Greenversations

About the author: Molly O’Neill, EPA’s Assistant Administrator for the Office of Environmental Information and Chief Information Officer.

It is no secret that I believe Web 2.0 technology has a place in government. This new generation of technology (e.g. wikis, blogs, etc.) is not all that technically complex, but it’s web-based which means it can be used to build communities easily over the Internet. It is an amazing leap forward in how all of us interact with information.

However, I would hazard that most people are more interested in the quality and product of the experience with their government and with each other rather than with the enabling technology. So, we need to think about how best wikis, blogs, and discussion boards can be used to interact inside of government or with citizens. When we roll these new technologies out, we need to do so understanding we are learning and evolving. The transformation of Marcus Peacock’s blog “Flow of the River” into this Agency-wide blog “Greenversations” is a prime example. I am not exactly sure where this technology will ultimately take us at EPA, but I can say we should not be paralyzed by it or chase the leading edge to the extreme. It does, however, allow us to truly invite and integrate citizen, community, scientific, and regulatory contributions in new ways.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlights how Web 2.0 is changing the way government does business “From Wikinomics to Government 2.0”. The Federal CIO Community is working together on establishing Best Practices in Government 2.0 (Gov 2.0). And, understanding that these new collaborative tools might have in impact on policy, many of us in the federal government are addressing these issues together as well with help from the National Academy of Public Administration.

At EPA, our mission requires an intense level of collaboration with partners in our shared mission. I can see the future as not too far off where Gov 2.0 tools are used to share vast amounts of information between levels of government from all over the world and for government to engage citizens in new ways. This is a critical step in evolving government services to become more agile, responsive, and inclusive.

Please let me know your thoughts on how Gov 2.0 tools can be effective in enhancing access to environmental information by visiting our National Dialogue on Access to Environmental Information website.

About the author: Lina Younes has been working for EPA since 2002 and chairs EPA’s Multilingual Communications Task Force. Prior to joining EPA, she was the Washington bureau chief for two Puerto Rican newspapers and she has worked for several government agencies.

Lea la versión en español a continuación de esta entrada en inglés.
Some links exit EPA or have Spanish content.

Among my duties as Hispanic liaison, I often conduct interviews in Spanish language media. Recently, I got a call from my cousin Lizette in Puerto Rico who had seen me on a Spanish TV morning show addressing the debate over tap water vs. bottled water. EPA sets the national standards for contaminants in drinking water and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sets the standards for bottled water based on EPA standards.

While talking to my cousin, I mentioned—“luckily in the U.S. we have one of the safest supplies of drinking water in the world.” She was quick to remind me—“yes, but in Puerto Rico we have many water challenges. As a Puerto Rican working at EPA you should do more to create awareness of our drinking water which is not in compliance with national standards,” she admonished. She also pointed out that since Hurricane Hugo back in 1989 many people opted for bottled water because “our tap water simply doesn’t taste right.”

I admit that the Island has many water challenges. Nonetheless, I recall the poor conditions and foul smell of the Condado Lagoon at the heart of the tourist section back in the 60’s—a situation which has dramatically improved thanks to the work of EPA in Puerto Rico—just to name one of the Agency’s contributions to the Island’s health and environment.

During our phone call, my cousin mentioned another issue: the lack of fluoridation in the Island’s drinking water. “That’s why so many people on the Island have dental problems.” Given that her brother, my cousin, is a dentist, she had some evidence. Frankly, I had to do some research myself.

I found out that the decision to fluoridate drinking water in Puerto Rico or any other U.S. jurisdiction is a state and local decision. Our role is limited to ensuring that the concentration of fluoride in drinking water from natural or introduced sources does not exceed 4 mg/L. I found out that in 1998, Puerto Rico adopted a law to add fluoride to the water largely at the behest of the state dental association in order to promote dental health. Although the law might be on the books, currently the local utilities are not adding fluoride.

Even though I am not in a position to comment on the fluoride debate, I will urge consumers to learn more about their drinking water and to get involved! (PDF, 36 pages, 2.8 MB).

Agua potable y el fluoruro

Sobre la autor: Lina M. F. Younes ha trabajado en la EPA desde el 2002 y está a cargo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Comunicaciones Multilingües. Como periodista, dirigió la oficina en Washington de dos periódicos puertorriqueños y ha laborado en varias agencias gubernamentales.

Entre mis responsabilidades como enlace hispana de EPA, frecuentemente hablo con medios hispanos. Recientemente, recibí una llamada de mi prima Lizette en Puerto Rico quien me había visto en un programa matutino de televisión hablando sobre el debate del agua del grifo y el agua embotellada. EPA establece los estándares nacionales para los contaminantes en el agua potable y la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos establece los estándares para el agua embotellada basada en los estándares de EPA.

Hablando con mi prima mencioné—“afortunadamente en EE.UU. tenemos uno de los suministros de agua potable más seguros del mundo”. Ella me indicó rápidamente—“Sí, pero en Puerto Rico tenemos muchos problemas de agua. Como puertorriqueña trabajando en EPA debes hacer más para crear conciencia sobre nuestra agua potable que no está en cumplimiento con los estándares nacionales”, amonestó. También señaló que desde el huracán Hugo en 1989 muchas personas han optado por tomar agua embotellada porque “el agua del grifo simplemente tiene mal sabor”.

Admito que la Isla tiene muchos desafíos de agua. No obstante, recuerdo las condiciones pésimas y el mal olor que emanaba de la laguna del Condado al seno del centro turístico de la Isla en los años 60—una situación que ha mejorado dramáticamente gracias a la labor de EPA en Puerto Rico—sólo un ejemplo de las muchas contribuciones de la Agencia a la salud y medio ambiente de la Isla.

Durante nuestra conversación telefónica, mi prima mencionó otro tema: la falta de fluoruración en el agua potable de Puerto Rico. “Por eso tanta gente tiene problemas dentales”. Dado a que su hermano, mi primo, es dentista, ella tiene alguna evidencia. Francamente, tuve que investigar el tema.

Encontré que la decisión de añadir fluoruro al agua potable en Puerto Rico o cualquier otra jurisdicción bajo la bandera americana recae en el estado y la localidad. Sin embargo, nuestro rol es limitado al asegurar que la concentración del fluoruro en el agua potable de fuentes potables o introducidas no debe exceder 4 mg/L. Encontré que en 1998, Puerto Rico adoptó una ley para añadir fluoruro al agua potable mayormente por el cabildeo del Colegio de Cirujanos Dentistas de Puerto Rico. Sin embargo, en la actualidad los servicios de agua en la Isla no están administrando el fluoruro.

A pesar de que no estoy en posición para debatir sobre el fluoruro, insto a los consumidores a aprender más sobre el agua potable y cómo involucrarse (PDF 36 pp, 1.7 MB).

About the author: Jeffery Robichaud is a second generation scientist with EPA, and serves as Chief of the Environmental Assessment and Monitoring Branch in Kansas City.

EPA has a broad and powerful mission to protect human health and the environment. We often think of this in the context of human impacts on the environment, but sometimes it is the other way around.

In Kansas City, a threat to our well-being rears its head every spring. I could tell it arrived the other night when I flipped on the TV to watch LOST and the screen lit up with red and green splotches over a map. It was storm season again and meteorologists had pre-empted Must-see TV for Twister TV with the fervor of election-night coverage or the latest celebrity car chase.

It was our first warning of the season, and my wife and I scooped up the kids and raced down into the basement. The all clear came, but another siren sounded an hour or so later. We repeated the drill (this time with sleeping children) and trudged to bed after another all clear. Not until the morning did we learn that two twisters touched down next to our local drug store. Five years prior a tornado ripped through Kansas City just a mile south of our house (my wife ever the wiser of the pair dragged me inside reminding me that I was now a dad). Sadly this was reinforced two years ago when our good friends lost their home in Springfield, Missouri to a twister. They had a newborn, which, as my friend told me, was the only reason they got off the couch and ran to the closet that saved their life.

