Moving Toward Sustainability

Biomimicry: Michael Pawlyn-- TedTalk

2011-05-02T18:04:00.003-04:00

The topic of this TedTalk was about biomimicry, which is this idea of looking at nature for answers on how to build and utilize it effectively. Michael Pawlyn uses the example of spider silk and how strong it is compared to manmade materials. There is nothing compared to its durability but the closest we have come to silk is this fiber that requires extreme temperatures, toxic chemicals and a ton of energy to pressure treat it. This is what he calls a downfall by 10, 100, and even 1000 factor savings and resource efficiency. Instead we could mimic the way a spider uses water and dead flies to make the strongest fiber in the world while also taking away the inefficient aspect to our archaic system currently in place. Pawlyn goes on to state his mission of biomimicry:
 Radical increase in resource efficiency
 Linear turned into closed loop systems
 Fossil fuel economy to solar economy
These could transform architecture that would allow nature and man to live in harmony. He talked about a structure that was 1% the weight of another greenhouse of the same size by pressurized roof structures that allowed more sunlight in. After a successful first year, he said the entirety of the structure actually weighed less than the air inside of it. This is a great example of resource efficiency through nature by using it as a design tool. He continues to talk about closed loop systems. One example was this project called cardboard to caviar where a restaurant closed their loop of waste. When packaging would arrive at the restaurant, instead of sending it back to the landfill, the owner paid for it to be shredded and sent to an equestrian farm for horse bedding. When that was soiled, the owner paid for it to be gathered and taken to vermicompost where worms would break it down and eventually ended in higher worm count. Again, they paid for the worms to be transferred to Siberian catfish farms, which would be turned into caviar and then resold back to the restaurant. Essentially it turned a linear system into a closed loop while adding profit to all the pieces making this system work. In addition, turning an economy that is almost entirely dependent on fossil fuels over to solar dependency takes a lot of space for photovoltaic panels. Earth receives ten thousand times as much energy from sun than we use each year. Not only would panels be harnessing as much of that energy as possible but it would also enable crops that would not be able to grow under direct sunlight to do so under the panels shade. This project would begin in the Sahara desert because of its need for reforestation and climate control. This plan would restore living plants and ecosystems to a place that has been barren for hundreds of years (since Caesar logged most of the forest) and prevent the furthering of climate change in that region.

Preserving Marine Life Diversity in the Pacific Islands

2011-04-11T09:52:00.003-04:00

A marine biologist named Greg Stone has had a huge influence in protecting the marine life of the Pacific Islands. He was blown away by his first expedition into the ocean surrounding the Republic of Kirbati in 2000 at the sight of such an abundance and diversity of the species located there. He claimed the area was "the last unexplored oceanic coral reef archipelago in the world." Upon going back to thank the president for allowing his visit, he learned that the island's primary (and basically only) source of income was allowing nations to fish there. Stone was not fond of the thought that over-fishing might occur, nor that Kirbati only made 5% income off of what nations were able to sell, so he proposed an idea where the island would be funded through protection services. While the process took years of planning and the banning of commercial fishing is only finally being put into effect this year, his help mad

e the Republic of Kirbati the largest marine life protected area

at the time the process was agreed upon and declared in 2006. Unfortunately, Kirbati is predicted to become the first country to completely disappear due to climate change, a process that will continue for the next 50-100 years.

The increasing temperature has already had an impact on the coral reefs located there, and they are what allows for such diversity as it is a coral reef ecosystem. A few years ago temperatures peaked and along with the abundance of sunlight in the area, it caused the reefs to be bleached. I researched this, and bleaching kills algae known as zooxanthellae. According to this website, "Zooxanthellae provide nutrients and oxygen to the coral through photosynthetic activities, allowing their host to direct more energy toward growth and constructing its calcium carbonate skeleton". As Stone mentions, the ecosystem in Kibati was fully restored after just six months because climate change is the only problem facing the region (as opposed to having a combination of problems such as over-fishing, toxin induced disease AND climate change), showing nature's own restorative power. This is a topic that we have discussed a lot in class and I found Greg Stone's mention of it very significant in why the reef has been able to thrive. I am very glad that Stone and his team researched the area before it was completely taken over by a money-hungry corporation, however it is really upsetting that despite the island being 700 miles away from the nearest airport, it is still impacted by our industrial habits.

Make Meadows, Not Lawns

2011-04-10T19:55:00.008-04:00

A world without bees would be like a plate of food without nutrition. Dennis vanEngelsdorp is a Pennsylvanian apiarist who has been studying the behavior of worker bees also known as honeybees. Within the last three years, the worker bee population has dramatically dropped by 36% for two consecutive years. Now there are several major causes of massive population wipeouts across the world. One ongoing problem could be varroa destructors that are tiny mites that latch on to bees and then reproduce once inside the hive eventually overtaking and killing the

queen. However, the most prevalent reason for this widespread attack is known as colony collapse disorder (CCD). It's described as a flu that wipes bees out almost immediately and the effects can be largely attributed to pesticide use from nearby farms.

As daunting as this may seem, beekeepers across the world are getting more efficient and productive during the bee season. Now, qu

eens and hives can be sent around the world via mail allowing bees to get in the hands of people who normally wouldn’t be able to repopulate bee colonies. Dennis draws support to this practice by noting that ancient Egyptians were known to transport bees up and down the Nile when blights wiped out populations of bees. History shows how humankinds heavy dependence on worker bee’s and their ability to pollinate a vast amount of land.

Since one of three bites we eat is in some way or another pollinated by bees, we are selfishly dependent on worker bee’s survival. Our diets would diminish entirely of nutrition because bees pollinate almost all living plants that we rely on. Also, earth’s biodiversity would deplete drastically since bees alone make up more of the species richness than mammals and birds combined. Together, bees and bats make up the worlds largest and most influential pollinators. Unfortunately, both are at high risk of extinction but closely watched. Dennis describes a huge flaw in society (predominantly America) called nature deficit disorder (NDD) that creates this unknown barrier between nature and humankind. He goes on to accuse lawns of being the major proprietor of pesticide use and destruction of what could be meadows. Meadows would invite wildlife into the backyards of people who shiver when a spider crosses their path. This would also create a beneficial habitat for worker bees and would cut back on the 5% of greenhouse gas emissions each year that are attributed to lawn care. In addition, 11% of all pesticide use in America would be alleviated from yards and the amount of water wasted on treating lawns would be utilized more effectively as well. Dennis argues a meadow, as opposed to a lawn, transforms your life by bringing aromatic fragrances and wildlife into the community we inhabit. In conclusion, we as a community need to reach out to nature in an attempt to break free of our unnatural nature deficit disorder. By cultivating meadows from our lawns, we can both reestablish a connection with nature while rekindling a livable environment for bees.

Watch the TedTalk here

http://www.ted.com/talks/dennis_vanengelsdorp_a_plea_for_bees.html

Vandana Shiva - The fight for equality

2011-04-10T09:48:00.016-04:00

Dr. Vandana Shiva was born on November 5, 1952 in Dehradun, India to a father who was the conservator of forests and a farmer mother with a love for nature. She was educated at St Mary's School in Nainital, and at the Convent of Jesus and Mary, Dehradun.After receiving her bachelors degree in physics, she pursued a M.A. in the philosophy of science at the University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada), with a thesis entitled "Changes in the concept of periodicity of light". In 1979, she completed and received her Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Western Ontario.

In 1982, she founded the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, which led to the creation of Navdanya in 1991, a national movement to protect the diversity and integrity of living resources, especially native seed, the promotion of organic farming and fair trade. For last two decades Navdanya has worked with many local communities and organizations serving many men and women farmers. Navdanya’s efforts have resulted in conservation of more than 2000 rice varieties from all over the country and have established 34 seed banks in 13 states across the country. More than 70,000 farmers are primary members of Navdanya. In 2004 Dr Shiva started Bija Vidyapeeth, an international college for sustainable living in Doon Valley, in collaboration with Schumacher College, U.K.

Dr. Shiva also works with many Governments to establish more nature and farmer freindly food systems. Among these countries she has worked with is Italy, India, Spain and many, many others around the Globe. Jigme Thinley, advising the Government on how to achieve their objective of becoming an Organic Sovereign country (the first fully 100% organic country).

Here willingness to work with many organizations and Governments has led to a great deal of accolades and appreciation from every corner of the Earth. Time Magazine identified Dr. Shiva as an environmental “hero” in 2003 and Asia Week has called her one of the five most powerful communicators of Asia.

Vandana Shiva is currently working on a 3 year project with the Government of Bhutan, at the invitation of the Prime Minister

___________________________________
Dr. Shiva has also published numerous books and publications. Below is a list of her works.
1981, Social Economic and Ecological Impact of Social Forestry Kolar
1988, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India
1991, Ecology and the Politics of Survival: Conflicts Over Natural Resources in India
1992, The Violence of the Green Revolution: Ecological degradation and political conflict in Punjab
1992, Biodiversity: Social and Ecological Perspectives (editor)
1993, Women, Ecology and Health: Rebuilding Connections (editor)
1993, Monocultures of the Mind: Biodiversity, Biotechnology and Agriculture
1993, Ecofeminism, Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva
1994, Close to Home: Women Reconnect Ecology, Health and Development Worldwide
1995, Biopolitics (with Ingunn Moser)
1997, Biopiracy: the Plunder of Nature and Knowledge, South End Press
2000, Stolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the Global Food Supply, South End Press
2000, Tomorrow's Biodiversity
2001, Patents, Myths and Reality
2002, Water Wars; Privatization, Pollution, and Profit
2005, India Divided2005, Globalization's New Wars: Seed, Water and Life Forms Women Unlimited
2005, Breakfast of Biodiversity: the Political Ecology of Rain Forest Destruction
2005, Earth Democracy; Justice, Sustainability, and Peace
2007, Manifestos on the Future of Food and Seed, editor
2008, Soil Not Oil
2010, Staying Alive
____________________________________
A few of her Awards

1993: "Global 500 Roll of Honour", by UNEP
1995: "Pride of the Doon" Award from Doon Citizen Council
1997: The Golden Plant Award (International Award of Ecology), Denmark
1998: Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic from the International Scientific Committee of the Pio Manzu Centre at Rimini
2009: inducted into the Public Intellectual Service & Advocacy (PISA) Society

2011: "Calgary Peace Prize" from the Consortium for Peace Studies at the University of Calgarynamed a "Citizen of the Next Century" by Future-ish

______________________

Her drive for gender, food and commercial equality is a very unique social approach to the adverse conditions around the Globe. She feels that relying on the rich business interests for food is very misguided. Companies such as Monsantos are among the Global companies thet Dr. Shiva fights. She feels that the monopoly of food is killing the land, degrading the farmer and poisoning the food. Her efforts through her many organizations and educational outlets offer the World with a genuine opportunity to change their system on the topic of overall equality. Although she is most known for her fight for food, she has been extreemyl vital in the fight for gender equality in her home country of India among many other countries around the globe.

2011-04-09T17:08:00.002-04:00

Ask Your State Legislators to Introduce Bills to Label GMO Foods

National polls show that the vast majority of consumers want foods that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to be clearly labeled. For more than 10 years, conscientious Senators and Members of Congress have introduced federal legislation for mandatory GMO labels, but the issue has never been voted on in Congress.

It's time to take the movement for truth-in-labeling and consumers' right-to-know to state legislatures and local governments, to grocery stores, restaurants, schools and hospitals and demand that they put labels on GMO foods now!

Please use this form to write to your state legislators, asking them to introduce legislation making GMO labels mandatory in your state.
Learn more: http://www.MillionsAgainstMonsanto.org

Here is a link to let your State Reps. know you want Genetically Engineered Food labeled. It takes 10-15 seconds. I Just did it, super easy. You have to copy and paste the link cause i cant figure out how to make it an actual link:

http://www.capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=22063501&type%20=ST

2011-04-06T21:16:00.002-04:00

The town of Sedgwick, Maine, population 1,012 (according to the 2000 census), has become the first town in the United States to pass a Food Sovereignty ordinance. In doing so, the town declared their right to produce and sell local foods of their choosing, without the oversight of State or federal regulation.

What does this mean? In the debate over raw milk, for example, the law opens the gate for consumer and producer to enter a purchasing agreement without interference from state or federal health regulators. According to the Mayo Clinic, a 1987 FDA regulation required that all milk be pasteurized to kill pathogens such as salmonella and E. coli. The Sedgwick ordinance declares that:

Producers or processors of local foods in the Town of Sedgwick are exempt from licensure and inspection provided that the transaction is only between the producer or processor and a patron when the food is sold for home consumption. This includes any producer or processor who sells his or her products at farmers’ markets or roadside stands; sells his or her products through farm-based sales directly to a patron; or delivers his or her products directly to patrons.

In short, the ordinance allows buyer and seller to enter their own agreement which overrides the regulation of government when dealing with transactions involving local foods.

This four page ordinance, which can be read in its entirety here, is revolutionary in that it relies on the consumer to educate themselves on the risk of consuming products (such as raw milks, cheeses, meats and vegetables), and shifts the power away from regulation, which prevents people from eating food of their choosing.

How does the ordinance accomplish this? It references three key documents:

The United States Constitution, which declares that the government derives its power from the consent of the governed (in this case, the governed want their raw milk and local meat!)
The Maine Constitution, and in particular Article I, § 2, which declares that all power of government is inherent in the people, who may alter, change or reform it if their happiness requires (again, raw milk = happy people!) and;
The Maine Revised Statutes and in particular §3001 of Title 30-A which grants municipalities the right to regulate health, safety, and welfare (which will sound familiar to urban planners) and §211 of Title 7 which states “it is the policy of the State to encourage food self-sufficiency for the State.”

This is huge news, and Grown in the City will be tracking the story in various ways in the coming weeks. Be sure to subscribe to Grown in the City so you don’t miss a thing.

Update: Be sure to check out the Interactive Food Sovereignty Map to track the spread of the food sovereignty movement across the US.

'The Zoetrope': A Do-It-Yourself Wind Turbine

2011-03-30T19:59:00.000-04:00

I found this article online the other day and thought to share, very interesting peice.

From EarthTechling's Caleb Denison:

If you live in an area that sees a fair amount of wind and you'd like to reduce your utility bill by harnessing some of that wind power, a wind turbine might be a good idea. The trouble with most commercially made home wind turbines, though, is that they're fairly expensive, extremely tall and, if you have neighbors, they might not appreciate the new addition to the neighborhood.

Washington state resident Mike Marohn commissioned an inventive alternative. It's called The Zoetrope and it's a vertical-axis wind turbine made out of easily attainable parts and, according to this article, it can be assembled by just about anyone.

Applied Sciences, which did the work, notes that the intention of this product was to provide supplemental water heating. The result is this wind turbine made of materials that you can find at Home Depot and online. Applied Sciences provides what you need to know to build one yourself, including some videos of the turbine and its parts in action and some other valuable resources that will help hopefully get the turbine connected to your home and operating.

During testing, the turbine was witnessed outputting approximately 150-200 watts of power in a windy period with gusts reaching up to 20 MPH. Under its current design, the actual average output is difficult to gauge. This is because certain parts in this turbine were tailored to withstand gusts of up to 60 MPH, conditions which are common here in the Northwest and likely to burn out more sensitive parts.

To encourage others to get involved in the development process, Applied Sciences decided to make the design of The Zoetrope "open source" so that anyone interested and industrious enough can help to refine the design and/or customize it for use in different geographical areas with differing wind conditions. The idea is appealing simply as a interesting science project, but the potential to save money and generate renewable energy in the backyard is rather compelling.

An End to Nuclear Power in Vermont?

2011-03-28T01:52:00.005-04:00

With the biggest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl continuing on in Japan, there is an understandable amount of concern raising over whether or not nuclear power plants are worth the risk of something going wrong. While efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee are nothing new, long-time activists have a renewed vigor to at least have the plant properly checked out. A tsunami is not exactly a threat, but other occurrences such as a flood, terrorist attack, or human error could expose similar flaws in the design of Vermont Yankee as that of Fukushima. It is particularly worrisome due to the age of Vermont Yankee. Since it has been around for more than thirty-seven years now, it has about three times more nuclear waste on the top floor than Fukushima. If something were to go wrong, the consequences could very well be devastating.

This article (scroll down to "An End to Nuclear Power in Vermont?") also tells of the three accidents that have occurred at Vermont Yankee over just the last six years, as well as some of the lies that the owners have been documented as saying. There has been a fire, cooling tower collapse, and a tritium leak all within that time period. On top of that, Entergy claimed that there was no chance of underground pipes attached to the plant containing radioactive material, when in fact there was, and just three months after this claim was made a pipe burst and strontium, caesium, tritium and maganese, and cobalt 60 were all leaked. It seems very obvious that the Vermont Yankee has not been seriously examined and that the owners are just assuming that nothing will go wrong. The Vermont Yankee website makes a point to claim of how "safe, clean and reliable" the plant is, but how trustworthy is that considering all that has happened within just the last few years?

It isn't an exactly similar situation, but I recently read an article on an elementary school in the city of Okawa, Japan that was hit hard by the tsunami. The teachers and students knew exactly what they were supposed to do when the city's alarm went off, but they all just assumed that nothing would actually happen to them. One teacher spoke up and encouraged that they should all head to the top of a hill nearby, but only one child listened to what he had to say and went with him. They are just about the only members of the school who survived the tsunami. It is very much in our societal human nature to feel like bad things only happen to other people and will never happen to us, but unfortunately there is no way of actually knowing what is going to happen, so why take the risk? What has happened and continues to happen in Japan is heart-breaking and was unpredictable, so why allow Vermont Yankee to cross their fingers and just hope that nothing goes wrong?

The Vermont State Senate voted overwhelmingly to deny the company the permission it needs to operate after Entergy's license expires in one year from now. Entergy, however, plans to take on the challenge to renew their licence and have the plant continue to operate in the same manor anyways. It is really quite discouraging how much power big companies have, and that they tend to not be too concerned of the hazards of their productions. Most large companies seem to be focused on making as much money as they can with very little regard for how it's currently affecting consumers and the environment or could do so in the future. If Entergy/the NRC were to win that battle, I would find it extremely disturbing that a company has more power than the state government, but I think (or hope) that just wont happen.

There are definitely some good aspects to Vermont Yankee. It provides a large portion of Vermont's power as well as a large number of jobs. So if Vermont Yankee did get shut down, I'm wondering what exactly the plan would be to provide all of the power that it does? Also, what would they do with the thirty year supply of nuclear waste? That is quite a lot to just store in barrels somewhere, and there are other harmful situations that it could lead to if a disaster occurred near the storage site. Maybe the plant will just be examined for potentially flawed design, but while that is better than completely disregarding what the plant is doing, I don't know if there is a fool-proof way to make a nuclear power plant harmless. Really, a full fledged nuclear disaster leading to deadly radiation flowing through the air basically sounds like one of the most terrifying things that could happen, since we all know that radiation has the power to cause a vast array of horrific side effects. I am not sure what the best way to handle Vermont Yankee is, but I am thankful that it is such a huge controversy and hope that measures will be taken to improve it and remove untrustworthy people from owning it.

The Future of Space: Mining!

2011-03-27T09:31:00.000-04:00

Space is open for business. After over 100years of extracting natural resources from earth, it looks as though the Planet cannot manage to sustain. Many people have put thought into how best to solve this problem, and many people have concluded that the Moon may hold the answer. Helium-3 is a dust ejected from the sun and brought to the moon from solar winds, since the moon has no atmosphere to reject such particles. Helium-3 happens to be a very potent form of energy, one which scientists say could sustain our energy needs here on Earth for thousands of years. Many companies have begun cost analyses to begin transporting the resources back home from depths in space, including the moon and mars. There is propositions to make the moon safe for mining crews and livable, and no this just isn’t a pipe dream from some rich business men, this is coming, it may already be here. NASA has started a program called the “Constellation program” whose main goal is to have a human outpost on the moon by 2020. This reversion into pillaging for natural resources will likely be carried out on other celestial bodies. One Russian company is built around the idea of fulfilling their goal to procure the helium-3 deposits from the moon and becoming filthy rich off of the product. The downside of such operations to the moon is the pollution that the exhibitions cause.

