This train is bound for a greener planet. The brainchild of Bob Wolf of We Are the World Radio Simulcast fame, the Green Train will depart from Portland in April and pass through various parts of the country during a six-week whistle stop tour featuring musicians, actors, writers and artists. The final stop is Washington D.C. where it will spread the message: Drop your political and religious differences and “dig in” by volunteering for Mother Earth.

“The Green Train is an old fashioned way to deliver a new and simple message,” says Wolf, who personally phoned radio stations and TV networks across the globe to ask that they play We Are the World. “This will be a world’s fair themed train carrying exhibits and simple solutions to living green in a modern world.”

The train’s 20-plus cars and two flatbed acoustical stages will make its way across the map powered by biodiesel and solar energy during the 28-state tour through the West Coast, the Midwest and South before winding up in the East. A European trek is planned for 2011.

We re told all the names of performers will be released soon, but we already know Merle Haggard is on board.

Can they make green inroads by taking their art on the road? Organizers banding the talent together argue if only two percent of the population of the world got involved, there would be more than 130 million simultaneous positive acts and environmental projects for improving our world. This would show our children how people can have a positive impact on the planet.

“It’s not rocket science, just re-educating ourselves and finally realizing there is a major problem and it’s time to fix it,” they say.

Want to get on board by hopping on the train and riding or helping behind the scenes? Go to the site and learn more about the mission.

Images: Green Train Global

Facebook is the second largest website in the US and the default social network of many environmental activists, where they (ok, we) go to develop supportive networks, raise awareness and funds for good causes. It’s also a platform for some excellent, environmental-fundraising games like Lil’ Green Patch (acquired by social games company Playdom in 2009) and Sea Garden (a MobScience game).

Obviously the environmental community, on and off Facebook, felt betrayed when the social media leader, in late January, announced its plans to build a data center in Prineville, Oregon that will be contrarily LEED-gold certified, yet run on coal power.

Yes, coal – that’s lump in your stocking, fine particles in the air and lungs, carbon dioxide-emitting coal.

Facebook’s data center electricity provider in Oregon will be PacifiCorp., a utility that is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, and generates most of its power from coal according to reports by SearchDataCenter.

The information and communications technology sector, according to Gartner research, is already as bad as and quickly surpassing the aviation industry in terms of global CO2 emissions. Why would Facebook – which has enjoyed a reputation as a game changer, and innovator – make the ICT sector worse, by going with the fuel that the Natural Resources Defense Council identifies as a top source of mercury pollution in the U.S., and a health threat to all who live near coal power plants?

End users do like free, or ad-sponsored Facebook. And coal power remains cheaper than cleaner alternatives like natural gas, or hydroelectric power (which has its own problems including damaging fish populations and rivers). But Facebook has said in a series of interviews that it focused on building an efficient data center, rather than the source of power it will use. We’re surprised an industry leader thought one good thing was good enough.

Is it unreasonable to ask Facebook to offer its services free to end users, but to buy more expensive, green power? Or, given their lack of environmental responsibility on this one, would you be willing to abandon your Facebook profile entirely?

Basic Reading:

“Criticism from Greenpeace and Change.org has attracted national attention within the information technology industry, catching Facebook off guard. ‘This has been a big learning experience for us,’ said Facebook spokeswoman Kathleen Loughlin. ‘We’re six years old. We’ve never owned a data center before. We’ve never owned land before…The energy source is one factor,’ Loughlin said, ‘but how we’re going to use that energy is another equally important, if not more important, factor to consider.’” A news feature by Mike Rogoway for The Oregonian

“After having rented out data center space in Silicon Valley and elsewhere for years, Facebook is now building its own data center in scenic Prineville, located in central Oregon. It’s a symbolic step for the company, which started out on an $80/month shared server just under six years ago.” – An InsideFacebook article detailing some of the efficient features planned for the company’s new data center

“For the first time Facebook will have its own facility but unlike Google or Microsoft, which both built data centers in the same area running off hydroelectric power, Facebook’s facility will be powered by dirty coal…” - An anti-coal petition from Change.org to Facebook’s CEO, with about 8,000 signatures as of Feb. 25, 2010

