Chemicals in plastics linked to early onset menopause

Chemicals in plastics linked to early onset menopause - Man-made chemicals found in a variety of everyday products – from food containers to clothes – may be causing early menopause in women, say scientists.

A study of almost 26,000 – the largest of its kind – found those with high levels of PFCs (perfluorocarbons) were more likely to have gone through the change of life prematurely.

Dr Sarah Knox, of the West Virginia University School of Medicine, said: "There is no doubt that there is an association between exposure to PFCs and onset of menopause, but the causality is unclear.

Higher levels of PFCs were associated with increased odds of having experienced menopause in women between 42 to 64

"Part of the explanation could be that women in these age groups have higher PFC levels because they are no longer losing PFCs with menstrual blood anymore.

"But it is still clinically disturbing because it would imply that increased PFC exposure is the natural result of menopause."

The study to be published in The Endocrine Society's Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism found higher levels of PFCs were associated with increased odds of having experienced menopause in women between 42 to 64.

Women in this age group with more PFCs also had much less of the sex hormone oestrogen compared to those who had low levels which are also found in furniture, carpets and paints.

Their broad use has led to widespread circulation in water, air, soil, plant life, animals and humans – even in remote parts of the world.

A probability sample of adults in the US found measurable concentrations of PFCs in 98 per cent of those tested.

Dr Knox said: "The current study is the largest ever to be done on the endocrine (hormone)-disrupting effects of perfluorocarbons in human women.

"Our data shows after controlling for age, women of peri-menopausal and menopausal age in this large population are more likely to have experienced menopause if they have higher serum concentrations of PFCs than their counterparts with lower levels."

In the study of 18 to 65-year-old women researchers ascertained the menopausal status of the participants and then measured their serum concentration levels of PFCs and oestradiol.

They found an association between PFC exposure, decreased oestradiol and early menopause in women over age 42.

The higher the PFC levels in women of child bearing age the lower their oestrogen also but this link was not statistically significant.

PFCs are known to have multiple adverse health outcomes including increased cardiovascular risk and impairment of the immune system.

Dr Knox said: "Our findings suggest PFCs are associated with endocrine disruption in women and that further research on mechanisms is warranted."( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Chemicals in plastics linked to early onset menopause

Warmer summers cause colder winters

Warmer summers cause colder winters - Warmer summers in the far Northern Hemisphere are disrupting weather patterns and triggering more severe winter weather in the United States and Europe, a team of scientists say, in a finding that could improve long-range weather forecasts.

Blizzards and extreme cold temperatures in the winters of 2009/10 and 2010/11 caused widespread travel chaos in parts of Europe and the United States, leading some to question whether global warming was real.

Judah Cohen, lead author of a study published on Friday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, and his team found there was a clear trend of strong warming in the Arctic from July to September.

Existing predictions would also expect a warming trend during winter as well. But Cohen and his team found this was not the case for some regions, in a counter-intuitive finding that reveals more about the complexity of the world's climate system than any flaws in the science of global warming.

A view shows the semi-frozen layer of a water reservoir on a cold day on the outskirts of Srinagar January 12, 2012. REUTERS/Fayaz Kabli

"For the last two decades, large-scale cooling trends have existed instead across large stretches of eastern North America and northern Eurasia. We argue that this unforeseen trend is probably not due to internal variability alone," the scientists say in the study.

Using temperature, rainfall and snow and ice data, the team found that rising summer temperatures in the Arctic meant the atmosphere could hold more moisture, leading to an increase in autumn snowfall in high-latitude areas.

Analysis of data showed the average snow coverage in Eurasia had increased over the past two decades. This additional snow cover in turn has led to a change in the Arctic Oscillation, the main atmospheric pressure pattern that governs winter weather in the far Northern Hemisphere.

When the oscillation is in a negative phase, high pressure cells over the Arctic push colder air towards the mid-latitudes, triggering colder than usual temperatures and fierce snow storms.

A positive phase tends to bring milder winter weather, such as the case at present in the United States and Europe.

COMPLEX

The team say the winter cooling trends cannot be entirely explained by natural variability of the climate system and need more study.

Cohen said the finding could improve long-range forecasting.

"Using the snow cover in a seasonal forecast can provide a more skilful or accurate forecast," Cohen, of Atmospheric and Environmental Research, a U.S. firm that helps businesses and governments manage climate risks, said in a statement.

