Home
Show latest blog entries
| Al Gore's Challenge | |||
| (Friday, 21 November 2008) Written by greeniac11447 | |||
| Recently, in one of my classes, KevinSweeney, the Chief of Staff from the Alliance for Climate Protection,came and gave a guest lecture about the work that they've been doing.He talked about how the group has been working directly with Al Goreon the We campaign. Now, Al Gore has been one of the biggest iconsfor the environmental movement in the past few years, butsurprisingly few people have heard about his speech, GenerationalChallenge to Repower America, which challenges the US to run on 100%clean electricity within 10 years. Watch his speech here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idlJDcr669o&eurl=http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/07/21/al-gores-energy-challenge-for-america/ So I watched it, and I thought it was a particularlypersuasive speech. Unfortunately, it hasn't really beenmentioned in mainstream media at all. Yes, on its face, it soundsridiculous to think that the United States, the biggest energy hog inthe world, would be able to convert entirely to clean energy within10 years. But, as Sweeney said, we have most of the technologyalready, like solar, wind, and geothermal energy. That, plus aunified national grid and a complete transition towards plug-inelectric cars, and we could be completely carbon-neutral! And now isa great time for it. We need the jobs, we need stable energy prices,and we need to curb the disastrous effects of global warming. During the lecture, Sweeney mentionedhow James Hansen, one of the most respected US scientists on climatechange, testified to the US Congress two years ago. Hansen said thatif we move very quickly and begin to level off carbon emissions inthe next ten years, and then ramp it down over the next fifty years,we will probably lose 10% of the species that exist today. On theother hand, if we don't have any action on climate change at all, 90%of the species that are here on earth will not be here in a century.2 years have already passed by since his warning, which means thereis only about an 8-year window of opportunity to level off our carbonemissions. And, Sweeney said, the Alliance has been counting downevery month since. What do you guys think? Do you thinkthat we should aim to completely convert everything to cleanelectricity within 10 years? Do you think we have the political willto go through such drastic changes during these times? | |||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| This crazy world | |||
| (Monday, 17 November 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Today the headlines on the NY Times website reads: Pirates Briefly Rattle Oil Market. The basis to the story is that Somali Pirates hijaked an Arabian oil tanker--so large it can hold up to 2 million barrels of oil and costs about $120 million!! So far the pirates have made no demands. The article also noted that this was a flagrant change for the bandits, who usually go after smaller, more easily obtainable vessels. This whole article comes as a surprise to me. I mean, pirates, really? Like, Capt. Jack Sparrow, Jolly Rodger sort of deal? Basically yes, but with more modern clothing and more advanced weaponry. Secondly, this should be a hint to the whole world that oil has become too treasured, that, despite our various attempts, it has become an irreplaceable commodity. Besides a military ship with tons of scary-advanced planes and bombs, or a yacht carrying the royal family, this is most valuable ship for pirates to capture. The pirates know that we need that oil. We need it for its money value and its energy value. They know the power they hold, and they are probably calculating the worth of the oil before they make any demands. Imagine if, instead, the world ran on wind energy or solar pannels. This couldn't happen! Pirates wouldn't be given the opportunity to capture our lifeline. They would probably be a bit more content because of the free energy they were harnessing from the sun, and go back to small time like capturing produce-carrying boats. Pirates capturing a ginormous oil tanker...I don't know how this isn't a hint for us to move further away from petroleum. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| The "Must Buy" Organic Foods | |||
| (Sunday, 16 November 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| Food prices are on the rise (Even the ridiculously organic and healthy food I buy for my animals has increased about 15% in cost). Our economy is a mess. National spending habits are changing. So what does all of this mean for the organic food movement? I am not sure yet, but I personally know many people that are opting out of buying organic products in order save some extra money to make up for their lost 401K plans. If this sounds familiar, here is a list of some of the foods that you might want to consider buying organic-as they are considered to come with the heaviest burden of pesticides, chemicals, additives and hormones. Produce: peaches, apples, bell peppers, strawberries, celery, lettuce, grapes, potatoes, tomatoes. Etc: meats, coffee, milk. When buying organic is not an option, there are also many fruits and vegetables that do not necessarily need to be organic because they typically use less pesticides, or have their own protective skin to protect from chemicals, etc. Some of these include: asparagus, avocado, bananas, broccoli, cabbage, kiwi, mango, onions, papaya, and pineapple. In the end, though, we are what we eat-so I always recommend organic. :) |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Mike the baker. | |||
| (Tuesday, 11 November 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| I know a man, a man that most people would call an average American. He has a wife, a few children, and he owns his own small buisness. His name is Mike. Now Mike told me that he doesn't know a lot about the environment and that is because he believes the media does not present enought daily information to keep him informed. I asked him why he didn't just take some time to look up what environmental things he was interested in. He said: he didn't have time. He was a man who worked all day to support his own business, he only had time to read the newspaper and eat dinner before going to sleep so it wasn't his fault he wasn't infomed on environmental issues. At first I was sympathetic to Mike's story. He does read the paper so it is not like he doesn't stay informed on his community, his country, or the world, maybe it is the media's fault. The environment is a very broad issue, anything from depleted fisheries to new advances in solar technology should be front-page worthy, so why doesn't the media pay more attention? It isn't Mike's fault, is it? After a lot of thinking I have come to the simple conclusion that Mike is ultimately wrong. The media does a great job reporting on environmental issues, its just that people are the most important part of our society, and that when they are dying in war their story surpasses wind mills. Secondly, no excuses play like a champion. If Mike has time to read the paper, he can take five extra minutes to look up environmental issues on his favorite publication or even this website. It's like saying its not my fault I am overweight, I don't have time to exercise. The truth is, if you want something bad enough you will make the time for it. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Top 10 for 2009 | |||
| (Monday, 10 November 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| If 2009 is your year to buy new, try buying as fuel efficient as possible. The top ten most fuel efficient cars in 2009 have been released by the dailygreen.com. The list goes: 1. Toyota Prius: 48mpg city/45mpg highway 2. 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid: 40mpg city/45mpg highway 3. 2009 Nissan Altima Hybrid: 35mpg city/33mpg highway 4. 2009 Mercury Mariner Hybrid: 34mpg city/31mpg highway tied with the 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid and the 2009 Mazda Tribute Hybrid. 5. 2009 Smart Fortwo:33mpg city/41 mpg highway 6. 2009 Toyota Camry Hybrid: 33mpg city/34mpg highway 7. 2009 Volkswagen Jetta:30mpg city/ 40mpg highway tied with the 2009 Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen 8. 2009 Toyota Yaris: 29mpg city/36mpg highway 9. 2009 Mini Cooper: 28mpg city/37mpg highway tied with the 2009 Mini Cooper Clubman 10. 2009 Honda Fit: 28mpg city/35mpg highway |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Lessons Learned from Ethanol | |||
