Vilsack's Confirmation Hearing

Yesterday, the Senate held its confirmation hearing for Gov. Tom Vilsack, President-elect Obama's pick for the next Secretary of Agriculture.

The hearing touched upon the most, if not all, of the major agricultural issues facing the new administration, including renewable energy, food safety, sustainable ag, rural development, trade issues, farm subsidies and commodity programs.

But some of the most enthusiastic language came in support of childhood nutrition and school lunches.

We can work with our schools to make sure fruits and vegetables are available. . . . We will be very aggressive in this area. . . . It’s going to be important for us to promote fresh fruits and vegetables as part of our children’s diets. . . . That means supporting those who supply those products.

Such ideas are in keeping with Obama's plan to work through the USDA's various nutrition programs to end childhood hunger by 2015.

The hearing, which ran just over two hours, is available as a Webcast from the Senate Ag Committee's site.

From all reports, Gov. Vilsack is expected to be confirmed as the new Secretary of Agriculture as early as Tuesday and sworn in soon after.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Biography and Farm Bill and Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Organic Production and Plants and Crops and Rural Life and Water Quality on January 15, 2009 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Will my daughter eat fruits and vegetables? Nutrition is good, as a small farmer I really would like more support. How are they going to get kids to eat fruits and vegetables though?

Submitted by: BradJ on February 26, 2009 05:51 PM

The Crossroads of Ag and Public Health

What is the connection between what you eat and how you feel?

Does the way an animal or crop is raised impact its nutritional value?

How are farming methods contributing to environmental problems and human health issues?

These questions and others like them represent the crossroads of agriculture and public health, that complex interdependency between what we eat and how it is raised with our individual and collective well-being.

They are the kinds of questions that seem to be popping up more and more, from the mainstream press to scientific journals and trade publications.

But clearly the frequency of the questions does not mean we have answers. In fact, as any researcher knows, most so-called answers just lead to more questions, more debate and more avenues for research.

To help bring some order to all that research and to the multiplicity of answers derived from it, the Center for a Livable Future, a research institute partnering Johns Hopkins University with its School of Public Health, recently launched a new Web site, the Agriculture and Public Health Gateway.

The gateway provides a central starting point for anyone interested in exploring the ag-public health connection. It lets you simultaneously search four key databases dealing with agriculture (NAL's AGRICOLA), ag safety (the National Agricultural Safety Database), medicine (PubMed) and the environment (Earthtrends). Or you can browse a range of Web-based goodies -- articles, reports, databases, programs, videos and more -- organized by topics such as crop production, community and occupational health, or food safety and labeling.

You'll find more details about the site on the Center's blog, or just jump in and start exploring. And when you find answers to the questions above, let us know.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Farm Safety and Food and Nutrition and Libraries and Natural Resources & Environment and Organic Production and Plants and Crops and Rural Life and Water Quality on November 04, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Hey! What a rich and inviting pool you left for exploration here. Thanks!! I also noted related ideas from an NPR broadcast today. This was on gut (human) microflora, and their contributions (or detraction) from our physical well-being. See: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95900616 These connections are not new. JI Rodale started "Prevention" magazine - then soon added "Organic Gardening." This witnesses his belief in food production and health outcome relationships. Thanks for these neat notes! - Karl

Submitted by: Karl Schneider on November 4, 2008 09:55 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 5, 2008 11:23 AM

Submitted by: Karl on November 6, 2008 10:00 AM

Submitted by: Water Damage on November 21, 2008 08:12 AM

Submitted by: Alex Tiller on November 26, 2008 01:42 PM

And Now a Word from Our Sponsor

I'm turning the blog-waves over to USDA today to help get the word out about the upcoming Agricultural Outlook Forum, February 26-27, 2009, in Arlington, Virginia.

This year's presenters and break-out sessions will deliver on the theme "Global Agriculture & Rural America in Transition."

You'll hear scientific, policy, business and marketing perspectives on a range of ag issues, from food safety to food security, from rural America to world markets, and from conservation efforts to developments in biotechnology.

The then Secretary of Agriculture will give the keynote, with an as-yet-unnamed distinguished guest speaker to follow.

Got any ideas who that distinguished guest speaker should be? I'm collecting suggestions below. Who knows, the conference planners just might listen.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Education and Farm Bill and Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops and Rural Life and Water Quality on October 29, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I wait, when can you send me more information about health?

