The GLRPPR Blog

My daughter started kindergarten last week and next week my son is off to preschool for the first time. We’ll all look back on these days fondly sometime in the future, but for now, I’m having some typical Mommy back-to-school blues. In the interest of combating those blues, I decided to focus on some greens–specifically in the form of green tips related to schools and students. In this post I’ll discuss how to reduce waste associated with school lunches; look for more discussions on green ideas and examples for K-12 and beyond in the days to come.

The Gear

For some online guides to reusable and eco-friendly lunch gear, check out the following:

• TreeHugger—Green Your Kid’s Packed School Lunch: The Buy Guide: This slide show provides information and links to several reusable lunch box/bag and container options.

• Mother Nature Network: Check out this recent blog post with lots of suggestions for eco-friendly lunch gear that will appeal to older kids as well as tiny tots.

The list below provides other specific ideas. Bear in mind that even though I provide notes on personal experience with a few of these items, all descriptions and links are provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as endorsements by me, GLRPPR, or GLRPPR’s parent organization, the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC).

• Laptop Lunches: My two little ones are pleased with their new Laptop lunch boxes. This was one of the first companies I became aware of that was selling eco-friendly, reusable lunch gear when I first started learning about zero waste lunches several years ago (before my little ones were born). Their products incorporate recycled fabric and plastic, and are free of lead, phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC).
• Fit & Fresh: This company offers a variety of BPA-free reusable containers for food and drink. Since my son is a huge fan of macaroni and cheese and both kids love soup, especially in colder weather, I have a few of the hot lunch bowls that include a folding spoon and handle on the lids. On days when they want some warm leftovers for lunch, they can carry these bowls instead of their other lunch boxes. Be advised though, that despite testing whether or not my kids could open these unassisted, my daughter and I both had a bit of trouble getting the lid off when she packed soup to school a few days ago. Small hands may find these bowls unwieldy at times, so this might be a better option for older kids.
• Thermos: I’ve noticed during back-to-school shopping that this veteran manufacturer of products to transport food and drink has begun marketing lunch gear that is BPA-free.
• BebelooshMini: I recently read about Elena Berlo’s reusable snack and sandwich bags, made of organic cotton and recycled hemp with Velcro closures, on the Inhabitots blog. For dry snacks and sandwiches, washable wrappings such as this are a good alternative to disposable plastic bags or plastic wrap.
• Wrap-N-Mat: When I bought a set of these reusable food wraps/placemats/napkins for my own lunches years ago (again, pre-kiddos), I had to order them online because they weren’t available locally. On a recent trip to a chain grocery store, I saw some hanging up like so many other small “impulse buy” type items peppered throughout the store aisles and was amazed at how consumer awareness can change product availability. This is also a lesson in checking your local stores rather than relying solely upon “retail locators” on web sites; the Wrap-N-Mat site says there aren’t any stores within 25 miles of my zip code that carry their products, but I’ve seen them with my own eyes.

Beyond these few suggestions, there are some common-sense ideas, such as including cloth napkins instead of paper (if you’re inclined to use a sewing machine, consider making your own from old sheets, clothes, etc.), sending real silverware instead of plastic, and any way you can eliminate disposable items and/or reduce packaging in your child’s lunch (or your own, for that matter). If disposable plastic bags are simply the best option in a given situation, teach your little ones to bring those back home for washing, just as would any other plastic container. We have done so in our home, and you would be surprised at how long they actually last for reuse. Special drying racks are marketed to encourage this behavior, but honestly, you can just use your existing drying rack–pop them over one of the glass holders, or slip them over some of your drying silverware to dry.

The Process

If you’re a parent, educator or administrator interested in implementing a waste-free lunch program at your school, check out http://www.wastefreelunches.org/. This site describes such a program that was created as a grassroots efforts by some concerned parents. Their waste-free lunch program started when a group of parents noticed how much trash the students were generating during snack time and at lunch. The site provides how-to tips to create a program, resources and success stories. Be advised that the links to lunch kits will simply direct you to the Laptop Lunches web site, since two of the moms involved in the grassroots effort described started their own company as a result, making Laptop Lunch kits.

