New York Renovator

From time to time, I like to feature a guest post when someone has something informative to offer and when I’m too lazy busy to write anything. This guest post about compost bins is brought to you by the cool dudes at NatureMill Compost Bins.

Making Energy Efficient NatureMill Compost Bins A Priority In Your Home

Despite all our best go green efforts in this country, food recycling still needs a healthy boost into our collective consciousness. Even though food represents one of the easiest recyclable resources, nearly half of all solid trash collecting in our landfills is in the form of food waste. To some, the process of composting seems labor intensive and it’s thought this is why food recycling isn’t more of a priority. Other homes admit being deterred by the apparent contradiction of utilizing electric compost bins and draining the earth’s natural resources in an effort to repurpose food waste.

Green Model Compost Bins: An Eco-Friendly Must Have

Fortunately, simplifying the composting process with an electric compost bin and preserving our world’s precious natural resources can work together side by side. Choosing an energy efficient compost bin from NatureMill minimizes the compost bin’s environmental impact with designs that run on fewer than 5 watts of power every day. The compost bin ensures the most efficient composting process for your home. With a typical expense of less than $.50 each month, it’s easy to see how a NatureMill compost bin can revamp the way your family views composting.

In 2012, sales of incandescent light bulbs in New York State will be illegal. The bulbs nominated to fill the void: Compact Fluorescent Lights, or CFLs. The government’s Energy Star website says that CFL bulbs use “75% less energy than standard incandescent bulbs and lasts up to 10 times longer.”

Honestly, I’ve been using CFL bulbs for certain rooms, and I haven’t seen any big difference between them an incandescent bulbs; CFLs may last a LITTLE longer than incandescent, but NO WAY not 10 times longer. Maybe 1.5 times. As a matter of fact, I filled my living room chandelier with CFL bulbs in December, and already one has blown. :-p These suckers are pricey, too. No one ever says that they COST 20 times more than incandescent. I have yet to see any reviews on CFLs, like I see all the hgh reviews and etc. If you know of a website that offers some statistics, I’m curious.

Anyway, I’m mainly against CFLs because they contain mercury, one of the most toxic neurotoxins known to man. Currently, there is no system for disposal of the bulbs that we will all be forced to use. Oh, there are a whopping total of THREE recycling centers in New York State (all near Albany) that accept CFLs from residents only (at the time of this writing, to my knowledge). But what are homeowners to do with burned-out CFLs? Throw them in the trash for the landfills? Imagine all the mercury polluting the environment, seeping into the water system. Ugh.

Some experts recommend that we save all our CFLs until the state figures out how to dispose of them all.

Uh, hello? We are supposed to stash old bulbs in bags under our beds until you guys figure out what to do with them?! You mean you didn’t have this all planned out BEFORE you passed such a law?

*rolls eyes*

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

How about you? Is your state regulating CFLs? Do you see a noticeable difference between them and the incandescents?

I seem to be on a roll these days regarding plastics, toxins, and the environment. I am by no means a “tree hugger,” as I do feel that modern technology has its place. Modern advances in manufacturing, technology and health have significantly improved our lives. But I will say that profligate abuse of the good earth God gave us is bad. I recently blogged about planned obsolescence and the toxins that are heavily incorporated into our lives and products. Plastics and materials such as Acrylic plastic and styrofoam are in the news again. I recently saw on USAToday that there’s a developing move into “bioplastics.” Bioplastics are a biodegradable plastic derived from plant matter, not petroleum as most plastics are currently. This is from Wikipedia:

Bioplastics or organic plastics are a form of plastics derived from renewable biomass sources, such as vegetable oil, corn starch, pea starch, or microbiota, rather than fossil-fuel plastics which are derived from petroleum. Some, but not all, bioplastics are designed to biodegrade.

Interesting, no?

While I think biodegradable plastic is superb for many things, there are some things that I would not want to use it for. Take, for example, Polyethylene sheets. These came on very handy for my renovation– I used them as drop “cloths,” tarps, covering furniture, and– most importantly– as my vapor barrier with insulation when I rebuilt the gutted walls.

I surely would not want these to biodegrade over time! Nothing provides a superior moisture and air barrier than poly sheets.

Yet, I would think that Plastic bag manufacturers could use biodegradable plastic, and make a WHOLE lot of people happy. The current petro-based bags NEVER degrade. Which reminds me, one of the kids place a couple of these bags in my compost bin and I have the pleasant job of digging then out this spring. :-p

Cups, packaging containers, package wrap, etc– these all are perfect candidates for this new wave of plastics. But I do think there’s a place for petro-plastics, still. I am very happy to see companies becoming more conscientious about reducing waste and toxins in our environment.

What do you think? Would you be more inclined to shop at a store that had biodegradable plastic bags? Or go to a coffee shop that served drinks in biodegradable coffee cups?