“The only truly green data centers are the ones running on renewable energy…Given the massive amounts of electricity that even energy-efficient data centers consume to run computers, backup power units, and power related cooling equipment, the last thing we need to be doing is building them in places where they are increasing demand for dirty coal-fired power.” – GreenPeace press officer Daniel Kessler via a HuffingtonPost op-ed

Further Resources:

“Coal accounts for a fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions worldwide,” reported in the New York Times‘ Green Inc. blog

A story on the waste problems created by coal power plants in B’More Green

A round-up of some of the green IT practices and technologies used by tech giants including Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and Facebook from Earth2Tech

Ironically, last April, Intel called for users to submit ideas via Facebook video submission about How to Green Data Centers, via Treehugger

A “clean coal” debunking site ThisIsReality.org that includes a public service announcement ad created by the Coen brothers

Image: Nick Perla

Editor’s note: This is the latest installment of EcoMeme, a column featuring eco news, tech and trends by EcoSalon writer and columnist Lora Kolodny.

Is space worth it?

Another year, another whirl of astronautical triumphs and failures, all at the taxpayer’s expense. With environmental problems already testing us to our limits, do we really need to go in search of the mysteries of the universe?

Not Worth It

Space eats money. The technical challenges of space exploration, particularly the manned variety, are such that any extraterrestrial venture is fabulously expensive. NASA’s 2007 budget? $16 billion. Accompanying this massive outlay is the failure rate. Space is the most hostile environment we know of – yet we’re launching super-expensive machinery into it, hoping everything will be fine. All too often, it isn’t. India has recently lost an £80m lunar probe. NASA lost both its Mars Surveyor spacecraft in 1998, at a cost of $125m. It’s a bottomless black hole. Why keep trying to fill it?

Space Can’t Solve Our Problems. “Spread humanity into space” goes the argument, but when only the richest reach the stars, it’s surely a nonsense idea. How exactly does this help our worsening overpopulation problem? It makes sense in the long run – but first things first, we have a planet to save.

Space Is Too Damn Big. The number of discovered exoplanets (”those outside the solar system”) now exceeds 400, with more popping into view every month. But in a practical sense, this is meaningless. They’re just too far away to ever go there. Not for nothing is space described as the “final frontier”: the distances are impossibly vast. When the best imagined speed to the nearest star results in a century’s travel-time (one way), you can be sure E.T. won’t be popping by for candy anytime soon.

Worth It

Space Is A Bargain. The work that NASA did with its relatively paltry $19b budget in 2009 is simply amazing. Sound like a lot? Compare it with the cost of the Iraq War ($10b a month) or GDP ($13 trillion+). Considering how tough it is to work in space, it’s terrific value for money. And the space program isn’t a drain – it generates revenue, creates jobs and stimulates many industries. Space exploration is investment at home. Without it, many technologies we take for granted probably wouldn’t exist. (Not Velcro – that’s a myth).

Space Is How We Fix Our Own Planet. Remember the incredible image of Earth-rise (shown below), described by photographer Galen Rowell as “the most influential environmental photograph ever taken”? That’s a gift the space program has bestowed upon us – ecological self-awareness. We know how fragile our world is because we can see it, bright and alive against the backdrop of the most profound emptiness we know. The help to our planet is technological, too: For example, you may have heard of a little invention developed for spacecraft called solar panels.

We Are Too Small. In July 1994, the remnants of comet Shoemaker-Levy smacked into Jupiter. Some of the holes left in its atmosphere were bigger than the Earth. Forget cheesy Bruce Willis films: it’s scientific fact that we’re a celestial sitting duck and it’s only a matter of time. It’s true we can’t move entire populations, but we can colonize other worlds (in theory) and as a species, give ourselves a fighting chance. Yet it’s not just raw survival instinct that should propel us towards the stars – it’s the fact that we’re human, and it’s what we do. We’re pioneers. It’s why we left the trees, why we crossed the oceans, how the proverbial West was won. Without exploration, we stagnate. Exploring space is how we can remain ourselves.

Images: ‘J’, Bill Anders

There is a mind-boggling array of branded waters on the market. The bottles come in all shapes and sizes, from the square Fiji option, with its dubious political connections, to the diminutive pink Evian vessel. It all adds up to a huge headache for the environment, which is why giving up bottled water should be a high priority for anyone aspiring to be green.

