green LA girl

Hooks and needles

Posted by Siel in knitting (March 31, 2007 at 7:12 pm)

Amazing how much faster I can find things if I arrange them neatly in a designated spot –

My crochet hooks were jealous of my knitting needles: Thus a new home, left.

The main yarn was once a lonely sweater sitting in Goodwill, and the gray yarn’s organic Cascade Yarns Eco Wool I got from Compatto in Santa Monica.

And the buttons are a couple of those extra buttons that come attached to my clothes. Overall, a v. eco endeavor –

Here’s the free pattern for this felted needle case, found via The Worsted Witch :)

Tags: , , ,

0 Comments | Email this post


Lit Thursday: Nova (or Ovalness…)

Posted by Siel in art/lit/music ( at 11:40 am)

“Too much talent colliding with ambition can’t help,” Standard Schaefer writes in his debut book of poems, Nova. And it’s these moments of wry humor that coax the reader, in little starts, into entering Standard’s own intense word-logic.

In Nova, more often than not, you’re responsible for your own meaning-making. Yet the poems also have their own internal logic, created by an odd scientific language — complete with footnotes and an pseudo-narrative of recurring characters, images, and action, an obsession with the gist and grit of things. And again, humor. The footnote for the word “foam”: “Our lather who is in curved and thick space, hollow is the sequential advance echoing through your name.”

Which is not to say the poems are abstracted, or mostly a linguistic play — though the playing is there. It’s there on the tactile level, what you feel on your skin, and beneath it:

But after the games of chance,
chance

what summates along the cilia
the sting of no one’s exactly after you

while below
heat, light,and motion for a pageant.

My favorite part is the short series of poems collectively titled “Ovalness,” which serves as a sort of paean to imperfections, a coming to terms with the ovalness of the self, of one’s writing:

“No more remorse about this shape you’re in or the indifference to,” beseeched a musty little orb, “A circle must not be allowed to lament its having been penned flimsier than a sphere.”

Books like these make me wonder why I read poetry, and if I in fact enjoy it. I think I do it because it requires a certain precise attention, sharpens thought to a single, obsessive focal point — a little vacation from the usual run of variagated ruminations. It’s like falling into an iced pool. Or a quiet starvation. “A habit of sky, gist, and grit.”

The carpet is covered
with a map of the carpet.

Yards and yards of why
would you ever
go out again

Tags: , ,

0 Comments | Email this post


Clicklist: The Grease ceiling

Posted by Siel in clicklist ( at 8:28 am)
  • Goldfish and the grease ceiling: Goldfish live in a deep fat fryer, in the water beneath the oil that floats on top. They get to eat little food scraps and are safe unless they try to escape…. (via kottke)
  • THINKing monomaniacally about a recycled and recyclable chair. David of The Good Human likes his new chair so much he wrote about it — thrice. At $649 - $959, the THINK chair’s really pricy, but David thinks it’s worth it and has posted a 10%-off coupon code.
  • Camera power! Hear Peter Gabriel talk about Witness, a human rights org that puts video cameras in the hands of ordinary citizens to document human rights abuses.
  • Scrappy little bags. OlovesM makes cute little eco-friendly bags from jute, hemp, remnant fabrics, and yoga mat scraps. Prices range from just $10 to $90, though the website’s still skeletal so actually buying one ain’t easy, yet.

Tags: , , , ,

0 Comments | Email this post


Friday Freebies: This Film is Not Yet Rated

Posted by Siel in freebies (March 30, 2007 at 11:48 am)

A weekly sharing of eco-shwag!

Get a DVD of This Film Is Not Yet Rated, a funny and insightful documentary that looks at the dark side of the MPAA rating system — specifically the who, hows and whys of films that’re given NC-17 ratings.

Comment or email by Sunday night to get into the drawing, which’ll happen Monday morning.

