Friday, October 30, 2009

Home Sweet Smog


After moving to New York, I would go spend the summers with my extended family. It was great! I looked forward to perfect weather, my grandmothers plush gardens that had all my favorite fruits, and going to the beach just a bike ride away. My home state of California is a beautiful place; it has a wonderful variety of this to do and see. There is one not-so pleasant sight, and that is the smog. I never noticed the severe pollution until I got older. I saw it coming out of smoke stacks in the same view of Redondo Beach. I noticed it looking out the window of the airplane seeing thick, ugly smog covering Los Angeles.

Smog is a kind of air pollution that usually comes from burning fossil fuels, used in industries but mostly car emissions. The sulfur dioxide produced from the fuels and smoke combine to make classic smog (green-planet). This nasty stuff has a horrible effect on building surfaces, crops, human heart and lung, and more (msnbc). Over the past decade, California has had at least half of its counties fail clean air tests (msnbc). Some levels have even violated the Federal Clean Air Act but there doing something about it. They’ve initiated the Smog Check program. This requires biennial inspections for all vehicles (except diesel powered, electric, natural gas powered vehicles over 14 tons, hybrids, motorcycles, trailers, or classic cars) to ensure that car emissions do not increase beyond a certain standard so as to not have exceptional polluters en masse; all failed vehicles must be repaired (Calepa). People mock the Smog Checks because it’s inconvenient and there’s a fee but I like it. When you really look at their plan, California officials are trying to promote a shift to clean transportation, even if subtly. They recognize that car emissions are a problem and had to make an unpopular decision to hopefully clean up California.

I’m not saying that smog checks are going to reverse everything and make it all better. I’m just really proud that something practical is being done about it. We have climate change this and ozone that, an oil crisis and sustainability issues. They’re all complex, with no answer to make it right but something must be done. I don’t want the heirs of this mess, generations from now to say of mine that we were too scared, to selfish, and too stupid to try.

http://www.calepa.ca.gov/Publications/Reports/repgov.pdf

http://www.green-planet-solar-energy.com/smog-air-pollution.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4862359/

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Climate Change Is Real

A survey conducted from September 30th to October 4th shows that currently 65 percent of the US public believe that climate change is a serious problem. This is apparently a drop in the percentage from 2007 when 77 percent of the US public considered climate change a problem. Whether this is a result of people being ignorant to important issues or is just a matter of statistics I dont know, but what I do know is that from personal experience I think climate change is a serious issue.

When I was younger I can remember waking up on christmas morning and there would be snow on the ground, but these past few years christmas hasn't been white but instead rainy and muddy. I've also noticed that in the past few years there has been many more rainy days. A few years ago we had so much rain one week that all of the streams and rivers in my hometown were flooded. One of the bridges near my house was washed away, some people who lived by the river had major damage done to their homes and in some places on the roads, the ground underneath had so much water that when you stepped on it, the water would gush up through cracks in the pavement. Every summer since this happened, three years ago, we've had a problem with flooding, the last two years weren't as severe but it's still enough to convince me how much of a threat climate change really is.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6300

Monday, October 26, 2009

Is Cuba really all that great?

After watching the video about Cuba in class I was slightly skeptical. Any time I've heard of Cuba, while in other classes or just over the news, it really hasn't been with the glowing enthusiasm that this movie portrayed.

While I am not saying it is impossible for the country to be as good as the movie proclaims it to be, I am saying that it felt like I was watching a Cuban propaganda video. Even if Cuba is a sustainable society, that doesn't mean its a good place to be. The country did these things because they had to, because their government demanded them to. Rationing of food by a government, especially when the people have no say can be an incredibly dangerous thing and I feel like the movie portrayed it as a benefit. The government it's self has stated the rationing has nothing to do with sustainability but everything to do with assuring everyone has the minimum intake of food. I simply would not stand for Obama deciding to only give me the "minimal intake" of food every month. Of course the rations can be subsidized with market purchased food a large portion of Cuba cannot afford the price.

The government in Cuba has strict policies regarding owning a computer and accessing the internet. Only a selected few may even access the internet and those few are closely monitored regarding online usage. Leaving the country is almost out of the question seeing as the government regulates out-of-country travel and rarely lets people leave. Dictatorship is in full effect in Cuba and regardless of it's sustainability I do not believe it would be a good place to live.

HOWEVER, American government is much different than Cuban, hopefully this is a obvious fact but I can understand your confusion if you where thinking of the last Presidential Administration. I believe that with people free of oppression we can not only model but surpass Cuba in so many ways. The hardest part is going to be getting the average American to realize the urgency of the situation, once this is done America will do what it always has in the past, rise to the challenge.

With large corporations spreading half-truths and lies it's very difficult to sort out the truth from the fairytale. If you watch the commercials during Monday night football, you'd be reassured that every company is going green but if you did a little research online you'd think the world was going to end tomorrow. The truth lies in between the extremes, but seeing it is very difficult. It's like trying to hear someone tell you their idea, with two other people screaming at you from left and right. Regardless American's can do it.

