Top Commuter Bikes in America
By Pippa Sorley
Filed Under Green Living, Sustainable Style | 2 Comments
Waylon Lewis, Founder and Editor of ElephantJournal.com, spells out what to look for when looking for a commuter bicycle.
With gas prices continuing to fluctuate like a roller coaster and the economy spiraling downwards, what better way to bring a smile to our every day than hopping on your bike and making your trip to work or the grocery store a true adventure??
Join the hundreds of other trend setters who are “biking the talk” and check out some of these fun, hip, and comfortable biking tips from the inimitable Waylon Lewis…
What’s the best commuter bike in America right now?
A commuter bike is defined, loosely, as a light, affordable, utilitarian bike fit for daily commuting. Qualities of the the winner will combine 1) upright riding position and practicality in riding and hauling groceries, schoolbooks etc. 2) style 3) at least 7 gears 4) utilitarian: gotta be compatible with rack, fenders (as well as bell and lights, which are always easy for any bike). Internal hub is nice: less maintenance, and seamless shifting.
Any bikes that I’m forgetting, just comment below with link.
First among contenders for that elusive ideal commuter bike: a heavy retro Euro beauty: Jorg & Olif. Pricey, but looks to be well worth it. Heavy, but gorgeous–your inner Cary Grant or Audrey Hepburn will wake you each morning and demand you dress up and bike down to your local cafe. Handlebars reach a bit far back–making the riding position almost too upright–but overall Jorg & Olif has gotta rate 9 outta 10.
A new fave, however, is the recently-released Gary Fisher Simple City. It’s a little heavy, but way lighter than Mr. Jorg & Miss Olif. It’s lovely, got requisite comfy seat, upright riding position (but not too upright), rackable back and chain guard to save that dress/pants from the oily, ripping grip of Mr. Chain. Still, it’s a lil’pricey for the 8 gear, 3 ain’t enough, so I gotta save up for that one, I’ve been riding a lovely…
…black Electra Amsterdam, which is sweet-looking, comfortable (though again slightly too upright) but heavy and needs a trip to the shop every other week (literally, just ask ‘em). So why’d I buy such a clunker (note: newer versions with Brooks saddles are probably better all-around than mine, which I got a year back)? I love the style, I love the company…and, oh yeah, my…
Bianchi Milano (in black) got stole. The Milano doesn’t get much respect–but it should. It’s good looking (red walled tires a bonus), sleek, light as air and (unlike the three above) ready to jump off a curb and hit the hills with abandon. Perhaps the ideal combo of good-to-look-at and eminently functional.
New to this list: the slick cool Paul Frank City Bike. Only three gears, but sweet-lookin’–in fact, our stylee videographer, Alex King, rides one he bought at Boulder’s Full Cycle. It’s light-ish, but no off-curbing mayhem for Mr. Frank.
Two “I coulda been a contendahs”: Biomega (gorgeous, if you love the Apple Air [which is kinda eco, btw] you’ll love this high-priced, fancy, hard to replace parts since it’s so unique) and Kronan (gorgeous, 5-speed max, colorfully classically European, stylee, like Jorg & Olif, super-heavy and pricey).
If you’re rich and your money’s under your mattress, rather than in the stockmarket, check out the A.N.T. Their site is bike porn for daily commuters.
My latest favorite: The Masi Urban commuter bike, it’s the coolest yet–light enough like the Milano to jump off a curb and not feel like half the bike’s gonna fall apart–stylish enough to give the Simple City a run for its money, affordable, cool (and–ouch!–hard) Brooksish seat, flat metal fenders (super-stylish), rack-compatible, cork (cool, and eco-ish) handlebars…barely a chain guard, which ain’t ideal, but it’s enough to keep your pans or skirt from turning black–an internal (commuter bikes must have internal, or maintenance and inconvenient gear-switching may send you back to your car) 7-gear hub (hopefully they’ll go with sturdy Nexus hub next time ’round) and last but not least the Masi’s got quick, but grippy tires fit for summertime (and the biking is easy) or winter (and black ice is lurking ’round every bike path corner). I’m in–despite being broke, starving, my mortgage on the line–I ran out and bought one this week (if I’d gone another month on my lovely but heavy and fragile Electra Amsterdam I’d hafta learn to play the violin).
