You Can Help Save the Environment by Wearing Eco-Conscious Clothing

Author: Fix.com | Published on: March 15, 2017

When you reach into the closet and choose your clothes or scour the racks at your favorite retailer, the choices you make have an impact on the environment.

Jeans manufactured in the USA or made to fair trade standards, organic cotton T-shirts, and sweaters that can be washed in cold water and hung to dry are far gentler on the Earth than clothing manufactured in sweatshops overseas from chemical-laden fabrics.

Opting for a “green” wardrobe means paying close attention to fabrics, countries of origin, and laundering requirements, and considering how to dispose of clothes that are torn or no longer trendy.

The decision to emphasize environmental sustainability in your wardrobe is easier than ever. Here are some tips to get started.

KEEP READING ON THE GOOD MEN PROJECT

Can Organic Cotton Become as Mainstream as Organic Food?

Author: John Ewoldt | Published on: March 25, 2017

MINNEAPOLIS | Organic cotton textiles register no more than a footnote in the world’s cotton production, but Vishal Naithani wants to change that.

His company, Sustained Organic Living in suburban Minneapolis, selects certified organic cotton grown in India with non-GMO seeds. The products are made using only fair trade labor on the farms and in the factories.

The challenge for Naithani and his company, which is known as Sol Organics, is to be able to create the level of interest among consumers for organic apparel that has been generated for organic food. For now, his chief weapon is price: He aims to price his products significantly lower than his online competitors and on par with high-quality bedding that is not fair trade organic.

“Every family should have access to affordable organic cotton just like they have access to affordable organic food,” he said. “It shouldn’t be only the wealthy who can afford premium products.”

KEEP READING ON THE ST. AUGUSTINE RECORD

Científicos Debaten en Roma el Papel del Carbono en el Suelo para el Clima

Autor: EFE | Publicado: 21 de marzo, 2017

Cientos de científicos y representantes de unos cien países iniciaron el martes en Roma un simposio internacional para debatir la contribución del carbono almacenado en los suelos dentro de la estrategia para combatir el cambio climático.

El director general de la Organización de la ONU para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO), José Graziano da Silva, dijo en la apertura de la reunión que el objetivo es intercambiar conocimientos de prácticas sostenibles que ayuden a reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero mediante la gestión de los suelos y a secuestrar carbono de la atmósfera.

Da Silva resaltó que los suelos son “fuente y sumideros” de gases de efecto invernadero y pueden emplearse para promover la adaptación y mitigación al cambio climático, ayudando a limitar el aumento de las temperaturas.

Y apuntó que están ayudando a distintas instituciones a crear un mapa global de la distribución del carbono orgánico en el suelo, esencial para mantener la fertilidad y la capacidad de retención de agua, que debería estar listo para fin de año y servir en las negociaciones del clima.

LEER MÁS AQUÍ
LEER MÁS ARTÍCULOS EN ESPAÑOL AQUÍ

Market Rejection of GMOs Grows — Four-Year Plan to Topple Toxic Agriculture

Author: Dr. Joseph Mercola | Published: March 26, 2017 

Our annual GMO Awareness Week is upon us, and in this interview, Ronnie Cummins, founder of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) details the current state of the opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

We first met about six years ago, when we collaborated to create the direct ballot initiative to label GMOs in California.

A lot has happened since then, including the passing of what’s colloquially known as the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, ironically misnamed “The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act” — this despite a full 90 percent of consumers supporting mandatory labeling.

The Trump administration has also selected or appointed notorious cheerleaders for GMOs and factory farms to his cabinet — Mike Pompeo as head of the CIA, Sonny Perdue as USDA Secretary, and Rick Perry as Energy Secretary.

Meanwhile, his Tea Party allies in Congress have called for the abolition of the entire National Organic Program!1

On the upside, in 2016 we saw, for the first time in nearly 20 years, a decrease in the amount of genetically engineered (GE) crops grown around the world, in terms of acreage.