Yes we are much larger than Cuba and our government can't literally force us but we have something that Cuba didn't. In America we have access to more resources and more people willing to use them. When you force someone to do something, it get's done half-ass, when you make someone understand the importance of getting something done, they do it right (usually!). So to basically answer the question posed in class, Do you think America can do what Cuba did for the energy crisis? My answer is yes, and we can do it better.

Sources:
In class Movie and other Ualbany classes.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/10/2009102624829972232.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba
http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_CUB.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107443.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_Cuba

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Cuba Living A Better Life?

During the late 1980’s early 1990’s Cuba’s economy was hit with a sledge hammer when the Soviet Union collapsed. What was once their primary source of outside goods and revenue their over dependence on imports failed them. The effects of peak oil crisis hit Cuba before anyone else, isolated, their entire way of life changed for survival. According to the in class film “How Cuba Survived the Oil Crisis,” Cuba’s imports and exports dropped tremendously by eighty percent. They encountered an energy famine virtually overnight, no oil, lack of electricity and food. Starvation quickly settled in and the people of Cuba needed to act quickly and adapt in order to survive. Agriculture skyrocketed. With no more food coming in, people needed to make their own. Those who lived in rural areas actually had the advantage of land, and farmers became much more respected wealthy. In fact some took from the city to rural settings. The government purchased with what money it had left thousands of bikes for its people with the knowledge that transportation would be an issue. Cars and other motor vehicles for the most part became useless blocks of metal that took up space. There was no oil to power them. The Cuban government also began rationing, so people could only get a certain amount of food a month necessary. However this was not enough. Farming and gardening began to spring up everywhere including the city called urban gardening. According to the movie, October of 1993 with the help of $26,000 American dollars began the popular rooftop gardens in cities. This urban gardening movement eliminated the need for transportation of food over long distances and of course all of this created new jobs and eventually revitalized the Cuban economy. This was not an easy process however; organic farming as they realized, takes a drastic transition. After such abuse of the land’s soil using artificial fertilizers and pesticides, the soil takes time to rebuild. Housing became much simpler due to the increase in difficulty to create cement and now many rely on the use of solar panels for electricity and to heat things such as water, when before the crisis hit, 95% of Cuba was connected to the grid. Air conditioning is hard to come by which is especially annoying a climate such as theirs, also most elevators are no longer in use. So many things we take for granted have been swept from them, but this did not hinder their ability to thrive. They found other ways to do things. Now twenty-one times less pesticides are used, finding adequate organic substitutes to solve problems, people even fabricated green house type housings for their gardens and farms constructed of fabric mesh that not only reduces the amount of pestering insects, but also increases their growing season. Another movie fact according to the urban planner who spoke, transportation is still terrible but what used to only have three major universities, Cuba now has fifty small universities spread all over the country; a perfect example of how the country has adapted to its problems on so many levels. In their struggle, a transition which took about six years Cubans have built much closer communities and strong cultural ties, with each other’s help for example among city dwellers who don’t have much land to garden, they now help each other. With cooperation and reciprocation, together they have the potential to gain much more and live more comfortably. In six years, one can argue that Cubans were eating almost as well as they did before 1989. In fact it is true that they are eating much healthier diets as a result of their organic transition, and how ironic is it that their infant death rate is less than that of the U.S., a developed country!

Cuba’s energy famine in 1989 was and still is a great example of what and a similar oil crisis may hold in store for us. In fact after famous geologist Hubbert accurately predicted the U.S. peak oil in 1970, which resulted in record high interest rates, gas prices, energy shortage, and of course the resultant plunge of the economy. Perhaps if we had took this more seriously along with the example of Cuba, and began seriously implementing steps for an organic transition sooner, maybe we would not be facing the much larger problem of the imminent Global Oil Crisis now. Alright well as I say, better late than never. Our way of life has to undergo drastic changes. Yes, I know way easier said than done, but what are we to do when it is too late? What kind of life will our kids have, and our kid’s kids? We can start by large scale urban agricultural and local growing more than ever. Making the transition to organic foods is one of the most important steps to take. A fact from the in class film, “the typical American a year consumes 10 barrels of oil for food, 9 for cars, and 7 for houses.” That just goes to show you how much we depend on oil for food. Is this an inclination for future starvation? Probably not for the U.S., as we discussed in class, due to the climate and diversity of land in the U.S. we will probably be okay. However that is a very egocentric way of looking at things being that as humans, shouldn’t it be our duty to collectively work together to save our planet globally? What is six years in the scope of things? This is about how long it took Cuba to get on its feet after its energy famine, why not strive for this before we stare our issue in the face, and smell it nasty breathe. Cuba did have an arguable advantage to undergo this transition indeed, because they a dictatorship nation, the government sort of put its foot down and made the initial decisions that forced people to keep the ball rolling. You could say they were thrown into the water, and had to learn how to swim, and that they did.
Home for the weekend, this morning I actually went on a short bike ride with my family to a new walkway bridge that opened up over the Hudson. On the way there passing through the city of Poughkeepsie I noticed plastic wind turbines sort of things, sort of like giant ‘whirligigs’ that harness any wind and convert it to electricity via wiring system of some sort. Surprised I actually stopped to take a picture which is below in a comment as soon as I find my camera cable. My town also has a local farming system built and farmed by locals, where one is able to purchase their all organic produce. I see how this sort of thing builds closer knit communities, and I enjoy it. It really makes me want to get more involved. Slowly I see changes, but this needs to be far more invasive in everyone’s lives to make any difference. My favorite quote by a speaker from the in class movie was, “If you don’t take care of the earth, the earth will take care of us,…get rid of us!” Human’s can and have always adapted, however it is up to us whether we would like to take a slightly easier path, than the hardest. By no means will anything be easy but much better than doing nothing.

