'Environment-friendly'

Environmentally friendly, also referred to as nature friendly, is a term used to refer to goods and services considered to inflict minimal harm on the environment.[1] Due to the fact there is no existing international standard for this term, the International Standards Organization deemed it too vague to be meaningful.[2]

Environmentally friendly labels are used across the globe to promote products, however there is no international standard, and many different labels. There are three types of environmental labels. Type I is a label that is only achieved after the approval of a 3rd party, Type II is a self-made claim, and Type III labels give information to the consumer about all products rather than selectively pick products that pass a standard.[3][4]


North America
In the United States, the phrase is commonly used for advertising or on packaging to promote a sale, but no Federal standard is required to display the labels, and thusly the Environmental Protection Agency has deemed them useless in determining whether a product is truly green.[2]

In Canada one label is that of the Environmental Choice Program.[5] Created in 1988,[6] only products approved by the program are allowed to display the label.[7]


Europe
Products located in members of the European Union can use the EU's Eco-label pending the EU's approval.[8] EMAS is another EU label[9] that signifies whether an organization management is green as opposed to the product.[10] Germany also uses the Blue Angel, based on Germany's standards.[5]


Oceania
The Energy Rating Label is a Type III label[11][4] that provides information on "energy service per unit of energy consumption".[12] It was first created in 1986, but negotiations led to a redesign in 2000.[13]


International
Energy Star is a program with a primary goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.[14] Energy Star has different sections for different nations or areas, including the United States,[15] the European Union [16] and Australia.[17]


Methods

Pest control
Integrated pest management is regarded as a more environmentally friendly form of pest control than traditional pesticides,[18][19] as its goal is to reduce pesticide use to a minimum by using a variety of less impactive means, with pesticides only as the last resort. Biological pest control is another form of control considered by many experts to be environmentally friendly.[20]


Waste management
Recycling and composting are viewed as more environmentally friendly forms of waste management than traditional burying or burning practices.[21] Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, has the largest composting facility in the world; representing 35% of Canada's centralized composting capacity.[22] The $100-million co-composter results in Edmonton recycling 65% of its residential waste.[22]

We can both say Environmental friendly Or Environment Friendly...


REFER TO
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/about_us/technology/environment/e/index.html

2007-07-14 23:14:41 補充：
BUT if u use ENVIRONMENT FRIENDLY 後面一定係要跟 Technology.

對不起，上面有一處講錯，
文法是 adverb modify adjective
所以是 environmentally modify friendly (adj)


.....

我是上面的 "allofusme"

environment-friendly (correct);
environmental-friendly (incorrect)

上面那位朋友冇聽過唔等於是錯，
environment-friendly (correct)
(being friendly to the environment)
結構等如出題者講的 "user-friendly" ，
所以是對的。


另一個講法是：
environmentally-friendly (correct)
friendly (adj) modify environmentally (adverb)
文法結構冇錯，
巴士車尾都是寫著這個，亦是最常用的講法。


反而 environmental-friendly 才是錯的，
environmental (adj)
friendly (adj)
這是複合形容詞的結構用法，
要正確使用複合形容詞須附合一個規則，
舉個例你就明白
例：red-soft carpet = red carpet + soft carpet
(一張紅色軟地氈)
複合形容詞須能夠拆開獨立修飾後面的名詞，
兩者的意思仍然要解得通。

現在返回 environmental-friendly (engine)
拆開後變成，
environmental engine (meaningless)
friendly engine (meaningless)
兩者都解不通，所以是錯的。

我就無聽過Environment-friendly啦
I think environmental-friendly is correct