But not all plastic water bottles are eco-enemies. Now, a new type of container is entering the fray and it might just make tap water fashionable again. Could the so-called Water Bobble be a new superhero in the water wars?

I came across the Water Bobble via the Luxist and I must admit I’m completely smitten. It has a cute jelly-bean shape, comes in six jewel colors, and best of all, it has a carbon filter to purify the water that comes out of the tap. It launched just a few weeks ago and I can imagine it being a big hit this summer!

I’m lucky enough to live in San Francisco, where the tap water is good quality, but that’s not the case for everyone. More than 20% of the US water treatment systems have violated the Safe Drinking Water Act in the past five years, according to the New York Times. At just $9.95, the Water Bobble could be a stylish solution to satisfy both eco-concerns and fears over water quality.

These glass bottles in a colorful silicon sleeve from Lifefactory are also pretty cute, although they don’t have a nifty carbon filter attached. I’m probably less likely to carry glass around when I’m on the move but it’s an elegant solution for chilling water at home. Glass is eco-friendly and free of toxins and the wide mouth makes it easy to add ice, mint leaves or slices of lemon. Lifefactory make baby bottles as well.

Finally, if it’s fizzy water or sweet sodas that you crave, I highly recommend the Soda Stream. It is a small machine that sits on your counter top and lets you carbonate water out of the tap. There are a variety of flavors of syrup – from cola to root beer – but in our house we mainly use it for water as it’s healthier that way. It doesn’t use electricity and it comes with two reusable plastic bottles and a refillable carbon cylinder so it produces zero waste (except maybe for empty syrup containers, which can be recycled). I gave my husband one for Christmas and he declared it to be the best Christmas present he’s received since he was a kid. It’s green and definitely fun to use!

One by one, the letters went up, until they made a rather bizarre request: SAVE THE POOD. But supporters of Hollywood’s iconic sign needn’t worry that it has been taken over for some kind of toilet-themed guerilla ad campaign – the ultimate message of “Save the Peak” is just a temporary plea for help to protect the mountain that this Los Angeles landmark stands on.

The Save the Cahuenga Peak movement aims to raise $13 million by April 14th to raise the $13 million needed to buy the land from Fox River Financial Resources, a developer that reportedly plans to build mansions on land adjacent to the sign.

As HOLLYWOOD gave way to messages like “SALLYWOOD” and “SAVE THE PEOK”, the San Francisco-based Trust for Public Land got just what they wanted: attention. The nonprofit group has already raised more than half the money needed to buy the land, with the sign slated to come down on Tuesday, February 16th.

This isn’t the first time the Hollywood sign has been hijacked for a cause – noble or not. In 1976, the sign briefly read “HOLLYWEED” thanks to prankster Danny Finegood’s desire to celebrate a relaxation in California’s marijuana laws, and it has also read “HOLYWOOD”, “OLLYWOOD” and “JOLLYGOOD” at various points over the last few decades.

The cause may be green, but what about the stunt itself? According to Fast Company, the Trust for Public Land doesn’t plan to recycle the thousands of yards of mesh material used to cover the sign, though they do say it will go back to the city. Used for five days, the material reportedly came with a price tag in the “high five figures”.

Images: SaveHollywoodland.org, Fast Company, LA Attractions

Musicians have been pleading for people to pay attention to the environment ever since I was a child. When I think back to the era of these songs it’s shameful that we haven’t come further. In the 70s we bought tiny cars, turned off lights when we left the room, put on sweaters, and kept the heat at 68 degrees. After two decades of amnesia we arrive in the now where all those old ideas seem new again – and necessary.

Joni Mitchell
Big Yellow Taxi

“They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.”

Beach Boys
Don’t Go Near the Water

Jackson Brown
Doctor My Eyes

“People go just where they will;
I never noticed them until
I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems.”

Jethro Tull
Wond’ring Again

“There’s the stillness of death on a deathly, unliving sea,
And the motor car magical world long since ceased to be.”

Kansas
Death of Mother Nature Suite

“Once she ruled the earth with love and wisdom;
But we were much too smart to live her way;
With greed and lust we tried to rise above her.”