References

- In Class Movie

“The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived the Oil Crisis”

























"Think Globally, Act Locally"

As we saw in Wednesday’s movie, the end of oil was not the end of Cuba. They were able to survive the collapse of their most powerful ally Russian and being shut out of international trade. Rather than ruin, Cubans reinvented the way they lived life. Their forced end of oil allowed the nation to move forward in ways it would have never been able to. It increased the welfare of the state and the people; Cubans gained good heath, a better sense of community, and energy and trade independence. Their response to the embargo allowed them to become a sustainable society. Cuba implemented solar energy, bikes, urban gardens, organic fertilizers, and animal power; simple things that benefit the people and the planet.

What if this consciousness infected with world? What if it didn't require a missile to draw the world’s attention to the importance of sustainability, community, and self-sufficiency? The world needs to take a lesson from Cuba and begin to “think globally, act locally”* so that we too can prosper not in terms of dollars signs but in the health of our people, country, and environment. One of our problems is that we look down on counties like Cuba. We look at their government (not that I agree), industry, and economic status and call them “poor” when we happily pay a ransom for the rape our planet for her resources, and then pollute it. We are impoverished in health and penniless in relationship. I truly hope that we can freely choose to make a change rather than be forced go down kicking in screaming.

*Some guy said it in the Cuba movie :]

Ladybug Infestation or Good Luck?

This past week, I was getting ready to go to class as one of my suitemates came back to our suite. He said, “Watch out for the ladybugs outside, keep your mouth closed”, “ladybugs?” I said. Sure enough, walking outside I walked into what seemed to be a swarm of ladybugs. I looked behind me, at the tower, and it was covered in ladybugs as far as I could see. After returning from class I noticed ladybugs inside the tower, in my suite, and even in my room. I assume many others have also witnessed this phenomenon, so I thought I would shed some light on the subject matter.

It seems these ladybugs, or Asian lady beetles, are in search for warmth during this early period of cold weather. The bugs seem to be attracted to tall buildings, pale in color, that are facing southwest. This is a normal occurrence, but why in this magnitude? Some scientists credit it to an overabundance of their food, Aphids (i.e. plant lice). Some scientists say it is because of our sporadic weather patterns; mixtures of hot and cold weeks. So, these bugs might appear in the highest concentrations on days of warm weather following a short, cold period. The ladybug releases a pheromone when it thinks it has found a “good” spot (warm and pale in color). I heard that this pheromone could reach other ladybugs up to a mile away, so maybe this can explain for the large numbers.

While they aren’t harmful, they may be annoying to some. Close your windows, patch up any holes in your window screens, and keep your door closed, especially if you live in a tower. Do not kill the ladybugs, for a few reasons- 1) they could stain your clothes: As a defense mechanism, when they feel threatened they release a “bad” odor substance that is yellow (will stain). 2) They are good for the environment: they are used to naturally control many plant “pests”, like aphids. So, ladybugs can be seen as a natural alternative to various harmful and un-natural pesticides and insecticides. They are one small way we can work with our natural environment, to rid ourselves of dependence on the many “unnatural”, or environmentally harmful substances we currently overuse. Also, ladybugs are seen as a sign of good fortune in some cultures- so maybe good luck is on the way.

Reference:

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2009/10/23/news/6315256.txt

Saturday, October 24, 2009

The Large Effect of One Small Change

In discussion of the things that we can do, and the small steps in the right direction of change, I have been thinking about what is being done. One thing that I realized, that I think is a step in the right direction, is the installation and use of the new Dyson Airblade hand dryers we now have in our restrooms at the University. At first glance, I was surprised to see these new and futuristic looking dryers. I almost had a confused feeling of how to approach it, but it was very easy to use. I slipped my hand inside, and almost instantly, powerful jets completely dried my hands. The directions said, “Insert hands and slowly remove”. The machine was loud but did its job very efficiently.

So what is so special and unique about these hand dryers past their futuristic design? Well, they are environmentally friendly. They use less energy, save trees, and promote clean hands through “airblade” technology. According to their specifications listed on the Dyson website, they use up to 80% less energy compared to traditional hand dryers, use a clean air HEPA filter that removes 99.9 % of the bacteria in the air used to dry our hands, and can dry 22 pairs of hands for the same cost of one paper-towel. This is a great improvement in efficiency, which is a crucial step to the environmental changes we as people need to implement on our plan for change. Twenty-two pairs of hands dried for the same cost of one paper-towel. Just think how many paper towels we each used to use to dry our hands just one time. This is a great step in efficiency, most certainly, in respect to the number of trees that will be “saved” from being cut down to be “manufactured” into paper-towels. These dryers save time (which is critical to our faced paced lives today), trees (valuable resources), and energy, which we know is a very limited resource.