The team's research is one of recent studies to highlight the complexity of the climate system and that scientists are still learning how much mankind and natural factors can influence long-term patterns.

Last October, a study led by the UK Met Office, found that a cyclical drop in the sun's radiation can trigger unusually cold winters in parts of North America and Europe. (Reuters)

READ MORE - Warmer summers cause colder winters

Search: in America's Most Polluted Cities

Search: in America's Most Polluted Cities - Remember the fog that lingered over Beijing during the 2008 Summer Olympics? It wasn't fog. It was dirty air. Yes, China faces a world-class air quality problem. But before you get too smug about its smog, consider this: 154.5 million Americans, just over half the nation's population, live in areas where air pollution levels are often dangerous to breathe. That's according to the American Lung Association's (ALA) just-released report 2011 State of the Air.

The cities ranked worst in air quality? California metros like Los Angeles, Visalia, Hanford and Fresno. Bakersfield, Calif., ranked the worst in terms of short-term and year-round particle pollution. It also ranked second-worst, behind Los Angeles, for smog levels, known formally as ozone pollution.

California metros "really have made great strides to try to clean up, but they have a lot of sources--a lot of people driving, a lot of ships coming into the port, especially ocean-going vessels," explains Janice Nolen, lead author of the report and an assistant vice president of national policy and advocacy at the ALA. "Plus, California has the warm, sunny climate that encourages pollutants to form and the geography that helps trap them."

Behind The Numbers

The American Lung Association's study ranks the air quality of 900 counties and more than 200 U.S. Census-defined Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas--cities and their surrounding suburbs--where an air pollution monitor is present.

The ALA analyzed data from 2007 to 2009 that had been collected daily through monitors operated by federal agencies, states and Native American tribes. The data was reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency. The ALA analyzed the data based on ozone pollution, short-term particle pollution and year-round particle pollution. Its report grades cities using, in part, the EPA's color-coded Air Quality Index, as well as its own weighting system that ranks the severity of pollution on a daily basis.

The EPA defines particle pollution as "a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets ... made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles." Year-round air pollution is an average of the daily levels of particle pollution on all 365 days. Short-term particle pollution measures the number of times in a year when levels spike above healthy standards for several days to several weeks. Ozone pollution has adverse effects on health as well, but is not as dangerous in the short-term.

"All three can kill people, and all three can cause asthma attacks," asserts Nolen. "But short-term and year-round particle pollution are more deadly than ozone."

For that reason Forbes focused on the metros most affected by year-round particle pollution for this list. The ALA compiled a list of the 10 worst culprits. (A total of 11 metros made the list due to a tie in the data.)

Many major urban hubs in the Golden State ranked high on the list, but one other southwestern U.S. city tied Los Angeles for second place: Phoenix, Ariz. Like California's hardest-hit cities, the foreclosure mecca's climate and geography serve as incubators for airborne toxins. But one of the biggest reasons for Phoenix's high pollution levels is actually cattle ranches found south of the city, in Pinal County and vicinity. "Those cattle ranches are contributing a lot of fine particle pollution to the small communities near them that are part of the Phoenix metro area, but also to the tribe adjacent to it," says Nolen. "It's also being blown into other parts of the city."

Closer to the east coast, Pittsburgh, Pa., has long been associated with coal, and it shows in the numbers. The Steel City ranks seventh on the list of most polluted, followed by another metro chock-full of coal-fired power plants: Birmingham, Ala.

Nolen says air pollution can cause asthma attacks, heart attacks, strokes, lung conditions and difficulty breathing for some people. California, for example, estimates that 9,000 people die each year from air pollution-related illnesses.

"We have a lot of folks that see this report and call up and ask 'where should I go?'" says Nolen. "We want people to do things like check the Air Quality Index. If it's going to be a very unhealthy day, you can take steps to avoid exercising outside or working outdoors strenuously." She also adds that people should avoid running within 300 to 500 meters of major roads, which tend to have elevated levels of air pollution.

The good news is that most metros and counties around the country have been improving their air quality, thanks in part to support from the EPA and the implementation, albeit slow, of the 1990 Clean Air Act. Most cities that topped the ALA's most polluted lists for particle and ozone pollution have seen their levels decrease. The only city in the top 10 to actually get worse in terms of year-round particle pollution levels was Bakersfield.

Here are the nation's five most polluted cities:

No. 5 Hanford, Calif.

