I was recently at the ABC Kids Expo show, and all around me were products being touted at BPA-free or bisphenol A free. As I was there selling Zigo’s, I knew nothing about this, but after my wife returned home from Whole Foods this week with six pricey BPA-free water bottles, I decided to investigate.

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a building block of many polymers used in a diverse array of products, notably including plastics used in drinking bottles and food containers, as well as a broad range of household products. From various exposures, including diet, inhalation of dust, and transdermally, BPA is detectable in 90% of the US population. Although concerns regarding the potential toxicity of BPA have been circulating for more than 70 years, a recent study (I. A. Lang et al. Association of Urinary Bisphenol A Concentration With Medical Disorders and Laboratory Abnormalities in Adults. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 300, 1303–1310; 2008) has significantly raised the alarm. Utilizing recently made available large-scale epidemiological data on urinary BPA levels¹, Lang et al. demonstrated in a cross-sectional population study including 1,455 adults aged 18 through 74 years that higher urinary BPA levels are associated with cardiovascular disease, diabetes and elevated liver enzymes, but not with other common diseases studied. Prior studies of BPA have focused on estrogenic activity, liver damage, disrupted pancreatic beta-cell function, thyroid dysfunction, and risk of obesity, all primarily in animal studies. But animals are not people and species-specific differences have been blamed for the previously observed BPA effects.

This large scale cross-sectional study is powerful but not the final word. A cross-sectional study of this nature is a snapshot that associates urinary BPA levels at a given moment with a chronic disease or another assay. BPA is excreted quite rapidly in the urine and this study does not actually indicate anything about the effects of long-term exposure to the chemical. A longitudinal study is required in which individuals are followed for many years and the association of BPA levels and the development of chronic disease charted over time. Another limitation of the study is that BPA urinary levels were statistically analyzed in regard to eight major diagnostic groupings and eight blood-based assays. Multiple regression analysis of this nature is notoriously susceptible to the detection of false positive results due to the large number of variables analyzed.

Nevertheless, this study, on the heels of numerous well-conducted animal studies that demonstrate metabolic and estrogenic effects of BPA at doses below the current acceptable daily intake dose (ADI) of 50 µg/kg per day, is likely to spur action. Canadian regulatory agencies have already declared BPA a “toxic chemical”. It is likely that the U.S. will not be far behind. Despite the FDA’s August draft report stating that “food contact” products containing BPA are safe, pressure is no doubt mounting, as well it should. The burden should be on industry to prove safety, not on the public to prove hazard.

As for me, I’m keeping my BPA-free bottles. But the true load of BPA in the environment is from myriad sources and is essentially unavoidable. Regulators should act and they should act now.

Tip: Avoid Type 7 and Type 3 (PVC) plastics with food or beverages as they can leach BPA, especially at elevated temperatures.

¹ US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2004

Change your life. Change the world. Zigo.

Sometimes it is best not to ponder the future, not to ponder a world where a self-centered species has squandered a planet’s resources and in the process glutted the environment with fossil-fuel derived carbon emissions. Instead today we imagine a world in which the collective will has determined that alternatives to fossil-fuels are required. In particular, today we focus on the generation of electricity with no net carbon emissions.

Electricity generation accounts for approximately 40% of humanity’s energy consumption, the vast majority of it from fossil-fuel burning, carbon spewing technologies. But an array of technologies, some old and some new, may soon change the calculus of electricity.

Hydropower. The power of water falling from up high can scarce be missed at natural wonders such as Angel Falls in Venezuela, the world’s tallest waterfall, or Niagara Falls, the most powerful falls in North America. The creation of dams and hydroelectric power plants supply almost 20% of the world’s electricity and requires no fossil-fuel. However, most obvious sources of hydropower have been tapped. New locations are likely to be more difficult and more costly to develop. Furthermore, hydropower is an old technology, existing for hundreds of years around the world in the form of water mills. Further improvements in efficiency are not likely to be profound. Also, the creation of man-made lakes backing dams has a profound environmental impact in terms of displacement of populations, effects on numerous species of wildlife, and emissions from decomposing biomass in reservoirs.

Nuclear. Is nuclear a dirty word? Can the world get over 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl or the next lurking disaster? Are more reactors a bulls-eye for terrorists? Would you want one in your neighborhood? Overall, nuclear energy supplies around 15% of the world’s electrical energy. Uranium is ample and relatively cheap. Energy output is reliable and suitable for sustaining power grids. Really, nuclear energy is quite clean. Until there’s an accident, of course. Or until you need to dispose of spent fuel and other really, really undesirable waste. If you follow the drawn-out wrangling regarding the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, you’ll begin to realize that nuclear energy is not likely to be a strong contributor to US energy supplies in the near future. The future of nuclear energy is more promising in regions with a more opaque political process; almost all of the new reactors being built are in Asia. As for me, not in my backyard.

Biomass. There’s nothing simpler than burning wood. Or crop residue. Or other stuff grown from the ground that burns. As a local solution for heating and cooking this is very viable, and more recently so for generating electricity, often as a supplement to coal or gas in conventional electrical plants. The downside of biomass is costly transport and the resulting necessity of linking available biomass to a nearby power plant. But if carbon neutral is your mantra, you can’t beat biomass. Plants capture carbon from the environment then give it up again when burned. Nice and sort of clean. Of course, growing plants for fuel diverts arable land from other endeavors, like feeding people.

Wind. Wind is the most rapidly growing source of alternative energy. The US added 5.3 gigawatts of wind capacity in 2007, which is 35% of all new energy capacity added in the country. The most important advance is the declining cost of installing wind turbines, making it in some cases competitive with coal. It is really, really clean, requiring no fossil-fuel whatsoever and giving off no carbon. But you can’t make the wind blow. Lack of reliability makes wind power on its own unsuitable for sustaining a power grid. Also, if you have ever admired the sculptural line of a wind turbine, imagine several hundred of them obscuring your view of the ocean. Many locations with desirable wind conditions are preferred pristine by those that live there. And of course there is the law of unintended consequences. Harness enough wind power and a butterfly somewhere will flap its wings. It is speculated that large wind farms can produce warming of downwind areas, as the cooling benefit of the wind is sapped.

Solar. Who says that you can’t improve on Nature? Today’s photovoltaic panels can convert greater than 15% of solar energy into useful electricity. A leafy plant of the green variety—around 1%. Solar energy is perfectly clean and it just feels so natural. It’s sort of back to basics. Everything comes from the sun…electricity too. And solar cells look cool and do not aggregate to quite the eyesore of a wind farm. But solar cells are also unreliable. Night, clouds and day-to-day variability make them unreliable for powering grids. Thermal technologies that couple solar energy to a working medium help solve this problem by storing energy. Distributed storage in batteries is another possibility. Overall, solar is a shining star of alternative energy, with plummeting costs driving demand. You can also add them easily to your own home or business. Try that with a hydropower plant. Although solar energy is not yet competitive with coal on a kilowatt-hour basis, when compared with the retail cost of electricity, it can be quite efficient on a small scale basis. But large installations will require wide open sunny areas, such as a desert, creating issues of distributing that power over distance. Nevertheless, the price of solar power is expected to fall in the future, possibly by an order of magnitude. Unlike mature technologies such as hydropower, solar energy is in its infancy.

Other. In an era of $4+ gas and whopping home electric bills, many eyes turn to the development of alternative and sustainable energy. Other possibilities not discussed are geothermal energy, harnessing the heat deep in the Earth, and tidal and wave power utilizing the might of the ocean. Of course, you can also modify your Zigo Leader or bicycle to be a pedal generator. See this article from Mother Earth News for some inspiration.

Let’s all just hope the sun doesn’t burn out.

Change your life. Change the world. Zigo.

We’ve recently attended Outdoor Retailer Summer Market, a trade show dubbed “the Woodstock for all things climbing, kayaking, and camping.” While the Zigo Leader may not fit into this descriptor line lock and key, it was still an incredible place for us to mingle amongst the Outdoor Industry and gain feedback.

Although we may be a small company, we feel as though we’ve made a deep and lasting impression amongst our peers. According to thestreet.com, there is a deep rooted long-term fear that the industry may take a downturn. It is the competition of XBox360 and Playstation 3. Are kids sacrificing the traditional pastime playing outside for a virtual world?

While we at Zigo have our internal concerns about the world’s fate due to rising oil costs and keeping ourselves healthy in an increasingly sedentary society, we had no idea that an entire industry was concerned, and enough so to start a $20 million marketing campaign called “I Will” (backed by REI, Northface, and Timberland) to pass on the love of the outdoors to a new generation. The Leader has been fortunate enough to be named as one such product by thestreet.com!

But regardless of the Outdoor Industry Association’s motivations, Zigo began as a way to provide parents a better way to transport their loved ones. With that aim in mind, Outdoor Retailer has given us our first taste of success.

Over the last four years of development, we’ve done a lot of testing with various weights in the ChildPod, handling, and overall consumer experience. We’ve held focus groups for parents for concept validation, design aesthetics, and rideability… but one thing that we haven’t tested is child satisfaction.

While working the booth at Outdoor Retailer, I cannot tell you how many children came up to us and asked to go for a ride. One toddler spotted us through two aisles and ran through another booth to get to us, then ran back twice as fast after we told him he couldn’t ride without asking his mom.

The most promising response, however, came from one parent who actually took the Leader for a spin with her child and her friend’s child. On the first day, two women exhibitors stopped by. On day three, one of them returned with her friend. On the last day, this friend came back with her kids, a fourth woman, and her kids. Then we finally relented, let them go for a ride, and they all came back with smiles.

Change your life. Change the world. Zigo.