Take Me To Post Comment Form Happy Earth Day! Or is that even an appropriate thing to say?

One of the pecularities of being an environmental journalist is that you rarely have the opportunity to write about anything "happy." Generally you're reporting on how our planet has less and less of the good stuff (native plants and animals, forests, fresh water, glaciers) and too much of the things that are potentially detrimental (cars, pavement, carbon emissions, nonrecyclable waste, invasive species).

It can be pretty depressing. Yet there is good news: We can fix almost anything that's wrong with the environment simply by changing our behavior. In some cases that will mean drastic changes, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

I see Earth Day as sort of an aspirational holiday, a time to celebrate not what we are but what we can become. We know we can do better, because we've done it before. Ohio's Cuyahoga River is no longer so polluted it catches on fire. The bald eagle is no longer facing extinction. Gasoline no longer contains lead. Spray cans no longer contain CFCs, which destroy the Earth's ozone layer. Any environmental challenge can be overcome, but it takes both the political will and the involvement of ordinary citizens.

Unfortunately, it's been a long time since the United States has had the political will to do anything positive for the environment. That's why it's refreshing to see so many corporations moving forward and doing the right thing voluntarily. Not only are they not waiting for the federal government to act; sometimes they're actually working in defiance of the EPA, which refuses to enforce its own laws.

I salute those companies. However, I want to be sure that they really are making a difference and it's not just "greenwashing." Here at The Times, I'm still getting dozens of pitches from companies, trying to convince me that writing about their "green" product or service would be the perfect Earth Day story.

I have joked that I would not be surprised if Hallmark started cutting down trees to produce "Happy Earth Day" cards. It does disturb me that a day which was meant to be about reducing our impact on the Earth has become an occasion when we are urged to consume more stuff. But if those purchases help consumers make long-term changes (such as buying and using a compost bin), then it could be worthwhile.

I want to praise some of my fellow journalists for getting the Earth Day message out to the public. In the media, we have no ulterior motive for promoting Earth Day. It doesn't help us attract more readers/viewers/listeners. We're doing this because we truly want people to become more educated about environmental issues.

On Earth Day 2007, NPR launched a year-long series of stories on climate change called "Climate Connections." That excellent project presumably ends today, and I will miss it.

On TV, CNN has been doing a series of reports called "Planet in Peril." The NBC family of networks is doing a "green week," incorporating environmental messages even into its talk shows and sitcoms. National Geographic Channel offered an extraordinary program, "Human Footprint," that graphically demonstrated how much each person consumes in their lifetime.

In print media, TIME magazine this week replaced its trademark red-bordered cover with a green border. Inside, the magazine offered a "Marshall plan" for addressing climate change, arguing that the U.S. should approach the problem with the same determination that we used to put a man on the moon.

Everywhere you look these days, you're hearing about the environment. And that's a positive development. Because the more it becomes part of the public consciousness, the more people will incorporate change into their daily lives. It does work; even here in Georgia, where we tend to be a little slow on the uptake, people are finally learning to cut back on their water usage.

Celebrate Earth Day? Yes! Let's celebrate our efforts -- give ourselves a pat on the back for what we've done so far, and encourage each other to do more.