Good Guide allows you to look up products while you're in the store and see how they're rated in terms of safety, environmental impact, and social concerns (Photo courtesy of Good Guide)
Companies that make things like cosmetics, household cleaners, and toys are not required to list every ingredient that’s in their products. Now, some shoppers are dialing up that information on their cell phones. Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
Companies that make things like cosmetics, household cleaners, and toys are not required to list every ingredient that’s in their products. Now, some shoppers are dialing up that information on their cell phones. Mark Brush has more:
There’s a new app for the iPhone that can give you information about products. It’s called Good Guide.
And you basically take a picture of a barcode – on say a bottle of shampoo – and then Good Guide gives you a score.
The guide can rate products on their environmental footprint – how socially responsible the company is – or how safe it is.
Other phones can access the same information using text messages.
Dara O’Rourke is the founder of Good Guide. He says he started the company after he discovered a sunscreen that he put on his daughter contained a potential carcinogen.
“And that really initially, actually kind of upset me, that this product that I’m bringing into my house and putting on my young daughter has chemicals that have been banned in Europe, banned in Australia, banned in many industrialized countries, but still are in products on our store shelves.”
O’Rourke says if consumers are interested, they can access the research and the life-cycle studies behind each product’s overall score.
A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:
Transcript
A lot of people want to know what
they can do to be more environmentally friendly.
Ellis Jones says you make a vote on environmental
issues every time you pull out your wallet.
Jones is a sociologist at the University of
California Davis. And he’s written a pocket-sized
booklet called ‘The Better World Shopping Guide’
that grades companies that make the things we buy.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham talked to
him about the guide:
Ellis Jones: “I think that people will use this guide to make sure that the companies that
are doing good work get their dollars. And the companies that are not doing good work,
they don’t get their dollars until they improve.”
Lester Graham: “I chose three topics. One of them is gasoline. No one gets an A+? But
you did give an A to Sunoco and you gave an F to Exxon-Mobile. Can you tell me really
quickly what went into those grades?”
Jones: “It includes everything from how polluting their petroleum refineries are, what
their human rights records are when they deal with communities abroad, how they deal
with consumers, what their advertising is like and how they do or don’t ‘greenwash’ – to
really give a sense of, you know, the difference between the good guys and the bad guys
in gasoline.”
Graham: “I also looked at bread, and you gave an A+ to local bakeries.”
Jones: “Supporting a local bakery is really about as good as it gets. Far above and
beyond what you can get supporting even the most organic bread company.”
Graham: “The third thing I looked at was water, because bottled water is such an issue
these days. The A+ was given to tap water, which, in most communities, is as good as
anything you can buy in a bottle.”
Jones: “The most powerful difference a consumer can make is actually avoiding the
product all together. So, anything to really minimize the impact because this industry
itself is inherently problematic.”
Graham: “Just casually flipping through looking at who rated an F in your guide, often it
seemed like it was the most recognizable name. Kraft, Nabisco, Libby’s. Those kinds of
companies. Why is it these really large corporations tended to do so poorly in your
guide?”
Jones: “Well, you know, I think this really points out a kind of inherent problem within
our current economic system. And that is that the way to get ahead in the system is to
grow larger, to gobble up smaller companies, to basically out-compete the other
companies around you by cutting costs wherever you can by using larger economies of
scale. And the process that gets lost in the system is the impact on the people and the
planet.”
Graham: “I’m wondering how this changes your view of things when you go shopping
now.”
Jones: “Well, let me tell you, I really have put in as much research as a human being can
into this. And I am still filled with questions. These questions are out there and we need
to keep companies accountable and the government accountable to be able to provide us
with good data so we can make smart decisions as consumers.
Graham: “So your guide doesn’t let us off the hook, we still have to do some of our own
homework.”
Jones: (laughs) “Exactly. We have to actually make do with the information that we
have now, make the best choices available, and then as new information comes in, then
we’re responsible to make even better choices. But in that process we have to build in
quite a bit of forgiveness, because one thing this book is not about being perfect or pure
in the world. It really is about trying to make the best choice at any given time in any
given place.”
A lead detector finds over 5000 parts per million of lead in this toy. (Photo by Lisa Ann Pinkerton)
A new federal law is forcing
toy manufacturers to get the lead out
of children’s products. Consumer
advocates are cheering the tougher
guidelines. Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
A new federal law is forcing
toy manufacturers to get the lead out
of children’s products. Consumer
advocates are cheering the tougher
guidelines. Julie Grant reports:
Consumer advocate Ed Mierzwinski says despite what
you’d assume, toys have not been tested for safety.
Mierzwinski is with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
He says, until now, the government agency in charge – the
Consumer Products Safety Commission – hasn’t been able
to do that.
“It was a rudderless ship. It had no leadership. It had no
money. It had one person testing toys. A guy named bob.
