Tag: home

Corporations Go Green to Boost Sales

Sales of household cleaning products don’t increase much
each year. But sales of environmentally-friendly cleaners
are growing at a rate of 20% or more. And that’s gotten the
attention of some of the biggest companies in the cleaning
products business. Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

Sales of household cleaning products don’t increase much
each year. But sales of environmentally-friendly cleaners
are growing at a rate of 20% or more. And that’s gotten the
attention of some of the biggest companies in the cleaning
products business. Julie Grant reports:

Pam Whittington cleans for a living. Most of her customers
have cabinets full of cleaning products: bleach, Soft Scrub,
Windex. Whittington says those cleaners do a good job.

“They work well, but they’re strong. You get kind of ill.
Sometimes, I mean, I’ve physically gotten ill from cleaning
products, almost to where you have to leave the home
because it’s so strong.”

Whittington tries to use the more natural products, even
vinegar and baking soda, and says they work fine for most
jobs. But sometimes, there’s just too much soap scum, too
much grime – and she needs the big guns – like bleach.

“Oh, yes. Bleach is totally strong. But you need something
to kill the germs. And bleach does that. Or, vinegar does to
an effect, but still you have to get things clean. And bleach
whitens things, and gets rid of all the stains.”

One of companies best known for selling bleach is Clorox.
Matt Kohler is a brand manager for Clorox. He says they
wanted to make a more natural product line for years. But
when they tested the concept with consumers, few people
were interested in buying environmentally friendly cleaners.

“And really up until this year the market for green cleaners,
we weren’t seeing enough consumer interest to be able to
be able launch something that could sustain itself in the
market.”

But a couple of things happened last year that opened the
green door for Clorox. Kohler says the company’s scientists
came up with natural cleaners that worked as well the
regular cleaners. And something else happened. Believe it
or not, Kohler says Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth got people thinking more about environmental issues. So
much so, that for the first time many started worrying about
the chemicals in cleaning products.


“So there’s really this group of consumers out there, and it’s
growing and getting bigger every day, that are looking for
ways to live a greener lifestyle. And they’re just not satisfied
with the options that are currently available. So when we got
all that data together, we really realized the market is really
ready for a green cleaning product, and that Clorox is pretty
well positioned to come out with a product that will meet their
needs.”

Clorox has started stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart, Target,
and most supermarkets with GreenWorks. That’s their line
of ‘natural’ cleaners, made with things like coconut, lemon
oil, and corn-based ethanol. The Sierra Club environmental
group has endorsed the new products line. But others are
skeptical about Clorox’s motivation.

Alex Scranton is science director for a group called Women’s
Voices for the Earth. Last year she surveyed the ingredients
in the major household cleaners – looking for chemicals that
are dangerous to human health and the environment. She
found that the Clorox Company makes 15% of the worst
products on the market. She says it’s hypocritical for Clorox
to now call itself a ‘green’ company.

“Well, you know, this is the question we had when Clorox
released their GreenWorks product. They were very
pleased to make these new products that were effective
cleaners, were 99-percent natural, or naturally derived
ingredients. And so it begs the question: if you can do that
with your new products, can you in fact apply that technology
to your old products? Why sell both?”

Clorox says most people still want their bleach and their
Pinesol. And that the company will keep selling them as
long as people keep buying them. But Scranton wonders if
people would buy them if they knew what was in them. She
says most mainstream products don’t disclose all their
ingredients on the label. It’s not required by law.

“These companies can pretty much use any chemical they
want, with a few limitations in their products, without too
much regard for what the long term impact could be either
on the environment or on health.”

Scranton says if people understood how dangerous some of
the ingredients can be, it might really convince them to buy
alternative products. Clorox says it’s giving people a choice,
and will be watching sales of Greenworks carefully. But it
won’t stop selling products that people keep buying.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Interview: Why Big Houses?