Say a lunar rocket explodes in space, the material left behind from the explosion will become an inanimate object and stay floating, obstructing what’s behind it for generations to come. This is because of the lack of gravitational pull, the same force of nature that allows our satellites to roam free. All of the materials we leave in space are there forever, there is no natural cycle to their decomposition in an oxygen free, atmosphere free environment. This presents a very problematic case for the scientists and businessmen, who must realize that any debris left in space will be there forever, and could potentially forever inhibit our exhibitions in space in the first place. This permanent problem could change our course for the rest of eternity, more so then our pollution of Earth, which has natural cycles of disposing of harmful waste and debris.

Although this sounds like an exotic idea, I suggest you listen to the TED talk given by Burt Rutan (which I have included in this post) and imagine ways in which we can and will one day venture and utilize space to our needs to sustain on Earth. I have also included in this post a very comprehensive BBC documentary entitled “Moon for Sale” which talks about the growing interest in space commodities.

TED Talk with Burt Rutan

BBC Documentary "Moon for Sale"

Solar Energy - Viablilty as Alternative Energy

2011-03-20T23:42:00.004-04:00

For as long as most can remember, we've heard about solar panels and their ability to capture the sun's rays as harnessable energy. Many support its expansion because of this clean, zero-emission concept, but is it the whole truth? Is solar energy an effiicient, harnessable source of energy that could one day replace fossil fuels? And if so, why hasnt a push been made to harness this power source?

The process of directly converting sunlight into electrical energy is known as photovoitiacs. This is often done by exposing certain materials, such as silicon, to sunlight. These materials reactively release electrons that are able to be harnessed as electrical energies. Layers of these materials are wired together on the surface of the panels, and contained in protective shielding to prevent damage from the elements and outside sources.

Technically known as Photovaitaic Arrays, the efficiency of most panels, even with the latest advancements in the technology, is around 19% for consumer-available versions, with around 27% for more advance, commercial panels. Other issues factor in as well, ranging from maintainence, costly additions to optimize production, to simpler things such as power loss in shading. Trackers that follow the movement of the sun and tilt the panel appropraitely are often very expensive, and when even small sections of the panel fall out of direct light, the power output drops sharply from the electrons backtracking the unused circuits.

But how much power does that actually produce, aside from the obvious deficiencies? And would that still meet our needs? For the last few decades, the estimated rate of consumption in the US has been steady at around 98,443 kwh (Kilowatthours) per year per person. This is roughly three to four times that of the rest of the world, which makes it a good focus group.

A standard solar panel in the United states can generally expect to harness about 1 kwh/m^2/day (kilowatthour per square foot per day) in favorable conditions. Taking into account the average usage of energy per person, every person would require approximately 270 kwh/day, or a minimun of 270 square feet per person. This is not accounting for unfavorable conditions where a surplus would be necessary, so an approximate double (by my opinion) would viably be needed for each person, equivalent to 540 square feet of solar panel coverage. For the entirety of the United States population, this would require 167,951,085,120 square feet to provide and compensate. That is more than half the size of Vermont!

Another barring to the use of solar energy is the very high cost of the panels as compared to normal hydrocarbon fuels. A typical array costs about $95 per square foot, when factored into the amount needed per person, would add up to around $25,000, before maintainance and upkeep. All together, it would cost $15,955,353,086,400 to construct the array that would be needed to support the Unites States population, more than the current total national deficit.

All in all, while solar energy is hailed as a clean, alternative form of energy, it is largely outside of a single citizen's ability to implement in their home, and well above the ability of the government to endorse.

The lichen microcosm

2011-03-18T10:30:00.002-04:00

Lichen is a fascinating example of successful symbiotic relationships between a fungus and algae. It is also a perfect illustration for endosymbiotic theory, a theory Lynn Margulis greatly contributed to. In this mutualistic relationship, both fungus and algae benefit: fungus obtains energy from the algae that conduct the photosynthesis process while algae are provided with a "home." From an evolutionary perspective, Margulis would argue that lichen is an adaptation that is the result of symbiogenesis (the merging of organisms into new collectives) rather than genetic mutation.
While lichen is made of a fungus and algae, it also provides a habitat for hundreds of bacteria and functions like a micro-ecosystem. Like Margulis, the mycologists interviewed find the micro-ecosystems to be very similar to the eco-systems of the Earth.
While lichen is one of the first organisms to grow in the course of primary succession and requires minimal resources, it appears to be vulnerable to human-made pollution. In Cambridge (MA) lichen has almost disapperead from the old cemeteries. I think lichen disappearance is a clear sign that our urban environment is not fit for human beings either. I also wonder what the evolutionary response to human pollution could possibly be, that is, how microorganisms might be able to cooperate and recombine for increased resilience...

Listen to the story on Lichen from Living on Earth!

A Vision For Sustainable Restaurants

2011-03-13T15:35:00.002-04:00

Arthur Potts Dawson, founder and owner of multiple green businesses gives us some insight into his sustainable visions for restaurants. Because the restaurant industry is undoubtedly the most wasteful industry in the world, Dawson has opened a handful of restaurants that exclusively employ green practices. For example, the first restaurant he opened is constructed of floors and chairs that are not only recyclable, but that are made from recycled materials. Furthermore, the entire restaurant is powered by sustainable energy- wind power. Perhaps one of his most brilliant ideas, although not part of the physical design of sustainability, is that he created a menu in which the customers are free to choose their portion size. Finally, in the restaurant there is some form of a dehydrating apparatus that breaks down and turns food into inner material that can be stored and composted at a later time.
Dawson’s most recent business enterprise is a project that is extremely necessary in order to foster sustainable practices in the average person’s life. It is called “The People’s Supermarket” and is a non-profit social cooperative project that was created to serve as a food bridge between urban settings and the rural communities in which their food is grown and harvested. Dawson’s goal is to make this the most “sustainable supermarket in the world” by committing to a zero food waste policy. Although Dawson has spent the majority of his work in the realm of sustainable restaurant practices, he understands the importance of launching something like “The People’s Supermarket” because it transfers that restaurant model of sustainable awareness and participation into the very core of our communities. Generally speaking, the working class probably won’t seek out to eat at a green restaurant, but with something like “The People’s Supermarket” everyone, on some level is able to make informed decisions when going to purchase food.
Within his work in the restaurant business, Dawson’s initiative that gives customers the choice in determining their portion sizes is truly revolutionary. In an industry that accumulates so much waste, reshaping the customer’s relationship to food, and giving them a role of responsibility in the restaurant is crucial if we as a society are going to adapt to more sustainable methods concerning food. As Dawson states, it is not about eliminating waste, it’s about minimizing it.”

Canopy Living in Costa Rica

2011-03-12T12:11:00.000-05:00

Costa Rica is a special place. The dense Rainforest climate and untainted landscapes provide visitors and residents alike with a pure and uninhabited experience. Over the past 100 years, vast deforestation and environmental mishaps have forever altered how many places in this region function and thrive, Costa Rica is trying to change this. As a country, Costa Rica has made a commitment to becoming a sustainable and environmentally viable place to live, learn and love.

Many social programs and initiatives have taken place to bring the country to a stable and sustainable level, my favorite of which is within Canopy studies. I watched a TED talk given by Nalini Nadkarni about the topic of Canopies. Nalini is an advocate, author and educator who spent her life devoted to the appreciation and understanding of our need and use of trees and more specifically, Canopy growth. I focused not only on her talk, but on a community named Finca Bellavista on the island. Finca is a tree house community which is built within the canopies of Costa Rica. They are commited to being 100% self sufficient and off the grid, all while having a very comfortable and enjoyable living experience. They use zip lines as transportation, rainwater as hydration and nature as it’s cradle. I have posted a promotional video that Finca Bellavista has posted for our viewing pleasure.

2011-03-10T20:09:00.002-05:00

Community Waste Management Environmental Educational Socio-Green(Up)Building Activism!

In Grenades Guatemala, elementary students learned about green building, the environment, waste management, and build themselves a school in the process all with the help of Laura Kutner. While serving in the Peace Corps Kutner was helping out at one of the local elementary schools. She was asked to help raise funds for the completion of two classrooms that had already been framed. She obliged and noticed the frame was the width of the plastic soda bottle in her hand and thought immediately of a fellow volunteer who was constructing building blocks out of plastic bottles stuffed with inorganic trash called Eco-Bricks. She thought this building method might be a cost efficient approach to finishing the classrooms.
With the help of neighboring students and littering citizens, the elementary school collected 8000 Eco-Bricks. At about one pound per Eco-Brick, that's 8000 pounds of garbage picked up off the ground and put into a wall, a wall that is even more flexible in earthquake territory than cement blocks.

Kutner knows that its not just the new classrooms that are important, nor the six new "bottle schools" recently built that are important but it's the underlying educational aspect of the project that is important as she states here: "The real long-term goal of these projects is the educational aspect to it, because this is not a long-term solution to trash management in any way, but just the educational aspect in learning how long it takes trash to decompose and what you can do with trash, and how much we produce. We produce enough trash to build buildings with it. And also, bringing communities together...it's in every sense of the word, a win-win."

I said it before and I'll say it again, us humans are good are creating waste, now we need to be creative with our waste. Waste management and recycling are going to be crucial survival skills for future generations. This building method and grassroots community organizing helps teach students to be conscience of their environment and more aware of their effect on it, while producing a positive outcome for themselves and their community. In an area where there was no conventional system set in place to recycle, the people created a way to recycle. This instills in the students the very essence of recycling at its most basic form. This is also a testament the volunteers of the Peace Corps, who can make the best of what they are given, a notion that is at heart, sustainability.

Link to Podcast: http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=11-P13-00006#feature6
Link to Bottle Schools website: http://hugitforward.com/

Are mushrooms the new plastic?

2011-02-28T10:28:00.003-05:00

Eben Bayer, is a co-inventor of mycobond, an organic adhesive that turns agriwaste into a foam material for packaging and insulation. Eben Bayer says he has a new organic recipe for a packaging material that protects fragile things from being damaged while in the box. A new age, 100 percent compostable Styrofoam. It is not made up of all the chemicals that Styrofoam is, or the "toxic white stuff", as Bayer puts it.

Eben Bayer took the hard facts of how bad Styrofoam is for the earth and all its habitants. He states that twenty billion dollars is spent every year on making things out of Styrofoam, from surf boards, coffee cups, to table tops, packaging material for just about everything we buy that comes in a box. According to the EPA, Styrofoam eats up about 25% of all landfills. Styrofoam does not go away, it will be around for thousands of years after use. It may be broken down into tiny microscopic pieces, so we cant see it, but we are breathing it.

He helped invent a new type of packaging. This packaging is made from mushrooms. It is completely compostable, does not cost any more to make it then Styrofoam, and only uses 10 percent of the energy to make than that of Styrofoam. The process of making this new packaging material takes about 5 days, but the mushrooms do most of the work. Mycobond is created by using natural growth process of fungus call mycelium. It is produced from crop waste like seed husks, seed husks and mushroom roots, (which bind the food scraps as they eat them). Again the foam is organic and compostable.

Material can be used as:

-fire retardants

-Insulation

-packaging components

Although the Internet dubs it to be catching on quickly, I feel as though its not quickly enough. If this new material is not toxic, completely compostable and cost as much to make as regular Styrofoam, then someone should start spreading the word and making it mandatory for companies to use this new mushroom packaging.

Green Schools in Indonesia

2011-02-28T10:16:00.003-05:00

I had the pleasure of watching a clip about a green school in Bali Indonesia by CO founder John Hardy. This Idea put into motion is giving students a relevant, holistic and green education in the most amazing environment on the planet.

Their classrooms are made of bamboo, in which have no walls, so the students feel the breeze as it passes through. The black board are made of bamboo, this school is nested on 20 plus acres of rolling gardens. There is a community built around this school, houses in which are also green houses. All food in this village is organic, are picked and harvested by the children themselves. This school also has, Compost toilets. This beautiful school is all built by hand.

I think this is the best idea I have seen so far in building a greener future, by shaping the minds of our future. Giving children a new way of thinking, we are on our way to a cleaner more greener, sustainable future.

http://www.ted.com/talks/john_hardy_my_green_school_dream.html

2011-02-20T13:34:00.002-05:00

POO-GLOOS, Where does your waste water go?

Gresham, Wisconsin, a small town of 600 is experimenting with their wastewater. Right now all of the wastewater is drained off into a "lagoon where there's bacteria, or bugs if you want to call 'em, that eat at the waste and they take and turn that into oxygen and get rid of all the sludge and heavier materials." Says Art Bahr, the Town Administrator.
The problem is that in the cold winter the bacteria in the lagoon doesn't work as fast at breaking down heavier materials. So the folks of Gresham have been experimenting with a Poo-Gloo. The Poo-Gloo or Biome is made up of seven small domes (figure 1) inside one big dome. Between them is a plastic material thats a fixed film technology. This basically increased the surface area in a warmer environment (biome) for bacteria to thrive and convert waste. The wastewater enters through the bottom, and after the bacteria remove harmful materials, the water drains out the top.
The town currently has one Poo-Gloo that is in an experimental phase. According to Bahr, the town will need thirty four of these Poo-Gloos dispersed between two ponds to handle the towns 275 utility consumers. At five thousand dollars a Poo-Gloo thats around $325,000 with installation and technology updates.
But whether it is cost effective or not, the Department of Natureal Resources is very interested in Gresham's experiment and how it can be used through out the midwest.

Figure 1

We generate a lot of waste as humans, especially modern American humans. I think small towns taking the initiative to find a better solution to pollution is 100% American Awesomeness. The cost of these little crap-shacks is 5000$ a piece. I don't know how long they last but the podcast said that, if they are maintained they should last for "many years." well for those kinda clams you'd wanna get your money out of it. I don't know if the 325,000$ start up cost for 275 utility costumers is reasonable or not. there are a lot of other questions this brings to mind. Who flips that bill? What is the alternative to Cold Weather Biome Lagoons? septic systems? How clean is the water that comes out the top? Can one household have their own biome lagoon? is a biome lagoon system better than septic? Are community wastewater treatment systems better than a residential system? how can we reduce waste altogether?

Waste is not going away, Waste is an integral part of American society, American as McDonalds apple pie. Waste is a product of humanity, and how we make it, deal with it, through it out, flush it down, is connected to our daily behavior and practices. HOW CAN HUMANS KEEP UP WITH THE WASTE WE GENERATE?

To check the podcast out yourself go to: http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=11-P13-00005#feature6

Is a grassroots movement enough to change the conventional food system?

2011-02-01T09:23:00.005-05:00

Our conventional industrialized US food system is at the core of pressing issues such as food access/security, obesity, and widespread pollution. It is simply unsustainable.
The locavore movement is an attempt to transform our current food system by promoting urban farming for the most part. Here are a few examples:

Detroit, which has lost a third of its population, could be home to 10,000 acres of arable land in deserted urban neighborhoods, and create up to 35,000 jobs connected to the food economy.
West Oakland CA lost access to fresh food as white residents moved out and the neighborhood became predominantly black; as a result, the rate of child obesity rose. Today, there is urban gardening, a food coop, and farmers markets thanks to grassroot efforts.
Re-think, a New Orleans group led by engaged students, has vowed to change food in public schools. As a result of their efforts, school gardens have been established and sustainable practices have been introduced in the kitchens and cafeterias.

Food is political and our food system clearly reflects our values as a society. Shifting our entire system towards a more sustainable model entails profound changes in our society. While all these projects are encouraging, I think they are almost anecdotal. Change from the bottom-up might take a very long time to reach a critical mass. But we are facing pressing issues such as food security and obesity that, it seems to me, require immediate attention and action. I don't believe that regulatory changes at the federal level would be effective, but perhaps at the state level where there could be less partisanship and more focus on problems to solve. I am thinking about the Farm-to-Plate initiative in Vermont as a model to drive change. Maybe I am a bit naive though...

*Post is a response to Going Locavore show*

pure convience

2010-12-13T01:54:00.002-05:00

Water is a some thing the world will need forever. Sustainable use of water is key for the future. I have been doing lots of reading and research on the change of use of the water. It has always been that 80% of the water in the US has been for agriculture. The issue become what is needed to be produce that is water intensive. An example of this is the tar sands in Canada it would only be possible to get the oil for it with out water. The logic of using something as important as water on extracting oil. The documentary liquid assets hit a lot of important points http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu0S3tp66Rg&feature=channel . There is nothing to switch to when there is no more water. People all over the world have been looking to water as an income source but finding that no amount of water in the world can be equal to a water supply. With more and more people going with out water it will be interesting to see what will be the optimum path to a global solution. If it will be government policy or capitalistic market policy, only time will tell.

ArborSculpture, A Primer: An Alternative to Milled Lumer

2010-12-12T19:54:00.001-05:00

I had a Tough time getting the formatting to work right in Blogger. Here is an embedded frame; And if that doesn't work a direct link to the Blog Post.

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1jSH4_BqDlNXiPv7kNNf0dpmEUIakDyhlN-QV_31EItg

Green Guide

2010-12-08T00:38:00.000-05:00

David Suzuki is a Vancouver, Canada native and attended Amherst College in Massachusetts receiving his B.A. and received his Ph.D from the University of Chicago in Zoology. He has created the David Suzuki foundation in which he states they work with the government, businesses, and individuals alike to conserve the environment.

“Our mission is to protect the diversity of nature and our quality of life, now and for the future.” Suzuki states on his website that Canada is doing everything they can to remain on the path of avoiding dangerous climate change and is also taking the right steps to create a safe level of greenhouse gas emissions. One of the top priorities at his foundation is the issues of climate change, something in which Suzuki is very passionate about and has created controversy when giving speeches, encouraging people to find a way to prove what certain leaders are doing to harm the environment is illegal and sending them to jail.

The foundation also promotes outdoor learning and encourages people, especially the younger generation, to learn what it is to live healthy and embrace outdoor living. On his website, Suzuki also offers tips of how to live healthier and what everyone can do to make informed decisions to decrease their environmental footprint. Among the website are tips to even eat sustainable seafood: “Eat locally caught or farmed seafood that shows up on the green or yellow lists on the seafood guides. This helps reduce the amount of energy used to provide seafood to your plate.”

Suzuki also talks of illegal acts such as dumping mine tailings into freshwater to spread the word of how to maintain nature. A lot of his focus is on the environment and how to bring communities closer to their natural habitats. He also encourages people to take action for smarter regulation of chemicals in cosmetics. Although its becoming a trend to advertise natural ingredients in food, the topic of chemicals in cosmetics is something not mentioned as often. Overall, Suzuki’s foundation provides tips to live more sustainably and the importance of everyone becoming involved.

Sustainable Transportation

2010-12-05T23:35:00.000-05:00

The movement of people and their possessions from one place to another has always left its environmental footprints on the land, but, as we learned, the modernization and mechanization of transportation had much grander effects on the land than any seemingly ancient transportation methods ever did. As David Suzuki points out in his Green Guide, America and Canada currently boast the largest transportation footprints. With more cars than drivers in the U.S., a 6-ton carbon dioxide emission quota per person on average in both Canada and the U.S., and a looming environmental problem that’s largely anthropogenic, it’s clear that our present-day transportation habits and patterns are causing us more harm than convenience.

When the awareness of our detrimental transportation habits is met with our desire to continue living lives filled with things, and travels, we create a transportation compromise. There’s a lot going on right now regarding sustainable transport, which, by definition, is any kind of transportation that produces a low impact on the environment or is attempting to progressively decrease it’s impact on the environment. Examples of sustainable transportation obviously include the basics, like walking, running, cycling, rollerblading, paddling, or skateboarding (a personal favorite). Other methods include public and mass transit, as well as transit-oriented development, which seeks to encourage and develop more ecologically friendly cities based on mixed-use residential and commercial designs with a transit station at the center. Environmentally friendly vehicles, or green vehicles, have experienced an outburst in popularity recently, which is good news; these cars, whether electric, hybrid, hydrogen powered, solar powered, biodiesel powered, or fuel cell powered, all produce significantly less harmful impacts to the environment than traditional vehicles.

Other methods of sustainable transport include, as mentioned by Suzuki, “better planning ... car sharing, carpooling, home delivery of groceries, videoconferencing, and telecommuting.” Suzuki also recommends buying the most fuel-efficient vehicle possible within your means, improving - and lessening - your driving habits, and switching to cleaner fuels. I especially took Through a bit of research, I’ve also discovered that there are numerous organizations dedicated to assisting people in the planning and execution of a sustainable travel experience, also known as sustainable tourism or eco-tourism. Though not exactly a method of transportation, the sustainable building and upkeep of the infrastructures that propel and connect our transportation systems is also prevalent in modern discussions. Such sustainable building and planning can help to ensure a more seamless, space-saving, waste-erasing and efficient way to move from point A to point B.

