National Geographic Society

By Catherine Zandonella, M.P.H.

My mother-in-law notes that my two precious darling children are, at times, a bit unruly. I fully accept that the cause of their boisterousness is my parenting style. Nevertheless, I am intrigued by a recent scientific study suggesting that chemicals in our environment can influence the brain development and behavior of future generations.

The study found that pregnant rats exposed to a fungicide called vinclozolin could pass down changes in certain brain genes to their third generation of offspring-their grandchildren. Some of the altered genes are suspected of contributing to conditions such as schizophrenia, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and Alzheimer's.

The researchers, led by Michael Skinner, a molecular and cell biologist at Washington State University, published their findings November 18, 2008 in the journal PLoS ONE. They found that those third-generation rats had altered behaviors, and that the changes in behavior and gene activity differed between males and females. Males became more hyperactive, while females became more anxious.

The chemical vinclozolin is a fungicide used on fruits and vegetables, and is a known endocrine disruptor. You may run into it as an ingredient in Scotts Vorlan EG, which is used to treat flowers and fruit trees. Skinner and his team suspect that the hormone-like action of vinclozolin disrupts the turning on and off of genes in both the reproductive cells of the embryonic rats being exposed and their pregnant mothers. These gene changes are called epigenetic because they involve the molecules that govern the turning on and off of gene activity rather than alterations of the DNA itself.

These changes in gene expression can then be passed on to offspring. Previously Skinner's team found that vinclozolin enhanced susceptibility to disease among members of the third generation, but this was the first study to look at brain gene activity and behavior.

Skinner cautions that the study as it was designed cannot prove that the gene changes directly caused the rats anxiety-like behaviors. The rats' parents were exposed to vinclozolin while in the womb, and may have treated their offspring differently, giving them less affection, for example, than unexposed rats give their young.

Nevertheless, the fact that exposure to synthetic chemical compounds can cause changes in behavior that we might pass on to our children and even grandchildren suggests that we should avoid purchasing or using harmful chemicals in cleaning products, lawn and garden applications, and other products at home and in the workplace. For my part, I hope my children are rowdy because they're young, and not because of any chemicals that their grandmother may have encountered.

I miss daylight. It's hard to get up before the sun rises to exercise, or to leave work in the afternoon darkness. One of my favorite celebrations of the year is of the Winter Solstice, which marks, within a few days of each other, both the earliest sunset and the shortest day of the year.

But I do appreciate the seasonal rhythms of darkness and light, day and night. And I love a night sky, its vastness awash with stars or lit up by a big harvest moon. And so I was moved by Verlyn Klinkenborg's cover story in National Geographic's November issue, "The End of Night." It's not often one reads about light pollution and its effects on living things. Light is a powerful biological force, according to scientists, acting for many species as a magnet, drawing seabirds, for example, to the light from gas flares on marine oil platforms, and prompting swans to migrate earlier than is optimal for nesting. Sadly, nesting sea turtles, which prefer dark beaches, find fewer and fewer of them on which to nest. Their hatchlings, which would normally move themselves toward the brighter sea horizon are confused by artificial lighting beyond the beach and are lost by the hundreds of thousands every year.

"In most cities," Klinkenborg writes, "the sky looks as though it has been emptied of stars." New York City scores a nine on the nine-point Bortle Dark-Sky Scale, according to the International Dark Sky Association, which has pushed for city and state legislation to turn the lights down.

New York has, in fact, begun to dim down. The State Assembly passed legislation in June requiring that new outdoor lighting have shields that reduce glare and waste. Other measures -- to require full streetlight shields and motion detectors in all commercial and government buildings, and to mandate more efficiently lighted billboards - are now under consideration. The business community may be a bit ahead of the politicians on these matters. Several of the city's newest skyscrapers incorporate cutting-edge technologies that appeal to both environmentalists and those eager to keep energy costs down. Landlords have also found that meeting stiffer energy-efficiency standards in their new and refurbished buildings is a selling point with tenants, especially those that pay their own electricity bills.