The average new American home is now 2400 square feet. Smart Growth
advocates say we’re buying big houses on big lawns and making the
problem of urban sprawl worse. Lester Graham talked with Chris Micci.
He’s a land development manager for a residential homebuilder. He’s
also a former lobbyist for the Real Estate Building Industry Coalition
in Charlotte, North Carolina. Micci says buyers see bigger as better:

Transcript

The average new American home is now 2400 square feet. Smart Growth
advocates say we’re buying big houses on big lawns and making the
problem of urban sprawl worse. Lester Graham talked with Chris Micci.
He’s a land development manager for a residential homebuilder. He’s
also a former lobbyist for the Real Estate Building Industry Coalition
in Charlotte, North Carolina. Micci says buyers see bigger as better:


CM: Typically, most suburban home buyers are looking for that larger lot, larger home.
And, you know, I can’t say there’s an absolute reason for why that is, but it’s what the,
what the customer or the consumer in the marketplace looks for.


LG: A lot of people see home as status and in fact, generally, I’m wondering how people
view their home or their house as it relates to their status in life.


CM: Oh yeah, absolutely, people definitely relate their home to their status. Obviously,
you know, for the majority of us out there, the home is the single largest purchase
financially in a person’s life…in their lifetime. As such, they see that home as a symbol of
their status and you know, appropriately so, want it to reflect that kind of status. Which,
you know, in turn reflects a larger home.


LG: Homebuilder associations say that local governments often drive the market for
bigger homes and bigger lawns because they zone areas so that lots have to be a certain
size. The idea is to draw those wealthier residents, upscale neighborhoods, so tax revenue
will come with those valuable properties. So builders have to build big houses to recoop
their money from the large land purchases. How much of a factor is government zoning
and regulation in the trend of big houses and big lots?


CM: Oh, I think it’s enormous. I think it’s probably about 95% of the entire equation when you
look at it. What they see is, they have to be able to see the ability that the development is,
in their minds, paying for itself. It’s paying for the government services that it provides.
As such, they see larger lot, larger home, higher sales prices as an answer to that to help
pay for those services… and that may or may not be the truth.


LG: Do you see places where towns are working with developers so that they can have their big
suburbs but still find a place for affordable housing within the same general area?


CM: There’s been one approach to it that I don’t necessarily agree with, but it’s called
“inclusionary housing.” What it typically does is the local government will require a
developer to include about 10% of dedicated housing as considered “affordable.” And
affordable can mean just about anything. There really is no clear, working definition of
what affordable is. A lot of folks out there that have their homes, they see that as a large
investment in their life. They see a lot of high value in that investment. As such, they get
concerned that with a proportion of affordable housing in their community that has to be
mandated and dedicated as such, that it could, in fact drive values down.


In a better case scenario is when local governments work with the folks in the industry to
put together, you know, a master plan community where you can include both segments
of affordable housing, higher end housing… a mix of retail, commercial space, et cetera. I
think you’ll see more success in efforts like that than you will in mandated housing.


HOST TAG: Chris Micci is a land development manager for a residential homebuilder in
North Carolina. He talked with the Environment Report’s Lester Graham.

Related Links

Rooftop Wind Power

  • Power lines lead from a wind turbine placed near a coast to catch steady breezes. New designs for smaller turbines might be used in urban areas where wind is more turbulent. (Photo by Lester Graham)

The government wants 20% of the
energy generated in the nation from renewable
resources. Today, we’re at a mere fraction of
that goal. Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports experts
believe the US could get there sooner if wind power
technology can be moved successfully to where the
electricity is actually consumed, America’s
cities:

Transcript

The government wants 20% of the
energy generated in the nation from renewable
resources. Today, we’re at a mere fraction of
that goal. Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports experts
believe the US could get there sooner if wind power
technology can be moved successfully to where the
electricity is actually consumed, America’s
cities:


Right next to Lake Erie, a large wind turbine spins hypnotically in the
breeze. Its three big propeller blades provide only around 6% of
the energy consumed at the museum where it’s located, the Great Lake
Science Center. So the big turbine is mainly for educational purposes.
The museum’s Executive Director, Linda Abraham Silver says turbine
catches the steady winds off the lake:


“We don’t want turbulence, that’s right. Steady wind is what produces
the best energy and saves the gears and instrumentation inside.”


