TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, September 8, 2008 (ENS) – Contrary to the idea that environmentalism is a youth movement, consumers over 55 years old are the most prolific users of green products in the United States, according to survey results released Saturday by ICOM Information & Communications, a Toronto-based marketing communications company.

ICOM conducted the household products survey in March and April 2008 with 6,036 people responding from across the United States.

The poll shows that despite higher costs, more than six in 10 U.S. homes now use environmentally friendly household products.

Both male and female groups 55 years and older reported above average usage of environmentally-friendly home goods.

How green is your home? (Photo
courtesy The Company Store)

Leading the way are 55-59 year old females, who are more than twice as likely as the average consumer to use green products, the survey shows.

Males 65-69 years old are second, more than 1.7 times as likely to use green products than the average American.

“The data is very telling for marketers,” said Peter Meyers ICOM vice president of marketing. “There is incredible interest brewing for sustainable products.”

“While the numbers show that significant inroads have been made with the older demographics, they also suggest untapped potential in prime younger consumer groups to engage them with eco-friendly products,” said Meyers.

Showing the penetration of green products into American homes, 61.9 percent of survey respondents said that they do use some type of environmentally friendly product.

When asked why they elect to purchase eco-friendly goods, a leading 33 percent of the group said it “makes me feel good about myself.”

When asked why they elect not to purchase or use green products, 50 percent of non-adopters cited high prices as the main factor.

The next most common reason selected for avoiding green goods was, “I do not believe that they are that much better for the environment,” said 17 percent of respondents.

Of those that said they do not use environmentally friendly products, both male and female demographics aged 25-34 years old were among the “least likely to use” eco-friendly products when compared with the national average.

“Younger demographics are still green, that is, inexperienced when it comes to engaging with environmentally friendly goods,” said Meyers.

“The data suggests that targeting these groups with more calculated offers – such as at slightly more aggressive price points, appealing to their personal values or reinforcing the true benefits for the environment,” he said, “could introduce green products to a new, promising consumer base.”

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, July 21, 2008 (ENS) – The Ontario Government and municipal officials from around the Great Lakes on both sides of the border have begun a new era of working together to restore, protect and conserve the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem.

A memo of cooperation signed Thursday by provincial ministers and Ontario representatives of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative commits them to consulting and cooperating on issues of municipal interest and responsibility around the Great Lakes. The signing took place at the annual conference of the Cities Initiative, in Toronto.

The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative is a binational coalition of over 50 mayors and other municipal officials from Canada and the U.S. interested in the health and well-being of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River system.

The memo was signed by Ontario Environment Minister John Gerretsen, Natural Resources Minister Donna Cansfield and Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

Environment Minister Gerretsen said, “Today we formally recognize the importance of engaging municipalities as key partners in sustaining the health and vitality of the Great Lakes for our benefit, but also for our children and future generations.”

Signing on behalf of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities initiative was Mayor Lynn Peterson of Thunder Bay, incoming chair of the Cities Initiative.

“By signing this agreement today, we are ensuring that our joint efforts to protect the Great Lakes, provincially and locally, will have the greatest positive impact for our communities,” Peterson said. “The Cities Initiative looks forward to working closely with Ontario municipalities and the Ontario Government on future Great Lakes decisions.”

Toronto Mayor David Miller, founding Canadian chair of the Cities Initiative and conference host, said, “This memorandum of cooperation represents the beginning of an important strategic partnership between the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, Ontario Great Lakes municipalities and the Ontario government. From Nipigon in the North to Toronto in the South, Ontario municipalities are investing over $2 billion to protect the Great Lakes every year.”

Canada geese fly into the sunset
over Goderich, Ontario on the
shore of Lake Huron. (Photo
by L. Michael Roberts)

Deb Shewfelt, mayor of the Ontario town of Goderich on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, says he and other Great Lakes region mayors finally have an equal voice in developing and maintaining the lakes.

At the conference, Shewfelt said he is encouraged by the attitude of the Ontario government led by Premier Dalton McGuinty, which has made a commitment to consulting municipalities on any decisions affecting the lakes.

On the U.S. side of the Great Lakes, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm has signed legislation ratifying the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact.

All eight Great Lakes states and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec now have approved the agreement, which ensures that authority over Great Lakes water usage is retained in the region, and promotes efforts toward water conservation and efficiency.