John Cougar Mellencamp
Rain on the Scarecrow

“Rain on the scarecrow, blood on the plow;
This land fed a nation, this land made me proud.”

The Pretenders
My City Was Gone

“The farms of Ohio had been replaced by shopping malls.”

Rush
The Trees

“And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.”

Blue Oyster Cult
Godzilla

“History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man.”

James Taylor
Traffic Jam

“Damn this traffic jam!”

Image: lanuiop

Cheese is my weakness. Camembert and cheddar, stilton and swiss, mozzarella and mascarpone, gouda and goat’s cheese, feta and fresh quark – I love them all. And while it may not be great for my waistline or as environmentally pure as organic lentils, at least I can eat it knowing that it’s a more eco-friendly choice than, say, tucking into a juicy slab of steak. Or can I?

My vegetarian friends certainly seem to think so – many of them seem to subsist on cheese. Trust me, I can understand why – it’s an easy source of protein, calcium, vitamin B12 and other nutrients that omnivores typically get from meat. It’s easier than boiling up lentils from scratch and, let’s face it, for most people cheese just plain tastes good.

These same vegetarians might feel confident, or even a little smug, that they are making good dietary and green lifestyle choices. After all, going vegetarian is better for your health, the welfare of animals and the environment. Isn’t it?

Maybe not. Actually, cheese is pretty much just as bad as meat on all counts. Here’s why.

1. Animals die.

You are drinking the milk of the cow rather than eating its flesh, but all the same animals die. Maybe you already know that most cheese is made with animal rennet and you take care to buy vegetarian cheese. Sorry, but you’re not off the hook!

How do you think the mother cow (or sheep or goat) gets milk? She has babies and since after six months her milk production declines, she needs to keep having babies. What do you think happens to the bull calves? They get killed. And since dairy cattle and beef cattle are generally different breeds and there’s little value in raising the male offspring of dairy cows for meat, this happens when they are still babies.

Often, the calves are slaughtered immediately or just left to die, then added to the farm’s compost heap. Otherwise they may be raised for veal, which is usually a cruel process where they are kept in a confinement in semi-darkness and denied proper food, so their flesh stays white.

However, there are varieties of veal that are more humanely raised, allowing the calves to stay with their mothers and eat grass. Surely the ethically consistent position is either to cut out meat and dairy, or to eat the “humane” veal along with your dairy? Oh and by the way, mama cow will likely only live until she is five to seven years old – instead of the 20 years that is her natural lifespan.

2. Animal cruelty.

Most EcoSalon readers will be familiar with concentrated animal feedlot operations or CAFOs. These factory farms are not just prevalent in the rearing of meat animals but in the dairy industry, as well. The book The Ethics of What We Eat by Peter Singer and Jim Mason cites a Cornell University Study predicting the number of dairy farms in the United States to decline from 105,000 in 2000 to 16,000 in 2020, while the number of cows per farm and the total milk production both increase.

Many cows are confined to a single stall where they are fed and milked for a single year and if they do get to move outside, it’s usually on a dirt lot rather than on pasture.

The modern dairy cow produces three times more milk than its counterpart from 50 years ago, as a result of breeding, and many cows in the United States are injected with bovine somatotrophin (BST), a genetically engineered growth hormone banned in Canada and the European Union. This boosts milk production by 10% but the site of the injection can become swollen and tender and the injections can increase problems with mastitis, a painful udder infection that affects one in six dairy cows in the US.

The natural lifespan of a cow is 20 years but most dairy cows are killed between five and seven years because they cannot withstand the unnaturally high rate of milk production. By “killed”, I don’t mean euthanised – the process of dealing with “downed” animals involves dragging and winching them by the hoof with a tractor and taking them to a truck to deliver it to the slaughterhouse.

3.  Cheese has a huge environmental impact.

Slate had a great article on the environmental impact of cheese, just before Christmas. The truth is that rearing dairy cows or goats is a carbon-intensive process – and for some reason, sheep are even worse. They need to be fed and most dairy cattle are not exclusively grass fed, so that requires grain to be grown and shipped in. If they are kept in CAFOs, there is a huge manure problem that can pollute local waterways. (If the untreated waste doesn’t go directly into streams and rivers, it’s sprayed onto fields through an irrigation system, but often in quantities too great for the soil to absorb, and then in heavy rain it runs off into the creeks).

