Bottled water sales have dropped for the first time in at least five years as a result of  vocal environmentalists sparing the landfill and a recession that has consumers giving tap water a shot.

Americans drank 8.7 billion gallons of bottled water last year, compared with 8.8 billion in 2007, according to consulting firm Beverage Marketing Corp. This is the first decline this decade, signs the Siggs and advocacy groups are making a dent. (Here at EcoSalon, we’ve encouraged readers to Stop the Bottle in 2009.)

According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, Nestle, the largest seller of bottled water in the U.S., reported its profits fell 2.7% the first half of the year. Nestle sells Poland Spring, Deer Park, S. Pellegrino and Perrier. And while the corporate giant peddles many other brands of food, bottled water was the only sector failing in global sales during the first half of the year, down 2.9% because of weakness in the United States and Western Europe.

“I thought we’d never be able to impact sales of bottled water, and all of a sudden it’s really gained momentum,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of advocacy group Food & Water Watch. “I think we’re making real progress.”

The progress has resulted from campaigns launched by consumer advocacy and nonprofit organizations to educate consumers about the massive waste and environmental damage caused by plastic bottles. According to Food & Water Watch, people are wising up to the environmental costs of bottled water: production consumes energy and emits toxic chemicals; transportation guzzles oil, generating pollution; and disposal amounts to littering, with 86% of all bottles put in the garbage instead of the recycling.

The figures are a welcomed departure from last year when bottled water ranked America’s third most popular beverage (followed by soda and milk) with sales exploding 59% from 2003 to 2008, making it one of the fastest-growing beverages. Surveys show 70% of consumers drink bottled water.

Americans drank 8.7 billion gallons of bottled water last year, compared with 8.8 billion in 2007, according to consulting firm Beverage Marketing Corp. This is the first decline this decade.

Image: elNico

Here is another good argument for prefab versus towers.

In southwest Florida, a 32-story, 200-unit condo building has a single tenant, the Vangelakos family of New Jersey, which purchased their $430,000 unit four years ago in the midst of the Fort Myers housing explosion.

According to a report by the Associated Press, the recession has made it tough to be neighborly at the building when there are no neighbors. The family of five is the sole occupier of the Oasis Tower One. When they visit to escape the cold back home, they have their run of the pool, game room and gym, but it’s sometimes scary to be alone in the often darkened tower.

This is not what Victor Vangelakos banked on. The 45-year-old fire captain made a $10,000 down payment and watched an empty lot become the home of an upscale development. But as the report points out, the massive structure, one of many going dark in Florida, symbolizes the foreclosure crisis as an increasing number of residents look for jobs or ways to cut costs.

“The future was going to be southwest Florida,” Vangelakos told A.P., adding he planned to retire and live permanently in the condo.

Apparently, most of the other tenants opted not to close on their contracts. Those that did have transferred to an adjacent building owned by the same company. That building actually has tenants so you aren’t so alone. But Vangelakos says his mortgage lender won’t let him do the same.

“It’s a beautiful building,” said attorney, John Ewing, who is representing 27 others who made deposits on units. “The problem is, it’s a very lonely building.”

Ewing adds that it seems time froze at the building six months ago when the last person signed-in at the front desk located in the lobby.

Will hungry developers keep building towers in the Cape Coral-Fort Myers metropolitan area despite deserted buildings like this one and others? Lee County has some suffered some of the nation’s worst economic stress from foreclosures, unemployment and bankruptcies, according to The Associated Press’ monthly analysis of more than 3,100 U.S. counties.

Perhaps Vegas is next.

Image: Tim Patterson

As the recession cuts deeper into the profits of big food companies, many brands are downsizing their portions in a bid to cut costs. In some cases, they are also downgrading their ingredients. But as chocolate giant Cadbury is discovering – you mess with your iconic brands at your peril.

Cadbury’s current advertising campaign involves eyebrow gymnastics from two children. Meanwhile, it has made some eyebrow-raising changes to the formulation of its popular Dairy Milk block in Australia and New Zealand. The new chocolate block is smaller, contains fewer cocoa solids (you know, the part that actually makes it chocolate) and it contains environmentally destructive palm oil. It now finds itself at the centre of a PR storm, having incurred the wrath of shoppers, foodies and environmentalists alike. Whittakers, a rival chocolate brand in New Zealand, is taking advantage of the furore with this comparative shopping ad.