Hanford is the nation's fifth most polluted metro area

MSA: Hanford-Corcoran, Calif.
Worst county: Kings County
PM2.5 annual design value (2007-2009): 17.3
Total population: 148,800 people potentially exposed

No. 2 (tie) Visalia, Calif.

Visalia is tied for the nation's second most polluted metro area

MSA: Visalia-Porterville, Calif.
Worst county: Tulare County
PM2.5 annual design value (2007-2009): 18.8
Total population: 429,700 people potentially exposed

No. 2 (tie) Phoenix, Ariz.

Phoenix is tied for the nation's second most polluted metro area Photo: iStock

MSA: Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, Ariz.
Worst county: Pinal County
PM2.5 annual design value (2007-2009): 18.8
Total population: 4.36 million people potentially exposed

No. 2 (tie) Los Angeles, Calif.

Los Angeles is tied for the nation's second most polluted metro area
Photo: iStock

CSA: Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, Calif.
Worst county: Riverside County
PM2.5 annual design value (2007-2009): 18.8
Total population: 17.82 million people potentially exposed

No. 1 Bakersfield, Calif.

Bakersfield is the nation's most polluted city Photo: David Jordan

MSA: Bakersfield, Calif.
Worst county: Kern County
PM2.5 annual design value (2007-2009): 22.6
Total population: 807,400 people potentially exposed ( forbes )

READ MORE - Search: in America's Most Polluted Cities

Mass Animal Die-Offs Are No Rarity

Mass Animal Die-Offs Are No Rarity — First, the blackbirds fell out of the sky on New Year's Eve in Arkansas. In recent days, wildlife have mysteriously died in big numbers: 2 million fish in the Chesapeake Bay, 150 tons of red tilapia in Vietnam, 40,000 crabs in Britain and other places across the world. Blogs connected the deadly dots, joking about the "aflockalypse" while others saw real signs of something sinister, either biblical or environmental.

The reality, say biologists, is that these mass die-offs happen all the time and usually are unrelated.

Federal records show they happen on average every other day somewhere in North America. Usually, we don't notice them and don't try to link them to each other.

"They generally fly under the radar," said ornithologist John Wiens, chief scientist at the California research institution PRBO Conservation Science.

Since the 1970s, the U.S. Geological Survey's National Wildlife Health Center in Wisconsin has tracked mass deaths among birds, fish and other critters, said wildlife disease specialist LeAnn White. At times the sky and the streams just turn deadly. Sometimes it's disease, sometimes pollution. Other times it's just a mystery.

In the past eight months, the USGS has logged 95 mass wildlife die-offs in North America and that's probably a dramatic undercount, White said. The list includes 900 some turkey vultures that seemed to drown and starve in the Florida Keys, 4,300 ducks killed by parasites in Minnesota, 1,500 salamanders done in by a virus in Idaho, 2,000 bats that died of rabies in Texas, and the still mysterious death of 2,750 sea birds in California.

On average, 163 such events are reported to the federal government each year, according to USGS records. And there have been much larger die-offs than the 3,000 blackbirds in Arkansas. Twice in the summer of 1996, more than 100,000 ducks died of botulism in Canada.

"Depending on the species, these things don't even get reported," White said.

Weather — cold and wet weather like in Arkansas New Year's Eve when the birds fell out of the sky — is often associated with mass bird deaths, ornithologists say. Pollution, parasites and disease also cause mass deaths. Some are even blaming fireworks for the blackbird deaths.

So what's happening this time?

Blame technology, says famed Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson. With the Internet, cell phones and worldwide communications, people are noticing events, connecting the dots more.

"This instant and global communication, it's just a human instinct to read mystery and portents of dangers and wondrous things in events that are unusual," Wilson told The Associated Press on Thursday. "Not to worry, these are not portents that the world is about to come to an end."

Wilson and the others say instant communications — especially when people can whip out smart phones to take pictures of critter carcasses and then post them on the Internet — is giving a skewed view of what is happening in the environment.

The irony is that mass die-offs — usually of animals with large populations — are getting the attention while a larger but slower mass extinction of thousands of species because of human activity is ignored, Wilson said. ( associated press )

READ MORE - Mass Animal Die-Offs Are No Rarity

Ancient animals escaped warming in Antarctica

Ancient animals escaped warming in Antarctica. New research focuses on scrappy survivor whose fossils were found in 1970. Antarctica served as a climatic refuge for animals during the world's largest known, and probably global warming-fueled, mass extinction event, according to new research that focused on one scrappy survivor.