The single wind turbine stands in a wide open space near Lake Erie, but here
on the streets of downtown Cleveland, the wind is blustery and
unpredictable. These conditions are hostile to traditional turbines.
So the conventional wisdom was wind power couldn’t flourish in urban
environments… that is, until now.


“I think the problem was the propeller, not the whole idea that wind
power was somehow unable to be captured in the city. Some people even tell
you there is no wind power in the city”


Bill Becker is an urban wind developer from Chicago. He’s abandoned the three-propeller design for a horizontal one.
And it kind of looks like a metal DNA double-helix strand. He says it’s
actually two turbine designs in one so the machine can function in low and high winds. The turbine, manufactured
by Aerotecture, is a lot smaller than traditional ones so it can be mounted on rooftops. Becker’s installed 16 on skyscrapers in
Boston and Chicago. They can generate enough electricity to power two homes annually in a typical breezy day.


Becker’s not the only inventor who thinks there are better alternatives
to expansive turbine wind farms sprouting up on ridges and bluffs
across the country. And in England, the three-blade concept isn’t dead
yet.


The company Quiet Revolution has a vertical turbine with blades curving
up and down it. It creates power in even the slightest breeze, but that
power isn’t any more than Becker’s model and it costs 4 times as much.


Instead of catching open wind, in California entrepreneurs are
capturing a very specific type of wind: breezes traveling up and over
building parapets. Those are walls that extend past the roof lines of
big box retailers and factories:


“There’s a potentially great wind resource on those buildings that’s
not being tapped into today.”


Spokesman Steve Gitlin says the company AeroVironment is tapping into
this wind with systems of 15 turbines each. These futuristic rotating
fans, each about six feet tall, line the parapets of flat-roofed
buildings:


“What we’ve done is figured out there’s a unique acceleration of wind over that edge of the building
so the turbine’s designed to actually extend above and angle slightly downward
over that acceleration zone.”


The AeroVironment system is the most expensive… six times as much as the Aerotecture double-helix
design and generates slightly more electricity. It does, however, operate in very low wind, five miles per hour or less.


Ken Silverstein says this range in cost and efficiency shows the urban wind industry is
still growing. He edits Energy Biz magazine, and
adds to make an impact on the market, these turbine costs must come
down. And the government could help jumpstart the industry:


“It needs to develop, it needs to reach economies of scale so that the
technology improves, so that the costs come down and so that wind becomes more widespread than it is today.”


But Silverstein says, urban wind designs like these offers the hope
that businesses and even homeowners could capture the energy of the wind
directly on their own.


For the Environment Report, I’m Lisa Ann Pinkerton

Related Links

Big Perks for Tiny Houses?

  • Gregory Johnson's teeny tiny house - 140 square feet in all. (Photo by Gregory Johnson)

New homes in America keep getting bigger and bigger. The average new
American home is about 2400 square feet. Moving up to a bigger house
can seem like a sign of success… or it might feel necessary for a
growing family. But in the face of pressure to buy big… some people
are choosing to downsize their homes… way, way down. Rebecca
Williams visits some of the tiniest houses on the block:

Transcript

New homes in America keep getting bigger and bigger. The average new
American home is about 2400 square feet. Moving up to a bigger house
can seem like a sign of success… or it might feel necessary for a
growing family. But in the face of pressure to buy big… some people
are choosing to downsize their homes… way, way down. Rebecca
Williams visits some of the tiniest houses on the block:


(Sound of door opening)


“C’mon in!”


Andru Bemis lives in a little house on a corner.


“Here it is, you’ve just about seen it. You’re standing looking at the
kitchen, you’re standing in the living room, there’s a study, and
there’s a bathroom behind that wall and somewhere above the bathroom there’s a
bed.”


It takes a hop, skip and a jump to cross from one end to the other.
That’s because his house is 300 square feet. Total.