Also check out this somewhat dated, though still inspirational report, “Best Practices for Food Recovery and Gleaning in the National School Lunch Program: SY 1998-1999.” It describes how the school districts used USDA grant funds to recover food from their cafeterias and donate it to the needy. Included is information on systems to recover, store, and donate the recovered food and how schools formed partnerships with local non-profit agencies. It also illustrates how school districts were able to identify and overcome obstacles to developing their programs. Finally, it shows how students can take an active role in this effort, and how food recovery and gleaning can be integrated into a school’s curriculum.

Food waste will always be generated in cafeterias to some degree–is there a composting program in place at your child’s school? If not, check out this manual from Connecticut, this fact sheet from Tennessee, this Cornell University web site (that includes a related online book to incorporate science inquiry with high school students) and this article from the April 2008 edition of BioCycle for inspiration and tips on how to create such a program. Even if the entire school is not involved in a composting program, individual classrooms can do composting projects with vermicomposting (see the Greening Schools web site for more suggestions on this topic).

The Food

Consider the most important part of your child’s lunch–the food itself–and how or if it contributes to lessons regarding sustainability or waste reduction. My kids help out in our own garden and know how to compost–this means they see food as something that someone works to obtain that isn’t meant to be wasted (though they are still kids and finicky eaters sometimes!). The more children know about the process of producing the food we eat, the more they will value it. Does your child’s school have a garden program? Check out the Chez Pannisse Foundation web site , the Edible School Yard and the National Gardening Association’s Kids Gardening site for ideas. If you have a bit of yard, or even a sunny windowsill for potted plants, consider growing something edible with your kids. Helping them connect to their food will help them understand why they should care about food waste.

Also consider talking to them about the benefits of local foods and eating things in season. Local Harvest can help you find farmers’ markets. Sustainable Table and Food Routes are other sites that can help in discussing issues surrounding food production and shipping with your kids. Engage them now in considering what it takes to get the food they consume and what actions are sustainable. Reducing the waste involved in our meals doesn’t just mean using cloth napkins–we need to consider agricultural methods, consumer demand, resources used in the transportation of food, and other factors. Food is a system, and learning sustainable behaviors starts with learning to think in terms of systems. You are your child’s best teacher when it comes to such worldview issues.

Share your thoughts–tell us about your waste-free lunch ideas and favorite resources in the comments section of this post.

Recently, GLRPPR’s Laura Barnes participated in a webinar hosted by our sister Pollution Prevention Resource Exchange (P2Rx) Center, the Western Sustainability & Pollution Prevention Network (WSPPN). Laura co-presented with Rick Yoder from another of the P2Rx Centers, the Pollution Prevention Regional Information Center (P2RIC). Donna Walden of WSPPN moderated the session.

Rick and Laura described many social networking and bookmarking tools (such as Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc.), why using these tools has become important for those in pollution prevention and sustainability organizations, how these tools can be great sources of information as well as marketing, and also provided some great tips for using these technologies. The audience asked lots of questions, and overall the webinar was very informative even for those of us who already regularly use Web 2.0 tools.

If you missed the session, or attended and would like copies of the presentations, these are now available for download on the WSPPN webinar page (look for “Web 2.0 Social Media Webinar, Recorded on July 28, 2010″).

Thanks to WSPPN, and particularly to Donna Walden, for making this webinar possible.

The National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NPPR) / Pollution Prevention Resource Exchange (P2Rx) P2 Results Task Force requests that your agency/program submit P2 results data for the calendar years 2007, 2008, and 2009 to your regional P2Rx center (GLRPPR for U.S. EPA Region 5) for input into the P2 Results Data System per the P2 Results Memorandum of Understanding. The P2 Results Data collection will begin on August 1, 2010 through September 30, 2010.

The P2 Results Task Force has recently worked on upgrading and improving the P2 Results Data System in response to comments and requests from users. In particular, the System now includes greenhouse gas metrics, updated and improved cost calculators, and the capability to identify results associated with EPA grant funding. The Task Force will be conducting webinars to brief System users on these changes and will announce the schedule shortly.

In addition to each P2Rx Center using the results data to generate regional reports, NPPR will utilize this data to help prepare a three-year national report on P2 results that covers 2007–2009. Since 1990, NPPR has documented over 200 billion pounds of waste reduced, 145 billion gallons of water conserved, and 125 billion dollars saved. These results demonstrate the value of P2 in not only environmental terms and natural resource conservation, but also in economic benefits such as job creation and retention.