The newly identified animal, Kombuisia antarctica, may not have been able to take the heat at the end of the Permian period 252 million years ago, so it moved to the cooler end of the earth.

Getty Images

During the Permian period, Antartica was part of the supercontinent Pangea and located further north than it is today.

Its fossils were found in Antarctica during the 1970s alongside the remains of other hearty Permian species who lived before the emergence of the first dinosaurs and mammals.

Jorg Frobisch recently led an examination of the fossils, including the new species, which he described to Discovery News as being the size of a housecat and having "a compact and robust body, stubby legs and a short tail."

"Kombuisia likely laid eggs, didn't nurse its young and didn't have fur, and it is uncertain whether it was warm-blooded," added Frobisch, a geologist at The Field Museum.

The animal, a reptile-like, distant ancestor of mammals, was an anomodont, a dominant group of plant-eating land vertebrates at the time.

The researchers previously found remains of Kombuisia's relatives in South Africa. With added geological evidence, they were able to piece together what might have happened in Antarctica at a time when 80 to 95 percent of all species in the oceans and on land went extinct.

When the mass extinction occurred, every continent was united into the supercontinent Pangea. According to the researchers, volcanic activity in Siberia may have triggered global warming that eventually killed off countless animals.

Although Antarctica was further north than it is today, it "would have been cooler and probably more humid than other regions in the world of the end-Permian extinction," Frobisch said.

The turtle-beaked and nearly toothless Kombuisia therefore headed south, where it shared Antarctic turf with other animals whose relatives later gave rise to mammals.

Many of these extinction survivors seemed to share a common trait: They were all small.

"Small animals are less susceptible to extinction, since they are more likely to engage in so called 'sleep-or-hide' behaviors, such as hibernation, torpor and burrowing," Frobisch explained.

Co-author Kenneth Angielczyk, an assistant curator of paleomammology at The Field Museum, said, "Finding fossils in the current harsh conditions of Antarctica is difficult but worthwhile."

Such fossils provided some of the first evidence of Pangea's existence, Angielczyk notes, and are now helping to reveal the events that unfolded before and after the Permian mass extinction.

The team's findings, published in the journal Naturwissenschaften, may offer insights into potential survival techniques for modern day animals threatened by climate change.

"Countless species are threatened by global warming today," said Frobisch. "A prime example of a threatened species is the polar bear, whose habitat becomes increasingly smaller as a result of melting sea ice in the Arctic Circle."

"However," he added, "it is questionable whether the polar bear or other threatened animals can respond in the same way as Kombuisia did in the Permian, simply because human activities severely limit the animals' possibilities."

He concluded: "The primary lesson we should learn from the studies of extinction due to climate change in the past is that it is of utmost importance today to control and reverse human induced global warming by taking counteractive measures, such as greatly reducing greenhouse gas emissions." ( Discovery Channel )

READ MORE - Ancient animals escaped warming in Antarctica

Not so cute after all, then!

Not so cute after all, then!. Fierce leopard seal displays its two-inch teeth as it hunts down a penguin. As any professional photographer will tell you, it can often be hard to get your subject to crack a smile.

However, there was no such problem for Amos Nachoum when he encountered this 12ft leopard seal.

As he bravely edged his camera close to the fearsome predator's face, it obligingly opened its jaws and showed off a fine set of 2in razor-sharp teeth.

Roar: The leopard seal's two-inch teeth look like they are about to take the lens off the camera in this image taken by Amos Nachoun and his team in Antarctica

The seal takes another run at the camera - whose operator must have nerves of steel

An experienced photographer of underwater wildlife, Nachoum spotted the seal as it hunted penguin near Pleneau-Island in Antarctica's Southern Ocean.

'The leopard seal is a sleek and violent hunter,' said Nachoum. 'He will ambush his prey by waiting in silence at the bottom of the shallow channels that run along the island.

'He will then launch himself at the unsuspecting penguin and grab hold of its feet.

'In one of the most visceral acts that I have seen in wildlife photography the leopard seal will then take the penguin to the surface and shake its body to a pulp before eating it.

'They do not like to eat the penguin's feathers.'

He added: 'They are the only seal capable of attacking a human and as such need to be treated with due respect.'

Captured in its full glory in February of this year, the agile leopard seal is part of a group that congregate each year on the Antarctic Peninsula to feed.

Gotcha: The leopard seal clamps a penguin in its fearsome jaws as it glares into the camera

Photographing one of Mother Nature's most brutal scenes is not an easy task.

'We travelled for four days from Ushuaia on the southern coast of Argentina in a sail boat at the height of the Antarctic summer to get to Pleneau Island,' Amos said.

'The air temperature can peak at around 10 degrees and the water temperature can fall as low as minus one.

'As such we must use dry-suits with thermal insulating layers to ensure that we can enter the water.

'Using these we can stay for up to one hour in the sea with the seals.'

Because of the dangers of diving in the icy Antarctic, experienced Amos has a serious respect for this type of photographic expedition.

'Antarctica is a final frontier,' he added.

The seal snaps the penguin in its jaws before taking it to the surface and shaking its body to a pulp

'Only very experienced divers who have excellent buoyancy could be prepared for this type of dive.

'They must understand that they face not only the danger from the seal, but from the water and climate too.'

For Amos, diving with any leopard seal is always daunting.

'In the water, most associate sharks with danger,' he said. 'But when divers with me see the intelligence, agility and size of the leopard seal they can become nervous.

'I explain that they must not encroach on the seal's space and not to provoke it into any unwanted action.'

Even though Amos has dived with Great Whites and photographed polar bears from three feet away, he is always in awe of the leopard seal.

'I have seen them throw themselves on to rocks during a hunt into the middle of a group of sitting penguins. They ignore all the others around them and chase the one penguin that they are targeting.

'They are single minded, decisive and want the particular prey that they have chosen.' ( dailymail.co.uk )

READ MORE - Not so cute after all, then!

Can you really save the planet by reheating a cold cup of tea?

Can you really save the planet by reheating a cold cup of tea? Our Science Editor takes a sceptical look at how we can reduce our carbon footprints. Do you feel guilty when you boil the kettle for another cup of tea or coffee when you didn't finish your previous one? Well, according to the Government's waste watchdog, WRAP, you certainly should.

For this week, it said that to decrease our carbon footprints we should always reheat the cold dregs rather than making a new brew. A separate report also argued that we must spend £15,000 on a full energy efficiency make-over of our homes to meet official greenhouse emissions targets.

For, collectively, we emit about 600m tonnes a year of carbon dioxide (the dreaded greenhouse gas) - giving a 'footprint' of ten tonnes for every man, woman and child in the country.

How can you save the planet? We look at what difference moves championed by green campaigners make

This is much better than America (20 tonnes) but massive compared to Third World countries and larger than France (6-7 tonnes) which has such a low figure because of its use of nuclear power.

These days, practically all human life involves a carbon impact - from driving and cooking to food and clothes production. With so much conflicting advice on what is environmentally-friendly activity - and what is not - we weigh up the conundrums involved in trying to reduce our carbon footprints . . .

IS IT BETTER TO REHEAT COLD TEA OR COFFEE?

According to the watchdog WRAP, producing a cup of white coffee from scratch emits about 150g of CO2 emissions - about the same as driving a mile in a small car.

But reheating a cold cup of coffee from room temperature to the 70C or so at which it would normally be drunk requires only about 30g of CO2 via the electricity needed to power the microwave.

What it tastes like is another matter...

SHOULD YOU BUY BEANS FLOWN FROM KENYA?

It has become a green mantra that we should 'buy local' and cut down on the 'food miles' that are incurred when produce is flown half-way round the world.

Although it seems ridiculous to fly vegetables in a cargo jet from Africa to Britain, several studies have cast doubt on this assertion.

According to scientists at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, the carbon emissions generated by food transport can amount to only a tiny amount of the total emissions generated by growing food.

For example, growing food in Britain (where farming is more intensive, typically using large quantities of fuel, fertilisers and other chemicals) will produce far more CO2 than growing the same product in a hot, sunny country where farming is far less intensive.

As a result, this extra CO2 may outweigh the benefit of growing the fruit and veg here.

A 2007 study by Cranfield University showed that the carbon cost of growing flowers in Kenya and flying them to the UK is perhaps a sixth of those grown in the Netherlands, even taking the emissions from airfreighting into account.

Add to this the loss of income and jobs for Third World producers and the moral case for 'buying local' can look decidedly shaky.