As noted by Cummins, “This represents the fact that this technology is failing, in the sense of superweeds and superpests are popping up all over the world.” In the U.S., three-quarters of farmers growing GE crops like soybeans, corn or canola are having problems with these herbicide- and pesticide-resistant pests.

Market Rejection of GMOs Has Grown

Even more importantly, consumers around the world have become aware of the many problems associated with GE crops and the toxic herbicides and pesticides used on them, and do not want any of it on their plates.

In other words, the market has started rejecting GMOs, and that’s what we’ve been fighting for all along. Nothing can or will change unless consumers apply pressure in the form of refusing to buy GMOs.

In the European Union (EU), which is the biggest agriculture market in the world, few if any GMOs are found on supermarket shelves.

In the U.S. — despite industry spending hundreds of millions of dollars to manipulate market preference — about 40 percent of Americans still believe GE foods and GE ingredients are dangerous. Another 20 percent are unsure whether GMOs are dangerous or not.

“This combination of consumer rejection and, basically, Mother Nature’s resistance, has caused a drop-off,” Cummins says. “I think this is the beginning of the end of at least this generation, the first generation, of GMO crops.

Now, industry is saying, ‘Don’t worry about the fact that we’re using more and more toxic pesticides and herbicides … Don’t worry about these pests spreading across the fields. We’ve got a new generation of GMO crops where we can just do gene editing.

We don’t have to pull some DNA from a foreign species and haphazardly splice it into a corn or a soybean crop.’

But the bottom line is that this gene-splicing and this so-called new gene editing are unnatural processes that disrupt the genetic structure, the natural workings of living organisms. These aren’t going to work either.”

Organics and Grass fed Are Increasing in Popularity

Worldwide, we’re also seeing strong growth in organics and grass fed farming and ranching. In the U.S., the organic sector grew 11.5 percent in 2016. Grass fed grew about 50 percent. In France, organics grew by 20 percent.

KEEP READING ON MERCOLA.COM

Mitigation Update: Agriculture and Soil Management in the Spotlight

Author: Jennifer Allan | Published: March 23, 2017 

Recent news has put agriculture and soil management in the spotlight, as soil is shown as a crucial carbon reservoir, and agriculture is responsible for a significant share of New Zealand’s emissions. This Update features these and other developments, that relate to the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13 (climate action).

Soil management could “make or break” climate change mitigation efforts, according to a report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). Plants and other organic residues absorb carbon and keep it in the soil, creating a reservoir of carbon, that, according to FAO, could be re-released back into the atmosphere by rising temperatures and other disturbances. The report recommends better information and good practices to help end hunger (SDG 2) while adapting to and mitigating climate change (SDG 13). The report was launched at the Global Symposium on Soil Organic Carbon where Fijian president Jioji Konousi Konrote warned that “if we fail to maintain our soils as a carbon reservoir, I am afraid that these discussions and negotiations [for the Paris Agreement] would have been in vain.” [FAO Report] [FAO Press Release]

To help countries develop agricultural strategies in the context of climate change, the UNFCCC and the FAO signed an agreement that facilitate the cooperation. The agreement will include policy advice, data sharing and promotion of access to knowledge by agricultural smallholders. It will also facilitate capacity building and sharing technical expertise between the staff of the UNFCCC, FAO and developing countries’ representatives.

KEEP READING ON IISD

Our Current Food System Is Broken and Unjust—we Need a Paradigm Shift That Values Nutrition As a Human Right

Author: Dr. Robert Biel | March 22, 2017

There is a sense that the world food system has reached an impasse. Hunger afflicts at least an eighth of the world population, mostly in the global South, but also in the North where austerity policies—which respond to crisis by prioritizing the interests of the wealthy—leave working people hungry. What is even more serious is that even this damaged ‘food security’ cannot be guaranteed into the future. International institutions now recognize that something fundamental must change, a realization embodied in the notion of paradigm shift and further concretized in the form of sustainable intensification.