Last year was a rough one for natural disasters in our Region. Everyone remembers the devastation that occurred in Greensburg, Kansas. At EPA, we get called in to assist with public health and environmental problems in the aftermath of events like the tornado in Greensburg or the flooding that struck Coffeyville, Kansas. It is heartbreaking to hear the stories of our neighbors, especially the occasional ones who ignored warnings.

Yes, newscasters tend towards exaggeration and embellishment to ensure rapt audiences, but don’t let that overwhelm the importance of heeding the underlying message. Next time you are faced with a flood, fire, hurricane, or tornado warning make sure you get yourself and family to a safe place instead of watching TV. And if anybody in Kansas City needs to know what happened on LOST let me know… I DVR’d the re-broadcast.

Each week we ask a question related to the environment. Please let us know your thoughts as comments. Feel free to respond to earlier comments or post new ideas. Previous questions.

Do you, your community, or your business purchase “green power“? If so, are you doing so voluntarily and how did you choose your electricity or gas provider? Are you happy with the results and the price you pay? Good return on investment? If you’re not, why not? Too much trouble? Not enough info available?

Why are you or aren’t you buying green power?

En español: Cada semana hacemos una pregunta relacionada al medio ambiente. Por favor comparta con nosotros sus pensamientos y comentarios. Siéntase en libertad de responder a comentarios anteriores o plantear nuevas ideas. Preguntas previas.

¿Acaso usted, su comunidad o su negocio compra “energía verde”? De ser así, ¿lo hace de manera voluntaria y cómo escogió su proveedor de servicio eléctrico/gas? ¿Está contento con los resultados del precio que usted paga? ¿Buenos réditos por la inversión? Si no está contento, ¿por qué no? ¿Es demasiado oneroso? ¿No hay demasiada información disponible?

¿Por qué está o no está comprando energía verde?

About the author: Larry Teller joined EPA’s Philadelphia office in its early months and has worked in environmental assessment, state and congressional liaison, enforcement, and communications. His 28 years with the U.S. Air Force, most as a reservist, give him a different look at government service.

I’d hoped my first contribution to this valuable space would speak to a cosmic issue, offering one person’s humble thoughts on how–on the job at an EPA regional office, and away–we can honor our sacred obligation to repair the world. Then, while leaving the train on Friday, I bumped into a co-worker. Our 10-minute walk somehow turned into a friendly contest to invent practical ways to save energy and water.

We came up with two ideas and, being veteran EPAers, devoted most of our words wondering why people more entrepreneurial than us hadn’t already developed and commercialized our utterly obvious breakthroughs.

The first was at our feet: the escalator from the train platform. Why, we wondered, does it continuously run all day long when, except for the morning and afternoon rush hours, it’s used intermittently? Why not have a sensor that starts it up when someone approaches? Energy Star friends, you’ve done wonders for fridges and are now needed at escalators.

Having solved escalator energy waste, and it being National Drinking Water Week, Fred and I devoted our remaining minutes to home sinks. Thinking of two daily tasks-washing dishes and shaving-it seemed sensible that there’s usually no need for the water to run for several minutes when it’s needed part-time. Thinking of doctor and dentist scrub sinks, can there be a safe foot pedal or other way to turn the water on and off while hands are occupied?

Although our last minute together covered possible technical challenges-reliability of switches, wear and tear on escalator gears, tripping over foot pedals, home maintenance-we decided that the R&D gang is up to the task.

Fred and I are willing to share the profits that will surely come our way. My question, readers, is whether our ten-minute commuter brainstorm under the streets of Philadelphia (it was raining) was worthwhile.

About the author: Marcus Peacock is EPA’s Deputy Administrator.