CAN MY GADGETS BE LEFT ON CHARGE?

And does leaving a TV on 'standby' really use as much electricity as having it on?

The impact of leaving electrical gadgets on charge and with the little red standby light on has probably been overstated. The carbon footprint of a mobile phone charger left on for a year, for example, is about the same as having a single hot bath.

And while watching a typical LCD TV for six hours a day will emit about 200kg of CO2 a year, leaving it on standby the rest of the time rather than switching it off will add only another 5kg.

Old-fashioned, cathode ray tube TVs use more electricity when on standby (10kg a year).

Figures for computer monitors will be similar to those for TVs. But although it won't save the world, it's worth switching off the whole lot at the wall anyway.

IS CYCLING REALLY THAT GREEN?

The bicycle is probably the most efficient machine ever invented. True, a lightweight aluminium bike, weighing 12kg, will generate about 50-60kg of CO2 in its construction (less if the frame is made of steel or recycled metal).

But thereafter carbon emissions (save minuscule amounts associated with the manufacture of new tyres, replacement parts and so on) are effectively zero.

Of course, the rider emits carbon dioxide with each breath. But as human beings usually consume meat and veg rather than petroleum, this carbon dioxide is exactly balanced by that drawn from the atmosphere by growing food.

TOWEL OR HOT-AIR DRIER IN THE LOO?

This long-running debate encapsulates the whole problem of determining whether we consider the environmental impact of switching on a machine which consumes electricity or if we also take into account the amount of energy and chemicals used to wash and dry the towel.

Tests to determine the answer to such a question were carried out at the University of Melbourne, taking into account everything from the environmental costs of extracting the metals and plastics needed to make hot-air driers, the costs of producing paper towels from woodpulp and, of course, the electricity and other energy consumed.

The surprising conclusion was that air-driers easily outperform paper towels on environmental grounds, emitting half the carbon dioxide per pair of hands dried.

SHOULD I DRIVE A HYBRID CAR?

Probably not, at least if you are concerned about cutting your carbon footprint rather than making a fashionable green statement.

It is quite true that the most popular hybrid vehicles, cars such as the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight which use electric motors and batteries to augment their petrol engines, can deliver impressive economy figures, equating to around 110g/km CO2.

But they are not THAT green - bettered in many cases by conventional small diesels and petrol cars, some of which have beaten the magic 100g/km benchmark.

If you take into account the additional environmental impact which comes from manufacturing large batteries - which have a life of only a few years - and the extra carbon footprint of these cars' more complex construction, the case for hybrids starts to evaporate.

So if you worry about CO2, buy a small economical car and concentrate on developing an efficient, smooth driving style.

BATH OR SHOWER?

According to the Energy Saving Trust, the answer 'really depends what kind of shower you have, and how long you spend in it'. And what heats the water in each case.

For most people, a shower will use less water, and therefore energy heating it, than a bath. However, for people with a power shower (which have very high flow rates), if you tend to shower for more than five minutes at a time, then you might be better off having a bath.

DOUBLE GLAZE OR LOFT INSULATE?

The construction of double glazing - making the PVA frames, the glass and so on - carries an environmental cost in 'embedded carbon', which will vary depending on the type.

But this is a one-off environmental cost; once your double glazing is installed, it has no further negative environmental impact.

Indeed, as with other forms of insulation, the benefits long term outweigh this initial hit.

For a typical household, over its 20-year lifetime a set of double glazing will easily save several tonnes of carbon dioxide; loft insulation is also beneficial and, being cheaper, pays for itself more quickly.

But turning down your central heating is probably the most carbon-efficient thing you can do in your house.

CAN I DRIVE TO THE BOTTLE BANK?

Generally, the answer is 'yes', although there are caveats, such as the fact that recycling is far more efficient in towns and cities than in the countryside.

One tonne of aluminium, when recycled, saves nine tonnes of carbon dioxide that would be emitted making the same amount of metal from scratch. But the figure for glass is only 300kg of CO2 savings per tonne recycled. The previous generation did far better, however.

The deposit bottles were simply reused without smashing them up, transporting them miles and melting them down.

Still, recycling glass probably makes sense, provided you take at least half-a-dozen bottles at a time and that the bottle bank is not more than a couple of miles away. ( dailymail.co.uk )

READ MORE - Can you really save the planet by reheating a cold cup of tea?