Green Living | Green living tips and advice

What has Obama done to maKe Republicans (Conservatives) angry?

I live in Cape Town, South Africa, thousands of Kilometres away from the US – but franKly, I (along with millions outside America) Know a lot more about US politics than most Americans.

So now, I would just liKe to asK – what Obama has done to maKe republicans/conservatives so mad.

1) The US economy is in significantly better condition than if the republican policies were still in place from the days of Bush. Remember, he WAS the one who started all of this after all.

2) Obama is trying to pass a healthcare bill – which is already a fact of life in most modern countries – why is it only a controversial issue in the US?

3) It is WORLDWIDE Knowledge that Obama has struggled to pass bills to aid job creation, and improve healthcare situations, and clean-up the environment; but has failed to do so on almost every occasion due to Republican obstructionism. It is common-Knowledge all over the world, and in newspapers everywhere that the Republicans have agreed to do nothing till November. I find that almost treasonous – at yet people of the US still support such a party – why?

4) Republicans are continuously calling for more and more tax cuts and budget cuts – these austerity measures have worKed nowhere in the world (Apart from Germany – simply due to there low amount of external debt), an example of how a country can go due to austerity – Greece. Economically, it is critical to raise taxes to increase revenues. Republicans refuse to listen to reason on this issue – and it appears that they are demanding tax cuts so vigorously, due to the corporations funding them to advance these policies.

5) Why is the US one of only a few countries in the world (In fact, I can’t thinK of another country) that still struggles to accept Global Warming as a present and dangerous fact. Schools here and around the world are already teaching it to children, we have institutes in universities that investigate ways to solve the problem of global warming, and mitigate its effects; and yet the US hasn’t even accepted the fact yet, yet alone try to solve the problem. Why? What evidence do you have (and you only – in the entire world) – what maKes you so certain that global warming doesnt exist, and yet almost every single other country is now trying to find a solution.

6) Finally, many Republican supporters label BaracK Obama a Socialist. FranKly, this is laughable. This is certainly not a point that is up for debate – the straight answer is that he is not (Sadly for many uninformed Americans). The Dow Jones is higher than its been in over half a decade, corporate profits are higher than ever – there is simply no possible reasoning to justify calling him a socialist. That unfortunately is a Republican tactic – and worse, is that the people using the label, don’t Know what a socialist is – they just assume its bad. For those that don’t Know what socialism is – it is the future. Not capitalism. Capitalism and communism lead to the same inevitable sinKhole of the rich get rich, and everyone else dies poor. Socialism simply means that not EVERY single thing in a country should be privatised – for example, not every hospital or school should be privatised. Here, we would consider the privatisation of prisons to be utterly ridiculous, but in the US – this is a reality. Some things need to be controlled and regulated by the government – after all, they are there to protect people from whatever harm (Human, environmental, or corporate).

Please note, I am not a fundamental supporter of any politician, but the Republicans have become to closed-minded, fueled by uneducated thinKing, primitive ideas towards women, and international relations and science that it is impossible to taKe such a party seriously – for most of the outside world – Obama is the only choice. I’m unsure why so many Americans don’t see how disastrous a Republican electoral victory would be. Please explain your views…
lol — It’s strange how you have provided no facts – just opinions that you have been force-fed by the media – and not facts. It appears that facts seem to be troubling, because you maKe personal attacKs instead of justifying your views.

Also, “common Knowledge” is another phrase for non-American media. These are the views from news sites and newspapers from media houses around the world, that arent being paid by corporations (Usually to sway senators)

Finally, I’m a 3rd yr Engineering student – our education is fine 😉 Maybe it’s your education you should be concerned by.
@thomas f : Where O where did I say MY country has any of the things I want. Secondly, we arent in a major recession. Also, high taxes, particularly for the rich, are essential in a modern society. Finally, the the size of government is irrelevant. Its about the efficiency of government (And by the way, the massive chunK of US governemt is in the Defence Dept – the area of gov Republicans refuse to cut, but Keep asKing for cuts). Please explain…
@ thomas f : It’s clear that you have no idea what socialism is. This is the republican indoctrination. You only example (North Korea) is the most communist country on earth. Convenient how you glossed over countries liKe Finland, Sweden,, DenmarK, the Netherlands…all SOCIALIST countries. And their HDI’s are amongst the highest in the world – higher than the US‘s at any time in history.
@ McNamara – that was most definitely NOT the cause the housing bubble – that way completely due to Bush’s deregulations with the help of Geitner and Paulson…You cannot possibly blame Freddie Mac, for a worldwide recession. This is due to governmental policy. Failed REPUBLICAN governmental policy.

Also, why won’t you speaK of cutting the Defense Budget – Republicans consistantly avoid discussing that. Probably coz all Republicans are so afraid that the world is out to get them lol

Global Warming. I have never heard anyone say something liKe that. Explain how almost every country is moving towards greener energy, and has climate change and global warming in their schools’ curriculums. There is no longer any debate in the rest of the world – it’s a fact. Here’s at least ONE source that you wont manage to twist and politicise: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/…

Once again, Obama has never said the private sector is his enemy. There is nothing wrong with tho
FranKly – from what I’ve seen here. Republicans are racist & intolerant, and lacK facts in their arguments. Not a single person here can repudiate anything I have mentioned perviously.

Human Caused Global Warming- Fact or Fiction?

The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change

Author/s: R M Carter
Paper ID: 702012
Year of Publication: 2007
Volume Title
Conference Proceedings – New Leaders’ 2007

Abstract:

Human-caused global warming has become the environmental cause celebre of the early 21st century. The strong warming alarmist camp currently includes the United Nations, most Western governments, most of the free press, many large corporations (including Enron, before it failed), the major churches, most scientific organisations and a large portion of general public opinion. This phalanx of support notwithstanding there is no scientific consensus as to the danger of human-induced climate change. There is, therefore, a strong conflict between the level of public alarm and its scientific justification. How can this be?

In a democracy, the media serve to convey to the public the facts and hypotheses of climate change as provided by individual scientists, governmental and international research agencies, and NGO and other lobby groups. In general, the media have promulgated an alarmist cause for climate change; they have certainly failed to convey the degree of uncertainty that is characteristic of climate science, or a balanced summary of the many essential facts that are relevant to human causation.

