This past Memorial Day Weekend officially kicked off the start of summer 2023, and with a new season comes new environmental news!

Clean Energy Investment Milestones

Global investment in clean energy is set to outpace that in fossil fuels for the first time, according to a report from the International Energy Agency (IEA). According to the report, about “USD 2.8 trillion is set to be invested globally in energy in 2023, of which more than USD 1.7 trillion is expected to go to clean technologies – including renewables, electric vehicles, nuclear power, grids, storage, low-emissions fuels, efficiency improvements and heat pumps – according to the IEA’s latest World Energy Investment report. The remainder, slightly more than USD 1 trillion, is going to coal, gas and oil” (Browning, 2023).

In short, “For every dollar invested in fossil fuels, about 1.7 dollars are now going into clean energy. Five years ago, this ratio was one-to-one” (Browning, 2023). While this spending trend is moving in the right direction, “current fossil fuel spending is significantly higher than what it should be to reach the goal of net zero by mid-century,” according to an IEA spokesperson (Browning, 2023). Moreover, demand for these traditional polluting energy sources is set to reach an “all-time high or six times the level needed in 2030 to reach net zero by 2050” while investment in new fossil fuel supply will increase 6% in 2023 (Browning, 2023), thus demonstrating the difficulty of weaning an industrialized world off of oil and coal, and the uphill battle that remains in the global decarbonization fight.

Plastic Pollution Treaty Talks begin in Paris

Over 2,000 participants gather in Paris this week to continue discussing a proposed treaty to tackle the global plastic pollution crisis. The group, known as the The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for Plastics, “is charged with developing the first international, legally binding treaty on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment. This is the second of five meetings due to take place to complete the negotiations by the end of 2024” (Adamson and McDermott, 2023). The focus of this session is to make critical decisions about “the objectives and scope of the text — such as what kind of plastics it will focus on” (Adamson and McDermott, 2023).

As “humanity produces more than 430 million tons of plastic annually, two-thirds of which are short-lived products that soon become waste, filling the ocean and, often, working their way into the human food chain,” there is an increasingly urgent need to address the plastics problem (Adamson and McDermott, 2023). Solutions however, vary wildly by who you ask—with industry representatives, manufacturers, public health professionals, government officials, and environmental groups & leaders all bringing their own perspectives. Each of these perspectives may steer the treaty talks in very different directions. Some of these possibilities include:

[A] focus on human health and the environment, as desired by the self-named “high ambition coalition” of countries, led by Norway and Rwanda, with limits on plastic production and restrictions on some of the chemicals used in plastics. The coalition is committed to an international, legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution by 2040. It says that this is necessary to protect human health and the environment while helping to restore biodiversity and curb climate change.

Alternatively, the treaty could have a more limited scope to address plastic waste and scale up recycling, as some of the plastic-producing and oil and gas exporters want. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Countries supporting this plan include the United States, Saudi Arabia and China. The U.S. delegation in Uruguay said national plans would allow governments to prioritize the most important sources and types of plastic pollution. Many plastics and chemical companies want this approach, too, with a plastic waste treaty that prioritizes recycling.

The International Council of Chemical Associations, the World Plastics Council, the American Chemistry Council and other companies that make, use and recycle plastics say they want an agreement that eliminates plastic pollution while “retaining the societal benefits of plastics.” They’re calling themselves the “global partners for plastics circularity.” They say that modern plastic materials are used around the world to create essential and often life-saving products, many of which are critical to a lower-carbon, more sustainable future.

Adamson and McDermott, 2023

It looks like an ambitious treaty and first-of-its-kind commitment to curbing global pollution is in sight, climate activists just hope it is not poised to be weakened by the powers of the plastic and oil industry lobbying…Stay tuned for an update soon!

Spring has sprung in Northern Virginia, and so has spring cleanup season!

We’re very excited to report we’ve had a lot of requests for cleanup supplies from individuals, families, Fairfax businesses, neighborhood & HOA groups, Girl Scout troops, school SACC groups, Honor Societies, and students of all ages. All of these volunteers have cleaned up residential and commercial communities, schools, and parks wide & far across Fairfax–which means our communities are looking beautifully green and pristine! (To keep it that way takes effort from all of us to use and waste less, and to ensure our trash is properly disposed of and contained!!)