I went to a baseball game last night. The Washington Nationals put on the worst performance I have ever witnessed by a Major League Baseball team. The Washington Post noted the final score, 12 – 2, while suggesting a “rare brand of unwatchable baseball” scarcely articulated how the Nationals “failed to perform in almost any capacity.”

What made it so bad? It was not errors. The Nats only made one error. The problem was an almost palpable lack of attention to detail – a lack of caring about the small things. I saw it the moment I sat down. How often, for instance, do you see a catcher overthrow the second basemen after the pitcher has thrown his last warm-up pitch? How about an infielder trying to flip a foul ball to fans in the stands - and coming up 10 feet short?

These were very small things and made no difference in the substance of the game. But when I saw both these things happen within the first few minutes I got a bad feeling about where the team was headed. What followed was a bevy of small things that, when accumulated, did matter. A pitcher, forgetting they had their foot on the rubber and then taking it off (balking in a run). An outfielder overthrowing a cutoff man. A pitcher failing to backup a play (another run). A batter failing to get a bunt down. An infielder shrugging at a sharp grounder that a diving glove might have knocked down. What came through - what became painfully obvious - was that on this night, for whatever reason, a few Nats were not playing at 100 percent. 90 percent seemed acceptable.

When you play 90 percent against a team that is playing 100 percent it doesn’t matter how much skill you have, you are going to get buried.

Mistakes happen, but when a person doesn’t care about whether they make a mistake, even a small one, really bad things will eventually happen. A ball club that doesn’t care eventually loses ball games. An EPA that doesn’t care means we will eventually have more contaminated water, dirty air, and abandoned dumps.

Right now this Agency is on top of its game. We consistently score near or at the top of all federal agencies in virtually every independent review of our operations. (I just found out today we got an “A+” on the latest financial and computer security scorecard issued by a committee in the US House of Representatives.) But to stay on top of our game - to consistently be the very best - we need to keep caring. We need to sweat the small stuff.

About the author: Lina Younes has been working for EPA since 2002 and chairs EPA’s Multilingual Communications Task Force. Prior to joining EPA, she was the Washington bureau chief for two Puerto Rican newspapers and she has worked for several government agencies.

Lea la versión en español a continuación de esta entrada en inglés.
Some links exit EPA or have Spanish content.

During the month of May, Asthma Awareness Month, I’ve been working on several activities to increase awareness among Hispanics about asthma. This pulmonary disease affects about 22 million individuals across the United States. While this is a serious, sometimes life-threatening disease, it can be controlled so asthmatics can live a healthy life.

During interviews in Spanish-language media, I have discussed several tips to address environmental asthma triggers, in particular, how to reduce indoor asthma triggers such as second hand smoke, dust mites, mold, cockroaches and other pests, warm-blooded pets (like cats, dogs or hamsters), and nitrogen dioxide, as a way to control asthma attacks.

I know that trying to keep beloved pets away from the bedrooms and off the furniture can be sometimes easier said than done. Nonetheless, that’s essential if you want to keep the pet dander, saliva, and hair away from the sleeping areas, upholstery and carpets.

Short of giving your pet up for adoption (a necessary drastic measure if pet allergens are your key asthma trigger), there are some steps you can take to reduce the exposure to cat allergens. A friend shared an article recently which recommends soaking a washcloth or sponge with distilled water and wiping the cat down twice a week to minimize its dander. The article published last year in Health Monitor emphasized the importance of using distilled water while highlighting that its use was much more effective than other commercial products that make the claim to reduce pet allergens. In the perfect world, asthmatics should leave the cat grooming to someone else. However, if the allergic individual lives alone, a paper mask can be used to minimize inhaling the allergen. Furthermore, vacuuming frequently using a vacuum cleaner with a HEPA filter is also highly recommended.

Needless to say, that working with your doctor to create an asthma plan that works for you is one of the first steps to managing this disease and living a fruitful life. Just wanted to share some advice for those who simply cannot say goodbye to their furry friend.