Food Footprint

2010-11-29T07:17:00.002-05:00

After reading David Suzuki's urgings on how and what we should try to eat on a day to day basis I have been trying to become more aware of my food choices. In the three weeks leading up to Thanksgiving break I almost entirely eliminated meat from my diet. This was a huge change for me considering I normally eat some meat four or five times a week. When I read that "raising 1 kg of beef generated the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 150 miles" I decided to try to lay off of meat for a while.

With no money going towards meat I was able to spend the little bit extra on organically and locally grown produce. Additionally the only meat I did eat over those weeks was some non corn fed, eco raised salmon and a locally raised, grass fed beef meatball. I also cut back on the amount of eggs I used but kept the amount of milk and cheese the same. I felt healthy eating predominantly vegetables and fruits and I felt good knowing I was at least trying to reduce my "ecological footprint from eating by up to 90%."

While this was an interesting experiment for myself, it was also frustrating. I wanted to buy only local organic produce but with the difference in price coupled with my rent and electric bills I couldn't always do that. Had i been buying more meat and stuck to only humanely and organically raised products the price increase would have been even steeper. It is deflating to someone trying to become a more thoughtful eater, as well as urge others to do the same, when finances come into play as a limiting factor. I found the best prices on organic produce to be at farmer's markets and feel that in order for there to be a larger movement in reducing our food footprint there has to be a push to continue the expansion of supporting more and more local agriculture through markets and CSA's to eventually lower the price of good food so that it is obtainable by the masses.

-Christian-

Diversity is Key

2010-11-28T21:30:00.000-05:00

When reading part 5 of Cradle to Cradle one thing really came to mind was diversity in food. Not just the food itself, but its genetics. Its easy to get many different food items at any of our local food markets, but with all the genetically engineered food out there i fear that diversity of food plant life is being manipulated too much. When we watched the Film in class about food, one thing that struck me as very interesting is that Monsanto has patented genetics, and seed stock, and that their seed stock that is being legitimately grown by farmers and is also pollinating other farmers crops that do not buy these genetics. I feel as though our food crop is getting "dumbed" down by such practices of patenting. I sincerely hope that all of our food stock isn't leaning toward this trend. We need different genetics in out food stocks to keep the plant species healthy and nutritious. Mixing genetics is what helps plants evolve to be strong and viable. If we are kept eating one type of corn with one type of genetic make up, I fear not only for us but for the plant itself. With any type of breeding project, whether plant of animal there is always the possibility of working yourself into a corner, and that corner usually comes with inbreeding. If we keep inbreeding these specimens without out-crossing them, there runs a high risk for sterility. And if farmers are getting forced to grow one type of seed, where is the diversity in that. I understand that breeding and some inbreeding needs to happen to stabilize certain genetics, but if out crossing never happens i feel like we are heading towards a heap of trouble. I am grateful though for the seed bank tucked away in the arctic that holds many of the worlds viable seeds in case we as humans get our selves in trouble, atleast we have that to fall back on.

side-note: my spell check has Monsanto in its word bank.........creepy

The Truth of Thanksgiving

2010-11-21T19:00:00.000-05:00

In the spirit of thanks giving I think it’s important to explore its history. In 1492 Christopher Columbus first landed in the Bahamas and encountered Native Americans. He immediately referred to them as an inferior race and wrote "They all go around as naked as their mothers bore them; and also the women.” He also said that "they could easily be commanded and made to work, to sow and to do whatever might be needed, to build towns and be taught to wear clothes and adopt our ways." He imprisoned thousands of Native Americans, he raped their women murdered their children and enslaved their men. The Pilgrims didn’t invent Thanksgiving.

When the Mayflower arrived on Plymouth Rock, they had only one slave left that had survived small pox and his name was Squanto. Squanto taught the pilgrims to grow corn and fish, he also helped them create a peace treaty with the Wampanoag tribe that resided on the land. The Native Americans in that part of the country already had a rich tradition of marking the fall harvest with a major fiesta. After the puritans first harvest they stole the Native Americans tradition and held a feast of their own to celebrate. At which the Puritans gave the Indians gift baskets, infected with small pox beginning the plague. After seeing the thousands of dead natives that the plague killed. The newly appointed Governor of Massachusetts John Winthrop, declared a day of thanks giving. Thus thanking god for killing over 700 savage, Native American, Men, Women and children.

King James of England, decades later called the deaths of millions of Native Americans "this wonderful plague." He thanked God for sending it. The puritans came by the thousands to claim land that the Natives weren’t even claiming as theirs. They said the land belonged to the earth and the pilgrims felt they were doing the natives a favor by killing them and abolishing this idea.

Major revisions to our history books, make heroes out of murderers. Our nation thinks of turkey As a Hallmark façade, in the same category as Santa and the Easter Bunny. The Native Americans invented holistic medicine, crop burning for fertilization and lived a life without pollution. This scared us, they didn’t believe in our God, they had rituals we couldn’t understand and so we killed them or colonized them and made them conform to our ways. Now most Indian reservations, are fueled by casinos and revenue from drugs.

We began as caveman living as nomads off nothing, developed technology and with it came power and greed. Now we have almost made extinct the people that know how to utilize best, our earth resources, with out damage to the Mother Earth. We don’t think about throwing trash on the ground or the truth behind thanksgiving anymore because it’s easy. We leave lights on and drive cars out of convenience because we cant see the bigger picture anymore. We have let the fascist puritan’s beliefs multiply and divide into the existence that is our reality today. I for one am going to give thanks on this thanks giving for those who have been forgotten but genuinely believed the earth was a sanctuary to be worshiped and protected and died because of those beliefs.

Tara Beach

Eating Local

2010-11-18T09:39:00.000-05:00

I think eating local is the first step to ending the industrial food market. Eating local would help the farmers in your area and by buying local you help stop funding major corporations which are putting pressure on local Farmers to lower their prices to conform to the cheap price larger companies offer. Also I would make a bet that Local produce taste much better than then food shipped from a ways away. From 1994 to 2004 Farmers markets have doubled because of people’s dissatisfaction with industrial food corporations. These corporations are shipping food thousands of miles away to be sold covered in pesticides and preservatives to keep the food fresh on the truck or plane ride to the destination. Alisa Smith and J.B. Mackinnon, two writes from Vancouver, B.C., lived for a full year on a”100-Mile diet” eating nothing grown, raised, or processed beyond that self-imposed geographic limit. Although they encountered some vexing challenges along the way (e.g., no wheat, no sugar, no salt), they eat an imaginative and healthy diet. Over the course of the year Alisa and J.B. befriended local farmers and fisherman. Also the two became intimately connected to the geography, climate, and environmental challenges of the North West. I think that everyone should give a go at the “100-Mile diet” you’re not only keeping yourself healthier by not ingesting so many preservatives, but also your keeping your money local and not fueling major food corporations. If you make an exception of wheat, sugar, and salt I think the “100-mile diet” would be much easier. There are farmers markets popping up everywhere. Find out when and where one is and go check it out.

Austin Wright

The UK and India Working Together

2010-11-15T11:46:00.004-05:00

The United Kingdom and India have been collaborating together on a path towards a low carbon future. The two countries want to work together to create a plan for India, with heavy investments from the UK, to be on the forefront of a clean energy based economy.

The discussion is led by the UK-India Business Leaders Climate Group (BLCG). Companies from both countries have been contributing in the conversation and the creation of a report. The wind energy mogul, Suzlon, has been a contributor, as well as, HSBC Bank. David Cameron, the Prime Minister of the UK, believes that this low-carbon path for India could create jobs, growth and environmental protection for the ever expanding country.

The BLCG advocates for the beginning of joint projects that demonstrate low-carbon technology. They also want to work together on joint research and development projects. The BLCG is also working to remove barriers of investments on clean energy and finding innovative financing mechanisms.

This idea is not a solution for India by any means. India is the fastest growing nation in the world, expanding at approximately 9% population per year. They are also in the front of the industry and business world. This makes it necessary for India to lead the way to finding a solution for clean energy. With the financial aid from the UK, and cooperation of the businesses in both countries, perhaps a balanced solution can be found.

Conservation International Conference

2010-11-01T11:14:00.004-04:00

A Convention of Biological Diversity was recently held in Japan. Many representatives from different countries attended the conversation, though the United States did not attend. The purpose of the conference was to set up a global conservation plan for the next ten years. The collaboration of representatives concerned by this issue are looking for remedies to the increasing problem of the loss of biodiversity in ecosystems.

Biodiversity is the foundation to life on this planet. A healthy and balanced ecosystem provides humans with the resources needed for survival on this planet. It provides clean water and air, prosperous insects for the pollination of crops, healthy soil, and many sources of pharmaceuticals that are so important in sustaining healthy populations around the world. Biodiversity is currently in crisis, with the current rate of species extinction at more than 1000X the rate expected. This is in turn causing problems within the ecosystem and effecting the human population. Currently, more than 1 billion people do not have access to clean water and approximately 2.6 billion people are living without proper sanitation. This problem is only going to escalate as the human population increases. Within 30 years there is expected to be 3 billion more people relying on the earth's resources. This will mean that the food output and the fresh water availability will need to double, only further pressing the natural resources.

The conference in Japan stimulated a lot of conversation on the topic of the sustainable use of the earth's resources and how to conserve what there is. The main solution from the conference is to conserve and protect certain areas and habitats from being destroyed. This idea will curve the rate of biodiversity loss and create a safe, protected area for ecosystems to prosper. It was decided that Governments around the world would need to pass laws to protect 25% of land area and 15% of ocean area.

Though the United States claims to be the super power of the world, the focus of the American Government has not been on how to protect and conserve the natural resources of the world. An initiative was started during the Bill Clinton Presidency called the Convention of Biodiversity. This initiative has not been funded or pursued by the current administrations and continues unused.

The Japanese Government has begun an initiative called "Life in Harmony". The Government has budgeted 2 billions dollars and will assist other nations who need aid for the research of conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources. This issue is seen as one of the most important to the Japanese Government, thus them holding the conference, and they are willing to help others financially to help with this important issue.

This conference brought together many nations of the world that are concerned by the issue of the sustainability of the earth's natural resources and the biodiversity within ecosystems. With nations working together for the benefit of the earth, solutions are more likely to be found to slow the extinctions of crucial species and conserve the resources that are so important to us as humans.

"Think of the concept of biodiversity as the very fabric of life on earth and each species as a thread. How many threads can we lose before the fabric is in tatters?"

Das Passivhaus

2010-10-31T21:12:00.002-04:00

The term passive house (Passivhaus in German) refers to the rigorous, voluntary, Passivhaus standard for energy efficiency in a building, reducing its ecological footprint. It requires the creation of extremely well-insulated, airtight building envelopes and the controlling of other energy uses in the house such as water heating, appliances and lighting.

The Passivhaus movement started in Germany in the early 1990s. According to performance standards set by the Passivhaus Institute in Germany, the building can’t consume more than 15 kilowatt-hours per square meter in heating energy per year (equivalent to 4746 BTU per square foot per year). This typically requires that the wall, roof and floor insulation must be between R40 and R60. The building can’t leak more air than 0.6 times the house volume per hour. An energy recovery ventilator provides a constant, balanced fresh air supply. Basically, if a house fulfills all the Passivhaus requirements, the goal is that fuel costs will be zero and it doesn’t need a furnace anymore.

Although Passivhaus standards are difficult to achieve, I think that setting the bar purposely high is a good thing. So far, setting firm targets for reducing energy standards and switching to renewable energy sources has moved Europe onto the forefront of renewable energy technologies. Most of the innovations today come from Europe, and EU countries are slowly but steadily moving towards fossil fuel independence. The high passive house standards will also most likely act as incentives for builders and architects to reach those standards or even come up with a mainstream solution for a zero-energy house.

As of August 2010, there were approximately 25,000 certified passive houses in Europe, while in the United States there were only 13. As with so many other green innovations and leading-edge building designs as well as with the widespread use of renewable energy, the question is why is the US lagging so far behind? I think you can guess the answer(s) to that. For now, let’s just acknowledge that the technology is here and ready to use. We shouldn’t stop and be satisfied with LEED certifications because we can do better.

Energy Efficiency

2010-10-31T11:19:00.002-04:00

In a time when our current energy policies are becoming more inefficient and expensive, it's beneficial to have people such as Amory Lovins active in promoting the use of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency. Lovins has been working with trying to spread the importance of renewable energy for years and has written many books about it as well as actively participated in trying to contribute to the movement.

One of his books, "Winning the oil endgame", he talks of substituting liquids made from biomass or wastes for petroleum fuels. He also talks of substituting natural gas for oil in uses where they are interchangeable, for example, furnaces or boilers. Lovins believes that the generation of energy should be done always at or near the site where the energy is actually used.

Soft energy paths are the route we should be taking when trying to use renewable energies. Soft energy paths are energy conserving and involve efficient energy use as well as diverse and renewable energy sources. These soft energy paths are based on solar, wind, biofuels, geothermal, etc. One of Lovins biggest concerns is the danger of committing to nuclear energy to meet societies energy needs. Amory Lovins also started the "Negawatt Revolution". Negawatt is a unit in watts in which watts of energy are saved, the opposite of a watt. He believes that people don't want kilowatt hours of electricity, they want to keep things cold or have hot showers, therefore saving energy becomes more efficient. In an interview with Charlie Rose, he uses this similar idea. He talks of digging for "negabarrels" of oil. These negabarrels are the opposite of digging for oil and can be done in major cities. He points out that by using "negabarrels of oil" (saving oil), you can save more oil than Saudi Arabia can produce.

Collecting Data and Using It,

2010-10-17T21:20:00.000-04:00

In Donelle H.Meadows Book "Thinking in Systems" on page 89 she says " When systems thinker encounters a problem, the first thing he or she does is look for data, time graphs, the history of the system. That's because long term behavior provides clues to the underlying system structure. And the structure is the key to understanding not just what is happening, but why."

To me this means, in order to figure out why something is going well or why something is going wrong we really need to look at all the facts. And furthermore, it makes me question why even sometimes with the positive facts out weighing the negative facts we still seem to ignore certain systems that work. The one system that we choose to ignore in America that has so much potential is Hemp Production. I do not understand how we can turn our backs as a nation on something that can clothe, feed, shelter, and so much more.

Lets get one thing straight, Hemp is not Marijuana, Hemp has no "Drug" properties. It simply cannot intoxicate a human. But what it can do has its own power and value. Hemp seed can be made into a food protein in many forms. Hemp fiber can make strong durable clothes, clothes that will last three times longer than cotton. It takes one acre of Hemp 120 days to produce as much usable fiber as 3-4 acres of trees can produce in 7-8 years. Hemp in the last few years has been made into a concrete type material, that homes can be made from. And Hemp oil can be used to run cars. To grow hemp you just need water and sun, it is usually pest resistant so no pesticides need to be used. It is such an amazing plant with so much potential yet we can not grow it in the US, just import it, which drives up the cost to work with or buy, even though it is only a "weed". It is a "system" that has worked for 1000's of years, it has founded countries, help discover new lands, and its future is wide open, as long as we let it in.

Biomimicry

2010-10-11T10:45:00.001-04:00

Biomimicry

Humans are infants in the grand scheme of life. Our biological elders have been here on earth much longer than we have, and compared to them, we still have everything to learn about sustainability. –Janine Benyus

*We are a biological organism which means that we are nature. So not to be confused, when Janine Benyus refers to nature, she means more than human

*Organisms have done everything we humans want to do without guzzling fossil fuels, polluting the planet, or mortgaging their future.

Bacteria arrived 3.8 billion years ago, since then life has learned to fly, circumnavigate the globe, live at the top of mountains, in the bottom of the ocean, light up at night, make miracle materials like skin, horns, hair, and brains.

The wood frog can freeze solid in winter and hop away unharmed in spring, a garden snail builds its own highway of slime, a rhino’s horn heals when cracked, even though it has no living organisms. These are all miracles of nature. A rhino did not go to school and learn to heal his horn, a frog didn’t have to learn how to freeze, and a snail does not have to learn how to produce slime. All of these come natural. Humans have different types of natural miracles that we do without thinking about that makes us able to survive. We breathe without thinking about it, when our eyes become dry we blink without thinking about it. Cardiac and smooth muscle contraction occurs without conscious thought and is necessary for survival. Examples are the contraction of the heart and peristalsis which pushes food through the digestive system. A human has a natural brain capacity to do much more than this, and in turn, do more harm to the planet. But we also have the capacity to do more good, it is up to us on how we use our brains, and to be more aware and learn more on how to live sustainable.

I believe the only reason some of humans behavior/actions are detrimental to a natural/sustainable life cycle, is that we humans have the capacity to learn and execute new ideas. If a wood frog knew a way to survive through the winter without having to be frozen in one single spot, I’m sure it would. If a gazelle knew how to use fire power, then it would do so on the cheetah before the cheetah killed him. If other forms of life had the brain power humans have, then they wouldn’t settle for the natural strengths their creator gave them. Humans have very complex brains that need stimulation. Our creator gave us such brain capacity so that we can put it to use. Our creator wants us to learn and create and build. That is a natural part of life for humans. I think for humans to go back to basics (caveman life) would be totally unnatural and a slap in the face to our creator. We weren’t given this supreme potential so that we can sit on rocks and bang sticks together. God wanted us to go to the moon, he wanted us to travel the world on airplanes, and he wanted us to do all of these things that we do. That is why he wired us in a way that through time we were able to figure out how to do all of these things.

Deforestation

2010-10-10T18:22:00.004-04:00

I think that it may, in some ways be hard to consider deforestation to have effects on sustainability because when people think of trees they don't realize all of the things trees are used for. Not only us as humans need them but hundreds of thousands of species rely on the rain forests for shelter and food, it is their home. What most people don't realize is that our forests have been rapidly decreasing due to to and misuse/abuse of Mother Earths trees. While reading about deforestation I came across a sweet book I was able to read online called Vital Forest Graphics. I thought this book offered some really good information about Deforestation in the past, present, and some things people can do to help rebuild our forests and stop deforestation. “Conserving forests has become a key weapon in the fight to reduce carbon emissions and slow climate change.” (VFG, 56)

Along with the conservation of many forests around the world, people are also doing their part to reestablish forested areas. “In 1999, China launched the ‘Grain for Green’ programme to promote recovery of vegetation cover, watershed management and poverty alleviation ... The programme now covers 25 provinces in over 1,600 counties (autonomous regions and municipalities) and involves 15 million households and 60 million farmers. From 1999 to 2002, 7.7 million hectares of land was converted into forest, including 3.72 million hectares of farm land turned forest and 3.98 million hectares of plantations established on barren hills.” This program is considered to be “the largest participatory community forest project in China, possibly in the world.” (VFG, 61) I believe that people are realizing how preserving our forests is becoming a key part of sustaining a healthy Earth and more people should be taking part in communities similar to the Grain for Green in China because these types of programs are the only chance this planet has for survival.

NHPR.org - Bacteria Power: Energy Minute

2010-10-06T19:19:00.000-04:00

NHPR.org - Bacteria Power: Energy Minute

Bacteria Power: Energy Minute

By Jon Greenberg on Tuesday, May 19, 2009

ARTICLE TOOLS

Hungry bacteria can cut energy bills by thousands of dollars a month.

I’m Jon Greenberg with this energy minute.

Treating wastewater takes a lot of power. But both the City of Nashua and Stonyfield Farm have struck a deal with bacteria to clean up their wastewater at a fraction of the cost of traditional methods.

They both built massive tanks called digesters. Inside these tanks, water and bacteria mix it up, breaking down solids. Now, the bacteria won’t do their thing if it’s too cold. Fortunately, as they clean the water, they produce a gas. Lisa Drake at Stonyfield says you can use that gas to run heaters under the tank.

DRAKE: So it keeps them nice and warm and keeps them happy and productive and that’s basically how it works.

This approach has already paid for itself at Stonyfield and saves Nashua about a million dollars a year on its electric bills. In Germany, they built a more advanced system that drives a 250 kilowatt power plant. They run the digester, heat buildings and still have juice left over to feed back into the electric grid.