Climate change is as much a geological as it is a meteorological issue. Natural climate changes, both warmings and coolings, are indeed a societal hazard. We usually deal with geological hazards by providing civil defence authorities and the public with accurate, evidence-based, general information about events like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and floods, and then by adapting to the effects when a damaging event occurs. As for other major natural disasters, the appropriate preparation for extreme climate events is to mitigate and manage the negative effects when they occur, and especially so for dangerous coolings. Attempting instead to ‘stop climate change’ by reducing human carbon dioxide emissions is a costly exercise of utter futility. Rational climate policies must be based on adaptation to dangerous change as and when it occurs, and irrespective of its sign or causation.

The issue now is no longer climate change as such, the reality of which will always be with us. Rather, the issues are, first, the failure of the free press to inform the public about the true facts of human-caused climate change and of the dangers posed by natural climate change. And, second, the vested interests held by many of the groups of warming alarmists. These interests include not only the obvious commercial ones, but also the many scientists and science managers who have discounted or remained silent about the huge uncertainties of the human-caused global warming hypothesis because it suited them to do so. Public opinion will soon demand an explanation as to why experienced editors and hardened investigative journalists, worldwide, have melted before the blowtorch of self-induced guilt, political correctness and special interest expediency that marks the sophisms of global warming alarmists.
Check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Can you think of what Bush else was for but then flip flopped on the issues?

# Bush claims to be in favor of the environment & then dismantles environmental protections.
# Bush was against campaign finance reform; then he was for it.
# Bush was against a Homeland Security Department; then he was for it.
# Bush was against a 9/11 commission; then he was for it.
# Bush was against Condi Rice testifying before the 9/11 commission; then he was for it.
# Bush was against testifying before the 9/11 commission himself; then he was for it. (Providing Cheney held his hand & if was OFF the record)
# Bush was against an Iraq WMD investigation; then he was for it.
# Bush was against deficits; then he was for them.
# Bush first says he’ll provide money for first responders (fire, police, emergency), then he doesn’t.
# Bush first says that ‘help is on the way’ to the military … then he cuts benefits.
# Bush was for fingerprinting and photographing Mexicans who enter the US, Then, after meeting with Pres. Fox, Bush was against it.

Can you think of any more?

Tar sands – Newly elected council by the Alberta gov’t?

Hi,

For my Environmental Science 104 class, my teacher has asked us to do some research and write a short paper on a newly elected council in Alberta. According to her, the council discusses environmental issues such as the tar sands. This is essentially all the (very vague) information she gave, and I’m finding it difficult to find anything even remotely related to this issue. It is a current event, does anyone know what the name of the council is or anything about it?

Links would be appreciated, but since it’s for a university paper, they need to be from reputable sources. Thanks! 🙂

Globalization Questions?

List three problems that stem from globalization.

What are some environmental issues related to globalization?

“you can’t run a linear system on a finite planet indefinitely.” What does this suggest for the future of globalization?

said it is the government’s job to take care of us? Do you agree? Think about some of the serious issues that affect the future of the earth. What role, if any, should government have in finding solutions?

What changes are needed to make sure our economic system supports, rather than destroys, the planet’s biological systems on which we depend?

Is climate change a threat to humanity as the UN alleges ?

A United Nations study has concluded that a failure to address major environmental problems facing the planet could threaten the very survival of humanity.

The problems include global warming, the extinction of species and unsustainable development.

The study says persistent issues are not being dealt with.

But, the executive director of the UN Environment Programme, Achim Steiner, says the study does not want to paint a picture of doom:

“What we want citizens is not to become frustrated and despondant but rather to become to some extent upset at the inability or unwillingness of decision makers be it political or economic, to respond to what the big picture is now showing us, which is essentially 20 years after 15 years after the earth summit in Rio, all major indicators of sustainability is still pointing downwards,” he said.
http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=86723

Why don’t we demand other nations meet or exceed our labor and environmental laws?

To bring back jobs we simply need to demand that all imports be made on par with our labor and environmental laws. This isn’t a tariff or another other unfair trade policy. It’s a matter of common sense because either we lift others up to our standards or we’ll be forced to go down to theirs in order to globally compete. And we all know which way the GOP would have us go.

To illustrate, in the early days of NAFTA, Mexican truckers were trying to come into the US in their unsafe tramp steamers. Because of the obvious safety issues they were made to bring their trucks on par with our safety laws. Mexican trucking companies were not given tariffs for any other stifling regulations. They simply had to come up to our standards.

The same should be true with our international trade on all imports. We are the biggest consumers in the world. Either do it our way or we’ll make that particular product here in America by Americans.
Come on people wake up. Either we fight to bring the world up to our standards or we’ll by default be forced down to their.
@Magick: Oh yes we can tell others just like we did with the Mexican truckers.
@ Rockit: Most already refuse our imports anyway. So what’s the difference. You do know that we are a big enough country that we don’t need to import anything. We can survive just fine.
@Lady: We’ll make it here or do without. We’ll survive just fine.
A habitual: No you do not care about environmental laws. Here in California toxic companies are moving to Texas in droves because they’re not allowed to pollute here. California is inadvertently poisoning Texas with Governor Perry’s blessing.

Btw, if we had strong unions we wouldn’t be having this discussion today would we?

Cap & Trade – Is Obama fooling us all?

Before you decide – you should really read this! Here is an excerpt:

Apparently the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is at the center of the world carbon trading markets – all currently voluntary. Here’s some history on CCX from its website:

Welcome to CCX: We are a financial institution whose objectives are to apply financial innovation and incentives to advance social, environmental and economic goals through the following platforms.

Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.

Chicago Climate Futures Exchange (CCFE) is a landmark derivatives exchange that currently offers standardized and cleared futures and options contracts on emission allowances and other environmental products. CCFE is a wholly owned subsidiary of CCX.

And from its “History” page

The institution that is today the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) began with a grant in 2000 from the Joyce Foundation, a leading philanthropy based in Chicago known for its innovative approach to public policy issues, which supported the inception, creation, feasibility and design of CCX. The support was provided as part of a series of special Millennium grants made by the Foundation to catalyze, support and reinforce ideas, concepts or institutions of lasting intergenerational significance.