The kids and I have been learning more about the toxins in our environment as part of a health course we’re taking. Some of the information just BLOWS my MIND. Did you know that, 30 years after PCBs have been banned, the toxin is found in our bodies in huge amounts, still? That our drinking water is filled with pharmaceutical drugs like testosterone, estrogen, narcotic pain relievers and antibiotics? And that, mixed with the unsafe doses of flouride and chlorine make a toxic soup? It’s all pretty scary stuff. The book offers ways to reduce our exposure to toxins. In case you’d like to look it up, it’s called The Seven Pillars of Health by Dr. Dan Colbert. Pretty eye-opening stuff.

The most recent chapter in the book suggested we visit SafeCosmetics.org to see which health and beauty products are safe (or toxic) to us. Yikes, there are carcinogens in our shampoo, toothpaste and deodorants! What the heck is all this junk doing on our shelves?

The website features an interesting video by Annie Leonard, the same lady who did The Story of Stuff videos.

The lady has been attacked by conservative groups because she is a member of the kooky group Green Peace. But you know what? I care not if the information is coming from a socialist in this regard. Is what she is saying TRUE?! Are we in danger from all these toxins? I’d say the answer is yes! Now, I don’t necessarily agree that we should become a socialist nation with a law for every ingredient that goes into shampoo, as Annie here suggests. I think she goes overboard when she says that. Because even in this video, she says there are companies ALREADY purposely making products WITHOUT the toxins, without laws that force them to do it! What companies and government need is PRESSURE from We the People. But if We the People says nothing, then they are just as complaisant in the poisons as the companies and governments. I don’t think we need the federal government regulating shampoo.

Anyway, it’s sure eye-opening. We need to change this, and pronto.

Some of you readers know about my unusual background: in the mid-80s, my folks ditched the corrupting influences and expenses of suburban life to go live on a mountain. As a teenager, I helped log trees for firewood, harvested edible weeds for eating, and learned how to make my own clothing, conserve energy and water, and etc. We never got “off the grid,” so to speak, but we learned to be frugal, be wise with what we had, to create as little waste as possible, and to learn to live off the land and our own resources. We eventually sold the property as we kids grew older, but it was a really rich experience for me then. It was unique, too– while the rest of society was looking toward Yuppiedom, we were becoming Hillbillies, lol.

Well, we didn't exactly go THAT far...

But today, saving energy and reducing waste is BIG! I’m so glad to be able to be a part of it. I have long believed that we must be good stewards of God’s good earth and of all the good things He’s given us. We’ve really tried to incorporate good stewardship with what we do here in this house and yard. We try to keep an eye toward future technology, but only future technology that helps us to serve God better, to be smarter in our consumer choices, and to reduce waste and inefficiency.

With that said, it was my extreme pleasure to ask a few questions of home safety expert John Drengenberg, the Consumer Safety Director at Underwriter Laboratories (UL). Since we are going to be renovating this summer (kitchen, dining room, and installing new plumbing and electrical wiring), I asked John’s advice regarding these things. I tried to keep you guys in mind, based on comments and articles you have brought up in the past.

Here are the questions I presented:

1. I’ve seen ads on the Internet for a small rooftop windmill device that the homeowner can install on their house roof. Are these for real, and could they truly generate enough energy for the homeowner to make this worth their time and effort?

2. Regarding “vampire” electronics, those appliances that use power even when they are “off” (such as televisions and DVD players): my readers and I hate these things. Is the manufacturer required to label the appliance as an energy hog? How/where can we find a list of appliances that do not continue to suck energy even when off?

3. How accurate is the Energy Star rating? I’d heard through the grapevine that the majority of appliances were receiving the rating, even when these appliances were not truly energy-efficient. Is this true?

4. I’m renovating my kitchen this summer (I have an 1855 house and the last plumbing and electricity updates were in the 1940s). It’s a 100% DIY project- we’re doing the electric, plumbing, installing cabinets, etc ourselves. My readers are going to experience everything we do as I blog about it. I’m looking for ways to make my home more energy efficient, and also have an eye toward the future (appliances, wiring, design). Do you have any recommendations as to what I can do or include in my kitchen to make it (and my home) energy efficient?

Check out John’s answers to my questions in the video. And John– THANK YOU so much for taking the time to answer my questions! Your information is so helpful.

If you go to the Underwriter Laboratories website, you can find a ton of information about energy-efficiency, buying and using products safer for the environment and families, and get information about terrific community projects. There are videos, too. I have found the folks to be very generous with their advice and attention– do check them out whether you are remodeling or not. I know you will find something helpful.

Short answer: YES.

Long answer: Depends on what state you live, and depends on the outcome of new bills coming through the U.S. Congress, as they seem to making up new and stupid ones every day….