The first change is simple – the 250g block now weighs just 200g. The packaging has been redesigned and the squares of chocolate shrunken so the block actually appears to be the same size. Chocolate lovers are furious at the resizing and the fact that the price has not dropped accordingly and have formed a protest site, at choclovers.org, and have been spreading the message via Twitter and a Facebook protest group. Cadbury says in the FAQ on its website (Australia and New Zealand) that it has actually reduced the wholesale price but it’s up to retailers whether to pass it on.

Product resizing is annoying for consumers but nothing new – and given that people eat more when the serving sizes are bigger, it might not be such a bad thing for the public health. It’s the second change that is more concerning from an environmentalist’s point of view.

Cadbury has reduced the amount of cocoa solids from 26% to 21% and added nasty vegetable fats – specifically palm oil – to compensate. The company claims that it’s done this, not to save costs as you might think, but to improve the customer experience.

We have done this for a number of reasons. Primarily it is because our consumers have been telling us that we could improve their enjoyment of our chocolate by making it slightly softer to bite. Vegetable fat helps deliver this softness whilst at the same time maintaining our chocolate’s great taste.

As a chocolate lover myself, I’m not so credulous that I believe that Cadbury has done this for my benefit. I know a bit about food and chocolate and there is no doubt that palm oil is a poor substitute for the real thing. I am pretty sure most chocolate fans would feel the same way – despite what Cadbury’s “independent research” might show. I’m probably not their market, though – I tend to go for more quality brands such as Green & Black’s, the organic brand now owned by Cadbury, and Lindt.

However, there are millions of people who do buy Cadbury chocolate so the formulation of their products is part of a bigger problem. The forests of southeast Asia have been ravaged by deforestation, spelling disaster for wildlife such as orangutans and tigers and for the climate. Palm oil production is one of the leading causes of this – both historically and currently.

The main customers of palm oil are food manufacturers looking for cheap fats – though demand is also rising because of its utility as a biofuel. The rainforest of the Congo could be next, with China set to establish a giant palm oil plantation in the African country. It is ironic that Cadbury’s last big advertising campaign involved a gorilla.

Cadbury claims:

We are Board members of the RSPO [Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil] and purchase Green Palm certificates that independently certify the fact that the palm oil we purchase has come from sustainable sources.

The RSPO has a set of standards, its Principles & Criteria, that define practices for sustainable palm oil production. These include the use of appropriate best practices by growers and millers, the responsible development of new plantings and environmental responsibility and the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity.

All well and good, except that the RSPO is widely regarded as greenwash – members have to do little more than pay a membership fee. Even the bible for big business, the Wall Street Journal reports that it’s a problem. The Green Palm Certificates, meanwhile, allow backers to invest in sustainable production without necessarily using the product. Even if Cadbury could be certain that it is buying palm oil from sustainable sources, which is dubious, it is still creating new demand for palm oil. Replacing existing palm oil for a ’sustainable’ alternative is one thing, but it does not help matters if it is additional consumption.

No one seems convinced – and the backlash is huge. In most recent news, the Auckland Zoo has stopped stocking Cadbury, in the name of the orangutans.

Image via Treehugger

Some people have an incredibly creative ability to make a pretty sweet lemonade out of very, very rotten lemons. What I mean is this: I live in northern Arizona, and much of our electricity comes from coal power plants on Navajo and Hopi land. Not cool. Not a sustainable industry or healthy for the residents. But that’s another story. This story is about turning coal burning’s poisonous by-product into homes.

Navajo Flexcrete is a small, innovative company, based out of the tiny town of Page, Ariz. Using the extremely toxic fly ash (think arsenic, lead, barium and mercury) from the local coal plant, it’s harvested, saturated with water and used as a concrete-like building material.

Now wait, you’re thinking, won’t this make a toxic building? Yes and no.

