Dear EarthTalk: I imagine you've been down this road before, but what's hot in the green-friendly sunscreen department nowadays?

-- Elaine Mayer, Ocean City, Md.


But the non-profit Environmental Working Group points out that this may not be the case, and that consumers should be careful about which sunscreens they trust for themselves and, even more important, for their kids.


"No one knows the cause, but scientists speculate that sunscreen users stay out in the sun longer and absorb more radiation overall," reports EWG. Scientists also suspect, says EWG, that free radicals, which get released as sunscreen chemicals break down in sunlight, may be playing a role.


More Information

Fact box

Also, EWG warns that many common sunscreen ingredients generate free radicals that can damage the body's DNA and skin cells, accelerating skin aging and potentially causing skin cancer in the process.

But just because some sunscreens can't be trusted and overexposure to the sun is unhealthy doesn't mean staying indoors all the time is a viable solution. Getting some sun is good for you, as the body converts it to Vitamin D, an essential nutrient that facilitates good health and prevents a wide range of diseases.


But which sunscreens do live up to EWG's stringent standards?

The major choice is between chemical sunscreens that break down quickly, penetrate deep into the skin and may disrupt the body's hormone system, and mineral varieties that can contain potentially irritating and damaging nano-scale particles.

According to EWG, mineral sunscreens are the better choice, as they protect against both UVB and UVA rays, remain effective longer and don't contain as many dangerous substances.

Some leading mineral-based options come from Alba Botanica, Beyond Coastal, ECO Logical Skin Care, Karen's Botanicals, Kiss My Face, Poofy Organics and Solar Sense, among others.


CONTACTS: EWG's Sunscreens 2012,; IARC,


-- Bill Wilson, Boise, Idaho



When plants die, whether through natural causes or when humans harvest them, this stored CO2 is released back into the atmosphere in an age-old cycle that doesn't contribute any additional greenhouse gas into the system.

But when we extract and burn oil and other fossil fuels, we are taking CO2 that would have otherwise remained locked up deep below the Earth's surface and releasing it into the atmosphere, essentially overloading the planet's carbon balance and leading to more global warming.

But as things stand today, the overall process of producing agrofuels is far from carbon neutral, given the fossil fuels expended in growing, harvesting and processing the crops (petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides, diesel fuel to run tractors, etc.) and then distributing them (via carbon-spewing trucks, trains, ships and airplanes).

Of course, growing such crops organically and processing and distributing them without fossil fuels would help close the gap between today's reality and the dream of carbon-neutrality.


Researchers are hoping to overcome this conundrum by generating agrofuels from less land- and input-intensive "crops" such as switchgrass, sugarcane, wood waste or even algae.



But according to Friends of the Earth International (FOEI), "Land grabbing by large companies and agro-businesses to the detriment of local livelihoods, forests and other ecosystems, with gross violations of human rights, have been witnessed in many countries where agrofuels are produced." FOEI adds: "The production of agrofuels is generating serious environmental damage and eroding the people's ability to control the production, trade and consumption of food, given that more and more agricultural land is being devoted for energy crops."



CONTACT: Friends of the Earth International,

EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E -- The Environmental Magazine ( Send questions to: