Are Vegetation-derived Cleaning Products Really Green?
Continuing the article series examining green cleaning products, this post looks at “ready-to use” and concentrated cleaning products derived from vegetation sources such as coconuts, corn, palm, etc. In this post, I am focusing on green cleaning agents derived from coconuts to simplify the analysis.
Many of the coconut-based cleaning agents used in major brands are reported to be relatively safe and easily biodegradable as was the case with the materials evaluated earlier (baking soda, vinegar, etc.). Therefore this evaluation considers the nature of the source of the cleaning agents and some of the steps involved as the product evolves from the coconut tree until it gets into the consumers’ hands.
First of all, the source is from a living plant supplying the raw ingredients on a periodic basis; a definite renewable source! The plant also uses atmospheric CO2 as it continues to live and produce the fruit and oil and therefore is an ongoing absorber of an additional environmental concern playing a role in removing greenhouse gases.
Additionally, most coconut-based cleaning agents are derived from raw coconut oil as it is being refined and the cleaning agents are constructive byproducts of the refining process.
Once the cleaning agents are produced, they are then delivered to various companies to formulate their specific “green cleaning product”.
Some companies opt to formulate their product at a “ready to use” concentration as matter of convenience while others deliver a highly concentrated formulation where the end user mixes the final use solutions in spray bottles or for other uses.
Though each vendor is still using an environmentally friendly agent, in my mind, there are distinct advantages to using the highly concentrated alternative:
- The only ingredient the consumer adds to the highly concentrated coconut-derived cleaning product is water therefore saving the cost of shipping a relatively large quantity of water;
- Less packaging is required since the highly concentrated cleaner is used to make the “ready-to-use” solutions many times over;
- Far less fuel is used to ship the highly concentrated cleaner (also saving on the cost of shipping as well); and
- Re-use of cleaner and mix bottles over and over again minimizes the amount of plastic waste to be sent out for disposal or recycling.
Granted the “ready-to-use” formulation is more convenient and some would consider less “sloppy”, I still believe a little effort to mix the final cleaning solutions may well be worth the effort considering what is being saved.
(Of course this could be the latent chemist starting to rear its nerdy head as well!)
Now that I have given you my viewpoint about vegetation or coconut-based green cleaning products, please let me know yours by commenting below ….
Are Baking Soda, Hydrogen Peroxide and Vinegar Truly Green Cleaning Products?
Over the last few weeks, I have been evaluating how different terms are used by those with an interest in green living. Today’s post will focus on the use of “green” as it pertains to three “home-brews” often touted as green cleaning products. These environmentally or Earth friendly household products are baking soda, hydrogen peroxide and vinegar.
The real question is … are baking soda, hydrogen peroxide and vinegar truly green or Earth friendly when used as cleaning products?
There is little doubt these common household staples are relatively safe and when used in the condition (diluted to a few percent in the case of hydrogen peroxide and vinegar) and flushed down the drain they pose little harm to the environment (or water treatment facility).
This is the basis most people claiming these are viable as green cleaning products use to formulate the conclusion they are indeed green or Earth friendly.
So it must be true then … baking soda, hydrogen peroxide and vinegar can be used as green cleaning products right?
But … where do these common household products come from (besides Good Golly Miss Jolly World 
)?
Definitely an interesting question ….. Let’s take a look at each product:
- Baking Soda – historically baking soda was produced via a synthetic industrial chemical method called the Solvay process, a switch to the use of a natural resource, the mineral trona, occurred during the 1980s. Here in the U.S. most of the trona deposits were formed from evaporation of large inland lakes ~ 50 million years ago in western Colorado and Wyoming. The trona deposits are now mined from several hundred feet below ground surface them brought to the surface to be processed to extract both sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) and sodium carbonate (soda wash). This does raise another question …. I wonder how many truly green or environmentally friendly mines there are in the World? Hmmmmmm …..
- Hydrogen Peroxide – though hydrogen peroxide exists in many organisms, virtually all hydrogen peroxide is produced from another synthetic industrial chemical process (Autoxidation) involving organic chemicals such as anthraquinone, a hydrocarbon-based carrier solvent, natural gas and a metallic catalyst (nickel or palladium). The organic chemicals involved are typically derived from petrochemical feed stocks. As I look over the process and chemicals involved I have to wonder where the “green” part comes into play …..
- Vinegar (acetic acid) – Much of the food grade vinegar we have around the house is assumed to be derived from the fermentation of ethanol derived from vegetation. When the label states “apple cider vinegar, rice vinegar, etc. that may almost be a safe assumption, especially if you read the “ingredients label” and it clearly states vegetation as primary ingredients. If you use biologically derived vinegar to make your own household cleaning solution you are likely being truly green. However, if you by a commercial product labeled as containing vinegar it is likely the source was from synthetic sources of ethanol (including petroleum) since only 10% of all acetic acid produced comes directly from biologic sources (vegetation) and mass production of the synthetic form is much cheaper to produce.
So in the final analysis how does each of these highly touted “green cleaning products” stand up to the scrutiny?
- Baking soda-derived from processing of a mined Earth resource – NOT GREEN!
