A new US project promises something new in the way of rechargeable batteries – delivery by mail direct to the end user with a real performance guarantee.

Many Canadians know that used batteries are a serious waste problem. Many are still very loyal to rechargeable batteries even though few last as long as claimed, especially if not continuously used and recharged. Battery recycling in Canada has been slow to get off the ground.

The new US initiative, known as earthCell, provides freshly recharged high performance  low self-discharge nickel metal hydride AA and AAA batteries by mail.  The batteries come with a prepaid mailer. When received by the distributor they are revitalized, tested, and sent out again. Those that do not meet specifications are recycled into new batteries.

To date, earthCells are available only in the US but the company states that it is looking for international distributors. This is a startup company funded by a creative project funding platform called Kickstarter where prepurchase helps entrepreneurs get their companies up and running.  As with all startups, one never knows what the future holds but this project seems to be in the top echelon of extended producer responsibility and environmental stewardship. GallonDaily wishes earthCell well and hopes that we will soon see a similar initiative in Canada.

More information about earthCell at http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/46649112/earthcell-the-renewable-battery

Consumer Reports, the magazine of the non-profit Consumers Union, has recently published a report of its findings of inorganic arsenic, a known human carcinogen, in commercial apple and grape juice.

A test of 88 samples of apple juice and grape juice purchased in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut found that 10 percent had total arsenic levels exceeding US federal drinking-water standards of 10 parts per billion. Most of the arsenic was inorganic. Consumer Reports speculates that the arsenic comes from contaminated soils resulting from historical use of lead-arsenate pesticides in apple orchards in the US and China. They believe that arsenic contaminated groundwater in China may also be a source of some of the arsenic.

A parallel study of almost 3,000 people found that those who said that they regularly drink apple juice had on average 19 percent greater levels of total urinary arsenic than those who did not, and those who reported drinking grape juice had 20 percent higher levels.

Consumers Union is urging the US government to set strict standards for arsenic in apple and grape juice.

Much more information on this project is to be found at http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/consumer-reports-magazine-january-2012/arsenic-in-your-juice/index.htm

Ecotricity, a privately owned UK not for profit company (Ecotricity uses the term not-for-dividend because they invest all profits back into the company) in the green energy business has announced a second round of ‘ecobond’ financing that allows ordinary people to invest in the green energy revolution.

Last year’s first round of ecobonds, which allow small investors to participate in a basket of renewable energy projects, was heavily oversubscribed.  Ecobonds are fixed rate corporate bonds with an interest rate of 6%, increased to 6.5% for customers of Ecotricity. As corporate bonds, ecobonds are not guaranteed but are regulated by the UK Financial Services Authority.  Ecobonds can be purchased only by UK residents.

The recently announced second round is limited to £10 million with a minimum investment of £500. Once an individual applicant has been approved the Ecobonds can be purchased online using a debit card. Business purchasers must proceed by mailing a cheque.

GallonDaily applauds Ecotricity for this initiative. Some wind projects in Canada have been funded by community investment but it is not yet a common model. The benefits of the Ecotricity model include the basket of projects approach, which helps to mitigate risk, and the ease of investing, not too much more difficult than buying a travel ticket online. Hopefully a Canadian company will soon strive to overcome the regulatory hurdles and launch a similar initiative in Canada.

Lots of information about ecobonds can be found at http://www.ecotricity.co.uk/about-ecotricity/ecobonds

A recent peer reviewed scientific paper indicates that, even at the low levels found in some drinking water, the pesticide atrazine, still quite widely used on corn in North America, may cause or contribute to irregular menstrual cycles and low estrogen levels. The paper compared these factors for women in Illinois, where atrazine levels in drinking water are higher, with those for women in Vermont, where atrazine levels in drinking water are very low.

GallonDaily sees this specific research as inconclusive but adding to the body of evidence that atrazine, which is not readily biodegradable, may be a more serious endocrine disruptor than bisphenol A (BPA), to which much more media and critic attention has been directed in recent years.

The bigger issue is that while so much attention has been focused on BPA the issue of endocrine disruption in a much broader range of chemicals has been given little attention. At some point this matter will return to the public policy agenda and a significant number of food and household products may be impacted by public concern.

The paper on endocrine disruption from drinking water (abstract: free; full paper: fee required) is at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935111002349

A summary prepared by the independent Environmental Health News is at http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2011/2011-1123atrazine-tied-to-menstrual-irregularities

A agricultural industry perspective on atrazine is at http://www.ontariocorn.org/envt/envpest.html

A more recent Federal government response to the issue of the effects of atrazine on amphibian populations is at http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/pet_283_e_32986.html

It used to be that resource companies could count on relatively low penalties for spills in developing countries but the Government of Brazil is showing big teeth in fining Chevron the maximum legally allowed amount. The oil company experienced a crude oil spill at one of its offshore wells earlier this month.

The relatively small spill, estimated to be about 2400 barrels in total compared to BP’s Gulf of Mexico spill which may have been almost five million barrels in total, took place in deep water about 120km off the Atlantic coast of Brazil.

Chevron has accepted full responsibility for the spill and has promised to do everything possible to clean it up. The Government of Brazil has fined Chevron 50 million reais ($USD28 million) and has suspended the Company’s permits for all current and planned exploration activities. More fines and penalties are possible. At the current level, the fine amounts to more than $11,500 per barrel of oil spilled.  Clean up costs will add significantly to this figure.

