LGBG Spotlight: Africa Inside — Passion and Commitment to Conservation

by

This month, LGBG is proud to present and salute Africa Inside.  This project is headed by Lori Robinson, Africa Adventures Specialist for the Jane Goodall Institute.  Lori’s unbridled passion and commitment to wildlife and natural conservation in Africa have been the guiding forces for her successful conservation work in Africa.

Lori’s remarkable journey to create Africa Inside began with a “life long passion to nature and animals.”  While on an assignment in Africa as a fashion model in 1984, Lori realized  that her deepening connection to nature and animals happened easier in Africa.  From that point on, she has remained committed to helping others identify that passion, namely,”the Africa inside of you.” 

Over the years, Lori has dedicated her time to promote conservation through the development of programs to educate Africans about wildlife conservation and environmental protection.  Lori cited the need for such programs based on the recognition of significant facts about local African citizens:

  • They have no positive direct experience with wildlife.
  • They have no emotional attachment to wildlife.
  • They receive no benefit from the animals.

Consequently, the locals had to be taught to have compassion for wildlife.  Thus, her Africa Inside program teaches children to be wildlife heroes.  The success of this program with the African locals’ increased awareness of the value of their land and wildlife and the desire to protect these precious resources speak loudly of Lori’s insight on the need for the younger generation to be the targeted group to educate to effect the needed changes in attitude toward the wildlife and the environment.

A second noteworthy project undertaken by Africa Inside is the  elimination of pollution by plastic bags.  This project brings attention to the danger of discarded plastic bags in Africa because they cause death to the animals who ingest them out of curiosity.  They clog rivers and streams, as well as get caught in bushes, grasses and trees, and they release toxins into the environment when they are burned with garbage.  To address the issue of the negative impact of plastic bags on the continent of Africa, Africa Inside developed an effective solution to the plastic bag pollution problem.  They organized an exchange whereby a reusable canvas shopping tote from America is given to anyone who has cleaned up 25 plastic bags from the African countryside.  This exchange has been overwhelmingly successful.  At one point, an exchange removed 320,000 bags from the “plastic pollution cycle.”

At LGBG, we are fascinated by Africa Inside’s success with this simple solution to such a large problem and with the overall success to date.  We feel that this is a very special project, and we are eager to get involved to ensure its continued success.  Africa Inside’s next plastic litter cleanup will take place in Samburu, Kenya in August 2013.  The program needs cloth shopping toes and financial contributions.  All contributions are welcome, and no amount is too small.  Please go to the Africa Inside website at http://africainside.org/globalconservation/one-wordplastics to see how to contribute or contact us at LGBG for more information on how to get involved in this wonderful project.

Africa Inside truly is a remarkable organization.  Driven by a passion for animal life and nature, this organization has maintained focus on solutions to real problems without getting bogged down in bureaucratic entanglements and intricacies.  This organization serves as an example of the difference that can be made when passion for a cause is combined with commitment, problem-solving abilities and tenacity.  Africa Inside– we are proud to salute you as an example of how to live green, be green.

Plastic bags are dangerous to wildlife.

Plastic bags are dangerous to wildlife.

A Green Movement Requires A Green Body

by
High-fructose corn syrup for sale

High-fructose corn syrup for sale (Photo credit: Steven Vance)

 

The fact that America has an obesity epidemic is no secret. Apologists argue that this is a product of the world in which we live.  Americans, today, live a more sedentary lifestyle than in the past, and as a consequence, we have become fatter. Of all of the member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), America has the largest population percentage (30.6%) that is obese.  Coming in at 23%, the United Kingdom is the second most obese nation, and interestingly, of all the other OECD countries, it is comparably most similar to America in terms of cultural aspects.  Following the sedentary lifestyle argument, it would only follow that the world’s most developed nations would have comparable obesity rates. However, in reality, this is not the case. The G8 countries are the most affluent in the world, yet none have an obesity rate close to that of America.  Having already listed the obesity rate of two G8 Nations, now allow me to name the rest: France: 9.4%, Russia:  Anywhere between 16.2% and 20 %; Russia does not actively report on obesity)[1], Italy: 8.5%, Germany: 12.9%, Canada:14.3%, and finally Japan: 3.2%.[2]