So the Masi may take the cake, thus far, in the pleasurable, leisurely race to get out of the car nirvana–but if you want to be truly green, and save some green, there’s no home like craigslist for affordable, old school bikes built as solidly as any of the above.
Posted on November 25, 2008 |
TOP ECO SKI HILLS IN NORTH AMERICA
By Pippa Sorley
Filed Under Green Living, News & Reviews, Sustainable Style, The Big Picture | 2 Comments
When winter finally rolls around, I’m like a kid on Christmas eve. I count down the days and wait with bated breath for the “freshies” to fall. Every snowy morning, I eagerly check the daily snow report to see where the best powder stashes might be. I admit it: I love skiing chairlift-operated ski hills. I thrive on rippin’ it down the Vails and Aspens of the world.
Nevertheless, sometimes I wonder: am I a hypocrite for supporting an industry that requires so much energy and land-use to operate? Is it possible to be an environmentalist and simultaneously a downhill ski addict?
Sure, I’ve done the back country hut trips, but nothing is quite like the high of slaloming freshly groomed “corduroy” first thing in the morning. Perhaps, it’s the security blanket that patrolled ski hills offer, or maybe it’s the fact that I’m a weekend warrior who doesn’t have time to hike 3 hours every time I want to make steep turns. But, if this makes me a hypocrite, then the least I can do is to try to be a mindful hypocrite.
So, how can I be more mindful? I can take the time to honor the majestic land and sublime beauty around me; I can take the time to give thanks to the massive swaths of trees that were cleared just so little ‘ole me – and 12 million other Colorado snow riders – can have the privilege to barrel down powdery slopes with pure ecstasy and delight. But perhaps most importantly, I can spend my dollar where it counts : by supporting ski resorts and businesses that are leading the path toward “skistainability”.
CREAM OF THE SUSTAINABLE SKI CROP:
When it comes to environmental policy, Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) blows other ski resorts out of the water. Driven by the arson episode in Vail by eco-activists, Aspen and other mindful ski businesses started to question the lack of environmental scrutiny within their $4 billion dollar industry. The “point” finally “tipped” in 1997, when ASC President & CEO Patrick O’Donnell – who previously ran Patagonia – installed its very first “Environmental Affairs” department, directed by Auden Schendler, who has spearheaded programs and initiatives that go way beyond green. In fact, his “Sustainability Report” was the first of its kind within the ski industry, and has garnered attention from consumers and competing ski resorts alike. ASC is one of the first businesses in America to be ISO-14001-certified. To me, this sounds like a type of oil change, but it represents one of the most stringent third-party certification programs that demand strict criteria for environmental responsibility.
“Climate change should drive everything we do,” says Schendler, who previously worked at the Aspen-based think tank, Rocky Mountain Institute. “We make our living off the environment. The least we can do is take care of it.” In light of this commitment, Aspen Ski Co has taken a plethora of steps to reduce their impact, and, in doing so, have managed to impress such environmental watch dogs as Natural Resources Defense Council and United States Green Building Council.
Plans are in development for a massive new base village in Snowmass – a $400 million dollar project – in which all buildings will be 30% more energy-efficient than required by code. And, ASC is one of the first ski resorts to offset 100% of its energy use with wind power. Here are some other impressive examples of how ASC is leading the way:
- Approximately 40% of facilities have been retrofitted for energy efficiency, including snowmaking guns at Snowmass, Buttermilk and Aspen Mountain.
- Established largest solar photovoltaic system in ski industry.
- 100% of snowcats use B20, a bio-diesel blend.
Aspen Ski Co. perfectly exemplifies what all other ski areas should be doing: truly walking the talk. So, how do other ski hills compare?
- Vail: in 1994, arsonists targeted Two Elks Restaurant in response to Vail’s expansion into a wetlands area now known as Blue Sky Basin. Since then, Vail, and other resorts, have learned a valuable lesson: that the environment and the integrity of ski resorts matter to their clientele. Following Aspen’s footsteps, Vail is starting to pay attention to their environment. Vail Resorts announced in August 2006 that they will offset 100% of its energy use by purchasing 152,000 megawatt-hours of wind energy from Boulder-based Renewable Choice Energy for its five mountain resorts (see below), specifically for its lodging properties, 125 retail locations and also its new headquarters in Broomfield, Colorado.