According to a local environmental group in Michigan, Lake Erie’s new “dead zone” is linked to runoff from livestock waste. Finally, there’s a problem that sounds like a joke but really isn’t – dairy animals are ruminants that fart and burp a lot of greenhouse gases, specifically methane. Scientists are working on reducing this problem by improving the diets of cattle, but it’s a long haul. All this is just to get the milk – to get cheese, it requires further processing and storage at just the right temperature.

4. Cheese isn’t healthy.

I know many people who go vegetarian – or simply cut out red meat – for health reasons. Yet they eat cheese. This makes no sense to me. In what universe is cheese a health food? I want to move there!

I’ve looked up the nutritional statistics on Fitday.com and generic cheese is 27% fat. A whopping 62% of that is saturated fat, while only 22% is protein. Admittedly you do get a decent serving of calcium with your fat, but there are 84 calories and a heart-stopping 20mg of cholesterol in just one slice.

By contrast, a typical cut of beef compares favourably with 26% protein and 20% fat, of which just 39% is saturated fat. You don’t get so much calcium, but that’s more than compensated for by the fact that 20% of your meal is iron, something many women lack. There is also less cholesterol in beef than cheese.

So pound for pound, beef is healthier than most cheese. Unless of course, you are eating low fat cottage cheese, in which case it’s only 1% fat and 12% protein. But then you could be eating healthier meats as well – lean cuts of beef or lamb, low-fat poultry and fish with healthy oils.

All this is not to make anyone feel guilty. But I do think there is little point in going vegetarian and then making up the shortfall with cheese. Sure, you can eat organic dairy in moderation from small family farms with good environmental and animal welfare practices – such as Straus Family Creamery in Northern California – but you can do the same thing for meat. I know plenty of ethically minded omnivores who eat meat and dairy in moderation and source both with equal care.

I believe if you are going to cut out meat, you need to fully embrace cooking with and eating beans and lentils. There are some great recipes – I am a meat-reducing omnivore myself but one of my favourite all-time recipes is vegan – a Lebanese eggplant moussaka with chickpeas that comes to me via Nigella Lawson.

Free-range and organic eggs are another good source of protein in moderation as well, though caged eggs still account for 98% of US egg production. (In Europe it’s a different story – sales of free-range eggs were due to hit two billion eggs a year in 2009 in the UK, exceeding battery egg sales in value terms, while from next year eggs from battery hens will no longer be sold in German supermarkets). You may want to check out Vanessa’s post on how much protein the human body actually needs.

Images: Joi, fklv, smoodysarah, orinzebest, TheBusyBrain

In 1985, Mary Porter and Alan Isaacs (below) launched a dating service to connect progressive-minded singles in the environmental, vegetarian and animal rights communities. GreenSingles boasts it has matched thousands of globally-conscious members who share  common values and interests.

“Relationships are hard enough, but they are made easier if you share common interests and values, when you ’speak the same language,’ and when you are moving in the same direction,” Isaacs tells me.

Now, 25 years after the singles network was hatched, it’s not just lonely hearts reaching out  for a green connection, but eco minded beings everywhere, through the expedient vehicles of social and ecopolitical networking. They are seeking  knowledge, friendship,  support and action to make a difference.

The Copenhagen Climate Summit showed us setting limits to protect our quality of life on the planet rests in our own hands, not in the hands of the man. Indeed, if the post-Woodstock generation has learned anything it is that real change comes through bucking the corporate stronghold through revolution. It appears a green one is afoot, even if it’s a communication revolution, bonding eco friendly cells one link at a time.

“The connecting and the collaboration can be fueled online but it is only essential if people disconnect from their computer and cell phone screens and take our cause to their neighbors, the streets and city halls,” says Marnie Glickman, founder of Green Change, an online organization building the green movement for peace, justice and democracy.

Glickman doesn’t believe virtual lawn signs make a big difference for the green revolution, and argues she must prioritize her online organizing to effect the kind of change that can save the world.