| (Saturday, 08 November 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| When ethanol first emerged as a viable alternative to fossil fuels, everyone was in awe of the power of corn. The government and the farmers propagated the message that corn was local, corn was abundant, and corn would solve the problem of dependency of foreign oil and ultimately subdue the carbon dioxide curve. But as we know now, ethanol was a hoax. Despite its good intentions it was worth less than the energy it produced. How did ethanol fool us? Its like we forgot to look before we lept. We heard of energy derived from the ground and we immediately thought we had found a renewable resource that had no strings attached. But we forgot that just because something is environmental does not designate it to be socially or economically feasible. And those three legs--environment, society, and economy--are what make the world go round, one cannot be universially good if it denies the others. So what has ethanol taught us? First, and most importantly, it taught us that food should never be used to drive our cars, especially when there are millions of people starving. Ethanol provoked a steep increase in the price of wheat and corn that propelled thousands if not perhaps millions more from becoming hungry. Also, it taught us that, as previously mentioned, resolutions that solely address the environmental aspect of an issue are sometimes not very good solutions at all. Third, ethanol showed us that, like any steps in movements, they sometimes falter, and they may actually be steps backwards rather than forewards. Lastly, and what I personally gained from the experience of ethanol, is that I need to do my research before I believe everything that is spoon-fed to me by either the media or the government, or the peole who will benefit most from the presented "answer." I blindly believed that ethanol would work and that we had actually found a way to cut out petroleum from our list of societal needs. We all need to do our research because we will end up in the same predicament that we did when fossil fuels replaced electric cars. Going along with the flow, even in the eco-movement can sometimes lead to unintential ignorance. We will be worse off if we are not willing to be active citizens and keeping every idea in check, so that those ideas completely fullfill our goals to a cleaner world. Stay eco, world. And make sure those in charge stay on track. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Really Tiny Cars | |||
| (Wednesday, 05 November 2008) Written by greeniac11447 | |||
| Especially in urban areas, smaller and smaller cars are popping up on our roads. Why? Consumers want them because they're cheap to refuel, easy to park, and fun to drive. Governments want them because they reduce emissions, reduce traffic congestion, and increase the capacity of the city's limited parking spaces. Here are two examples of some exceptionally tiny electric cars. Winner of the “autonis” design award is the Tango, aptly named, since it's motto is: “It takes two.” One person sits directly behind the other in this narrow car frame, making this an ideal car for commuters. The Tango is basically like a motorcycle, except with a super-sturdy car shell, making it much safer on the road as well as keeping the driver insulated from the air flow and weather outside. While the tall and narrow frame makes the Tango looks like it would be easy to topple over, it actually has a low center of gravity, and weighs about the same as a midsize sedan. If you want to learn more or buy one yourself, click here . Featured in Time's “Best Inventions of the Year” is the CityCar, the foldable, stackable concept car. Developed by MIT, this car would work as a citywide car-sharing program, intended to fill the gap between public transportation stops and people's homes. All around the city, and especially near public transportation stops, there would be stacks of CityCars. When stacked together, they're so tiny that 6-8 cars would be able to fit in one traditional parking space. People who want to use one would be able to swipe their credit card and rent a CityCar, then drive to another CityCar destination and drop it off there. While it's not yet on the market, How Stuff Works explains, well, how the CityCar works here . |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| It's almost time to VOTE. | |||
| (Monday, 03 November 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| Once again, the topic of elctions has come up. But with less than 24 hours before the polls open nation-wide, I think it is important to keep the conversation going.... Have you made your decisions yet? Are you voting for the environment this year? Hopefully you have a good understanding of the issues at hand. An estimated var NYTD = (window.NYTD || {}); NYTD.NYTINT = (NYTD.NYTINT || {}); NYTD.NYTINT.ads_page $87,798,379 was spent to broadcast 38 ads related to the presidential campaign on the issue of energy and the environment from April 3 to Oct. 27, 2008. This has been one of the spendiest races in history. Will it pay off? I am keeping my fingers crossed that our nation will vote for the environment this time around. If you are still undecided about your presidential pick and consider environmental issues a priority, educate yourself at: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/65bd0fbe-737b-4851-a7e7-d9a37cb278db.htm |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Futuristic Tires | |||
| (Monday, 27 October 2008) Written by greeniac19850 | |||
| A lot of people have been payingattention to the environmental impact of their cars, but few realizethe importance of their tires. These two nifty inventions not onlysound cool, but are good for the environment. After the recent oil spike, most peoplehave learned about the importance of proper tire pressure for themileage of your car. On the other hand, while everyone wants toreduce how much gas they have to pay for, not everyone wants toconstantly check and maintain their tire pressure. Thanks toself-inflating tires, they may not have to. The system works usingthe rotation of the tire itself, keeping it at the proper pressurewithout any maintenance or work or your behalf. Not only are yousaving yourself time and energy, but you're helping reduce yourcarbon footprint by keeping your car running at its optimal mileageall year long. You can check out the mechanics of it here: http://inventorspot.com/articles/selfinflating_tires_will_keep_yo_11182 An even cooler invention is theself-regenerating tire. Yes, it does sound futuristic, but it's aactually very simple concept. When the outside layer of the tirewears down the grooves and loses traction, this tire actually has asecond molding of grooves and tread blocks. Because of this simpletechnique, these tires can be used 30% longer than other tires. Notonly is this great for people who hate changing a flat tire, but mayhelp reduce the number of tires in landfills. You can check out somepictures here: http://inventorspot.com/articles/tires_can_now_self_regenerate_7082 Despite their catchy titles, self-inflatingand self-regenerating tires haven't yet caught on widely enough to befound in major stores . Hopefully for youand me, they'll be able to “gain some traction”soon. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
| Green Football, and I ain't talking about team colors | |||
| (Saturday, 18 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Football has officially gone green. This may sound weird because football is about being tough and "environmental" usually implies a somewhat softer touch. I recently googled "go green" just to see what comes up. And on the first page of the search came up the Philadelphia Eagle's website! The headline reads "Its Time for Some Serious Trash Talk," accompanied below by a recycling sign implemented into the O in Go Green. Trash? Recycling? Yes, verrrrry cleaver Mr. Philly Mc Eagleson. The team website talks about how players and volunteers planted over 1,500 trees to offset the team's carbon footprint from travelling to away games. Their stadium also has solar panels to reduce green house gas emissions. The webiste also provides fans with statistics about waste, focusing on food packaging and the benefits of recycling. To read more, go to: http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/gogreen/ |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Forced Environmentalism | |||
| (Thursday, 16 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Thanks to my empty gastank and lack of adequate funds to provide for that gas tank, I am now a bike commuter! Hooray. I should be more thankful, really. More thankful that gas is so unaffordable, despite massive subsidization efforts from the government. Really, my growing thy muscles pulse for joy at the sight of my abandoned car, parked, unused for a week now. Its funny how laziness can get in between me and my love for the environment and the goal of a decrease in atmospheric carbon dioxide tons released per capita. Its ironic that the thing pulling me towards a greener lifestyle is my wallet resembling something of the great dust bowl, lacking growth and financial fertility. I always said how much I hate money because the control it has over people's plans and moods, and now I am suffering my fears. If the ailing economy is causing people like me to ride their bikes or take public transportation, this should be the time that we make the latter better! US buses are notoriously smelling and in some cases filled with haunting individuals. Dependency on foreign oil is a huge topic and both presidential candidates are at least looking into offshore drilling, if not ANWR. But, to me, this is the breaking point. This is where we as a nation have the chance to say, screw it, lets just quit our addiction, lets give it up all together. Can't we put on a hydrogen-patch or chew some natural gas gum to quit our oil addiction? We are on the breaking point of going towads more oil, or breaking away from it. We are flirting with the boundry. Now is the time to fall off the wall. If high costs have made an environmentalist act more environmental, and non-environmentalist act more environmental (even if they are not aware), shouldn't this be the time to invest in new technology? |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Exploding Whale | |||
