The Singapore Environment Council (SEC) has launched a new certification scheme to facilitate the adoption of environmentally sustainable practices among local food-court operators.

SEC's Executive Director, Howard Shaw, said food courts generate huge amounts of waste and consume massive amounts of energy and water every day.

The Eco-Foodcourt certification assesses the environmental management system in a foodcourt, from its environmental policies to water, energy and waste management.

One of the mandatory requirements is that takeaway orders must not be placed in styrofoam boxes.

Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources, Dr Amy Khor, who was at the launch, gave certificates to Singapore's first two Eco-Foodcourts - The Deck at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, and the Kopitiam @ City Square Mall.

Examples of environmentally sustainable practices implemented at The Deck include organic food recycling, the recycling of cooking oil, and the use of eco-friendly and reusable boxes as well as the promotion of meat-free meals.

Kopitiam's Corporate Communications Manager, Ms Goh Wee Ling, said the tenants saw a bonus for being environmentally responsible.

They saw operating expenses fall when they managed the use of energy and water wisely.

It was reported last year that Singapore saw a 31 per cent increase in waste generated since 2000, with food waste as one of the top five waste types.

The SEC aims to give the Eco-Foodcourt certificate to 10% of the food courts in Singapore by the end of this year.

Going forward the SEC says it is working towards a certification for community clubs and retail establishments.

(Source: New eco-label for food-courts [Channel News Asia])

Danny Clark's idea was simple: If he could make plastic water bottles biodegradable, it would reduce the impact on landfills, curb roadside litter and reduce the amount of plastic garbage that eventually washes into the oceans.

But the Mesa, Arizona, man's venture has run into opposition from a large and unexpected source: the $400 billion recycling industry, which fears that making plastic bottles biodegradable will reduce the stream of plastic refuse used to make everything from carpet to clothing to new bottles. In addition, the industry fears that changing the makeup of plastic bottles could make it more difficult to recycle them.

With plastic-bottle sales already slowing and only a small amount being recycled, the industry is meeting threats to its profits head-on, actively campaigning against attempts by companies like Clark's to make bottles biodegradable.

Billions of plastic bottles, which take millions of barrels of oil to produce, appear on supermarket shelves every year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Only about 28% of bottles manufactured in the U.S. end up being recycled, the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said. The other 72% wind up in landfills or as litter.

"Bottles are a big issue. It's talked about, and it's pretty visible," Clark said.

He launched his start-up, Enso Bottles, in 2008 and says he has come up with a truly biodegradable and recyclable polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, plastic bottle.

PET is used to make a wide range of products, particularly packaging containers for consumer goods, such as water and soda bottles. Traditional plastic PET bottles can take hundreds of years to break into smaller pieces, but those pieces never actually decompose.

Clark's company produces an additive used in the plastic-manufacturing process and says on its website that independent testing data show bottles start to biodegrade in as little as 250 days in a controlled environment or as long as five years in the elements. In addition, Clark's data show that the additive doesn't diminish the quality or effectiveness of the plastic, he says.

Clark said that technologies allowing plastics to biodegrade have been around for several decades but had not been applied to PET bottles.

Recycling-industry experts have concerns about Enso's biodegradable efforts, saying they are not convinced the technology works, but they also worry that if it does, it will damage their business.

Dennis Sabourin of the National Association for PET Container Resources said the association is not in favor of anything that disrupts that recycled-product stream.

"We want to make sure it does not affect the raw material," Sabourin said. "Does it affect the service life of products that are being made today with (PET bottles)?"

More than a year ago, the association sent out a news release to all PET manufacturers asking them to refrain from using biodegradable additives. The experts say biodegradable products are more difficult and costly to recycle than PET bottles.

David Cornell of the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers said Enso has tried to convince them that the biodegradable additive will not hurt their business, but the recycling industry still fears it poses a threat.

"So far, we haven't seen that it does degrade or is not hostile to recycling. If it doesn't degrade, then who wants it? If it does degrade, what does it do to recycling?"

Cornell credits Enso for trying to solve a problem and said that, unlike some other companies, Enso has tried to work with the industry and communicate about product tests.

"They're working on it. I will give them credit," Cornell said.