As you may know, in the past the P2 Results Data System publicly presented the results only on a regional level. Recently, the P2 Results Task Force decided to begin presenting the data on a state-wide level in addition to the regional and national reports. This decision was based upon the results of a recent survey that NPPR conducted of system users, which found that approximately 85 percent of the respondents were in favor of this aggregation of data. The P2 Results Task Force has decided to monitor the use of this state-wide aggregated data and will reevaluate this decision if there appears to be any improper or out of context use. Aggregation of the data at the state level will be accomplished through the System with no extra burden on the programs that share their data.

The survey also found that 75 percent of the respondents were in favor of aggregating and presenting the data on a program level as well. The Task Force is interested in further input from users like you on whether to proceed with publicly displaying this more refined level of data aggregation. The Task Force plans to continue to solicit input and suggestions on the level of data transparency provided through System. Contact Jeff Burke, NPPR (jeff@p2.org), Terri Goldberg, NEWMOA and Task Force co-chair (tgoldberg@newmoa.org), or Ken Grimm, PPRC and Task Force co-chair (kgrimm@pprc.org) to share your thoughts.

Data submitted after the September 30, 2010 deadline will be included in the System but may not be utilized in the upcoming NPPR national report.

If you have questions on how to participate in the system, contact GLRPPR Executive Director Bob Iverson. To obtain an account for the P2 Results Data System, contact Tyler Rubach. Additional questions should be sent to Ken Grimm.

View the fact sheet about the P2 Results Task Force and learn more about it.

[Jeff Miller, Conservation Advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity in San Francisco, CA, is guest blogging today. His topic: CBD's petition to the U.S. EPA to ban lead shot and fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act. Thanks to Madeline Sten, P2Rx National Coordinator, for asking Jeff to contribute a post.]

Bald eagle with sternal recumbancy from lead poisoning, photo courtesy The Raptor Center, University of Minnesota.

When the Environmental Protection Agency ruled last year to phase out the use of lead wheel weights for balancing car tires, the decision passed with no opposition from car manufacturers, wheel weight producers, or public citizen groups. It was, after all, a common-sense decision that guaranteed a safer environment, reducing the lead released into waterways when weights drop off cars and are ground into fine particles by passing vehicles. Manufacturers will have to adjust their production processes, a small price for society to pay for removing a source of toxic lead.

In a similar effort, the Center for Biological Diversity and American Bird Conservancy, along with other conservation, hunting, and veterinary organizations petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency this month to ban lead from ammunition used in hunting and weights used for fishing.

The petition to eliminate lead from hunting and fishing sports has nothing to do with the rights of Americans to bear arms and to hunt. Literally hundreds of recent peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown the dangers of lead in the environment for both wildlife and human health.

A variety of non-toxic bullets, shot, and fishing weights not made of lead are readily available and are equally effective. Some non-lead ammunition costs a bit more, but once lead-free regulations are in place and manufacturers re-tool and begin producing copper, steel, and tungsten bullets and shot in higher volume, prices will drop dramatically, just as the cost of eco-friendly light bulbs fell as they became commonplace.

Lead is an extremely toxic substance that is dangerous to people and wildlife even at low levels. Exposure can cause a range of health effects, from acute poisoning and death to long-term problems such as reduced reproduction, inhibition of growth and damage to neurological development. Bald eagles, golden eagles, California condors, and other predatory and scavenging birds die in significant numbers every year as a result of feeding on carcasses or gut piles contaminated with lead fragments left behind by hunters.

Up to 15 million mourning doves die each year from lead poisoning from consuming spent lead shot pellets, which they mistake for grit– that’s almost as many doves as are intentionally killed by hunters. Swans, cranes, ducks, geese, loons and other waterfowl ingest spent lead shotgun pellets and lead-based fishing tackle lost in lakes and rivers, often with deadly consequences.

The deaths of these and other lead-poisoned birds due to renal failure, neurological dysfunction, or seizures are slow and painful. Harder to measure, yet possibly more significant than direct mortality, are secondary losses due to the “sub-lethal” effects of lead, such as reproductive failure, increased susceptibility to disease and infection, and increased predation due to anemia and weakened muscles.