 

Despite having very similar levels of living, America’s obesity rate is staggeringly higher. However, it would be factious of me not to say that there is not a correlation between income levels and obesity rates.  The OECD has taken note and has released some staggering facts such as, “until 1980, fewer than one in ten people were obese. Since then, rates doubled or tripled and in 19 of 34 OECD countries, the majority of the population is now overweight or obese. OECD projections suggest that more than two out of three people will be overweight or obese in some OECD countries by 2020”1. Nonetheless, the question must be asked: despite obesity being on the rise, why does America appear to have such a huge head start? While a sedentary lifestyle does undoubtedly play a role, there is another dominant factor as well. Your good old Uncle Sam is determining what you are and aren’t eating through laws and taxes.

 

America was founded as a democracy, but that has not stopped the establishment of kings in this country. The first and most famous king was, of course, King Cotton. The economic power of this cash crop helped propel the economic success of America in a pre-industrialized world. While it is uncomfortable to think that the forging of cotton and slavery together helped establish America on the world stage, it is a reality, and it is our duty as Americans not to shy away from our past. However, our King today started out in a more humble fashion and ascended to the throne over the course of American history. I am, of course, talking about King Corn, present in America at the first landing of settlers and saturating American culture today, quite literally might I add. Agriculture in America is a business that is heavily supported and subsidized by the federal government. While we will be primarily discussing its negative consequences, we must recognize that it was started to help farmers in the Great Depression, and many programs, such as crop insurance, are beneficial. However, this government support has morphed over the years and skewed the market in favor of corn and corn-based products. So how does this all work? It works through the rather bluntly titled Farm Bill:

 

“The 2008 Farm Bill approved $300 billion in mandatory spending (this figure does not include discretionary spending measures that are approved separately). About two-thirds (67%) of the spending measures were allocated toward nutrition, followed by agricultural subsidies (15%), conservation (9%), and crop insurance (8%). The remaining three percent included credit, rural development, research, forestry, energy, livestock, and horticulture/organic agriculture.”[3]

 

The Farm Bill is typically renewed every five years, but has yet to be renewed in whole. At the moment, it is a victim of Congressional gridlock, a reexamining of its benefits, and the pull of the corn lobby.

 

farm-bill-allocation1

 

This pie chart details the percentages of the bill from 2008. As you see a majority went towards the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps. We, however, are to focus on the 14% that went to crop subsidies. With regards to the 2008 Bill:

 

“The [2008] bill [gave] some $4.9 billion a year in automatic payments to growers of [corn and soy] such commodity crops, thus driving down prices for corn, corn-based products and corn-fed meats. Cows that are raised on corn, rather than grass, make meat that is higher in calories and contains more omega-6 fatty acids and fewer omega-3 fatty acids—a dangerous ratio that has been linked to heart disease.

 

Cheap corn has also become a staple in highly processed foods, from sweetened breakfast cereals to soft drinks, that have been linked to an increase in the rate of type 2 diabetes, a condition that currently affects more than one in 12 American adults. Between 1985 and 2010, the price of beverages sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup dropped 24 percent, and by 2006 American children consumed an extra 130 calories a day from these beverages. Over the same period, the price of fresh fruits and vegetables rose 39 percent. For families on a budget, the price difference can be decisive in their food choices.”[4]

 

Here are some more numbers to put the effect of corn syrup into perspective:

 

  • Percentage of high fructose corn syrup in Americans’ daily caloric intake: 7
  • Percentage of U.S. caloric sweeteners made from high-fructose corn syrup: ~40
  • The year that high fructose corn syrup became available in the U.S. food supply: 1967
  • Percentage U.S. consumption of high fructose corn syrup rose between 1970 and 1990: 1,000%
  • Percentage of obese Americans in 1960-1962: 13.4
  • Percentage of obese Americans in 2005-2006: 35.1
  • Approximate ratio of obese Americans in 2007-2008: 1 in 3

 