One thing I do not know is who made the push for these new dryers; this small but valuable step. Was this the work of students? Or some sort of administrative decision to save the University that other valuable (yet imaginarily valuable) resource: Money. Either way this shows us that something seemingly small can affect our global environment and although on a small scale currently, what if everyone adopted these new dryer’s throughout the world? …. Think about it.

References:

http://www.dysonairblade.com/technology/environment.asp

"350"

Last year I took a class to fulfill a general education requirement in information literacy, UUNL206x, which was taught by Irina Holden. This class was aimed at research in the physical and natural sciences. Entering the class, I did not have many expectations besides completing my requirement in information literacy, but the class proved to be very valuable to the rest of my college career thus far. One of the things that stuck with me after completing the course, besides some of the very valuable research techniques, is that I continue to read the New York Times via the Internet. This was required for the class but the habit remained after the course because of the valuable information, particularly in the science and health sections.

One article in the science section caught my eye in its relatedness to this class. The article is titled “Campaign to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Picks a Number” by Andrew C. Revkin and was published on October 24, 2009. The article focuses on the number “350”, its significance, and why environmentalist campaign’s are choosing to display awareness of this number. The number 350 is in reference to the number of carbon dioxide parts per million (ppm) present in our atmosphere, that if surpassed can cause drastic effects on the atmosphere and climate. Currently, the number stands at 387 ppm according to the article, a significant increase over the recommended maximum. Some scientists say that 350 is an impossible goal at the present time or in the near future and almost seems absurd. Regardless of the actual number, the goal should be to decrease the current level not slow the rise or halter the increase. www.350.org has some valuable information on the subject matter and is run by environmentalist Bill McKibben. Sociologists question this older tactic in the fight against global warming and deleterious environmental effects, and say that a fight with legislation and litigation would be more effective. I agree, but this is a start and awareness is always the first step in progress.

So how can we decrease this number? Well one way is to decrease and limit emissions of various harmful substances that we have become so accustomed to. (i.e. fossil fuels and coals) We must plant trees; not destroy them. Overall this is a problem that we (the human race) will have to deal with and the main focus as we have so eloquently discussed in this class is “change”. Renovation of our current lifestyle and overhaul of the things we depend on and use for energy.

References:

http://www.350.org/understanding-350#6

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/science/earth/25threefifty.html?_r=1&ref=science

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Back to the Old Days

From what we have learned in this class the future of ours and other nations is one of forced restrictions of energy and consumer goods. With the coming events nearly inevitable due to peak oil as well as global warming it is necessary for us to rethink the way we conduct our lives. In my opinion, the biggest obstacle to this is peoples expectations of what their lives should be. Many people who belong to the upper and middle classes have been blinded by consumption and now are unable to see the illogical nature of their behavior. The evidence for this is the fact that while the evidence of our future crises is clear many seem oblivious to reality. People continue to consume energy at an accelerated rate irrespective of the present need to conserve. I personally know a handful of people who would be unable to cope with a situation similar to that of Cuba as we saw in the movie. I believe that this is because many people have lost touch with our primitive roots and are now unable to deal with a life closer to the earth. I would hope that even though we may not react before a crisis occurs, we may be able to react fast enough once it has happened to overt disaster. The fear I have is that the people who are disconnected now may be thrown into denial when the crisis occurs and may damage our chances of having an effective reaction. After this stage of denial I believe that these people will panic and once again damage our ability to react effectively.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Monitoring Earth

While on the internet earlier this week I came across a couple of articles that I found interesting and that both correlated with each other. The main idea of the first article was about various space agencies teaming up with google to monitor the rates of deforestation of tropical rainforests using satellite imagery. This monitoring of the forests from space is providing even more accurate and credible data on deforestation rates and carbon content of the forests than we have had before. A similar project has been started monitoring the ice sheets in Antarctica and the rate of these ice sheets melting. New more accurate results show that the ice sheets are melting at a slightly slower right than was being estimated.

I think these new methods of gathering more accurate data are great ideas but I also can't help but wonder if it will have any different effect on producing a solution. While this data may be more accurate it doesn't seem to me like it tells us anything we didn't already know. The forests are still being cut down and the ice sheets are still melting because of global warming. In my opinion our energy would be better spent working on solutions to the problem instead of trying to polish the knowledge we already have.