And in 2007 the whole thing just came to a crisis.”
Mierzwinski says 30-million toys were recalled last year.
This new law requires all children’s products meet tougher
new standards for toxic materials. It also gives the
Consumer Product Safety Commission more money, staff,
and authority.
But the law doesn’t take effect until February – so toys for
sale this holiday season could still be a problem.
Reporter Karen Kelly's daughter making safer cleaning products at home (Photo by Karen Kelly)
Most people probably don’t enjoy
cleaning. But we’ve all got to do it.
And if you’ve ever looked at the household
cleaner aisle in the grocery store, you
know there can be some pretty strong
chemicals involved. Karen Kelly reports
on a cheaper, chemical-free alternative:
Transcript
Most people probably don’t enjoy
cleaning. But we’ve all got to do it.
And if you’ve ever looked at the household
cleaner aisle in the grocery store, you
know there can be some pretty strong
chemicals involved. Karen Kelly reports
on a cheaper, chemical-free alternative:
(sound of store)
I’ve just arrived at my neighborhood grocery store with a plan: to find what I
need to make my own household cleaners.
I head over to the cleaning aisle and pull out a list of ingredients I got off the
internet.
I see borax and
washing soda on the shelf.
They`re both made from naturally-occuring minerals and cost about five bucks
each for a 4 to 5 pound box.
I look around for soap flakes – to make my own dish soap – and find a big bar I
can grate myself.
The only thing missing is castile soap. It’s a biodegradable soap used in a lot of
these recipes.
I’ll grab that next at the natural foods store.
To be honest, I never paid that much attention to the ingredients in household
cleaner – until I used something with dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride on
my bathtub. It comes with warnings.
I rinsed it and took a bath. My 4-year-old also took a bath.
And we both ended up with a very itchy skin rash.
That convinced me. I had to find a safer way to clean the tub that, number one,
worked. And number two, wasn’t too expensive.
Which pretty much meant I’d have to make it myself.
We decided to start with the all-purpose cleaner.
Karen Kelly: “Okay. We need borax, which we have, castile soap, hot water.”
Child: “We have that! We can just turn on the sink and make hot water!”
Kelly: “And vinegar.”
Child: “We have, do we have vinegar?”
Kelly: “Yes.”
Child: “And Mom, we have hot water.”
We mix up a recipe I found on the David Suzuki Foundation’s website.
(sound of stirring and banging)
They’ve got a whole bunch of do-it-yourself recipes for bathtub scrubbers,
laundry soap, furniture polish, you name it.
Lindsay Coulter is the person who devised these concoctions.
She says a lot of people forget that you don’t need fancy products to get your
house clean.
“You know, if you talk to your grandmothers or your great-aunts, you’ll find that
they too used things like washing soda, baking soda, white vinegar, and a basic
castile soap. Things like vinegar – it’s acidic and helps lift grease and
deodorizes. A lot of the things you’re cooking with anyways, so you probably
already have it in your kitchen. And the benefit? Just peace of mind that you
know what goes into it.”
But does it work? It’s time to find out.
(sound of spraying)
We spray. We wipe. The bathroom sink shines.
Next, we try the bath tub scrubber. It’s a mix of castile soap, vinegar – which is
a natural disinfectant – baking soda, and water.
(sound of cleaning the tub)
The tub looks great, actually. And you know what? This is a lot cheaper.
Brand name all-purpose cleaning sprays are about 4 bucks a bottle where I live.
It cost me just a dollar – and about 5 minutes – to fill that same bottle with my
own mix.
So it’s cheap, it’s easy to make, and, best of all, I don’t have to worry about chemical reaction after a soak
in the tub.
Earth at twilight. A digital photograph taken in June 2001 from the International Space Station orbiting at an altitude of 211 nautical miles. (Photo courtesy of NASA)
The first Earth Day in 1970 often gets credit
for jumpstarting the modern environmental movement.
Lately, Earth Day’s meaning might be changing a bit.
A lot of companies are running Earth Day ads and
offering special Earth Day shopping events. Rebecca
Williams reports the idea is that we can buy our way
to a better world:
Transcript
The first Earth Day in 1970 often gets credit
for jumpstarting the modern environmental movement.
Lately, Earth Day’s meaning might be changing a bit.
A lot of companies are running Earth Day ads and
offering special Earth Day shopping events. Rebecca
Williams reports the idea is that we can buy our way
to a better world:
You can’t watch TV lately without tripping over ads around Earth Day.
Campbell’s soup is wearing an Earth Day label. Campbell’s says condensing
soup means smaller, lighter cans. So, that means less waste. Of course,
they’ve been doing that since 1897. Long before Earth Day and the
environmental movement.
Even Barbie’s excited about Earth Day. She’s got a limited edition line of
accessories. They’re made from scraps of fabric that would otherwise have
been thrown away. She’s so crafty.