(Source: Eco-friendly plastic bottles stoke recycling fight [USA Today])

Today's plastic resins are all based on petrochemical sources. Moreover, their production involves highly toxic ingredients, such as epichlorohydrin, bisphenol-A, melamine, formaldehyde, and phosgene. Such resins are not biodegradable, and cannot be burned safely, because their combustion releases many toxic components. Even the sawdust of coated plywood and medium density fiberboard (MDF) is harmful.

Rising to this challenge, University of Amsterdam scientists have developed a range of new thermoset resins starting from 100% non-toxic renewable raw materials derived from biomass. By choosing the appropriate components and conditions for the cross linking/polymerization process, they succeeded in making a variety of bio-plastics, including rigid foams, elastic foams, and rigid and elastic plates. These new materials are fully biodegradable, non-toxic and non-hazardous. Moreover, the starting materials are cheap and readily available worldwide.

The new resins can in principle replace polyurethane and polystyrene in building and packaging applications, as well as epoxy resins in the production of plywood and MDF. The University of Amsterdam has filed European and US patent applications on the invention and is currently working on developing industrial applications and upscaling of the process.

(Source: Biodegradable and 100% renewable non-toxic plastic resins from biomass [University of Amsterdam])

Less than one-third of the biofuel used on British roads meets government environmental standards intended to protect water supplies, soil quality and carbon stocks, according to new figures.

The Renewable Fuels Agency says that just 31% of the biofuel supplied under the government's initiative to use fuel from plants to help tackle climate change met its green standard. For the remaining 69% of the biofuel, suppliers could not say where it came from, or could not prove it was produced in a sustainable way, the figures show.

In April 2008, suppliers began mixing biofuel into all petrol and diesel supplies under the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), and by 2009-10 – the time period to which these latest figures relate – biofuels accounted for 3.3% of UK transport fuels. Suppliers were supposed to ensure that 50% of biofuel met government environmental standards, but the target is not mandatory and was not met.

Several suppliers, including BP, Total, Morgan Stanley and Chevron, also failed to meet targets on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and providing data on the source of their biofuels.

The Renewable Fuels Agency's chief executive Nick Goodall said: "We've seen some progress from suppliers in meeting the challenge of sourcing their biofuels responsibly, but in many cases it has been disappointingly slow. Too many are lagging behind and dragging overall performance down. With mandatory sustainability criteria due to be introduced with the [European] Renewable Energy Directive, companies currently missing all three targets need to make a step change in performance."

Scientists and campaigners have warned that biofuels could cause more problems than they solve, with concerns over the destruction of tropical forests and impact on global food supplies.

The majority of UK biofuel is imported. Biodiesel from soy was the single biggest source (31%) in 2009/10, with a large increase in Argentinian soy compared to the previous year, something that Friends of the Earth biofuels campaigner Kenneth Richter calls a "huge cause for concern".

There are also concerns about the impact of biofuels on food prices. The United Nations has singled out biofuel demand as a major factor in what it estimates will be as much as a 40% increase in food prices over the coming decade.

The Renewables Fuel Agency published the Gallagher review into biofuels in 2008, which recommended that the government slow the introduction of biofuels until more was known about the possible negative impacts.

Ministers responded by reducing the rate at which the RTFO's biofuel targets will increase, so that the total biofuel content in petrol and diesel will reach 5% in 2013-14. A separate EU plan aims to include 10% biofuel in transport fuel by 2020.

(Source: Two-thirds of UK biofuel fails green standard, figures show [Guardian])

At age 9, while traveling with his family and being "roadschooled," Birke Baehr began studying sustainable and organic farming practices such as composting, vermiculture, canning and food preservation. Soon he discovered his other passion: educating others -- especially his peers -- about the destructiveness of the industrialized food system, and the alternatives.

Now, 11-year-old, speaking at TED, he presents his take on a major source of our food -- far-away and less-than-picturesque industrial farms. Keeping farms out of sight promotes a rosy, unreal picture of big-box agriculture, he argues, as he outlines the case to green and localize food production.

(Source: Birke Baehr: What's wrong with our food system [TED])

An American company is about to begin construction of a US$12 million anaerobic digester in Richmond, Canada that it claims will be North America's first high-efficiency system to produce renewable energy from food and yard waste.

Harvest Power's digester technology, if successful in Richmond, could be deployed at landfills across Canada according to Natural Resources Canada, which is investing $4 million into the company’s Richmond facility over two years.