http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/40613

http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/40604

Less Needs to be More

In today's video we saw how Cuba had to react to an overnight change in the availability of oil. They were forced to make changes so they would be able to survive. According to the video, Cuba uses one-eighth of the energy that the United States uses. That is a significant difference in energy. One would expect or at least i expected that their life expectancy would be lower than ours roughly based on the energy consumption. Well boy was i wrong, Cuba and the United States have equivalent life expectancies. I feel that this speaks worlds about the excess energy the United States uses. There is no excuse for the excess energy. We can't argue that that it is necessary for human life to continue or for longer life expectancy when we can see that Cuba is doing just fine. I believe some of the speakers hit the nail right on the head, Americans need to change the way they think. One example a man used was about asking everyone to turn off lights to save energy. The Cubans turned off the lights because they knew it would hep. He said that if you ask americans the same question they're going to ask why? and say that they pay for it. I agree with his answer on this. As Americans we grow up learning that if we do well in school we'll go to good colleges and if we go to good colleges we'll get good jobs and good jobs have high salaries and benefits. We know that if we work hard we deserve the credit and should have something to show for it. We pride ourselves in the fact that we "have come so far" technologically. We currently crave biggER, fastER, newER, bettER things. The "ER" implying that its improved upon the old. We update cell phones, ipods, and TVs like its a necessity when most of the times it usually cosmetic. I feel like this notion is apart of why it's be so difficult for people to accept living differently and using less energy. Our way of life consists of working hard to improver or better ourselves and with that comes more possession and better possessions. The luxuries of not having to wash dishes but have a dish washer, or having a maid, or a driver. Just the other day i was saying that i hope i am wealthy enough to never wash my own clothes or my own dishes. It's the society that we live in. I can not imagine living a different life style and i am sure there are plenty of other people that feel the same way. Matter of fact at the begining of the semester when i was reading the cartoon guide for this class my friend asked what class the book was for and i told him and we started talking and he said "oh stop it Katie, you know we not gonna have to worry about a shortage of oil during our life time" and he's not the only on i know who feels this way. People do not think its as real of a threat as it is. They don't feel that they are the one who should be responsible for fixing the problem either. So i can't imagine the US handing the change very well. I believe if it was a necessity we'd be able to but if it was a voluntary attempt was made to be less reluctant on energy it would not go over well. I hope that we can learn from the Cuba video. I would love to see Americans working with one another to change the fate of the planet but were gonna need a lot more education on the topic. The video also pointed out just how many books and articles that have been written and they've helped but still its not enough. It makes me wonder what type of catalyst would be needed to really get the ball rolling. Especially among government officials.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Kittens

I was home sick last week with what the University recognized as a "flu-like illness". When I returned to my home to Springfield, my parents surprised me with two new kittens! It is amazing how much you can learn from such tiny creatures. For example, they have never been outside before. I opened the door to let them sniff the air, and they were petrified! It reminds me of those who are afraid of the necessary changes in our energy production--too frightened to step into new territory, despite all of the incredible opportunities it may hold.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

NItrogen Fertilizer Decrease, Healthy Americans Increase

Enriching the Earth chapter 8 we see that it touches base again on the U.S. and what we would face when nitrogen based fertilizer is no longer available. Smil hits on the fact that the US currently supplies 3600 kcal/capita, our need is about 2000 kcal/capita. This is quite a difference and shows that if we did lose our nitrogen fertilizers it wouldn’t effect us negatively. In fact we would still have leftover food after our specific need.
So it brings up another point, America needs to slim down and when we are faced with a tightening of food supply I think it could be in one sense or another good for the people. You always hear people talking about obesity trends in the US but there hasn’t been any huge change to reverse this trend. The first day in my nutrition class this semester Dr.Wulff put up several slides to show the change. Over a period of 18 years some states have increased from 10% obesity rate to 30% obesity, that is a huge difference. How can it be that some countries are starving while the US gets almost double what it needs which results in a large amount of obese people. In chapter 8 Smil says that soon we will have to adopt a Mediterranean type diet, which is not a bad idea at all. A Mediterranean diet includes healthy fats (olive oil, canola oil) , lots of fruits and vegetables, healthy grains such as pasta and rice, and emphasis on the small amount of red meat you are allowed to consume. If America was put on this type of diet we would see the obesity rates falling because a large part of our diets consist of red meat which is high in saturated fat which ultimately contains high calorie content.
So once agriculture has to tighten their belts they will no longer be able to sustain the meat industry since so much of its cereal and legume production, around 70%, goes directly to feed for animals. When it is no longer plausible to expend so much of a harvest to feeding the animals cut backs will have to happen so animal meat will not be so readily available. The new goal will to make sure the people are fed and it will have to be that in order to do that we have to make some changes. I think the changes will not be so bad on the people. Even though Americans are so dependant in their lifestyles to food always being there and in abundance that once food production decreases we have the opportunity to grasp a new healthier lifestyle.

Sources
Enriching the Earth- Smil
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4644

Friday, October 16, 2009

If She Were My Mother


Historians note that the Industrial Revolution as one of the most important events in the twentieth century, and it was. It completely changed the way we live life. An abundance of cheap energy had found its purpose. New and improved technologies like the steam engine, the sowing machine, the automobile, and the airplane. It also was the cause of mass urbanization in everyplace that chose to participate.

While these great things were born from such an exciting time, there was also a serious negative consequence both to the planet and those who live on it. Industrialization, with its mechanized, large scale manufacturing produced fly ash, and massive air and water pollution. We still continue to strip the earth for her resources, fill her waters with poison, and infect her land with our junk.

Sometimes I feel as if we treat the earth like we have somewhere else to go. It’s not like when we trash this place we’ll just get a new one. A bigger, better version of what we had. Right now, humankind has this relationship with the earth where all we do is take, take, and take. For a century we’ve refused to think of the long-term consequences of our lifestyles. All I know is if Earth was my mother, she’d be pissed.