By the numbers

So far this spring, we’ve supported 36 cleanups, with over 1,000 volunteers putting in nearly 100 hours of work improving their communities!

We love the Earth so much, we needed a little more than one day to celebrate! Which is why we launched Earth Month+ again this year, and are sharing a whole bunch of Earth-loving activities & events to help you get outside, appreciate nature, learn about how and why we can protect it, and well…celebrate Earth!

But first, a shameless plug: our Earth Daze event is back and better than ever! We look forward to Earth Month and this event specifically for most of the year, and we hope you’ll join us for fun activities, sustainability information, amazing vendors (see list below) and the launch of our special collab with Aslin Beer Company: the Earth Daze Hefeweizen brewed with toasted coconut!

Some of the amazing vendors we have this year include low-waste stores, nonprofits, and handmade & natural artisans from across Virginia!

• Eco Maniac Company
• The Inside Scoop
• Trace: The Zero Waste Store
• Debby Ward: Unity Garden
• Hoagland Handmade
• Mason and Greens
• The Simple Closet
• Bentley’s Bird Houses
• River Sea Chocolates
• Klean by Kerensa
• Rooted and Adorned
• Legacy and Lace Consignment

Additional Earth Month+ Opportunities and Events

To celebrate Earth Day, there are many festivals and events across Fairfax County which are free to the public, including:

• Providence District Earth Day Celebration with Supervisor Dalia Palchik – Friday, April 21 from 2-5pm at Providence Community Center
  Hosted by the Providence Supervisor’s office, join the community center staff, Fairfax County Park Authority, Merrifield Garden Center, Citizens Climate Lobby, Green Springs Gardens, former tree commissioner Laura Beaty, and others to honor and learn about Earth. There will also be activities and donations collection!
• Fairfax City HisTree Day – Saturday, April 22 from 10am-4pm at Historic Blenheim
  This new city event will combine living history presenters and music with learning and exploratory activities celebrating both Fairfax history and Earth Day. Earth Day-specific activities will run from 11am-2pm. Free admission!
• The 5th Annual Environment Expo –  Saturday, April 22 from 10am-2pm at Fort Hunt Park
  A free family-friendly festival featuring loads of activities and exhibitors sharing information about climate action, environmental challenges we face and solutions we can participate in to make Fairfax County, and the world at large, a healthier, more sustainable place. Attendees will be treated to workshops, live music, live reptile and raptor demonstrations, nature walks, giveaways, solar cooking and robot demonstrations, and more.
• Healthy People, Healthy Planet: Earth Day Fairfax Event – Saturday, April 22 from 10am-4pm at Sully Historic Site
  This Fairfax County Park Authority event will feature entertainment, activities, food vendors, Touch-A-Truck and prizes and more.

And in the remaining weeks leading up to Earth Day, there are plenty of opportunities to get involved in group clean ups across the DMV region. For example:

• Fairfax County Park Authority x The Nature Conservancy Cleanups – multiple dates, April 9 – May 7
• Friends of Accotink Creek: Potomac and Accotink Creek Watersheds Cleanups – multiple dates, April 8 – May 20
• Friends of Little Hunting Creek’s Annual Spring Cleanup – Saturday, April 15
• Town of Herndon Annual Spring Cleanup – Saturday, April 15
• Friends of Dyke Marsh x National Park Service Potomac River Cleanup – Saturday, April 15 (*registration required)
• WMCCAI Potomac Watershed Cleanup – Saturday, April 22
• EcoAction Arlington’s Earth Day Cleanup – Sunday, April 23
• Senator Scott Surovell and Delegate Paul Krizek’s Little Hunting Creek Cleanup – Saturday, April 29

Most of us are very familiar with the prefix “bio.” It often indicates a reference to living plants or creatures, and it connotes images of the earth, its many life forms, and perhaps a few scenes from Planet Earth or National Geographic images. But the prefix bio as it’s used in the marketing of new plastics–think: “bioplastics,” “biodegradable plastics,” etc.–is not the innovative, earth-friendly process it sounds like. This is yet another case of greenwashing in the plastics industry. 