An initial grant of $347,000 was made to the Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University to provide technical support to Dr. Richard Sandor and colleagues to examine whether a cap-and-trade market was feasible in the U.S. to facilitate significant greenhouse gas reductions, using a voluntary regional Midwest model from which national and international lessons might be drawn.

So CCX was established through a grant from the Joyce Foundation to explore the feasibility of market-based trading of carbon credits and since then, several other trading markets have bloomed from this core. Now, here’s where it begins to get interesting. Guess who was on the board of the Joyce Foundation when this grant was awarded? Do you need three guesses or should I just come right out and say it?

The answer? President Barack Obama.

Sandor launched the climate exchange in 2003 after getting two research grants from the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation. The money went to the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, in Evanston, Illinois, for Sandor’s pilot program to trade carbon credits.

Now, lest you say that a board appointment does not a strong connection make, Chairman Sandor made a point to mention in that article that:

“Obama was on the foundation that gave us the grant,” Sandor said. “We know him well.”

http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/cap-and-trade-the-answer-to-global-warming-or-another-wall-street-payday/

Does the current climate change issue follow the pattern of past environmental predictions?

I just read an older yet (in my opinion) still current essay on the robustness of past environmental predictions. Actually, it’s public testimony before the US House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources in 2004. The arguments in this testimony appear to be fairly convincing.

Here are two interesting passages:

“What are the lessons to be learned from this record of badly exaggerated predictions of environmental disaster? First, scientists, even well meaning ones, don’t know as much as they think they do. They generally go wrong because they ignore or misunderstand how human beings interact with the natural world and with other people, that is, they are largely ignorant of economics. ”

“Science can tell us what may be problems, but it can’t tell us what to do about them. Solutions depend on a deep understanding of human values, politics, and economics. Scientists are no more qualified to pronounce on those topics than their non-scientific confreres and fellow citizens.”

Could this apply to climate scientists of today? Do you think in 10 or 20 years, the current climate crisis will be regarded in this same manner?

http://reason.com/archives/2004/02/04/science-and-public-policy

(Note: And for those of you who are unfamiliar with the author and will no doubt be looking to declare him a kook, I’ll save you the time and point you to Exxon Secrets: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=11

So now that you know he is with the CATO institute, perhaps you could spend more time focusing on what he is saying rather than who he is. Thanks.)
David b, I certainly agree about your comments on the media. The translation done from science to Joe Public terms can certainly be fumbled by the messenger (ie. the media). And the more complex the science, the greater the potential for fumbling. Joe Public who takes the MSM at face value must feel like a rag doll in a tornado.

question about globalization?

List three benefits of globalization

List three problems that stem from globalization.

What are some environmental issues related to globalization?

The movie’s narrator said, “you can’t run a linear system on a finite planet indefinitely.” What does this suggest for the future of globalization?

The narrator also said it is the government’s job to take care of us? Do you agree? Think about some of the serious issues that affect the future of the earth. What role, if any, should government have in finding solutions?

What changes are needed to make sure our economic system supports, rather than destroys, the planet’s biological systems on which we depend?

Why is Obama allowed to spend tax payer money based on cronyism?

and not solely on their economic merits?
He chooses which company to give our money to only if they are one of his top donors.

No less than 80% of the stimulus loans and grants given by the Department of Energy to alternative energy companies has gone to companies either run by or primarily owned by Obama’s financial backers — individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party.
That’s a large chunk: about $16.4 billion out of $20.5 billion in issued loans.
A CBS News report in January found that at least 12 companies that received billions in Federal assistance were now in financial trouble.
Five have already gone bankrupt: Beacon Power, Evergreen Solar, SpectraWatt, Eastern Energy, and Solyndra.
Last week, Abound Solar announced it was laying off 280 workers (70% of its staff) and delaying a new factory in Indiana. Abound got $400 million of your tax dollars.
That’s a far cry from July 2010, when Obama said Abound would use the money to “manufacture advanced solar panels at two new plants, creating more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs” at plants in Indiana and Colorado.
But that’s what you get when you pick energy investments based on the Buddy System…
What is the problem with you libs. The President is NOT suppose to give money to his Friends in Business. Why does 16.5 Billion not bother you? Just pissed off, poof, gone, wasted! These companies had NO Merit, like NOT good companies to invest in!

Do you realize why the Congress wishes away wikileaks as undependable..?!?

Because more and more revelations of its ugly sides are appearing daily in the news. See the latest:

US Ambassador to India, had said that he believed that the cabinet reshuffle in 2006 when Iyer was replaced by Murli Deora as Petroleum Minister was done to enhance Indo-US relations…

Karat said: “… Mani sankar Aiyar was removed from the Petroleum Ministry “because of the energy policy he pursued and they brought a pro-American person (Murli Deora) into the ministry replacing Mani Shankar Iyer..”

“His efforts to bring the India-Pakistan-Iran pipeline to fruition…his efforts to bring an alternative energy grid…his talks with China…all this we knew that’s why he was being shifted out,” he said.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/digging-up-the-past-is-lefts-agenda/767966/#postComment

So whether it is the Pak policy or the petro policy, it is the US govt that decides Indian decisions under UPA rule! It is onething to be a friendly country and quite another to be a subservient one! Allowing PM’s plane to be inspected by US officials because it was supplied by their country or transfer of petro Ministers was done to please US etc are sure to be detrimental to national interests!

what are your thoughts?

Poll: Economy outweighs environment – Where do you stand on this issue?

Political climate for energy policies cools

Poll: Economy outweighs environment

By JENNIFER ROBISON
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Monday’s National Clean Energy Summit 2.0 will bring a parade of celebrated public policy experts to Las Vegas to discuss greening the country’s economy.

But as leaders including former President Bill Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger encourage investments in alternative energy, their policy prescriptions could face serious headwinds from changing public opinions.

Recent surveys show Americans cooling to global warming, and they’re even less keen on environmental policies they believe might raise power bills or imperil jobs. Those sentiments could mean a tougher road ahead for elected officials looking to fund investments in renewable power or install a carbon cap-and-trade system.