I spoke with Ed Dunn, an ecological builder who uses Navajo Flexcrete, and he says that during the construction process, builders need to use a particulate mask (just as they use when cutting wood or regular concrete block), because cutting or drilling the Flexcrete blocks will let out some toxic powders, but once the block is sealed and painted, there is no off-gassing and the product is stable and safe. Flexcrete has an R-factor of 35, providing excellent insulation, perfectly suited for homes utilizing passive solar.

Granted, this is not the most perfect of ecological home-building products, but when you consider the current situation of the coal plant’s fly ash being dumped into a side canyon of beautiful Lake Powell, wouldn’t it be better used to make well insulated homes that are suited for the extreme heat and cold of the high northern Arizona desert?

And I’m sure the creators of Navajo Flexcrete don’t want to perpetuate the dirty coal business in order to have more fly ash for their product – they are simply using the toxic waste that’s already there and safely turning it into homes.

Alchemy, if you ask me.

Image: ASU

Soy: It’s everywhere. It’s eaten in copious amounts by bodybuilders, as a meat substitute by vegans and vegetarians, and unwittingly in a wide variety of processed foods by most people.

We’ve been told that soy is good for us and the fact of lower incidences of cancer and heart disease in Asian populations is cited as proof. The truth is there is no historical precedent for the amount of soy we consume in modern processed foods. Though soy did originate in Asia, it is used sparingly in Asian cuisines and more often in its traditional forms, like miso, tofu, natto, and tempeh.

According to the United Soybean Board’s own website, soy protein (processed soy) serves as a functional ingredient in the following foods and for the following applications:

Baked Goods – used to hold moisture, extend shelf life, improve texture and mouthfeel, and improve manufacturing, handling, and machine ability.

Breakfast Cereals – used to boost protein value and quantity.

Pasta – to boost nutritive value, especially in school lunches.

Beverages and Toppings – to whiten coffee creamers, emulsify, provide texture, and add protein content.

Meat, Poultry and Fish Products – to enhance moisture holding, texture, cohesion, yield, shelf life, and nutrition.

Dairy-Type Products (scary in itself) – soy protein lowers cost, improves nutrition and reduces allergenic response.

Here’s a quote from the Soybean Board website: “Processed and whole meat products can be improved by adding soy protein, which provides the product flexibility and cost stability consumers demand.”

Now, from the list of uses above and this quote, it looks to me like soy protein is a mighty functional food for the food processing industry. How did so many consumers become convinced that soy protein is a functional food for them?

Nearly 60 percent of the foods sold in supermarkets and natural food stores contain soy. Much of this is disguised in cookies, crackers, burgers and other meat products. It’s also a main ingredient in protein bars, meat substitutes, and any number of other foods.

Why is the food industry putting soy in everything?

If we look at how soy protein is made, it might give you some idea.

After soy vegetable oil is made, there is a lot of soybean meal left over. This defatted soybean meal is mixed with an alkaline solution to remove the fiber, and then washed in an acid solution to separate out the protein. The protein curds are then dipped into another alkaline solution and spray-dried at extremely high temperatures. Then it is spun into protein fibers using textile industry technology.

The food industry has figured out a way to utilize a highly processed industrial byproduct by putting it in food to extend shelf life, yield, and nutritional content. And then they’ve funded a lot of studies and spent a lot of advertising dollars to convince us that this substance is good for us.

You’ve seen some of the conflicting research (summarized below). You’ll have to decide for yourself which studies you believe and what dietary decisions are right for you.

Personally, I’m sticking to real food as close to its natural state as possible and avoiding processed foods of all types. And when I eat soy, it will be in small quantities in its traditional forms. Check back on Friday for a recipe using tempeh, a fermented soy product that originated in Indonesia.

Here is a brief summary of the claims made on either side of the bean pod along with some links to help you do your own research. The truth usually lies somewhere in between.

The “Soy is good!” camp: Soy contains isoflavones that prevent cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis and more. Soy’s phytochemicals protect against heart disease. Men who drink two servings of soymilk every day are 70% less likely to develop prostate cancer. Soy is a low fat form of protein. Soy lowers bad cholesterol. Soy prevents breast cancer. Soy builds strong bones.

