The Green Issue

    Your Oakland Magazine is a great read. Very informative without being boring. I was reading The Green Report [April 2008] and found some information that is incorrect. I am referring to page 25, item 8, Put eWaste in Its Place. You mentioned in the last sentence that you can take e-waste to Alameda County Computer Resource center in Berkeley, which is correct; but you also mentioned that Alameda County Household Hazardous Waste facility in Oakland takes it, which is not correct. They have never accepted electronic waste; they take paint, chemicals, batteries, motor oil, etc., but no appliances or computers or electronics.
Celia Bacina, Oakland

More on Green

    I loved your green recycling guide, although you missed some of my favorites. We minimize our contributions to the waste stream through donations to the Oakland Museum’s White Elephant Sale and via giveaway ads on CraigsList and Freecycle.
    My absolute favorite organization, however, is one I founded, called the Children’s Book Project East Bay.
    With the help of a large group of enthusiastic volunteers, we have recycled more than 200,000 books in less than three years by giving them to anyone who works with children in need. More than 1,000 professionals, including teachers, social workers and health-care professionals, have come to our distribution center for books to use or give to kids who otherwise lack home reading materials. We encourage your readers to donate new and gently used books from pre-school through high school with the exception of textbooks and encyclopedias. We also encourage any of your readers who work with children in need to choose from our extensive collection from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesdays and Thursdays. And, of course, we are always looking for additional volunteers to assist in collecting, counting and organizing the books.
    The Children’s Book Project is housed in the Grand Lake Neighborhood Center, 530 Lake Park Ave. You can reach us at (510) 238-2301.
Ann Katz, Oakland

Consider Population Growth

    I very much enjoyed your article “The Green Revolution.” It seemed to have a real urgency to act to save the planet, and I think you assume correctly that many of us want to get on board to do exactly that. You, however, fail to mention the one problem that must be tackled if we are to succeed—population growth.
    If we do not curtail our population growth, we cannot possibly hope to succeed. We currently have 6.4 billion people on this planet. United Nations population scenarios project that number to be 7.6 billion in 2050, at the low end, and 10.5 billion on the high end. If governments want to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60 percent, and the world’s population rises to the midrange forecast of 9.2 billion, each person would in fact have to slash his emissions by
72 percent.
    More efficient technology, renewable energy and lifestyle changes will help do that, but growing prosperity and consumption in developing countries will also make it harder. That all our low-energy light bulbs, home insulation, efficient cars, boilers and washing machines have so far failed to stop the growth of emissions illustrates how difficult cutting them will be.
    Dealing with population growth is a long-term project that encompasses economic development, political reform and education. But the truth of the matter is, that when women can choose the number of children they have, they consistently choose smaller families. Any article that deals with greening the planet has missed the mark if it does not list population growth as one of those issues that must be tackled if we are to have meaningful progress.
Rosemary Heil, Oakland


    Green?! When did toxic light bulbs become green? They’re toxic waste! LEDs are green. Even incandescent bulbs are green compared to burning coal or methane or wax or trees for light. Geeks still eat incandescents in carnival shows—not CFLs. No bulb that causes migraines in people and animals is green. LEDs are green, recyclable, nontoxic and not migraine causing. Oh, yeah, they use half the energy and resources of a comparable CFL, work in recessed cans [low heat] and almost everywhere else and have for decades. Try making taillights for vehicles from fluorescents—bad idea. Toxic lighting is bad for all of us—just stupid. Go LED, not CFL.
Linus Hollis, Piedmont

Energizer Bunny

    I just want you to know how pleased and impressed I am about the wonderful article, “Living in the Moment,” Ginny Prior wrote about me in the April issue. She described me and my personality quite accurately and with a real good sense of humor. I have received many nice comments about my tap dancing across the Golden Gate Bridge last November. Please thank her for all the nice publicity her article has generated for me.
Michael Grbich, Oakland


    The article “Waste and Recycling” in the April issue contained an editing error. The article should have said: “Landfills are the source of 24 percent of U.S. methane. They continue to emit methane for 15 years.”


The name of Paul Romer, an outstanding graduating senior from the College Preparatory School, was misspelled in May’s “ExtraOAKLANDary Students” article.

We Want to Hear From You

    Mail letters to Letters at Oakland Magazine, 7977 Capwell Drive, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94621; e-mail them to letters@oaklandmagazine.com or visit www.oaklandmagazine.com. Letters, which may be edited for length and clarity, must be signed, and they must include a daytime telephone number for verification. No anonymous letters will be published, but names may be withheld upon request.

Add your comment:

Please visit our Privacy Policy for information regarding how we use this information.

Edit ModuleShow Tags Edit ModuleShow Tags

Big savings on local dining & more.

Edit ModuleShow Tags

Edit ModuleShow Tags Edit ModuleShow Tags
Edit ModuleShow Tags Edit ModuleShow Tags Edit ModuleShow Tags