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle, chair of the Council of Great Lakes Governors, said, “It is gratifying to see our region uniting as never before to protect the Great Lakes. We must now build on this momentum, working with our congressional partners to turn these protections into law.”

Now, the focus shifts to the U.S. Congress which must grant its consent for the Compact to become law.

Support in Congress appears to be building. According to the Council of Great Lakes Governors, more than 20 members of Congress, including both of the presumptive nominees of the major parties – Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, a Great Lakes state, and Senator McCain of Arizona – have expressed their support for the Compact.

In addition to safeguarding Great Lakes water from diversion from the basin without consent of the signatory states and provinces, the Compact provides a comprehensive management framework for achieving sustainable water use and resource protection.

The eight Great Lakes States reached a similar good faith agreement with Ontario and Quebec in 2005, which the provinces are using to amend their existing water programs for greater regional consistency.

In Muskegon, Michigan earlier this month, U.S. federal and state officials met to launch a new partnership to transform a Great Lakes toxic hot spot into a Great Lakes prime vacation spot.

Serving in his capacity as chair of the Great Lakes Commission, Michigan Lt. Governor John Cherry announced a partnership between the Commission and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, to begin restoring fish and wildlife in Great Lakes Areas of Concern. These 43 toxic hot spots were designated under the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

The partnership’s initial focus is Muskegon Lake, where contaminated sediments, industrial discharges and shoreline development have degraded water quality and damaged the lake’s once abundant fish and wildlife.

Over the years nearly three-quarters of the lake’s shoreline has been hardened with concrete and other structures, and more than one-quarter of the lake filled with residue from sawmills and industrial operations.

The three-year, $3.4 million Muskegon Lake Habitat Restoration Project will restore 73 acres of wetlands, soften 18,000 feet of hardened shoreline, and remove nearly nine acres of fill.

The project will be partially funded by NOAA’s Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Program, a new effort to engage the agency’s skills and experience in restoring fish and wildlife in the Great Lakes. It will be implemented jointly by the Great Lakes Commission, NOAA and the West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission.

Outoing Chairman of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, Mayor Gary Becker of Racine, Wisconsin said, “The identity of communities along the Great Lakes is so closely tied to these waters. … Coming together as a region, as we are doing with the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration, is critical to addressing contamination at our beaches and within the Lakes on a larger scale. For the sake of the Lakes, this regional effort needs to succeed.”

On Friday at the conference, Mayor Lynn Peterson of Thunder Bay, Ontario was chosen as the 2008/2009 chair of the organization.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, July 14, 2008 (ENS) – Half of Ontario’s northern boreal forests will be protected from unbridled resource development so these trees can continue to fight global warming, under a conservation plan annouced today by Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty.

The government of Ontario will extend permanent protection to at least 225,000 square kilometers (86,872 square miles) of the Far North Boreal region under its Far North Planning Initiative, the premier said – an area almost twice the size of England.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty
(Photo courtesy Office of the Premier)

“Although the Northern Boreal region has remained virtually undisturbed since the retreat of the glaciers, change is inevitably coming to these lands,” said Premier McGuinty.

“We need to prepare for development and plan for it,” he said. “It’s our responsibility as global citizens to get this right, and to act now.”

Environmental groups were delighted.

“This announcement sets out the most ambitious conservation agenda for the Boreal Forest in Canada,” said Janet Sumner, executive director of The Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society Wildlands League. “Today’s announcement fulfills the premier’s promise to protect the boreal forest by doing land use planning before large scale industrial development.”

The Wildlands League, working with other conservation groups, has been a strong voice calling on Ontario to protect its intact boreal forest for the past five years, said Sumner, given its critical global ecological value as one of the world’s most important remaining stretches of wilderness.

Mining and logging will be permitted in the protected area, but only under stricter regulations and providing that local Aboriginal communities approve.

New forestry and the opening of new mines in the Far North would require community land use plans supported by local Aboriginal communities.

Scientists, First Nations and Métis communities will collaborate to map and permanently protect an interconnected network of conservation lands across the Far North, the Ontario Environment Ministry said in a statement.

McGuinty said his government will work with all northern communities and resource industries to create a broad plan for sustainable development.

The Northern Boreal region makes up 43 percent of Ontario’s land mass, but it is home to just 24,000 people living in 36 communities.

To ensure community input, the new initiative provides for a local land-use planning process before development can be approved. Each year, a number of the 36 communities will complete local land use plans. The entire process is scheduled to be completed in the next 10 to 15 years.