Las mascotas y el asma

Sobre la autor: Lina M. F. Younes ha trabajado en la EPA desde el 2002 y está a cargo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Comunicaciones Multilingües. Como periodista, dirigió la oficina en Washington de dos periódicos puertorriqueños y ha laborado en varias agencias gubernamentales.

Durante el mes de mayo, el Mes de Concienciación sobre el Asma, he estado trabajando en diferentes actividades para crear conciencia entre los hispanos acerca del asma. Esta enfermedad pulmonar afecta cerca de 22 millones de individuos en Estados Unidos. Mientras es una condición seria, y a veces puede ser mortal, si es controlada debidamente los asmáticos pueden vivir una vida saludable.

Durante varias entrevistas con medios hispanos, he mencionado varios consejos para abordar los desencadenantes ambientales del asma, en particular, cómo reducir los desencadenantes del asma en entornos interiores tales como el tabaquismo pasivo, los ácaros de polvo, el moho, las cucarachas, y otras plagas, los animales de sangre caliente (como gatos, perros o hámsters), y bióxido de nitrógeno, como una manera para controlar los ataques de asma.

Sé que el mantener a las queridas mascotas fuera de los dormitorios o lejos de los muebles puede resultar más fácil decirlo que hacerlo. No obstante, esto es esencial para asegurar que la caspa de los animales, la saliva o los pelos no tengan contacto con las áreas donde duerme, los muebles tapizados o las alfombras.

Mientras que en los casos más extremos es posible que tenga que dar su mascota en adopción (una medida drástica, pero necesaria si los alergenos de mascotas son el principal desencadenante de sus ataques de asma), hay algunos pasos que usted debe tomar para reducir la exposición a los alergenos de gatos. Una amiga me envió un artículo recientemente que recomienda el mojar un paño o esponja con agua destilada para limpiar a su gato dos veces en semana para minimizar la caspa. El artículo fue publicado el año pasado en Health Monitor.com. ] [El artículo enfatiza la importancia de utilizar agua destilada y destaca el hecho que su uso es mucho más efectivo que otros productos comerciales que alegan la reducción de los alergenos de las mascotas. En un mundo perfecto, los asmáticos deberían dejar que otra persona limpie su querido gato usando este método. Sin embargo, si la persona alérgica vive sola, entonces debe utilizar una máscara de papel limpiar la mascota y para minimizar el inhalar el alergeno. Además, el pasar la aspiradora frecuentemente utilizando un filtro HEPA también es altamente recomendado.

Demás está decir que el trabajar con su médico para crear un plan de asma que funcione para usted es uno de los primeros pasos a seguir para manejar esta enfermedad y vivir una vida fructífera. Sólo quería darle algunos consejos para aquellas personas que simplemente no pueden prescindir de sus queridas mascotas.

About the author: John Lehrter is a research ecologist with the Office of Research and Development in Gulf Breeze, Florida, who joined EPA in 2004. His research activities examine the sources, transport, and fate of pollutants from watersheds to the coastal ocean.

My wife and I have been painting the exterior of our house over the last month or so. It has been a hectic and challenging task. We get home from work, throw on our painting clothes (soon to be retired), and paint until the sun goes down. On weekends we vie for trips to the hardware store to catch a respite from the endless brush strokes. All in all, though, it has been a good experience and the best reward is that we love our house again.

As I was painting on Earth Day it struck me that aesthetics, like a freshly painted house, are very important in how we perceive our surrounding environment. As a water scientist at the EPA, I am often asked the “Why?” question. Why is it important to safeguard water quality and quantity? My typical response is to cite the ways that we are dependent on water resources such as clean drinking water supplies, fisheries resources, and the large number of other natural services provided by freshwater and marine ecosystems. Usually, I forget to even mention aesthetics.