| (Thursday, 16 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| This is completely crazy, and you may not believe me unless you see it for yourself. BUT, in 1970 a dead Pacific Grey whale floated on shore in Oregon. The Highway Division that was in charge of its disposal didn't know what to do. They needed to get rid of it quick because it was unsightly, smellled horrendous, and could not decompose fast enough or be eaten quickly enough by seagulls. The highway division decided that the best solution was to stick a half ton of dynamite in the whale, exploding it into millions of tiny pieces that could decompose or be eaten quicker than the whale would as a whole. As you may have guessed, this did not work. Despite the fact that spectators were displaced to watch the event a quarter mile away and the dynamite was injected on the inland side of the whale--in hopes to launch its decapitated body into the ocean--the plan failed miserably. The explosion send massive whale parts everywhere, even raining down on the people 400 meters away. All the seagulls were scared away from the blast, and a car was completely crushed by a giant whale piece. They division ended up picking up the large pieces they could find and burrying them in the sand. The reason this is important to mention is because 1. Karma: if you disrespectfully dispose of a great natural being by something as outlandish as dynamite, you probably deserve to be covered in its remains. 2. The crew in charge states that they wanted to do this for ecologial purposes, as to decompose of the body faster. Okay, but dynamite? 3. We have come a long way in the environmental movement. Its nuts to think that 1970 was the beginning or middle of the US moving towards more environmentally-friendly practices, so it is disappointing, especially in an area like Oregon, that they would still convert to macho destruction for "ecological" purposes. I would have expected this from the 80s, but the 70s?, not the 70s. The good thing is that we have learned a lot since that moment. Perhaps it wasn't Rachel Carson who spawned the environmental movement, maybe it was the exploding whale that opened people's eyes to the (literal example of) destruction man has on the natural world. Now, at least in the part of California that I live in, when dead whales come on the beach, boats drag them to the middle of the ocean where sharks and seagulls alike can eat the carcus, and the smell will not bother humans. To see the real news report of the exploding whale, check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGVkHl-nBhE The visual, I feel, does not even do it justice. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| A Watered Down Emergency | |||
| (Wednesday, 15 October 2008) Written by greeniac11447 | |||
| It's amazing how disconnected we are from the effect on environmental problems on people. It's so easy to waste a huge amount of water without a blink. For example, Starbucks recently got in trouble for keeping the tap constantly running, wasting 6 million gallons of water a day. That's enough water to sustain the population of Namibia, which also happens to be in a drought. In fact, Starbucks staff are actually banned from turning off the water, as a company policy. Starbucks representatives claim that the tap must constantly run as a matter of hygiene to rinse off the dirty silverware, but experts say that constantly running the tap is an unnecessary waste. You can read the article here . In contrast, in so many other countries like Namibia, getting enough water is a daily struggle. Usually women would have to physically carry a small amount of water over the long distances, wasting time and effort. However, new innovations like the Q drum allows even children to roll 50 liters of water back home. Read more about the Q-drum here . Another extremely creative innovation is the PlayPump water system, which is a metal merry-go-round that children sit on and spin around on. This pumps underground water into a tank, from which adults can draw water. The great part about this innovation is that kids have fun spinning on the merry-go-round. You can watch the video here . It's always great to see innovations which allow increased access to clean water. And yet, these things are practically unheard of. It's so much of a norm in our culture to see water as essentially a cheap commodity, and not as a valuable necessity for life. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| The Polaritty of Reaction | |||
| (Friday, 10 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Why is it that environmental movements are always and only spawned by ecologically-devestating occurrances? At the University of California, Santa Barbara, their Environmental Studies department was created after an epic oil spill occurred off their coast. And the 1970s was marked with such activism because chemical and pesticide usage was exposed through texts like Rachel Carson's famous book Silent Spring . It is only in dire times do we see a need to make a difference. But saving our world from self-destruction takes time and often reactions come too late. To reverse global climate change many argue that action should have happened decades or even a century ago. And sadly, environmental topics like any news story recieve less press; people simply lose interest. It loses its WOW-effect people stop caring. Take the 1980s. People were so sick of hippies and protests that the counter culture reacted--like any good generation next in line does--and abandoned these ideals. Ronald Regan even jumped on the bandwagon and took down the solar pannels that Jimmy Carter had put up on the white house the term before. While jumbo-flare jeans were abandoned and peg-pants emerged, the environmental movement was diminished to ignorance and apathy. But now that the green movement has re-emerged again, what will it take to keep it there? Global warming made the cover of every major publlication from Time Magazine to the LA Times and now it is just common knowledge. People know it exists despite skeptics who still some how emerge from their caves late in this global-warming game. So it is common knowledge like "the sky is blue" or "cheetos are tastey" but does that then mean that the movement towards a cleaner sky will continue? Or will people forget and give up? Hurricane Katrina was a direct result of this climate change. The waters are warmer, El Ninos will become more common, and weather will be more extreme than ever before. But people in Lousiana are still homeless despite the fact that we have already forgotten about them. Ironically, as I write this, two college girls across from me are talking about how excited they are to go to a free talk by a really famous guy who has been to the north and south poles and is going to talk about global warming. I hope this was an omen that we are just starting our course towards a cleaner world. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| All this chemical talk has got me excited | |||
| (Friday, 10 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| It is apparent that we live in a world of chemicals. I've heard statistics that no babies are born without chemicals in them, that means that they are grown in a somewhat toxic environment. I also heard that 2,000 new chemicals are produced annually. Let's face it, chemicals whether they are toxic or composed organically are here to stay. When people talk about "environmental" products, they often say that they are those without chemicals. But is that even freakin' possible? If a newborn baby is contaminated before it takes its own breath of air, then how is it possible for an organic t-shirt to be chemial free? And what is the harm of buying a shower curtain with some chemicals in it? It's not like I'm going to chew on it or melt it and rub it all over an open wound. So whats the big deal with buying things with chemicals in them if they aren't ingested or able to aerially travel through your nasel passages? Perhaps the deal with chemical-based things is that they represent a world moving towards the unnatural, I mean way more unnatural than it is now. Is organic a resistant movement to the future of Farenheit 451? Or is the anti-chemical movement more expressing its concern with the mehtod in which that plastic curtain is constructed? Is it how it is made the reason these products are so harmful? Or is it more the carcinogens that effect the workers? Don't get me wrong, I am all for a world of anti-chemicals. I worked in a lab first year of college and the smell of some substances gave me headaches, made me naucious, or whatever, so i know they are really not healthy. If my body had that harsh of reaction to a hand-whiff, then ingestion would surely lead to death. It is ironic too if you look back at crazy chemicas that people, like in coal mines, had contact with that at the time were not aware of the toxicity. Of course later it was found out, but think of all the products we use today, like Fribreeze, that are on everything we touch and are even in the air. I hope in twenty years time we don't find out that it is cancer causing or else a lot of people are going to be negatively affected. I am not really sure what I am getting at with this, just the point that chemicals are everywhere and no matter which part of them that we look at, whether it is the production, the worker's interaction, or the customer's interaction their level of toxicity is not known. No matter how much we know now, we will always be more educated in the future. I guess I would say it just best to stay away because a "safe" chemical today may mean a cancerous one tomorrow. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Candid Answers in 2008 | |||