Such recognition is all the more significant since, for most of its history, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) tended to be somewhat unwilling to offend corporate interests. Within the UN system it was mostly the two successive Special Rapporteurs on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler and Olivier de Schutter, who pushed for a more radical and systemic critique. The latter notably placed his authority behind agroecology, a term that implies bringing farming back to an understanding of natural systems, and that forms an important point of reference for this book.

A landmark in official critiques of the ruling food paradigm was the publication of Save and Grow, A New Paradigm of Agriculture—A policymaker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop production, which argued specifically for a revitalization of small farms and a recognition of their dignity and essential contribution. Expanding on this, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) further stated: “The world needs a paradigm shift in agricultural development: from a ‘green revolution’ to an ecological intensification’ approach. This implies a rapid and significant shift from conventional, monoculture-based and high-external-input-dependent industrial production towards mosaics of sustainable regenerative production systems that also considerably improve the productivity of small-scale farmers. We need to see a move from a linear to a holistic approach in agricultural management, which recognizes that a farmer is not only a producer of agricultural goods, but also a manager of an agroecological system…”

This and similar statements embody a welcome reflection on what the shift may entail: terms like ‘mosaics’ and ‘regenerative’ imply a change in how we think, moving away from linear and reductionist approaches and towards a systems perspective.

These ideas are stimulating. Nevertheless, we should ask whether the new paradigm is correctly framed. Not everyone, even among those critical of the old paradigm, would accept that it is, particularly the assumption that the answer is ‘intensification,’ which could imply a merely quantitative solution and contradict the more qualitative issues raised. Indeed, the notion of a ‘new paradigm’ entered the debate quite some time ago, precisely in relation to quality issues. The emphasis on quality arose as a critique of earlier mainstream policies, targeting mainly quantity, which often were critically labelled ‘productivist’ and were typified by the now-discredited Green Revolution in which hybrid crop strains were bred only for quantity of yield.

KEEP READING ON ALTERNET

Using Soil to Fight Climate Change

Authors: Seth Itzkan, Karl Thidemann & Bill Mckibben | Published: March 25, 2017 

Lake Champlain, the crown jewel of New England, is sick. Every time it rains, fertilizer runs off farms, flowing downstream to pollute the rivers and lakes we cherish.

Two bills under consideration by the Vermont Legislature, S.43 and H.430, promise to address this problem — and fight global warming. These bills promote practices that enhance soil’s natural ability to retain water, nutrients and carbon. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, a 1 percent increase in soil organic matter enables each acre to hold onto an additional 20,000 gallons of rainfall. More water absorbed into soil means less irrigation is needed and pollution of water bodies decreases.

At the 2015 Paris climate talks, France’s minister of agriculture, Stéphane Le Foll, introduced the international “4 per 1,000” climate and food security initiative, calling on nations and regional authorities to boost the carbon content of their soil by 0.4 percent per year. In conjunction with deep cuts in fossil fuel emissions, this seemingly modest improvement to soil would draw down enough carbon to halt the increase of the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere. That’s the good news. The bad news is the CO2 level is already dangerously high.

As spelled out in climate guru James Hansen’s latest paper, “Young People’s Burden,” negative emissions are now in order. In addition to keeping fossil fuels in the ground, we also need to remove excess CO2 from the air. Anything less is a prescription for disaster.

KEEP READING ON RUTLAND HERALD 

El Aliado (o la amenaza) Que Yace Bajo Tierra

Autor: Carlos Laorden | Publicado: 23 de marzo, 2017

Una espada de doble filo. De la que, además, aún queda mucho por conocer. En un momento en el que el cambio climático está (al menos oficialmente) en cabeza en la lista de prioridades mundiales, reducir la emisión de gases de efecto invernadero es la madre de todas las batallas. Y en esa lucha, los suelos del mundo que contienen más carbono que la atmósfera y la vegetación terrestre juntas pueden ser un gran aliado, si además del carbono orgánico que ya encierran, se consigue que secuestren todavía más. O pueden ser un enemigo, si al maltratarlos liberan los gases que acumulan desde hace años, décadas, o en ocasiones milenios.