“One thing we are doing is getting people to consider running for office or to identify good leaders in their communities,” she explains. “We call those who are identified, meet with them and tell them one way we can stop global warming is to replace the bozos who aren’t doing much work themselves.”

Is online green collaborating making inroads for saving the planet’s resources?

“Networking between grassroots organizations, I think, has made them far more effective in sharing best practices and lobbying for change,” observes Keith Gilless, Dean of the College of Natural Resources at the University of California, Berkeley. “Clearly, if people weren’t getting something out of it, they wouldn’t be putting so much into it. The hard part is the same with any search engine; how do you not drown?”

It’s a provocative question, considering the seemingly endless number of entities residing in the great, green abyss. They include social services like Twitter, Myspace , LinkedIn and Facebook as well as political action sites such as World Coolers and Make it Right.

You can befriend and follow any and every green address registered online, an enormous and often exhaustive investment of time for those truly committed to the cause.

Domains like Cooltribe allow for the exchange of ideas, while emerging eco media, such as our own EcoSalon, cover news and trends in areas from wellness to the three R’s of reducing, reusing and recycling. There is a wealth of home improvement industry links, grassroots water and animal protection groups, fair trade vendors, college campus activists, regional farmers markets, green moms, fashionistas, biodiesel fuel resources, hippies sharing winter solstice rituals – even celebs like Brad Pitt, Daryl Hannah and Adrian Grenier.

Gilless, who has seen the College of Natural Resources triple in size at Berkeley since he first started there 26 years ago, admittedly went kicking and screaming into cyberspace, but now like many of his generation, finds it to be indispensable in educating the school’s 1900 environmental studies undergrads and 400 graduate students.

“We make extensive use of the web in teaching now, if only because it is so much cheaper than photocopying, and from the standpoint of the environment, a lot better than photocopying,” says the dean, who set up a site for connecting students, faculty and alumni this year and watched it spread like wildfire. “In terms of delivering materials and accessing scientific literature, it is very important. ”

But as with most movements, a green revolution comes down to relationship building, something the prophetic founders of Green Singles sensed back in ‘85 with the idealized notion that love is the answer. Find a mate who cares as much as you do and team up for action.

“There is strength in numbers,” says matchmaker Isaacs. “We need to show a united front in order to save the planet.”

Researchers at U.C. Davis are trying to connect the dots leading to 10 autism clusters in California. One theory is that those parents are using certain hazardous household products, exposing their kids to dangers linked to the neuro-developmental disorder that usually surfaces by the time a child turns three.

According to the Contra Costa Times and other news sources reporting the findings, the study authors don’t attribute the cases to a toxic waste plant or other widespread polluter, but rather to household items like cleaners or landscaping products.

The report released by the University this week says the clusters show autism rates nearly twice the amount of ones in surrounding areas, including three in the Bay Area: Parts of Redwood City, San Carlos and Belmong; Parts of Santa Clara and Sunnyvale; Western San Francisco. No clusters were found in the East Bay.

Other clusters are in Southern California and the Central Valley. And one San Diego cluster was found to have rates of 61.2 per 10,000 births, compared with 27.1 per 10,000 births in the surrounding region. The researchers said the study is the first one looking at the geography of autism births in the state to learn of local sections of elevated environmental risk.

In producing the study, which was published online in the journal Autism Research, the scientists looked at nearly all of the 2.5 million births recorded in California from 1996 to 2000. The report says some 10,000 children born during that period were later diagnosed with autism.

The scientists who conducted the study are now conducting two additional studies examining the environmental causes of autism, and plan to collect dust samples from the homes of 1,300 families to see if common chemicals are the culprits.

Main Image: Mercury News

The Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas is a gadget geek’s dream date and the source of many tech news “leaks,” debuts and reviews. So why were green issues apparently under wraps as the world’s biggest tech executives made early keynote speeches there, on the mainstage of the trendsetting tradeshow, Wednesday?

Nobody was asking – or so it seemed – green questions, discussing environmental issues or highlighting eco-friendly features of the technologies on display. Not live, on blogs or in broadcasts. And certainly not in detail.

Microsoft executives, for example, hyped their gaming projects for 2010 including the release of a “prequel” game Halo: Reach, part of the wildly popular Halo franchise. But they didn’t say how many physical copies of the game they expected to manufacture, and if these included recyclable components.