With this energy minute, I’m Jon Greenberg.

We are too many

2010-10-03T20:35:00.003-04:00

Whenever my friends and I are discussing the fate of our planet (which happens quite often), we come to the same conclusion: one of the root problems our planet is facing is the population explosion of the human race. At the beginning of the 19^th century, world population was only about 1 billion. By 1960, it reached 3 billion and doubled to about 6 billion during the next four decades. Currently, the world population is about 6.7 billion. Although the growth rate declined since then due to a global increase in education levels and standards of living, we are expected to reach 10 billion by the year 2050.

American biologist and ecologist Paul Ehrlich has warned us over and over again about unlimited population growth and limited resources. He developed the formula I=PAT: Human Impact (I) on the environment equals the product of population (P), affluence (A: consumption per capita) and technology (T: environmental impact per unit of consumption), which is mentioned in Tom Wessel’s “The Myth of Progress” but most ecologists focus more on affluence and technology. Understandably, population control is a sensitive and very emotional issue that impacts not only economics and the environment but also sociology, philosophy, family, politics, ethnic and national pride, religion, sexuality, and individual rights.

Many western countries accuse the “under-developed and under-educated world” for the overpopulation. And, indeed, there is a strong inverse correlation between education and birthrate. The western countries all are seeing a decline in their population growth rate. But, according to Paul Ehrlich, “The key to understanding overpopulation is not population density but the numbers of people in an area relative to its resources and the capacity of the environment to sustain human activities. […] It also depends on how those people behave. When this is considered, an entirely different picture emerges: the main population problem is in wealthy countries.” Our behavior has caused the biggest environmental crisis this planet has ever seen and it is our responsibility to act first.

Marvelous Magic Mushrooms

2010-09-30T17:32:00.002-04:00

Mcdonough and Braungart propose a radical shift in the way we think about design. An industrial revolution moving from a "cradle to grave" approach towards a more sustainable "cradle to cradle" method. Ideally following nature's "upcycle" wherein, the idea of waste is non existent, with all parts able to be re used in any form to benefit the whole.

A prime example of this idea of design being "a signal of intention" is evidenced by Far West Fungi in California. They are growing mushrooms in brick shaped containers, and after harvesting the edible mushrooms they dry the thin, white, rootlike material known as mycelium. After being dried the mycelium, which is already shaped and tightly packed due to the growing containers, takes on the form of a "super brick." These bricks are non toxic,fireproof, and mold and water resistant. They also trap heat better than traditional fiberglass insulation, and are stronger, pound for pound, than concrete. Not only is this a no waste building material, but to grow the mycelium corn husks are used as fungi food. This is important because neither humans nor other animals can eat the husks making them essentially a waste byproduct of corn. While this is a fledgling idea, and not yet a full scale production, other companies have begun marketing "mycoproducts." Ecovative, a New York based company, has a mycelium alternative to styrofoam used in packaging. After use the product can be put in your garden for compost.

Mcdonough and Braungart propose that we design "products and systems that celebrate an abundance of human creativity, culture and productivity" and leave an "ecological footprint to delight in." I think that the examples of Far West Fungi and Ecovative embody these design ideals and are great examples of a step in the right direction.

Cycles

2010-09-28T20:56:00.003-04:00

Life as we know it is based around cycles.

The cycle starting with photosynthesis uses sun light as energy to convert CO2 +H2O into Sugars and O2. Then humans and other living organisms use Sugars and O2 in respiration to produce energy, H2O and CO2. When a tree falls in the forest bacteria and fungi are already on the scene and start feeding off and breaking down the plant material. Leaving the elements and nutrients in a simplified form, ready for the next young tree. All of these systems work together. They cannot be isolated from one another. They build together, like a storm gathering momentum as it progresses and constantly being affected by every aspect of anything. Resulting in the mind-numbing complexity and diversity of our universe.

Cycles are sustainable because there is no waste. The by-product of one step is the raw materials of the next step. The nestedness and synergy between cycles provides diversity and redundancy. Diversity and redundancy can be thought of as other small scale cycles that are constantly fixing the imbalances in the world. Acting as a sort of buffer zone from drastic change. Designing our world with the natural world as a model we can expect these same benefits. Imagine a world were whenever something has been used up it is transformed into something else. No waste.

Blog # 1 Complexity/Sustainability

2010-09-27T15:14:00.000-04:00

Ben Daubenspeck

Blog #1

9/27/10

Complexity/Sustainability

When I hear “complex”, I think of something challenging such as math, getting a new couch into a 3^rd story apartment. But nature gives the word complex a whole new meaning. The word “challenging” flies out the window and “fascinating” takes it place. Tom Wessels talks of complex systems when referring to our bodies. He paints a vivid picture in my mind when he tells how, “during out development we witnessed one cell growing into more than 30 trillion cells”. Then he goes on to say how the 30 trillion cells consist of 254 different types. It baffles me when I think about this stuff because I am someone who likes to make sense of everything, and human existence and the complexity of nature makes no sense to me. I just chalk it all up as a miracle and don’t look very far into it because like I said, the complexity of our bodies, the environment, co-existence, etc, all of that leaves me speechless. Co-evolution is another extremely truly amazing part of life. Wessels says that each species’ plays its own ecological role, meaning that every single species plays an important role in the life cycle. Co-evolution is species adapting to one another, all with the common goal of survival. He mentions the bee and the spider, and how over time the spider has learned to avoid being caught, while the bee has learned tricks on how to lure the spider out in the day time.

With all of these miracles taking place in all forms of life, we are starting to realize our impact as human beings, and how every little thing we do plays a role in the size of our footprint. Over time we have established a very large footprint, and recently we have been concerning ourselves with way to reduce our impact on the earth due to our realizations of the damage we are causing. People are wanting to live more sustainable life styles, mostly meaning that they are looking for way to go green. More people are driving hybrid cars today than ever before, mainly for the reason of saving money on gas, but at the same time they are reducing the size of their foot print compared to someone driving a truck. Also you see more and more people recycling, and looking for “green” labels when shopping. I bought the energy efficient light bulbs for my apartment for example. They are more expensive, but they are proven to use less electricity, in turn lowering my electric bill. So as you can see, a lot of people go green just to save some money, but it is great because at the same time they are reducing their impact and living more sustainable lives, weather they realize it or not. Maybe they are just trying to maintain their budget, but I think that they are being more sustainable at the same time. Going green is typically more expensive at first, but in the long run it proves to be worth it both in the environment and in your wallet.

Green Revolution

2010-05-02T18:10:00.002-04:00

I have always been concerned with being more sustainable, and after take Moving Toward Sustainability, I am even more aware of the impact that my everyday actions make on the Earth. I now have the knowledge to a sustainable individual and I feel like its my duty to inform people that are ignorant to the Green Movement about what they can do. It will take the help from everybody to fix what we have done to this Earth, and I think that transcendence is just as important as recycling and energy conservation. All throughout history there have been revolutions against the many atrocities that the government, as well as humans in general, have committed. The most recent in the United States being the protests against the Vietnam War, millions of American's came together to advocate for peace and love. The most pressing issue in the United States, and all over the world, is how much, and how rapidly, we are polluting the Earth. More and more people are realizing that action needs to be taken to fix this, but the people that really need to be convinced to go Green are our political leaders. As unfortunate as it is, politicians control everything, with out their support we can't get anywhere. This is why I propose a revolution. It takes the power of millions of people, with the same goal, to overcome great social obstacles such as this. For the whole Earth to become Green, we need the strength that comes from a outright revolution.

How can we stop obesity?

2010-05-02T17:37:00.002-04:00

Obesity is a rising problem in America, it is actually called an epidemic. People have been asking why obesity is such a problem for a long time, but the real question we should be asking is how can we stop the problem in its tracks and keep people from becoming obese. No one wants to be obese, but so many people are. Why? There are so many reasons why people over eat, but I believe that the biggest reason is the fact that people are uneducated. Ignorance kills. Not only do people not receive enough information about healthy eating habits, but the information they do receive is wrong. We are constantly bombarded with commercials advocating for the unhealthiest of places, McDonald's, Wendy's, and Burger King. It is ingrained in people's minds that all these fatty foods are too tasty to resist, and that a Big Mac equals good food.

If we were to just eat foods that came purely from the Earth, nothing processed whatsoever and free of any additives, there would be no such thing as obesity. The Earth gave us an abundance of good food, everything we need to live and prosper. People used to eat just when they were hungry, just to survive. Now there is so much food available that people no longer eat to live, but eat for pleasure. There is of course nothing wrong with getting pleasure from food, but most of the food that people get pleasure from are very unhealthy and very fattening. We need to begin educating people right from the start, in elementary schools, that everything you put into your body becomes your body.

Last Chapters

2010-04-19T10:42:00.003-04:00

I love reading Dave Suzuki's Green Guide for the simple fact that it gives you information and outlets to find further information to change things in your personal life. The goal of zero waste is a time consuming one that requires attention to detail to read the tiny print on labels provided by major corporations being one example with the goal of seeing through the bought out term "environmentally friendly." The websites mentioned through out the book for further awareness are very helpful. He highlights simple ways to cut one's carbon footprint such as composting, reusing, repairing, and recycling, but is sure to make the connection that without government laws mandating these paths towards zero waste and major corporations leading by example, more people will not get on board. Leading perfectly into McDonough's sixth chapter using the Ford company as an example of reinventive thinking towards biomimcry methods.

The focus on one of America's major automobile assembly corporations changing the typical paradigm of "don't ask, don't tell" into an open, creative thinking zone in order to keep the employees best interests at heart while still making profits is a great example for many corporations that are feeling trapt by the pressures to escape economic downfall. If corporations are being bailed out by banks, creating more debt, it should be painfully obvious that new methods must be put underway and their employees may love them for it in the end. People, as living creatures desire sunlight, fresh air, and social interaction to feel good about their lives. In incorporating this in their new building, Ford is seeing positive feedback rolling in. Makes sense! I'm finally inspired by Cradle to Cradle instead of told that my personal contribution isn't enough. The dwelling into how corporations can change their methods by looking into what is making each product, not just the product itself and choosing other materials seems like a realistic step in the right direction. I'm thinking this book should be sent to every major corporation in the world.

2010-04-11T23:50:00.002-04:00

This week I was particularly interested in Jim Motvalli's essay, Reinventing the Wheel. This essay talked about the partnership between consumer demand, government policy, and environmental concern as related to transportation. Motvalli proposes realistic alternatives to the unsustainable transportation practices in the U.S., which include driving oil-dependent vehicles, and spending more time on highways than any other country. He recognizes that Americans enjoy the privileges and conveniences that accompany owning personal vehicles, and he doesn't suggest that Americans can or should completely relinquish their dependence. He talks a lot about hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell cars. I believe he wrote this essay sometime around 2004 when giant SUVs like Hummers were extremely popular. Also, the hybrid and electric car movement was just beginning. In a matter of years, the popularity of more energy efficient cars has risen dramatically. All of the major car companies have now realized that cars that are better for the environment are better for business. Ultimately, the U.S. is a capitalist society and consumers can drive better business practices because for many companies it is all about the bottom line: profit.

Educated consumers can make choices to buy more sustainable products, whether it be cars or light bulbs. This will create competition for companies to make more sustainable products to put in the market. I think it is important to note the example of the fabric company that McDonough and Braungart consulted to make more sustainable products. Not only did they end up with a nearly wasteless product that did not pollute the environment, the company ended up making more profit while having healthier, happier workers that did not have to work in toxic conditions. I hope that more and more companies realize that designing more sustainable products can profit them economically as well as benefit their employees and the environment. I also hope that consumers continue to make smart choices about what they buy, because I think that is the first step that will cause companies to change their practices. Eventually companies may make sustainable choices for more than economic reasons, but for now let's do our part as consumers to start the ball rolling.

"Natural Capitalism"

2010-04-11T10:18:00.003-04:00

"Natural Capitalism" as a middle ground sounds great. Being environmentally conscious doesn't mean going back to living like cave men. Personally that is an extreme my mind immediately jumps to. Adapting some minimalist tendencies may do us all some good, but using the awesome knowledge we posses to creatively design ways to enforce a new industrial revolution leading to a more sustainable future is positively inspiring! Products of everyday life that are produced by companies with a zero waste operation that enhance not only the lives of us humans, but the lives of the creatures in our environment that are being "annihilated." This task can sound very daunting considering the sacrifices that may have to be made in order to pull it off, but Paul Hawken gives me hope. "'How many of you spend too much time with your children or know someone who does?' Nobody raised a hand." The proof that our communities and families even have lost their connection to one another is depicted in this question. An overall theme I have taken from the reading pushing everything else aside is: appreciating and forming better connections w/ each other and looking at long term benefits are key to changing the paradigm of American culture today. I'd say that's happening with many organizations globally right now.

As far as Amory Lovins and Hunter Lovins (amazingly appropriate last names) claim on the "capitalism" we quote today not being true capitalism, I am of totally ignorance. I guess over the years I've just coupled my pessimistic thoughts (ahem, realism some would say) of this culture w/ the term, putting a western spin on it. Financial Capitalism: An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism encourages private investment and business, compared to a government-controlled economy. Investors in these private companies (i.e. shareholders) also own the firms and are known as capitalists. Ah! Now that that is clear, the Lovins have a point.

The most shocking revelation for me during the last part of this reading came w/ Jim Motavalli's dwelling into Hydrogen energy for new methods of transportation and such. Last I knew, Hydrogen wasn't a sustainable alternative to oil because it is produced from coal and nuclear energy, which are frowned upon now, and storing it is somewhat apprehensive. Reading it can be cultivated from wind and solar recyclable energies as well was exciting! The fuel-cell working as a battery lasting obscenely long gives a stepping stone to a non oil dependent method of transportation. If the experts can expand on this and major corporations start pushing it in our faces there may be big changes in our lifetime!

Paul Hawken Inspires

Save the Environment, Drive an S Class!

2010-04-01T10:07:00.009-04:00

When one thinks of excellent fuel economy and ultra low emissions, the Mercedes-Benz S Class is a vehicle that rarely comes to mind. Until now. The S Class is Mercedes largest four door sedan. The S Class usually comes equipped with V-8 or V-12 engines in the American market. Mercedes engineers have been developing hybrid and hydrogen vehicles for years and are now able to offer their first hybrid model in the United States. The S400 BlueHybrid is powered by a 3.5 liter gasoline V-6 engine and a 15 kilowatt electric motor. The S400 BlueHybrid is the first production hybrid vehicle in the world that utilizes a lithium ion battery. The estimated average fuel economy for the S400 BlueHybrid is 30 miles per gallon . In comparison, the twin turbo v-12 gasoline powered S600 achieves an average 13 miles per gallon.

Conventional hybrids leave much to be desired in regards to luxury. The S400 BlueHybrid is available with heated, ventilated, and massaging seats front and rear, keyless go, night vision with pedestrian detection, automatic high beam headlight control, voice activated satellite navigation, digital surround sound stereo, radar controlled cruise control, 3 television screens, adaptive air suspension, blind spot detection, and the list goes on.

The S Class is a vehicle that is used by CEO's, world leaders, and wealthy people all over the world. If these people start living by example, the rest of the world is sure to take notice. For most people purchasing an S Class, the cost is of little concern. However, it is encouraging to see that the S400 BlueHybrid is the least expensive S Class model offered in the United States. The S400 BlueHybrid is also exempt from the S Class' usual Federal Gas Guzzler Tax. People will be more apt to make environmentally friendly decisions when they are also economically beneficial. I guess you can have your cake and eat it too.

Timing

2010-03-28T20:01:00.003-04:00

This weeks reading summarized and reiterated all we have learned about thinking in systems. "How do we change the structure of systems to produce more of what we want and less of that which is undesirable? Meadows references world leaders and companies that two often push the price leverage point in the wrong direction ultimately weakening the feedback loop instead of balancing or strengthening it. The loops and examples are interesting ways of looking at systems however the continuous examples actually start to make the scenario more complicated to me. We learned in Nature's OperatingInstructions that Nature is and endless series of systems. I can not help but reflect back to the way Native Americans worked within the system. They intervened, at the right time and when necessary. In the end, their ways kept the rhythms and increased growth at a slow paced rate. It was for the greater good and survival. We need to look more at the roots to understand the cause.

2010-03-15T10:13:00.000-04:00

Monstrous Hybrids---“mountains of waste rising in our landfills are a growing concern.” Seems to be a great concern, but it also seems to be to easy to solve these problems of waste. That maybe why the action is not in effect. Fact: Americans are materialistic, 88 percent of the people in their society stated that they are materialistic and like shopping a bit too much. It is always annoying to hear after the second time, but it’s not that annoying for change. When I read McDonoughs it really feels that I am reading five pages over and over again. It should start to sink in after a while that there can and will problem unless some changes are made. Recycling is as good and its seems to be.....its really just down-cycling….up-cycling is really the way to go.

Biological metabolism and Technical metabolism was the main discussion in the readings this week. McDonough always brings me back to the expression of the cherry tree, and how it has multiple benefits to the ecosystem----the releasing of the blossoms and the delicious cherries for humans. Composting! it seems to be so simple and helpful to the environment, (and our backs from taking out the heavy trash) but it continues to be not in peoples priority. One last thing that was intriguing was the running shoes that give off toxins on the road and into the grass. Healthy living is not getting so healthy anymore. Some technical metabolism that I thought was interesting to bring up was how Henry Ford and his Model A cars used the shipping crates as their floorboards. That’s been about 80 years ago, where did we steer off from that mentality, at least for industrial resources. Of course resources are cheaper, but when looked at the production, transportation, and eliminating cost, its far more harmful.

Growth. Good, bad, or ugly.

2010-03-08T19:58:00.003-05:00

At first i had a solid connection to the readings. A balance of raw messages by Thomas Malthus and others, coupled with writers who were inspired by the spirit and beauty of nature. Malthus; appears dark and cynical regarding an exaggerated reality during an exciting time of early industry. He touched on intangible thoughts; yet sowing seed for continuous topics for centuries to come; population and growth. While he is recalled as Scrooge", it astounds me that the could be so far ahead of his time (1798).

Moving along, the readings touch on modern environmentalism eventually stating that growth brings negative consequences. I agree with Fritz Schumacher (1973) raising the concept that "People must make a serious shift in what they concider to be wealth and progress". This week I realized how we overconsume our needs as as a result have become less resourceful. More things = less creative uses = more garbage = more pollution.

While I am grateful for a rising awareness from class and our readings; William McDonough's Cradle to Cradle often leaves me feeling frustrated. His writing is clear and concise, although often invites moments of sadness. It is well understood, but sometimes the unraveling depth of doom is depicted a bit to much. However, the goal is met because his thought provoking detail ultimately evolves our minds and shifts awareness; a huge step to make the world a more healthy, hearty, sustainable place.

Becoming Standard

2010-03-01T09:47:00.002-05:00

"The most effective way of dealing with policy resistance is to find a way of aligning the various goals of the subsystems..." ~Meadows (115) Many systems, many goals and somehow...we need to make it work. The development of so many ideas and thoughts over our socio-economic & environmental outcome has led to some confusion and turmoil and we HAVE to make it work.
But how?
In the most positive light...our American capitalist society has led us to believe we need certain things, certain ways, certain paths...I guess in a way that is an agreement in the system but we really need change. The subsystems traditionally allow one voice and I would like to see others become much more powerful and stronger.
Government has a definite hand in our everyday actions and but our voice needs to be stronger.
We are getting there, thought. Just the simple idea of recycling has gone from a meager thought to a social norm and those be shunned to not have a recycling bin. We can do it, we are on the way so let our systems unite for all that should be done, all that is good, all that CAN be.

Returning to Nature

2010-02-22T00:33:00.003-05:00

This week's reading in Nature's Operating Instructions provided me with new hope that a sustainable future is not only possible, it is going to happen. Part 1 of this collection of essays reminds us that the answers to the sustainability problems are already being answered in other natural systems. People such as John Todd are already mimicking nature's systems and applying their concepts to human issues. For example, the Eco-machine created in South Burlington uses a small aquatic ecosystem to purify water. Janine Benyus also illustrates in her writings about biomimicry that many other organisms already employ efficient systems that not only enable their survival but contribute to their environment. I loved her story of the hummingbird, which is an elegant example of an efficient, sustainable being. She explains how the tiny bird can fly across 600 miles of open ocean on 2.1 grams of fuel having already pollinated up to 1000 blossoms per day (p.6)!