| (Wednesday, 08 October 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| Although this is one of the most important presidential elections of our time, there are also some very important races happening in the House and the Senate. Many of the candidates running for a seat in Congress have not been clear on their stance on the environment-most notably around the issues of global warming, renewable energy, nuclear power, transportation, and fuel-efficiency. Now you have an chance to find some answers! "CandidAnswers is a new Web site that tracks the congressional candidates' answers to the biggest environmental questions of our time. With the click of a button, a questionnaire will be sent to your candidates, asking for their positions on important energy and environmental questions." Some candidates have already responded, some still need to be asked! http://environmentamerica.candidanswers.org/ |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| The Green Collar Economy | |||
| (Wednesday, 08 October 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| A Greeniacs article was just put up titled "Growth in Green Collar Jobs"-discussing the rise of the "green" sector in our economy. It also brings up a discussion on how the new rise in green collar jobs can help relieve our economic crisis by providing more at home job opportunities for the unemployed, etc. A pioneer of this idea, Van Jones, just recently published a book The Green Collar Economy -offering a plan to solve both our environmental and economic crisis. "Van Jones illustrates how we can invent and invest our way out of the pollution-based grey economy and into the healthy new green economy. Built by a broad coalition deeply rooted in the lives and struggles of ordinary people, this path has the practical benefit of both cutting energy prices and generating enough work to pull the U.S. economy out of its present death spiral." http://www.vanjones.net/page.php?pageid=2 |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Drill, Baby, Drill? | |||
| (Friday, 03 October 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Yesterday were vice presidential debates, and it seemed to me that this event was both more exciting and informative than the presidential one. The most interesting aspect was the immense focus on energy in the United States. I thought it was ironic how the Governor of Alaska was so pro-drilling in the state that houses some of the most extrodinary wildlife and national parks (hello! Denali!!!) in the world. I also thought it interesting that she was continually refocusing the debate on our national energy crisis. Overall these are how I see the two candidates, and please correct me if you have facts otherwise, because it is important for voters like me to be properly informed: Palin 1. Does not entirely belive that global warming is man-made. 2. Does not care how global warming came about, just thinks we should fix it. 3. Is pro-drilling in ANWR. 4. Nuclear energy is a go. 5. Alternative sources, yes, but USA oil production a YES. Biden 1. Yes, obviously global climate change is man made. 2. Because it is man-made, we then know how to fix it (reduce GHGs). 3. Anti-drilling in ANWR. 4. Nuclear energy is a go. 5. Alternative sources: HELL YES, USA oil production: thizz face. Now, I, of course being a greeniac am biased, but i would just like to know why someone whom is an every-day witness to the beauty of Alaska, and the retreat of ice caps and the death of polar bears, can be so pro-oil? How would drilling in ANWR reduce GHG emissions? I'm confused, can someone help me with this one? |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| Energy Awareness Month is here | |||
| (Thursday, 02 October 2008) Written by greeniac24 | |||
| Energy Awareness Month is here! The DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) has dedicated the month of October to energy awareness, specifically helping individuals learn more about energy efficiency: staying warm while spending less. To see all the resources the DOE has to offer this month, check out its website at http://www.energy.gov/ and the press release on this month’s initiatives: http://www.energy.gov/news/6618.htm . | |||
| [ Back ] | |||
| Environment & 2008 Elections | |||
| (Tuesday, 30 September 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| Energy and the environment are key issues in this years election- and both candidates believe in the importance of a good, clean energy policy. Public opinion on both sides of the political spectrum shows that America is looking for change. According to the Sierra Club, "Americans recognize and accept clean energy as a driver that will transform our economy, create and keep good jobs, save families and businesses money, generate new investment and opportunities, free ourselves from the big oil companies and foreign countries and cut air, water and global warming pollution." But who will make the best decisions for the environment? When it comes to reducing carbon emissions, Obama supports 80% reductions by 2050, and McCain supports 65% reductions by 2050. With fuel efficiency standards, McCain supports it, but has offered no specific target-whereas Obama supports a 52mpg fleetwide standard by 2025. McCain believes states and local governments should create their own Renewable Energy Standards, while Obama supports a national RES of 25% by 2025. McCain believes in expanding our domestic oil and natural gas exploration to reduce prices at the pump, while Obama will require oil companies to develop the 68 million acres of land (over 40 million of which are offshore) which they have already leased and are not drilling on. Now obviously, I am a little biased. But I do believe that in order to pick the right candidate for the environment, a good amount of research is required. After Friday's debates, I realized that the reality of many of these issues is not exactly what we hear.To read up on each candidates environmental plans, go to: http://www.johnmccain.com//Informing/Issues/17671aa4-2fe8-4008-859f-0ef1468e96f4.htm http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Chicken manure power | |||
| (Thursday, 25 September 2008) Written by greeniac11447 | |||
| I just stumbled upon this very interesting article. In the Netherlands, a power plant just launched this month is being powered by chicken manure. Yes, entirely by chicken manure! This is the now the largest chicken-manure power plant in the world, powering 90,000 homes: http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/09/08/dutch-harvest-chicken-manure-to-power-90000-homes/ Not only is the power plant carbon neutral, but it prevents whatever greenhouse gases would have gone up into the air had the manure just been sitting out in the open. As an added bonus, this power plant simultaneously solves the problem of chicken waste disposal, using a third of the nation's chicken manure. Another clever use of manure is in California, where cow manure is used to make natural gas. PG&E, a regional energy company, is attempting to recruit dairy farmers for their cow manure: http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN0440606220080305?rpc=64 Like chicken manure, cow manure's energy is stored in the methane, which gets filtered out to be used to make natural gas. While it's not yet as efficient as other energy sources, dairy farmers love the fact that they get extra revenue, and PG&E loves using this method to meet its renewable energy goals. I'd personally love to tell visitors to my home that my house was powered by chicken manure or cow manure. While I think these are a really innovative uses of manure, I don't know whether manure will really be the next big thing in the future of energy. What do you guys think? |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| WE ACT | |||
| (Monday, 22 September 2008) Written by greeniac7003692 | |||
| Today I read about an organization called WE ACT. Its an acronym for West Harlem Environmental Action and its goal is to stop environmental predijuice in tougher areas, like Harlem. A lot of times poorer communities are not seen as a priority for environmental or health related issues because their voices are not as strong in the political field. This is not only common on the national level, but is also reflected in the international one as well when "third world" countries do not have the resources to hold "first world" ones accountable for the abuse of global ecosystems. WE ACT is one of those organization that really makes me appreciate people with such drive. To be honest, most people think becoming more green is a pain in the butt because it takes a constant awareness of everyday habits. Just things like taking 2 squares of toilet paper instead of 6. And it is difficult to do to some degree, but what WE ACT is working on is not only keeping their members' habits in check but also making sure people who don't want to hear their complaints about environmental injustices do. They are having an event called "Advancing Climate Justice" in January that invovles many New York City leaders. If only I lived on the East Coast... |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| Estime Festival de música de Isla - Treasure Island Music Festival | |||