“Right now, Americans are more concerned about the economy than the environment,” said Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll. “The politician who says, ‘I’m going to cripple jobs and shut down factories’ would be in trouble in this economy.”

http://www.lvrj.com/news/52828402.html

Study: Plenty of wind to power East Coast?

Liberals talk a good game when it comes to alternative energy sources. The following study basically states that the East Coast can be powered by the wind.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20070202-17315300-bc-us-windpower.xml

However one of the most powerful Democratic Senators, Edward Kennedy, is blocking the establishment of a wind farm on the east coast in the waters off Cape Cod. Reason being is that he can see if from his house.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/05/09/kennedy_stevens_take_aim_at_cape_cod_wind_farm/

Is this a not in my back yard issue or does Kennedy really support wind power?
People, this is not a personal attack against Kennedy. He does a lot of double speak about topics and this is one of them. Its great somewhere else, but not in the Cape where his family has a house.

Does financial gain from cap & trade explain why China suddenly stopped calling for a new reserve currency?

China has been calling loudly for a new world reserve currency for months and months. Many people don’t know because the mainstream media doesn’t report it on the front page or the evening news – you must go to the investment pages to read about it.

The last call was as recent as LAST WEEK”

“China’s Central Bank Renews Call for New World Reserve Currency”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=atQgG1C5Ielw

Google for more. you will find numerous reports (weekly) about it.

then two days later …

The original title of this article was “Treasuries Advance After China Says Reserve Policy Is ‘Stable’” and it has since been changed to “U.S. Treasuries Advance Amid Quarter-End Portfolio Rebalancing “. Hmm. The content changed somewhat as well but still covers it in brief
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=al9.Xmi7SwH4

“…Yields fell after Chinese central bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan said his country is sticking with its foreign-currency reserve policy for now…”

WHY THE SUDDEN REVERSAL? Is it possibly because China will be a major benefactor of cap & trade?

How many of our tax dollars will go to create new jobs and new industries in China?

Consider, for example, what cap & trade does in creating demand for RARE EARTH METALS which are essential for alternative energy technology. As it stands now, we will depend on China to meet the demand to be created by C&T.

“Crunch looms for green technology as China tightens grip on rare-earth metals (May 2009)”
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article6374603.ece

“China’s grip tightens on ‘green’ metals”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/KF30Cb01.html

“… The rare-earth metal neodymium, used in electric car motors and wind turbines, is at the epicenter of the race between wealthy and emerging nations to create green technologies, while poorer countries appear to be relegated to spectator status. … Neodymium is a lanthanoid, at position 60 on the periodic table of elements for the number of atoms in a single molecule. Its production and wide range of uses reflect the competition over raw materials in the area of green technologies. … Unless production of green technologies is supported outside of China by new mining in North America, Africa and Australia, the only place to manufacture them will be China, predicts Lifton, adding that if China decides not to export those rare metals, there won’t be any other place to obtain them. … ”

For those who jump in here and claim the new industries will be created in America, I ask you: what is the incentive for corporations to develop new industries in America when they can pay slave labor wages in Asia and avoid environmental regulation? Let’s be realistic.

And considering the potential for profit to China, does its unwillingness to cap its own emissions disturb you a little and/or even give you a little pause to question the motivation behind cap & trade?
.

Hmmm. Maybe this explains it, in part. Hot off the press:

“IMF Board Authorizes Debut Bond Issuance to Fund Aid (Update1)”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ankFTAhAUk68

Read the article – China is purchasing $50 billion. It seems there is no need to call for end to the dollar as reserve. The IMF activating SDRs as currency marks the final nail in the coffin for the dollar. Its only a matter of time.

I Need a Name for an Eco-Friendly Clothing Line?

I’m starting an eco–friendly clothing line, that will use organic cotton etc. The problem is a name, I envision it in green text with several modifications like some letters etc.

Does anyone have any suggestions for an eco–friendly clothing line name? One worded- is perferred, and it can be in any language as long as it sounds nice and rolls of the tongue with ease 🙂

What is a good store that sells organic/eco-friendly clothing in Toronto?

I Need a Name for an Eco-Friendly Clothing Line?

I’m starting an eco–friendly clothing line, that will use organic cotton etc. I envision it in green text with several modifications like a leaf or so over a vowel etc.

Does anyone have any suggestions for an eco–friendly clothing line name? One or Two worded- is preferred, and it can be in any language as long as it sounds nice and rolls of the tongue with ease 🙂
It’s aimed at 16-25ish year old people like it’s going to begin with graphic tee’s you can say urban clothing but not baggy. It’ll be slim fit and it’s pretty hip. Thank You! 🙂

Another thing is maybe i don’t want something that sounds common, i want it to be unique so not stuff like “eco–clothing, ecowear, ecoshock, etc. lol something that sounds good to the ear is what i’m going for but not cheesy, a name teens would like from all backgrounds. thanks!!

I Need a Name for an Eco-Friendly Clothing Line?

I’m starting an eco–friendly clothing line, that will use organic cotton etc. I envision it in green text with several modifications like a leaf or so over a vowel etc.

Does anyone have any suggestions for an eco–friendly clothing line name? One worded- is preferred, and it can be in any language as long as it sounds nice and rolls of the tongue with ease 🙂
It’s aimed at 16-25ish year old people like it’s going to begin with graphic tee’s you can say urban clothing but not baggy. It’ll be slim fit and it’s pretty hip. Thank You! 🙂

Name for an eco-friendly clothing line?

Hey, after much researching i came across a name i do find good for a brand name of a clothing line. It is v-life™. I was wondering if you thing it would sell. Would you guys ever shop or buy stuff from a brand labeled as such, being eco friendly [organic cotton] and it’s aimed at 16-25 yr olds girls and guys. Im startng with graphic tees, slim-fit.

Here is the link of how I would have it look [the brand name].

http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn94/vicalexander91/Picture2-1.png

What do you guys think of the name? (The “v” can stand for “vic’s” like Vic’s-life)Thanks :

Advantages and disadvantages of windturbines?

what are some advantages and disadvantages of using windturbines as an energy source? Example: They ruin the landscape and they are renewable energy resources

Physcial science please help ?