Entender mejor el funcionamiento de estos mecanismos y buscar la forma de poner a los suelos de parte de la humanidad en la lucha contra el cambio climático ha sido el motivo que ha reunido en Roma (Italia) a representantes de Gobiernos y expertos de todo el mundo durante tres días. Ronald Vargas, experto de la FAO (la agencia de la ONU para la alimentación y la agricultura, anfitriona del simposio) ha abogado en la clausura por empezar, al menos pero cuanto antes por hacer lo necesario para mantener en el suelo el carbono que ya está allí.

LEER MÁS AQUÍ
LEER MÁS ARTÍCULOS EN ESPAÑOL AQUÍ

Adolescente Quiere Plantar 100 Mil Millones de Árboles

Autor: Laura Parker  | Publicado: 7 de marzo, 2017 | Traducido por Regeneración Internacional

Generalmente no se invita a los niños a hablar en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas. Pero ahí estaba Felix Finkbeiner, niño maravilla alemán con sus lentes de Harry Potter, sudadera gris y corte de casco – con una pregunta sombría sobre el cambio climático.

Read more

Our Cotton Colonies

Author: Meta Krese | Published: March 20, 2017 

A major thread of the British Empire, the crop helped weave the efficient and ruthless structures of today’s globalized economy. The T-shirts we buy at retailers like Gap and H&M may feel far removed from the bloody past of a crop synonymous in

the 19th century with slavery and sweatshops. But when one follows the global supply chain of cotton growers, workers, traders and factory owners, it becomes increasingly apparent that capitalism has not, in fact, traveled far at all from its bloody origins.

Cotton is a flexible crop. It will grow anywhere rain is plentiful and temperatures remain above freezing for at least 200 days a year. Archaeological records show that humans have cultivated it for millennia in Africa, India, Central America and South America. As early as the 7th-century B.C.E., Herodotus described the army of Xerxes I of Persia wearing clothes of exceptional beauty “made of wool that grew on trees.”

Europe was late to the game, relying on linen, flax, silk and wool through much of the Renaissance. When the English India Company brought cheap and colorful calico and chitz to Britain in the second half of the 17th century, they were an instant hit. Europeans loved that the lively colors didn’t fade with the first washing.

To squash this new competition, European textile producers used all kinds of leverage against the Indian cotton industry. France outlawed cotton entirely in 1686; England passed a partial ban on Indian cotton in 1701 and a stricter ban in 1721; Spain, Prussia and other nations followed suit with various restrictions.

Businessmen eventually saw an opportunity for profit, however, and began building a European cotton industry grounded in colonialism and slavery. The cheap cotton harvested by enslaved people in North America allowed Britain to undercut India’s prices. According to historian Gene Dattel, Britain was importing 1.2 billion pounds of cotton annually from North America by 1860. Nearly 1 million workers in Britain’s mills and factories rendered the cotton into garments that made up 40 percent of national exports.

“Cotton,” writes Dattel in Cotton and Race in the Making of America, “was the single most important contributor to Britain’s economic power and its rise to preeminence as a world empire.” Cotton became a springboard for the Industrial Revolution, and for a global economy that favored limitless accumulation of capital.

Today, cotton crops occupy about 2.5 percent of the world’s arable land. The industry is the primary source of income for hundreds of millions of farmers and factory workers. That income is typically meager, however. Cotton workers are the perennial losers in a global race to the bottom. Multinational clothing companies seek out the cheapest textile manufacturing hubs. Factories, in turn, buy the cheapest cotton they can find. Any added expenses, including higher wages, may prompt buyers to flee to ever-cheaper factories—sometimes leaving entire national economies in tatters.

In These Times followed the cotton life cycle from the fields of Burkina Faso to the factories of Bangladesh to the sales racks of Slovenia. Along the way, we spoke with the people who make the shirts, jeans and countless other items you wear every day, to understand the real wages of cotton.

KEEP READING ON IN THESE TIMES