Woodland caribou in Ontario’s boreal
forest (Photo by Liv Vors courtesy
Global Forest Watch Canada)

Preserving these spaces will help ensure Ontario’s biodiversity, said the premier’s office in its statement. Still wild, Ontario’s northern boreal region is inhabited by more than 200 species of animals such as polar bears, wolverines, and caribou – many of which are threatened or endangered.

Permanently protecting these lands will help a world wrestling with the effects of climate change, as they are a globally significant carbon sink.

The Ontario government says protecting this region is key to its plan to fight climate change. The forests and peat lands in the Far North store about 97 billion metric tonnes of carbon dioxide and absorb around 12.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, the government said.

Preserving these lands also protects the core cultural connection of the Aboriginal people who live there, their connection to the land, clean water and abundant hunting and fishing.

Lois Corbett, senior policy advisor to Ontario Environment Minister John Gerretsen says, “To bring in new resources benefits sharing on the other half of the land for our First Nations communities strikes a new approach that puts those communities at the center of ecological protection and economic development in the future,” Corbett said, “instead of forestry and mining companies.”

“Our plan will ensure that mining potential across the province is developed in a sustainable way that benefits and respects communities,” the Premier’s Office stated.

“We will ensure that our mining industry remains strong – but we also need to modernize the way mining companies stake and explore their claims to be more respectful of private land owners and Aboriginal communities. The Ontario government believes exploration and mine development should only take place following early consultation and accommodation of Aboriginal communities.”

Ontario boreal forest (Photo
by John Wartman)

To ensure that mining practices are up to date in the far North and across the province, the McGuinty government will review the Mining Act, and consultations will begin early next month.The government intends to introduce legislation in the upcoming session and new mining rules would be in place for later next year.

“The commitment to revise the Mining Act is also extremely welcome,” said Sumner. “Ontario is now taking a leadership position in Canada on this issue, leaving behind an antiquated law that has no place in our future.”

A 2007 survey of logging, road building and other human disturbances in Ontario’s northern forests conducted by Global Forest Watch Canada using satellite imagery showed the rapid conversion of forestlands to logging and road building.

The intact forest habitat required by the threatened woodland caribou is being being destroyed, the survey showed.

“We found that over two-thirds of the study area, which is half of Ontario, was likely no longer suitable for caribou habitation. This has serious implications for the survival of this species within much of Ontario,” said Peter Lee, executive director of Global Forest Watch Canada.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, June 18, 2008 (ENS) – Canada today became the first country ever to be brought to court for failing to comply with its legal commitments to combat global warming.

Friends of the Earth Canada is suing the Conservative government led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper for following a strategy to reduce greenhouse gases that fails to meet Canada’s obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.

The lawsuit is the first in the world to seek enforcement of the protocol, an international treaty ratified by 180 countries, including Canada.

Heard in Federal Court in Toronto, the legal action could force the government to create a new plan to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gases six percent below 1990 levels, a legally binding target the current government says the country cannot meet.

The coal-fired Lambton power plant emits
greenhouse gases from its location on
the St. Clair River south of Sarnia,
Ontario. It burns 640 tons of coal per
hour. (Photo courtesy Ontario
Power Generation)

Pro-bono lawyers from Paliare Roland Barristers and Ecojustice told the court today that the government is in violation of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, or KPIA, a federal law enacted on June 22, 2007.

“The case is about defending the fundamental principle that the government must be accountable and comply with the law,” said Ecojustice lawyer Hugh Wilkins. “The government cannot pick and choose which laws to obey. The law is the law.”

The KPIA requires that, “Within 60 days after this Act comes into force and not later than May 31 of every year thereafter until 2013, the Minister [of the Environment] shall prepare a Climate Change Plan” that describes measures to be taken to ensure that Canada meets its obligations under the protocol.

Environment Minister John Baird has not prepared such a plan.

Under the KPIA, the Cabinet was required to pass binding, final regulations in December 2007, but they have not.

“Put simply, Canada has failed to comply with the law,” said lawyer Chris Paliare, who is arguing the case. “We are asking the court to declare that the government is bound by the law and must be held accountable to the will of Parliament.”

Of the 38 industrialized nations with binding international targets under the Kyoto Protocol, Canada is the only country that has indicated that it does not intend to meet its obligations.