Of course, there’s a reason why it’s raining Earth Day ads.
“Companies advertise in ways they think people will respond.”
Tom Lyon directs the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at
the University of Michigan.
“Five years ago they didn’t think they were getting a whole lot of mileage
out of advertising green. Now you could say green is the new black – every
company is moving in this direction.”
Lyon says the reality of climate change has been more widely accepted in the
past couple years. People are wondering what they can do about it. And
companies are trying to tap into that.
Joel Makower has been studying green marketing for 20 years. He’s the
executive editor of Greenbiz.com. He says Earth Day marketing ebbs and
flows over the years. But he hopes Earth Day never turns into a marketing
event on the scale of Christmas.
“I think most people recognize the very clear reality that we’re never going
to shop our way to environmental health and so to the extent that Earth Day
becomes an excuse to consume, then we’ll have sent all the wrong messages.”
But Makower says a lot of companies actually are making big changes in their
practices and they should talk about that. He says Earth Day advertising
makes sense if the company’s doing something to improve all year long.
Otherwise he says it might just be a stunt.
Others think Earth Day as a marketing opportunity is probably here to stay.
Adam Werbach is the Global CEO of Saatchi and Saatchi S. It’s a major ad
agency. He says companies see Earth Day as another holiday.
“The reason that works so well this year – Easter came very early and there
was a large gap between Easter and Memorial Day so Earth Day fit in really
well so that stores could get through their Easter merchandise and start
putting green merchandise on the shelves and then move into Memorial Day.”
Werbach thinks that’s actually not a bad thing. He’s had feet in both
worlds – as a former president of the Sierra Club. More recently he’s been
a consultant for Wal-Mart. He thinks consumers should be the ones driving
companies to improve their practices.
“Our hope is of course that people who have tried these new products will
return and buy them in the next month so that in the end you’re creating a
cycle of demand for green products on shelves so that they don’t go away and
be a one time occurrence.”
But at the same time, Adam Werbach is a little conflicted. He wishes Earth
Day could be the one day of the year we could take a break.
Infants are widely exposed to a class of chemicals that might be harmful to their
reproductive systems. That’s according to new research published today/this week
(Monday, February 4th, 2008) in the journal Pediatrics. Mark Brush reports – the
chemicals are known as phthalates:
Transcript
Infants are widely exposed to a class of chemicals that might be harmful to their
reproductive systems. That’s according to new research published today/this week
(Monday, February 4th, 2008) in the journal Pediatrics. Mark Brush reports – the
chemicals are known as phthalates:
Phthalates are everywhere. They’re used to make plastics softer. And they’re used in
perfumes, shampoos, and lotions to help the product absorb into your skin.
Researchers at the University of Washington found that infants had higher concentrations of phthalates in their urine if their mothers used baby lotions, shampoos and powders.
Dr. Sheela Sathyanarayana led the study. She says it can be hard to avoid phthalates:
“In terms of personal care products and cosmetics, we don’t know. The products are not
labeled to contain phthalates in them, and so it’s very, very difficult to kind of counsel
families about what to do.”
Sathyanarayana says more study is needed to determine human health effects. Animal
studies have shown that the chemicals can change hormone levels, leading to
reproductive problems in males.
DuPont has agreed to take part in a new E-P-A program aimed at eliminating the use of a potentially toxic chemical. The chemical is known as C-8. And it’s used to make Teflon and other nonstick and stain-resistant products. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
Transcript
DuPont has agreed to take part in a new program aimed at eliminating
the use of a potentially toxic chemical. The chemical is known as C-8,
and it’s used to make Teflon and other nonstick and stain-resistant
products. The voluntary program was proposed by the EPA. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
The EPA wants DuPont and seven other chemical companies to
completely eliminate C-8 in the next nine years.
The effort is drawing praise from environmentalists. Timothy Kropp is a
senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group. He says finding
a substitute for C-8 can decrease pollution and damage to human health…
“This chemical is ubiquitous in people’s blood, and it’s persistent and
everywhere throughout the environment. It is such a wide ranging
chemical with so many concerns that it’s high time that someone took
care of this.”
One EPA official says this is a great opportunity for the industry to get
ahead of the curve and demonstrate leadership in protecting the
environment.
Many people do not know what to do with old computers and
equipment, so they end up in the trash.
Electronic waste can potentially contain harmful chemicals like
lead, mercury, and cadmium. Recycling computers and other electronics is a
way to help the environment.