Really, though, the environmental issues we’re most often confronted with on a personal level are aesthetic. During the spring, especially, the natural world showcases its beauty. As we ride to work or run errands we’re visually inundated with scenery. Green scenery, like a city park or a coastal marsh, evokes feelings of well-being. While other scenes, like urban brownfields or heavily eroded hillsides, indicate environmental problems and challenges.

In a lot of cases, training in the environmental sciences is not required to recognize a “good” or “bad” environment. It is rather confusing, however, about what an individual might do to improve things. Educational resources about the environmental issues related to water and what you can do to lessen your impact are available from EPA’s website. Generally, actions that improve aesthetics are a step in the right direction.

Now that we’ve nearly completed painting the house, it is time to start rethinking our yard … and the rest of our environment. I guess I won’t be throwing away those work clothes after all.

About the author: Jeff Maurer manages Web content and does communications work for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. He has been with EPA since 2005.

Before I moved to DC, I lived next to Wrigley Field, home of the Chicago Cubs. I love Wrigley Field – it’s like stepping back in time. The scoreboard is still manually operated. There are no billboards for advertising. They don’t play rock music over the PA system, though they do play polka music on the pipe organ during rain delays. You can still buy standing-room tickets at Wrigley, which is good because the seats were apparently installed when the average American was three feet tall and suffered from tapeworms.

Compare that to recently-completed Nationals Park here in DC. Nationals Park boasts 41,888 American-sized seats (my description, not theirs), a 4,500 square foot high-definition scoreboard, and every other amenity you could possibly imagine. The fan experience is great, though their music choices tend to favor Fergie and Fall Out Boy, with surprisingly little polka.

It just goes to show how much attitudes and planning have changed. Fans in 2008 expect a lot when they come to a ballpark. They expect quality food. They expect not to sit behind a post. They expect to do the chicken dance (why?). As a result, the designers of Nationals Park had to consider a lot more than did the designers of Wrigley Field.

And finally – finally! – it seems that environmental impact is becoming a major consideration. Nationals Park is the first LEED-certified ballpark in Major League Baseball. It has several “green” features, including a plant-covered roof that reduces water runoff, an elaborate water filtration system, high-efficiency lighting, and low-flow plumbing fixtures. Compare that to Wrigley Field, which barely features plumbing.

I’m glad that ballpark designers – and designers in general – are starting to figure this out. People in 1914 – the year Wrigley was built – didn’t care too much about the environment, but people in 2008 do. For example, people at public events expect to be able to recycle their empty bottles. I know this because EPA’s Recycle on the Go initiative – which encourages recycling at public events – has held several well-received events in public spaces, including at the 2006 Major League Baseball All-Star Game.

Attitudes and expectations change over time, sometimes for better (e.g., ballparks should have more than one bathroom), sometimes for worse (e.g., Lady Lumps is acceptable music during a pitching change). I think the message is clear: in 2008, the public expects environmentally-friendly buildings and spaces.

Each week we ask a question related to the environment. Please let us know your thoughts as comments. Feel free to respond to earlier comments or post new ideas. Previous questions.

With Memorial Day coming up, it’s time to think about the sun. How do you protect yourself (and your kids)? Do you follow any of the SunWise program’s recommendations? If you actively seek sun or use a tanning bed, why? And what would it take to convince you to seek shade instead?

Why do you seek shade or sun?

En español: Cada semana hacemos una pregunta relacionada al medio ambiente. Por favor comparta con nosotros sus pensamientos y comentarios. Siéntase en libertad de responder a comentarios anteriores o plantear nuevas ideas. Preguntas previas.

Ya que se acerca el Día de Recordación de los Caídos, es momento de pensar en el sol. ¿Por qué debe protegerse (y a sus hijos)? ¿Normalmente Sigue las recomendaciones de SunWise? Si activamente busca el sol o los salones de bronceado, ¿por qué? ¿Qué tenemos que hacer para convencerle que debe buscar la sombra?

¿Por qué busca la sombra o el sol?