To businesses, the green aura given off by bioplastics is an advantage, helping to reconcile busy consumers to the polymers we use every day. In environmental terms, that’s precisely the problem: they risk absolving us of the need to carry out the basic work of reducing, reusing and recycling. Ultimately, that’s the only way that we’ll deal with our plastics addiction.

David Fickling, Bloomberg

A recent article from Bloomberg highlighted how biodegradable plastics may in fact do more harm than good. According to the article, some types of bio–or plant-based–plastics may release more carbon in degradation than their fossil fuel-derived counterparts. Moreover, the author notes how the degradation of plastic is an invisible process, which doesn’t quite evoke the same response as oceans and lands visibly littered with plastic. Without public knowledge of the drawbacks and consequences of plastics sent to indefinitely degrade in landfills (including the majority of innovative plant-based ones), the out-of-sight, out-of-mind mentality will remain securely in place in our high-consumption society.

Emissions from plastic degradation — an invisible process taking place deep underground, and producing no emotive imagery of floating debris, tangled turtles or overflowing waste dumps — may be far more insidious. Bioplastics “are not permanent solutions because they still reaffirm the take-make-waste linear economy mindset,” said Alice Zhu, a researcher into plastic pollution at the University of Toronto.

David Fickling, Bloomberg

Again, the solution to the plastic problem is not to continue to produce more or different types of plastic, it’s to produce less. To cut off this stream of pollution at the source. To turn off the tap!

December 21st is National Crossword Puzzle Day, so we invite all you cruciverbalists out there to try your hand at our’s: Let’s Get Green and Clean (Fairfax)!

This crossword puzzle was created with https://crosswordlabs.com tool.

The case for real vs. artificial trees this holiday season.

At a Glance:

The Verdict:
Ultimately, if you’re looking for the most sustainable way to celebrate your holiday, real trees are the way to go. However, there are certainly pros and cons to real and artificial trees–we break them down in more detail here: 

The Life Cycle & Environmental Impact of Christmas Trees
In terms of sustainability and life cycle, natural (“real”) trees are the clear winner. There is a common misconception that Christmas tree harvesting is detrimental to the environment, which might encourage some folks to opt for a plastic tree which they can reuse year after year. It’s true that the environmental impact of tree farming is complicated–it depends on factors like transportation methods and distance, how trees are watered, and what types of fertilizers or chemicals are used to grow them (Hubbard, 2022)–but according to the National Christmas Tree Association (NCTA), “Real Christmas Trees are a renewable, recyclable, natural product grown on farms throughout North America” (NCTA, 2022). The association emphasizes that trees are not cut down from the forest, but in fact “grown as crops, just like corn or wheat, and raised on a farm. Once they are harvested, new seedlings are planted to replace [them], whereas fake Christmas trees “are a non-renewable, non-biodegradable, plastic and metal product most often made in overseas factories” (NCTA, 2022). 

When considering all aspects of their life cycle, many experts believe that artificial Christmas trees actually have a greater negative impact on the environment (Brown, 2017). For example, “In the U.S., around 10 million artificial trees are purchased each season. Nearly 90 percent of them are shipped across the world from China, resulting in an increase of carbon emissions and resources” (The Nature Conservancy, 2019). According to Lienna Hoeg, a Christmas tree specialist in Nova Scotia, “Not many people are aware that for every one acre of Christmas trees, daily oxygen can be produced for 18 people. If you use or purchase an artificial tree, you’d have to use that tree for 20 years for it to have the same environmental impact as one natural Christmas tree” (Hubbard, 2022). Moreover, most artificial trees are manufactured from metal and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), petroleum-derived plastic which often contains phthalates harmful to human health (Wang, 2020). On average, an artificial tree will last 5-7 years, meaning it will eventually need to be replaced. With limited reuse options, artificial trees are often landfilled, where, due to their non-biodegradable, non-recyclable PVC material, they will remain for centuries after disposal (Brown, 2017).