In all of the readings for this course I have seen a repetition of two main themes: first to reinvent how we look at problems, and second to turn waste into food. At first the idea of sustainability seemed to be a problem for bureaucrats and scientists. New laws would be passed to regulate toxic emissions and unsustainable practices, and I would do my part by buying new energy efficient light bulbs and buying products made from recycled materials. I completely bought into the idea that "less is more" and that reducing was the key to sustainability. Now I realize that the real goal can be more than just being "less bad" as William McDonough would say, and in fact rebuild in a way that contributes to the environment.

Other natural systems are living proof that waste can equal food. What are we humans waiting for? I agree with Benyus that experts in unrelated disciplines such as engineering and biology should come together and look at sustainability problems together. The solutions are there for us to find, but we have to ask different questions and look at the problems in untraditional ways. After all, we are part of nature and must therefore work with it and not against it.

Farm for Your Life

2010-02-14T20:10:00.005-05:00

The NCGA, or National Corn Growers Association, has a rather compelling website. They state the many valuable and viable attributes of corn, it's uses and how it can move us into a new ideal. "...A reliable supplier of food, feed, fiber and fuel for the United States and the world marletplace." Ethanol, a renewable fuel derived from corn, already stands to produce 11.5 billion gallons annually.* Amazing! Domestic jobs, no more foreign fuel, a resurgence in farms! The NCGA is fully motivated to relax our dependance on foreign fuels and diversify and accumulate domestic jobs....what could be better? The incredible, edible corn.
As a country, we utilize corn in almost every product we use from day to day. It is very vital to our society...more than we realize. Maybe it's time to rethink...
According to Wessels, "large industrial farms produce(s) a limited number of crops -- low diversity -- and consume(s) great quantities of petroleum..." (p 79). This is not necessarily a turn towards the future that I think we as society should be looking for. As a culture, unhealthy, filler foods consumer us, products and materials overwhelm us. Providing a large part of these, corn may be to thank, or not.
Again referencing Wessels, farms were once deverse, offering many crops and options for farmers to explore. Agribusiness has changed how farms fuction and who controls them. As lobbyists and policy makers push for business, a way of life held in the highest regard in our country has been diminished under their control. If we attempt to take government out of farms, they will suffer. Less funding could destroy them completely. What should be done? What can we do to regress our alliance...to corn?

*www.NCGA.com

Too Little, too late?

2010-02-03T17:11:00.003-05:00

I certainly hope not. The readings brought a few very interesting points up that cause me to be fearful of the future for the human race. For instance, the key to survival of anything on our planet is truly species richness. As discussed by Wessels, this is dependent on a few very key factors:

- stable physical environment
- the amount of physical structure in an ecosystem
- an ecosystem that finds the balance of species levels of competition

Well, the species of homo sapiens could be in a world of trouble if we don't find some equilibrium. The Earth as we all know is ever changing and evolving, with natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, and the recent destruction in Haiti. We've proved humans are resilient, but natural disasters are like death and taxes... they're going to happen. Yet we create our own destruction by means of polluting, not recycling and re-using, then force war upon one another. Our own ecosystem is actually being destroyed at an unrecoverable unsustainable rate. There is no question about it, we as humans want to ever increase our status among ourselves in our environment, but at what cost? "...real progress will be attained only if we develop a socioeconomic model that fosters diversity and energy conservation and achieves a dynamic equilibrium in which the amount of materials and energy consumed annually remains the same and can be supported by the biosphere. " - (Wessels, 97-98)
McDonough summarizes that an ant, small and seemingly harmless has a more effective and sustainable lifestyle and has for millions of years, (as it nourishes plants, animals, and soil...) whereas human in a little more than a century have brought decline to nearly every ecosystem on the planet. I worry that if drastic measures are not taken into consideration by both law enforcement and the individual, what chance of sustaining does the human race truly stand? That to me is a notion of a truly sad nature.
"Do Whatever you can, no matter how inconvenient, to limit your 'consumption.'" (McDonough, 6)

"Cradle to Cradle" and the Toxins Inside of It

2010-02-02T19:43:00.000-05:00

Upon picking up the book “Cradle to Cradle”, one can’t help but notice that this book is different from others. The pages have a different weight, texture, sheen, even smell (I had to check). The introduction of the book explains that it is not printed on paper but on plastic resins. This enables the book to be waterproof, durable, and recyclable. Are books like these more sustainable? The authors believe that a tree “is not a fitting resource to use in producing so humble and transient a substance as paper.” Will we be better off with plastic books, or will this be a problem in the future?

The authors, William McDonough and Michael Braungart talk about off gassing and the presence of toxins in many items we come into contact with everyday. I am familiar with this because of research I completed when shopping for my first mattress. When people shop for mattress most think about size and firmness. Many fail to realize the amount of toxic substances in the foam and covering. These toxins are released by off gassing and are inhaled by the people sleeping on said mattress. Now one can avoid this problem by buying a mattress from a company like Hastens which uses all organic products like horsehair, cotton, and wool, but this comes at a price. A Hastens bed costs anywhere from $4,500 to $60,000. That being said, I am currently breathing in toxins every night.

The reading from last class dealt with GDP and how it wasn’t a good indicator of economic growth as it accounted for all growth either positive or negative. We can’t honestly look at an increase in revenue from a mattress plant and an increase in revenue from a cancer center and call it progress. If we look at the mattress example, we can see just how expensive it is to be environmentally friendly. We have to look at these costs and ask ourselves “What is the best choice for the long term?”. Too frequently we forget to think about the long term effects of our choices. Someone may be ok with buying a pair of shoes dyed with heavy metals, but would they buy them for their children?

What Can I Do? Humble Yourself Before Mother, Earth.

2010-01-27T09:55:00.003-05:00

It took me a a fair amount of time with my own thoughts, friends, and a quick look outside for me to decide this was a course I decided would be incredibly important to take. It actually reminded me of high school when you are told you need to take Health & Fitness, and you sit there and think to yourself, "I'm healthy enough, I'm plenty active... I must be fit too." Then you get down to the "nitty gritty" information, and it turns out to be the kind of stuff (however awkward) that you carry with you for the rest of your life! Not only the ideas and practices you've been taught, but the ideas you've formulated on your own as well. Similarly, I pondered as I was seeking out coursework for my Associates in Business, all you hear about is the declining state of health in which our globe suffers. I thought, "What Can I do?" It is very true that "the Earth's regenerative capacity can no longer keep up with our demands... We're no longer living off the annual interest provided by the Earth's bounty... and eroding the planets natural capital," (Suzuki) and if we continue in this manner we've polluted the Earth past the point of recovery, so what can I do? What can any of us do...?

Through searching the Internet Machine a bit, I found a link that we could all spend 2 minutes on, as it is both helpful to our current issues and in laymen terms as it was created for children. http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?s=11247975&clienttype=printable
I do affirm following these little steps, in the early stages of a concerted effort to begin to change our lifestyles, we can in fact attempt more invasive ideas such as "cradle-to-cradle" and electric cars. We all need to humble ourselves a bit, for an easier transition to occur. As we all had to crawl before we could walk and if we can subscribe to the idea that maybe we can make a difference, we're already heading in the right direction. "The effect of one person bringing his or her own bag to the the supermarket may seem inconsequential in the global context, a tiny drop in the bucket. But if we all brought our own bags, the total impact would be enormous, in the same way that enough drops can fill a bucket." (Suzuki)

Keep Diversity Alive

2009-12-14T09:34:00.003-05:00

Its just one of those days, where I sit down to write and just continuously draw blanks. So i was flipping through the syllabus and saw a couple questions from a week or two ago, the reading questions running down the side of the page. These questions are pretty simply asked but evoked more thought than just about anything else today, so I am going to answer one to the best of my ability.

The question is, "Explain whether you think genetic engineering enhances or diminishes biodiversity?"

I say that genetic engineering diminishes biodiversity, this is because its like putting survival of the fittest on fast forward. As far as i can tell, genetic engineering is taking all the qualities (for example) of the plant species that you want and enhancing them and sometimes also removing the characteristics that are not desired. Ultimately, you skip the natural reproduction stage, creating an organism that is designed the way we see fit and taking it out of mother natures hands.
Finally you end up with a species that blooms early, flowers later and survives colder weather, than you take that one seed and reproduce it a million times and plant an entire field of the same plant, genetic copies of each other, same as the one in the row to the right and to the left. These plants are so similar to one another even rite down to the genetic make up, this is the opposite of biodiversity.
There is nothing diverse about this at all, these plants would not even continue to grow this way if humans were not around to continue to plant them, at this point they are ridiculously unnatural. Biodiversity is there to fill in the gaps, when one species climate changes only the one that can stand the heat, or most times the opposite, will stick around and continue to survive on this planet, this is why we need the differences, if everything were the same we would all have the same weaknesses as well. I say keep the diversity alive and well.

2009-12-13T20:27:00.003-05:00

David Suzuki asks us what you can do He discusses voting for people, who are ecologically literate,telling us that we can “speak up” or speak out on the topic. We need become agents of change using the tools of the day like videos on the internet, writing in our own blogs, or creating a web site. We can take action and become volunteers in green organizations or volunteering as agents of change, writing letters to the powers that be. It’s all about getting the word out!!! Companies that do not follow the new sustainability models we are creating need our attention the best kind of attention we can give them is to Boycott Them. I believe that a boycott is a way to cast a powerful message not only to a company, but the rest a world that we as consumers will not stand for these unethical policies any longer. So often people’s attitude is “let’s not make waves”, but I say when we make waves, more people take notice and without waves, others will not notice the changes on the surface of the water of our culture... The more we speak out against environmental injustice, and the more we bring attention to companies that aren’t considering sustainability and the earth first, then to hell with them! The best way to get rid of that kind of ignorance is not buying their goods. It seems to make good sense, to purchase goods and services from companies who model cradle to cradle and cradle to grave environmental philosophies. These are companies who have taken the time and made the investment, they are real stake holders in an emerging sustainable model.

Suzuki also makes mention of choosing a green career. He mentions that it’s clear that the scope and scale of environmental challenge is so large that whatever skills that you possess, there’s certainly environmental work available. And on that topic I was listening to a radio interview a few days ago on vpr.
Here is the link to the interview: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121380416&ft=1&f=1006

It seems these two guys Eben Bayer with classmate Gavin McIntyre invented Greensulate insulation and Ecocradle packaging — both made from mushrooms. Bayer came up with the idea as a student at Rensselaer Polytechnic in New York and developed it. Now the two have a company called Ecovative Design. Fascinating discovery they made working together to come up with sustainable models for use in today’s marketplace. It's an amazing story. The insulation is completely green and compostable and it’s also fireproof. Read the interview its pretty cool.

Suzuki’ list of “Ten Policies” is a great Laundry list or “to-Do” list of ideas that can really make a difference. Let’s say we could use this list aas a model for change so when we are having conversations with friends and family, buying goods and services in the marketplace or attending civic or cultural functions we could put our list to work. We could take the time to do a little research into each of the ten categories and implement our findings in the way we think about the earth and use these as “imperatives in how we communicate with others.
So taking my own advice I decided to look into Suzuki’s point #9 on ecological literacy, (which by the way was my platform last week concerning changes in the educational system of our country as way to implement real sustainability) He mentions the Educational document from Australia titled “Educating for a Sustainable Future:A National Environmental Education Statement for Australian Schools”. And because we have almost instant access to information these days it took me approximately .27 seconds to locate on my favorite browser.
Well this PDF is just a jewel, a real visionary like approach to changing Australia’s’ educational system to make all the stakeholders more ecologically literate. As Suzuki mentions that reading and writing are simply not enough any more. If one is to be literate in our new paradigm, one need be aware about where our drinking water comes from, where there garbage goes, and how climate change really works.The Australian document puts responsibility for these emerging issues of global importance where they belong, at the feet of administrators, teachers, parents and students. The goals of the report are “Environmental education for sustainability involves approaches to teaching and learning that integrate goals for conservation, social justice, cultural diversity, appropriate development and democracy into a vision and a mission of personal and social change. This involves developing the kinds of civic values and skills that empower all citizens to be leaders in the transition to a sustainable future” imagine an educational system whose goal is to develop different values and skill sets that make sustainability a priority. It sounds like a wonderful idea to me. Literacy is one of the greatest gifts we can bestow upon our culture. Once awakened to the urgency of these issues, it will be much easier to create more systemic leverage in much less time

Here is the Website for the Paper: http://www.environment.gov.au/education/publications/sustainable-future.html

DK

Diminishing Biodiversity

2009-11-29T23:08:00.006-05:00

Large industrial "argribusiness" farms that can be 100's of acre's in size mostly consist of a mono-culture, one crop, and its usually corn. Each plant is genetically the same as the next, all of the plants are clones of each other through genetical engineering making these plants GMO's (genetically modified organism) . The corn is genetically modified for one purpose, production. After harvest the seeds of these plants are disregarding and new seeds are bought to replace the old ones. This is a complete paradigm shift from the generations before us when farmers collected seeds and used selective breeding to fulfill many needs; to increase the robustness, (resistance to weather and pests) increase output of crops, as well as producing desirable traits such as its nutritional benefits as well as aesthetics, taste and appeal. These two different paradigm I see as the difference of starting a garden where you want to grow a crop such as carrots and your choice it to buy seeds from Monsanto or a seed bank. With Monsanto you would also need to buy pesticides which have been integrated into the process so that they become essential. You may have a few different option of the types of carrots that you could purchase with Monsanto but at a seed bank there could be hundreds even thousands of different varieties of carrots;different colors, taste, and resistances. Having recently harvested some carrots from a small farm with four or five varieties I much more enjoyed the carrot that I picked from the ground no more than a mile and a half away from my house, sweet and crunchy loaded with nutrients, pesticide free, GMO free instead of a grocery store carrot that has traveled halfway across the country or even the globe boring and dull doused with pesticides its whole life cycle and possible being a GMO. Since agribusnisses such as Monsanto are profiting so well, by exploiting resources, polluting genetics and polluting the planet with pesticides, it has allowed them to cut corners from old traditional ways and is quickly allocating their growth making small sustainable farming less profitable by being undercut from the consumption of agribusiness crops vs local and small sustainable crops because of its availability and its usually significant lower price. As Monsanto and other agribusiness continue to grow they are becoming closer and closer to controlling what we eat. Allowing this would eventually make it impossible for small competing farmers to survive as well as the diversity of genetics saved through the seeds that the farmers have collected, traded, and inherited passed down many generations.

Will our world end?

2009-11-29T19:00:00.003-05:00

So I am supposed to write about my views on Capitalism. Until recently I was totally oblivious to what that mean't. Growing up in a household that could care less about the government, has made me quite ignorant to politics. I will do my best to compare Capitalism and what i think about Natural Capitalism, well my thoughts on it all I guess. I think that the thought of our society being back to the way it was at the beginning in 50 years, is probably being very optimistic. Just because we are becoming more aware of how things are working or not working for our environment doesn't mean that more people will try to do anything about it. People are thinking that "someone else" will do the work and then we will be fine. They don't realize that EVERYONE needs to do their part to help. Myself included! I am most definately going to try to do my part and be less wasteful and more conservative with what I am purchasing. How long will I use what I am buying and where will it go when I am done? These are things I would not have even thought about without taking this class! As for Natural Capitalism, its a great concept and we have done a lot of things to get "back" to where we began before all the industries came about. I hope that we can get some of nature restored but am pretty sure that we as a whole will keep producing and the population will continue to go up and up and the cycle will keep going on to destroy what little we have left. We are all hoping this does not happen, so we can all try to do our part and help.
I really liked the section about replacing the carpet with carpet squares, not removing the whole carpet, that way people are not wasting the whole piece of carpet, wasting money by moving all the office out, halting production, getting sick from the fumes afterward and the carpet rotting in some landfill for thousands of years. Making a carpet squares and just replacing those when they are worn out, still provides a job for someone and cuts down on carpet that can not be recycled!
I guess without Capitalism in the first place, we wouldnt be where we are now with jobs and making money and people having the power they have, however, if it never happened, we would have probably figured out some other way to distroy our earth, so now we are just gonna have to find a way to fix this problem!

No more chemicals

2009-11-23T18:07:00.000-05:00

I love this time of the year, it’s a time for family to get together, and talk about the old days. When things were simpler, and how many things that were being made or developed were made with pride. It was a time of quality not quantity. Cars lasted longer, gas was cheaper, and food was affordable, healthy and it wouldn’t kill you. With all the research and advancements man kind has made don’t you think are food would be more delicious and nutritious? but its not, because people have forgotten about a time of quality and entered a time of mass Production food doesn’t taste or look as good or even last as long but you can get twice as much for the same price. We have genetically made plants to grow when they are not supposed too. Ever had a summer tomatoes compared to a winter tomatoes? the ones grown naturally in the summer are super plump and tasty winter tom’s may look the same but have very little taste. We have also developed plants to be poisonous to pests but have consequence for cattle that may eat the plant. Today unless you are growing organic you’re growing chemicals, which goes in to the soil and water and cause irreversible damage. Can’t drink the water, Can’t eat the fish, and Can’t farm the land.

More Like "Crap and Trade"

2009-11-16T16:38:00.006-05:00

Democracy Now! ran a great story last week about a couple of EPA lawyers who have decided to speak out against the the inadequacies of the Markey-Waxman bill. In their interview, they incorporated a lot of the systems thinking type concepts that we've been talking about and, I felt, did a great job of explaining -- systemically -- why the potential law might do more harm than good. DN! apparently picked up on this story because the EPA tried (with limited success) to censor the couple. The video that landed them in hot water is still up on youtube, though, and is arguably more interesting than the interview transcript:

Industrial Agriculture; What a Waste.

2009-11-16T08:42:00.002-05:00

Here we are all of us residing in the U.S. Living on land that was inhabited by a people who knew good stewardship of the land. I am of course speaking of the Indians. They knew how to take care of the land so it could take care of them. Here we are depleting the very source of our existence, mother earth. We are an advanced civilization who needs to take a few steps back in order to go forward. What I mean is industrial production of our food is depleting the soils and using 10 calories of fuel to make 1 calorie of food. This is obviously unsustainable and extremly wasteful.
For the first time in a long time small farms are on a come back in this nation, thanks to a little organic garden on the Whitehouse lawn. The Obama administration gets it. Or at least he has admited that the agribusiness is based on fossil fuels.
We need to put the land first and most everything else in order of prority behind land usage. We are an economy based on agriculture. If our agriculture practices are unsustainable then we are unsustainable. We need new farming practices. For example people need to start growing their own food small home gardens or "victory gardens" as they were called back in WWII. The citizens of this great nation need to get some dirt under their fingernails. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for us. As far a giants agricorps I hope these new prenennial hybreds Wes Jackson is coming up with can help restore the bread basket of America. I am hopeful that with education and new innovations we can keep the health of our land an indeed the world for future generations to come.

2009-11-15T20:26:00.017-05:00

I must admit, I can't say I have really enjoyed the systems reading assignments so far this semesmter. That is until this week. After reading this weeks assignment in depth, I have a greater appreciation of the insight Meadows has brought to understanding "leverage points-places to intervene in a system". My two recent visits to Spencer's farm, and my observations therein have provided me the opportunity to see thes ideas of levergage points at "work in the field" (the pun is intended)

As of this Sunday night, I belive that agriculture does fit into Meadows' ideas of a leverage point for sustainability. Let's consider Meadow's idea from the first line in chapter 6. "So how do we change the structure of systems to produce more of what we want and less of which is undesireable?"

Lets say this model is undesirable:Corporate farming practices all over the globe including, monocroping wopping amounts of acreage, petroleum based pesticides, genetically modified species of plants and vegetables, mineral depleting planting practices, damage to plants and other animals from cross pollination from GMO's and runoff of pesticides into the air and surrounding water systems.

Let us for a moment assume that our "minimum goal" with respect to agriculture is to provide substantial vegetable crop yields per acre, maintain the importance of biodiversity, define and maintain an "organic Quality"standard, minimize the amount of degredation to the soil and the surrounding environmental rescources, create smaller locally based farms, and lets throw in turning a profit as well. This goal is a serious leverage point compared to the previous example.

