BISPHENOL A UPDATE

CANADIANS RACE TO GO BPA-FREE:

STORE SHELVES EMPTYING OF ALTERNATIVES

Earlier this month I reported on Canada’s quest to ban bisphenol A from store shelves. Like many of the good news stories I publish here, I had to dig deep to find relevant details, because feel-good environmental stories are not easy to come by in the mainstream press. I was under the impression that the bisphenol A story was buried deep in the “Science and Technology” section of a few scattered newspapers, and that the story hadn’t really reached a mass audience here in Canada. Boy, was I wrong.

This is from Carly Weeks at the Globe and Mail:

Canadian parents have been emptying store shelves and bombarding manufacturers with orders in the past week as they scramble to stock up on baby bottles made without bisphenol A, a potentially harmful and increasingly controversial chemical common in many plastics.

The overwhelming demand has resulted in shortages across the country and backlogs at many distributors, making it difficult for some parents to get their hands on BPA-free bottles.

"There's definitely been a surge in the last week or so throughout Canada," said Ron Vigdor, president of Florida-based Born Free Inc., one of the only major companies that specialize in BPA-free bottles. "We've been told a lot of shelves are empty today."

Read the full article here.

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a hormone disruptor that has been linked to cancer and reproductive problems. BPA can be found in many everyday products including food cans, plastic water containers and baby bottles. Studies have shown that people can be exposed to Bisphenol A when it leaches out of these products.

BPA is currently under review by Health Canada (and other agencies around the world), but I think it’s great to see people taking action without waiting for governments to make the decision for them. In fact, why not help make Health Canada’s decision a whole lot easier: sign Toxic Nation’s petition to ban BPA

¡VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN!

AUSTRALIA NEXT TO AXE THE PLASTIC BAG

NO LOVE FOR PLASTIC BAGS DOWN UNDER, IS THE PLASTIC SHOPPING BAG AN ENDANGERED SPECIES?

Australia wants to become the next country to rid itself of pesky plastic shopping bags, hoping to phase out plastic bags completely by the end of this year. The nation produces four billion plastic bags annually, with most of them ending up in landfill.

While there is resistance to the plan from Australian industry and retail groups, the government is sticking to its guns – and keeping its options open. Around the globe, countries and municipalities are finding ingenious ways to rid themselves of this plague of plastic, from bag taxes to outright bans. Whatever the government of Australia decides, one thing is certain: plastic shopping bags are quickly becoming a thing of the past.

¡Hasta la Victoria Siempre! takes a look at the anti-plastic bag movement around the world:

CANADA: In April, 2007, Leaf Rapids, Manitoba became the first city in Canada to ban plastic shopping bags. Tofino, British Columbia did the same in May. Huntingdon, Quebec went bag free last month. The province of Quebec is currently considering a 20 cent bag tax.

CHINA: The Chinese government announced last month that plastic shopping bags will be banned nationwide effective June 1. Businesses who defy the ban will face hefty fines and/or the seizure of property. Read our full article here.

INDIA: A number of Indian states have outlawed plastic bags. A cow found dead in the streets of New Delhi recently had some 35,000 plastic bags in its digestive system. Cows are viewed as sacred animals by most Hindus. In Mumbai, storm drains clogged with discarded shopping bags were partially to blame for disastrous floods in 2005 that killed more than 400 people. Plastic bags are now completely illegal in the city of 18 million.

IRELAND: In 2002, Ireland passed a 33 cent tax on plastic bags. Within weeks, plastic bag use dropped 94 percent. The tax is collected by the government, which uses the money to finance environmental enforcement and cleanup programs. The country is now considering a similar tax for debit machine receipts and chewing gum.

U.S.A.: In March 2007, San Francisco became the first city in North America to ban the bags.

Bangladesh, Taiwan, South Africa, Thailand, Papua New Guinea, Nepal and Zanzibar have all banned the bag. In each of these countries, the main concern was unsightly — and ubiquitous — litter. South Africans have long referred to the thin white plastic bags as "national flowers."

While these countries have had success in cleaning up their plastic bags, efforts have failed in many places because of heated opposition from manufacturers and merchants, who have said a tax would be bad for business. In London, Los Angeles, New York and Toronto, proposed taxes have failed to gain political approval. Some countries, like Italy, have settled for voluntary participation.

In January almost 42 billion plastic bags were used worldwide; the figure increases by more than half a million bags every minute. Over 500 billion bags are used annually worldwide. A vast majority are not reused, ending up as waste in landfills or as litter. Because plastic bags are light and compressible, they constitute only 2 percent of landfill, but since most are not biodegradable, they will remain there for hundreds of years. Read Karen Pearce’s excellent article on the life and death of a plastic bag here.

Of course nobody needs to wait for their government to ban plastic bags before they stop using them. Alternatives are readily available, ranging from re-usable bags to biodegradable bags made from tapioca starch. Making the switch from plastic bags is a simple step to help clean up your neighborhood, to help reduce energy from the producing and recycling of bags, and to help reduce the amount of plastic in the environment.