Accessibility of Christmas Trees
While it might be the more sustainable option, purchasing a real Christmas tree is not always the most accessible for those wishing to deck the halls. Location, urban density, space limitations, storage concerns, tree maintenance and disposal, and rising costs are just a few of many considerations that go into the purchase decision of a real or artificial tree. For example, for older people or those without the capacity to carry and install a real tree, an artificial tree may simplify their holiday setup. Likewise, artificial trees come in a variety of shapes and sizes, as well as pre-lit selections, which again offers convenience and flexibility for some consumers. Furthermore, artificial trees offer an alternative solution for consumers who live far from Christmas tree farms or do not have the means to transport a real tree back home with them. As far as access to real Christmas trees, in addition to local parking-lot tree sales, trees at home-improvement and big box stores, and tree farms themselves, there are numerous companies across the country who offer tree delivery services for an additional price.

The New Wave of Christmas Trees
If you really want to step up your sustainable game for the holiday season, check out a potted tannenbaum. Multiple companies around the U.S. are renting out real Christmas trees, a trend which is growing in popularity. Here’s how it works: consumers can order trees online (where they may browse different species, heights, and prices), the company delivers the potted trees to homes or businesses, and the consumer simply cares for the tree according to the instructions of the rental company. Often, there is a timeline for rental (e.g., 30 days), after which the potted trees are picked up or returned back to the company’s nursery to continue growing until the next holiday season (Hubbard, 2022; Shea, 2021). Cost wise, Christmas trees range in price but are generally comparable to a cut real tree, though without the wasteful disposal at the end of the season. Instead, potted trees offer a sustainable life cycle of growth, rental, return, repeat, and “after about seven years, when the trees are too large for rental, they are planted in the ground” (Platt, 2019). The feel-good factor consumers receive from nurturing a live tree, which will ultimately help to reforest and beautify our lands, is a considerable perk for those looking to make their holiday a little more sustainable!

As the country celebrated another America Recycles Day this past week, we looked back at some of the new reports, major announcements, and state of recycling in the U.S. today. 

America (Doesn’t Really) Recycles Day

A Greenpeace report out at the end of last month exposed some ugly truths about plastic recycling in the U.S. which offer a sharp contrast to the celebrations of the 25th annual holiday.

According to the report, despite seeming advancements in the packaging, production, and greater plastic industries, the majority of plastic waste in the U.S. is still not recyclable. Worse still, the portion of plastic that actually is recyclable is being recycled less. Specifically, the report estimates the recycling rate in the U.S. “declined to about 5–6% in 2021, down from a high of 9.5% in 2014 and 8.7% in 2018, when the U.S. exported millions of tons of plastic waste to China and counted it as recycled even though much of it was burned or dumped” (Greenpeace, 2022). 

The report went on to discuss the 5 most impactful reasons that plastic recycling is failing in the U.S.:

1. Plastic waste is too widespread to collect – poor and outdated infrastructure makes collection of plastic waste very difficult.
2. Mixed plastic waste cannot be recycled together – with hundreds of different types of plastics, mixed recycling is not only impractical, but also not logistically feasible. Other concerns include contamination, limited use, and low demand for recycled plastic end-material.
3. Plastic recycling is wasteful, polluting, and is a fire hazard – it’s estimated that as much as a third of collected plastic bottles are deemed “contaminated” and consequently landfilled. Additionally, microplastics produced in the mechanical recycling process are discharged with wastewater to pollute the environment. Lastly, highly flammable plastic creates concern for fires at production & recycling facilities and their surrounding communities. 
4. Recycled plastic has huge toxicity risks – plastic products may contain and absorb toxic chemicals (e.g., motor oil, pesticides, bleach); mixed plastics recycling risks contaminating other recyclables in the process. This reality limits the applications for recycled material to be reused in food-grade packaging or bottling.
5. Plastic recycling is not economical – compared to new plastic production, it is far too costly to collect, sort, truck, and safely reprocess plastic waste.

Ultimately, this jam-packed report reminds us that the recycling industry in the U.S. still has a long way to go. If you’d like to read the report or listen to coverage about it, here are some great additional resources to peruse:

• Greenpeace report: Circular Claims Fall Flat Again.
• NPR investigative reporter Laura Sullivan explains the plastic problem and new Greenpeace report.
• Interview with Lisa Ramsden, WBUR Here & Now from Nov. 2, 2022.

