Do you know where your pension coming from? For some US teachers, it’s Chinese coal.

The Chinese coal industry is known for its lucrative returns: the China Shenhua Energy Co. gained 65% from July to September, and many investors claim they can’t afford not to be in China. In fact, 20% of Shenhua’s stock is held by U.S. investors — one of whom is the Teachers Retirement System of Texas.

But China’s coal is also a huge polluter. According to the New York Times, China uses more coal than the US, the EU, and Japan combined, contributing an enormous amount of CO2 to the atmosphere. Coal-fired plants emit more than 60 different hazardous air pollutants. The large amounts of sulfur dioxide produced by Chinese coal cause acid rain, which pollutes water sources. But because of China’s rapidly advancing economy, the country needs energy — fast and cheap. Coal-fired plants are much cheaper and quicker to build than natural gas, nuclear, or hydroelectric plants, and it’s widely available.

China’s booming coal industry is also harmful to its citizens, producing so much sulfur dioxide that the World Bank estimated 400,000 premature deaths happen each year due to pollution-related illnesses. Not only that, but as much as 40% of air pollution in South Korea and Japan is believed to originate in China, and many experts believe that pollution from China is reaching the western part of the United States.

Do Texas teachers know where their pensions are coming from? For that matter, are other teacher retirement systems investing in Chinese Big Coal? I checked out Missouri’s Public School Retirement System, in which my husband and I have each invested. With my little financial knowledge, I was able to determine that PSRS has invested with Merrill Lynch, which is a shareholder in Shenhua. Just how much of my money is in coal remains to be seen. Looks like it’s time to work towards divestment…

Source: Associated Press

When Amy wrote about green magazines, she mentioned GOOD as being one of her favorites. I, too, a self-described magazine junkie, am a big fan of GOOD since it’s inception last year. With all the depressing news out there on any given day, GOOD always reaffirms my faith in humanity. Its focus is, like its name implies, good stuff: those things that are making our world a little bit better, and when I’m feeling down about what’s going on around me, GOOD usually perks me up. It’s a rare magazine that doesn’t need an annual "green" issue: sustainability has been a priority since the magazine was founded.

The latest issue (Sept/Oct 07) is no exception. The issue, which commemorates their one-year anniversary, focuses on design solutions. A topic I covered a while back, green schools, gets a feature nod from Eva Steele-Saccio. Steele-Saccio highlights different schools’ efforts to reduce their footprint and become more energy efficient, and acknowledges that there are benefits beyond energy savings: "Green schools create a healthy atmosphere for learning that has measurable results. The combination of natural light, fresh air, open plans, and multi-use facilities that encourage community involvement has helped student test scores rise by 20% and reduced asthma rates by 39%."

There’s also a feature about a village in England that launched a community effort to reduce their carbon footprint, with the ultimate goal of becoming the first carbon-neutral village in the U.K. GOOD’s product reviews almost always include items produced with sustainability in mind, and in this issue, they create a proposal for better CFL packaging: create a package that can be used to ship burned-out bulbs back to the producer for proper disposal. There’s also a profile of Rogan Gregory, founder of clothing company Loomstate, who was virtually responsible for bringing organic cotton to the fashion industry though his work with Loomstate, and his other two companies, Rogan and Edun

Even subscribing to GOOD can make you feel good: 100% of your $20 subscription costs goes to your choice of twelve charities, including the World Wildlife Fund and Oceana. Good is printed on 30% recycled post-consumer paper that is EcoLogic certified, and 100% offset by projects Good is actually involved in.

The September/October issue of GOOD is on newsstands now.