“While other industrialized countries actively work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change, our government has offered pollution holidays for emitters for decades to come,” said Beatrice Olivastri, chief executive of Friends of the Earth Canada.

“This government has broken the law,” she said, “and, as Canadian citizens, we have both a moral and legal imperative to insist on enforcement of our own laws on climate action.”

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen
Harper (Photo credit
unknown)

The lawsuit seeks a declaration from the court that the government has not complied with the KPIA and an order requiring it to do so.

Under the Liberal government of Jean Chretien, Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol on December 17, 2002, taking on the legal commitment to reduce emissions by six percent below 1990 levels by the end of 2012.

But when the present Harper government took office in February 2006, Canada backed away from its Kyoto Protocol commitment.

The country is unable to achieve this level of greenhouse gas reduction, then Environment Minister Rona Ambrose said at a 2006 United Nations meeting in Nairobi, Kenya.

“We recognized that it was time to face up to our challenges in the most Canadian way – to be forthright with Canadians and our international partners about the results of Canada’s previous efforts, and to be realistic on the progress we could make by 2012,” Ambrose said.

On April 26, 2007, the Harper government announced its Turning the Corner strategy, which set greenhouse gas reduction targets to a different target – 20 percent below 2006 levels by 2020.

Canadian Environment Minister John
Baird at the UN climate
conference in Bali, Indonesia.
December 2007. (Photo
courtesy Earth
Negotiations Bulletin)

Meeting this goal would leave Canada 39 percent off target with the Kyoto Protocol in 2012 and would not achieve the Kyoto target until 2025, if at all, says Olivastri.

Olivastri says, “The people of Canada through their elected representatives made the Kyoto Protocol law in Canada when they passed the KPIA, so in FOE’s estimate, Canadian law must be enforced. This case is about whether the government will enforce its own laws.”

Federal lawyers have argued in a legal brief on the case that the adequacy of the Turning the Corner strategy is “not justiciable.” They hold that Parliament, not the courts, must resolve the issue.

The Federal Court is expected to rule on the case this summer or early fall.

In the meantime, the Harper Government is proceeding down its own path.

On March 10, Baird detailed the Turning the Corner plan to reduce greenhouse gases 20 percent by 2020 – with carbon trading, offsets, a technology fund, and a program that gives credit for early action.

By capping emissions and allowing exchanges to sell rights to emit greenhouse gases in the future, carbon trading enables industries to manage their emissions risks at the lowest cost while creating incentives for technological innovation.

Canada’s cap-and-trade program is being carried out by the Montreal Climate Exchange in collaboration with the Chicago Climate Exchange, which has been operating since 2003.

Luc Bertrand, chairman of the Montreal Climate Exchange, said the federal government’s air emissions regulatory framework meets the minimum conditions for the creation of a futures market.

On May 30, Baird and other officials celebrated the opening of the Montreal Climate Exchange.

“Carbon trading and the establishment of a market price on carbon are key parts of our Turning the Corner plan to cut Canada’s greenhouse gases an absolute 20 percent by 2020,” said Baird at the opening. “Clearly, our government’s action to fight climate change is working hand in hand with groups like the Montreal Climate Exchange.”

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, June 9, 2008 (ENS) – The giant paper and forest products company AbitibiBowater has decided to “temporarily” stop logging on the traditional territory of the Grassy Narrows First Nation.

The decision comes after decades of lawsuits and peaceful protests by the people of Grassy Narrows, including the longest standing logging blockade in North America.

The tribal actions were taken in an effort to protect the 2,500 square miles of forests, lakes and rivers north of Kenora, Ontario that comprises Grassy Narrows traditional territory.

Last October, AbitibiBowater was formed as a merger of Abitibi-Consolidated Inc. of Quebec and Bowater Incorporated of South Carolina.

AbitibiBowater is the third largest publicly traded paper and forest products company in North America and the eighth largest in the world.

It is in the fresh approach made possible by the merger that led to this decision, AbitibiBowater CEO David Paterson wrote in a letter to Ontario’s Natural Resources Minister Donna Cansfield.

“The flexibility of a newly merged company, paired with the current context of an industry that gives access to unused fibre, allow us to temporarily find alternative wood supply for our operations,” he wrote.

Rainforest Action Network, RAN, a San Francisco-based conservation advocacy group, praised the company’s decision.