The company is breaking ground on its digester, which will sit directly adjacent to the composting facility, within a month, according to Paul Sellew, Harvest's co-founder and CEO.

Sellew said the company chose Richmond because of federal and provincial government policies supporting renewable energy production. It also liked Metro Vancouver’s landfill diversion policies.

Although some Metro Vancouver municipalities divert more waste from the landfill than others, they are all participating in the Zero Waste Challenge, which aims to divert 70% of the region's solid waste from landfills by 2015.

Most of the 200,000 tonnes of food and yard waste that Fraser Richmond, a Canadian company acquired by Harvest Power in 2009, turns into fertilizer each year comes from Metro Vancouver.

In an email, the City of Vancouver's engineering department said 20,000 tonnes of yard trimmings and food scraps were collected from Vancouver homes from May to December 2010 – an 8% (1,500-tonne) increase compared with the same period in 2009.

Sellew said that in the U.S., about 97% of food waste is incinerated or taken to landfills.

"So places like Vancouver that are beginning this source separation of organics, those are the exceptions to the rule right now."

Sellew added that only about 100 communities in North America are separating organic garbage from the main waste stream.

Waste that enters the digester becomes a meal for microbes in an oxygen-free environment. A byproduct of the process is biomethane, or biogas, which can be converted into electricity.

Wastewater treatment plants and other facilities gasify liquid waste through digesters, but Sellew said Harvest's will be the first North American-based digester to gasify "high-solids" (food and yard waste).

Harvest's digester requires the high-calorie content of food waste to create usable biogas.

Give the imbalanced ratio of yard to food waste delivered to Fraser Richmond, only about 27,000 of the facility's 200,000 tonnes of collected waste will initially enter the digester annually.

The City of Vancouver says that approximately 35% of household garbage is compostable food scraps and food-soiled paper.

As more residences and businesses divert their food waste, Harvest will expand the digester's capacity from two to around five megawatts (MW) of biogas-generated electricity. Roughly 250 to 300 homes can be powered by one MW.

Once the waste is converted to biogas, its leftovers are composted with other garbage.

Sellew said the waste is largely the same volume and quality before and after it's digested.

The company is negotiating with local electricity companies about selling its biogas.

(Source: Food waste helping feed Harvest Power’s garbage-to-gold ambitions [Business in Vancouver])

Anthony "Van" Jones is a senior fellow at the Center For American Progress and a founder and senior policy advisor at Green for All, an NGO dedicated to building an inclusive green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty.

He lays out a case against plastic pollution from the perspective of social justice. Plastic trash, he argues, hits poor people and poor countries "first and worst," with consequences we all share regardless of where we live and what we earn. At a recent TEDx that focused on the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (TEDxGPGP), he offers a few powerful ideas to help us reclaim our throwaway planet.

(Source: The economic injustice of plastic [Guardian])

The Santa Monica City Council has approved a ban on single-use plastic bags.

The council voted 4-0 Tuesday night to approve a ban affecting most retail outlets in the city beginning in September.

Under the ordinance, plastic bags will no longer be available at grocery stores, clothing shops or other retailers. The exception will be restaurants providing food and liquids for takeout. Vendors at the popular Santa Monica Farmers Markets will no longer provide single-use plastic or paper bags.

Heal the Bay, an environmental nonprofit group, called the action "one of the most aggressive" on single-use bags in the United States.

"Sending a powerful message that the plastic pollution plague can be abated, the vote furthers the recent momentum for enacting local bag measures throughout California," the group said in a statement.

Santa Monica joins other areas in California that have similar bans, including parts of Los Angeles County, Marin County and the city of San Jose. The city of Calabasas will consider a ban on plastic bags Tuesday.

Santa Monica had first planned to hear the item two years ago, but an industry group's threat of a lawsuit prompted the city to conduct an environmental review of the ordinance.

"The Santa Monica Council's leadership today shows that local governments are going to address this critical issue despite threats from industry and state inaction," said Mark Gold, president of Heal the Bay. "The plastics industry knows the writing is on the wall."

Shoppers who forget their reusable bags may purchase paper bags at checkout for at least 10 cents each.

Heal the Bay said the measure seeks to end the "environmental and fiscal waste" created by the use of about 26 million single-use plastic shopping bags each year in the city of Santa Monica alone. California municipalities spend nearly $25 million each year to collect and dispose of plastic bag waste, the group said.