For our part, Green Guide just moved into a space with just one light switch for the whole floor. It's not that large a floor, but it feels strange to not be able to turn the light off in my office when I leave. Worse still, what an awful waste for me to have to light the whole floor when I am the only one in the office. I have an LED desk lamp, which helps on these late-fall afternoons, as my desk is in a dark corner (LED lamps are particularly energy efficient). And hopefully we'll eventually be able to afford a lighting retrofit that would allow for zone lighting, motion sensors, timers and more.

In the meantime, I'm encouraged to see New York join the many other cities that are taking steps to save energy and cut down on light pollution. It may be a long, long time before we get to see Venus from our rooftops, but perhaps if we've got it in our mind's eye we'll keep working toward reaching that goal some day...or night.

by Mary Logan Barmeyer

We've heard again and again that it's time to kick the plastic water bottle habit and head back to the tap. Despite evidence that our tap water is highly regulated and just as safe as bottled, news about pharmaceuticals and chemicals in drinking water or pipes that may contain lead, or even just bad tasting tap, can make us wary of getting our water straight from the faucet. Although most water filters can't eliminate every contaminant, they can help reduce them. But are unrecyclable water filters any better for the environment than recyclable plastic bottles? Not if you can recycle them.

Zero Technologies recently launched a recycling program for filters, the only program of its kind in the country. Ninety percent of the materials in its ZeroWater filters are recyclable--even the filter media are recycled for use in wastewater-treatment plants--and they can be shipped back to the company in their original packaging in exchange for a discount on replacements. (Zero is also one of the only companies to offer filter bottles made of glass, although the ABS plastic used in their other products has been tested to ensure no chemicals leach out).

ZeroWater's carbon and ion-exchange filter reduces dissolved solids in water down to zero parts per million, which you can test with a total dissolved solids (TDS) meter that comes with the filter. The filters are also NSF certified to remove lead, chlorine taste and odor, mercury, hydrogen sulfide, chromium, aluminum, zinc and iron.

But remember, you may not need a water filter at all. Your annual Consumer Confidence Report, which you can get through your water supplier, will tell you about local water quality, and if you're worried about lead in your pipes, check with your health department or contact a specialist to test your household water.

ZeroWater filters are available online at www.zerowater.com. Half-gallon pitchers are $39.99, and larger 2.5 gallon bottles are $119.99 for glass or $99.99 for plastic.

By Wendy Gordon

I was curious to see how Wikipedia defined "sprawl" and sure enough, it was appropriately harsh:

"Urban sprawl, also known as suburban sprawl, is the spreading of a city and its suburbs over rural land at the fringe of an urban area...The term urban sprawl generally has negative connotations due to the health and environmental issues that sprawl creates. Residents of sprawling neighborhoods tend to emit more pollution per person and suffer more traffic fatalities. Sprawl is controversial, with supporters claiming that consumers prefer lower density neighborhoods and that sprawl does not necessarily increase traffic. Sprawl is also linked with increased obesity since walking and bicycling are not viable commuting options. Sprawl negatively impacts land and water quantity and quality and may be linked to a decline in social capital."
Earlier this month, in its battle to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, California passed a new law, the nation's first, which takes direct aim at urban sprawl and the amount of time people spend in their cars. The number of miles driven in California has increased 50 percent faster than the rate of population growth, largely because people have to drive
greater distances in their daily lives. With passenger vehicles being the biggest single source of carbon dioxide in California, producing nearly one-third of the state's total, citizens there felt something had to be done.

The new law requires emissions-reduction goals for 2020 and 2035 be assigned to each of California's 17 metropolitan planning areas. Local governments will then devise strategies to meet the new targets. Zoning laws may likely be modified so developers can build new housing closer to where people work. And improving mass transit will be a priority so commuters don't have to rely so much on cars. The bill contains significant incentives, including the promise of substantial federal and state money to regions whose plans pass muster.

This anti-sprawl measure is the latest in a string of initiatives from the California Legislature, including a 2002 law to greatly reduce carbon emissions from automobiles, and a 2006 law requiring that one-fifth of California's energy come from wind and other renewable sources. In the absence of federal action on climate change, we are deeply indebted to states like California, and cities across the country, which are taking leadership action on this vital national security issue.