Clearcut at Grassy Narrows (Photo
courtesy Amnesty
International Canada)

Since 2003, RAN has worked with the Grassy Narrows community to pressure U.S. companies Weyerhaeuser Corp. and Boise Inc. to drop their logging contracts with AbitibiBowater for wood obtained from Grassy Narrows land.

In February, following a RAN day of action, Boise agreed to suspend its contract unless community consent could be established. AbitibiBowater’s withdrawal will also force primary customer Weyerhaeuser to stop sourcing wood from the area, RAN believes.

“We are thrilled for the Grassy Narrows community that their forests, which are key to their livelihood and culture, will no longer be clear-cut against their wishes,” said David Sone of RAN’s Old Growth Campaign.

“Grassy Narrows has scored a major step forward for Indigenous rights,” he said. “We’re calling on all companies to follow suit and respect the rights of Indigenous peoples to give or withhold consent for industrial projects on their traditional territories.”

RAN is calling on Abitibi to extend this precedent across its global operations, to respect human rights, and to value the role of intact forests in providing climate stability and clean water.

The Canadian constitution and international law affirm First Nations’ rights to provide or withhold consent for industrial projects on their lands. But Ontario’s mining and logging laws continue to permit resource extraction companies to operate without the consent of First Nations.

On May 29, Indigenous groups in Toronto marched and camped on the front lawn of the Ontario legislature with a coalition of labor, student and faith-based groups to protest this law.

There is evidence that the Ontario government of Premier Dalton McGuinty is listening to the Grassy Narrows First Nation. On May 12, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources issued a statement saying that the two governments – the tribal and the provincial – are starting new talks on forest management.

Ontario Natural Resources Minister Donna Cansfield and Chief Simon Fobister signed a Memorandum of Understanding at Grassy Narrows First Nation to create “a positive, long-term relationship between the First Nation and the province.”

“This agreement is a significant advance towards a new and positive relationship with Grassy Narrows that is sustained by mutual respect and leads to improved opportunities and a brighter future for the people of Grassy Narrows,” said Cansfield.

The breakthrough follows six months of discussions between Grassy Narrows First Nation and former Canada Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci, who was retained to advise Minister Cansfield.

Justice Iacobucci said he believes that both parties “can move forward based on the principles of mutual respect, mutual understanding, mutual participation and mutual accountability.”

“The McGuinty government is forging a new relationship with Grassy Narrows First Nation,” said Minister of Aboriginal Affairs Michael Bryant. “This agreement builds upon our commitment to strengthen relationships with all of Ontario’s First Nations, Metis and Inuit communities.”

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, April 24, 2008 (ENS) – An international coalition of academics, environmental, and conservation groups today called on the governments of the United States, Mexico, and Canada to “stop interfering” with the tri-national Commission for Environmental Cooperation, CEC, particularly its core citizen complaint procedure.

The 20 groups and individuals say in their letter to the top environmental officials of the three countries that the citizen submission process “has reached a critical point with its future threatened by ongoing political interference.”

“We are deeply concerned by increasingly blatant government interference in the operations of this important environmental watchdog,” said Albert Koehl, lawyer with Ecojustice, Canada’s largest environmental law organization.

Based in Montreal, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation was established in 1994 in a side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, to address fears that NAFTA would prompt businesses to leave the United States because of lax environmental enforcement elsewhere.

The Commission was the first of its kind in the world in linking environmental cooperation with trade relations.

The coalition says the CEC has waited too long
to address the environmental problems of
Mexico’s Lake Chapala in Guadalahara.
(Photo courtesy Explore Guadalahara)

The side agreement includes a provision allowing citizens to request investigations into a country’s failure to enforce its own environmental laws.

The Citizen Submissions on Enforcement Matters mechanism enables the public to play an active whistleblower role when a government appears to be failing to enforce its environmental laws effectively.

Members of the public trigger the process by submitting to the CEC a claim alleging such a failure on the part of any of the NAFTA partners.

After a review of the submission, the CEC may investigate the matter and publish a factual record of its findings, subject to approval by the CEC Council, which consists of the top environment official in each of the three NAFTA countries.

While, all appears calm and cooperative on the surface, the groups allege that the three governments are undermining the work of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation by obstructing its investigations and limiting their scope.

“When the CEC was established, we saw it as a novel and promising model for other trade agreements,” said U.S. Professor John H. Knox of Wake Forest University School of Law. “It’s sad that this promise is being squandered by our leaders to avoid the small fallout of scrutiny that comes from citizen complaints.”