Here are a couple of thoughts with respect to leveraging the corporatel farm systems that I became aware of while visiting Spencer's farm and the rest of the Intervale system.

By creating smaller more conscientious farming models, a possible leverage point could be subsidies and tax incentives to enhance more of this type of growth. Spencer's model of small succession plantings is a buffer which "allows for more flexibile response to demand needs."the intervale system is a coop of small sytems that allow for rather simple and less expensive stock and flow changes compared to the idustial model. The smaller 1/2 pint model and succession plantings substantially decrease any concern of delays with the worse case scenerio resulting in product put in the cooler as a way to regulate other system changes. The Intervale's smaller farming model is an excellent way to manage the balancing feedback loop. The leverage comes from smaller crop sizes coupled with the ability to react quickly the "directness and size of corrective flows."Spencer's tight monitoring of weekly yield to sales ratios, helped him with greater control of the flow elements. The 1/2 pint 7 year business plan demonstrated the strength of the reinforcing feedback loop. The more they were able to meet their projected goals the more willing they were to increase the goal for the next season. The information system flow was one of the most apparent leverage tools I observed. Spencer and his wife keep excellent weekly records and were able to quickly adjust to trends. By sharing information with others at the Intervale and taking their observations and conclusions on the road, it has a deffinite affect on the larger systems, and ultimately benefits others. Another important area of possible leverage would be reframing the "rules". Incentives for farmers to move to this type of model. Perhaps a sytem where cooperative land use, increased yields using natural methods, improving soil and environmental conditions of the land, would be incentive options. Even a tax break or waiver for donating a percentage of yield to the community. Another obvious leverage point is the self organization piece. As in Ausubel's example of the Native americans being stewards and having some positive influence in the self organization of California' garden of eden, the smaller cooperative model allows farmers to be a symbiotic player from inside the system, even an advocate for this evolutionary process, enhancing not controlling the systems process.

I observed the 1/2 Pint Farm as an example of redifinigng goals. The cooperative structure of the Intervale system with many different farming models being tried and tested at the same time, including a pretty substantial enhanced composting project, is in turn modelling that a new paradigm is possible with a reasonable and concerted effort. The farm seems to flourish with its 250 species of biodiversity, on 1 & 1/2 acres and models several leverage points with respect to the current corporate farming model.

Americans are buying into the idea that we have the power to make real fundemental changes perhaps the single voice for paradigm shift will be representative of many voices from all over the world speaking as one harmonious voice. When that voice speaks loud enough and the sound is one that is attractive to more and more people, then we may very well have come to that "tipping point" that has been referred to so many times in the recent past. Perhaps then yoga needs to be our mantra or prerequisite to change. Because before we can dance with these new concepts we are going to have to limber up muscles of possibility. Flexibiltiy will allow us to stay on task as we continue to push up against our own resistance to change.

Impresive Practices

2009-11-11T22:43:00.005-05:00

The culture we call our own is much like many that have come before ours, living on this planet, using its resources, exploring its lands and settling its "wilderness". It is considered normal practice to move into a new area, exploit its natural riches, dispose of waste; human and other, and even pollute its waters. Now, not every culture does this, although we are certainly guilty, the native Americans that inhabited California in the late eighteenth century coincided very well with mother nature.
In part two of Natures Operating Instructions there is a nice passage explaining some of the aspects to the native American culture and what steps they took to preserving their homeland. The settlers that were exploring California in the 1780's were surprised and unaware of the Indians involvement with the homeland and assumed they had lived in California for thousands of years without altering the land.
But in fact the the natives practiced very specific laws regarding the resources of their land and using them. Managing the land began with a deeply detailed knowledge of place, or climate, season, soil, etc. For example, When the elderberry appears it means the shell fish are now poisonous and can no longer be collected and eaten. But when the berry ripens in the fall, its the signal to start collecting the fish again.
When the wren starts to sing, the salmon will be around in a few more days. All sorts of little natural occurrences are indicators of other occurrences. The indians learned these and followed the way of the earth. The natives also would have large rabit hunts, for food and fur of course but also because the rabit was in direct compotition with people for other crops and had to be controlled.
One of the most interesting practices of the natives was to burn the land. Settlers came and did not understand this, thinking the Indians were crazy and even creating laws against it. But the fires cleared out the undergrowth allowing the larger trees to prevail. The settlers remarked on how a walk in the woods was like a park, this was due to the burning of the undesired plants.
I found all this very interesting because how far we live from nature. We all love a good walk in the woods here and there but as a society we bend nature to live around us. We do what we want whether its good for mother nature or not. And because of all this bending, nature is starting the break.
We are pushing our resources to the extreme and do not moderate our consumption. The native Americans for example had a quarry which was their source of chert. This hard rock was used for tools and weapons and it was also pretty rare. Each man was aloud to go in their once a year, take one swing with a hammer and keep what fell off. This was such an unbelievably good idea, preserving the valuable stone for generations to come. I think if the modern world we lived in was able to base life of the preservation of nature we would all be way better off. But unfortunately we are using up oil like water and polluting our oceans faster than we can clean them. I'm not sure if we will ever be able to live life the way the California Natives did and surely seem to face a certain terrible fate.

Human Keystone

2009-11-09T02:50:00.001-05:00

The study of keystone species is something that I have learned about only recently. The extent to which keystone species effect or control their environment was something that I hadn’t fully considered until now. Looking at the interconnected web that they hold together, the extent to which ecosystems have mutualized seems very clear. The essays by Malcolm Margolin, and Dennis Martinez in part II of Natures Operating Instructions were really quite eye opening. Fallowing with the current paradigm I had always considered humans as an external disturbance to the workings of a natural ecosystem, rather then another biotic species interconnected and included with in that ecosystem. I think that this understanding is imperative for us to fully grasp the effects, both positive and negative, that we can create in our environment.

Waste equaling food or is it food is wasteful?

2009-11-02T08:42:00.002-05:00

In cradle to cradle McDonough mentions that for example when trees bloom and then drop cherries, it is then absorbed back into the soil, making it better soil for the environment around the tree and for the tree to produce better cherries the next time around. By being absorbed back into the soil, it becomes reusable, for food rather than waste. If we could get a really great composting system in place for say, 8 out of 10 households, we would cut down waste going to our landfills and we could nourish the soil or gardens in those households. I myself have a really big composting pile, for leaves and food leftovers. We have only minimal waste when going to the dump every 2 weeks or so compared to when we weren't composting. Coffee grounds and egg shells are very nutrient based for certain flowers and can really help the gardens grow bigger and heartier. We had to test out certain styles of fencing and bariers for the compost pile, the animals love food scraps! So definately do some research before trying to build one!

Material recycling, well that is pretty complicated. We as a whole have made certain things that we can recycle but other things are clearly marked as "unmarkables". We need to phase out the products that are never going to be known as recycleable and start replacing those items with chemicals and materials that can be recycled. I just wish there was someone out there that cared enough to start doing that instead of taking up space in rented lots or storage spaces for these "unmarkables". I guess it would require someone pretty high up that constructed these materials (pvc) to change them. Why change something that is already done and they are getting the money for it? right? I helped my friends up at Mt. Norris last year build a fence for the waterfront, PVC was the cheapest and sturdiest material to make this fence. If I would have known then what I know now, I probably would have suggested something else for that fence, probably wood of some sort! I was part of that problem im sorry to say!

As for what I think of Suzuki's zero-waste challange, I think its a good idea, it actually got me thinking about what I buy at the grocery store, what I "NEED" or don't need to have for hair products! I think that if you took all the crap that I have in my bathroom closet and put it in a pile, I could pollute my whole town for a day with the airosole hairsprays! I don't always use this stuff but if i need it, I have it, but did i need it? Probably not. I am definately going to be more consious of what I am purchasing for "girls stuff" in the future! Guess that is one chapter I did understand!

Waste=Food

2009-11-01T19:53:00.006-05:00

Although the information from Suzuki's reading is helpful and interesting, I find it too unoriginal and bland. It seems more like a to-do list rather than idea's that could help us become more efficient in the future. Instead of expanding on the ideas I thought were helpful in Suzuki's reading, I would rather go into the idea of waste being used as "food" brought up in McDonough and Braungart's reading. Sure, recycling and using less resources is a must in our journey towards a more sustainable planet, but in our time and day, it's not enough. Recycling can only save so many resources, and eliminate so many harsh chemicals being emitted into our atmosphere. Even if everyone in the world recycled everything they used I don't believe it would solve our problem. The idea of up-cycling is a different story. By creating products that consider up-cycling as the most important aspect of the product, we can truly move towards a better world. Imagine a world where every product is re-used into the makings of either the same product over, or other products (or both), this would be truly amazing. McDonough mentions that products must either be able to be re-used in the industrial cycle, or used to benefit the biological cycle, although he also mentions that with some products today, it is impossible for either one or the other. But is this true? Aren't we able to come up with ideas that are maybe considered, "far out" or "impossible"? What if space travel became so regular and inexpensive that we could dispose waste out there that are unable to be dispose on Earth. Could there be elements or chemicals floating out in space or on other planets that could aid in the break down of products that would otherwise be "impossible" to break down? I do not know, but I do think it's important that we keep exploring different, and possibly bizarre, ideas.

Waste=Food

2009-11-01T19:53:00.000-05:00

stop to smell the flowers

2009-10-19T10:09:00.002-04:00

Mcdonough's ideas of eco-effectiveness correlate nicely to Meadows thoughts on system surprise. A major reason why systems can surprise us is because of the linear thought patter we have all developed. We see the cause and effect, "event-level" of a system rather than understanding the behavior of a system. This gives us the ability to answer questions and solve problems but leaves almost no room for the way the world really works, on a non-linear system with constantly changing inputs, outputs, and feedback loops. "The relationship between cause and effect can only be drawn with curves or wiggles, not with a straight line."

Eco-effectiveness is breaking the linear model of the world. It challenges the reduce, reuse, recycle mantra of the eco-efficient era and moves towards the idea of being 100% good, rather than just being less bad. An efficient mind may drawn the conclusion if doing a little less bad is good, than doing a lot less bad will be even better. A great assumption for a linear world, but ultimately we have the same results, it just took us much longer to get there. Not to bad mouth the idea of eco-efficiency, it can buy us time to develop new ideas and it is the responsible path to take at the moment but what if we looked at the world with a slightly different twist.

McDonough relates his new ideas and buildings to the system of a cherry tree. He is looking to create an environment, a book, or anthing else that not only does not promote deforestation or polluting the waters but helps become a part of the natural system and would improve upon it's environment. He discusses creating a book that does not posses toxic inks or paper, and that when finished can be taken and not only recycled but cleanly upcycled. It would be made out of a product that would not lose it's value. He also talks about a building that promotes healthy wildlife along with workers. That uses the natural world to help cool, light, and warm that building. A building that would help keep workers in tune with the change of seasons and times of day. The landscape would have wetlands that help filter storm water and waste water giving the local river a helping hand.

These ideas were a result of looking at the world the way nature works in it. The cherry tree did not produce waste, it may be abundant in blossoms but they behave as food, fertilizer, home, and are aesthetically pleasing. The tree cleans our air and water, it creates no harmful effects on the world around it.

This is our time to be inspired. We have the ability to create and do good. (be 100% good in fact, what an interesting challenge) It's time for us as a whole to escape our one track minds and think a little out of the box. The answers to a sustainable future do not lie on the paved road ahead, they are somewhere on the side of the road that we haven't taken the time to stop by, smell the flowers, and say hi.

Paul Stamets - The Magic of Mushrooms

2009-10-12T10:30:00.005-04:00

The study of biotechnologies is very new and interesting to me. I feel like this could be the new wave to ride on our way to rebuilding a successful and sustainable planet earth. Out of all the current biotechnological studies, I found Paul Stamets', "Magic Mushrooms: Planetary Healing with Deep Biology" excerpt to be one of the most interesting. Stemets describes how the use of fungi can be used to treat and heal polluted soil and ecosystems and also help control insect population. The amount of species of fungi is astonishing and their are still several to be discovered. As of now their are species that have medicinal, edible and now biotechnological qualities, who knows what the future brings with this amazing life-form. Stamets gives one example of the power of the mushroom that really blew my mind. A group of bioremediation companies (including Stamets company, Fungi Perfecti) was called to a diesel fuel spill near Bellingham, Washington. Each company was assigned to a mound of soil that had been destroyed by the spill. While the other companies went about using a standard bacterial and enzymatic procedure, Stamets knew a particular mushroom species that had abilities to break down such a toxic substance, the oyster mushroom. So his inoculated the soil pile with the mycelium of the mushroom. After six weeks the companies came back to the site and all except the pile covered in newly formed oyster mushrooms were still contaminated and unable to support life. The pile with the oysters mushrooms had broken down the toxic spill by releasing acids and enzymes, and tests of toxicity in the soil came back negative. Following this, the mushrooms attracted flies, which laid eggs on them. Maggots came in, which drew in birds and other small mammals to this soil pile, all because of this "magic" mushroom! It is necessary that this practice of study becomes more well-known and popular, it is the future of keeping the planet sustainable and clean.

2009-10-12T10:03:00.002-04:00

The readings this week have given me the personal challenge to reword or redirect my thoughts. Thinking is Systems reminded me that "flow takes time to flow", things change at their pace but it's not always the outcome or the outflow that needs to be looked at, as obvious as it may seem, the inflow or origins are just as important and just as easily changed.
i tend to be very linear in my thinking and it's always important to me to be reminded to break things down and look at them in a system and not just points that need to be worked towards and conquered. Going with the theme of looking at things from a different angle, in the chapter about biomimicry in Natures Operating Instructions, the author challenges us and himself to ask questions like "how does nature stay clean", rather than how can we "tweak our conventional solutions" when it comes to everyday things such as cleaning a surface. Both authors offer different ways to start viewing our world.
It's encouraging and inspiring to read about people trying to develop safer, effective, and more sustainable ways to live the life we live. When a Hummingbird pollinating it's fuel source (the flower providing it with nectar) or the quick clean design petals of a lotus flower are the driving forces behind new ideas for gas stations or building facade paints it's exciting to think what else is out there for us to listen to and look for.

fish or bacteria?

2009-10-12T09:34:00.002-04:00

Randall von Wedel has changed over from studying medicine to studying the environment. He was very discouraged by the deterioration of our environment. So Randall decided to research natural bacteria (bioremediation), effective solvents that are derived from vegetable oils (biosolvents), and a clean burning fuel made from nontoxic renewable vegatable oils and recycled cooking oils (biodiesel). He states that we all have connections to the earth and all do our part in poluting it. This I totally agree with, whether we mean to or not. "Industrial biotreatmant plants are basically bioremediation systems using living bacteria to process polluted water in ponds and tanks." We just needed to do tests to see which were biodegradable and which ones can break down these complicated materials. He started in a lab and tried to acclimate the bacteria to the point that it will use the toxic material as a source of food, as energy and as a source of carbon dioxide and water. He later creates a bacterial aquarium, with 5 gallon tanks and then larger drums. His end result was, he could clean up oil spills by installing this process. So this would be used for gas stations, shopping malls, truck terminals. They would interupt the flow of water where the oil, gas or diesel concentrates, then process the water in an above ground reactor. It would need to be treated over a period of about twelve to fifteen hours until the water comes out clean. The concept of all bioremediation is the same: you're letting bacteria eat something that has energy. They use the energy to grow and we get back clean water.

John Todd

2009-10-12T09:02:00.003-04:00

We are fortunate to have John Todd as a resident in Vermont. I live in South Burlington and I did not know that my waste was being treated by Mr. Todds living machines. I had heard of the tilapia farms at the magic hat brewery and I thought it was a great idea. I had also heard of the project at the power plant on the intervale it was supposed to take the heat that was escaping through the stacks and pump the steam into underground pipes to warm greenhouses and supply fresh produce to the area. Unfortunately it died in some bureacratic mess.

Biomimicry seems to be the way to go in waste water treatment. You can take waste treat it, make it clean, and make money. It is a win win situation. It can be applied in countless ways in countless regions around the world. History will think fondly of Mr. Todd. Why the system is called living machines because it is a process which accelerates the natural process of water purification. He mimics natures three step process of a pond, stream and marshes.

Mr. Todd was the first winner of the Buckminster Fuller award in 2008 for his revolutionary views on how to clean up rural West Virginia. The Appalachia Mts have been leveled to get to the coal veins. This area in W. Virgingia is one the biggest ecological disasters in the world and it is not in some third world nation. The next time you hear the words clean coal think of these unfortunate peaple. The federal clean air and water act does not apply to these people. Our need for energy outweighs their need for clean air and water. There are trillions of gallons of toxic coal slurry and very little of the local habitat left to even begin to treat this sesspool. So Mr. Todd has put a plan together to treat the slurry with eco machines and begin to reforest the region for biomass fuel and add windmills. Ironically to make the area energy self sufficient. The project is called Comprehensive Design for a Carbon Neutral World: The Challenge of Appalachia.

He also co-founded Living Technologies Inc. a design, engineering and construction firm in Burlington. He has authored several books. He has a non profit Ocean Arks International. He founded the New Alchemy Institute.

He considers himself a Comprehensive Anticipatory Design Scientist.

2009-10-05T11:23:00.001-04:00

During the Industrial Revolution and not until too long ago people have had the mentality that the resources that we are depleting are in abundance not needing to worry about the limits they may have. That nature is always replenishing itself through its natural systems and that we are of no impact. We now know that this is surely not the case. We are depleting resources at a rate much faster than nature can replenish them and are quickly reaching are limit to growth. In “The Myth of Progress” the author Tom Wessel’s approaches this problem through scientific explanation of the three “laws of sustainability,” The law of limits to growth, the second law of thermodynamics, and the law of self-organization in complex systems. Wessel’s give a prime example of limits to growth during World War II with the introduction of twenty-nine reindeer to the island of St Matthew north of the Aleutians. These twenty-nine reindeer where introduced to this island as means to supply meat for the nineteen men stationed there. When the war was over, the men stations on St Matthews Island soon departed for their homes leaving the reindeer uncontrolled with no predators. The reindeer flourished for the first few decades with population growths growing massively. Soon the reindeer’s population exceeded its carrying capacity and thus depleted all of the necessary resources that where once abundantly available. Consequently the reindeer no longer had the resources to survive and sustain life. I believe that we are quickly reaching our limit to growth as well. Our resources are growing smaller as our waste is growing larger. There needs to be serious change in the way we expend energy, use resources, and created products to reverse this effect. Wessel details some of the ways to support many of these new ideas that can be executed on an individual bases or as a whole community to lessen one’s ecological footprint. I believe that we are currently moving in a direction that will fail miserably because it isn’t based on sustainability. Instead of dealing with these problems re-actively we should be dealing with these problems pro-actively before they have a greater effect to the health and wellness of our planet. It is usually much easier to prevent a problem rather than trying to fix a problem that has manifested through being ignored for so long.

2009-10-04T22:39:00.001-04:00

Wessels defines the idea of a ruling paradigm, and the necessity of a change for the continuation of a livable planet and flourishing population. All of the books we are reading refer to the various hindrances to, and possible solutions for, the return of an ecologically conscious world life style. In the Myth of Progress; Wessels puts forth the widely regarded idea of the importance of decreasing consumer consumption. In the first chapters of their Green Guide Suzuki and Boyd further this idea, and present easily implemented actions an individual can undertake to move toward a “greener” existence. Then in Cradle to Cradle; McDonough and Braungart propose a different kind of solution. They propose that the emphasis on consumer change shift to that of an emphasis on the industry to change.
In Nick Garcia's third blog he brings up the fascinating remarks of Paolo Soleri. On the page before the opening of the introduction to Thinking in Systems; Meadows quotes Robert Pirsig, from his Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainencem. Both of theses thoughts refer to the difficulties of a paradigm shift. Removing individual parts of a problem does not necessarily quantify to a solution. Meadows illustrates it is all about the system, not so much its parts, but their interactions as a whole. Our current unsustainable ruling paradigm is just that: a complex system of functioning, interconnected elements. For our paradigm to shift it is imperative for us to (as fully as possible) understand the complete system we are working to improve and evolve. The linear approach to problem solving, though far from being unhelpful, seems to be the dominant one in the mass “green” culture. From the information I've gleaned so far from in particular, Wessels and Meadows, it looks as though the solution for finding a functioning and sustainable future can found. The end solution is likely not to be about fixing the specific elements that arise as we run across them. More important is looking at the complete system, defining the feedback loops, and identifying the root problems. As this process is undertaken, it will likely be the work and ideas of individuals like Wessels, Suzuki and McDonough that will enable us, as a species, to cope in the meantime.