Imagine my shock when I opened my mailbox to find the latest issue of Newsweek sporting a fire-glowing orb and the headline "Global Warming is a Hoax.*" It’s hard to believe (particularly for the GO family) that there are still people who deny that climate change is happening and caused by humans. With the influx of pro-green exposure in the media, many greens saw this past year as the tipping point in awareness and activism on global warming. Yet, "deniers" still exist, and Newsweek’s cover story (complete with tongue-in-cheek headline) aims to track the foundations of the denial movement, the major players behind it, and the motivations behind the well-coordinated effort to keep the American public doubting that global warming is real. (That asterisk? It noted "Or so claim well-funded naysayers who still reject the overwhelming evidence of climate change.")

"They patterned what they did after the tobacco industry," says former senator Tim Worth, quoted early in the article. The key tactic? Creating doubt in the minds of both policymakers and the public by disputing the science behind global warming. As soon as then-senator Al Gore brought global warming to Washington’s attention in 1988, groups with benign names such as the Global Climate Coalition and the Information Council on the Environment, which were actually lobbyist groups from the petroleum, steel, auto, and utilities companies, began an all-out war to contradict the overwhelming body of science that supported global warming.

The rhetoric changed as the science supporting global warming grew more and more conclusive. It started with "the science behind global warming is wrong", moved to "global warming is happening, but it is not the fault of humans", and ended with the current denier mantra, "global warming is happening, and we may be causing it, but it’s effects are hardly anything to worry about."

Also impossible to ignore in the article is the amount of money and power changing hands between lobbying groups, policymakers, and scientists. One Exxon-Mobil-backed group has offered $10,000 to scientists willing to speak out against global warming. And that might be what’s so depressing about the "deniers": it seems that from day one, their motives were entirely based on the acquisition or preservation of money and power. As Gore demonstrated in a graphic in An Inconvenient Truth, what’s more important: bars of gold, or the entire planet?

The article is fascinating and puts a face (and clear strategy) on the campaign against the planet. This issue of Newsweek is on newsstands now, and the entire article can be found on Newsweek’s website.

Ontario's Liberal Party unveiled its plan for statewide environmental sustainability education, Education Minister Kathleen Wynne announced yesterday. "We must help students build on the knowledge and leadership they have already shown on climate change issues," said Wynne. "Our government is committed to reaching every student with an environmental education that inspires them to take positive action."

The Canadian province's plan infuses environmental education in all grade levels across disciplines, as well as creates an optional Grade 11 course focuses exclusively on environmental education. Ontario previously had mandatory environmental education, but that initiative was eliminated in 1998. The new initiative will cost $4 million.

The plan was partially in response to a report issued by the Ontario Ministry of Educations's Curriculum Council and their Working Group on Environmental Education that recommended the standardization of environmental lessons and inclusion of parents in that education. The report, titled Shaping Our Schools, Shaping Our Future, is available online.

The plan is just part of a string of environmentally-friend initiatives the Ontario government has supported, including the EcoSchools program, two green-themed websites targeting high school and elementary students, and a Clean-Air and Climate Change artwork and essay contest.

Proving that sustainability is a priority for today's young people, two colleges are incorporating sustainability into their graduation ceremonies. Grads at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania took pledges of sustainability at their commencement, while Ohio's Oberlin College took the first step in a five-year plan to make Commencement/Reunion Weekend completely carbon neutral.

At Dickinson, grads signed sustainability pledges, vowing to recycle more and conserve resources. Those who signed pledges, about a fifth of the graduating class, wore green ribbons on their commencement gowns to signify their committment to sustainability. Dickinson itself has significantly increased the amount of sustainabilty measure the university is taking, and even boasts an alumni group specifically committed to sustainabilty on campus. The school has operated an environmentally-friendly apartment complex, dubbed the "Tree House", for fifteen years, and has a Campus Sustainability Specialist on staff.

Oberlin wants to green its actual commencement ceremony by implementing such changes as printing graduation programs on 100% post-consumer recycled paper, biodegradable tableware and local and organic food at dining events, available carbon offsets for travelers, and CFLs in outdoor lighting. Oberlin students will also have green ribbons on their gowns signifying their committment to sustainability. Future measure include widespread composting for all food and tableware waste over the course of the weekend, and university-fascilitated ride-shares for those travelling to and from Oberlin. Oberlin even has a "sustainability portfolio", documenting the campus's committment to sustainability.