- Mammoth Mountain, CA sits on geothermal volcanic cauldron from which they will tap their energy use required for new development. They also run bio-diesel throughout their operation.
- Alta recently rebuilt their mid-mountain restaurant - the Waston Shelter – green with low-flush toilets, fluorescent lighting, and energy efficient windows.
- Jackson Hole, Wyoming runs two chair lifts on wind power.
- Because of their long-term sustainability plan and implementation of the Environmental Management System document in 1993, Whistler Blackcomb has won numerous awards, including the ski industry’s top prize in 2003 and 2005 for environmental excellence in ski resorts across North America. Their next goal is to reduce waste by 80% by end of 2008.
Originally written for elephant Journal by Pippa Sorley, 2007
Posted on November 18, 2008 |
Energy Tips: What to Look For When Buying Windows
By Andy Mazal
Filed Under Green Living | Leave a Comment
Seemingly, windows are simple devices designed for very simple purposes: to let light inside and to let you see outside. However, if you’ve ever purchased windows before you know that the illusion of simplicity disappears quickly once you begin to be confronted with all the choices you have to make, from the material the frame is made out of, to the “U-Factor”, Solar Heat Gain Coefficient, number of panes and films, and more. Making matters more complicated is that valid advice for one region might not apply to another region due to differences in climate. For example, a window in the Rocky Mountains needs to perform a very different job to a window in a hot humid climate.
First, let’s get something straight: no matter how much you spend on a window, it is very likely to be by far the weakest link in your home’s insulated building envelope. Even the best, most expensive and highest tech window will not even come close to insulating as well as the wall surrounding it. All the same, the choices you make in selecting a window can dramatically affect the energy consumption of your home and, just as important, your comfort. Here we’ll attempt to de-mystify the window buying process a bit.
Number of panes: This refers to the number of sheets of glass that make up a window. Old windows were single-paned, with only one thin piece of glass between the interior of a building and the outside world. These windows were horribly inefficient, with their main benefit being that they kept wind out, but did little to keep heat inside (or outside). The advent of dual pane windows improved the efficiency of a window dramatically by sandwiching a layer of air (or an inert gas) between the two panes. Today there are also windows with three panes as well which are even more efficient, but are also usually much more expensive. When buying windows today you’ll almost always be dealing with dual- or triple-paned windows; the only reason you would ever buy a single pane window today would be because it is required by zoning, most commonly in historic districts where the main concern is maintaining the historic character of the area.
Frame Materials: The material that the frame of a window is made of can have dramatic effects on performance and price. At the low-end, but very common, is vinyl. This is a great “bang for your buck” material as it’s cheap, easy to work with and does not transmit heat very well (which is good). However, it has a few disadvantages as well. First, you’re very limited in color: white or almond, in most cases. Secondly, vinyl is somewhat unstable and has a tendency to warp a little over time when exposed to extremes of heat and cold, which results in the window leaking air around the cracks more over time as well. All the same, millions and millions of vinyl-framed windows are installed every year, and they can be a great choice as a replacement window when replacing old, leaky inefficient windows. Even the cheapest off-the-shelf vinyl window will be far more efficient than a leaky 1960s or 1970s-era aluminum frame window, and especially an even older a single-pane window. Other materials run the gamut from wood to fiberglass to composite materials. All work well, and often the decision will be made based on cost and maintenance issues. For example, wood-framed windows look great and are quite efficient, but often cost more and require more maintenance — they have to be painted every few years. Another option we’re starting to see more and more of is “clad” windows which are sort of a hybrid: wood on the inside and clad with some other material such as aluminum or fiberglass on the outside. These exterior materials are often pre-finished from the factory and might never have to be painted at all.
However, even after you’ve decided on style, manufacturer and material, your job is not done yet. When you look at a new window you’ll see a large label with lots of strange numbers and statistics printed on it. At the least, you’ll see two Energy Performance Ratings: U-Factor and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC). You might also see numbers for Visible Transmittance (VT) and Air Leakage (AL). Here’s what all that means:
U-Factor: The U-Factor is a measure of a window’s resistance to heat flow expressed as a number between 0 and 1. The lower the number, the more effective it is at resisting heat flow, and thus, the better it insulates. In almost all cases you want to get that U-Factor down as low as you can, because in either hot or cold climates you want the window to insulate as well as it can to either keep heat outside or to keep heat inside. An extremely efficient window will have a U-Factor of around 0.15 but even if you aim for a U-Factor of 0.40 or 0.35, you’ll be doing well.
