sources. Bill Parson, of the office of Rep. Chris Van Hollen said that “what Obama prioritizes is key; he will have to deal with the economy, healthcare and also with climate change.” 

During the discussion, the speakers agreed that the government cannot address climate change without addressing energy, economy, security and foreign policy. Obama and Congress will need to replace outdated legislation with new laws  that will put us on the right path.

Find out more: 

http://www.eesi.org/111308_pcap http://www.climateactionproject.com/plan/

tags: Earth Day, Earth Day 2009, Earth Day Network