Coffee and You: How Healthful is it?
From the nerve-jangled caffeine addict to those who have a mug about once a year, a lot of Americans drink coffee. But is it healthful?
From the nerve-jangled caffeine addict to those who have a mug about once a year, a lot of Americans drink coffee. But is it healthful?
Driven by the disastrous effect two-stroke engines were having on the environment, the Bluewater Network was created in 1996 as a project of the Earth Island Institute. Bluewater Network, now part of Friends of the Earth, focuses on the negative effects of transportation on air and water quality.
Natural gas provides about 24 percent of U.S. energy requirements, compared to 40 percent for oil and 23 percent for coal. Consumption has risen for a decade because gas was relatively cheap until the late 1990s and generates fewer pollutants and greenhouse gases than coal or oil. But even with a drilling boom under way, domestic production lags demand and environmentalists are opposing new LNG projects.
Veggie "biodiesel" buses are cool with touring bands these days, and sometimes the music also includes a lecture on the benefits of this low-emission fuel. Top players with biodiesel bus conversions include Neil Young, Dave Matthews and Jack Johnson.
I always found it amusing that New York Yankee slugger Joe DiMaggio—"Joltin" Joe," as the sportscasters dubbed him—went on after retirement to stump for kitchen coffee makers. But one thing Mr. Coffee never jolted us with were the real facts about America’s favorite hot beverage.
Americans are putting more of the other-other white meat—fish—on the table than ever before. The average person eats 15 pounds per year. That’s probably good news for a country grappling with growing rates of obesity and heart disease. Eating fish has complex environmental consequences, but several organizations help consumers isolate a range of tasty, sustainable options.
To most casual drinkers, coffee has as much to do with songbirds as chalk does to cheese, but a growing movement centering on coffee’s many political dimensions is beginning, like the caffeine in the cup, to wake up a disinterested public.
Environmentalists are incensed at draft regulations proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last week calling on older coal-fired power plants to be judged on hourly pollution output as opposed to the current annual standard. Under the proposed change to the controversial New Source Review program, power plants would be able to emit more pollution than is currently allowed by simply operating for more hours.
According to the results of a recently conducted Harris Interactive Poll, nearly three-quarters of American adults agree that protecting the environment is important and standards cannot be too high. Meanwhile, almost half of the 1,200+ respondents surveyed believe the federal government should get more involved in environmental protection. Only one-fifth feel there is too much environmental regulation currently.
With consumers facing rising gasoline costs and skyrocketing prices for home heating oil this winter, the debate over the short- and long-term future of America’s energy supply rages on. Some observers point out that it’s getting tougher for environmentalists to distinguish among sources of energy that are acceptable and those that should be met with picket lines. This question is being raised with regard to the once universally despised specter of nuclear power, and it’s also being applied to liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage facilities.