- Hydrogen Peroxide – derived from industrial chemical synthesis – NOT GREEN!
- Vinegar – if derived from a clearly labeled plant source – LIKELY GREEN!
- if an ingredient in commercial “green” cleaner – NOT LIKELY GREEN!
Let me know how you feel about baking soda, hydrogen peroxide and vinegar as green cleaning products by commenting below!
Do Unto Nature Well for Your Actions Create Your Legacy
As each of us strives to exist in harmony with nature by maintaining a green lifestyle, many of our daily actions project beyond our personal benefit as we help sustain our environment.
Perpetuating the green living philosophy by finding new ways to enhance our interactions with the natural environment leaving a postive legacy in our wake.
This ideal is best communicated in a quote by Albert Pine (19th Century English author):
“What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us. What we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal.”
So the next time you take action on any green lifestyle initiative, remember, not only are you helping others and the environment, you are also creating a piece of your legacy as well …
Green Living Lifestyle and Health: To Supplement or Not to Supplement (Dr. Stephen Chaney)
I received an email recently with a message from Dr. Stephen Chaney I believed to be of interest to anyone concerned with health and living a green lifestyle regarding supplementation issues.
The message provides great insight regarding what appears to be confusing information concerning the use of supplements and things you should consider when coming across new information.
======================
“To Supplement or Not to Supplement by Dr. Stephen Chaney, Ph.D. (Bochemistry)”
I came across an article a few weeks ago showing that supplementation with 800 mg of folic acid reduced hearing loss in a group of older men and women.
Some of you may recall hearing about a study several months ago suggesting that intakes of 400 mg of folic acid (the recommended Daily Value) or more was associated with a slight increase in the risk of colon cancer. In fact, some experts were recommending that if you were over 50 you should take a multivitamin only every other day.
About a month after that there were a couple of studies showing that in adults over 50 supplementation with 600 to 800 mg of folic acid significantly decreased the risk of dementia.
Are you confused yet?
The problem is that many people don’t understand the difference between “relative risk” and “absolute risk”. Perhaps the best way to help you understand the difference is to give you an example.
I read another paper the other day arguing that colonoscopies were a waste of medical resources. You might say: “That’s absurd. Colonoscopies have been shown to reduce the risk of colon cancer by 60%. Why wouldn’t you want to recommend that everyone over 50 get a colonoscopy on a regular basis?”
Yes, but that’s a relative reduction in risk. Your absolute risk of developing colon cancer over your lifetime is only around 6%. If you reduce that by 60% you have achieved only a 2.4% absolute reduction in the risk of developing colon cancer.
Now that you understand the difference between relative and absolute risk I should tell you that the Framingham study has shown that your lifetime risk of developing dementia is around 20%. Similarly, your lifetime risk of developing severe hearing loss is around 33%. (That might be an underestimate, however, because those statistics predated rock bands and iPods).
When you look the same data from the viewpoint of absolute risk it helps you sort out all that conflicting information.
When you look at absolute risk the benefits of folic acid supplementation far outweigh the potential risks for most people.
Of course, if you have a family history of one of these diseases that dramatically changes the equation.
In my case, I have a family history of colon cancer, so I will continue to endure the colonoscopies at the recommended intervals (At least until a better diagnostic procedure comes along).
However, I also use a holistic supplementation program, and I think that the benefits of folic acid as part of that program far outweigh any risks.
================
I guess this post examining supplementation issues is definitely defined as a green remedy of nature 
….
Factory Farms, Genetically Altered Food and Potential Health Concerns
I recently visited a colleague’s blog site and read a post triggered by Michael Jackson’s untimely death due to cardiac arrest. The post addressed the issues associated with people, their lifestyles, health background and heart disease.
One of the key points made by the author focused on the relationship between lifestyle and poor health choices as being a major factor leading to heart disease. Part of the poor choices relates to the types and quantities of food we eat and the manner in which it can impact our health.
Fast Food = Bad and Regular Food = Good, right?
Though no one questions the potential health threat associated with eating processed foods, especially fast foods; what about the fruits, veggies, poultry and meat produced on factory farms or derived from genetically modified or altered organisms?
Organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have already started to assess these problems due to higher risk of allergic reactions and lower nutritional values with food from these sources. It will be interesting hear about the findings of these organizations.
In the meantime, two questions arose as I pondered the nature of these food sources and their potential health impacts:
- If man deliberately alters the genetic code to create a new organism for a given purpose (higher yield, more resistant, flavor, etc.), can this new organism really be considered natural? Part of the reason this question instantly popped in my mind pertains to my background in geology. The most basic type of Earth material is a mineral which by definition must be natural thus created via the Earth’s natural processes. If we create a pseudo-mineral in the lab, it is not considered a true mineral. From my perspective, if we genetically alter an organism for a specific purpose, we have effectively done the same thing and therefore that organism (or food) should not be considered natural!
- How long will it be before a new type of food processing facility pops up with a catchy marketing slogan like you see below!
Soylent Green Anyone?
===================
What is Soylent Green?
Now there is some … “food for thought”