Submitted by: jhjityiity on October 30, 2008 09:58 AM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 30, 2008 10:13 AM

Submitted by: Bill Harshaw on October 30, 2008 12:27 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 30, 2008 02:13 PM

Submitted by: Karl Schneider on November 4, 2008 10:29 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 5, 2008 11:31 AM

How Should We Respond to Wildfires?

Wildfires happen, either through natural causes, human intention, or carelessness. Many are happening now. Today.

In general, when wildfires do occur, the firefighting arsenal is brought in to stop them.

The question is, should it be?

Fire wreaks havoc. It destroys timber, reduces vegetation, creates conditions that encourage erosion. Of course, when it impinges upon developed areas, it also threatens people, homes, towns and livelihoods.

And with more people building in wildland areas, such unfortunate encounters are happening more and more frequently. And costing more and more money to fight.

But fire isn't all bad. Dubbed "Nature's housekeeper" by some, wildfires can be beneficial to the forests they engage. They help maintain forest health by burning downed trees and fallen leaves, releasing soil nutrients, thinning the canopy and triggering seed germination. Some ecosystems even depend upon fire for their re-generation.

How do we balance the costs and benefits of wildland fires? Where should we draw the line on fighting them? Should they be stopped or simply managed? Is it even possible to have a hard-and-fast policy for something that is so unpredictable?

And how do your answers change when it's your house that's in the line of fire?

Or maybe your answers don't change, because you draw the line at building homes in likely fire zones. Maybe those developments simply are somewhere they shouldn't be.

This week the Los Angeles Times is turning over some of these questions in a five-part series titled "Big Burn."

The series delves into the financial, political, social and environmental factors that feed into our individual and collective responses to wildfires. It also examines the policies, decisions and actions that might be contributing to a growth in such fires.

Two parts into the series, and I'm hooked. I've never lived in an area prone to wildfires, so these issues haven't popped up for me with every fire season. Not being well-versed in them, I want to know more.

Fortunately, there's no shortage of resources.

In addition to the the lastest media offerings, I'm looking at NAL's Forestry and Grasslands page. I've also added two recent reports from the Congressional Research Service (a unit within the Library of Congress) to my To Be Read pile:

• Wildfire Damages to Homes and Resources: Understanding Causes and Reducing Losses (PDF | 186 KB), and
• Forest Fire/Wildfire Protection (PDF | 186 KB).

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Emergency Response and Natural Resources & Environment on July 30, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Hi Nice site! G'night

Submitted by: NeidapyHeplal on October 1, 2008 09:58 AM

Submitted by: Ryan on March 3, 2009 11:19 PM

Photo of the Week: A California Wetland

Do you know where to get great photos of this wild and wonderful world, from wetlands, grasslands, rangelands, and fields to streams, lakes, rivers, wildlife and livestock? What if you want those great photos to be free and with few restrictions on use?

Then head on over to the photo gallery put together by the good folks at USDA's Natural Resources and Conservation Service. You'll be amazed at the variety and quality of their photos related to natural resources and the environment.

Another great thing: you can use the images as you wish. They just ask for a simple photo credit.

The shot above shows a restored wetland in Yolo County, California, an agriculturally-rich area up near Sacramento. Numerous reclamation efforts there have turned acres of farmland into wetlands, conserving the land and protecting the wildlife. Given that the county sits along the Pacific flyway, a major migration route for waterfowl and other North American birds, these efforts are particularly important.

One such project has even been touted as a notable success story in the Wetlands Reserve Program, a voluntary program that helps landowners protect, restore, and enhance wetlands on their property. This program can deliver both technical and financial support, so if you're considering restoring a wetland on your property, be sure to check it out.

So, to get more photos like the one above, browse through the NRCS photo gallery.

But to learn more about the function and value of wetlands, see the wetlands resources from our friends at NAL's Water Quality Information Center.

It's a wild and wonderful world out there. Let's appreciate it.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Art, Artifacts and Photos and Natural Resources & Environment and Water Quality on June 25, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

very nice picture

Submitted by: Anonymous on July 1, 2008 06:17 AM

Liquid Gold?

Gasoline prices are nudging $4.00 a gallon. At that rate, according to the Washington Post, folks driving the massive Hummer H2 need $128 to fill the tank. Even my fuel efficient compact took $40 to fill two days ago.