The “Soy is bad!” camp: Soy doesn’t lower cholesterol as much as we first thought. The estrogens in soy can lead to breast cancer. Soy can decrease sperm count and libido. Soy can prevent ovulation. Soy can cause thyroid problems, constipation and other digestive problems. Soy is a common food allergy.

Further reading:

Mothering

Soybean Board

Woman to Woman

Steady Health

Images: Obesityhelp

Governments let companies pay to pollute. Imagine if you could pay companies not to pollute?

Actually, you can. All you need is a web connection and a credit card.

Carbon trading is a big part of how rich countries are attempting to meet their targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The basic idea is that governments allocate or sell a limited number of permits to pollute. Companies can sell the permits, so although they can pay to pollute, they have a financial incentive to innovate and cut their emissions.

Ideas like this will become increasingly important. The United States does not yet have a carbon trading scheme in place but it’s considered likely that this will change after Barack Obama becomes President. On a lesser scale, Australia is moving in a similar direction since belatedly signing the Kyoto Protocol under its new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.

Yet even without the participation of the U.S., the world market in greenhouse gases is already worth $48.26 billion. The European Union carbon trading market is one of the biggest components.

The system is far from perfect – the EU has handed out too many permits, it won’t start charging for them until 2013, and the price of carbon is low. The scheme has not been a disaster but it’s fair to say the scheme is not a driver of massive environmental change right now.

A small group of UK environmentalists have come up with an ingenious plan to speed things up.

EU rules specifically allow individuals to participate in carbon trading. That’s where you come in. For the cost of a membership fee, an organization called Sandbag will buy permits on your behalf and cancel them! The fewer permits in the system, the less pollution is permitted.

Sandbag has loads more information on its website about who they are and how this works. They are a member of the Guardian Environment Network, so they’ve been vetted by The Guardian.

I often feel that arcane economic levers such as carbon trading are the domain of pointy-headed policy wonks. This is such an imaginative response to it and one that puts the power back in our hands. I want and need a clean planet and I’m prepared to pay for it. Now I can.

Image: Señor Codo

Over at the Dancing Rabbit eco-village, the Milkweed Mercantile is showing how to turn a healthy profit without taking liberties with your environmental principles (as we recently reported). We’ve been lucky enough to chat to founder Alline Anderson – and here’s what she had to say about her business model, her seasonal routines and the concepts of “ecoluxe” and sustainability.

Ecosalon: What do you think are the dangers for anyone setting up an eco-friendly business using the traditional American business model?

Alline: To me, the traditional American business model, where bigger is better, really has no place in the eco-friendly business world. If a business is dependent upon constant growth, where do sustainability, re-use, and thoughtful consumption fit in? Can bigger really be sustainable? And how much is enough? Business leaders must be willing to stand up and say “we’re big enough, we don’t need total world domination, let’s focus on what we do, and do it well.”

Many eco-friendly businesses are crafting an exciting new business paradigm. We’re really excited here at the Mercantile to be creating a life where our work and play are closely intertwined. The café (when it opens) will be a place where the community gathers. We’ll purchase foodstuffs from our neighbors and from around the Midwest, encouraging more organic farming and food production. Additionally, our guests are kindred spirits who are interested in learning about our way of life, and how to encourage eco changes in their home communities. Like a pebble dropped in a pond, we hope the ripple effect reaches those who are ready and searching for what we have to offer.

It has been fascinating to watch “green” businesses become huge and successful only to sell out to big corporations. I find it very disappointing, but cannot begin to understand how overwhelming a large, successful business would be to run. I turn instead to the businesses involved in Co-op America and Social Venture Network. They are incredibly inspirational to me ““ most are dedicated to the Triple Bottom Line of People, Planet, Profit. If my staff and I can earn a living doing what we love, be respectful and take good care of each other, and contribute in a meaningful way to our community, well, that really feels like success to me.

Ecosalon: You’re clearly a passionate advocate for using local, seasonal produce. In what ways can you see the seasons affecting the way the business runs?