Tags: , , ,

10 Comments | Email this post


Clicklist: Reincarnation of the dildo

Posted by Siel in clicklist ( at 9:24 am)

Tags: , , , , ,

3 Comments | Email this post


Clicklist: My evil subtext

Posted by Siel in clicklist (March 29, 2007 at 8:56 am)

Tags: , , , , ,

2 Comments | Email this post


Going bananas! Chiquita supplies guns to save environment?

Posted by Siel in fairtrade, food, consumerism (March 28, 2007 at 2:48 pm)

Read the glowing business articles, and you’d think Chiquita’s one of those surprising corporations gone seriously green.

Check out, for example, this Business 2.0 article which notes that Chiquita, working with Rainforest Alliance, put in “$20 million to overhaul the environmental and employment standards at all of its 127 farms, which employ 30,000 workers in seven Latin American countries.”

Nice move — until you consider the latest news coming out of Colombia regarding Chiquita’s other practices — paying out at least $1.7 million to terrorist groups from 1997 to 2004, allegedly to “protect its employees and its thousands of acres of plantations.” This includes Chiquita’s “shipment of two oceangoing cargo containers filled with 3,400 AK-47 assault rifles and 4 million rounds of ammunition” to paramilitary groups.

Chiquita’s plea bargaining, saying it’ll settle for a $25-million fine. Colombia’s Atty. Gen. Mario Iguaran says “he would consider requesting the extradition of up to eight executives of Chiquita Brands International Inc. to face criminal charges including arms trafficking and criminal conspiracy.”

The problem, for us, is that mainstream media reports about these companies are never contextualized. The Business 2.0 article makes no mention of Chiquita’s shady dealings with paramilitary groups. And the LA Times article makes no mention of Chiquita’s effort to halo its image via the Rainforest Alliance.

Thus, we get sharply conflicting articles that seem contradictory, to the point many people simply become disengaged, not really believing or disbelieving anything. Is Chiquita a good or bad company? If you rely on MSM reports, who knows? So people keep on buying the Chiquita bananas because, well, they’re there, and who really knows what this transnational company’s up to…. It’s all very complicated, they say….

The situation becomes especially distressing when we get enviro-orgs — grateful for the token move by a big transnational, which means just chump change for Chiquita but big bucks for a nonprofit — happily giving companies like Chiquita green lip service for a teeny green nod.

Says Chris Wille of the Rainforest Alliance about Chiquita: “It would be a challenge to find a company that has come so far and so fast.” Business 2.0 gushes that “Today all 110 of Chiquita’s company-owned farms and the vast majority of its independent farms are certified by the Rainforest Alliance. Chiquita now recycles 100 percent of its plastic bags and twine and has reduced pesticide use by 26 percent.”

At some point, you have to wonder: Does recycling even matter in the context of a company’s involvement in fueling nationwide violence and countless deaths? I mean, I heart recycling, but you gotta put this stuff in context! (read more about the Chiquita situation via Alternet)

It’s this dichotomy — between a company’s M.O. and a company’s greenwashing tactics — that makes so many activists skeptical of corporations that purport to go green. Says Jonathan Rosenthal of the fair trade fruit company Oke USA (covered here): “I’m really not convinced that [the efforts of transnational banana companies] is a genuine effort at reform.” Jonathan points to a long history of exploitation and violence, allowed and even encouraged by these transnational companies. Traditionally, these are not exactly companies that have “cared” about the people who produce its bananas, he notes.

The difference today, however, is that going green’s become a money-making proposition. Thus, companies like Dole are trying to earn green points to capture the eco-market. Dole Fresh Fruit International, Dole Food’s fresh fruit division, has launched a site about its organic bananas operation called Dole Organic. The site has details on the growers and on the location and certification of banana farms. Frans Wielemaker of Dole says: “It is an educational tool, which increases transparency and thus consumer confidence in our products and in our brand,”

Now, no one’s saying that this tool is “bad.” The problem is that this tool is not contextualized within the larger business practices of Dole as a company. Jordan Bar Am, fair trade activist, asks: “what percentage of Dole’s total production is organic, i.e. what percentage of their total business is now ‘transparent’?”