Is it any wonder that more people are finally willing to look at alternative fuels?

As the New York Times reports, however, some are taking "alternative" a bit too far.

Thieves are now targeting used cooking oil because it can be turned into biodiesel. And in response, some restaurant owners have taken to posting security cameras on the grease bins behind their establishments in an effort to protect the newest "liquid gold."

You read it right. Fryer grease is being stolen and sold on the commodities market. As the New York Times explains:

Its value has increased in recent months to historic highs, driven by the even higher prices of gas and ethanol, making it an ever more popular form of biodiesel to fuel cars and trucks.

In 2000, yellow grease was trading for 7.6 cents per pound. On Thursday, its price was about 33 cents a pound, or almost $2.50 a gallon.

Wanna-be veggie drivers out there should know though that the Environmental Protection Agency does not accept vegetable oil (or cooking oil) itself as biodiesel. Yes, there are conversion kits on the market that allow it to be burned as an engine fuel, but usage alone doesn't meet the legal definition of biodiesel. Instead, the oil must be processed with alcohol to remove the glycerin, "making it thinner, lighter, and cleaner burning" through this process called esterification. Only then is it legal for sale and use in vehicles on public roads, as one Charlotte, NC man learned the hard way.

To learn more about biofuels, especially what USDA is working on, see NAL's Bioenergy and Biofuels page.

And then take a few minutes to tell us what you're doing to make your gasoline dollars stretch a little further.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Natural Resources & Environment on June 05, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Global Food Security Conference

Today in Rome, heads of state from around the globe began an intensive three-day conference on food security, climate change and rising food and fuel prices. The conference, called by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, is intended to help countries devise sustainable solutions to rising food prices and to address the growing challenges of climate change and energy security.

Much of the conference is available online. Resources include conference documents and written remarks, along with audio and video webcasts of the sessions.

USDA Secretary Ed Schafer leads the U.S. delegation to the conference.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment on June 03, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Earth, Baseball and the Federal Blogger

What is it about government bloggers and baseball? I can't explain the connection, but the correlation appears to be growing. Peruse the evidence for yourself:

The folks over at the Smithsonian American Art Museum started off the trend almost two years ago with not one, but two, different entries on baseball in art.

I followed by blogging about baseball field designs back in InfoFarm's early days, and then, the very next day, the Department of State's blog, Dipnote, trotted out its own baseball reference.

Last month, the Library of Congress blog stepped on the field with an entry on their impressive collection of baseball-related photos and artifacts.

Then, a few weeks later, Colleen, one of the GovGab bloggers, covered our national pastime with an entry aligned with the Opening Day.

Finally, today, the Environmental Protection Agency launched its new blog, Greenversations, with a posting that brings together baseball and Earth Day.

Must be something in the water at federal buildings. Or maybe baseball still is the national pastime, despite some suggestions to the contrary.

Whatever the case, I'm psyched to be joined by so many baseball fans in the federal blogosphere.

I'm psyched, too, since it is Earth Day, to read that the EPA has worked with the New York Mets to identify the latest green technologies and practices that will be incorporated into the Mets' new stadium.

The Mets aren't the only team considering our environment though. From what I've read, brand new Nationals Park, home of our very own Washington Nationals, was built with green design principles. According to the team's site:

Nationals Park will strive to become the first major stadium in the United States accredited as a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System™ certified ballpark. The new ballpark will pay particular attention to issues affecting the health of the Anacostia River, such as stormwater management and minimization of water pollution.

Newsweek covered the greening of the new ballpark last week. And earlier USA Today provided a neat graphic detailing the various environmental design measures that have gone into Nationals Park, from the lighting to the green roof, from the building materials to the cleaning products, to the water filtration system alluded to above.

But the earth-friendly improvements don't stop there. Larry DiVito, Head Groundskeeper for the Nationals, did his homework when it came to field maintenance equipment. He acquired an outfield mower that runs on biodiesel and a utility vehicle powered solely by electricity.

So worry not, Nats fans, the home turf -- Kentucky bluegrass for those who care -- will be well cared for.

