Have you ever wondered what happens when you flush your toilet? In Kenya? If you live in one of Kenya’s urban slums then your toilet does not flush. Your toilet could be a plastic bag known as a flying toilet or a bucket whose untreated contents are later emptied directly into your environment. During rainy periods residents - particularly women and children - become susceptible to deadly waterborne illnesses like typhoid and cholera.

So now that you're completely grossed out, I hope you find this idea refreshing... What if each flush meant money for small businesses and fertilizer acceptable for use in agriculture?

A team of recent MIT Sloan School or Business graduate are out to permanently reduce sanitation-related disease by making sanitation profitable. Their company, Sanergy (“sanitation” plus “energy”) has been called “the single most innovative sustainability initiative on the planet”.

The Sanergy team is building a network of low-cost sanitation centers in urban slums. Sanergy’s “Fresh Life” toilets are painted a bright turquoise blue color and have been designed so that they are easy to clean. The toilets are offered as franchises to Kenyan entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurs, who receive training from Sanergy charge residents a small fee to use the Fresh Life toilets. Sanergy also plans to sell the Fresh Life toilets to landlords and organizations that attract high concentrations of people such as schools, restaurants, and churches, and will be offered to customers as a value-added good.

Sanergy’s pilot toilet  is utilized by the students of a Bridge International Academies school in Nairobi slum Lunga Lunga. Another one opened on International Toilet Day in Nairobi’s informal settlement Mukuru Kwa Njenga.

The Fresh Life toilets are serviced daily by waste collectors and the waste is transported in sealed containers to a centralized biogas digester. The biodigester converts the human waste to methane gas energy, which is then combusted in CHP engines to generate electricity. Once Sanergy has more toilets (and more waste) the company plans to sell the energy back to the grid. The output from the biogas will be processed into fertilizer and sold to Kenya’s farms.

In recognition of the company’s potential to scale, USAID’s Development Innovation Ventures program recently awarded Sanergy a $100,000 grant. Maura O’Neill, the Chief Innovation Officer of USAID, said that USAID is supporting Sanergy because “We believe they have a real promising model that, if works, could scale to solve sanitation problems for millions globally.” If Sanergy reaches its milestones then USAID will award Sanergy an additional $1M and $3M to help the company scale. Indeed the Sanergy model has the potential to be replicated around the world, anywhere where people need access to sanitation solutions. Keep up with all of the recent developments on the company’s website as they “turn sh*t into gold”.

Primary season is heating up, starting with the Iowa Caucus earlier this week. It was a squeaker, that brought new possible frontrunners into the news cycle and ended some Presidential dreams. Coming into Iowa, candidates stumped on a range of issues, including sustainability and climate change. Here's where the 2012 hopefuls stand:

• Who says your vote doesn't count? In the Iowa caucuses, Mitt Romney claimed victory by a margin of just eight votes. Wonder where this guy stands on climate change and sustainability issues? In October, Rick Perry released a video accusing Romney of adopting Obama-style policies on carbon emissions. While that's totally true, Perry omitted the fact that Romney later withdrew his support, citing economic concerns. Romney has criticized Obama over the government’s failed investment in the solar energy company Solyndra. But during his last presidential campaign he said he supported the $4 billion the US invested in green energy, and said he would increase it five-fold to about $20 billion a year. Additionally, as Governor of Massachusetts he launched the ($15 million) MA Green Energy Fund. A former Republican Capitol Hill energy aide has said of Romney's position on environmental issues: “It’s like a box of chocolates, you don’t know what you’re going to get. Frankly, there’s a bunch of people who are tired of getting a box of chocolates.”
• Iowa runner-up Rick Santorum has a long record after sixteen years in Congress. Upon review, the Mother Nature Network concluded, “Santorum is nothing if not consistent — the question is whether or not you agree with him.” He has consistently supported drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and opposed environmental regulations. The former U.S. Congressman and U.S. Senator was on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show on June 8. When asked about his views on climate change Santorum replied, "It's just an excuse for more government control of your life, and I've never been for any scheme or even accepted the junk science behind the whole narrative."
• U.S. Representative Ron Paul, who came in third in the Iowa Caucus, is a cyclist, but has said “I don't ride my bike because I think I'm destroying the environment by driving my car; I ride it because it's a great way to be outdoors and enjoy the environment.” Despite that statement, he has co-sponsored bills that would offer tax breaks to Americans who commute by bicycle and use public transportation. However, Paul has said that if elected President he wouldn’t do anything about climate change because "we're not going to be very good at regulating the weather.” He does, however, think “something is afoot” with the planet.
• In 2008, former Vice President Al Gore approached Newt Gingrich about appearing in a television ad with then Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Gingrich agreed, and appeared in the ad calling for action to address climate change. Under fire from other candidates, it’s a decision he now describes today as “the dumbest single thing I’ve done.” Today, Gingrich claims he "never favored cap and trade,” a policy where companies could buy and sell credits that allow them to put certain gasses into the atmosphere. Brooks Jackson (factcheck.org) says "It's true [Gingrich has] never favored the approach taken by Democrats, but he said in 2007 that he would 'strongly support' cap and trade if combined with "a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions."
• So where do the other candidates stand? Many candidates have been outspoken on their feelings towards the Environmental Protection Agency. As Governor of Texas, Rick Perry brought a (losing) lawsuit against the EPA when the Supreme Court ruled that the organization has a duty to regulate carbon pollution. On the other hand, Jon Huntsman has never shied away from expressing his feelings that science should be leading the dicussion on climate change. In August 2011 Huntsman went as far as to criticize other GOP candidates in an ABC interview by saying, "I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science, and, therefore, in a losing position." More recently, however, Huntsman has expressed that science cannot actually give us enough definitive information to properly form policies that address climate change. While he might disagree with whether or not climate change is an actual problem - he can agree with other GOP candidates on the existence of the Enviromental Protection Agency, calling for an end to its "regulatory reign of terror".

To sum it up, it appears that most GOP candidates feel that addressing climate change and environmental regulation are things the government should be doing a lot less of.

And now the for the latest action in the Gulf oil spill accountability blame game – BP is alleging in federal court  that Halliburton intentionally destroyed evidence that would have exposed their negligent and procedurally unfounded cementing process used on the Macondo well. According to BP, Halliburton destroyed test samples that would show the cement used to seal the well was unstable.

Each one of these multi-billion dollar companies that have individually been found liable in some way, not just BP, are looking for any possible 'out' that would save them millions in damages. Even BP is winning legal battles and reaping the economic benefits that accompany a judgment in their favor. BP is due to receive $250 million in a settlement with Cameron International, a company used by BP to design the blowout preventer. “Today’s settlement allows BP and Cameron to put our legal issues behind us and move forward to improve safety in the drilling industry,” says BP CEO Bob Dudley. Now Cameron is removed from the chain of responsibility and BP makes more empty pledges to continue the clean-up.  Where is the progress going to begin?

The point I'm trying to make here is that all this time has passed and the people of America stand as the pawns in the blame game being put on by BP, Halliburton, Transocean and countless others. Where do the people come in? What about the environment? Instead of trying to fight for less in damages, these corporate giants should be fighting for the good of the people hurt by their shared negligence. The fact of the matter is that all has not been made right in the Gulf; actually, no one has stepped up to even come close.  BP continues to have a hand in the claims honoring process; Transocean won’t even take responsibility for their proven fault; and Halliburton may now be found to have intentionally destroyed incriminating evidence.  Give me a break! Corporations, step up to the plate and accept responsibility for what you have done.

Oh, and if you're hoping our friends in Washington will help officiate the blame game, think again: current legislation aiming to bring billions of dollars in fines directly to the affected states is being held up by an influential Ohio congressman.

Sushi chef Bun Lai may just be the most sustainable chef out there. Bun, who grew up in Connecticut and spent much of his time  at the beach, is now the owner of Miya's, the top sushi spot in New Haven.

But this story isn't about enterprise; Miya's is not your conventional sushi restaurant and how Lai put his sushi spot on the map is what will really blow you away.

Bun had always been a proponent for sustainability and eating the right food and for the right reasons, but one day along the Long Island sound, Bun took this to a new level. He and a friend were flipping rocks and looking for the little green crabs he had grown custom to from his youth, when he stumbled upon something new...something different. Bun Lai found a crab he had never seen before and peaked by his curiosity, he decided to take this specimen back home with him and do a little research. As it turns out, Mr. Lai came across the Asian shore crab, one of the many invasive species that plague or society and cost our government close to $120 billion in damages. So what did Bun do?

Well, most people wouldn't have been as curious as Bun and probably would have just ignored this new crab, but Bun is not like everyone. He found something he was not accustomed to and, after doing some research,  he figured out a way to put this problem crab to good use. Lai excavated the meat from the crab and added it to a new sushi roll he called the Kanibaba, which is now his restaurants biggest hit.

Bun Lai has found a way to kill two birds (er, crabs) with one stone. Not only does he help get rid of an invasive species that is damaging a delicate ecosystem, he also makes a delicious dish that is loved by the people of New Haven. It's both profitable and environmentally friendly. This is sustainability in its purest form.

Bun Lai is not content with only one sustainable dish, and he has continued to push the envelope in terms of turning a negative into a positive.  Lai uses the Dead Man's Fingers, an invasive seaweed, as the base of his very popular Miso soup. Bun Lai's choice to use local invasive species as items on his menu, while doing away with traditional fish such as tuna, eel and shrimp, is a very progressive move that is paying off. Hopefully Bun will serve as an inspiration for other chefs who want to push into new frontiers of sustainable dining.

If you haven’t already heard, there’s a rare feeling of success within the environmental community this week. The State Department has decided to delay the decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline until 2013.  Though the pipeline is not definitively rejected, the delay will allow more time to explore the project's potential impact before a decision is made, and possibly re-route the 1,700 mile pipeline around environmentally-sensitive areas.

This is the issue that prompted 1,252 protesters to get arrested outside the White House during the summer, and another 12,000 to form a giant circle around the White House last week. All the signs had pointed to the pipeline getting approved - a decision that could have forever altered the Obama administration's already frayed relationship with the environmental community. Now, the President faces criticism that he put politics over job creation.

House Speaker John Boehner blasted the president, saying “By punting on this project, the president has made clear that campaign politics are driving U.S. policy decisions--at the expense of American jobs," Boehner said. "The current project has already been deemed environmentally sound, and calling for a new route is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt to avoid upsetting the president’s political base before the election.”

Activist and pipeline protest pioneer Bill McKibben had another take. “The people spoke, loudly, and thankfully the president heard…since we get few even partial victories on climate, this is a big day.”

The President did not directly concede that the protests drove the State Department's decision. But he did reference "a number of concerns have been raised through a public process" when stating his support for the delay.

The pipeline would bring oil from Canada’s tar sands to the Gulf of Mexico and built through the part of Nebraska that is home to the Nebraska Sand Hills, a thin layer of grass-covered dunes that lay atop the Ogallala aquifer. The aquifer and the highly permeable Sand Hills underlie 27% of the irrigated land in the U.S. and is a vital part of Nebraska’s environment. Should the pipeline ever leak or open, environmentalists say the damage to the aquifer would be irreversible. Nebraska ranchers had even called for it being re-routed. But there is equally strong support for the pipeline from the oil and gas industry, as well as labor unions. According to Boehner, the pipeline will create 20,000 American jobs.

With so many special interests having a stake in the pipeline, the non-decision has implications well beyond even that vast expanse of the aquifer as the decision will rest in the hands of whomever the President may be in 2013 when it comes to the table again. Both supporters and critics agree that the President listened to environmentalists on this issue, which may point to a major shift in the political dynamics of Washington.

To most people, Coachella means cutting-edge music, celebrity sightings and three days of unadulterated fun (well, six, now that the perennially sold-out festival has been extended to back-to-back weekends).

But the residents of nearby La Quinta, CA are calling festival goers "the people who destroy our environment", and they could keep Coachella from getting a permit to hold the event next year.  They've asked Indio, the city that hosts the festival, to assess the need for a thorough "environmental review" of the event  under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Such a review would evaluate the environmental impact of traffic, noise and pollution generated by the festival and would last well into the Spring or beyond. Therefore, the status of next year's Coachella (scheduled for the weekends of April 13-15 and April 20-22) is now up in the California desert air.

In response, Indio agreed to postpone signing a new two-year contract with Goldenvoice, the promoter of the event, and asked for two weeks to put together a report about how the concerns of La Quinta residents are being handled.