Jonathan agrees. “What about the other 99% of their production?” he asks. Jonathan says he applauds the move but also cautions, “on the other hand, don’t believe the hype.” Pointing to Dole’s well-documented habit of breaking up unions and harrassing workers, Jonathan says “it’s always a mixed story,” and urges consumers to hold corporations accountable.

So what’s a banana eater to do? “When it doubt, slow it down,” Jonathan says. “Look at the stories, what percent of their volume this story represents, and then ask ‘what are the stories they’re not telling?’ … I think the thing that excites me about consumer being enlightened is that they can start to decide for themselves. If [transnationals] are going to choose a path of engagement, [consumers] can demand that these companies be more genuine, more involved.”

Wanna make it even easier? Go for the fair trade companies like Oke USA that’re really defining what good business practices are. “I think that’s always been one of the goals of small companies,” Jonathan says, “to use our leverage to force the big guys to set a higher standard…. I think the goal of a company like Oke and Equal Exchange is to really keep the bar high and to engage customers to keep that dialogue.”

Oke USA’s current goal’s to get its fair trade bananas into SoCal sometime in May 2007.

Tags: , , , ,

10 Comments | Email this post


Clicklist: Stayin’ alive — at 1000 yrs

Posted by Siel in clicklist ( at 8:28 am)
  • Write your autobiography when you’re 1000 years old. Aubrey de Grey, British biogerontologist, says we could be living for centuries — if we just get serious about funding and discovering the techonology.
  • The post 9/11 Afghanistan needs private investment more than aid, says Ashraf Ghani, former Finance Minister of Afghanistan.
  • That childhood sweatshirt you donate to Goodwill might come back to haunt you, as Jacqueline Novogratz’s did when she went jogging in Rwanda — and ran into a kid wearing a sweatshirt with her name on it, literally. Watch the short lecture by this founder of Acumen Fund, and hear about how “The question isn’t ‘how do we fix this?’ The question is ‘How can we help Africans to do this for themselves?’”
  • Environmentalist Curtis White lambasts the environmental movement for conceptualizing the environmental cause within the confines of capitalism’s systems and “languages of science and bureaucracy” in the Orion.

    Curtis says: “It is because we have accepted this rationalist logos as the only legitimate means of debate that we are willing to think that what we need is a balance between the requirements of human economies and the “needs” of the natural world…. Environmentalism seems to conclude that the best thing it can do for nature is make a case for it, as if it were always making a summative argument before a jury with the backing of the best science.”

    A bit overblown in my view (I still don’t get his problem with the word “ecology”), but an insigtful look at the way environmentalism gets conceptualized within a capitalist society.

Tags: , , , ,

5 Comments | Email this post


Ecomagination = Imagining lower environmental standards

Posted by Siel in environment (March 27, 2007 at 2:26 pm)

Is General Electric’s Ecomagination just greenwashing hype or the real thing? After a little back-and-forth with GE, I’m pretty convinced it’s the former.

It all started innocently. General Electric’s PR rep asked me if I wanted to go to GE’s Green Technology Tour. Sure! I said, but then got sick, and had to email my questions about GE instead.

Now I’m no expert on trains, but I know how to google — which is how I got to Green Car Congress’s fascinating post about how the EPA’s calling for a 75% reduction in NOx emissions for locomotive — and how GE’s pushing for a lower 65% reduction, arguing that a 65% reduction is “more technologically sustainable over the life of the locomotive.”

So I asked, very politely:

If possible, I’d also like to know more about GE’s statement that a 65% reduction is more technologically sustainable over the life of the locomotive. Is GE is saying that 75% reduction is possible for a new vehicle, but that the reduction levels get lover as the locomotive gets ages? Or is GE saying that a vehicle created with the 65% reduction in mind will last longer than one created at the 75% reduction level (and if so, why)? Or is GE bringing up a different issue altogether (and if so, what is it?)