But if you'd like some tips on keeping your own fields "green," check out the environmentally friendly techniques the Nationals' DiVito provided for Earth Day 2007, along with a great collection of turf-related sites from my NAL colleagues. Do your part to help make every day Earth Day.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Blogging and Natural Resources & Environment on April 22, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Dear Mary Ann: This is my favorite infofarm topic. Please do more like these, Best, Peter

Submitted by: Peter on June 25, 2008 02:20 PM

Ag Words on the Growing Edge

As a follow-up to yesterday's entry on locavores, I wanted to quickly mention the other agriculturally related words that have recently been in the running for Word of the Year.

In 2005 Oxford gave the nod to "podcast," a decidedly non-agricultural word, but a technology the aggies have certainly taken advantage of, including the folks over at USDA's Economic Research Service and National Agricultural Statistics Service.

And among the runners-up that year we had "bird flu" and "trans fats," two very different but significant challenges to our health that ag researchers are addressing.

The following year was also big for agriculture and the environment. "Carbon neutral" took the top spot, encouraging all of us to reduce our carbon emissions and to then balance "our remaining emissions...by purchasing a carbon offset, paying to plant new trees or investing in 'green' technologies such as solar and wind power."

Then "CSA," community supported agriculture, occupied a key runner-up position, and -- who knows? -- maybe contributed to "locavore's" win in 2007 by building momentum in the "buy local" movement.

For the librarians in the audience, 2006 also brought us "DRM," digital rights management, a mere hop, skip and a jump from the copyright issues we discussed the other day.

Then, as noted earlier, "locavore" snagged Oxford's latest blue ribbon, but the mysterious "colony collapse disorder" made the list, as did "upcycling," a innovative alternative to waste disposal, one that puts a value-added spin on recycling.

So, not bad, nine words in three years related to agriculture, the environment, nutrition or librarianship. (I cast a wide net.)

But what did Oxford miss? Any other good, new agricultural words out there? Send 'em along or make 'em up. We're always ready to push that growing edge.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops on January 18, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Hello! Nice site ;) Bye

Submitted by: BersJonrete on January 20, 2008 12:26 AM

Submitted by: David Engel on January 23, 2008 09:57 AM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on January 23, 2008 01:26 PM

Submitted by: Lori Finch on January 24, 2008 05:18 PM

Are You a Locavore? Should You Be?

So, do you consider yourself a locavore? If so, you're environmentally conscious and trendy, wearing a label declared the "Word of the Year 2007" by the New Oxford American Dictionary.

For those who've never heard the term, it was coined just a few years ago by Jessica Prentice, one of four women in San Francisco who set out to eat food grown or produced within 100 miles of their homes. They weren't the only ones doing so, but their word caught on, at least in some circles, and is now, as Oxford sees it, a "word to watch."

It has gotten a few amateur (maybe even professional) lexicographers in an uproar: Should it be "localvore," (with an "l")? Should it be "localtarian," to convey the choice implied (a la "vegetarian")? Should we even care?

Of course, the last question touches upon more than just the word, but on the choices and actions the word encompasses -- eating locally, supporting nearby farmers and producers, reducing the transportation and shipping costs associated with what we eat.

The payoff comes in terms both personal and global. The food I get from our neighborhood farmers' market is generally fresher and tastes better than the long-distance stuff. Even the meat is more flavorful. And I get all that while doing something positive for the environment.

Not so fast, interjects Sarah Murray. While buying locally might supply those benefits, "food miles" shouldn't be the sole factor taken into account when buying food. We must also consider harvesting and production methods, storage requirements, food packaging, and other steps along the road from farm to fork.

Murray cites the example of a British snack company that teamed up with the Carbon Trust to measure the carbon footprint of a bag of its potato crisps. In calculating the carbon dioxide emissions in the making and shipping of the crisps, they found that the troublespot was not transportation, but "storing and frying the potatoes." Making changes there, Murray points out, could reduce emissions more than constraining the miles the crisps travel to consumers.

Okay, sounds good. But what about the formula used for calculating a product's carbon footprint in the first place? What gets included? What doesn't? And how far down the growth and production chain do you go? As an article in The Economist points out, how you answer these questions significantly impacts your formula, and, of course, the results.

And taking a consumer's position on this, how will I know which formula is "right"?

Obviously, this carbon footprint stuff is tricky business, and the scientists will be hashing out the details for some time. Until then, though, until we see standards, I'll work with what I do know and buy locally as much as I can. I might never be a true locavore -- I like chocolate way too much for that -- but I'll do what I can, even if it does address just one factor in a lengthy environmental equation.