If you bought a new computer over the holidays, there are plenty of places to drop off your household’s old computer. But to prevent more of the old monitors, laptops and other items from winding up in landfills, some Midwest states are looking to make sure computer makers get involved in recycling their products. One of the few manufacturers that already helps re-use old computer parts is Texas-based Dell, Incorporated. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach went to a Dell-sponsored recycling center and has this
report:
Transcript
If you bought a new computer over the holidays, there are plenty of
places to drop off your household’s old computer, but to prevent more
of the old monitors, laptops and other items from winding up in
landfills, some Midwest states are looking to make sure computer
makers get involved in recycling their products. One of the few
manufacturers that already helps re-use old computer parts is
Texas-based Dell, Incorporated. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Chuck Quirmbach went to a Dell-sponsored recycling center and has this
report:
About a year ago, Dell helped set up and publicize a computer
recycling plant at a Goodwill Industries facility in Dell’s home city
of Austin.
(Sound of clunking)
Goodwill employees and volunteers sort through the hundreds of
boxes of computers and computer parts that are dropped off – at no
charge to the consumer – at the site. Newer computers are set aside
for repairs, and hard drive memories are erased. Older computers go
to a bench where workers like Paul take apart (or demanufacture)
them.
“I’m taking apart all the useable parts. Motherboard, power sources,
cards, ports, metal goes into bins, plastic goes into bins for
recycling and what not.”
(Sound of ambience switch)
Goodwill sells the reusable parts at its retail store elsewhere in the
building. Used LCD monitors, for example, go for as low as twenty
dollars.
Manager Christine Banks says some of the equipment is under
a 30-day Goodwill warranty. Other parts can be exchanged if the
customer isn’t satisfied. Banks says Goodwill is happy this computer-
recycling program makes a profit.
“Our operation does. However, there are 7 or 8 other Goodwills
throughout the country that do this that barely break even. We’re just
fortunate we have higher tech donations, a pool of employees with
more technology, it’s very tricky.”
Some states charge high disposal costs for unwanted computer parts,
which can contain potentially harmful chemicals. Those high costs can
make it difficult for a recycling program to get off the ground, but
environmental groups say the fast-growing pile of circuit boards,
monitors, and plastic parts can leach poisons like lead, mercury, and
cadmium into the environment.
They say small-scale projects like the one in Austin have to be part of a
broader effort to keep electronic waste out of the nation’s landfills. That
effort could include government mandates forcing manufacturers to
safely dispose of old products.
Robin Schneider is with the Austin office of the National Computer
Takeback Campaign.
“So, to really deal with the environmental problems of millions of
pounds of toxins, we’re gonna need something bigger than this. This is a
piece of it…and gonna need lot of pieces of it.”
Schneider says she’s encouraged that some Midwest states are
looking into manufacturer takeback programs. She acknowledges that
recycling may drive up the cost of new computers, but she also says
manufacturers may start redesigning computers so that it’s more
profitable for the companies to take them back.
Most Americans have a trace amount of the chemical C-8 in their blood, and no one knows where it comes from. But the DuPont Company is going to conduct studies that could solve the mystery as part of a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
Transcript
Most Americans have a trace amount of the chemical C-8 in their blood,
and no one knows where it comes from, but the DuPont Company is
going to conduct studies that could solve the mystery as part of a
settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
DuPont spokesman Cliff Webb says the company will spend five million
dollars to investigate the potential breakdown in the environment of C-8,
a key ingredient in Teflon and other non-stick materials.
“We’ll hire independent third parties to serve as a panel administrator for
peer review and consultation, and then the panel will address any specific
activities and findings they see as a result of the study, and the public
will have an opportunity to nominate also a panel member.”
Webb says the three year study will focus on nine chemicals or products
that could release C-8, but he won’t divulge what they are, explaining
they’re confidential business information.
An EPA advisory group has concluded that C-8 is a “likely carcinogen,”
but DuPont disputes that.
Under the settlement agreement, DuPont also must pay a record fine of
more than 10-million dollars for failing to disclose C-8 data to regulators.
The United States and Canada are updating a 30 year-old regional water quality agreement. The governments are launching 14 public hearings in both countries to gather ideas. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:
Transcript
The United States and Canada are updating a 30 year-old regional water quality
agreement. The governments are launching 14 public hearings in both countries to
gather ideas. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:
The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was initially designed to rid the Great Lakes
of chemicals. In the 1970’s, it resulted in the ban of phosphorus in detergents and other
consumer products. The ban is widely credited with starting to clean up the lakes.
Dennis Schornack is the U.S. chair of the International Joint Commission. He says a lot
of new problems have emerged since the agreement was last updated in 1987.
“Looking to the future, the threats that we have today have changed, one especially
important threat is invasive species. Foreign species have disrupted the food chain in the
Great Lakes.”
Schornack says other issues that need to be addressed include water runoff from streets
and farms that contain pesticides and other chemicals, and lakefront development.
The U.S. and Canada hope to complete an update of the Great Lakes protection
agreement in 2006.
Good Guide allows you to look up products while you're in the store and see how they're rated in terms of safety, environmental impact, and social concerns (Photo courtesy of Good Guide)