In the United States, 3,000 tons of lead are shot into the environment by hunting every year, another 80,000 tons are released at shooting ranges, and 4,000 tons are lost in ponds and streams as fishing lures and sinkers. The science on the environmental impacts of lead ammunition poisoning is indisputable. The petition references nearly 500 peer-reviewed scientific studies that starkly illustrate the widespread dangers from lead ammunition and fishing tackle. At least 75 wild bird species in the United States are poisoned by spent lead ammunition, including our national symbol, the bald eagle.

Humans who eat game meat shot with lead bullets are also at risk. X-rays of shot deer and of packaged game meat reveal tiny fragments of lead left behind when bullets disintegrate on impact. Children are particularly sensitive to even low levels of exposure to lead and can suffer neurological damage. In recent decades our society has taken actions to reduce human exposure to lead from paint, gasoline, water pipes, toys, waste dumps, and shooting ranges. Spent ammunition and fishing weights are the major remaining uncontrolled sources of ecologically relevant lead exposure.

Hunters have made substantial contributions to conservation – funds from their hunting licenses and the voluntary purchase of duck stamps support National Wildlife Refuges and wildlife habitat. Shooting non-lead ammunition is a logical continuation of hunting conservation ethics, which is why the hunting group Project Gutpile, one of the co-petitioners to the EPA, has been rallying hunter support for the switch to non-lead.

The change to lead-free ammunition is essential, reasonable, and timely. Advances in technology and increased knowledge of lead’s risks mean we can now enjoy hunting and fishing without contaminating the land, wildlife, or ourselves.

For more information visit the Center for Biological Diversity’s Get the Lead Out web page.

Related Resources

• Let’s Get the Lead Out: Non-lead alternatives for fishing tackle
• GLRPPR’s Outdoor Recreation sector resource
• P2Rx Lead Sinkers Topic Hub

The Great Lakes Regional Pollution Prevention Roundtable (GLRPPR) has recently released a new Sector Resource on Light Pollution.

The International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) defines light pollution as “any adverse effect of artificial light, including sky glow, glare, light trespass, light clutter, decreased visibility at night, and energy waste.” Light pollution not only is a sign of inefficiency in lighting and energy use, it can also have adverse effects on wildlife, particularly migratory birds, or other animals whose behavior is affected by light levels or that orient themselves based upon the glow of sunlight or moonlight at the horizon. For example, hatching sea turtles look for the moon glow on the horizon in order to find their way from the beaches where they are born to the sea. Light pollution from cities can confuse them, causing them to be lured away from the ocean toward the dangers of vehicle traffic and predators.

Sector Resources are collections of records for both online and hard copy material related to a particular industrial sector (e.g. “Agriculture”) or a topic of interest across a wide variety of sectors (e.g. “Energy Efficiency”). A list of expert contacts that may be consulted for further information on the subject at hand is also included within each Sector Resource, as well as relevant events, funding opportunities and archived questions and answers from the GLRPPR Help Desk. Each item listed within a Sector Resource has a full record, containing the item’s title, a brief abstract, a link to the item (if it is available online), date of publication, source and resource type. Price and ordering information are listed for hard copy items where available.

Currently, the Light Pollution Sector Resource includes links to general information on the topic, best practices, related organizations, relevant regulations and technological solutions. If you would like to suggest a resource to include, contact Laura Barnes or Joy Scrogum.

A complete list of all GLRPPR Sector Resources is available at http://www.glrppr.org/sectors/.

The Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center (PPRC) recently released the Climate Change Topic Hub™, a peer-reviewed, information-packed online resource geared toward small- to medium-sized businesses and industrial sectors that offers an extensive list of pollution prevention opportunities involving process modification, material substitution, and new technology.

Additionally, it provides over 100 topic-related electronic tools, websites, and reference articles. It includes the contact information for over 20 agencies, nonprofits, partnerships, and programs that offer expertise in climate change.

Topic Hubs™ are web-based guides to peer-reviewed pollution prevention information and expertise on a particular subject. Topics range from sector-wide compendiums such as aerospace industry to more narrowly-focused topics such as semiconductor manufacturing. Topic Hubs™ include background information, pollution prevention opportunities, reasons for change, where to go for help, and links to more information on the subject.

PPRC, like the Great Lakes Regional Pollution Prevention Roundtable (GLRPPR), is a member of the Pollution Prevention Resource Exchange (P2Rx), a national network of regional information centers.