Physical Science:
1. What is the difference between a chemical & physical change?
2. List 5 things that are evidence that chemical change has occurred?
3. List an example of mechanical energy turning into heat energy.
4. What is the difference between a chemical and physical change?
5. Define the following: renewable resource; nonrenewable resource.
6. List the 8 types of energy.
7. List 6 types of renewable energy resources.
8. List 5 types of nonrenewable energy resources.
9. List 10 ways to conserve energy in your own home.
10. Give an example of chemical energy being turned into radiant and heat energy.
11. What is an ecological concern with using plastics?
12. Where does all energy on the earth come from?
13. What is the meaning of the term “Fossil Fuel”?

Answer these 22 (Or as many as you want) Simple science questions.Ill put u as best answer?

1. What does a microphone convert sound energy into?
2. What kind of energy is stored in a battery? What kind of energy is found in food?
3. WHat does a wind turbine convert Kinetic energy into?
4. What are the units of energy?
5. WHat are the units of temperature? What temp. is absolute zero?
6. Heat energy can only be transformed if their is a difference is what?
7. WHat is conduction? Give an example of a conductor.
8.WHat is convection? Describe an experiment that shows convection currents.
9.WHat is radiation?
10.What is the difference between heat and temperature?
11.What are fossil Fuels? How does the suns energy get stored in fossil Fuels?
12.How does the suns energy
a)Create Wind?
b)get stored in food?
13.Describe in detail how electricity is generated and supplies your home.
14.Name 3 Fuels That are burnt in power stations to generate Electricity.
15.WHy is petrol definitely not burnt in power stations?
16.WHat are Non-Renewable Resources? What are renewable resources?
17.Why will renewable energy resources never run out?
18.WHat are the best 2 ways of reducing the amount of fossil fuels we burn?
19.Give 2 examples of the use of solar cells. Describe how waves generate electricity.
20.what is the principle of conservation of energy?
21.When is energy Most usefull?WHy are energy transfers not perfect?
22.WHat form of energy does wasted energy usually appear as?

PLEASE AND THANK YOU!!!!

Science Course Work !?

FOSSIL FUELS:
how are fossil fuels extracted?
how does this effect the environment?
give some examples of fossil fuels.
how does their use effect the environment? (think greenhouse gases, global warming, acid rain)
RENEWABLE RESOURCES:
name 3 types of renewable energy resources ?
how can they replace fossil fuels ?
do they have any negative effects on the environment themselves ?
EARTHQUAKES AND VOLCANOES:
how do they effect the environment?
EXTENSION FOR DISTINCTION:
compare and evaluate the effects of natural disaster and human use of fossil fuels on the environment

just answer at what u really know , and 10 points for the best, thank u ^_^
mmm ya i know

Geography Review!!!!!!!!!!!!! 10 points?

Can you please help me answer theses questions

Approximately how many people immigrate to Canada each year?
Does Canada have natural decrease or increase?
Why is it important for the government to know about the balance of different age groups in Canada’s population?
What happened to Canada’s population a) after WWI b) during the Depression c) after WWII?
Why are Canadian families today generally small in size?
Why were Canadian families much larger in the past?
What has helped Canada’s death rate to decrease?
Roughly what % of Canadians lives in cities?
Why has this % changed?
Why do people immigrate to Canada today?
Briefly describe the process they undergo.
What kind of immigrants is Canada looking for?
Which area currently supplies the most immigrants to Canada?
Why do people emigrate from Canada?
To which areas do they emigrate?
Why do new immigrants mostly settle in large cities?
What are a) low order b) middle order c) high order goods and services?
How is urban development having an impact on the fringes of the city?
Which sector of Canada’s economy employs the highest %?
What are the major factors affecting where an industry will locate?
Why are Canada’s energy resources so important?
What problems face Canada’s resource industries today?
Why are environmentalists protesting about the Athabasca tar sands extraction?
Why do relatively few Canadians work in agriculture?
What are renewable resources? Give examples.
Explain sustainability.
28. In which parts of Canada are most secondary industries located?
29.Why has there been a decline in rail transportation in Canada?
Why is it important to know (and show) the source of your data?
When writing an exam what are 3 important things to remember in terms of how you tackle the exam?
Canada’s largest immigration was just before WWI. What attracted people to settle here?
What is a refugee?
What are push and pull factors?
Currently, which category is larger, family or independent (economic) immigrants?
Which are the important factors for being accepted as an immigrantWhat is multiculturalism?
What is a) a baby bust b) a baby boom?
Why might each create problems for Canada?
Most Canadians work in primary industries. True or false?
What is the difference between coniferous and deciduous trees?
What is geocaching?
How can Google Earth be used by geographers?
How do satellite photos help meteorologists?
What are Canada’s major waste disposal problems?
What can be done to reduce these problems?
How are environmentalists trying to protect Canada’s resources?
Identify the ways water is returned to the atmosphere.
Where is the Greenwich or Prime Meridian?
How are lines of longitude numbered?
Lines of latitude run parallel. True or false?
Which is the longest line of latitude?
Where would you find a) the Tropic of Cancer b) the Tropic of Capricorn c) the Arctic Circle d) the Antarctic Circle?
What would you find at 90 N?
What happens at the International Date Line?
Why does it not exactly follow 180?

When are we going to do something about over population ?

Why is over population rarely mentioned as an environmental issue ?
When it is clearly the worst threat , everything is amplified by over population.

Over population deniers have nothing to back up their claims. , who can someone not understand something so simple.
Of course there is so much space on Earth you can have a couple more billions people but …the quality of life for all living beings reduce as we multiply , we are destroying everything……

The effects of human overpopulation are multiple and ominous. As birth rates climb, natural resources get used up faster than they can be replaced, creating enormous economic pressures at home while the standard of living plummets throughout the rest of the world.

As the result of having so many people who do not understand our reality and its behavioral demands, we have created an interrelated web of global environmental problems.