I hope that in the light of all this green talk that nations and all the individuals within them will make steps toward more sustainable lifestyles. I hope that we begin to live like the world is ours and she’s all we have.

(Industrial Revolution information came from my His158 class with David Bassano)

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Bottled Water

In high school I was a part of a group called the Watershed Project. In this group we would run tests on water from different streams and rivers and determine the water quality. After the tests were run we would try to come up with ways that would make the water less polluted and better quality. Since then I have had a personal boycott of bottled water. I think its just stupid to spend my money on something that you can get for free. From taking bio 230 I also know that plastic water bottles are made from oil and they can only be recycled a certain number of times before they cant be reused. After looking on the internet I have found yet another reason to avoid plastic water bottles, the health risks.

Plastic water bottles contain a chemical called bisphenol A and a recent study at Harvard University and by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention shows that drinking water from plastic bottles increases the levels of this chemical in the body by 70%. This chemical, a necessary ingredient in plastic that makes it hard and transparent, also disrupts hormonal systems in the human body. This can lead to increased chances of reproductive defects, brain damage, cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes. This has an increased effect on infants and small children, which is even more of an issue when you consider that many food containers and bottles are made with a plastic that contains the same chemical, bisphenol A.

http://www.naturalnews.com/027236_BPA_health_disease.html



http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/greenberg/archives/2008/02/bottled_water.html

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Wolves

Recently Professor Hirsch asked us to sort of post up something regarding our background and how we got to how we think today. I'm going to be honest when I say I don't really understand he wants us to go about that, so this post is sort of a shot in the dark.
My concern for the environment and a sustainable way of life was a direct consequence of my parents. I can't remember a summer we didn't spend in the Adirondacks camping and hiking, I loved to be out there. As I got older the trips got more intense and I loved it more and more. It was more then just enjoying the outdoors though, thanks much in part to my mom I grew a respect and connection to the woods. As time went on and tales of forest destruction, global warming and extinction started to actually started to mean something to me, I became very concerned. I quickly realized how closely everything was related, even as close to home as the Adirondacks. Global warming could lead to a change in the environment, could kill animals and could ruin much of my beloved northern forests. There where many global threats with very local affects and I made sure to educate myself as best I could. Perhaps my quest is selfish in that It began because I didn't want to lose what was close to me but it continues on today in a desire to protect the earth.
I guess my focus is on wildlife. I've always really enjoyed the company of animals regardless if they where pets or wild. I also feel they face the most immediate threat. Global warming, renewable energy, population and pollution will affect humans directly and these topics are starting to receive positive attention. However preservation of wildlife is not so lucky. While wildlife are affected by all those problems I listed above they too face other threats.
Perhaps the largest threat they face is us. Whether its clubbing of seals in Canada or the aerial hunting of wolves in Alaska, wildlife faces real time threats every moment.
While clubbing of seals is tragic, I feel aerial hunting of wolves is the problem which can be attacked more directly, mainly because it occurs in our own country. Simply stated there is no reason for such a form of hunting. Arguments about subsistence hunters and competition just don't make any scientific sense.
Let me first disprove any notion that it is subsistence and local hunters who use helicopters to hunt wolves. “Twice in the past 12 years, Alaska voters have approved state ballot initiatives to limit the use of aircraft to kill wildlife—and twice the state legislature, encouraged and abetted by the [appointed] board of game, has overridden the citizen-passed laws to restore use of aircraft,” states Rodger Schlickeisen of the non-profit Defenders of Wildlife.
Of course, the people killing the wolves are doing to to control predator population and allow subsistence hunters a chance at bagging some Caribu to survive. However many traditional hunters believe this hunting violates the ethics of hunting and fair chase.
Of course the Alaskan Board of game says their decision to allow aerial hunting of wolves is backed in science. However a lot scientists disagree.
It is problems like these that seem to avoid the public eye because it does not affect most people. Who cares about wolves in Alaska that we never see or hear? Even for people who care it is difficult to maintain awareness about such problems when you have your own life and your own concerns. This is why I fear for wildlife, they have no voice and rely solely on people to represent them, which is not an easy task to say the least.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Is Plastic Better Than Glass?

