With Nature

Perhaps the most amazing moment I’ve experienced in nature occurred when I was a 6th grader. I went with most of my class to Catalina Island of the coast of California. We stayed at a camp wedged between a cove and the hills. Over the course of five days, we explored the area around us, kayaking in the ocean, and hiking in the underbrush nearby. Perhaps one of the most magical nights we spent in this area was the time all of us decided to go on a “trust walk” in which everyone linked hands and went off through the woods in the darkness, warning those behind us of upcoming obstacles.

While there we spent time studying the wildlife around us, such as the local fish as well as the birds. I had never seen quail so plentiful before. A sizable flock often occupied the small meadow on the Western side of the camp. They were Catalina quail, slightly different from those on the mainland, we were told. Smaller and a littler fatter, they generally stayed near the ground in order to scrounge for food.

Section two makes the case that we are losing speciation at a horrifying rate, and I believe that we must do what we can to counter this loss. We must maintain biodiversity by expanding the amount of protected land that we have already dedicated to natural preserves. The wild is an important natural resource on its own, and should be treated as such.

The Non-Human World and Why We Need It.

I'm a little upset with how difficult it's been for me to answer this question, but I think i've settled on a memory. In 2005 I spent the summer in northern rural Japan. The area I lived in was vastly dramatic, spanning a large fertile valley, forest-rich mountains, an a plain that led to the Pacific Ocean. That summer I became engaged in the environment more than any other time in my life, biking from biome to biome, experiencing the affect of mankind on each, from abandoned mills on damned up waterfalls, to granite controlled oceanscapes. This experience was heralded with the discovery of a small river, not man-made, but obviously influenced by giant slabs of concrete every once in a while that held up the rocky soil and treeline above. The experience of discovering an abandoned speck of nature in the crazy-hectic country that is modern-day Japan brought me back to simpler times of self-dependency and engaging the world around us.

My time in the deep woods and high mountains was marked with discovering wild monkeys, climbing natural waterfalls, and accidentally crossing the almost indivisible line of rice-farm and high-wetland. Being removed from the confusion of not speaking Japanese, and sticking out like a sore thumb really changed how I view the non-human world as well as its ability to act therapeutically.

Addressing the second part to the question on the nonhuman world:

In pure humanly selfish terms, biodiversity and the idea of saving nature is undeniably necessary. In this regard, the overwhelming about of unharvested, un-researched, and simply unknown that exists in the world is worth protecting for the potential for mankind's manipulation. Medications, scientific breakthroughs, and linking ourselves even further to the world we occupy are all examples of why we need to protect our own interest in the great unexplored wilderness.

In addition to all this humankind selfishness, as mentioned in my personal engagement of the natural world, we can all benefit from the maintenance of natural space and biodiversity on a therapeutic level. In my opinion knowing, experiencing and loving all that our own environments have to offer is a critical part of leading a full and enriched life.

Photographic Memory

For me the times when I have felt the most connected with nature would have to be almost any time I have been out taking photographs. One specific memory is after my town had a huge ice storm I was driving away from the school and all the trees had the sun passing through them so you could see the ice really well. Or another time I was out taking some photos in the woods by a local park and I saw a coyote walking around the woods. I think that I remember these times the best because I have the photos to remind me of them. I have always enjoyed walking around in the woods and just being out in nature and the photos just keep the memory fresh.

I do think that saving nature in a goal we should be pursuing, I think that in human terms I would not want to deprive future generations of being able to see nature. I myself am sad when I read about some awesome animal that has died out and I can never see for real. But also simply for the sake of the planet it does not seem right to remove these animals which are the results of millions of years of development simply due to our desires.

The Power of Sunrise in Kenya (accompanied by memories of The Lion King)

In March of 2010, I was fortunate enough to spend a short time in Kenya. While most of my time there was spent in one of the world's largest slums, Kibera, I did spend the last day there in the countryside on safari. We left the bustling streets of Nairobi at 4 that morning- it is best to see the animals very early in the morning. My friends and I hopped into a van and hit the trails. About an hour later the sun began to rise. So did the lions, elephants, zebras, gazelles, and more. In that moment I could very nearly hear the Lion King music playing. :) In that moment, everything was peaceful. I was exhausted, but content to watch these creatures in their natural environment; not behind panes of glass in a zoo. I spent that morning watch lions lounge, zebras roam, and elephants play. It was incredibly beautiful and moving.