We are depleting our natural resources: our forests, fisheries, range lands, croplands, and plant and animal species. We are destroying the biological diversity on which evolution thrives (this is being called the sixth great wave of extinction in the history of life on earth, different from the others in that it is caused not by external events, but by us).

With powerful new electrical and diesel pumping techniques, we are draining our aquifers and lowering our water tables. We are systemically polluting our air, water, and soil, and consequently our food chain. We are depleting the stratospheric ozone that shields us from harmful ultraviolet radiation. And, we are experiencing symptoms of global warming: heat waves, devastating droughts, dying forests, accelerated species extinction, dying coral reefs, melting glaciers, rising sea levels, more frequent and intense storms, and a more rapid spread of diseases.

How can it be so hard to understand ??? what are we waiting for…..
Tasha : Ok, now that it’s addressed, what do you have in mind to do about it?

Reply : Reduce human reprodution rate drastically , if people do not want to cooperate willingly then we must enforce special laws , 1-2 child policy. Over population is very serious it is much more serious then murderers which we have laws for ( For a good reason , same should apply with over population )

What are the social implications of a genetic basis for the differences in IQ between whites and blacks?

I’m not suggesting anything so don’t accuse me of racism. I’m just presenting a what if scenario. If it could be proved beyond doubt that the differences in IQ between whites and blacks is a result of genetic differences and has very little to do with the environment, what would be the social implications of this.

I would say ending affirmative action is one thing that could and would be done, because affirmative action assumes that blacks and whites have the same intellectual potential, and that blacks are only at a disadvantage because of the environment that they grow up in. Affirmative action assumes that IQ differences and SAT score differences between whites and blacks is largely environmental. If it could be proved that the IQ difference between whites and blacks is largely genetic, then affirmative action is a waste of time and achieves nothing and should be brought to an end.

What other social implications can you think of?

Another question – Why are we so determined to censor this debate on race and IQ. The truth may be harsh, but surely it is better to know the truth than hide from it. Any scientist that speaks on issue of race and IQ is attacked by everyone and censored in the media. This is not healthy because it prevents us knowing the whole truth on the issue. Atleast let them investigate it properly and let them share their findings with the world instead of attacking and being frightened of what they have to say.

What are the social implications of a genetic basis for the differences in IQ between whites and blacks?

I’m not suggesting anything so don’t accuse me of racism. I’m just presenting a what if scenario. If it could be proved beyond doubt that the differences in IQ between whites and blacks is a result of genetic differences and has very little to do with the environment, what would be the social implications of this.

I would say ending affirmative action is one thing that could and would be done, because affirmative action assumes that blacks and whites have the same intellectual potential, and that blacks are only at a disadvantage because of the environment that they grow up in. Affirmative action assumes that IQ differences and SAT score differences between whites and blacks is largely environmental. If it could be proved that the IQ difference between whites and blacks is largely genetic, then affirmative action is a waste of time and achieves nothing and should be brought to an end.

What other social implications can you think of?

Another question – Why are we so determined to censor this debate on race and IQ. The truth may be harsh, but surely it is better to know the truth than hide from it. Any scientist that speaks on issue of race and IQ is attacked by everyone and censored in the media. This is not healthy because it prevents us knowing the whole truth on the issue. Atleast let them investigate it properly and let them share their findings with the world instead of attacking and being frightened of what they have to say.

Libs how about some real answers to real issues?

Proven you increase taxes on the wealthy for the benefit of the poor. This slows the economy and decreases available jobs creating an unemployment state. Why do you persist?

Proven you want to leave Iraq yet have no plan of departure that stabilizes the Middle East? What’s your plan?

Proven you want us to “do something in Darfur” just like Amnesty International wanted us to “Do something” in Iraq in 2002 yet you turned rabid when everything became a challenge? What’s your plan for recovery of Darfur?

You want zero environmental industrial base. Yet you want bio based products and all natural products whenever you turn around? How can you accomplish this?

These are just a few but the trend becomes a Kid’s Christmas list and you are never satisified. You all want and demand more yet give and create the strategy less and less.

What is the appropriate place for the market?

This question is asked after reviewing Ron Paul’s position on free markets.

Markets can be a great way to reach optimal efficiency levels when talking of commodity exchanges and supply and demand. There are, however, some assumptions that economists often make when talking of markets (at least from a very general and basic level). They are:
1) Many buyers and sellers
2) Standardized mode of exchange (ie: currency) representing an exchange value (separate, often from use value of a commodity).
3) Buyers and sellers have the same information.

Under the above assumptions, there’s no question that free markets are meant to reach optimal efficiency and productivity levels. However, let us review something such as an environmental issue. In this case (the one I’m most familiar with), it will be water management.

The natural place for the market is to fully satisfy demand with an available supply. If everything is left to the market, this would inevitably mean that water would be transferred from lower valued users to higher valued users (which, in most cases, means more specialty crop production and water being transferred from irrigation to municipal or industrial uses). Environmentally, however, this could mean more mono-culture agriculture, dimishing genetic variation amongst crops, and the marginalization of lower valued water users (which can lead to more farm consolidation and the decline of many rural communities). Socially and enviornmentally, we can see examples where the “optimal” outcome can leave many people unemployed and the enviornment degraded.

So, I ask… what do you think is the appropriate place for the market regarding:
1) Social outcomes
2) Economic outcomes
3) Environmental outcomes

And, finally, what do you think the government’s role should be regarding markets?
@ Arpotter. I will give you an example. Let’s say you have an area like Northern Montana or Southern Alberta with irrigated pasture land and sileage production (which accounts for most irrigation in those regions), cereal grain production, and other specialty crop production. On the pasture land you have a huge variation of native and introduced species of plants and animals. Medium sized farms producing other crops can grow Marquis wheat, Durum wheat, and other types… and maybe peas and corn for feed.

