CHAMPAIGN, Illinois, October 14, 2008 (ENS) – An herbicide that effectively kills broadleaf weeds in corn, but also has wiped out most of the grapes in Illinois and other Midwestern states, may finally have met a grape it cannot kill.

Researchers at the University of Illinois have developed a new grape called Improved Chancellor which is resistant to the popular herbicide 2, 4-D.

“In 1946, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic or 2, 4-D was introduced. It was a wonder herbicide,” said Robert Skirvin, plant biologist in the College of Agriculture, Consumer and Environmental Sciences. “It works really well in corn and wheat and grass crops because it kills the broadleaves, so the grasses are resistant to it, but grapes are incredibly sensitive to it.”

Skirvin said that 1/100th of the amount of 2, 4-D commonly used on corn to kill broadleaves, will kill grapes. Today, more than 50 years after it was introduced, it is still the third most widely used herbicide in the United States.

“A grape resistant to 2, 4-D would be a huge plus to our industry,” said Kansas grower Rebecca Storey. “As a vineyard and winery owner we have suffered losses from this chemical that runs in the tens of thousands of dollars – not to mention the time and effort to identify the sprayer and prove the damage in a court of law. This grape would be a gift to our industry.”

The Chancellor grape (Photo
courtesy Cornell University)

The Chancellor grape was once widely planted in France for table wine production.

The discovery of the gene that makes Improved Chancellor resistant to 2, 4-D came about by accident.

“The USDA found a soil bacterium that had a gene that breaks down 2, 4-D,” Skirvin explained. “Someone noticed that after spilling 2, 4-D on the ground, something in the soil broke it up – metabolized it. They were looking for something to control pollution and discovered this soil bacterium instead.”

Skirvin received permission to use the bacterial gene and began in 2002 to transfer it to a grape that would ultimately be resistant to 2, 4-D.

He and his graduate student Richard Mulwa followed standard genetic engineering techniques in order to transfer the gene to grape cells.

“Selecting the transformed cells is the most delicate stage of the process because out of hundreds of thousands of cells, there may be only 25 cells that actually contain the gene,” said Skirvin.

He explained that in order to locate the cells that have the gene, another gene is inserted as a marker.

The cells are then placed onto a medium that is comfortable for the cells with the marker gene. All of the normal cells die. The only ones that will live are the ones with the marker, which are also the cells that contain the 2, 4-D resistant gene.

Stephen Farrand, a University of Illinois microbiologist, assisted in all aspects of the gene transfer and Margaret Norton oversaw all of the tissue culture operation.

“Then we have to take the cells and regenerate them into plants. We use a tissue culture media and start the cells growing. After about two years in the lab, we had tiny seed-like shoots that developed from the transgenic grape cells,” said Skirvin.

“These were grown until they were big enough to be transferred to a limited access greenhouse where they were allowed to mature and produce fruit,” he said.

From these experiments, eight Chancellor plants were obtained.

DNA testing showed that only three of them had the herbicide resistant gene. Cuttings were taken of those three and planted. The plants were then sprayed with 2, 4-D. Each of the three Chancellor plants was tested, along with one of the original Chancellor plants as a control.

“It was quite an accomplishment to get the gene into the plant,” said Skirvin. “This grape could help salvage the wine and grape industry in the Midwest.”

If all goes well, Skirvin hopes that in about five years they’ll be able to work with a grape grower to produce wine using their new patented cultivar Improved Chancellor.

Because the new grape is genetically modified it has not yet been tested outside the greenhouse. Skirvin hopes to get permission to grow it in an isolation plot outdoors by spring 2009.

“We have to do tests to make sure that there aren’t any poisonous compounds that would get into the grape or the wine,” Skirvin said.

“After the grapes have been tested and found safe to eat,” he said, “I think it’s going to be beneficial to Minnesota, Nebraska, Illinois and other Midwestern states – anywhere grain is grown and 2, 4-D is sprayed on the crops.”

The research for this project was funded internally by the University of Illinois, which holds the patent for Improved Chancellor.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 7, 2008 (ENS) – The world’s largest financial services company, Citi Inc., has joined a network of investors, environmental groups and other public interest organizations working with companies to address sustainability challenges.

Citi was approved March 27 as a Ceres network company by the Ceres board of directors, who cited the company’s leadership on climate change as a determining factor. Companies that join the Ceres company network commit to making continuous strides in improving their sustainability performance and reporting practices.

Citibank ATM machines at a New York
City branch. (Photo by Richard
Alexander Caraballo)

Citi is among more than 70 companies in the Ceres network, including more than 20 Fortune 500 companies. Ceres also directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, comprised of more than 60 institutional investors who collectively manage over $5 trillion in assets.

“We are pleased and excited to join the Ceres network. Ceres is a well-respected NGO known for its expertise on climate change and stakeholder engagement,” said Pamela Flaherty, president and chief executive of the Citi Foundation and director for citizenship at Citi, “We look forward to partnering with them to further develop our initiatives in this space.”

Citi provides consumer banking and credit, corporate and investment banking, securities brokerage, and wealth management. Citi’s brand names include Citibank, CitiFinancial, Primerica, and Smith Barney.

Until 2004, Citi was one of the world’s top funders of the fossil fuel and logging industries, which made the corporation a major target of the Rainforest Action Network, RAN, and other environmental groups. Embarrassed by demonstrations such as a 35-foot-tall Earth-shaped balloon carrying the message “Citi Lives Richly and the Earth Pays!” at Cornell University and similar critical banners in front of its New York headquarters, in 2004, RAN and Citigroup agreed that the corporation would adopt an environmental policy to guide its lending practices, a step other banks have since taken.