Andru Bemis says a little house is better:


“I’m not owned by it, that’s one of the biggest things. I’ve only got
one sink I’ve gotta keep running, I’ve only got one of anything, don’t have an entire house to
take care of. I also leave town a lot and don’t have to leave an
entire house and worry about it.”


Bemis is a musician. His love of music explains the 5,000 records
lining one wall of his house and taking up precious space.


Of course he also makes room for his banjo.


(Sound of strumming)


You just don’t see tiny houses that much any more. Some, like Andru
Bemis’, are remnants from the early 20th century. His tiny house is in a sleepy
neighborhood that used to be the factory district. He’s seen other
little houses like his get torn down to build bigger new ones.


“Bigger is better, I guess. Bigger means you’ve achieved a lot more.
But as far as I’m concerned bigger generally means you’re working a
whole lot harder.”


That’s one reason people are choosing to live small. They’re after a
simpler life with less stuff. A smaller house costs less to buy and
maintain. And some people argue smaller homes make better use of
resources because they just use less of everything.


Jay Shafer says building small is the greenest thing you can do with a
new home. He owns the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company. He designs and
builds super small houses. He started with his own home. It was
really tiny – 70 square feet. That’s 7 feet by 10 feet.


“It’s a huge challenge – it’s much harder than designing a large house.
There’s just no room for error. And if you want to do it well and get
the proportioning right you have to consider everything as part of
everything else.”


Shafer says to live in a tiny house, you have to figure out how much
elbow room you need. Turns out, 70 square feet was a tad too small for
Jay Shafer. So he traded up to 100 square feet.


Shafer says tiny houses are a tough sell for most Americans. But some
people just love small little spaces. Shafer calls himself a
claustrophile. He’s built 10 tiny houses and sold dozens more plans.


Gregory Johnson is one of Shafer’s converts. He’s a computer
consultant in Iowa City. He lives in one of Jay Shafer’s high tech
tiny houses. It’s just 140 square feet. But with a little bit of
magic, one room turns into three.


(Sound of sliding panels)


“You can take what was an office and in about 20 seconds it converts into
a dining area with a sink off to our right because that’s the kitchen.”


Gregory Johnson says his tiny house has changed him. He says he had
his doubts at first, like the time he visited Jay Shafer at the construction
site:


“He showed this little hole I was supposed to crawl through, the
passageway to the upstairs to the loft and I thought I might have to
lose some weight to get up in there (laughs).”


Johnson says he started really scaling back. He realized if he had a
refrigerator, he’d just fill it up with ice cream and pizza. Things he
really didn’t need. So to save energy, he doesn’t have a fridge at
all. He started eating nuts and grains and fruit. By shrinking his
life down to match his house he lost 100 pounds.


Johnson says tiny spaces don’t work for everyone. But he says he has a
fulfilling life with a whole lot less stuff and space to put it in.


Many tiny house owners such as Andru Bemis want their miniature homes
to make a statement: size does matter.


(Andru Bemis song: “my house is a very small house it’s the littlest
house there is/it’s bigger than yours”)


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Study Reinforces Pesticide-Parkinson’s Link

People who are often exposed to high levels of pesticides
could be at a higher risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease. The
GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports on the findings of a new study:

Transcript

People who are often exposed to high levels of pesticides could be at a higher risk of
developing Parkinson’s Disease. The GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports on the findings of a
new study:


Researchers say people who are routinely around pesticides are 70 percent more likely to
develop Parkinson’s Disease. Alberto Aschiero was the lead researcher. He says the
pattern seems to be true for both farmers and backyard gardeners. He says even though
the findings are not conclusive, they confirm the results of earlier studies:


“I think this is enough to recommend to people to be very conservative in using
pesticides, especially when one is not essential, like in some home and garden
applications.”


Aschiero says he’s not advocating a warning label be placed on pesticide products yet.
He says that would be more appropriate if researchers can pinpoint specific pesticides
that are linked to Parkinson’s disease.


For the GLRC, I’m Chris Lehman.