"Surely Some Revelation Is at Hand"

2009-10-03T22:03:00.024-04:00

I'm taking a Macroeconomics class this semester as well, which is sort of challenging to absorb alongside all these critiques of the system that it focuses on. The material being so fresh, I frequently find myself contrasting what I'm learning about the way the market is supposed to work with what we're discussing in this class about how it actually has worked and how it might be made to work differently. This week, that clash was particularly sharp when Meadows introduced her flow diagrams: they recalled a figure from my economics text (which I found in a slightly altered version on Lewis & Clark College's website) that portrayed the flow of money through a market economy as it was exchanged for goods and services, labor and production.

It seems so elegant as presented. The more people spend, the more firms produce, and the more people get paid in turn for their labor or investment! The faster those arrows whip around, the better off everyone would seem to be -- as McDonough writes, "GDP takes only one measure of progress into account: activity." (36) Yet as we're learning, the center somehow cannot hold. What is it about this accounting that creates the impression of sustainable reciprocation and masks the loss of "human and ecological health, cultural and natural richness, and even enjoyment and delight"? (43) Maybe applying systemic thinking to the problem will reveal its weakness.

According to Meadows, a system consists of elements, interconnections, and purpose. For the diagram above, we can see that the elements are the capital stocks of firms and households as well as the markets to exchange them; the interactions are of course those exchanges of wealth, goods and services. The function, ostensibly, is to enable people access to goods and services they could not otherwise provide for themselves; as Wessels discussed in the Myth of Progress however, this has become equated in neoclassical economics with constant growth. Since there are no inflows or outflows documented here, we might wonder how the economy is supposed to increase in size by building only on the materials it is already comprised of. Perhaps it swells like a balloon, stretching itself thin and empty to increase in circumference -- of course, balloons can only be inflated to a certain point before they pop.

Perhaps it was fatuous to ignore the "land and capital" ascribed as possessions to household units, but it was in service of a point. The diagram above assumes the availability of a stock of natural resources in the system but doesn't address their provenance. Similarly, it eliminates the concept of waste (albeit in a much different sense than do McDonough and Braungart). If we were to represent these in- and outflows in the diagram, we could better conceive of our economic system as part of -- rather than separate from -- the biosphere and its resources.

I say "part of... its resources" because it allows for the possibility suggested in Cradle to Cradle that human endeavor could actually contribute to environmental quality. I haven't done away with waste in my diagram, however, because I intend it to reflect things as they are currently. Meadows writes that "as long as the sum of all inflows exceeds the sum of all outflows, the level of the stock will rise," which means that for the economy to perform its function as described by Wessels -- that is, for it to grow ever larger -- the consumption of natural resources needs to be faster than the generation of waste. (22) That is, the taps need to be flowing faster than the drain. We tend to consider the inflow more than the outflow, which means that to keep those economic arrows spinning around we adopt policies and practices that cause us to consume more and have little concern for the waste we generate as long as it's less than the harvested natural capital.

Braungart and McDonough, in their cradle-to-cradle model, would focus more equally on the waste side of the equation to keep the economic bathtub full. Better design, they suggest, can make manufactured products not just less useless at the end of their lives, but actually integral parts of some other industrial or biological process. Making more thorough use of the material and energy we extract from our natural environment can lead us to waste less (theoretically to waste nothing) while maintaining stocks of wealth and quality of life previously sustained through the brute force method of massive inflow. With that in mind, let's reconsider the stated purpose of the economic system above: to enable access to goods and services.

What is it that hinders such access? Is it a dearth of technology, labor, production or extraction capacity? Or is it that, despite our eagerness and ability to consume we are running into natural limits like the amount of carbon that can be processed by the environment or the worldwide arable acreage? Is there something wrong with our bathtub, or have we just opened the taps as wide as they'll go? Maybe we should use some sort of grey water treatment to reclaim some of the gallons swirling down the drain. Cradle to cradle design incorporates some of the most important insights of systems thinking toward some of the most important goals outlined in The Myth of Process.

Utopia and/or Revolution

2009-10-03T19:07:00.003-04:00

When McDonough and Braungart write that they “see a world of abundance, not limits,” they seem go challenge Wessels and those like him who believe that the ethos of consumption needs to be changed. I don't think that they literally mean not to recognize limits to growth, however: the difference is in large part a semantic one, reflected in the constructive framing of environmental/industrial tension that Dave Kaczynski so astutely pointed out in his post.

While I recognize the ideological utility of such positioning, the authors' position seems to have an empty world-style economic perspective because of its focus on human-created capital. They provide numerous exciting examples of reprocessing, repurposing, and recycling manufactured goods while maintaining access to some form of those goods (in contrast to Wessels's anti-entropic intention to simply do away with many consumer goods). As I spent more time thinking about it, though, I realized that McDonough and Braungart are really avant-garde full worlders looking to “increase the productivity of the scarcest (limiting) factor” (natural capital), “as well as to try to increase its supply.” (Costanza, Robert. Ecological Economics, 83)

So it seems to me like the Cradle to Cradle authors are looking to find a way to maintain a dynamic equilibrium in the world's economy after all. By mimicking the natural world's efficiency at storing and utilizing energy the concept of waste could be eliminated and society's economic life could become more self-sustaining and anti-entropic. This is the bridge between these books: although McDonough and Braungart envision a world in which our modern material expectations continue to be met, their road to that future is the same as Wessels's to long-term sustainablity: a “more diverse, integrated, and efficient” economic system. (89)

Incidentally, Paolo Soleri presaged this conversation as early as 1971: “The only hope, which is then in addition the chance to gain for one's self some "divinity," lies in replacing man, this phenomenon of supercomplex nature, within the terms defined by reality, accepting the first postulate thereof ... that of complexity and miniaturization.” (Utopia e o Revoluzione, Perspective v 13 / 14 p 281-285, 1971) Earlier in the paper he rejects the idea of utopia because it involves an attempt to live outside the limits of natural laws, and the idea of revolution because it suggests a movement to a human condition previously unexperienced in history. This consideration is relevant in a comparison of these two books as well, I think: McDonough and Braungart's "city like a forest, cool and quiet" and "ecological footprint to delight in" (14, 16) might sound utopian just as Wessels's "Need for Cultural Change" -- and associated rhetoric, e.g. "Never in the history of democratic societies..." (107) -- might sound like a call for revolution. One very important consideration for those interested in implementing their ideas will be how to persuade society not just of their virtues but of their achievability. To do that it is important to present (as Cradle to Cradle especially tries to do) such new models as natural adaptations to natural law that are compatible with human nature as well.

2009-09-28T22:30:00.000-04:00

I think that as Americans we don’t react to problems that don’t
directly affect us, rather we choose to only confront problems that finally spill into our daily lives. We don’t act until it’s too late. For example, think back to a few years ago when our airport security was weak. It took a national disaster to change policy and better the level of airport security. The same is true with environmental issues. We don’t feel the need to fix them, but if a major disaster were to occur, our minds would change. I think that Wessel’s view is correct in the way that at the rate we are moving, the future for the environment is grim. There are future implications that we need to address now, before it is too late. There has been some major progression toward lowering our economic footprint, such as the “go green” initiative and major recycling efforts put forth by our government. But this is just a start. Vermont is very well educated in sustainability, but we need to better educate other areas that do not have this green mindset.

Conscious Energy

2009-09-28T21:29:00.001-04:00

First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. This statement from a scientific view I completely agree with but from a philosophical view I have to argue. From a personal stand point we all have a day to day routine where we expel a certain amount of energy and time on the things we find important in our lives; such as relationships, health, personal well being and the well being of others around us. Being educated and educating others

to make conscious and positive decisions in regards to how they impact the environment can create a collective energy changing our wasteful mindset changing the energy we expel each day to move towards a sustainable future.

Some of the simplest things such as having a garden in our backyard makes a huge difference by lessening our ecological footprint by reducing carbon emissions, unnatural pesticides and fertilizer pollution. In terms of the second law of thermodynamics stating that although energy cannot be created nor destroyed it can be transformed from one form to another I believe that this means that all energy is cycling. Converting energy from one form to another is not always 100 percent efficient sometimes losing energy called "entropy" but not actually lost only transferred to unusable energy. Having a garden is a perfect system when looked at linearly. Expend energy to grow the food that in turn provides the energy back, a perfect cycle, 100 percent efficient.

Not a bad idea

2009-09-28T14:32:00.004-04:00

Having never written a blog before i find myself sitting her wondering how to begin. With so much information gained from Wessels and even the first few pages of Cradle to Cradle, what stands out to me the most? What new and old information can i reflect on in a interesting way? What can i say to make an impact on all the other intelligent people i am surrounded by? I find i am struggling this very same way when trying to decide how i can positively impact this beautiful yet endangered world around me. What stands out to me the most as something i can do personally to help earth? What new ways of living can i look into as well as what tried and true methods are already helping our planet? Moreover, with many highly qualified ecologists, biologist and scientists of all kinds, what can i do that hasn't already been done?
After reading Wessels i find he has a very strong point of view and goes into great detail to explain the science behind many different aspects of our environment. From the Acacia tree and its ants, the spider and wasp combo, to the Hemlock and Rocky ridge. But these are all analogies to relate certain aspects of our actions to the world around us. As an intelligent consumer this is all very interesting and helps me to understand the delicate balance around us, but i feel, with all Wessels had to say, Bill and Michael have cought my attention more in their 13 pages then Wessels ever did.
Bill and Michael, authors of Cradle to Cradle, seem to see the world for what it really is. They understand the vale over our eyes, the endless consumption machine that we are as a world, wait scratch that, as a race. With all the distractions around me, i am unable to make the rite decision, most of the time, regarding the environment and its health. Me being like many millions of other Americans, I am set up for failure.
In their rooftop conversation Bill and Michael hit the nail on the head. In essence, Do not change what the consuming masses have learned to do or buy already. Simply change what it is they are buying and the problem will fix its self. That is a good business plan, using the structured yet dirty economy we have already and infiltrate it with clean, reusable products. Instead of changing the consumer we are changing the product to fit the needs around it, just as we have done so many times before. This would certainly answer my questions from before in one foul swoop.

"Only madmen....."

2009-09-28T14:16:00.004-04:00

Honesty should never be confused with pessimism. Wessels book presented an, at times ,hard truth about our current situation. At the speed we are moving there are, and will be incredible environmental implications we will not be able to avoid by sticking our heads in the sand. He goes as far as to compare our increasing economic growth to a biospheric cancer. At this place and time i find it hard to disagree. We are moving and producing with little regard as to how we will maintain ourselves on this planet, and we have shown little interested in slowing down. Never once did i get the feeling Wessels felt defeated, nor was he presenting the information with a "gloom and doom" attitude, if anything i related much more to Wessels work than i did the beginning of McDonough's book. I'm certainly not a pessimist, but perhaps a realist. (you may ask yourself what's the difference, i'm still trying to figure it out) but McDonough seemed to overlook things in his efforts. He points out that a recycled carpet required just as much energy and waste as would a new carpet, and then praises himself for using a synthetic "paper" that was recycled and could be again. I suppose the difference between the two was that the carpet would eventually make it to the landfill but the book would continue in the cycle. But would it? And would it just use more energy in the process? I'm certainly not bashing is efforts, and appreciate his creative approach , i just feel he's getting a little lost in his idealism. (a huge conclusion to draw from reading 16 pages i know, i'm remaining open) I am however intrigued and inspired by the idea of doing "less bad" an idea that can go to great lengths. Exponential growth and what our future holds as a result of it is certainly a topic with much room for reflection, besides "Only madmen and economist believe in perpetual exponential growth."

Sustainability vs. Social Norms

2009-09-28T11:47:00.002-04:00

It is no secret that we need to work on reducing the waste that humans create in the world. Everyone for years has been told to 'reduce, reuse and recycle', but all too often we just go about our normal lives and don't go out of our way to better the planet. It's the old mentality of "if it's not convenient, then it's just not worth doing". This is a poisonous mindset but it bring to mind thoughts of actualization; will we ever, as humans (mainly as Americans), ever come together and put a stop to frivolous waste? Well, as years go on, it seems that things are getting easier by way of convenience. It seems as though every grocery store has recycled paper products available and many have organic or local produce departments. the government is even giving tax breaks as an incentive to make your home less energy dependent. last year, my parents installed three large solar panels on the roof of there house. between the panels themselves, the wiring and the tank that stored the excess energy, the whole project cost around ten thousand dollars. this is a lot to undertake at once, but they knew that once tax season rolled around they would get about six thousand of that back between the Massachusetts and federal government. In David Suzuki's Green Guide, the author talks about reducing your ecological footprint, so that everyone can live on the planet without stepping on too many toes (foot humor). My parents found a very active way to reduce their footprint, but it's just as easy for all of us regardless of our financial situation by contributing in more subtle ways.

Moving Toward Sustainability by way of the “New Industrial Revolution”

2009-09-28T10:49:00.006-04:00

After completing Tom Wessels’ book, I am left feeling less than inspired to “move towards” the sustainability issue. Despite his ideas and comments in the last 3 chapters concerning the reality of the free market, our obvious need for cultural change, as well as his personal feelings and ideas about interconnectedness via “Black Elk Speaks”, I am still not moved into action. Tom Wessels' writing comes from a problematic focal point and I don’t feel sufficiently inspired by the body of Wessels' contributions to take on what appears at times to be an insurmountable task. I feel the need for real focus on solutions, and a revolutionary approach to immediate change and how we frame the sustainability discussion are not his paramount goals.

After completing the introduction in McDonough’s and Braungaurt’s book “Cradle to Cradle”, I am feeling refreshed and inspired by their ideas on how to implement real fundamental change. The sustainability question that is continually bubbling up in my life goes something like; how do we as a people design, resource, manufacture, and recycle the products that are intended to enhance our lives? They begin their introduction with two and one half pages of examples of everyday problems that demand real solutions. they go on to demonstrate a viable example of how to print books on the subject of sustainability in a way as not to kill trees and further damage the environment. Then they proceed right into over nine pages of their own personal experiences, strength they have gained on the subject, and some real old fashioned hope for the future. They use evolved terminology, a new synthesis of the same old problematic rhetoric. Terms like “evolve away from”, and “seek more effective solutions”. They introduce us to the current "struggles"of the current “framework at odds”. Industry vs. the environmentalists, “We need to do more with less”, “Minimize your footprint and feel bad and guilty if you don’t". Although these concepts may at some point have a positive end result, the “guilt trips” have yet to be a cause for measurably effective change. What about the concepts of abundance and re-framing the subject in that way?

The background experience of these two authors is very important. McDonough has been abroad and saw first hand how the scarcity of resources encouraged people to create simpler, local, yet effective designs and solutions. When he returned to the states he witnessed how fruitless it is “tacking new technologies onto the same old model”. Braungaurt grew up in Germany with a background in environmental chemistry, politics, and Greenpeace. His ideas about “protesting more knowledgeably” led him to “reframe the debate” within his own vision for sustainability. Moving from “enforcement to encouragement” and from “recycle” to “upcycle”
Shortly after their first meeting McDonough’s and Braungaurt created the Hannover Principles in 1991 a set of design guidelines that would “eliminate the concept of waste” or as they say in the introduction “not reduce, or avoid waste as environmentalists were propounding, but eliminate the very concept by design.”

The wings of our emerging sustainability paradigm are still wet and fragile. We need researchers and scientists,as well as activists, corporations, and people everywhere to embrace this new model of thinking and living. I am looking forward to exploring in detail, the thoughts, personal experience, and practices that McDonough and Braungaurt will explore in th rest of "Cradle to Cradle". It is my hope that their ideas will affect change in all of us. I for one feel we are on the cusp of the most amazing and critically transformative time in the history of the environmental movement and mankind itself. and these are the new paradigm thinkers that will lead the way.

”

We can not have it both ways...

2009-09-28T09:08:00.006-04:00

I loved Wessels book The Myth of Progress. The idea that one day fuel prices will so high that big box stores will not have the monopoly they now enjoy. When it is cheaper to buy locally than have our food shipped from 1500-5000 miles away. They will eventually close and and the land the are are on now becomes a farm again.
Being a poor college student I struggle with the decisions I have to make in order to survive. I mean I would like to eat locally all of those fresh, tasty and expensive items taunt me. Often I do find myself walking into a store as large as a football field. I feel guilty but there is little I can do I need the cheaper food. Also I have gone to Walmart to buy toilet paper and stuff for school it is at least 1/2 the price. Yes I do shop there knowing that it costs American jobs and it destroys the local diversity of shops and yes I feel guilty. I am after all a consumer not a citizen anymore. A victim if you will of the quagmire of cheaper goods made outside of our country. With corporations having the rights to sue sovereign nations even if these same corporations are putting peoples live at risk. Corporations are getting way to big they are simplifying a diverse free market economy and making it much more unstable. These corps live outside of any known system of law. I think we need to form a green corp. to fight the bad corps. on a level playing field. We could name it the People Corporation its sole duty is to ensure safety for its members and maybe try to bring mutualism back into the equation.

Any Day Now... Please

2009-09-27T22:23:00.004-04:00

Upon reading The Myth of Progress, I found that there were passages that made me hopeful, and there were parts that made me very depressed about the future of the planet. The concept that various species are often exceeding their capacity, with regular population drops, even in just my lifetime, is unsettling. It makes it seem as though it's just a matter of time before the human population exceeds its carrying capacity. I found that I felt hopeful when I read about nature balancing itself. I guess because I always felt that our negative impact on our environment would lead to a barren wasteland of a planet. Wessel seems to have a different idea about our impact of the planet, which seems to look at it more as "the planet will balance itself regardless of whether of not humans are around." I guess we just have to hope that we're part of this. More appropriately, I guess we have to see what we can do to become part of it. Unfortunately, it seems that, at this rate, we're headed for extinction. Though, given the complexities of human behavior, who knows, we might make some big changes in the right direction sometime soon. As with most revolutions, everything happens at the drop of a hat. For instance, social revolutions tend to happen when they're most needed, just when injustices become intolerable, just when the shit hits the fan. We can only hope that we'll be able to make these moves in the right direction soon. Ideally before said feces is spattered all over. But alas, there's no way to know when it will happen. Prediction only happens in theory. I suppose when we all are walking around smelling like metaphorical dung we will know it's now or never.

The Myth of Progress... Myth or reality?

2009-09-27T22:18:00.003-04:00

In the remaining few chapters of the Myth of Progress, Wessels first describes the role of co -evolution and how it goes hand in hand with mutualism within an ecosystem. He illustrates how in nature, mutualism allows species to coexist and provide for one another while gaining benefits for doing so. If one thinks about our existence in a more broad view, everything is on a smaller scale in comparison to something else. For example, we consider the Earth a rather large place, in comparison to us, but in comparison to other planets, and...to the universe, Earth is minuscule and is just another system working within larger systems. My point being is that if smaller scales of mutualism can function in a positive manner, such as the example of the bull's-horn acacia tree and the acacia ant, then it can also work on a larger scale, such as humans and the environment. Wessels then describes the several drawbacks of our continuously growing industry. Big-box stores and large corporations like Wal-Mart are devaluing humanity. In the simple ages of human existence, everyone relied on one another to make ends meet and to survive, now that way of life is extinct and it's every man/woman for themselves. We need to look back to our roots, in order to move forward into becoming more sustainable.

The McDonough and Braungart reading, I found very enlightening. Unlike in David Suzuki's "Green Guide", this text seems to have gone much deeper into the understanding of each of the fact's they provide (just like Wessels said, understanding something is much more effective than just knowing the facts.) I have already found myself questioning the products I buy, and where I buy them from. I find myself asking, "What is going to happen to this product after I'm done with it?" "Is their a more eco-friendly alternative to this product?" Yes, there is. I'm very eager to find out what else this motivated two-man team has to offer in the next several sections.