In terms of "saving nature," I definitely think we should work to save it- or at least a good portion of it. I'm not a vegetarian, my carbon emissions are high; the only thing I really do to save nature is not use plastic bags. I certainly don't want them to end up stuck in the lungs of a whale. Similarly, I tend to think that people are most important. But that doesn't mean that I'm all for human activity completely ruining nature and killing all the animals. I don't think dolphins should be slaughtered like was seen in The Cove. I don't believe is cutting down every single tree in the Rainforest. The more I live the more I begin to think that the human world is big enough. We're already using more than our fair share of resources. So in short, yes- we should work to "save nature."

Unless some apocalyptic event occurs and we need it...

Desert Rider

When I was 15 I went I spent part of my summer on my uncle's ranch in California. It was the first time I had ever been to California and it was also my first time seeing the desert. My uncle has several horses and his home is literally in the middle of nowhere. There was desert all around us and it took long drive before we would get to the nearest town. One afternoon I decided to go horseback riding out in the desert. I went alone, which looking back was not the safest thing for me to do, the desert is a very large place and I could have easily gotten lost and have been left outside for several days. But I also feel that having been alone is what really helped the experience be more "magical."

I ended up riding for several hours and eventually the sun started to set while I was still out in the desert and I have to say it was one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen. The sky was almost purple, it was quiet, it was just me and the desert. It was amazing.

I am a huge advocate of saving nature. Mainly because it is where we come from as a species and a culture, it also provides us with a sense of spiritual relief and is a way for people to get away from other people and have a change of pace in their lives. Nature can help an individual feel more connected to the world and can give us a sense of belonging to something bigger then just a city or a country.

I came across this organization and it changed the way I looked at progressive biology for environmental change.

From this website I was directed to the internationally recognized series of innovative talks, TED, for a talk that the director presented to the organization.

Check out the short clip here

Eben Bayer, the talker of this lecture, first outlines the dramatic affect that plastic based consumerism is having on our environment. He cites styrofoam as one of the worst culprits, filling over 25% of our landfills and its inability to be broken down naturally. He talks of styrofoam and its breaking down in the pacific trash gyre as a clog on Earth's respiratory and circulatory systems. Viewing the biomes of the world as recycling plants, human's introduction of plastics has created huge set-backs.

To counter the heavy dependency on styrofoam that modern lifestyles has created, Bayer introduces his innovation of mass agriculture of fungi mycelium to create a 100% sustainable and compostable alternative. To create the mushroom-root based foam-like product, he introduces a locally organized and distributed movement catering to regional preferences and availabilities across the globe. The mycelium, after filling with agri-waste like corn husks, literally grow into any shape or mold you need (see seconds 6:55-7:25 for a great example.) Once these products are finished being consumed you introduce them into a local environment and they act as natural, safe fertilizer.

What's great about this organization is the multi-faceted green approach to an incredibly overlooked dependency problem of styrofoam. With small, highly active facilities producing local products from local agricultural waste, a compostable solution is presented and a great argument is made. It was nice to see biological innovation being employed for a grave offense of humanity on the planet.

My Home Town

http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/travel/city-guides/chicago-green-traveler/

I am from Chicago and I have always thought it was one of the best cities ever, mostly because I grew up there so when I saw this article which is on Chicago becoming a greener city I became very excited. For me its just further proof that Chicago is awesome. And for the most part the article did not disappoint me, its kind of a traveler's guide to a green Chicago. It comments on our abundance of parks all over the city, especially our largest park Grant park which is in the heart of downtown. The article also mentions the large number of green roofs and new LEED platinum buildings that are being built all over the city, the major's efforts to make Chicago greener, the building of zero-net homes. My favorite part of the article though was that that author talked about the contrast between the old Chicago, the US's leading industrial city and transportation hub, that was known for being dirty and was perhaps the ideal industrial city and this newer greener "city in a garden" Chicago. Chicago is still the same as ever, big on transportation and full of pork loving city goers, the spirit of the old industrial Chicago is still alive and well, its just changed to be geared towards a greener way of life.

I will say that that article did focus a little too much on on what one could do in Chicago and all of the fun things you could do there and I was hoping that there would be more on the green aspect of Chicago. But the article is still a cheerful one because it shows us that even in what was once one of the least green places in the United States, can become greener, which gives hope to all of us, that even though going green might be hard, it can still be done.