In their letter to the members of the CEC Council – Canadian Environment Minister John Baird, U.S. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, and Mexican Environment Secretary Juan Rafael Elvira Quesada – the coalition alleges that they are not only limiting the scope of CEC investigations to a narrow set of facts, but also that they are taking too long to address serious environmental issues that can distort trade relations at the expense of the environment.

Among the total of 23 factual records that have been recommended since the CEC was established, the complainants point out three that have been subject to long delays that they say are due to political interference – one in each of the three NAFTA countries.

* United States: Coal-fired power plants (SEM 04-005): There has been no vote to date on a factual record recommended in December 2005 relating to an allegation that the U.S. EPA is failing to enforce its Clean Water Act against power plants for mercury emissions contaminating shared water bodies.

* Mexico: Lake Chapala II (SEM 03-003): There has been no vote to date on a factual record recommended in May 2005 relating to an allegation that Mexico is failing to enforce environmental laws to protect the Lerma-Chapala-Santiago-Pacífico basin.

* Canada: Ontario Logging (SEM 02-001 and SEM 04-006) and Pulp and Paper (SEM 02-003): It took seven months before approval was given by the CEC in February 2007 the release of factual records, even though votes on publication are normally required within 60 days.

“The failure to make decisions discourages public participation and, since Council communication usually takes place behind closed doors, promotes public distrust and suspicion,” the coalition says in its letter.

“The CEC’s watchdog role is a small price to pay by our governments for a measure of credibility to their assertions that NAFTA respects the environment and other social values,” said Gustavo Alanis of the Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental in Mexico City, a coalition member.

“It’s too bad our governments are so short-sighted that they can’t bear even this small amount of scrutiny,” he said.

The coalition’s call to the NAFTA parties to halt political interference coincides with a three-day CEC symposium and public forum on environment and trade issues in Phoenix, Arizona that winds up today with a public forum focusing on how well NAFTA is addressing environmental issues.

It also coincides with the two-day North American leaders summit in New Orleans that ended Tuesday with a pledge to “redouble efforts to address climate change” by the leaders of the three NAFTA countries – Prime Minister Stephen Harper, President George W. Bush, and President Felipe Calderon.

North American leaders meet in New Orleans.
From left, Mexican President Felipe
Calderon, U.S. President George W.
Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen
Harper. (Photo by Joyce Boghosian
courtesy The White House)

The three leaders also agreed to “implement compatible fuel efficiency regimes and high safety standards to protect human health and the environment” in the auto industry; upgrade border crossing systems with more uniform procedures; and install advanced screening equipment at ports of entry to deter and detect the smuggling of nuclear and radiological materials.

They agreed to make food and product safety standards more compatible.

The three leaders agreed to develop a framework for harmonization of energy efficiency standards, and sharing technical information to improve the North American energy market.

They agreed to reduce barriers to expanding clean energy technologies, especially carbon dioxide capture and storage to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. “We are working to better North America’s air quality and working together to improve the safety of chemicals in the marketplace,” the three leaders said.

They did not say they would work to remove political interference from the core citizen complaint process of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation.

The coalition says the failure to consider all the facts and the failure to act promptly to resolve environmental problems “undermine the legitimacy of NAFTA” and “the principles of environmental accountbility, transparency, and public participation” that the environmental side agreement was intended to bring to the NAFTA arena.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

TORONTO, Ontario, Canada, February 15, 2008 (ENS) – A harmful chemical found in 90 percent of plastic baby bottles sold in Canada leaches into the infant formula, milk or other liquids being drunk by babies, according to a new study released by Environmental Defence, a nonprofit organization based in Toronto.

The chemical, bisphenol A, is a known hormone disruptor and is associated with adverse health effects, including breast and prostate cancer, early puberty in girls, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and obesity.

The study, “Toxic Baby Bottles in Canada: Bisphenol A Leaching from Popular Brands of Polycarbonate Baby Bottles,” found the chemical leaches at from hard plastic baby bottles when they are heated.

Lab results found leaching of bisphenol A with a range of 5-8 parts per billion among the bottles tested. Recent scientific research shows that bisphenol A can be harmful at doses below the levels found in the study.

Environmental Defence is calling for a ban on the use of bisphenol A in baby bottles, reusable water bottles and all other food and beverage containers.

“Clearly, we are putting our babies’ health at risk by using brand name plastic baby bottles,” said Dr. Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence. “The federal government must act immediately by banning bisphenol A from baby bottles and other food and beverage containers.”