Alline: My favorite topic! Here in Missouri there is a definite change of seasons. I’ve been studying wildcrafting  (the practice of harvesting uncultivated plants from their natural, or “wild” habitat), nosing through old Euell Givens and Edna Lewis books. The woods here on the Dancing Rabbit Land Trust are filled with edibles if one knows what to look for. This spring I experimented with violet jelly (tastes just like spring) and salads using the flowers and beautiful heart-shaped violet leaves. Hunting for morel mushrooms is like an accidental treasure hunt. This year, as a novice, I only found a single mushroom, yet the time spent traipsing about in the sun-dappled woods was lovely. We also have maple trees that we tap for syrup, which is a delight to pull out on a dark wintry morning. Summer has its own treats, as does fall. Just yesterday our neighbors brought some small native persimmons to dinner. I had never tasted anything like them ““ they were absolutely extraordinary. I look forward to working all of these into the Mercantile menu.

The birds here are also seasonal. In the spring the male goldfinches turn a blinding yellow, and the mornings are filled with the songs of randy cardinals, robins, and house wrens. There are bird nests all over the village, and we all keep track of when each batch of chicks fledge. We’re near enough to the Mississippi River that we see a lot of migrating geese, ducks, and swans overhead. It’s fun to be able to drop everything and run outside when we hear that honking sound in the distance, and marvel at the hundreds of birds flying by. One of our B&B rooms is called The Rachel Carson “Sense of Wonder” Room; I hope that we can share our sense of wonder with our guests.

Another goal is to introduce people to the joys of startlingly fresh local produce. Most of us, even if we were blindfolded and placed in a sensory deprivation tank, would be able to tell the difference between a tomato fresh from the garden and one from the grocery store, which was picked while not-quite-ripe and trucked without mercy across the country. Beyond tomatoes, there is a whole world of flavor out there that is waiting. For example, one of my favorite things to do is show friends what Brussels sprouts on the stalk look like ““ talk about beautiful! Then I have them taste some Brussels sprouts which have been roasted with a dollop of good olive oil and a sprinkle of sea salt. We’re looking to change lives, attitudes and maybe even habits. Eating locally is one of the best things we can do for ourselves and for the planet.

Ecosalon: In your own words, “sustainability is not about deprivation”. Do you think there is still a lot of prejudiced resistance to the “eco-luxe” concept of living (where top-quality living and eco-friendliness go hand in hand)?

Alline: I’m not sure I embrace the concept of eco-luxe. One can have an incredibly comfortable life and still be sustainable. Size and scale are really important considerations. How sustainable are $500 organic wool sweaters, 10,000 square foot houses (even if they’re powered with renewable energy) and single occupancy Priuses? How much more would each of us enjoy our lives if we could work one less day a week? We might not have as much money, but what really makes us happy? I am not advocating buying the cheapest stuff we can find ““ I believe it is our responsibility to be thoughtful, informed consumers. I fully support buying Fair Trade, Union, organic, socially-responsible products. But even green products come with a cost other than the price tag. I’d like to encourage people to think about what they are trading to have the newest, coolest, hottest items, green or not.

Designers in home and fashion are now promoting lots of eco fabrics and materials. I love that this is happening ““ I am excited by the shift from a petroleum-based system to one that utilizes more renewable materials. But I sometimes worry that the point is being missed. For example, if one has a perfectly serviceable kitchen, are you helping the earth or merely your ego by ripping out the floor and replacing it with eco-cool cork or bamboo? I fear that green may be perceived as a trend, only to be discarded when the next thing comes along. I’m hoping that we can help consumers understand the ideas and ethics behind sustainability, to learn to differentiate green from green-washing, and to evaluate the difference from true need and superficial want.

In some circles the idea of sustainability still carries a perception of a “granola eating, Grateful Dead listening, Birkenstock wearing, kumbaya singing” lifestyle. Fortunately that stereotype is quickly becoming outdated and we are all finding more common ground than we’re being led to believe exists. Parents who are concerned about the health of their families become ardent environmentalists, people of faith find correlations between their religions and earth stewardship, folks on a budget see the benefits of a simpler life. We each come to our own truths on our own paths. Which is as it should be ““ no one here at the Mercantile claims to hold the keys to an ecological life; we’re just enjoying the heck out of finding the answers.

Many thanks for your time, Alline – and we wish the Milkweed Mercantile all the success it deserves! You can learn more about supporting the Milkweed Mercantile here.

Image: Purple milkweed – by tlindenbaum