When water moves away from pasture and sileage production, it `USUALLY` goes towards higher valued crops like corn, potatoes and sugar beets (in those regions mentioned). Furthermore, it expedites farm consolidation by driving out less efficiet users. The result is usually fewer crops grown (less variety), albeit higher valued ones. Over the last 20 years this trend has led to less variability amongst crops (since only the toughest and best strains are chosen or production)
@ james

I’m using the example of prior appropriation, or use based, water laws that are very typical in the Western states, Australia and parts of Western Canada. Many of these regions have adopted water markets to varying success. Riparian water laws are typically characteristic of the eastern part of North America where there usually are not any water markets.
@ james

I’m using the example of prior appropriation, or use based, water laws that are very typical in the Western states, Australia and parts of Western Canada. Many of these regions have adopted water markets to varying success. Riparian water laws are typically characteristic of the eastern part of North America where there usually are not any water markets.

Scientific hypocrisy…?

Why do conservatives have such confidence in the ability of science and technology to invent new solutions to problems like alternative energy sources or any other new markets or new products? …but when there’s bad news, when science and technology tells us man-made Global Warming is a distinct possibility…they just suddenly lose confidence, call it a socialist conspiracy and hire new scientists to support their point of view?

Is the something that we don’t know about the oil supply from the middle east?

Solar panel as far as the eye can see in Dubai, millions of dollars being pumped into alternative energy, Geo-scientists being recruited from all over the world for work in Dubai. A vision for the first carbon free city named MASDAR. Is there something that we don’t know?

Here in the United States we are bickering amongst ourselves about any investments made into alternative energy? The left says yes, the right says no and while we fight…are we missing the boat?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8586046.stm
http://www.masdar.ae/en/home/index.aspx
ok…I see that there is no way through the bubble. I am capitalist and liberal, if there is way to make money while doing good for my planet, I will take it. Just thought I would take time to inform.
@Boober: yes, the first link includes an artist rendition…go to the next link. I have engineer friend who have been asked to go to Dubai for interviews.

Shouldn’t there be an up or down vote on off shore drilling? All arguments have been debunked!?

When President Bush spoke about drilling off shore the price of oil fell $25.00 a barrel! You talk about someone who gets heard!

Some say that the US only has 3% of the worlds oil reserve! However the Interior Depts. MMS estimates that in the Gulf of Mexico alone it has 45 Billion barrels of oil.

Another argument is that oil companies aren’t using the leases they already have. What out of 7,457 leases that the oil companies are leasing only 1,877 are producing 130,000 barrels a day which is concidered one that is “producing”. With the price of a barrel still over $100.00 a barrel that charge never made sense.

What about the environment? First of all there is strict guidlines that the oil companies have to adhere to and they spend billions of dollars a year answering to the EPA. In the last 15 years and out of over 7.5 billions of barrels of oil there has only been 691 oil spills. Not to minimize the danger but any form of energy will have it’s trade offs.

What about alternative energy? I believe that we should go after all types of energy to become “energy independent” but with our lifestyle we need to ween ourselves off of oil, coal and natural gas. There is NOTHING else available! Why spend millions on a phantom technology when we can lower the price now? Why punish oil companies with more taxes when we have a means to lower prices now! Our government is always wanting more taxes and not a solution.

69% of Americans want to drill and the Democrat leadership in congress again will not allow an up or down vote on a very important legislation.

McCain ’08

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/ar2008081102145.html
http://www.enegytomorrow.org/oilandgas/

Home

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap18-2008aug18,0,3079035,full.column

What has Obama done for our country?

I’ll tell you what he’s done!
MORE THAN BUSH DID IN HIS 8 YEAR TERM.
Let’s see, Obama:
-Reversed restrictions on stem cell research
-Appointed an assistant to the president for science and technology policy
-Created a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
-Expanded loan programs for small businesses
-Extended and indexed the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch
-Expanded eligibility for State Children’s Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP)
-Expanded funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners
-Directed military leaders to end war in Iraq
-Sent two additional brigades to Afghanistan
-As promised gave a speech at a major Islamic forum in the first 100 days of his administration
-Granted Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba
-Restored funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program
-Released presidential records
-Now requires new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions
-Pushed for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors
-Created a White House Office on Urban Policy
-Supported increased funding for the NEA
-Funded a major expansion of AmeriCorps
-Worked to overturn Ledbetter vs. Goodyear
-Banned lobbyist gifts to executive employees
-Pledged to weatherize 1 million homes per year
-Invested in all types of alternative energy
-Enacted tax credit for consumers for plug-in hybrid cars
-Provided grants to encourage energy-efficient building codes
-As promised appointed at least one Republican to the cabinet
-Extended unemployment insurance benefits and temporarily suspended taxes on these benefits.

I’m sick of hearing ANYBODY say that Obama hasn’t been doing anything, you don’t even watch the news, read the papers, research shit online. How would YOU know what he’s done? Who are you to say he’s not fit for presidency, who are you to say he can’t do his job right? How could you even THINK that he’s worse than Bush when he’s gone a hell of a lot more than Bush ever did within his 8 years.
Even other countries are finally happy that we got a good president, because it’s about damn time we get this country whipped into shape.

Your beloved Bush put us into war, he put us into an economic crisis, and now Obama has to get us out, and he plans on trying his hardest, in fact he’s already started.

So all you Obama haters, shut your mouth unless you’re actually informed.
And to you racists, I don’t know how anybody can’t like somebody just because OF THEIR FREAKING SKIN COLOR!
Ughh, I KNOW this isn’t a question, and I know I’m going against the rules by ranting, but WOW. I guess Americans really ARE stupid.
ALSO, yes a lot of people hate him for his skin color, they say it plain as day, they call him a f-ing n*gger, I’ve heard it plenty of times. What, did you think there was no such thing as racism in America?
Also, it wasn’t an actual question moron, as I clearly stated in my passage. Do you see why you’re a moron now?

Does the rebuttal arguement for drilling off the coasts make sense?

One side says that we need to drill off the coast to ease our burden. The other side says the oil wont effect the market for 5 yrs. Then also goes on to says we need to invest more in alternative energy. But wouldn’t alternative energy, even if discovered today, not make it onto the markets in less than 5 yrs also? Why not do both?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080618/ap_on_go_pr_wh/offshore_oil
There is money being invested in alternatives. Shoot, my wife worked on fuel cell research in college.

places to buy eco friendly products?

just thought id let you all know about ecostore24 it a really cool online store packed with energy saving products

Natural and Eco Friendly Products for sale?