Three major brands of bottles were tested in Canada – Gerber, Avent and Playtex. Lab results show the highest level of leaching from the Avent brand baby bottles.

Playtex brand baby bottles had the lowest level of leaching.

Hard plastic baby bottles have
been found to leach bisphenol
A when heated. (Photo by
Jean-Paul Bonjour)

Levels of bisphenol A leaching increased exponentially when the bottles were heated, with the Avent brand bottles showing the highest concentration.

“As parents, learning about which products are unsafe and choosing healthy and safe alternatives is the first step towards protecting our children and families from toxic chemicals like bisphenol A. Ultimately, we need our provincial and federal government to step up because these toxic products shouldn’t even be on store shelves for an unsuspecting parent to pick up and give to their children,” said Monique Fabregas, a mother and founder of GreenMom.

Tests were also conducted on baby bottles bought in the United States using products made by Avent, Dr. Brown’s, Evenflo and Disney. The results were similar to testing done on bottles bought in Canada, with Dr. Brown’s bottles showing the highest concentration of bisphenol A after the bottles were heated.

Based in St. Louis, Missouri, the Handi-Craft Company, which makes Dr. Brown’s bottles, has said, “All of Dr. Brown’s Natural Flow baby bottles were designed and engineered with the best health of baby in mind. Before going to market, Dr. Brown’s products are tested to ensure they meet federal safety standards.”

Canadian safety standards may be revised in view of the BPA findings. Health Canada is currently conducting a safety review of bisphenol A as part of the federal government’s Chemicals Management Plan, and will recommend whether to regulate the chemical in the coming months.

In Ontario, the McGuinty government is creating an expert panel to review toxic chemicals, starting with bisphenol A, with a view to introducing stricter regulations to protect Ontarians’ health.

“With so many scientific studies showing harm in low doses, there’s no excuse for failing to act to protect children’s health,” said Dr. Kapil Khatter, Pollution Policy Advisor for Environmental Defence. “The absence of regulation is needlessly putting children’s health at risk.”

Environmental Defence is also encouraging retailers to stop selling products that contain bisphenol A. Both Mountain Equipment Co-op and Lululemon recently chose to take bisphenol A products off their shelves.

The U.S. version of “Baby’s Toxic Bottle” was written by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice, and Clean Water Action, in collaboration with Environment Defence. It was released in the United States by a broad coalition of public health and environmental nongovernmental organizations including: Alliance for a Healthy Tomorrow, Boston Common Asset Management, Breast Cancer Fund, Center for Health, Environment and Justice, Clean New York, Clean Water Action, Environment America, Environmental Health Fund, Environmental Health Strategy Center, Healthy Legacy, Learning Disabilities Association of America, MOMS (Making Our Milk Safe), Oregon Environmental Council, and New Jersey Public Interest Research Group.

In New Jersey, Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein, a Democrat, expressed support for state level action to eliminate childrens’ exposure to chemicals such as BPA.

“Parents should not have to wonder whether child care products are putting their children at risk for toxic exposure. Strong safety standards are needed to ensure that parents and consumers aren’t confronted with this question,” said Greenstein. “As a New Jersey lawmaker, I firmly support legislative action to eliminate the hidden toxic hazards that threaten the health of New Jersey families.”

However, the American Chemistry Council assures consumers that polycarbonate hard plastic baby bottles are safe to use even when heated.

“The claim that bisphenol A migration levels remain elevated after a single treatment with boiling water was not confirmed in a far more comprehensive study from researchers at the University of Athens who examined migration over repeated cycles to determine what happens under real-life repetitive use of polycarbonate bottles,” the Council says on its website.

“These researchers found that elevated migration levels are a transient effect that quickly recedes to a baseline level with continued use, even when boiling water was used in each subsequent cycle,” the Council said.

“For decades, polycarbonate plastic has been safely used to make baby bottles and reusable water bottles. The safety of these products has been supported by numerous science-based safety evaluations of bisphenol A that have been conducted by independent government and scientific bodies worldwide,” the Council says.

Still, parents who wish to do so can choose plastic baby bottles made without bisphenol A, or glass baby bottles.

The report, “Toxic Baby Bottles in Canada: Bisphenol A Leaching from Popular Brands of Polycarbonate Baby Bottles, is online at: www.toxicnation.ca.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.