This won’t be a popular sentiment, but I don’t care, I’m going to say it anyway.

Folks, enough with this whole “going green” gimmick. The planets ecosystem is unfortunately fucked beyond repair, and too many companies are making a quick buck selling “green” products to a guilt ridden public.

I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’m actually all for trying to save the Earth, but I don’t think driving a stupid Prius and using low wattage light bulbs that prevent me from seeing a fucking single thing are the ways to go about it. Hell, as it is, most of these “planet saving products” don’t even do what they advertise!

So with all of that pessimism out of the way, you could probably imagine my eye-rolling and groaning, when I was sent the Novothink Solar Surge for the iPhone 3G and 3Gs.

The Surge is the first Apple approved charging case available to consumers that features a solar-charging option. Think of it as a hybrid (pun intended) external battery and case/solar charger for your iPhone.

Does it make your not so slim iPhone even bulkier? You bet it does.

Still though, I’ll give the Surge this. It is made very well. Within it’s sleek packaging, the Surge boasts a 1500mAh lithium-ion battery that should double your iPhone’s already sub-par battery life. You can charge the battery via a USB 2.0 port, or more importantly, through the solar panels on its backside.

During my testing of the unit, I charged it by leaving it outside to soak up some rays for a few hours. Thanks to the LED battery status indicator below the solar panels, I knew I had successfully charged up the Surge once all four bars were the color … wait for it … green (of course they are.)

Once attached to my increasingly obsolete 3G, I proceeded to use the hell out of my phone more than usual, just to see if the Surge worked as promised. Much to my surprise, it actually did. It seemed to add a good hour or so of extra juice to my iPhone 3G.

I’ll put it to you this way. I normally wake up at 9 a.m., use my phone throughout the day, and I’ll need to charge it up again, usually around 4 p.m. By using the Novothink Surge, I didn’t have to charge up again until almost 6:00 pm. For that alone, I applaud the hell out of this product.

But, does all that extra battery life actually make the Surge worth buying? Well, I guess that depends on your frame of mind. If you’re like me, and you’re either tired of all this “going green” nonsense or, if you couldn’t deal with additional bulkiness added to your iPhone, then I can’t justify paying nearly $70 for this thing.

However, if you’re one of those militant Eco-Nazi types who won’t even let their
house guests use paper napkins (wait, you want me to wipe my mouth with this rag? Gross!) and you’d rather use solar energy while using your iPhone, well, then pick up a Surge. It’s definitely no gimmick.

The Novothink Solar Surge for iPhone 3g and 3GS retails for $69.99.

It’s something of which North American cell phone carriers should take note. Kenya’s Safaricom, in partnership with Chinese cell maker ZTE, has launched a solar powered cell phone made from recyclable materials, Bloomberg reports.

ZTE Coral-200 Solar. Credit: Flickr/techfever

ZTE claims its Coral-200 phone can recharge using the sun’s rays and has a talk time of a little over two hours. In a country like Kenya, the phone is a perfect addition to current cell options.

While there are more than 17 million cell phone subscribers in Kenya, only 1.3 million have access to constant electricity. Many people have to go into major metropolises just to charge their phones, a major inconvenience.

While the ZTE Coral isn’t the glitziest solar phone on the market, it serves a great purpose to people in Kenya.

Samsung Blue Earth

Earlier this year Samsung also introduced a solar phone with spectacular specs. The phone is made of recyclable plastic and boasts a pedometer, MMS‚ capability and a touch screen. LG and Sharp have also manufactured solar phones. None of phones are, however, slated for a U.S. release. What a waste.

Samsung Blue Earth. Credit: Flickr/uriondo

Cell phone carriers in North America should look to these phones as options for at least the outdoorsy-types. Solar-powered phones give campers the ability to stay connected while in the wilderness, just in case something happens.

As low-cost options with GSM networks, consumers could purchase the phones as at least backups to their iPhones or smart phones until solar phones can boast more impressive features, more along the lines of those offered by smart phones.

I know I’d love to have one.

Across most of Major League Baseball (MLB), teams are turning greener than the outfield grass, reports the June 2009 issue of E – The Environmental Magazine (now posted at www.emagazine.com/view/?4664). They’re reducing energy consumption, extending recycling efforts, and taking the first steps into renewable energy. So far, four parks, including Fenway Park in Boston, the nation’s oldest, draw some of their power from solar energy.