Coachella started in 1996 and has boasted an impressive line-up every year since with artists like Radiohead, Madonna, Jay-Z and Daft Punk. Last year it sold out in less than two weeks and welcomed over 75,000 music fans from all over the world. Indio and La Quinta residents have complained about the festival in past years; including traffic, late-night rental house parties, and even “riding horses without permission.” According to mydesert.com, “Barbara Bishop, president of the Mountain View Country Club Homeowners Association, said 80 percent of the community's security incidents happen during the Stagecoach and Coachella weekends.” (Stagecoach is a county music festival held on the same grounds). With the announcement that Coachella would be extended to a second weekend, many residents of the area are saying they've had enough.

When Coachella started, La Quinta was mostly vacant lots and desert. Now, it's been developed into private gated communities of mansions surrounding golf courses. The fact that it is a wealthy area experiencing a population boom clearly plays into the local politics - the economic stimulus that comes from hosting the event means little to the well-off residents.

I remember last year waiting in line to enter the Coachella camping grounds. There were neon words of "peace, love, and music" all over the cars. Everyone was blasting tunes and getting amped; ready to let go of all worries and enter in a new world of three days of pure fun. Little did I realize that by letting go of my real world stress, it was creating stress for folks in the surrounding towns.

When I left Coachella, I saw all those neon signs on the ground, the overflowing trash cans, and could still hear the echoes of electronic sounds at 6 AM. My soul could also hear the citizens of La Quinta calling us "the people who destroy our environment." So when I go back to Coachella this year -- whatever weekend it ends up happening -- I will make sure to bring my raver sunglasses, and also my respect for the land and the people living on it.

Fans of moe. and Guster can feel pretty good about the bands they love. Both have been model citizens when it comes to supporting causes and various organizations. Guster's Adam Gardner even formed his own non-profit (Reverb). So it's no wonder that when Patagonia launched the Patagonia Music Collective, they were two of the first bands on board. The Collective raises money for environmental organizations through the sale of downloads.

In a pair of videos produced by HeadCount, members of each band talk about the songs  they donated and the organizations they chose to support.

The video with moe. also features a live performance of their song "One Life," played at the All Good Music Festival this past summer as part of a "Challenge Set" - a bonus set played to reward fans for downloading the track at least 1,000 times. Proceeds from "One Life" support the Rainforest Action Network.

Guster's track is a live recording of "Satellite" from a performance at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Gardner and bandmate Luke Reynolds speak of the performance and of Reverb, which downloads of the song support.

Also included here is a video with G. Love and Samantha Stollenwerck that we released over the summer.

So enjoy the videos. And if you like a tune, throw down a buck and download it. You'll feel good every time it comes  up on your iPod.

Click here to download tracks.

When Barack Obama was elected president, many environmentalists thought "their guy" was in the White House. Three years into his presidency though, many are so disappointed in his policies, that they've taken to getting arrested just to get his attention.

In fact, 1,253 were arrested last month for "blocking the road to the White House" including environmentalist Bill McKibben and actress Daryl Hannah. Some kept vigil in front of the White House for two weeks (check out this video.) According to some, this protest was the biggest civil disobedience action since 1977 and the most sustained of efforts since those of the civil rights movement.

So what's all this about?

A motherload of oil is sitting in "Tar Sands" in Canada, and there's a proposal to build a $13 billion dollar Keystone XL pipeline to get that oil to the U.S. Because it crosses an international border, the President can decide whether or not to approve it, without having to go before Congress.

The pipeline would stretch over 1,700 miles through many US states (including my home state of South Dakota) and is more than twice the length of the Trans-Alaska system.

Critics believe the way the oil is extracted from Alberta’s tar sands is detrimental to the environment and will result in more greenhouse gas emissions per barrel of final product versus the production of conventional oil. They also say it poses a threat to the Northern High Plains Aquifer system, which supplies 30 percent of water used in the U.S. for agriculture and irrigation. The nation’s top environmental organizations - who sometimes can't agree on anything - are unified against the pipeline.

However, supporters of the pipeline and a government-issued report say if it's not built, that oil would be transported to refineries by tankers and barges if not the Keystone XL.

The final decision is set to be made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the President by the end of the year, and the last State Department hearing will be in early October--so expect more "civil disobedience" in Phase Two, if you will. The fight is far from over.

But all indications are the pipeline will get approved. The State Department released its final environmental assessment earlier this month. The report found there would be no significant impact to the vast majority of resources along the corridor. According to the State Department’s analysis, the likelihood of potential spills is limited.