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC): This is a measure of how much solar radiation (i.e., heat) a window allows to pass through it. It is also expressed as a number between 0 and 1, with 0 being no solar heat is transmitted through the window and 1 being 100% of solar heat transmitted through it, although in most cases it will vary between 0.2 and 0.8. In this case, whether you want a lot or a little solar heat transmitted through the window will depend very much on where you live and what direction the window faces. In the cooler northern climates you will generally want your south-facing windows to have a higher SHGC (above 0.7) so you can take advantage of the passive heating effects of the sun during the cold winter months. In the warm southern latitudes you’ll want to choose windows with a much lower SHGC (below 0.4) since your biggest concern is usually keeping cool during the hot summer months. In fact, SHGC is even more important than U-Factor in hot southern climates, so if you live in a hot climate and have to choose based on cost, opt for a lower SHGC at the expense of a higher U-Factor if you must.
Visible Transmittance (VT): VT is the measure of the amount of visible light transmitted through the window. This number will vary between 0 (no light transmitted at all) to 1 (100% of light is transmitted) but because the VT rating includes the frame of the window, which obviously transmits no light through it, the number will generally be between 0.3 and 0.8. In most cases you want this number to be as high as it can be, since much of the point of having windows in the first place is to let in light, however there are certainly situations where you’d want to have less light transmitted, such as when glare is an issue.
Air Leakage (AL): This is a measure of the amount of air passing through the cracks in the window assembly, expressed as a cubic feet of air passing through a square foot of window. Although all windows that open will have some air leakage, it should be pretty obvious that this is a measure you’ll want to keep down as much as possible. Aim for 0.3 or less.
Low-E: This stands for “Low-Emittance Coating,” and is a microscopically thin and virtually invisible coating of metallic layers deposited on the glass of a window or skylight. The purpose of a Low-E coating is to reduce the U-Factor of the window (and thus make it more resistant to heat flow) by reflecting long-wave infrared radiation, otherwise known as “heat.” Most windows today have some sort of Low-E coating on them as a way to push that U-Factor down.
Hopefully this has helped to shed some light on what you should be looking for when buying windows, whether replacing old ones or when building a new house. In almost all cases you’ll have a professional installer involved during the ordering and installation process, but now that you’re an informed window consumer you can double-check to make sure that this person is recommending an appropriate product. Ask them to explain why they are recommending what they are recommending and not just ordering the “default” because it’s easier. The characteristics of the windows you end up with can make a very large difference in your energy consumption and comfort, so make sure you’re getting the correct product for your climate and for the orientation of each window you’re installing. At the very least, ask your window professional “Why is this window here and why is that window there?” — and make sure they have a good answer!
Andy Mazal
Inhabit - Green Building Consulting
andy@inhabitconsulting.com
www.inhabitconsulting.com
Posted on November 11, 2008 |
Peak Oil - It Is The Economy
By Anita M. Burke
Filed Under News & Reviews, The Big Picture | Leave a Comment
Rex Weyler, co-founder of Greenpeace, author, activist, thought leader, and friend, recently posted a thorough article on Peak Oil. In light of the recent financial crisis, it seems important to remind eCoTimes readers about some of his important insights.
As a veteran in the sustainability industry, I have been asked by scores of people recently, “Wow - you were talking about this three years ago… at the time I really thought you were crazy; and now look it’s happening! WHAT CAN I DO?”
Rex Wyler does a fantastic job of summarizing the best course of action. The recent $700 Billion bailout “solution” is no solution. It’s a simple quick fix that only feeds the addiction. It may temporarily stop the shakes, sweats and shudders that accompany detoxification, but, what are we going to do when the last hit of credit wears off?
Rex Wyler nails it… grab a cup o’ fair trade coffee and take a look…
PEAK OIL - IT IS THE ECONOMY
by Rex Wyler
As the era of cheap liquid fuels draws to an end, everything about modern consumer society will change. Likewise, developing societies pursuing the benefits of globalization will struggle to grow economies in an era of scarce liquid fuels. The most localized, self-reliant communities will experience the least disruption.