There’s activity on the construction side as well, with green stadiums opening in each of the last two years, and another one on the way for 2010. Citi Field, the new home of the New York Mets, just opened in April. Last season brought Nationals Park in Washington, the first Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certified Major League stadium (it reached the silver level), and next season promises a new park in Minnesota seeking LEED gold.

Building from the ground up gives new parks environmental opportunities that existing parks don’t have. Both Nationals Park and Citi Field have energy-efficient field lighting and waterless and low-flow plumbing fixtures, for example, and both designs incorporate green (vegetative) roofs and white (reflective) roofs to battle the heat-island effect. Additionally, both projects emphasized using recycled steel and concrete, and minimized construction waste sent to landfills.

But it’s not only new stadiums that are getting a green makeover. The previous Red Sox owners were loudly on record as wanting to relocate to the city’s waterfront, where, if they’d wanted to, they could have achieved all sorts of green firsts ‚­ not to mention considerable new revenue streams. But the owners decided to update the current ballpark instead, preserving not only its historical allure but all its embodied energy, a fact acknowledged by the city last year when it named Fenway one of its 12 greenest buildings.

It is likely that the vast majority of green construction work over the next several decades will also be renovation, not new construction.‚  MLB is at the end of an epic building boom, and most parks are far nearer their beginnings their ends.

Stadiums “don’t simply get built and then remain intact for 30-40 years,” says John McHale, MLB’s executive vice president for administration. “There’s a lot of rearranging and re-purposing of space, probably at the 8-10 year mark, and then again at 20‚­about every decade. I expect the renovation work is going to be done with a much higher consciousness to LEED certification than has ever been the case.”

Expanding the Field

And the promotional opportunities are evident to more than just the National Resources Defense Council‚­which has partnered with MLB‚­and the teams. All four of the solar installations at MLB parks‚­at the homes of the Colorado Rockies, the San Francisco Giants, the Boston Red Sox and the Cleveland Indians‚­were funded in part by local utilities or nonprofits.

In Cleveland, the club was approached by the nonprofit group Green Energy Ohio, the host of the 2007 National Solar Conference, “because they wanted a show piece for the attendees to come see,” says Brad Mohr, assistant director of ballpark operations. The result was a 42-panel, 8.4-kilowatt array.

Mohr, a passionate proponent of renewable energy who now is investigating wind turbines for the club, thinks the panels will not only influence “the average person used to coal burning,” but could also yield an even broader benefit: “What I’m hoping for is that a startup will see that photovoltaics work at this latitude, recognize that Northeast Ohio has an incredibly skilled labor force from the car manufacturing plants that have closed,” and open a plant, he says.

How the Yankees Dropped the Ball

To environmentalists and residents in surrounding New York neighborhoods, a Bronx cheer seems the most appropriate response to the new Yankee Stadium project. They and some of the stadium’s Bronx neighbors are furious at the Yankees and the city for building over 22 acres of public parkland and cutting down 377 mature trees, 70% of the local tree population in a poor area that already had a sky-high asthma rate.

While the stadium accommodates fewer spectators (52,325, including standing room), it boasts more concessionaires, restrooms and nearly double the retail space of the old haunts. There are also more luxury suites: 56 instead of 19, plus 410 “party suites.”‚  Front-row seats sell for a Ruthian $2,500 each.

But don’t expect to see parks advocates lining up for them at the turnstiles.‚  “Kids were crying while they chopped down these trees with no warning whatsoever,” says Geoffrey Croft, president of New York City Park Advocates and outspoken opponent of the stadium project.

Critics cite among their grievances the secretive nature of the city’s deal to allow the Yankees to pave over popular Macombs Dam and John Mullaly parks, which was negotiated and signed before the public was informed, they say. Protests and legal actions against the project were unsuccessful.

“Everybody just loves the Yankees so much that they wouldn’t even consider what the people had to say,” says Karen Argenti, a board member of the Bronx Council for Environmental Quality, which also opposed the new stadium. “There were no elected officials who would stand up for the community. It was impossible to get a fair hearing on this.”

E – The Environmental Magazine distributes 50,000 copies six times per year to subscribers and bookstores. Its website, www.emagazine.com, enjoys 100,000 monthly visitors. E also publishes EarthTalk, a nationally syndicated environmental Q&A column distributed free to 1,750 newspapers, magazines and websites throughout the U.S. and Canada ( www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek). Single copies of E’s May/June 2009 issue are available for $5 postpaid from: E Magazine, P.O. Box 469111, Escondido, CA 92046. Subscriptions are $29.95 per year, available at the same address.