Related Links

Generating Energy From Dog Poop

A major city is about to become the first in the nation to generate energy from dog poop. Yes, you heard that right… dog poop. The GLRC’s Tamara Keith reports:

Transcript

A major city is about to become the first in the nation to generate energy
from dog poop. Yes, you heard that right…dog poop. The GLRC’s
Tamara Keith reports:


A recent study by the city of San Francisco found that nearly 4-percent
of all the trash picked up from people’s homes is animal waste. Yuck.
And while most, would gladly leave that stinky issue alone… San
Francisco officials see it as an opportunity.


The city’s garbage company is launching a pilot project. They’re
planning to collect the waste and then put it in a methane digester. As
the waste breaks down, it will produce gas that can be burned to power
an electricity generating turbine.


Robert Reed is a spokesman for Norcal Waste, the trash company.


“There’s literally 10 million tons of pet waste created annually in the
US, and it’s an edgy area of recycling. No one is doing anything about
it.”


Reed says he hopes San Francisco’s poop power program will be a
trendsetter.


For the GLRC, I’m Tamara Keith.

Related Links

Architecture Students Go Solar

  • The University of Maryland's solar powered house, designed to resemble the path of the sun across the sky, contrasts with the older architecture of the Smithsonian Museum. (Photo by Stefano Paltera/Solar Decathlon)

18 teams from around the world are competing this week
in a solar home competition in Washington, D.C. Each team competes
to see who can build the most aesthetic and livable solar home.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jennifer Guerra reports:

Transcript

Eighteen teams from around the world are competing this week in a solar home
competition in Washington, D.C. Each team competes to see who can build the
most aesthetic and livable solar home. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Jennifer Guerra reports:


Richard King is the director of the Solar Decathlon
Competition in the nation’s capital. We called him on his cell phone as he
was wandering around the National Mall checking out the different houses.
We asked him why he thought solar homes have a future in the housing market.


“You see gas prices are going up, natural gas prices are going up. We call
that volatility in the supply market. Solar energy doesn’t have that. Yes,
you have to buy a collector that you put on your house, but from then, on for the
next twenty years, you don’t have to worry about the price of energy going up
because the sunlight is free.”


Free and limitless, as King points out, and the houses being put up on
the mall try to show how they take advantage of that energy and still look
like something you’d want to live in. As King wandered around the solar
village, he stopped at the University of Michigan’s house.


“Michigan just got their end caps on, and now we finally see what it looks
like. We were all wondering what they had up their sleeve, so it’s pretty
neat.”


Before the University of Michigan team shipped their house to D.C., we
dropped by the School of Architecture. They were just putting the finishing
touches on their entry.


(Sound of talking)


That’s John Beeson, the project manager of the Michigan Solar House
project. It’s called Mi-So for short. They had to be creative to make sure
their entry was dependent on the sun for energy.


“This is a solar contest, so we are very limited in terms of what we can do for energy production. We can’t even convert kinetic energy, somebody bouncing on something, into electrical energy. We’re very limited.”


The house has to be totally off the grid, which means lots of large
batteries and thin, photovoltaic panels, neither of which make for an
aesthetically pleasing house. And in the world of architecture, if it doesn’t look good from the outside, no one’s going to care if its energy efficient.


“Most consumers today aren’t gonna buy something just because it’s sustainable.”


Lee Devore is the Michigan team’s operations manager.


“But if you have two apples, and they’re identical, and their cost is
roughly the same, if one is more sustainable than the other, it’s that extra
thing, but the thing they’re really concerned about is that it’s still a beautiful
thing to possess.”


Back on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., Solar Decathlon
Competition director Richard King says in this contest, beauty’s as
important as sustainability.


“In the 70’s, we just stuck solar collectors on the roofs in all kinds of
directions and one of the barriers are a lot of people didn’t like that up there on
their roof. So we’ve employed these schools of architecture to design very
beautiful-looking buildings with solar integrated in to actually
prove that solar energy works.”


So to make Michigan’s solar house stand out as the belle at the D.C.
National Mall, John Beeson says the team turned to Michgan’s most noted
industry, the automakers, for tips.