The Battle of Bunker Hill

2009-09-21T08:04:00.004-04:00

Under Wessels' complex-systems framework, sustainability is analogous to dynamic equilibrium. In his vision of progress, our cultural economic system “matures” and divorces itself from the unnatural concepts of unlimited growth and unlimited substitutability. At this point, ideally, society becomes like the old growth forest he returns to in each chapter: the amount of energy we absorb is exactly the same as the energy we release. Wessels presents a concise yet thoroughly considered explanation not only of the fact that such an arrangement is at odds with our current paradigm, but of how that came to be so. His broadly systemic approach to the urgent problems of unchecked economic expansion and concomitant environmental degradation was both refreshing and reassuring to me for the perspective it provided.
Suzuki and Boyd, on the other hand, had a nervous energy to their writing that left me unconvinced of the efficacy of their approach to the same problems. In fairness, they are proposing much more concrete measures to combat environmental degradation than Wessels; given that, I think that while their conceptualization of the problem's ultimate causes are in line with that author's, their approach to implementation of solutions is a bridge too far. Certainly, being more thoughtful about how we house and feed ourselves and how and when we travel will be integral to mitigating our cumulative environmental impact – my concern is that such considerations focus on specific parts of the extant economic system, rather than fundamental change.
This seems to me to be the greatest challenge faced in averting environmental degradation to the point of bifurcation. Wessels writes that “large-scale change in complex systems never comes from the top down; it always bubbles up from the bottom,” and to that end the Green Guide is a useful book to have been published. Unfortunately, I think the potential exists for people to soothe themselves with the suggestions made in that book and others like it. Even of the people who buy the book (which is ranked only around 20,000 on Amazon), how many will really adopt a majority of its suggestions? I know, despite my near-crippling terror about the dangers of worsening environmental quality, that I haven't necessarily the fortitude to make the most dramatic and impactful changes.
I want to be clear (Spencer) that I am not suggesting that we can't change, or that the problem is “too big.” I am trying to make a fine point about the usefulness of the practical, changes-we-can-all-make-in-our-daily-lives approach to the current predicament, of which concern about the aggregate impact of incremental changes is only the first half. The corollary is that, after replacing their incandescent light bulbs and purchasing local kale – even after forgoing a jet-fueled vacation to Hawaii – people might well feel that they've “done their part.” This is dangerous, in part because they will have. As long as our complexly intertwined model of global capitalism persists as the dominant paradigm, consumerism (and I'm talking specifically about the U.S.) will reign supreme, and the net effect of all these measures will be to forestall the symptoms of a well-established disease. While even Wessels writes that our aim should be to slow movement down the continuum of degradation, such movement will enable us to avoid making really hard decisions about societal values (see Tom Friedman in the New York Times: "Real Men Tax Gas"). I don't mean to disparage any of these authors, or anyone making palpable changes to their lifestyle in an effort to help. I just think about last summer, when gas prices went over $4 per gallon and people stopped driving so much: prices dropped, and everyone hit the road in celebration. As much as many of us do want to to work for real change, I think we are also very good at deferring it by moderating the current, unsustainable model.
Unfortunately, while the intra-economic changes proposed by Boyd and Suzuki are incremental, the environmental detriment caused by the current economic model is compounding. The end result of the well-intentioned changes proposed to mitigate the environmental impact of industrialized societies might well be to delay the biggest changes past the point of their usefulness. I think of William Prescot and his courageous but doomed militia on a hilltop in Boston nearly 250 years ago: he told them, "don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes," and the rest is history.

Organic Farming Will Save the Third World

2009-04-26T20:30:00.002-04:00

An article from Science Daily reports that organic farming, at least within the third world can increase the amount of produce harvested. Without having to buy extra fertilizers or expand their plots, they can organically provide themselves and the rest of their communities with food. Organic farming is especially important in these areas because if synthetic fertilizers were used, the run off would create dead zones in their water systems because of a lack of oxygen. Conventional farming can also lead to soil erosion, increased pest resistance, and loss of biodiversity. In a community that may already be struggling to survive, a conventional farm could be the straw that broke the camels back and leave the land unusable. A community living in the third world does not have the luxury to order food and have it shipped directly to them. Between the lack of infrastructure and the rural areas, this would cost a lot of money they do not have. An organic farm would insure natural regeneration of soil, no pesticides or synthetic fertilizers, and a natural cycle of nutrients.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070711134523.htm

Ants and Us

2009-04-06T08:52:00.002-04:00

The book gives a really interesting example of the thousands of different species of ants around the world and how they adapt to be fitting to their environment, so they are not only beneficial to their species, but also to their surroundings. Humans, in some ways, are similar to ants in that we have developed different cultures and practices in countries all over the world in different ecosystems. However, with humans, (and for the sake of this example lets think of different cultures of people as different species of human), like the book says, because of our use/transfer of goods and energy, some species thrive, while others decline. This is because some species have managed to develop faster than others, due to power and money; and of course power and money often lead to the accumulation of more assets, furthering still the development of those species. Thanks to the idea of "developed" and "undeveloped" countries and the ramifications that go along with those, we have gone global. Globalization has made us all co-dependent on each other, and is I believe, a big part of the reason that things like changing our behavior to fit climate change, etc., is so difficult. We have built this web that gets more and more delicate, and more and more intricate with every advance of industry. The big problem with this is that when something goes wrong, it upsets the ENTIRE system and causes big problems for everything and everyone. This is why it is so important to support local businesses and food sources. We need to stop depending on all of the different species of people all over the world for our survival. We need to strive to be more like ants!

locally we can save the world

2009-04-04T17:35:00.002-04:00

I felt that this weeks reading and last week readings had a lot in common. The main points in the readings was that buying locally foods and supplies will help out environment, ecological footprint and save us money. some key reasons to buy locally are Fewer or no chemicals to preserve the food, lower shipping costs using less fuels, Less packaging/ package waste, and it also Promotes/supports your community. buying local products does a lot of things for the environment even though it can cost a little more in the long run it is saving our economy money, but it is also a lot more beneficial on the planet with less machines, work, and gas to get you the same supplies you can get right in your backyard in your community. it depends how you look at things if you want to get things shipped in it might be cheaper and give you more quantity, but if you buy locally you know what you are getting and it is of better quality, it is your choice on which you would rather prefer but if you want to do more for yourself, community, and economically, than you should buy locally. This readings had made me better and more aware on how much just buying locally produce and building materials are really so much beneficial to you as a person knowing what you are getting an eating healthier foods with out hormones and pesticides all over and in it, but it is also a lot more beneficial for everyone cutting down on package materials, traveling materials, and not to mention the fuel needed to transport all of these supplies causing pollution and travel fees when I have access to purchase these things right in front of me. The readings have opened my eyes on how buy local products can make a big difference and how I'm going to be better at supporting and buying local products.

Energy from Algae

2009-03-30T16:03:00.003-04:00

I recently read an article from EcoWorldly that announces italys plan to use Algae (brought into the canals by ships traveling from Japan and Sargassi Sea) by turning it into fuel to turn turbines to supply 50% of the energy needed in venice. They plan to have a powerplant up and running by 2011. This would be a zero emmisions production of energy and personally I think this is an awesome idea. The Algae planned to be used (Sargassum muticum and Undaria pinnatifida???) are a nuisance to the people of venice, clogging and blocking canals. This is what we need to see more of, taking one thing that we dont need and turning into something we do need. I do not know how they plan on making this work and transforming this algae to fuel but this is, to me, a really genius idea. The article I found was short and I really would like to learn more about this. if anyone wants the article here is the site- http://ecoworldly.com/2009/03/27/algae-a-new-fuel-for-the-venice-seaport/ If you find anymore information on this, please, let me know.

Organic Cotton

2009-03-30T15:15:00.003-04:00

I've decided to do my post on an article that I found about organic cotton. I choose this article for one reason; the new "big thing" is eating organic, even though a lot of people dont understand what organic means and why we would benefit from an organic lifestyle. But, you dont hear much about organic clothing. The first and I think, most important benefit of organic cotton is the greatly reduced danger of ingesting/breathing in the toxins for those who still pick cotton by hand in the cotton fields. Though cotton is mainly picked by machines these days, many developing countries do not have the luxury of cotton picking machines doing their work for them and therefore are exposed, daily, to the harmful chemicals being used by non-organic farmers. Another benefit of organic clothing would be, of course, we are not "wearing" harmful pesticides on our skin. I myself do not know enough about the dangers of specific pesticides to explain exactly what it could do to affect your health, but who does? The fact that you know something could be potentially harmful to you or your families health should be enough to make you want to start changing the little things that could, in the long run, make a positive difference in your health.
I have been trying to introduce more and more organic foods into my diet (which isnt always easy). But, I think it would be easy to just start getting clothes made with organic cottons, keep the stuff we already have, just dont buy anymore clothing made with non-organic cotton. I also read that companies like Nike, The Gap and L.L. Bean are starting to use organic cotton in their clothing, meaning the more we buy, the more organic cotton they use and this would influence other companies to use organic cotton. This would be an easy switch, they even say organic cotton is softer :) so why not? This is just one more little step we could take to do our part.

food for thought

2009-03-29T21:57:00.000-04:00

I think that the Green Guide is a very helpful, informative book that has a variety of useful tips. I like the fact that it is a recent publication (2008) because I feel that the websites that are mentioned in the book are current and up to date. The book lists many ideas, relating to sustainability, which I really never gave much thought to before. Some of the things addressed in the readings regarding food made me think about some of the food choices that I make. I think that the most difficult challenge for me is going to be to reduce the amount of meat, eggs, and dairy that I consume. I guess I can start with the “meatless Mondays” idea and take it from there. Suzuki states “Changing your diet could make a bigger difference in reducing your ecological footprint than changing your vehicle.”

I think a lot of times people forget about how their personal food choices affect the whole ecosystem. I know that being conscious of the impact of my food choices on the environment is one of the most effective ways to manage my ecological footprint. Last year I joined a community garden for the first time and I felt a great deal of personal satisfaction from planting, growing, and harvesting my own produce. Not only did I save a lot of money but I also reduced my ecological footprint. I learned a lot from the whole process and I plan to continue to have a garden every summer.

Michael Reynolds, Earthships

2009-03-16T12:29:00.001-04:00

Ilya Pentenrieder
Blog Entry

I decided to do this assignment on Michael Reynolds, he is an amazing “green” architect from New Mexico. He designs houses and buildings called Earthships, these are buildings made out of all recycled materials. The walls are made from materials that store heat, such as stone, dirt-filled tires and adobe blocks; and a natural ventilation system. These factors work together with the natural temperature of the ground, and with the sun and the seasons, to heat and cool the house without ever requiring air conditioning or heating.

Right after graduating from architect school he left what he called a wasteful building. In 1971 he started collecting all tossed out beer cans and made a beer can home. He made a total of sixty of these homes, and perfected them so that they were sustainable homes.

His latest invention was the Earthship, which is made to sustain a family of four. Earthships are designed so that the house has many layers and stays at a constant 72 degrees Fahrenheit. This makes it an environment where you can grow your own fruits and vegetables. All the appliances in the Earthship are powered by a solar power system. Therefore Michael Reynolds estimates that the electric bill for a four bedroom, six thousand square foot home with high-speed Internet would be $100 per year.

Reynolds has a strong opinion on architects in the present day. He believes that they are all caught up in their lives, and uppity about their designs when all they are doing is screwing up the world. Reynolds can appreciate modern architecture on an art level, but what good is that if there is a flood coming? "I could try and make them look like conventional houses, but why take a Porsche and make it look like a covered wagon?" Reynolds deploys another nautical analogy: "It feels like I'm crossing the Atlantic on a boat and people have been washed overboard. I'm throwing them a life preserver, and they're rejecting it because it's supposed to be white and I've got a green one."
- Michael Reynolds, CNN News-January 25,2008.

Earthships have proved their viability in the American desert and the Sussex countryside, but if they are to be a credible alternative to conventional housing, Reynolds will have to make them work in cities. In order for this to be made possible Reynolds would have to be given a piece of city land to tear down and use all the recyclable materials to build a community of new Earthships that are sustainable for city life and weather.

I think that Michael Reynolds has proven to many American people and people all around the world that living a sustainable lifestyle is possible, and quite simpler then people thought. The Earthship is one of the best inventions yet in my eyes, and I hope that someday we can all look at this genius idea and take advantage of living wonderful sustainable lifestyle.

again

2009-03-16T10:11:00.006-04:00

For years I've seen people carrying around their little pocket bottles of hand sanitizer or Purell antibacterial soap. I always used to joke with them that if they keep killing off all the microbes around them that they're immune system wouldn't be able to handle an attack as well as it might if it had to fight off a microbe once in a while. I always dismissed it as nothing more than a joke, but these people seem to get sick just as often as I do and seemingly battle the sickness for longer.

This week's reading in cradle to cradle touched on an interesting point. They mention that all the anti-bacterial, anti-microbial, and even anti-biotics eventually wind up going down the drain and mixing in with the sewage. They state that this becomes a problem when these products kill off all the bacteria that is used to break down the sewage, they basically hinder the process. Whats more interesting is that the only bacteria that survive are the ones that are resistant to these products. We have essentially created the perfect breeding ground for the antibiotic resistant "super bugs" that everyone worries will kill us all. We created these super bugs all because we wanted to kill off the bugs we could have beaten anyway. What irony!

anti bacterials making us sick?

2009-03-16T09:48:00.001-04:00

Harnessing Our Waste

2009-03-15T20:58:00.003-04:00

Many conversations that I have had about current world issues lately have come back around to the idea of globalization. The system of globalization is the result of wide-spread hunger for instant gratification with disregard for possible long-term consequences. Even the way we have set up our small towns has employed the immediate gratification mentality, and now, as we are learning more about the effects we are having on the environment and seeing ways we can change, it's hard not to look back and wonder why no one put these changes into effect in the first place.

One big improvement we could make is the harnessing of waste energy. My parents are involved in a project with the city of Burlington that is working to take the energy that is wasted at the electricity producing McNeil power plant, and use it to heat homes and businesses in the area. The plant uses sustainably, locally harvested wood to fuel its productivity, which is great, but there is also a lot of heat that doesn't get used. Currently, the heat that doesn't get used in the process of producing electricity, gets cooled with water and then released into the atmosphere. Wouldn't it be great if, instead of just increasing our carbon footprint, we actually had a use for this waste? In theory, there is enough wasted now to heat most of the buildings in the Old North End for nearly nothing (of course there is the cost of installing new pipes all throughout the ground in that section of town). This is, both socially and environmentally, the right thing to do. The number of people in the part of town (which is one of the poorest parts of Burlington), that would be affected by this would have the relief of not having a gas bill, AND we would not be burning up precious resources twice when we have the option of burning them up only once. It is a win-win, which is why I can't imagine why every power plant wasn't initially built with this idea in place, or at least why they aren't NOW incorporating it everywhere. Much of Scandinavia uses this as a resource and it is becoming more common in China as well. I think it is time for the U.S. to jump on board, it would be a very worthwhile investment.

Doing a little can go a long way

2009-03-08T17:39:00.002-04:00

In this week's reading of the green guide it was telling us and giving all sorts of hints and ideas on how to make our ecological footprint better. The first thing of topic was talking about homes being a practical size house for our needs rather than having a giant house when there is only two people living in it, some easy tips that where given to help save us money and out environment is to shut of the lights when we leave the room, but to also change out lights to cfls or halogen lights which might cost a little more but in the long run, but last longer and use less energy which will make you money to spend a little extra money. all throughout the chapter it breaks your house down into different sections on how you insulating your house better and fixing the drafty area's in your home is'nt a hard thing to fix and will cut your fuel bill down a good chunk, or also being aware of the phantom power that your appliances even if they are shut off still draw and suck power, or when you leave your house fro work you can turn down your thermastat beacuse why does it have to stay warm when no one is there. The chapter does a great job providing you with ideas and tips how to cut costs and use less of things that in reality gives us more, it also makes you more aware on how simple practical changes do make a defference. This chapter is good at explaing different things because i think many people are nieve and dont really realize all the simple little things that you can do, does make a difference even if it is changing your lightbulb.

Sweet Pond

2009-03-02T18:09:00.004-05:00

After our discussion of design in class today, I decided to look up eco-homes in Vermont and see what designs people had used that fit out landscape and environment. In southeastern Vermont there is a community under development called the Sweet Pond Eco-Community. This community is a group of nine eco-houses built in an apple orchard surrounding a beaver pond. Picturesque right?
The design is actually quite simple, using two simple shed form, using sheltering and the low-lying structure for passive solar.

It's basically two boxes stuck together with varying roof angles. They also plan to incorporate things such as shared parking structures, shared septic, and shared water to limit land use. While these are all fine and dandy, I am still waiting for a residential home that is 100% eco-friendly, or at least above the 75% range.

Taking into account the landscape, environmental challenges, and challenges of an eco-friendly home, the conventional ideas of a house or home may not be applicable. Say you were to incorporate a living machine into your home, it would need to be a proper size to support several people and the waste that they produce, and rather than have a room dedicated to your living machine, you would need to find a way to incorporate it aesthetically into your living spaces.
I met someone the other day who had decided to build a 100% eco friendly home using a slightly altered conventional farmhouse design to blend better in the Vermont community and architectural landscape. I wonder if conventional design and aesthetics and another system that will have to be completely remade to become sustainable.
We have said in class that this is an opportunity to rebuild every system. Does that apply to cultural aesthetics too?

H2O

2009-03-02T11:33:00.001-05:00

Through my research on Sandra Postel (my chosen subject of my in-class presentation) I have been thinking a lot about water.

What is water? Quite simply, it is the nectar of life without which all life will parish. Here in America, I don’t think that urgency of the world’s water supply is regarded as dire and important as it is. This is because we live in a place where we have access to bountiful amounts of clean, fresh water to drink, bathe, wash our cars, and water our plants and lawns. But in other corners of the world, clean fresh-water is scarce. We have all seen the commercials on TV for children.org where the advocate is holding a dirty but beautiful child, talking about how she lives in a place where she is forced to drink and bathe in dangerously contaminated water, and play in under-managed leach fields…When here in America we flush our toilets with water that is more suitable for those children to drink. My point being, we do not see on a daily basis, the urgency of the situation.

Postel’s contributions to research on water include causes such as the Global Water Policy Project: http://www.globalwaterpolicy.org/ and the Worldwatch Institute: http://www.worldwatch.org/. I encourage everyone to check out these sites!

Eventually our attention must shift to these issues, before it is too late. That day is rapidly approaching and the consequences of non-action are even more undesirable than we can imagine from our comfy lives in America where we are sheltered from the extremes of this dire situation.

growth

2009-03-02T10:44:00.002-05:00

I believe that in order for us to start moving in the direction of sustainibility we need to define the way we grow as a civilization. instead of growing materially we need to start growing with our thoughts and experiences.Every civilization has its cap on what it can do and how it can think. If we dont think outside of the cap we have created then we cant grow as a civilization. So if our society is so bent on economic growth why cant we put the energy we expend on growing economically to growing mentally. If we all grew mentally then materialistic ideals would not be as important making it easier to give up our paridigm we have created today. Then we can grow with the grains of the earth instead of growing against them making our planet a more hospitable place to live. In washington D.C a big group of people meditated to try and reduce the crime rate by 25%. The police commissiner said it was imposible but it actually happened the crime rate was reduced by 25%.One can only imagine if everybody gave off good vibes like that there would be no crime. This is the way we need to grow with our thoughts.

The Great Soil Builders of Our Planet

2009-02-23T09:36:00.003-05:00

I would like to direct the class focus to the magic mushroom section of Part 1 of our reading. The fungal technologies used to regenerate life in our ecosystem are outstanding. I found this to be the most interesting part of the book so far. The section I am referring to is the remediation project that used oyster mushrooms to extract the diesel fuel spill near Bellingham, Washington. What really blew my mind was that laboratory tests found virtually no toxic oil residue in either the soil or the mushrooms, the result of enzymes and acids that the fungi release that break down such molecular complexes. If this can happen over a six week time period, what other ways can we actively decontaminate our polluted earth? Can we apply spore mass to any polluted location? What is the extent of using this technology? What are some examples of contaminated locations that might be likely testing locations for fungal technologies? Land fills? Water treatment? Mountain top removal sites? Toxic waste dumps? And, are there companies that capitalize on this technology by buying cheap contaminated useless land, and covering it with oyster mushrooms. Only to then sell the land for ten time more than you originally bought it for, along with selling your mushrooms to a local food store. Weird, but possible I think................Brendan O'Connor