For those that believe that young people today are focused only on themselves, measures like the ones at Dickinson and Oberlin are visible reminders of this generations committment to creating a sustainable future. With college and university presidents pledging to fight climate change, it's inevitable that other schools and students follow suit.

Bill McKibben's highly successful Step It Up campaign may have overshadowed the release of his latest book Deep Economy, which probably overshadowed the recent paperback re-release of one of McKibben's earlier books, 1995's Hope, Human and Wild: True Stories of Living Lightly on the Earth. Luckily, this second edition of Hope (Milkweed Editions), largely in part because of a new afterword by McKibben, remains relevant, and, like its title says, hopeful.

The book discusses, in four sections, pockets of civilization that can give us hope for sustainable communities and environments. McKibben starts with arguably the driest section, chronicling the regrowth of wildlife in New England despite our best efforts to completely destroy it. Although the most tedious of the book, I found this section full of promise because it reminded me that in our quest to "save the environment", we are really saving humanity: the earth will continue to bounce back long after we're gone.

The second two sections discuss two local solutions to global problems in the communities of Curitiba, Brazil and Kerala, India. In the first, ambitious city planners in Curitiba use practical, yet ingenious solutions to the city's problems to create a sustainable city where people's desires are met, no matter what their income, and residents feel a strong sense of community. For example, Curitiba's favelas, or slums, were constantly overwhelmed with trash piling up. Local officials started a program where residents of the favelas could exchange bags of gathered trash for equal-weight bags of food purchased, by the city, from local farmers who had a surplus. A model public-transportation system, based on buses owned by private companies, but with fares and routes dictated by the city, had, in twenty years, grown from 25,000 riders per day, to 1.5 million. City planners changed much of the downtown business district into pedestrian-only areas.

Kerala's story was different, but no less remarkable. In a region where people survived on, at the time of first publication, $330 per year, life expectancies were equal to those of Americans, there was virtually 100% literacy, and education was a community priority, for adults and children alike. Keralites have been able to avoid the abject poverty that pervades much India, due to their leaders committing to putting people first, and breaking down socioeconomic barriers such as race, class, and gender through community commitment to problem solving.

The stories of these communities are so completely intriguing, mainly because of their innovative, yet practical approaches to solving problems that also plague us here in America. It indicated to me the glaring ethnocentrism that we sometimes demonstrate when it comes to looking outside our own country for answers to problems.

The final original section of the book covers McKibben's reflections on the first three, although I found the afterword much more fascinating, as McKibben reflects on the original text ten years later. Were Curitiba and Kerala able to sustain the successes they had achieved? How have NAFTA, the WTO, and 9/11 affected sustainability? Are we doomed, or does hope still exist? McKibben doesn't have all the answers, but I was left with hope that those answers are out there, waiting for us to discover them.

Country Home magazine has released its 2007 list of Best Green Places in America, and Burlington, Vermont has taken top honors.

Cited for its many unique green attributes, Burlington was noted for its advanced community compost facility and it's Eco Info Project.

Country Home examined 24 data metrics in five major categories to determine which of 379 metro areas are best for those wanting to live a green life. The study collected data on traits such as air and watershed quality, mass transit use, energy use, organic food producers, farmers markets, and number of green-certified buildings.

Rounding out the top ten were–
2. Ithaca, NY
3. Corvallis, OR
4. Springfield, MA
5. Wenatchee, WA
6. Charlottesville, VA
7. Boulder, CO
8. Madison, WI
9. Binghamton, NY
10. Champaign-Urbana, IL

The study is featured in Country Home's green April issue, which hit newsstands yesterday.
What do Green Options readers think? What makes where you live worthy of green distinction? Country Home is welcoming suggestions for other green communties. Go to Country Home to nominate your city, or comment below.