Shoutout to Australia for getting on the global bandwagon, and to every country, province, state, and municipality who has taken measures to rid the earth of the pesky plastic bag.

Sources, resources, and discourses:

1. The Australian – article
2. The Australian - article
3. CBC – article
4. Clean Up Australia – website
5. The Montreal Gazette – article
6. The Montreal Gazette - article
7. The Toronto Star – article
8. The New York Times – article
9. Westcoaster.ca - article
10. ABC – feature article
11. inhabitat - photo

LIGHTS OUT FOR INCANDESCENT BULBS

IRELAND, PHILIPPINES, AUSTRALIA,
CANADA, U.S.A. TO BAN THE BULB

Ireland has become the first country in Europe to ban the incandescent bulb. Sale of the traditional bulb will end by the beginning of next year, in favor of low-energy alternatives. The switch to energy-efficient bulbs will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 700,000 tonnes per year and shave 185 million euros (US$269.3 million) per year off householders' electricity bills. Ireland currently uses more energy for lighting homes than anywhere else in Europe.

Meanwhile, the Philippines has become the first country in Asia to ban the bulb, phasing out incandescents by 2010. The ban will reduce the Philippines' annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2.2 million tonnes.

Australia, the first country in the world to announce a ban, will be bulb free by 2009-2010. Canada will ban the bulb by 2012, the United States by 2014.

Industry is also jumping on the bulb bandwagon (or is that banned-wagon?). Philips, the world’s largest lighting manufacturer, says it will stop making incandescent bulbs by 2016.

WHY CHANGE BULBS?

First of all, traditional bulbs are old. The incandescent light bulb is based on a design invented in the 19th century by Thomas Edison. Less than 10 percent of the energy used by an incandescent lightbulb generates visible light; 90 percent is wasted as heat. Most of this energy is generated by fossil fuels, which causes CO2 emissions leading to climate change. Compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) use 5 times less energy than incandescents, which means far less CO2 pollution. CFLs, therefore, are better for the climate.

CFLs are also more cost-effective than regular bulbs. While CFLs cost more at the hardware store, they last far longer than an incandescent, and therefore save money in the long run. CFLs last between 6 and 15 years, while an incandescent usually lasts only one.

If the entire world banned the incandescent bulb in favor of energy-efficient bulbs, this simple step would permit the closing of more than 270 coal-fired power plants, sharply cutting worldwide carbon emissions. For the United States alone, this bulb switch could shut down 80 coal-fired plants. The European Union could shut down 25 more.

TAKE ACTION:

First, switch to CFLs if you haven’t already. Save yourself some cash while saving the world.

Next, join Greenpeace’s 7-step global energy efficiency campaign.

Shoutout to Australia for lighting the way. Shoutout to Ireland and the Philippines for showing leadership and acting quickly. Shoutout to Canada, the U.S.A. and Philips for getting on board. Shoutout to everyone who has already made the switch.

¡VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN!

Sources, resources, and discourses:

1. EU Business – article
2. Reuters UK - article
3. Tech Digest – article and photo
4. The Associated Press - article
5. Greenpeace – article
6. Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government – press release
7. Natural Resources Canada – press release
8. Earth Policy Institute – article
9. BBC News – article
10. The Sydney Morning Herald - article
11. Greenpeace – light bulb Q&A

CANADIAN STORES PULL TOXIC BOTTLES

CANUCK RETAIL CHAIN

DUMPS POLYCARBONATE BOTTLES

Canada's largest outdoor-goods chain has pulled water bottles and food containers made of polycarbonate plastic from its shelves over worries about the chemical bisphenol A (BPA), which has been linked to cancer and reproductive problems. Vancouver-based Mountain Equipment Co-op is the first major Canadian retailer to stop selling products that contain BPA. U.S.-based outdoor gear company Patagonia and baby bottle manufacturer Whole Foods Markets have also dropped products containing BPA.

Bisphenol A is a synthetic chemical compound used in a wide range of consumer items, including water bottles, baby bottles, and the linings of food cans, including most major brands of infant formula. BPA is a hormone disruptor, and low-dose BPA exposure has been linked to permanent changes to genital tract, increase prostate weight, decline in testosterone, breast and prostate cells predisposed to cancer, and hyperactivity. Studies show that BPA can leach into food if heated or scrubbed. Manufacturers say the products are not dangerous, citing studies from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that containers manufactured from polycarbonate do not pose a health risk to humans.

Health Canada is conducting an assessment of bisphenol A and expects to issue a final report in 2009. Norway and the European Union are also reviewing the product. Japanese manufacturers voluntarily stopped making products using polycarbonate plastic six years ago.

There are plenty of alternatives to using polycarbonate plastic. First, avoid food and beverage containers that contain BPA - containers marked with the recycling symbol #7. Or better yet, avoid plastics altogether and switch to glass or stainless steel containers.

Finally, take action: sign Toxic Nation’s petition to ban BPA.

Sources, resources and discourses:

1. The Globe and Mail – article
2. ENN –article
3. ENN – article
4. Wikipedia – “Bisphenol A”
5. Environmental Defence – webpage
6. Toxic Nation – petition to ban bisphenol A