Oil is a fixed asset of the planet, representing stored sunlight accumulated over a billion years as early marine algae, and other marine organisms (not dinosaurs) captured solar energy, formed carbon bonds, gathered nutrients, died, sank to the ocean floors, and lay buried under eons of sediment. Like any fixed non-renewable resource, oil is limited, and its consumption will rise, peak, and decline.
World oil production increased for 150 years until the spring of 2005, when world crude oil production reached about 74.3 million barrels per day (mb/d), and total liquid fuels, including tar sands, liquefied gas, and biofuels reached about 85 mb/d. In spite of the efforts since, and tales of “trillions of barrels” of oil in undiscovered fields, liquid fuel production has remained at about 85.5 mb/d for three years, the longest sustained plateau in modern petroleum history. Discoveries of new fields peaked 40 years ago
Meanwhile economies everywhere want to grow, so demand for oil soars worldwide. The gap between this surging demand and flat or declining production will drive price increases and shortages. That’s peak oil.
Peak experience
Peak oil is not a theory, but rather a simple observation of a common natural occurrence. Peak oil is only one symptom of an exponentially growing population, with exponentially growing demands, reaching worldwide limits of all resources.
“Peak oil has long been a reality for the oil industry,” says Anita M Burke, former Shell International senior advisor on Climate Change and Sustainability. “To believe anything else belies the facts of science.” In 2007, Dr James Schlesinger, former US Defense and Energy Secretary stated flatly, “if you talk to industry leaders, they concede … we are facing a decline in liquid fuels. The battle is over. The peakists have won.”
Global warming, caused primarily by forest destruction and the burning of fossil fuels, now aggravates natural limits and the human turmoil that these limits provoke. One might think that peak oil will solve global warming because less oil means less carbon emissions. Sadly, this is not so because humanity took the best, cheapest, and easiest oil first, leaving dirty, acidic, expensive oil in marginal reserves that require vast amounts of energy to recover. In the 1930s, 100 barrels of oil cost about 1 barrel in equivalent energy to extract. That ratio is now about 20:1 and sinking fast. The Canadian tar sands produce barely 1:1 net energy. By the time someone burns tar sands oil in his or her vehicle, the industry has burned nearly an equal amount retrieving it.
When we account for the net energy left after production, and population growth, we discover that the world peak for net-oil per-capita occurred three decades ago, in 1979. Many oil suppliers – Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and others – recognizing the limits of the resource, are now keeping more of their oil for domestic use, and saving it for future growth. Regardless of energy alternatives – ethanol, nuclear, solar, wind, tidal – humanity will never again enjoy the current consumption rates of cheap, convenient fuels. This fact changes everything.
We witness the impact in the increasing scarcity and cost of food and other critical resources that rely on oil. Most trucking firms now add a fuel surcharge to hedge against fuel price increases. As fuel prices soar, airlines cancel flights or simply close down. In many cities, police add a gas charge to traffic tickets because police departments have already spent their annual fuel budget on high-priced gasoline.
The post-peak oil era will require new human development patterns and strategies that cope with limits to growth. Humanity has no new continents to exploit or planets to occupy. Frantic industrial nations may drill in the Arctic and dig into dirty tar sands, but none of this will increase or even match the past abundance of cheap liquid fuel that we have already squandered. Nevertheless, the actual moment that world oil production peaks is less relevant than our preparation for the impact.
Relocalization
Well-financed voices promoting global industrialization claim our economies can grow “forever,” or “for the foreseeable future,” but these voices cry out against the evidence before our eyes. Our massive growth economies were built with cheap oil. Poorly planned development left behind disappearing forests, toxic lakes, soil erosion, species loss, foul air, dead rivers, drying aquifers, and creeping deserts.
The dream of a globalized world marketplace linked by airplanes and trucks will not endure. Monolithic superstores that rely on liquid fuels to ship cheap goods around the world will become the relics of the cheap oil era. These massive chain stores also undermine the local enterprise that communities will need to survive.
“The current solutions being bantered about are inadequate to the conditions we are faced with,” says Anita Burke, after decades inside the oil industry. “We must embrace adaptation strategies that immediately create whole new ways of being in relationship to each other and the planet. Buy local, get off of hydrocarbons in every aspect of your life, gather in community, and espouse only love - your grandchildren’s lives depend on it.”