| (Friday, 19 September 2008) Written by greeniac33883 | |||
| El Festival de música de la Isla del Tesoro promueve verde en muchos sentidos…permitiendo concierta asiduo para reciclar sus teléfonos celulares viejos, tener una etapa enchufada solar, reduciendo las emisiones, reduciendo el desecho, y teniendo una tienda del reciclaje. Pienso que es realmente gran que cada vez más festivales de música, especialmente en San Francisco , van verde y educar el público acerca de cómo ellos pueden ayudar el ambiente. http://www.treasureislandfestival.com/greening.php |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Recycling Old Cell Phones at Music Festival | |||
| (Tuesday, 16 September 2008) Written by greeniac33883 | |||
| The Treasure Island Music Festival is promoting green by allowing concert goer's to recycle their old cell phones by having it be "refurbished and put to further use." I think it is really great that more and more music festivals, especially in San Francisco , are going green and educating the public about how they can help the environment. Recycle Old Cell Phones At The Treasure Island Music Festival Festival News Recycle old cell phones at the festival posted 08.19.08 EHS Pilates In partnership with Phones 4 Charity and the American Red Cross have combined efforts to collect and recycle cell phones. Your donated cell phone will be refurbished and put to further use. Refurbished phones are sent to emerging countries and areas in the United States where there is a necessity for cell phones for both safety & communication. There are some parts of the world where technology is so precious that a cell phone can mean the difference between life and death. Please bring your old cell phones to the EHS Pilates booth. http://www.treasureislandfestival.com/ http://www.treasureislandfestival.com/news.php?mode=detail&articleID=38 |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| ¡Piense Verde! | |||
| (Thursday, 11 September 2008) Written by greeniac33883 | |||
| ¡Hola ! ¿Querría alcanzar fuera la comunidad hispana y preguntar, "Cómo más latino puede meterse en es ambientalmente amistoso"? ¿Qué pueden hacer hispanos para más ser implicada a preservar la tierra por energía de reciclar y guarda? Cualquier idea... |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Green Dream Cruise | |||
| (Wednesday, 20 August 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| The previous blog made me smile in appreciation for hybrids. Being a Detroit native, time spent living in San Francisco (where every other car is a hybrid :) has made me realize that there is hope for the automobile industry. It has taken awhile for this new wave of green cars to hit the Motor City, but it is finally starting to make its much needed debut. If any of you have spent time living in the Detroit area, or have worked for the Big Three, you have probably heard of the Woodward Dream Cruise. "The Woodward Dream Cruise is the world’s largest one-day celebration of car culture, attracting more than 1 million visitors and over 40,000 muscle cars, street rods, custom, collector and special interest vehicles." It is the epitome of the American automobile. This year, however, was the first year that the Cruise highlighted a "Green Car" and "Green Machine" category. The green trophy went to a 1916 Detroit Electric. Although the technology for green vehicles has been around for a long time-it is nice to see that the old hot rods and muscle cars are now cruising down Woodward Ave with the newly recognized "green machines". For more Dream Cruise info, www.woodwarddreamcruise.com |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
| Hybrid cars! | |||
| (Wednesday, 20 August 2008) Written by greeniac50 | |||
| A little birdie (greeniac1) told me he recently purchased a new hybrid and loves it! Tell us more, G1! Those of us residing in New York City do our part by not driving cars at all...but out on the left coast, things are a bit different.....thumbs up to you for making the best of it. :) |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Online is the new Commute. | |||
| (Friday, 08 August 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| I was recently reading an article in a small-town newspaper titled, "Gas costs may drive students online". The percentage increase of higher education students taking courses online was shocking! At a Front Range Community College, this summer more students were enrolled in online courses than enrolled as full-time commuter students. At the University of Colorado at Boulder, enrollment in online courses was up 20% from last summer. I also noticed that many businesses are offering meetings and other correspondances via the web. It is not clear if this rise in online education is directly related to the rise in gas prices. Some students did say, however, that enrolling in online classes will save them about $50/week. And already, Colorado State University is launching a new online degree program called "Global Campus" to help students coap with rising gas prices. It is fascinating to see how the world is forced to change. I wonder how much this will affect our current education model? |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Horticulture Therapy | |||
| (Friday, 08 August 2008) Written by greeniac121212 | |||
| My interest in horticulture therapy began about five years ago, when I volunteered on a farm called Gould Farm in Monterey, Massachusetts. Gould Farm is a therapeutic community for people with mental illnesses. When I went to work at Gould Farm, I had never heard of agricultural activities being used as a form of therapy, but it sounded like a cool idea to me. I had, however, worked on an educationl farm and seen what a calming and joyful impact farming can have on healthy children. Gould Farm was extremely impressive. Of course, it wasn't perfect, but it seemed to be at least largely successful in helping people through very tough times in their lives. Over the course of the past five years, I've seen several other horticulture therapy operations. Last year, I went to a greenhouse in New York City where people with developmental disabilities worked under the guidance of a therapist. One man, who was autistic, could not speak at all, but he could sign so well that he could describe to me how a specific plant was going to grow. It was clear that his work in the greenhouse meant the world to him. This coming fall, I'm going to be interning at a farm near Ithaca, New York, whose founders were inspired by Gould Farm. This farm is called Compos Mentis, which, translated from the Latin, means "togetherness of the mind." It is towards this goal that members of the farm program strive. The American Horticulture Therapy Association has a fascinating website, which may interest you: http://www.ahta.org/ I sometimes wonder why farming can have such healing effects. Is it because we are somehow hardwired to love to be in nature and see the green? Is it because being out in the fields can be so conducive to good conversation? I hope to see more horticulture therapry programs spring up and grow in the coming years. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Zero Population Growth | |||
| (Friday, 08 August 2008) Written by greeniac24 | |||
| While I have been optimistic about the newfound environmental awareness that has taken hold in the US (better late than never) and pioneered in many European countries, I have nonetheless had a nagging pessimism: the reality of this planet's exponential population growth. While it is human nature to procreate, so is the survival instinct. In the last 50 years the world's population has doubled! Can we expect recycling, driving hybrids, changing energy consumption patterns and sources to sustain the ever-multiplying population? We currently have a serious world food shortage problem, but how can we strive to lessen and ultimately alleviate this problem when our population continues to strain resources every second of every day? Many environmentalists have looked to vegetarianism as the true solution to our fuel versus food struggle, but even vegetables take resources and space to grow, and at some point we will have to face the reality of population control measures, whether they be imposed by governments and/or worse, mother nature. Wouldn't it be better to start the population conversation earlier rather than later, and try to use the power of globalism to craft a reasonable and equitable solution? I have been surprised by the lack of discourse on this highly important and self-evident (although easily denied or ignored) issue, but recently I have come across a couple of articles published in Mother Earth News addressing the issue and have included the links here: http://www.motherearthnews.com/richfolkscantfixitalone.aspx?blogid=1182 , http://www.motherearthnews.com/Nature-Community/2008-06-01/United-States-Population-Growth.aspx |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Global Warming, or maybe not | |||
| (Monday, 04 August 2008) Written by greeniac19850 | |||