The Uplifting Reality about Modern Energy

The headline reads: The Solvable Problem of Energy Poverty: Spread of Electricity Need Not Harm Climate, says UN Report

When I first began looking at National Geographic for "uplifting" articles concerning the environment, I became... concerned. Out of the first 20-some stories, only two seem even remotely ok, not to mention cheerful. And cheerful isn't exactly what I got from the above article, but it is semi-hopeful.

This article from National Geographic covers new meetings of the United Nations that are addressing the effects that adequate energy and cooking techniques for the world's poorest people would have on the environment. It briefly mentioned the health consequences that burning wood and other traditional materials can have on a person and I believe it! In the very short time I spent eating and cooking in a person's home in Kibera, the slum outside Nairobi, Kenya, my friends and I had to step outside because we couldn't breathe.

This was the most important part:

Tackling the larger goal of universal energy access— reaching all 1.4 billion people who lack access to electricity and the 3 billion relying on unventilated and inefficient wood, charcoal, and dung cooking stoves—would require only a modest increase in carbon dioxide emissions, the report calculated. That’s because the amount of fuel needed to address basic needs is small, and the opportunities for using cleaner energy are great. If the world takes the problem on, by 2030, global electricity generation would be just 2.9 percent higher, oil demand would rise less than 1 percent and carbon emissions would be just 0.8 percent higher than the world’s current trajectory.

So that's good. We've talked about how if everyone in China was able to get a car the world would basically end. The UN is saying that that won't be the case for this issue. The article also asserts that this goal is affordable! Amazing! Providing modern energy would cost $41 billion annually over the next five years (which is only 0.06 percent of global GDP). But this is where we run into trouble.

The more and more I learn about the world the more depressed I get about the United States' attitudes toward everything!! They don't give a hoot about human rights and they sure don't care about allowing people to eat without killing themselves from toxic smoke. As usual, the United States doesn't want to pay up. While that might be (is) depressing at least this article asserts that this is a possibility. Modern energy can mean the difference between life and death for the world's poorest people and knowing that it's economically and environmentally feasible is... uplifting. :)

Solar Projects in the West

http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2010/10/05/first-federal-approvals-for-big-solar/

Earlier this month, two major solar-power units received formal approval to go forward with construction. This follows several other solar projects the Bureau of Land Management has approved in California. BLM approval represents the last hurtle that a company must clear before construction can begin.

This is a critical part of California’s 33x20 Plan, in which the state attempts to produce 33% of its energy from renewable carbon-neutral sources by 2020. Although it may seem ambitious, the state has enacted legislation to encourage the growth of such industries within California’s borders. The goal is to establish a strong base of renewable energy within the state. Some environmental groups hope that such projects will proliferate in coming years.

These projects represent a transition in the way we get our energy. Hopefully clean energy will catch on across the board, but this has yet to be seen. In time, we may well see the expansion of such projects not only in California, but also around the world.

Food taken for granted

Until I started to take this class, I never thought a lot about the food choices I made and how they related to the environment. I had been aware for a long time that meat is far less efficient that consuming plant matter for food, as a large amount of energy is lost in the raising of animals. I always believed in eating everything on my plate, as not to waste anything. This was my only real long-standing means of preventing food going to waste. Also, I have heard that poultry is a more effiecient meat to raise that any bovine product. Animals like chickens have much shorter life spans and provide useful byproducts like eggs, while cattle take a number of years to mature before being brought to slaughter. Cows and other such creatures require a large amount of energy to take care of, house, transport, and process.

When looking back on the last few days, I realize that a large amount of the food I consumed was processed in some way. Be it the cereal I had in the morning, the hamburger meat I had for dinner yesterday night, at least one part of my main meals (breakfast, lunch, and dinner) have been processed in some way. This costs more energy that simply making a meal from unprocessed components (fresh meat, uncooked vegetables). We need to think about getting our food closer to the source. Urban farming can offer us this, but at this moment, we largely lack the time and effort required for it. Another aspect of our food is the packaging required. A large amount of this is not meant to be recycled, and much of it gets thrown away.

E(at)nvironmentalism

1.) I'll admit it. I don't really notice what I eat. This is not to say that i'll shovel whatever food passes in front of my face, but I can honestly say there is little environmental consideration when I'm cooking a meal or eating out somewhere.