Environmentalists are not convinced. They point to the fact that The TransCanada pipeline currently running through the Upper Midwest has already experienced 14 spills since opening operations just over a year ago, including a spill in North Dakota of 21,000 gallons.

Obviously there are will be a lot of factors ultimately involved in the Obama Administration's decision whether to support this project or not. How much would this pipeline help? How much will this decision affect his re-election campaign? If he doesn't support it, does he risk being painted as anti-jobs and hurting the economy? If he does, will he further erode support among his "base"? Only time will tell but unfortunately, time is running out.

When you normally think of space and the infinite-ness of the universe it’s hard to imagine that it's getting crowded up there. But that exactly what’s happening. Recently, scientist in the US, have warned NASA that the amount of ‘space junk’ orbiting the earth may be reaching a ‘tipping point’.

Over the past 25 years many nations have introduced a myriad of new satellites and spacecraft. These orbiting technological wonders are eventually abandoned and left to circle the world at tremendous speeds. Even in the immensity of space, these discarded pieces of space trash pose a danger to space exploration.

In 2007 the Chinese government demonstrated a weapon that could destroy a satellite, creating over 150, 000 pieces of debris that now circle the earth. This is in addition to the debris created by unintentional satellite collisions that have occurred over the past few years.

Estimates put the amount of debris that can be tracked from earth at around 22,000 pieces. However it takes only small pieces to do damage to spacecraft or the International Space Station. In recent years, the space station has had to alter its orbit in order to avoid space junk. The amount and severity of the space debris was so great that astronauts and cosmonauts on the International Space Station were forced to take emergency measures and board the escape pods back to earth in the case of a terminal collision with the junk.

It’s easy to see how humans have applied our environmental policy’s to space. The idea that space is an endless garbage dump where there are no consequences to our endless pollution has backfired on us in a big way. Without better planning, we soon may find ourselves trapped on our own planet, until we figure out a way to clean up the universe.

A story is unfolding that has environmentalists, civil liberties advocates, and music lovers all taking notice. Last week, federal agents executed search warrants on Gibson guitar factories in Nashville and Memphis where they seized guitars, electronic files, and multiple pallets of wood. Why? They are accused of importing endangered wood to make guitars out of, an offense that - due to a recent amendment to hundred-year-old law, is basically equivalent to serving a snow leopard for dinner.

Gibson, however, has a different take on things, and claims they are a victim of indiscriminate acts by the government and have been denied due process. According to a press release issued by Gibson, the Department of Justice claims that the wood, which comes from India, is illegal only because it wasn't "finished by Indian workers." Basically, if the guitars had been made of the same wood but manufactured by Indian workers in India instead of by American workers on U.S. soil, there would be no problem.

Gibson's CEO Henery Juszkiewicz says the company has done nothing wrong:

"We're in this really incredible situation. We have been implicated in wrongdoing and we haven't been charged with anything," he says. "Our business has been injured to millions of dollars. And we don't even have a court we can go to and say, 'Look, here's our position.'"

The Gibson press release notes that this is the second time the DOJ's Fish and Wildlife Service has raided their factories.

In 2009, more than a dozen agents with automatic weapons invaded the Gibson factory in Nashville.The Government seized guitars and a substantial amount of ebony fingerboard blanks from Madagascar. To date, 1 year and 9 months later, criminal charges have NOT been filed, yet the Government still holds Gibson’s property. Gibson has obtained sworn statements and documents from the Madagascar government and these materials, which have been filed in federal court, show that the wood seized in 2009 was legally exported under Madagascar law and that no law has been violated.

The Justice Department isn't making any comments yet, but the Washington based Environmental Investigation Agency has concluded through independent investigations that in 2009, Gibson did indeed violate the Lacey Act, a law dating back to 1900 that in 2008 was amended to make it "unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce any plant, with some limited exceptions, taken or traded in violation of the laws of the United States, a State, or an Indian Tribe, or any foreign law that protects plants."

Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood.

"Gibson clearly understood the risks involved," says Johnson. "Was on the ground in Madagascar getting a tour to understand whether they could possibly source illegally from that country. And made a decision in the end that they were going to source despite knowing that there was a ban on exports of ebony and rosewood."

The company denies the allegations made by the EIA and asserts that they stopped importing wood from Madagascar in 2009.