EPA Announces New Grant Funding

This week, the U.S. EPA also announced that applications are now open to access $375 million in grant funding for solid waste infrastructure for recycling projects as well as recycling education and outreach efforts. The funding is open to state, local, and tribal governments. According to the EPA’s press announcement, this fund reflects “the largest EPA investment in recycling in 30 years” (EPA, 2022).

Plastic Sustainability Targets set to be Missed

A report from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and U.N. Environment Program released earlier this month revealed that a large majority of the world’s largest consumer goods (and plastics) producers are set to miss their 2025 target of using solely recyclable, reusable, or compostable packaging (U.S. News, 2022). Some of the brands–which include companies like Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Mars, Nestle, and Unilever–have demonstrated varied progress on updating their sustainability. But according to a spokesperson from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, despite progress from some companies, the majority still need to invest more in finding new packaging methods: “Flexible packaging waste is extremely hard to deal with, not generating it in the first place will need to be an important part of the solution…We won’t just recycle our way out” (Bloomberg, 2022).

Today, there seems to be no shortage of options when we browse the aisles of cleaning products at our local stores. But with so many options and flashy marketing, how does the eco-conscious consumer know what products are truly “green”?

“Greenwashing” is a popular marketing strategy employed to make products, or companies, seem more appealing to the conscientious customer base. Terms such as “green,” “natural,” “plant-based,” “non-toxic,” “eco-friendly” and similar buzzwords may catch the eye of well-intentioned individuals who prefer to support environmentally-conscious brands. However, just because products contain one or more of these labels, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are entirely sustainable or safe. Which is why it is important to read the labels and to think about what qualities of a cleaning product are important to you – do you want a product in less plastic packaging? A biodegradable, non-toxic product? A plant-based product?

Understanding what goes into your product and what to look for on a label can be helpful in making an informed, eco-conscious decision when it comes to your cleaning products. And fortunately, as with many other types of consumer goods, there are also seals of approval from independent, third-party organizations to help you shop for products that meet your values. Next time you shop, keep an eye out for these three seals:

The UL ECOLOGO label signifies that a product has a reduced environmental impact. Factors include manufacturer’s energy consumption, water use, and waste.

The EWG VERIFIED label attests that a product has no harmful chemical ingredients.

The Safer Choice label is certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it reviews a product’s chemical ingredients for human and environmental health, product performance, sustainable packaging and production measures.

If you’d like to read more about this topic, check out this article and news story from NBC Washington.

A new report reveals how Virginia voters feel about plastic pollution and potential policies to address it. The report, a collaboration by Clean Virginia Waterways of Longwood University and the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program with OpinionWorks, describes findings from a statewide survey of Virginia voters conducted in March, 2022. The opinion research aimed to explore Virginians’ attitudes about several problems facing the state, with a special focus on gauging public opinion on proposed policies related to reducing plastic waste and pollution.

Ultimately, the research group found that “Virginia voters are very concerned about plastic pollution, ranking it higher than climate change and the COVID pandemic” (McKay et al., 2022). Given their concern for the state of the environment in Virginia, researchers asked survey respondents about their opinions on several proposed policies to reduce plastic pollution. They found that:

• 76% of Virginia voters support a policy to require less plastic in packaging
• 71% of voters support shifting the costs of recycling from taxpayers to the producers of the plastic waste
• 65% of voters support deposits on beverage bottles, cans, and containers (i.e., a “bottle bill”)
• 63% of voters support a cigarette litter fee
• 63% of voters support a ban on polystyrene (foam) food and beverage packaging
• 61% of voters support banning single-use plastic grocery and shopping bags
• And 47% of voters support a 5-cent fee on single-use grocery and shopping bags.

The findings of this survey not only reveal the deep concern Virginia voters have for their environment, but they also demonstrate voters’ readiness to support public policies to address plastic pollution in their communities. 

You can find the survey and read more about its collaborators on the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program and Clean Virginia Waterways websites. 

McKay, L., Register, K. and Raabe, S. (2022). Plastic Pollution: Virginia’s Voters Support Action: 2022 Public Perception Survey. Prepared for the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program.