View all of the Topic Hubs developed by GLRPPR and other P2Rx Centers at http://www.glrppr.org/hubs/.

This year the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP) will mark 25 years of providing waste management, pollution prevention, and energy efficiency assistance to Minnesota’s businesses. 2010 is also the 20th anniversary of the Toxic Pollution Prevention Act (TPPA).

On Thursday, August 19th, a 25th Anniversary reception to celebrate MnTAP’s success will follow the annual intern presentations at the McNamara Alumni Center at the University of Minnesota. The Intern presentations will be held from 1:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m. and the reception will be held from 4:30 p.m.- 6:30 p.m.

For more information or to RSVP visit http://www.seek.state.mn.us/calendar_detail.cfm?ID=6164.

Happy birthday MnTAP!

Over on the Sustainable Electronics Initiative (SEI) blog, Aida Williams provides an update on three new state e-waste laws that have recently passed in Vermont, South Carolina and New York.

The SEI has also produced a new resource comparing and contrasting e-waste laws, the products covered within the laws, whether disposal bans are involved, etc. Check it out online or download the chart in PDF format.

[The P2Rx Directors have offered to post occasional entries in regional blogs.  Thanks to Paula Del Giudice from PPRC for the following.]

Just 16 years ago, Jay Hair, former Chief Executive Officer of the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) asked me to stand up before the plenary session of the annual meeting of NWF because I was holding my baby daughter, Katie—then a tender two months old. He pointed out to the audience that the reason why we were there—the reason why we should be working so hard on behalf of the environment—was for the future of our children.

Hair was wrapping up a session during which acclaimed scientist, Dr. Theo Colborn  (professor at University of Florida, Gainesville, and author of the book Our Stolen Future), was speaking about chemicals that acted as endocrine disruptors. Her news was alarming: malformed frogs—the product of chemical spills. World-wide sperm counts declining—caused by the advent of chemicals that mimic hormones in our environment.  If I hadn’t been wrapped in the warm cocoon of new motherhood with my amazing son Kevin, then three, and now this beautiful little gift in my arms, thinking that anything was possible, I might have broken down and cried–the way I did later when I saw the documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

We filed out of the plenary session and into the restaurant for lunch.  I wanted to meet Theo and so we were introduced.  She greeted me warmly and congratulated me on my new baby. I asked her, “Dr. Colborn, how do you feel about breastfeeding?” She said, “I wouldn’t do it. If I did, I would get in and get out, just for bonding.”

“What about all the toxins in our environment? Don’t they impact dairy cows? Isn’t cow’s milk worse?” I asked.

Oh, no, she told me. Cows don’t have anywhere near the chemical burden that humans have.

I was devastated. As she walked away, that’s when the tears started to flow. How could that be? How could feeding my own child in the way that God intended be harmful to her?

Here we are now almost two decades later still talking about harmful chemicals, our human burden, endocrine disruptors, health impacts, etc.  Meanwhile chemicals are becoming even more ubiquitous. We may be reaching the “tipping point,” however, which is good news for future generations. The chemicals that seem to be pushing us toward that tipping point of tolerance have been polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDEs) used as flame retardants and now BPA (bisphenol-A ), an organic compound that has been suspected of being hazardous since the 1930s.

“Bisphenol-A is now deeply imbedded in the products of modern consumer society, not just as the building block for polycarbonate plastic (from which it then leaches as the plastic ages) but also in the manufacture of epoxy resins and other plastics, including polysulfone, alkylphenolic, polyalylate, polyester-styrene, and certain polyester resins,” quotes the Dr. Colborn and co-authors Dianne Dumanoski  and Dr. John Peterson Myers  in Our Stolen Future. BPA is also an inert ingredient in pesticides as well. Human exposure to BPA comes from a myriad of sources such as: dental sealants, coatings in metal cans, food containers, refrigerator shelving, water bottles, microwave ware, eating utensils, films, sheets, laminations, reinforced pipes, adhesives, nail polish, and baby bottles.

In over 200 studies, BPA has been linked to a number of health concerns, such as cancer, developmental, and reproductive issues, according to the Washington Post. As a result, several states and cities have taken steps to ban BPA to protect its citizens, particularly children from harmful effects by banning BPA from products such as baby bottles, sippy cups and children’s dishware, along with sports bottles. Washington State, Maryland, and Wisconsin passed bans this year and Minnesota and Connecticut passed bans in 2009. Several other states, including California, Vermont, New York, and Illinois have similar bans pending. However, attempts in other states have been unsuccessful.