The other weekend on a visit home I went out to a restaurant with my family for dinner. I have a bad habit of drinking soda for dinner when I go to restaurants, so my brother and I usually order our favorite soda root beer. This time they came in the glass bottles they were originally sealed in (IBC root beer to be exact). I was not surprised, because this is not the first restaurant I have been to that serves glass bottled root beer. However I have noticed that root beer is probably the only soda that is ever served in a glass bottle at restaurants. Let’s face it; most beverages have made the transition from glass to plastic. Coke no longer uses its classic glass bottles as seen advertised in those cute polar bear commercials we all know and love. There is no more milk man who delivers your milk in glass bottles at your door step, and takes the old ones to be used again. Now we have to go to our local Stewart’s gas station or supermarket to pick up a couple of giant plastic gallons of milk to last for the week to fill up those bowls of inviting unhealthy cereals made of corn before school. Yes, beer is still sold in bottles, but far more in cans, and even in most major stadiums, parks, and venues have beer companies made the change to plastic. In the distant past, the glass deposit soda bottle was the only kind of soda bottle available. Plastic bottles are an environmental travesty doing a great job polluting our environment as well as causing health risks. Glass milk bottles were delivered, taken back by the milk men when empty to be washed and sterilized, then used once again. Plastic cannot be sterilized, but sure they can be recycled, at least the ones that actually end up in recycling bins. This is supposed to be the eco-friendly thing to do however they can only be turned into another bottle once. ‘Eco-friendly companies have made efforts however to expand other uses for recycled plastic bottles including transforming them into things such as: plastic lumber, garden supplies, pallets, crates, plastic pipe, kayaks, school lunch trays, park benches, railroad ties, carpet, and fiberfill for clothing, pillows and sleeping bags,’ according to Earth911.com. I came across a very comical and simplified, yet vivid excerpt written by Jules May of the cycle of a plastic bottle. Here it is…

““I’ve got to load them into the back of my car and drive (carbon … carbon) to the dump, where they’re put into a skip. Then a lorry comes along, picks up the skip, and drives (carbon, carbon) to the docks where the bottles are poured into containers and loaded onto a ship which steams halfway around the world (CARBON! CARBON!) to China, where they all get “recycled”.
You know what happens in China? There’s actually not much of any use that you can make out of waste plastic – it’s no good for food, so you can’t make new bottles out of it – so half of it gets burned right away on huge, stinking bonfires – so there goes our clean air. The other half gets shredded, drawn, and eventually rendered down into clothes (fleeces, blankets, and so on), loaded back on a ship, and sent (CARBON! CARBON!) back here, so we can wear our garbage.
And when our garbage clothes eventually wear out? What then? We throw them away (because not even the Chinese can think of anything to do with old woollies). It goes into landfill (because, remember, you can’t burn it). And says there for – you have been listening, haven’t you? – 24,000 years! Did you know that 75% of non-biodegradable landfill is clothes? So it ends up as landfill anyway, in spite of all that transportation and processing.”

This never really hit home to me until I came to college and became a member of the Medical Fraternity. Every semester as a group we go door to door in downtown Albany asking for clothing and non-perishable items that we will donate for them. Surprisingly on such short notice people out of the goodness of their hearts manage to gather up a good amount of items. This past Saturday morning, after about three hours only, out of curiosity we counted up how many articles of clothing we collected which came out to 913!!! Walking door to door we only made it to a couple of neighborhoods. It is amazing how wasteful humans are, and especially in this case how much clothes we must go through and dispose of globally. Plastic bottles are definitely a convenience. They are lighter cheaper to deliver and truck, and not breakable; But even to create plastic, petroleum, our precious and quickly depleting natural resource, is being used not to mention the toxic chemicals that come from them when being disposed. If you ask me plastic bottles need to go. How much are we willing to lose for convenience, apparently money still has a chokehold on the well being of our planet and ultimately our lives.

References

Article 1

http://earth911.com/plastic/plastic-bottles/what-happens-next-to-plastic-bottles/

• Article 2

http://julesmay.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/why-recycling-is-bad-for-the-environment/

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Commercial Hunting

After reading this weeks readings in the Cartoon Guide to the Environment I realized what I wanted to blog about since it is something that has irked me for quite some time. I am talking about commercial hunting, the very source of rainforest diversity depletion, food chains getting disrupted, illegal whaling in Japan, and much other environmental factors gone awry.

Before the world was industrialized that is to say before we started a mass market that could be traded anywhere in the world, people would hunt, fish, and farm for their own family or their own community. Now it is at the point that we can get generally anything we want from anywhere we want so long as there is a demand. Even if the demand is for something that does not provide reasonable food, clothes, and shelter, if the money is there it will be provided. In the process of wanting something exotic and extravagant they are just depleting a resource that is too fragile to continue hunting without the animal going extinct or greatly effecting its habitat. This leads to regulations and even with regulations the demand is just as high which continues the hunting but for a higher price.

An example of an ecosystem being greatly disrupted by commercial hunting in the rain forests in south Asia, Africa, and in the Amazonian. Since the diversity of species is quite numerous in these regions they are targeted for the rarity that appeals to the general public. Regulations in these area are far lower then they should be such as in the Amazonian rainforest only 1.6 percent is protected. So the rest is free reign for commercial hunters and loggers to take advantage of. This is reinforced by the communities surrounding these areas since in every market they need workers to help get the products out of these forests so then roads are created and vehicles are mobilized to supply the world with what it wants, regardless of the repercussions it could have on the environment.

On top of products such as Ivory from Elephants or feathers from exotic birds a ever threatening product would come from our sea creatures such as whales and seals. Seals have been hunted for many years but the demand for their warm stylish coats made places such as Canada slaughter houses that was extremely barbaric in action (79% of hunters would skin the seal without the seal even being dead.) It has finally come to its end(not entirely though) but to the extent where countries stopped getting the imports at the rates it used to be. Another product is whale which you can see right on the discovery channel “Whale Wars” which is about the illegal poaching of Whales in Japan. Although they say they are hunting the whales for scientific research you can buy a whale burger anywhere in Japan. The Japanese deny that they are illegally killing whales yet they have propaganda all over Japan urging people to eat whale since they were needed to be killed off to preserve the fish environment that Japan is so dependent on. There is no evidence that the whale community has this effect at all.