| Global Warming Did It! Well, Maybe Not. As reported in Sunday's Washington Post: We're stuck on the notion that climate change is the culprit every time a natural disaster strikes. But that's just muddying the waters. By Joel Achenbach Sunday, August 3, 2008; Page B01 We're heading into the heart of hurricane season, and any day now, a storm will barrel toward the United States, inspiring all the TV weather reporters to find a beach where they can lash themselves to a palm tree. We can be certain of two things: First, we'll be told that the wind is blowing very hard and the surf is up. Second, some expert will tell us that this storm might be a harbinger of global warming. Somewhere along the line, global warming became the explanation for everything. Right-thinking people are not supposed to discuss any meteorological or geophysical event -- a hurricane, a wildfire, a heat wave, a drought, a flood, a blizzard, a tornado, a lightning strike, an unfamiliar breeze, a strange tingling on the neck -- without immediately invoking the climate crisis. It causes earthquakes, plagues and backyard gardening disappointments. Weird fungus on your tomato plants? Classic sign of global warming. You are permitted to note, as a parenthetical, that no single weather calamity can be ascribed with absolute certainty (roll your eyes here to signal the exasperating fussiness of scientists) to what humans are doing to the atmosphere. But your tone will make it clear that this is just legalese, like the fine-print warnings on the flip side of a Lipitor ad. Some people are impatient with even a token amount of equivocation. A science writer for Newsweek recently flat-out declared that this year's floods in the Midwest were the result of climate change, and in the process, she derided the wishy-washy climatologists who couldn't quite bring themselves to reach that conclusion (they "trip over themselves to absolve global warming"). if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf ) { placeAd('ARTICLE',commercialNode,20,'inline=y;',true) ; } Well, gosh, I dunno. Equivocation isn't a sign of cognitive weakness. Uncertainty is intrinsic to the scientific process, and sometimes you have to have the courage to stand up and say, "Maybe." Seems to me that it's inherently impossible to prove a causal connection between climate and weather -- they're just two different things. Moreover, the evidence for man-made climate change is solid enough that it doesn't need to be bolstered by iffy claims. Rigorous science is the best weapon for persuading the public that this is a real problem that requires bold action. "Weather alarmism" gives ammunition to global-warming deniers. They're happy to fight on that turf, since they can say that a year with relatively few hurricanes (or a cold snap when you don't expect it) proves that global warming is a myth. As science writer John Tierney put it in the New York Times earlier this year, weather alarmism "leaves climate politics at the mercy of the weather." There's an ancillary issue here: Global warming threatens to suck all the oxygen out of any discussion of the environment. We wind up giving too little attention to habitat destruction, overfishing, invasive species tagging along with global trade and so on. You don't need a climate model to detect that big oil spill in the Mississippi. That "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico -- an oxygen-starved region the size of Massachusetts -- isn't caused by global warming, but by all that fertilizer spread on Midwest cornfields. Some folks may actually get the notion that the planet will be safe if we all just start driving Priuses. But even if we cured ourselves of our addiction to fossil fuels and stabilized the planet's climate, we'd still have an environmental crisis on our hands. Our fundamental problem is that -- now it's my chance to sound hysterical -- humans are a species out of control. We've been hellbent on wrecking our environment pretty much since the day we figured out how to make fire. T his caused that : It would be nice if climate and weather were that simple. But "one can only speak rationally about odds," Kerry Emanuel, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has studied hurricanes and climate change, told me last week. "Global warming increases the probabilities of floods and strong hurricanes, and that is all that you can say." Emanuel's research shows that in the past 25 years, there's been an uptick in the number of strong storms, though not necessarily in the number of hurricanes overall. Climate models show that a 1-degree Celsius rise in sea-surface temperatures should intensify top winds by about 5 percent, which corresponds to a 15 percent increase in destructive power. The tropical Atlantic sea surface has warmed by 0.6 degrees Celsius in the past half-century. At my request, Emanuel ran a computer program to see how much extra energy Hurricane Katrina had because of increases in sea-surface temperature. His conclusion: Katrina's winds were about 2 percent stronger in the Gulf, and not significantly stronger at landfall. Maybe climate change was a factor in generating such a storm, or in the amount of moisture it carried, but the catastrophe that Katrina caused in New Orleans can more plausibly be attributed to civil engineers who built inadequate levees, city planning that let neighborhoods materialize below sea level and Bush administration officials who didn't do such a heckuva job. Let's go back to those Iowa floods. Humans surely contributed to the calamity: Farmland in the Midwest has been plumbed with drainage pipes; streams have been straightened; most of the state's wetlands have been engineered out of existence; land set aside for conservation is being put back into corn production to meet the demands of the ethanol boom. This is a landscape that's practically begging to have 500-year floods every decade. Was climate change a factor in the floods? Maybe. A recent report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that heavier downpours are more likely in a warming world. Thomas Karl, a NOAA scientist, says that there has been a measurable increase in water vapor over parts of the United States and more precipitation in the Midwest. But tree-ring data indicate that the state has gone through a cycle of increasing and decreasing rainfall for hundreds of years. The downpours this year weren't that unusual, according to Harry J. Hillaker Jr., the Iowa state meteorologist. "The intensity has not really been excessive on a short-term scale," he said. "We're not seeing three-inch-an-hour rainfall amounts." This will be a wet year (as was last year), but Iowa may not set a rainfall record. The wettest year on record was 1993. The second wettest: 1881. The third wettest: 1902. Iowa is an awkward place to talk about global warming, because the state has actually been a bit cooler in the summer than it was in the first half of the 20th century. Hillaker says the widespread shift to annual plants (corn and soybeans) and away from perennial grasses has altered the climate. The 10 hottest summers in Iowa have been, in order, 1936, 1934, 1901, 1988, 1983, 1931, 1921, 1955, 1933 and 1913. Talk about extreme weather: One day in 1936, Iowa set a state record with a high temperature of 117 degrees. And no one blamed it on global warming. if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf ) { placeAd('ARTICLE',commercialNode,20,'inline=y;',true) ; } Rest assured, we may find ways to ruin the planet even before the worst effects of global warming kick in. The thing that gets you in the end is rarely the thing you're paying attention to. The basic problem is that there are so many of us now. Four centuries ago, there were about 500 million people on Earth. Today there are that many, plus 6 billion. We're rapidly heading toward 9 billion. Conservatives say that we just need to focus on maintaining free markets and let everything sort itself out through the miracle of the invisible hand. But the political tide is turning against unfettered free markets and toward greater regulation. Climate-change policy is part of that: Somehow we've got to embed environmental effects into the cost of energy sources, consumer goods and so on. The market approach by itself has let us down. Viewed broadly, it appears that humans are environment-destroying creatures by nature. The notion of the prelapsarian era in which we lived in perfect harmony with nature has been effectively shattered by such scientists as Jared Diamond, the author of "Collapse," and Tim Flannery, who wrote "The Future Eaters." If everything gets simplified and reduced to a global-warming narrative, we'll be unable to see the trees for the forest. Consider the June issue of Scientific American, where you'll find a photograph of a parched lake, the mud baked into the kind of desiccated tiles that scream "drought." The caption says: "Climate shift to unprecedentedly dry weather, along with diversion of water for irrigation, has converted this former reservoir in China's Minqin County into desert." Um . . . "this former reservoir?" Look closely, and you can see concrete walls in the background. This is not a natural place: It's a manufactured landscape. Here's a wild guess: This part of China is an environmental disaster that has very little to do with climate change and very much to do with high population and intensifying agriculture. Last week, we saw reports of more wildfires in California. Sure as night follows day, people will lay some of the blame on climate change. But there's also the minor matter of people building homes in wildfire-susceptible forests, overgrown with vegetation due to decades of fire suppression. That's like pitching a tent on the railroad tracks. The message that needs to be communicated to these people is: "Your problem is not global warming. Your problem is that you're nuts." You should definitely worry about global warming. But you don't need to worry about global warming when your house is on fire. achenbachj@washpost.com Joel Achenbach is a reporter on The Post's national staff and blogs at washingtonpost.com/achenblog. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