From what I have ascertained so far, it is illegal to collect rainwater in the following states:

• Utah
• Washington State
• New Mexico
• Colorado– although I JUST saw a news story published this week that says this has changed. BUT it appears that city dwellers who rely on municipal water cannot collect rainwater.

I also heard that in 1998 the UN past a resolution that all water on the planet is to be commercial, to be bought or sold like, you know, an XBox or something. GRRR. Now I have not confirmed this, but if anyone has any input, feel free to leave a comment and I’ll check it out. Also, there was a “water war” in Bolivia after the country privatized their water resources, and then a company from the U.S. (Bechtel) won a contract for the resources. Immediately, the company had the collection of rainwater outlawed because they wanted a complete monopoly on the resource. People colecting rainwater cut in to their profits.

Now, some of the water laws, especially for the western states, go way back– back to when the area was owned by Spain. Water is a precious resource over there. BUT, this law is being stretched. The laws state that you can’t divert streams or suck lakes dry for your own use. Sure, I understand that– evil people were crooks and stole the water resources. Bad. OK. But some states are suddenly interpreting this to mean that people can’t collect rain in rain barrels?! That’s dumb. The government does NOT own the rain. It’s ridiculous for the government to PRESUME to be able to CONTROL the rain and it’s diversions, as well. If those old water laws are now being interpreted so as to place more restrictions and heavier burdens on citizens, and line the pockets of Big Business and their Government Buddies, that’s tyranny. That’s all there is to it.

You know, we Americans ARE the government. We abide by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Dare I say that we do not have to obey de facto laws and we have the right to redress the government for grievances. These things are really going waaaay too far in this country.

In August, I wrote a post about “planned obsolescence” and a great video called “The Story of Stuff.” In a nutshell, the video tells us that our economy relies on the constant activity of the shopper (that is, shopping) to keep the economy rolling. That’s why so few save, debt is so high, and it’s why the stuff we buy does not last. I was once again reminded of this when I wrote my post about my 6-month-old vacuum cleaner breaking down (and it never really worked right, anyway). This planned obsolescence and shopping craze is a system, a purposeful plan by governments to cash in on our slave labor and on more power and trading.

This video, “The Story of Stuff,” spells out the entire system and how it works. It’s a GREAT video and I think it’s very timely. Here is a trailer of the entire video.

See? Why else do we have to replace, on a CONSTANT basis, everything from toasters to vacuums to bathroom vanities to cars? That’s why!

This kind of an economy is not sustainable. There is an END to its cycle, and it isn’t a happy ending. Governments (who have grown fat off our backs with this kind of economy) are doing everything they can to prevent the end, but by prolonging the agony, we will experience the economy’s long, agonizing death. The only ones who will walk away with money in their pockets will be the international bankers (in the U.S., this includes the Federal Reserve) and the politicians (who are paid by the international bankers). Looking to the government for “change” will further enslave us into their system, as we are seeing right before our eyes.

Here’s an interesting story I found today; it echoes something I wrote here, and what I also blogged about here.

Energy fears looming, new survivalists prepare

Convinced the planet’s oil supply is dwindling and the world’s economies are heading for a crash, some people around the country are moving onto homesteads, learning to live off their land, conserving fuel and, in some cases, stocking up on guns they expect to use to defend themselves and their supplies from desperate crowds of people who didn’t prepare.

The exact number of people taking such steps is impossible to determine, but anecdotal evidence suggests that the movement has been gaining momentum in the last few years.

These energy survivalists are not leading some sort of green revolution meant to save the planet. Many of them believe it is too late for that, seeing signs in soaring fuel and food prices and a faltering U.S. economy, and are largely focused on saving themselves.

…”I was panic-stricken,” the 50-year-old recalled, her voice shaking. “Devastated. Depressed. Afraid. Vulnerable. Weak. Alone. Just terrible.”

Typical sensationalist journalist drivel. :-p Why do they have to make it sound like we’re wearing tin-foil hats or something?

The gist of the story is correct– more people are letting go of the consumerist mentality that is suffocating our society, and opting to live off the land. But the news story opts to paint such folks as either “terrified” or kooky. There is nothing wrong with tossing the television, learning to grow your own food, and having guns! If anything, people who are consumerists are the historical aberration!

Anyway, it’s an interesting story. I’m glad to see more folks willing to take responsibility for their living. Our excessively wasteful society is going through a change, absolutely. There may be a few difficult bumps along the way, but I personally am glad to see it. I think our nation will benefit from more and more people living off the land again– working hard– and taking more responsibility for their way of living. And we’re not a bunch of fuddy-duds, either; I don’t think we would rule out Orlando vacations or fun stuff, like this journalist seems to imply (and by the way, reading “dusty” old books is really, really fun!).

I think the real meaning of the news story comes not from the bigoted vocabulary of the journalist, but of the lady he interviewed, who said that she, “hopes to someday band together with her neighbors to form a self-sufficient community.”

What’s wrong with that?