I was told there is a company that sales natural and eco friendly products. But I cant remember the name. You have to pay a 15 dollar membership and use around 35 points a month… You can also sale these products and get a commission. They sale cleaning products, laundry soap, beauty supplies, even food, ect. If someone knows the name of this company please send it my way so I can check it out.

Why are some people more attracted to eco-friendly products over others?

Is it by the way they look?
By the price?
Why do some people go for them and others don’t? what do you think are the main reasons?

eco friendly products, not manufactured in the uk…..?

Hi guys im searching for products which are eco friendly but not manufactured in the uk.. Do you know of anything which is eco friendly and not manufactured inside of the unkited kingdom on which it has to be imported?

places to buy eco friendly products?

just thought id let you all know about ecostore24 it a really cool online store packed with energy saving products

Looking for a Job in Canada or US?

My name is Sinan and I am living in Germany and looking for an job opportunity in the Canada or US.

I have been working as an Project Engineer in the Environmental Industry (Germany) for more than fourteen years. I also worked in the Automobile Industry, (Turkey), where I was responsible for the implementation of ISO 9000.

My area of responsibility includes the development and management of project budgets. I proactively analyze multiple reimbursable contracts and am responsible for project budget management in close cooperation with the project manager and project schedule planner. In my function I also develop action proposals. My duties further include implementing change and contingency management issues as well as benchmarking progress measurement.

I am multilingual in English, Turkish, and German,

I am looking forward hearing from you.

To Pounder:
The thing is that I need a sponsor. Idon´t have a work permit. It is hard to find a employer which would sponsor you.

Today oil prices hit a new record: $122 per barrel. How could we react?

Today oil prices hit a new record: $122 per barrel. With quickly rising gas prices and other economic issues in the spotlight, many of us are feeling the pinch. But what exactly is causing this change in our economy, and as Christians or Muslims or Hindus, how can you help improve the situation? We are fully religious conscious and caste conscious. How can you get rid of this from your foolish Religious sentiments? All are humans, hence, think positively and do something for this cause towards environmental pollution.

Why not ban/charge for carrier bags in the UK?

They’ve done it in Ireland, and now Hong Kong is doing it:

“Plastic bag levy to pay for green education in Hong Kong” on Yahoo News at:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070522/tsc-hongkong-environment-b1f5339.html

“Money raised from a Hong Kong government levy to be placed on the use of polluting plastic bags will be used to fund green education programmes, the environment chief said Tuesday.

The bags are considered harmful to the environment as they take so long to decompose when trashed. The levy is aimed at reducing the number used each year.

Environment chief Sarah Liao said the levy money would be used to teach environmental issues to school children and to fund conservation programmes.”

If they can make such a sensible change, why can’t our government, which keeps telling us it’s supposedly supportive of green issues?

Who thinks countries should be got rid off and people placed to live together along new criteria?

Being of the same nationality is such a rubbish basis for grouping people together to obey all the same laws and live similar life styles. What have i got in common with my neighbours? Sod all. But I have friends in the U.S. Russia, Poland, Israel, Iran, Germany, Spain – all over the place- who i have far more in common with. Would it not be better if we organised where we lived and how we lived- the laws of our lands – along criteria such as what we believed in? There could be a Fundamentalist Christian state, different forms of socialist/communist states, rampant capitalist states, whatever there was a big enough population of people to justify them getting their own place! I would, for example, go for somewhere with no drug prohibition, where communities lived in small farming communities and governed themselves- an agricultural, by the sea, paradise type thing! 🙂 We would maybe not have TV or cars or designer clothing, but, i think i could live happily without these things. And with a few other things added and few more taken away, I know i could live a much happier and contented life- and i don’t think i’m alone?
But, i am aware enough to know some people want to live in a world of fast cars and chasing the dollar and doing business deals …while others want to make their religion the prime governer of their lives etc.. The world is big enough! Couldn’t we just have a big vote, determine the type of nations that were going to exist, then determine the size of each new nation by the number of people wishing to live in it? In this way people would be able to live in the type country they wanted to instead of the ‘sameness’ that is threatening every country on Earth right now, this democratic, christian capitalism that is spreading like a cancer. It would also be the opportunity to end the inequality between nations of the earth. We are all people and all, at heart, the same, and the sooner we see that then the easier it’ll be to accept the differences we do have, tolerate and respect those differences and the better it is going to be for EVERYONE!! People would have old friends and neighbours and family in different nations too making wars less likely! U.N. or some other effective body could govern it all. Shouldn’t we as a race be asked if we want this though? The technology is almost with us that would allow humanity to answer such a question and allow us to finally put wars and poverty behind us and start tackling global warming and environmental issues and working together instead of against each other, with every citizen of the world more content living in a nation with a belief system they supported and one that they had chosen for themselves. And people would of course be able to move between these different states. Your kid could leave your island dope smoking country and make his fortune in one of the big capitalist states, then trade it all in and move back to be where he grew up. Only problem would be people who still wished more than anything to belong to their country of birth- ultra nationalists – idiots. Jesus, if the principal thing that defines you is a flag, or an anthem or man made lines drawn on a map marking out the boundaries of a space on the crust of the planet and then given a name – there can’t be that much to your character.
I think its time we organised our living arrangements on better guidelines than nationality.

why pesticides has become worse?

32,000 tons of pesticides were produced in the US in 1960. Despite the formation of the EPA, the availability of more information, and a greater public awareness of environmental issues, 615,000 tons of pesticides are used in the US each year

are there any eco friendly ways of washing clothes?

How “eco-friendly” or not are wood clothes hangers?

Why should be we choose organic clothes? Why should we live an eco-friendly life?

What are the advantages and disadvantages for living an eco–friendly life?
Why are organic stuff are better?

is going to a laundry mat instead of doing a load of clothes at home eco friendly?

I Need a Name for an Eco-Friendly Clothing Line?

I’m starting an eco–friendly clothing line, that will use organic cotton etc. The problem is a name, I envision it in green text with several modifications like some letters etc.

Does anyone have any suggestions for an eco–friendly clothing line name? One worded- is preferred, and it can be in any language as long as it sounds nice and rolls of the tongue with ease 🙂