In the end you just realize how ridiculous people are about getting what they want even if there are dire effects that come from it. Who are we to effect Earth's ecosystems in the way that we do only to benefit ourselves and could easily do without? When will we learn???



http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0430-hunting.html
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2009/08/23/japan-whaling-scientific-research-or-commercial-hunting/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_hunting
-Chapter 9 in Cartoon Guide to the Environment

Populatio too large

I can't say that I have a hugely profound statement to say, but it seems that a lot of this courses material all points to the same conclusion. In order for the human race to continue after oil the population of the earth has to drop back to its carrying capacity. This is something I have heard before, but not from scholarly origins. About a year ago I began to follow the conspiracy movement going on in America. I was frustrated by what I saw going on in the government and I wanted some answers that satisfied my intellect. What I found was that the large portion of groups all pointed to a shady organization with the soul purpose of world domination. The organizations plan was to seize control by varying mechanisms and to eventually reduce the earth’s population drastically so that they could be more easily managed. This is interesting that this supposed organizations plan aligns itself with that of the earth itself.

It makes me wonder, if we are to resume our previous ways of living before oil, to return to the earth, how many people have to die for that to really work. It's obvious that the earth’s carrying capacity has been exceeded, but who decides who gets cut loose for the betterment of the rest. If we are to increase the carrying capacity of the earth using renewable resources and efficient technology, how far will we have to stretch to make up the difference? The facts are already here, we are about to reach peak oil without any real plan for the other side of the hill, so it seems obvious who will decide who lives and who dies. The answer is that we have already made the decision for ourselves. If you live in suburbia and oil becomes too expensive to afford, not just for you, but for everyone you know, then how will you get to the grocery store. For that matter how will the trucking companies afford to get the food to the grocery store? How will the farmers afford their petroleum based fertilizers to even grow the crops? The answer is, they won’t. The people who won’t survive are those who don't know how to survive without oil.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

A Man Ahead of His Time

Earlier this week, while I was studying for an anthropology exam, I noticed an interesting connection between an idea by a man Charles Darwin used as a source in his theory of evolution and everything we have have been talking about in our biology class so far. This mans name was Thomas Malthus, a british economist who wrote "Essay on the Principle of Population" in 1798. Darwin was focused on Malthus' observation that animals in the wild often reproduce to have more offspring than can survive, but after reading more about him, I found his ideas about human society to be interesting as well.

Malthus stated that like animals in the wild, man too is capable of overproducing, that it would inevitably happen if left unchecked and it would eventually become a problem with resources as well. I was intrigued when I saw this, that someone way back in the end of the eighteenth century had predicted the events that are happening in the world today. Of course when Malthus wrote these things he was not worried about fossil fuels and alternative energy sources but the food supply and that once rapid population growth began famine would become a global epidemic, and it is unfortunate to say that he was right.

He stated that the decline of living conditions would result from three things: people having too many children, the inability of resources to keep up with the population, and the irresponsibility of the "lower class". Malthus concluded that to keep this problem under control poor people needed to have smaller families. While his view about "classes" may be wrong if everyone began having smaller families it may lessen the burden of the problem we are currently facing, afterall Malthus has been right so far whos to say his solution isnt right as well.

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/malthus.html

Friday, October 2, 2009

Spread the Word

This week in class we discussed a very important and urgent dilemma concerning the extraction and discovery of oil resources throughout the world. I may be the only individual in the class that could say this, but I honestly had no previous background information or education on such a matter. Therefore as one could imagine, the discussion on the Oil Peak Theory was a shocking topic and was a huge wake up call. I can admit that although I believe the reading the newspaper and/or watching the news is a valuable tool for staying updated on current events, I have not yet formed a daily habit of doing so. This I believe is one reasons for my lack of knowledge on this topic. I would like to believe that I am not the only person who can say this. 

I gradually became more curious as to the rest of the publics extent of knowledge on the Oil Peak Theory, so i decided to find out for myself. I currently reside in University apartments. Being in an apartment setting, I decided to confront a few fellow students and question their knowledge/feelings on this particular topic (these were students from a wide range of majors). I was surprised at what I discovered. Out of  ten students, ONE was able to tell me a very brief description of what an oil peak is and the effects it may have on our future. The remaining students had, like me, no or very little knowledge of the subject. If this is such an important, life altering problem, why is there such a lack of education on this topic?

This isn't a problem a hand full of people can fix themselves, this is going to take the determination of the whole country..even the whole world! If it wasn't for this class, when would have I discovered this huge problem sitting right in front of me? When will my fellow college students discover this catastrophe waiting to happen?  We, the current college students, will soon be joining the working force and will be assisting in running this country. It would serve a great value if WE had the proper education on this matter so that we can change or adapt our ways of living NOW to be sure that we will not corner ourself into a devastating situation LATER.