BEESON: “People like taking their cars and tricking them out, and the house is the same thing, you
just don’t know you’re doing it, every time you move into it. So why not make the architecture built that way, so that people can change it and affect it the way they want. So for us, there would just be panelized construction. We would just put these panels up, I’m done with this sink, this mirror combination. I’m gonna take it down and sell it on Ebay.”


GUERRA: “Are people ready for this?”


BEESON: “We hope. If not, it’ll be a good exploratory example of it on the
National Mall for people to go see.”


Even after a winning team’s been picked, the challenges aren’t over. It’s one thing to build a solar prototype for the competition, it’s another to
take that prototype and turn it into homebuilding that can be mass-produced
for less waste and lower costs. Once that happens, we might just see solar
homes popping up in new neighborhoods.


For the GLRC, I’m Jennifer Guerra.

Related Links

States Sue to Increase Energy Efficiency

The home appliance industry is taking issue with a lawsuit filed by several states. The states want improvements made on energy efficiency standards. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

The home appliance industry is taking issue with a lawsuit
filed by several states. The states want improvements made on energy efficincy standards. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


In all, fifteen states and the city of New York have filed suit,
claiming the Department of Energy is years behind schedule writing
updated energy efficiency standards for twenty-two common appliances. The
states say if the federal government would get up to speed, consumers would benefit.


But the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers says there are
good reasons the government is behind schedule. General Counsel
Chuck Samuels says the energy department faces a lot of complex
rule-making.


“It is impossible for any agency to do all these rule-makings. What DOE has been forced to do is to prioritize and pursue those standards
that which will have the most benefit.”


Samuels says refrigerators and clothes washers have become much
more energy efficient. He acknowledges that tougher rules for other
large appliances like furnaces and air conditioners have not been
finished.


For the GLRC, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Study: Home Births Safe for Low-Risk Moms

Only about one percent of North American babies are born at home. But a study in the British Medical Journal reports home births can be a safe alternative for low risk women. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:

Transcript

Only about one percent of North American babies are born at home. But a study
in the British Medical Journal reports home births can be a safe alternative
for low risk women. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:


Researchers followed more than 5,400 pregnant women in the U.S. and Canada who were
planning a home birth with a professional certified midwife.


They looked at the death rate of newborns, the number of mothers who ended up in the hospital,
as well as the number of medical interventions used during labor.


They found low risk women who planned to give birth at home had the same likelihood of their
child dying as low risk women who went to the hospital. That’s fewer than two deaths out of
every 1,000 births.


Kenneth Johnson is an epidemiologist with the Canadian government.


“The participants experienced substantially lower rates of epidurals, episiotomies, forceps
deliveries, vacuum extractions, and cesareans.”


Home birth remains controversial in North America. While several Canadian medical societies
endorse home births, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists remains opposed
to them.


For the GLRC, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

‘Mcmansions’ Deflate Energy Savings

  • Many people are now making more energy-conscious decisions for their homes. However, one consideration that gets overlooked is the actual size of the house. (Photo by Bjarne Kvaale)

Every year, Americans build about one and a half million single-family homes. One researcher says a lot of these houses are simply too big for American families and the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee
reports:

Transcript

Every year, Americans build about one and a half million single-family homes. One researcher says a lot of these houses are simply too big for American families and the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:


When energy-conscious homebuyers look for a new house, they usually check for the right things: high-tech insulation, special windows, high-efficiency furnaces.


But one researcher suggests these homebuyers waste energy by buying more house than they need. Alex Wilson compared the size and efficiency of American homes for MIT’s Journal of Industrial Ecology. He says, since 1950, American families shrank by twenty-five percent, but their houses are now twice as large.


“If we’re significantly increasing the house size, our energy bills are still going to go up. So we lose the benefits that we would otherwise realize through these better technologies.”


He does hold out hope for bucking the trend toward miniature mansions. A number of architects want to make smaller homes more attractive through higher-quality design and materials.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links