Yet fewer than 5% of plastic grocery bags are recycled each year statewide, with others filling space in landfills and harming animal life when the bags wind up in waterways. In offering his support for the measure, Santa Monica Councilman Richard Bloom also noted that many bags float on the breeze, creating hazards for motorists.

(Source: Santa Monica approves ban on single-use plastic bags [Los Angeles Times])

Twenty-one reusable bags sold as alternatives to disposable plastic or paper bags had dangerous levels of lead, according to new test results provided to USA TODAY. The non-woven-polypropylene bags bags, sold by chains including Safeway, Walgreen's and Bloom, all had lead content above 100 parts per million — the highest level that many states allow in consumer packaging. The tests were conducted by Frontier Global Sciences for the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), which plans to release the results Monday. The group tested 71 bags and inserts from 44 retailers and organizations.

Often it was the bags' inserts that contained the high lead levels. The Safeway bag inserts had the highest level of lead — 672 ppm — behind only CVS bags recalled in November. Earlier this month, the Center for Environmental Health (CEH) reported finding lead levels 15 times the federal limit for kid's products in Disney-themed Safeway reusable bags.

Safeway said Friday night it was pulling the O by Organics reusable bags from sale while it awaits information from the bag maker. It recommends throwing away the bottom insert. It stopped selling the Disney bags, as well.

Bloom says it stopped offering the bag tested in November and will refund anyone concerned about the bag. Walgreen's says it now tests for lead and other toxins, and all current bags pass. It sells several bags and wasn't sure exactly which bag CCF tested.

CEH says there is no safe level of lead exposure, which can lead to brain and kidney damage.

Bruce Lanphear, a public health doctor who has testified before Congress about lead exposure, says "it's hard to quantify" the risk of bags' lead, but notes lead builds up in body tissues and that levels once thought safe are not.

"It just doesn't make sense to allow a poison to be used in reusable bags," says Lanphear, a health sciences professor at Canada's Simon Fraser University.

Food and Drug Administration spokesman Douglas Karas says the agency would need more time to review the results, but would "expect the use of safe materials" in bags. Still, he says lead in some bags "would present little or no likelihood of migration to (packaged) food."

While CEH and CCF are both testing for lead in reusable bags, CEH favors bans on disposable bags that the business-funded CCF opposes. CCF wants to show the "unintended consequences" of "fad legislation."

Thirteen cities and Los Angeles County ban the use of disposable plastic bags, and Washington, D.C., has a five-cent tax on them. Environmental groups favor bans or fees for disposable bags, especially those made of plastic, because they can last hundreds of years and harm fish and animals.

The American Chemistry Council, which is pushing recycling instead of bans or fees, has also paid for testing showing bacteria in reusable plastic bags. The group says it is for "consumer choice" and that people need to know that they have to wash the bags between uses.

"It's an interesting irony for them to say that we should stay away from plastic bags," says CEH's Charles Margulis.

(Source: Tests find high levels of lead in reusable bags [USA Today])

Amid a debate on environmental hazards caused by the use of plastic, India's environment minister Jairam Ramesh is not in favour of a blanket ban on it across the country but said it could be area specific.

"I don't think India can afford to take a position on blanket ban on plastic all over the country. I am not in favour of a blanket ban on plastic all over the country," he told reporters after a discussion with industrialists on the subject organized by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI).

However, he said there can be specific areas where the use of plastic could be discouraged.

Ramesh said his ministry is in the process of notifying the plastic waste management rules.

"We have the objective of minimizing the environmental hazards caused by the large scale disposal of plastic waste. At the same time we don't want to kill the plastic processing industry, which is very important in terms of employment generation in our country," he said.

"The objective of the plastic waste management rules is not just to manage the environmental hazards caused by plastic disposal, but also to ensure that we don't kill the plastic industry," he said.

Noting that hazardous waste management is a very serious issue, the minister said though 6 million tonnes of hazardous waste is generated in the country every year, only 2.5 million tonnes of it can be recycled.

"So we have to increase the facilities for treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes and we have to ensure that these are done in environmentally sustainable manner," he said.

He said there was a lot of discussion on converting waste into energy as the municipal solid waste management is becoming a very serious environmental challenge.

Both the ministry of urban development and environment and forests should address that challenge, Ramesh added.

(Source: Ramesh not in favour of blanket ban on use of plastic [Economic Times])