| Gold in the Garbage? | |||
| (Monday, 04 August 2008) Written by greeniac121212 | |||
| I just came across a very interesting article in "The Independent," a business-focused publication, about an increasingly popular phenomenon: aspiring business-people seeking trash! Strange, huh? What would money-wise investors want with the unappealing contents of a landfill? Well, apparently people are starting to notice that recycling waste is economically beneficial for much the same reason that it is environmentally beneficial. It takes a whole lot less energy to produce metal, for example, from recycled materials than it does to produce metal from "virgin" materials. That saved energy means less carbon emissions for the environment and less fossil fuels to purchase for the business! Who could dream up a better win-win situation? However, these enthusiatic business owners may well run into the problem of not having enough trash material to let their businesses grow indefinitely. While the idea may not be suited to be a big business venture for lots of people, it has certainly already become a moderately sized business venture for some. The field seems promising. Read more about it and let us know what you think! Here's the link to the article from "The Independent." http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/prospectors-sift-through-americas-garbage-in-a-gold-rush-founded-on-metals-plastic-and-paper-883619.html |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Red, White, Blue...and Green? | |||
| (Friday, 01 August 2008) Written by greeniac1217 | |||
| On a recent trip to my old college stomping grounds of Boulder, Colorado I noticed signs in the airport reading, "red, white, blue, and green." Naturally, I was curious. I quickly realized that these were advertisements for the Democratic National Convention that will be held in Denver this year. Organizers for this event are working to make the 2008 Democratic National Convention the most environmentally-sustainable Democratic Convention in history. From the construction of the event to the execution of it, environmental practices are being incorporated at every level-even down to the politicians who attend. House Speaker and Permanent Convention Chair Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Convention organizers announced the "Green Delegate Challenge," offering special rewards for the delegation or delegations that demonstrate the highest level of commitment to offsetting their carbon footprint from attending the Convention. "As part of the challenge, delegations with the highest percentage of members offsetting their carbon will be recognized in their seating section on the floor of the Pepsi Center during the Convention. Each delegate, alternate and super delegate from that state will also receive a limited edition "green" prize. Any delegate who offsets their travel will receive a unique wearable "green item" for Convention week, available only to these delegates, and be recognized individually on DemConvention.com." On my bus ride to Boulder I looked out at the Rocky Mountains thinking, "Thank you Denver." For more information on how this event is going green check out, http://www.demconvention.com/green-delegate-challenge/ |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (1)
| The Seattle City Council members are NOT fans of plastic bags | |||
| (Wednesday, 30 July 2008) Written by greeniac40021 | |||
| I'm not a fan of plastic bags either, so I think this is pretty cool: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008078617_grocerybags29m.html So, basically, Seattle is going to start charging a 20 cent fee per plastic bag. Grocery stores will be allowed to keep some of the fee (small stores can keep the entire fee) and any revenue generated will be used to promote recycling programs. So hopefully people will just start to use canvas bags. Maybe the City Council should also think of a way to make reusable, canvas bags affordable and easy to get for everyone - maybe utilizing the fee? The article did mention that food banks will now be collecting and distributing canvas bags. I guess people could still use paper bags if they really wanted a disposable bag. I think there are problems with this kind of legislation, and a lot of people have a right to be mad, but on the other hand, it is so important to stop using plastic bags, and some people might not stop unless they are forced to. I will be curious to see how it works and whether or not other cities follow suit... |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (2)
| How Useful is the UN? | |||
| (Tuesday, 29 July 2008) Written by greeniac121212 | |||
| The Greeniacs movement, like all grassroots movements, promotes small, piecemeal actions. In our case, we promote actions that can improve the state of the planet. I, as a grassroots activist, am very enthusiastic about encouraging people to help the environment in small, unintimidating ways. This is something important that we Greeniacs tend to have in common! However, even a grassroots activist sometimes gets curious about what's going on way up there at the top of the ladder, far from the grassroots... Specifically, I've recently become curious about the UN and what their role is in the development of environmentalism around the world. The division of the UN that deals with green issues is called the United Nations Environment Programme, or UNEP. One early landmark for UNEP was the Stockholm Conference of 1972, where UN members first acknowledged and agreed that there is no way to separate global development from the state of the environment. Since then, UNEP has held many conferences around the world, of which the most famous outcomes have been the Millenium Development Goals of 2000 and the Kyoto Protocol, which came into effect in 2005. The UN may seem elusive and far off, but, in at least certain ways, the UN has allowed itself to be influenced by voices coming from the grassroots. For example, the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, headed by activist Wangari Maathai, has inspired UNEP members to launch the Billion Tree Campaign, which urges communities to plant trees to stop erosion, mitigate climate change, and boost the economy. But how much effect does UNEP actually have on people's lives and conditions on earth? How many people around the world have been influenced by UNEP? These questions are hard to answer. It has always seemed to me that small-scale, grassroots activism is the most motivating to people and therefore is the most effective. However, perhaps small-scale movements have been influenced in important ways by the large-scale bureaucracy. Who makes the most difference and where should donation dollars go??? To read more about UNEP, you can check out its comprehensive Organization Profile at http://www.unep.org/PDF/UNEPOrganizationProfile.pdf |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Recycling Expands in SF... | |||
| (Tuesday, 22 July 2008) Written by greeniac24 | |||
| I only today found out that since Earth Day in April 2008, the city of San Francisco has expanded its recycling program to include all plastics that are numbered 1-6, so basically all plastic except #7. This I thought was something that should have been publicized better, given that all our recycling bins are no longer accurate (previously, other than plastic bottles, only #2, 4, & 5 were recyclable). I found out because when I went to the Tuesday Farmer's Market at the Ferry building, which I go to every week, I splurged and purchased a delicious raw food apricot cheesecake. I went to the disposal station, put my plate into the compost, and went to put the plastic fork into the trash but was stopped by the attendant who told me about the new policy. Now I was thrilled to find out about this development, but at the same time was struck with a wave of guilt for all the #1 and #6 plastic that I could have been recycling for the past 3 months but instead sent to the landfill. How was it that I didn't know? Now I will just have to take on the mission of spreading the word! |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Animal Superpowers | |||
| (Monday, 21 July 2008) Written by greeniac121212 | |||