In May 2007, Citi announced its latest expansion of the company’s sustainability program with a $50 billion commitment over the next 10 years to address global climate change.

The company says it intends to act through investments, financings and related activities to support the commercialization and growth of alternative energy and clean technology among the clients and markets it serves, as well as within its own businesses and operations.

“Citi’s commitment to tackle the challenges posed by climate change is exciting,” said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres. “Citi is well positioned to reduce both its own operational greenhouse gas footprint and those of its clients. Ceres looks forward to working with Citi to develop solutions to the climate threat and further integrate sustainability into the company’s business strategies, products and services.”

Citi joins financial service companies Bank of America, State Street, and Wachovia, which are already members of the Ceres network.

In January, Ceres released a report, “Corporate Governance and Climate Change: the Banking Sector,” which analyzes climate change governance practices of the world’s largest banks. Of the 40 banks scored in the report, Citi was ranked highest among U.S. banks.

The report found that a growing number of banks are beginning to factor the risks of climate change into their businesses, but that more aggressive actions are needed from banks, such as explicitly incorporating carbon costs and climate risk into their lending and investment decision-making.

In response to this growing concern around the carbon impact of investments, Citi joined JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley last month in releasing the Carbon Principles, a new set of guidelines for advisors and lenders to U.S. power companies.

The principles were in response to the financial risks power companies face from emerging carbon-reducing regulations.

“The Carbon Principles are a great start and are heading in the right direction by putting carbon intensive industries on notice that they need to factor carbon costs and climate risks into their business development plans,” Lubber said.

The protests continue. This one took
place on November 16, 2007 at a
Citibank in San Francisco. (Photo
courtesy Rainforest Action Network)

“We are looking forward to seeing Citi and the other bank signatories take these principles a step further by disclosing specifics on actual implementation,” said Lubber, “including carbon pricing.”

Environmentalists are by no means satisfied with Citi’s position. The Rainforest Action Network says the Carbon Principles are “an important step toward recognizing the climate risks associated with financing coal plants” but the group says they are “limited by their lack of any binding commitments and their failure to address the impact of destructive coal extraction methods such as mountaintop removal mining.”

In December, Rebecca Tarbotton, director of Rainforest Action Network’s Global Finance Campaign, pointed out, “Citi is the largest financier of the coal industry, which is by far the leading cause of climate change.”

The environmental group is urging Citi’s new chief executive Vikram Pandit to “set new standards for the banking industry by refusing to invest in outmoded and dangerous industries like coal.”

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

The inherent contradiction between “sustainable design” and creating more stuff — whose relative necessity and functionality may vary from person to person — is a difficult issue for TreeHuggers to reconcile sometimes. While our favorite designs sure look good and offer a greener alternative and lighter carbon footprint [www.sundancechannel.com], does the benefit of owning them and having more stuff outweigh the materials, labor, emissions and energy expended to get them to us? Maybe; maybe not, but any way we can reduce any (or all) of these is a good thing. Looking toward the future, we think the answer may be on the horizon: 3D printing and downloadable designs.

The concept of downloading designs and then “printing” them in your own home is quite simple, though much more complicated in practice. The idea exists in a few different formats, but is essentially this: a designer dreams up a new product; publishes and helps distribute the plans; we buy them and either 1) contract a local manufacturer to build it or 2) gather the materials and build it ourselves. Think of it like IKEA without the roof-rack or the trip to the big store; using flat-packed designs; most everything could be (at least mostly) constructed from a flat sheet of plywood.

Most designers (and the population at large) aren’t really quite ready for this, so we present option #2: 3D printing. Technology is coming [www.treehugger.com] to allow three-dimensional objects to be “printed” (meaning fabricated, really) in your home from designs downloaded from the internet (or on something like a CD or DVD, direct from the designer). Intriguing, no? Right now, the technology can only do simple, solid plastic forms, but Cornell University has made a machine that can “print out” in silicone, plaster, Cheez Whiz and Play-Doh. Until the technology becomes more flexible (and cost-effective), we’re limited to our current printing capabilities; since this usually involves inkjets or lasers, downloading designs is pretty well limited to what we can print on paper. Fortunately, there are a handful of designs out there that can give you an idea of what can be done.

1) Having this pinhole camera [www.treehugger.com] is as easy as downloading the design, printing the PDF, following the instructions, loading the film, and pointing and clicking to your heart’s content.
2) Foldschool furniture [www.treehugger.com] follows the same idea, though on a slightly larger scale. Designer Nicola Enrico Stäubli says, “Mass culture is run by superficiality and ecological absurdity. The mindset of foldschool is to restore design to one of its original missions: to provide a product at an affordable price through a smart manufacturing process.”
3) Why stop with a camera and furniture when you can download and print a whole house [www.treehugger.com]? Well, a scaled-down replica of a house, at least, but still an impressive bit of design and architecture considering it’s made from the same stuff TPS reports are usually printed on.
4) ReadyMech [www.treehugger.com] is a series of smart, fun designs that you can download and assemble yourself, if you don’t want to wait around for robot-built house. Maybe not as functional as a house, but still a great example of how to short-circuit the entire expensive production, transport and sales process that consumes so much energy.