Overall, it’s just too costly and it takes too long to seek chemicals reform one chemical at a time. The country needs the Toxic Substances Control Act to be modernized and enhanced during its reauthorization.  Clear safety standards based on science should be adopted against which the safety of chemicals can be weighed. New chemicals should be assessed for their safety. Priority chemicals should be established. Green chemistry should be promoted. This cannot be another unfunded mandate by Congress.  It’s time to take action so that another generation doesn’t have to wonder if the everyday products in their lives will place their baby daughters in jeopardy.

Celebrate Earth Day with a CyberExhibit (originally curated in 2000 on the 30th anniversary of Earth Day) by the University of Buffalo Libraries, which commemorates the anniversary of Earth Day.

It includes: a brief history of Earth Day, a listing of selected international, national, state, local, and campus Internet resources, and other materials. A special feature on education is added for the 40th Anniversary with expanded resources for kids, and teachers/educators in formal K-12 and non-formal (nature centers, museums, parks, camps, zoos, etc.) settings.

Dr. Manohar R. Kulkarni, P.E., has been appointed director of the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, a division of the Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign effective May 1. Kulkarni has been chair and professor of mechanical engineering at the University of North Dakota since 2004.

Kulkarni earned his doctorate at the University of Missouri, Columbia, his master’s at the University of Iowa and his bachelor’s degree at the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, India, all in mechanical engineering. He served as professor of mechanical engineering and energy processes at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, from 1993 to 2004. While there he established and directed the Energy Management Center at SIUC. Prior to that, he worked as a senior research engineer at Johnson Controls, Inc., Milwaukee, for seven years while serving as an adjunct associate professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

Kulkarni has presented and published widely. His research interests include thermal system analysis, energy management, energy optimal control of thermal systems, energy efficient technology transfer, thermal analysis of materials and transient thermography.

“We are very pleased that Dr. Kulkarni will be joining us to lead ISTC and help us identify new opportunities for the Center’s work to promote sustainability for Illinois,” said Institute Director Dr. William W. Shilts. “His energy, engineering and academic experience are an excellent fit for ISTC and for the Institute and they will be invaluable.”

“I see great opportunities for ISTC to help the State of Illinois move forward with sustainable economic development and I’m eager to take on the challenges,” Kulkarni said.  “I am also happy to be returning to Illinois and look forward to settling into the community.”

The ISTC promotes sustainability and increased economic viability by providing technical assistance, conducting and sponsoring research, and disseminating information on environmental issues. Begun in 1985, ISTC programs include sustainable business practice assistance, an electronic waste initiative, development of energy resources from wastes, research on emerging contaminants and innovative river sediment management. ISTC is a recognized regional and national leader in manufacturing technology diffusion, environmental research and innovative information resources.

The Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability at the University of Illinois is the home of the Illinois State Scientific Surveys: Illinois Natural History Survey, Illinois State Archaeological Survey, Illinois State Geological Survey, Illinois State Water Survey and Illinois Sustainable Technology Center. It was established by statute July 1, 2008 and builds on the Surveys’ reputations for basic and applied research and service.  The Institute gives Illinois citizens, businesses and decision-makers objective, timely, cutting-edge science and solutions necessary to manage the State’s resources, environment and economy wisely.

The following is a guest post by Anne Less, Knowledge Center Specialist for the U.S. Green Building Council. For more information about the UGBC’s Knowledge Center, as well as to search their catalog (available on Library Thing), visit http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2159.

In order to serve the ever-growing professional development needs of the green building community, over the past year, the USGBC Knowledge Exchange team has collected and cataloged over 400 free digital resources that relate to green building.  The USGBC Resource Catalog includes a wide variety of resources on green building topics, including energy efficiency, materials, affordable housing, best practices, business cases, etc.  This collection, which is limited to free, educational, non-promotional resources, aims to inspire a commitment to lifelong learning and sustainable building practices and behaviors.

The USGBC Resource Catalog can be found at http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2175.

Content suggestions are always welcome!  To recommend an item for the Resource Catalog, please email KnowX@usgbc.org.