But what are you doing? Have you tried being a locavore, even on a short-term or seasonal basis? Do you grow your own herbs or veggies? Have you joined a community supported agriculture program? Are you a regular at the local farmers market? Let's hear your tips for reducing our individual carbon footprints.

Or offer your comments on our latest Word of the Year. Does "locavore" work for you? Got a better idea? Propose it here and you might find fame via your well-chosen neologism. Wouldn't that be cool?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops on January 17, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I have started looking into this for myself. The task can sound simple at first, but in reality may require some research. I would have to cut many things from my diet like bread and beer because ALL the ingredients weren't grown within 100 miles of my home. Then again wine would still be available. The process of researching what does grow in your area opens up your mind to what really goes into producing food and getting it to your kitchen. And as we already know the food that's least processed is usually the best for you. So I think I can do without the potatoe crisps, but I draw the limit at giving up beer. It's a challenge that I want to take soon. I'd love to hear if anyone else does this, what their personal parameters were and how it went!

Submitted by: Virgie J on July 9, 2008 07:15 PM

Growing Green

I was a kid during the energy crisis of the 1970s. I don't remember sitting in long lines at the gas pumps, but I do remember watching news stories about them. And I very much remember hearing my dad's "Who left the TV on?" echo through the house when he found Hogan's Heroes pulling another one over on Colonel Klink without someone there to watch the shenanigans. The plea that we'd be "coming right back" carried little weight.

I can easily imagine similar exchanges still happening today, as parents try to keep a lid on rising fuel and utility costs.

And that might not be any more true than in rural America, where small farms struggle to stay afloat, making energy efficiency an economic imperative. "Being green," it turns out, can be as much about the money in your pocket as the fuel in your tank.

Farm energy options now run the gamut from wind, solar and geothermal power to the biofuels we're hearing so much about. And simply conserving energy and increasing efficiency can yield substantial, immediate benefits as well.

Find information about all these forms of renewable energy at the Alternative Farming Systems Information Center here at NAL. Then, once you've settled on the energy choices that work for you, find what you need to make it happen with the Farm Energy Search Tool, which will point you to equipment dealers, installers, fuel distributors, funding sources and technical assistance in your state.

And if you're already using alternative energy on your farm or in your home, tell us about it below. What differences have you noticed in your processes and your bottom line?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Natural Resources & Environment on October 05, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

I remember only being able to buy gas on alternate days during the energy crisis of the '70s--based on whether your license plate # ended in an odd or even digit. How did we get here? What kind of collective amnesia lead us from those days to giant SUVs and unrivaled energy consumption?

Submitted by: Jamie on October 10, 2007 03:03 PM

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 11, 2007 03:25 PM

Submitted by: Cindy on October 30, 2007 02:04 PM

Gardening with a Mission (and a View)

Here's a stunning statistic for you: The Federal government is the nation's single largest consumer of energy, spending more than $9 billion to power its vehicles, operations, and approximately 500,000 facilities throughout the United States.

And stunning statistic #2: The Department of Agriculture is the second largest landholder in the Federal government, occupying approximately 89 million square feet of office and laboratory space; operating over 23,000 buildings; and managing 193 million acres of land. That's a massive agency with equally massive energy needs.

But the Department, along with the entire Federal government, is taking steps to conserve energy and to move toward sustainable operations.

Conserving water, recycling, reducing waste, and shifting to alternative fuels and biobased products are just some of the measures already in place to cut energy use.

For the most visually attractive measure though, you'll have to check out the green roof (PDF | 140 KB) recently installed at USDA headquarters in downtown Washington, DC.

Green roofs, also known as living roofs or vegetated roofs, originated in Germany, but they're catching on here in the States, especially in urban areas. They bring together vegetation, soil and a waterproof roofing membrane to create an environmentally friendly, energy efficient alternative to traditional roofing. Among their benefits:

• Insulating the building below from temperature extremes
• Reducing water run-off
• Absorbing air pollution
• Providing habitats for birds and other small animals
• Improving the building's aesthetics

For some great pics of other green roofs, check out the city halls of Chicago and Atlanta, and a handful of projects in Portland, Oregon.

But green roofs aren't just for large buildings. Homeowners are installing them too, often with great success. Just hit the Web to learn more.

And check back tomorrow for more energy talk, this time on the farm side.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Natural Resources & Environment on October 04, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.

Name:

.....

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.