Earlier, CNN syndicated a feature story by Ben Parr of Mashable predicting TV on computers, 3-D in your home, a range of increasingly smart mobile phones and e-book readers would be among the technology concepts out of CES 2010 to effect consumers worldwide, for years to come.

Great insights! But where are the eco-details? Like: how greenly manufactured (or not) were those 3-D TVs by Sony, or the super thin ones by LG? How enduring are those armies of new e-book readers, and are they lower impact than used books or books from recycled paper?

It’s frustrating that “green” aspects of new products don’t appear to be as important as gigabytes and screen size by now in general and tech trade media. Consumers care. As EcoSalon previously reported, consumer demand for green gadgets is strong in the U.S.

At least NBC Universal, the official broadcast partner of CES 2010, assigned morning news man Al Roker to a segment on national television where he discussed, with Fast Company’s Paul Hochman, several items from exhibitors including the Regen Renu, a 9×9, sweetly designed solar panel that when fully charged can power an iPod for six hours.

To be fair, there was a reference to nature reported by Gizmodo’s live-blog summing up the Sony keynote speech when executives promised a 3-D version of Shark Week – brought to us by Discovery and IMAX (for viewing on a Sony set).

Even with lackluster discussion early on at CES concerning the environmental impact of mainstream gadgets, the executive director of the Green Electronics Council, and the Electronic Products Environmental Asessment Tool (EPEAT, pronounced like “repeat”) Jeff Omelchuck has high hopes of CES and the people who pay attention to it.

EPEAT is a green standards and ratings organization for the computer, laptop and display industries, that could do for electronics what LEED did for buildings, or the Motion Picture Association did by rating movies, namely to make them easier to understand before buying (or selling).

Omelchuck explained Wednesday afternoon, upon arriving to Las Vegas, that he expected to see more discussion – and marketing – of green aspects of the technology on display by this year’s conference end.

“Consumers are getting smarter,” Omelchuck said, “Brands can no longer say things like ‘we’re energy efficient compared to ourselves last year,’ or ‘this is made from some recyclable materials,’ and convince a consumer their product is green. The manufacturers are recognizing they have to meet stronger criteria. Before there was really no historical market data to prove demand for greener electronics existed. Each year our understanding gets better.”

We hope it gets so much better that a separate Greener Gadgets show held by the same conference organizers, the Consumer Electronics Association, won’t even be necessary someday. Though, this year’s takes place in Manhattan, Feb. 25th.

Love gadgets but hate e-waste and greenwash, too? Read up on CES, and e-waste issues below. Then, let manufacturers and bloggers know “green” should be a priority as high or higher than any other cool factor when it comes to new tech toys.

Basic Reading:

“No matter how cynical most may be right now about eco-friendly electronics, eventually everyone attending will have green ingrained in their heads.”- A blog post via Treehugger entitled “CES 2010 A Steaming Pile of Hypocrisy? Does it really matter?”

“Computing will play a role in protecting our planet from climate change and other environmental issues…There are over 250 million cars in the U.S. alone and the latest ones have more computing power on them than our first manned rocket ships providing opportunities to help drivers avoid traffic jams, [and] offering real-time tips for efficient driving…We also need to ensure that we improve the efficiency of PCs.” -A blog post by Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer for Huffington Post, ahead of his CES 2010 keynote speech

“EPEAT, an eco-label for consumer electronics, has…existed behind the scenes as a business-to-business eco-rating system helping giants like the U.S. Federal government purchase low impact computers. Now, EPEAT is going business-to-consumer, making their bronze, silver and gold ratings publicly available as a reference point for shoppers…” – A Core77 feature story on EPEAT and eco-ratings of computers and other electronics

Further Resources:

The home page of EPEAT, which stands for Electronic Products Environmental Assessment Tool

An eWeekEurope.com news feature about Greenpeace’s efforts to stop the illegal shipping of ewaste to developing nations

Gizmodo’s “The Best of CES 2010” special section

Live, streaming video of CES 2010 events via Crunchgear

Engadget’s coverage of CES 2010 news, events and products

Image

This is the latest installment of EcoMeme, a column featuring eco news, tech and business highlights by columnist Lora Kolodny.