Because we’ve had a long history of companies pushing back environmental standards set by federal, state, and local govt. environmental agencies in the past (ex, our zero emissions vehicle standards) with the excuses blaming either the lack or expense of technology, I think Californians have become much more sensitive to these types of claims made by companies — and seek more details to ascertain that the information given out by big companies about technological possibilities is true.

This is the response I got from one Shaunda Parks of GE Transportation, via the PR rep:

GE is committed to aggressive emissions reductions. The proposed rule was just released. We will use the period reserved for public comment to understand its intent. As we work through the public comment period, it is imperative that all of the stakeholders and their needs are considered - we must ensure that all types of emissions and fuel efficiency are considered and that the technology is proven and robust to endure over the useful life of the locomotive….

We must ensure that all types of emissions and fuel efficiency are considered and that the technology is proven and robust to endure over the useful life of the locomotive. As we review the proposed rule, we will be focused on a balance approach that achieves aggressive reductions across several types of emissions and takes into account fuel consumption.

Um, so GE hasn’t actually ensured “that all types of emissions and fuel efficiency are considered and the technology is proven and robust” — yet it’s already pushing lower standards to the EPA?

As you can imagine, I emailed back:

From the replies, it appears to me that GE is saying that it doesn’t understand the intent of, and hasn’t done enough analysis on, EPA’s new regulations regarding NOx reductions (” We will use the period reserved for public comment to understand its intent.”) — yet GE has already recommended a reduction that’s 10% less than the EPA’s.

I guess it leaves me wondering why GE went ahead and made a push for less stringent regulations when it doesn’t yet “understand its intent.” Any ideas?

And as you can imagine, I didn’t get a response to that email.

If GE had really studied and proven that a 65% NOx reduction will, in the end, be better for the environment by making engines last longer, well then I’d applaud them. But to push for lower reductions, making claims that haven’t even been researched?

Sadly, even some eco-blogs have been taken in by the hype — hello Inhabitat! — and are simply repeating what’s printed in GE’s press releases. Inhabitat praises General Electric’s Evolution Series Locomotive, which Treehugger has already said this about: “the so-called “green” Evolution engine is designed to meet less stringent 1997 regulations…. Under those standards a locomotive emits as much pollution as 500 diesel trucks”

Tags: , ,

1 Comments | Email this post


Tuesday questions: What’s up, green Doc?

Posted by Siel in questions ( at 12:47 pm)

A series that runs every Tuesday, where I ask questions unrelated to the environment, fair trade, or local politics that I’ve been wondering about but haven’t been able to google the answers to. Any advice is appreciated.

Reader Lisa wrote me a while back, asking if there’s such a thing as green health insurance — “anything like Working Assets where maybe a tiny portion of our outrageous premiums goes to something good and not just gulped down the corporate profit margin?”

I’ve tried to do a lil research, but haven’t found anything appropriate — Though I have found out about eco-dentistry….

As a grad student, I get free health insurance through USC. It’s Blue Cross, and it’s treated me well — because it has to under the school policy. Outside USC, Blue Cross has been a bad, bad corporation.

Still, since I live in the US, where we sadly still don’t have health coverage for all, I’m sort of of the opinion that finding good, reliable insurance is the key issue here, let alone any greening. Good, reliable health coverage’s tough to find in the US, so my advice is to focus on getting the best health care you can afford. I like my readers healthy –

That said, I’m curious, as is Lisa. Know of any green health insurance? Actually, I’d be interested in hearing what company you’re going with and why and how they’re treating you — It’s useful info for all –

Update, 4/14/07: No green docs, but a Green Guide for Health Care, “the first and only sustainable design toolkit tailored to the health care industry,” is now out. (via TreeHugger)

Tags: ,

6 Comments | Email this post


Next Page »


idealbite eco tips

Advertise with
green blogs!


Advertise with
Blogs of LA