Now that I've gotten that off of my chest, I'd like to say that i'm also aware that I make other decisions about what I eat. I actively seek out supermarkets that host organic and local fair, usually in regards to convenience and price. I'll go out of my way to carpool to Trader Joes rather than settle for Giant, but that's not to say that all of my purchases are locally grown or produced. In shopping for food, I habitually bring my own bags and try to buy less packaged goods. There was a time in my life when I gave up beef and pork to try to reduce my carbon footprint (after learning of the huge amount of methane that cattle and pig farming produce) but as of late i've reverted to full omnivorism. Now I self-monitore the amount of cow or pig that I consume and typically rely on poultry based on personal preference.

2.) In the last two days I've eaten locally baked pastries and a bunch of coffee for breakfast (ham and cheese,) one egg/avocado/cheese sandwich for dinner, and one trip to a restaurant where I had a seasonal special, pork tenderloin and butternut squash. Out of all of this food I'd have to consider the coffee to have the greatest environmental impact due to shipping, roasting, and packaging. Everything else I ate was probably local to VA/MD/DC, but my coffee came all the way from Peru (fair trade at least...) I'm primarily using distance to determine my impact, but I recognize the resources that went into producing pork include a lot of feed to fatten up and energy to slaughter the pigs.

I am Carnivore. Hear me roar!

Until I began college I had never eaten anything organic. And I had never made a point to know where my food was coming from- whether it was close or far away. I guess I didn't know that people actually did that. While I've been made aware of the impact that food has on the environment, I still don't make a point to eat things that are locally grown. I basically eat whatever is most convenient in my dorm room. Similarly, when I'm at home I don't make a point to eat local food, but it happens. Living in a rural area gives my family and myself plenty of space. We have a garden in the summer and eat fresh vegetables. To prepare for winter we can vegetables like green beans and carrots. I know exactly which family friend my chicken, eggs, and beef comes from too. That's what I find interesting about my two lifestyles- in DC, people spend a ton of money and make a point to eat organic and local, but at home it just comes with the territory.

I've come to understand (from recently popular documentaries) that meat has the largest environmental impact. And while I sympathize with Mother Nature, it hasn't really crossed my mind to eat less meat or become a vegetarian. It's not that I don't care about the environment. I do. I try to be a good person. I recycle, I have reusable grocery bags. But food is different. It's not something that I ever thought of as having an impact. And I think that a lot of people would agree. Generally, when you're at the grocery store you just buy. If you asked most people what about their lifestyle they could change to have a positive impact on the environment, I don't think that most would say look at what you're eating and where it's coming from. They would say recycle, use reusable bags, don't litter, etc.

I also drink a lot of pop. I wonder what the environmental impact of a can of Coke is...

Food, I eat it.

Honestly I don't think about environmental concerns when I think about getting food. Yes in the abstract I know that I shouldn't really be eating food shipped from around the world, but in practice I am living off of about a 30 dollar a week food budget. This doesn't allow me much leeway for getting food that has been grown locally or has a low impact. Now if I had maybe even just a little bit more money for food I could let the concerns into my thought process, however when I am living off Cup O' Noodles and other cheap packaged food I can't really afford to be concerned with my impact.

The thing that in my mind has the biggest impact that I have eaten in last few days has to be Cup O' Noodles. This is because of the packaging that it comes in. A styrofoam cup, plastic wrap and a paper covering as well. Nevermind that the actual food probably doesn't have a huge impact on the environment simply the packaging has enough of an impact. The other contender for the worst thing I eat has to be anything I eat at McDonalds. Meat in general is terrible for the environment with something like a cow requiring so much grain, water and land to be raised. In addition there is the green house gases that cows release in the atmosphere (methane).

Food? Enviroment?

To be honest, I never really thought about where my food was coming from and its environmental impact until about three years ago. And despite the fact that I have slighty more knowledge about it now then I do then, I am sorry to say that I have not really changed my eating practices to be more green and I could not tell you how green or anti-green they are.

Its not that I don't think that eating green is important, it is and I do know that it takes a lot of natural resources to get that MacDonalds hamburger but just simply is not on my "top ways to be green" list. Sometimes I feel gulity and try to buy local and organic and I eat less meat but that almost always wears off. And I think that part of the reason why that happens is because green food is not pushed as much as green transporation, using green technologies, tecycling and turing off the lights when you leave the room. Because those are things on the top of my list, I use public transportion more then cars or I walk places, I buy and use green lightbulbs, I am a big recycler and I always unplug my electrionics when I am done with them. And I do those things becaue I am repeatdly told to do them and that they are good for the enviroment. If I felt more pressure to eat green, I probably would. Because I do care about climate change and I do want to make a difference, but honestly I like most other Americans am more likely to do something that is green if I am told more often about it.