Communities addicted to cheap oil, especially suburban environments without public transport, will become untenable. Regions that still build highways for cars are simply designing their own demise. Smart communities will design light, convenient public transport to run efficiently on the most locally available energy source.
The post-peak oil era will require that we re-establish local manufacturing and food production, and refurbish economies that have been gutted by globalization. Smart urban designers are now planning for the end of cheap energy, global warming, and the human migration that these changes will set in motion. Smart neighbourhood and regional planners are preparing communities for the inevitable transition from escalating consumption to conserver societies, built on a human scale and linked to social services and the natural cycles that sustain them.
Building communities in nature
I recently walked through an abandoned industrial section of Vancouver, where I live. The empty, poorly designed, decaying buildings seemed depressing, but I noticed how much actual green space flourished with wild plants. Squatters with gardening skills, I kept thinking, could make a life for themselves here.
Human society can change. Witness the historic changes to establish democracies, end slavery, secure civil and women’s rights, or eradicate polio and AIDS. Humanity can harness its resources to change destructive habits and improve living conditions. The crisis of peak oil provides an opportunity strengthen the two pillars that nourish real quality of life: local community and wild nature.
Relocalize: The end of cheap oil means less products arriving from around the world and less jobs making junk to sell elsewhere. Globalization is literally running out of gas. As fuel prices soar, communities will have to supply more food, water, and vital resources locally. If you are thinking of earning a degree in international finance, it might be smart to take some permaculture courses as well.
Preserve Farmland: Wise communities will preserve agricultural land, support farmers, provide local food for local consumption, compost all organic waste including sewage, build soils, apply efficient water use, move toward vegetable diets, and restore and replenish water resources. Rather than building suburbs and highways on farmland, smart communities will design small residential neighbourhoods on the least-arable land, integrated with the life-giving farmland and natural bounty that supports a healthy society.
Change the pattern of community: The entire distribution of public activity, public space, and housing must adapt to less fuel and resource consumption. Past planning in the cheap-oil era created public dysfunction, decaying city cores, foul air, and squandered energy. We do not have generations to correct these mistakes – the time we have to act is now best measured in months, not decades. We now face the choice of responding gracefully and wisely or reacting later in chaos.
Productive urban green spaces: Cities face huge challenges and require green space, not only for play and peace of mind, but for food. Suburbs and urban neighbourhoods must be redesigned to transform lawns and streets into productive green zones linked by public transport. Planting trees anywhere reduces global warming. Cities such as Bogotá, Columbia, and San Luis Obispo, California have shown that degraded cities can revitalize community and economic life with programs that increase green space.
Public transport: Basing development and land-use patterns on the private automobile may be the worst design decision in human history. The automobile is responsible for resource depletion, global warming, degraded farmland, alienated neighbourhoods, aesthetic eyesores, time wasted in traffic, and an epidemic of transport death and injury. Light rail public transport is clean, energy efficient, safe, community-building, and allows travelers to be productive rather than stressed. Smart cities will implement public transit, encourage bicycle use, and create neighbourhoods that encourage walking for most services and family needs.
100% recycling: Nature recycles everything. There is no “away” in nature where garbage and waste is thrown. Human communities must mimic the 100% recycling of nature, eliminate designed obsolescence, and turn garbage landfills into recycling centres. Sewage is natural compost that can be converted to productive soil, as demonstrated in Sweden, India, and Mongolia.
Preserve wilderness: Smart ecological planning not only nurtures people but also preserves wilderness habitat for species diversity. In regions where indigenous people still live on the land, wilderness also preserves cultural diversity and knowledge of local food, medicines and resources.
Modern consumer cities – made possible by the age of cheap fuels, designed for cash profits, or not designed at all – alienated people from each other and from their organic roots. When we gaze upon degraded cement landscapes and the lost souls of inner city children taking refuge in gangs and drugs, we see the cost of broken communities. The end of cheap fuels may help us reclaim an authentic quality of life, not purchased with more stuff but with relationship: our affiliation with each other and with nature.
Rex Weyler is author, journalist, ecologist and long-time Greenpeace trouble-maker
Rex Weyler, www.rexweyler.com
original at “Deep Green” blog, Greenpeace International,
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/deep-green/deep-green-july-2008
Posted on November 6, 2008 |
-
Buy eCo Products