| Much as we love to anthropomorphize animals, most of us have probably never read or heard that animals, like us, use medicines and alcohol to increase their sense of well being. Well, according to Dr. Karl Shuker, in his book, "The Hidden Powers of Animals," they do! Tanzanian chimps use aloe gel in the same way that humans do, to relieve skin discomfort. The chimps also actively use antibiotics (from the Aspilia plant), the same ones that are used by humans living in the area. These chimps have discovered and long been using the same plants that the native peoples use to remedy parasitic infections and stomach pains. Monkeys in Africa have also been known to use plants to cure diarrhea and sooth menstrual cramps! And it's not just chimps and monkeys that use medicinal plants either. Sparrows tend to eat the paradise flower, which provides them with an anti-malarial substance, specifically during malaria epidemics. Female elephants are even thought to eat from a certain type of tree to induce labor! As far as intoxiation goes, animals from butterflies to birds to elephants are also known to drink too much at times and experience the effects, much the same as humans do. Interestingly, however, the starling is able to metabolize alcohol so much faster than other animals, including humans, that it does not get drunk. I find all of these discoveries very interesting. It seems there is so much we humans do not know about animal knowledge and behavior. It's only through patient attention to subtle cues that scientists have been able to learn as much as they know now. The more I learn about animal "secret powers," the more shocked I am, and the more I think that we still have entire worlds of informaiton left to learn about these topics. One of the most remarkable "animal super power" stories I've ever heard was in an environmental science class. My teacher has read about a certain group of dolphins that was noted to sing a certain song together. When a new dolphin was born, she or he would be taught the song and sing along too. As the scientists observed these dolphins for multiple generations, they noticed that, with each geeneration, the song kept getting longer. One theory is that the dolphins were recording history! |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| Preservation and Restoration | |||
| (Saturday, 19 July 2008) Written by greeniac40021 | |||
| Before I moved to Illinois, I had never seen a real prairie. I heard about them from time to time, but I mostly had a weird, skewed idea about what a prairie was. In my head there was some region in middle America filled with grasses and rolling hills and nothing else. This scene also included cowboys, native Americans and teepees, covered wagons, Laura Ingalls Wilder along with her whole family, as well as large herds of galloping bison. Needless to say, I was pretty wrong about a lot of things. I visited a prairie for the first time when someone from the environmental club invited me to go on a restoration workday at one of the nearby Cook County forest preserves. Standing in the middle of a prairie was amazing. The plants were beautiful and diverse, birds flew overhead and I could hear the wind rustle through the grasses. But not all of the prairie was like this. A large part of it had been overrun by an invasive species, buckthorn, that crowded out the native grasses and flowers and took away habitat from native animals. Every weekend, volunteers diligently worked to restore the little prairie that Illinois has left, in some effort to preserve some of our nation's natural history and native wild lands. There are less than 1 percent of the United States' tall grass prairies left, and the ones that are left are in special preserves or parks. However, because of invasive plants, lack of natural fires, and increasing development, even these prairies are being threatened. Restoration and preservation of our natural wildlands is important, and will never succeed without the help of volunteers and activists. Not only are we preserving our natural heritage for our children and grandchildren to see, but we are also preserving the habitats for thousands of plants and animals, many of which are already faced with extinction. A famous scientist, James Lovelock, pioneered the Gaia Hypothesis. According to Lovelock, Earth is like an organism, with complex processes and everything in it operating to create the world as we know it. In the same way that a human body needs all of its parts to function, Lovelock proposed that Earth functions the way it does because of the interactions and relationships of all of its parts. In an effort to protect and preserve our wild lands and all of Earth's ecosystems, volunteers have been working hard to undo some of the damage that has already been done. There are lots of ways for you to get involved. Try searching the internet for a local restoration group in your area. If you live in Chicago and are interested in prairie restoration, try looking up the North Branch Restoration Group (www.northbranchrestoration.org) Otherwise, try contacting local environmental groups and finding ways that you can help preserve America's natural wildlands. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (3)
| Honolulu to air condition buildings with seawater | |||
| (Thursday, 17 July 2008) Written by greeniac4 | |||
| G4: I think that this is an excellent opportunity to use the earth's graces for one of our life’s little luxuries that we are so accustomed to. A hefty price tag, but long term more efficient. Article: Honolulu to air condition buildings with seawater By Jaymi Heimbuch Posted Fri Jul 11, 2008 1:42pm PDT A new green project called Honolulu Seawater Air Conditioning (HSWAC) proposes to cool down buildings with seawater, rather than fossil fuel-based air conditioning units, and it is getting some serious green to back it. Private investors have put up nearly $11 M, completing the funding effort for the $152 M project, with about half of the final funding coming from investors from Honolulu. Construction on the project is set to start the first week of January, 2009. The system will pump cool water, about 45° F, from 1,600 feet below the ocean waves. The water will travel through the pump system to an onshore station where it will cool fresh water that circulates in a closed loop through customers’ buildings in downtown Honolulu. Once the cold seawater has done its job, it is pumped back into the ocean at a shallower level, going through a diffuser to ensure proper mixing and dilution to the surrounding sea. I’m curious as to the maintenance requirements of this system during and after storms, though apparently the creators know what they’re doing since the VP of Engineering at HSWAC and the President of the project’s management company, Renewable Energy Innovations, LLC, pioneered the system in Sweden and have shown that it works quite well. I’m also curious as to what fuel is going to be used to power the system. Hopefully they’ll take a hint from the newly required solar-powered water heaters and go renewable with the system. Regardless, the savings potential is astounding. Honolulu depends on imported oil and fossil fuels for 90% of its electricity, so to use seawater instead would drop costs by over 20%. Building owners are pretty peppy about this savings, and the project has already committed over half of its 25,000 ton capacity to future customers who have signed on, which even includes the Hawaiian Electric Company’s headquarters. It's a very good sign that there is so much enthusiasm behind the project from businesses and government. Via TreeHugger, Renewable Energy World; Photo via lrargerich |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (2)
| Community Gardens | |||
| (Tuesday, 15 July 2008) Written by greeniac121212 | |||
| What effect does community gardening have on a neighborhood? On the environment? These questions interest me, because I want to know if my time spent working on communal gardening projects could be part of a larger movement of bringing people together, greening our cities, and channeling positive energy into small, organic revolutions. Community gardens come in all shapes and sizes, and serve various purposes. For example, some gardens are divided into small plots that are allotted to individual people. Other gardens are not divided into plots and focus almost entirely on bringing communities together rather than producing large amounts of food, perhaps devoting much of their land to playground space for the children. My community garden is quite small and donates all of its produce to a food pantry. With so many different models out there, I wanted to search for a unifying theme, and I came across the American Community Gardening Association: http://www.communitygarden.org/ This website has links to research studies that show the benefits of community gardening. Although the benefits may seem obvious to me and probably to you, the truth is that government agencies and other organizations want to see hard facts, statistics that will prove to them that investing in community gardens is a worthwhile idea. I love the ACGA's definition of a community garden, because it is so inclusive. Very simply, it states: a community garden is "any piece of land gardened by a group of people." A community garden can be anywhere, and can involve any number of people. The most inspiring part of the website for me is the section on starting your own community garden. First hand, I've seen the effects that communal gardening has on people. I recently started a garden at the group home for teenagers where I work, and already the kids have revealed things about themselves to me in the garden that they have not revealed in other places. There's just something about growing plants together that makes people open up to each other in new ways. |
|||
| [ Back ] | |||
View/Add Comments (0)
| I'll have my salmon wild, please. | |||
| (Saturday, 12 July 2008) Written by greeniac40021 | |||
| In addition to dams, pollution, climate change, and years of over fishing, a new threat is facing many wild salmon population | |||