A Brazilian Government perspective from the Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis (IBAMA) can be found in Portuguese at http://www.brasil.gov.br/noticias/arquivos/2011/11/21/ibama-multa-empresa-chevron-em-r-50-mi-por-vazamento-de-oleo-no-rio-de-janeiro

A press release from Chevron is to be found at http://www.chevron.com/chevron/pressreleases/article/11232011_chevronvoluntarilysuspendscurrentandfuture.news

According to a story being carried this morning by CTV, Canada is planning to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol later this month. GallonDaily has no independent confirmation of this news but is concerned about the possible impact of the announcement on Canada’s international reputation, especially as the news item leaked on the first day of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Durban. Participating in a conference as a party to an international agreement while already having made a decision to withdraw from that agreement, assuming the CTV story is correct, is hardly likely to be seen as ethical behaviour by the international community. Indeed, again if the CTV story is correct, Canada may have taken a decision that will scuttle, or at least seriously delay, a Canada – Europe Free Trade Agreement and that will significantly worsen relations between Canada and much of the developing world.

There is no doubt that the Kyoto Protocol is not in good health. The international agreement does allow countries to pull out with one year’s notice. The United States, our largest trading partner, is not a party. Nevertheless, the annual meetings, as well as meetings of subsidiary bodies, do provide a place for international discussion of possible climate initiatives. The Protocol has defined methodologies for measuring controlling and measuring greenhouse gas emissions. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been made available for climate controlling projects around the world. Not just countries but many businesses have benefited economically from projects undertaken within the various frameworks of the Kyoto Protocol.

It is true that, unless Canada withdraws before the end of this year, we may be subject to sanctions for failing to meet our Kyoto Protocol commitments. However, other parties to the Protocol are at least partly understanding of Canada’s challenging circumstances and our close economic ties to the United States, the sanctions are negotiable, and there is no evidence that the other parties would try to extract a major pound of flesh from Canada for our Kyoto failure. Damage from pulling out is likely to at least equal any damage that may result from failing to meet our commitments.

A new poll in 23 countries by Canadian pollster GlobeScan, conducted for the BBC, suggests that nuclear power for electricity generation is not attracting majority public approval in any of the countries where the research was undertaken.

The poll, conducted between July and September this year, shows the highest support in China (42%), Nigeria (41%), Pakistan (39%), USA (39%), UK (37%), Ghana (33%), and Egypt (31%). In all other countries where the poll was conducted, support for new reactors was among less than 30% of those polled. In France, with the highest percentage of power from operating reactors, public support for new reactors stood at 15%. In Germany, where the government has decided to close reactors, public support for new reactors stands at 7%. Neither Canada nor Iran were included in the survey.

The poll also indicates that the belief that conservation and renewable energy can fill the gap left, if there is a move away from fossil fuels and nuclear energy, is now the consensus view.

Detailed poll results, methodology, and comparison with results from similar research conducted in 2005, are available at http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbc2011_energy/

The environmental and consumer group U.S. PIRG, the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups, has published its 26th annual survey of toy safety. In addition to safety concerns about choking and loud noise, U.S. PIRG found very excessive levels of lead and phthalates in  a few toys being sold in U.S. stores. The presence of both substances is regulated by U.S. law because of concerns over their health impacts.

Government agencies cannot possibly monitor the presence of these additives in all toys being imported into North America. The fact that an environmental group is still finding them in toys suggests that the manufacturing industry in Asia and North American importers are still not doing enough to ensure that these substances are not present in the resins used for these toys. To avoid damage to a retailer or brand’s reputation, GallonDaily recommends that importers and retailers take additional steps to ensure that these additives are present at no more than trace levels in imported plastic goods, especially toys.

The report can be found at https://www.uspirg.org/home/reports/report-archives/product-safety/product-safety-reports/trouble-in-toyland-the-26th-annual-survey-of-toy-safety

The UK government has announced that it will support an initiative to build Sustainable Development Goals to focus international attention on the need to sustainably manage the world’s natural resources. It plans to launch the formal process for the new goals at the Rio+20 summit in June 2012 and hopes that they will replace the Millennium Development Goals after 2015.

UK Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman is quoted as saying: “Producing more food sustainably, dealing with environmental degradation, providing access to clean energy and poverty eradication are all part of the same picture. We need green growth to deal with them.”
“I welcome the proposal to use Rio+20 as a launch pad to develop new Sustainable Development Goals which will help to provide incentives for greater global cooperation to address these challenges.”

No response yet on whether or how the Government of Canada intends to participate in this initiative. GallonDaily expects that a new round of global Sustainable Development goals is likely to have a greater impact on international business, particularly companies involved in renewable and non-renewable resources, than the existing Millennium Development Goals.

The press release announcing this initiative is at http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2011/11/21/sustainable-development-goals/

A new report from the European Environment Agency discusses some of the air pollution downsides from carbon capture and storage technology systems.

The report points out that CCS requires from 15% to 25% more energy than an uncontrolled system so total emissions before storage are increased. This means that an increase in air pollutants other than carbon dioxide. Of particular concern are particulates, nitrogen dioxide, and ammonia from breakdown of the amines used to capture the carbon dioxide. However, the report does project that CCS systems would cause a decrease of 60% in EU CO2 emissions if implemented at all coal-fired electricity generating plants. If implemented at all coal, gas and biomass plants, the result could be a net reduction in total GHG emissions.

Note that there are as yet no full scale CCS systems in operation. GallonDaily suggests that economic factors make it unlikely that all EU coal fired generating plants will have CCS by 2050.

A summary of the report, as well as a link to the complete document, is available at http://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/carbon-capture-and-storage-could