One could argue that America itself has been the test subject since 1967 concerning the effects of high fructose corn syrup. Actual clinical studies are starting to point in the same direction as well. As stated in a recent study published in the journal, Global Health:

 

“Researchers compared the average availability of high-fructose corn syrup to rates of diabetes in 43 countries. About half the countries in the study had little or no high-fructose corn syrup in their food supply. In the other 20 countries, high-fructose corn syrup in foods ranged from about a pound a year per person in Germany to about 55 pounds each year per person in the United States. The researchers found that countries using high-fructose corn syrup had rates of diabetes that were about 20% higher than countries that didn’t mix the sweetener into foods. Those differences remained even after researchers took into account data for differences in body size, population, and wealth.”[5]

 

This all begs the question of what we as the public can do about this. There are a wide variety of answers. Some argue for getting rid of the subsidies altogether or extending them to fruits and vegetables. Both arguments rest on the notion of the even playing field upon which capitalism is built. Let the consumer vote with his/her wallet, and the invisible hand will choose the one that is more beneficial. However, we must recognize that corn has a huge head start in this affair, and as such the two hardly can be deemed to be on even footing. This should be taken into consideration during the debate itself, the debate which is still ongoing. This is still a debate which the public can affect, whether you support the status quo or seek change of any kind. Your voice  still can be heard by your Representative and your Senator. Of course this is America, home of the ‘do it myself’ attitude. If you’ve lost faith in the political process in this country, and I think there may be several of you out there, why not break the chain, if only a little, by planting your own garden? Democracy is and should never be a top-down process. If a bill is to become law or if something is to be given preference, it should be initiated at the behest of the people. This helps to ensure that we live green, be green.

 

 

 

By Sean P. Maguire

 

[1] http://www.oecd.org/health/49716427.pdf

 

[2] http://www.aneki.com/countries2.php?t=Countries_with_the_Highest_Obesity_Rates&table=table_obesity&places=2=*=*=*=*=*&order=desc&orderby=table_obesity.name&decimals=–1&dependency=independent&number=all&cntdn=asc&r=-373-404&c=&measures=Country–obese%20population%20aged%2015%20and%20over%20(OECD%20Countries)&units=–&file=obesity

[3] http://www.snaptohealth.org/farm-bill-usda/u-s-farm-bill-faq/

[4] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fresh-fruit-hold-the-insulin

[5] http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20121127/high-fructose-corn-syrup-diabetes

 

Silver Lining in Fiscal Deal for Commuters

by
MONROE STREET PARKING LOT IN CHICAGO HOLDS 2,7...

MONROE STREET PARKING LOT IN CHICAGO HOLDS 2,700 CARS FOR COMMUTERS AT LAKE SHORE DRIVE. NEW CONSTRUCTION IS UNDERWAY… – NARA – 556196 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While most of the conversation on the recently passed fiscal cliff deal has focused on large-ticket items, such as tax rates, tax breaks, and unemployment benefits, the deal did address and enhance a subsidy for commuters, which is a silver lining for the green movement.

Over the past year, the tax code has provided a subsidy for commuters who drive to work. Under this provision, an employer could cover up to $240 per month in parking expenses tax free for drivers.  Conversely, commuters who took public transportation were only covered for up to $125 of their monthly expenses.  Under the new fiscal cliff deal, the two benefits are set at equal levels, retroactively for 2012 and for 2013.

This provision definitely is a victory for the green movement, which stresses the need to reduce gas consumption and the number of cars on the road.  Also, the argument to increase the benefit to those who take public transportation brings to light the realization that subsidized parking is a distortion because there is a cost involved to provide and maintain parking facilities for drivers, thereby causing an adverse impact on land use.

Hopefully by equalizing the benefit for parking and taking public transportation, more people will opt for the latter.  Discussions on programs such as these now entertain the possibility that commuters who opt for the parking subsidy would be allowed to take the cash benefit.  The goal here is to encourage car or van pooling, which still goes a long way to reduce the number of automobiles on the road on any given day.  Also some jurisdictions are considering plans to increase the cash benefits for commuters who bike to work.

Given that transportation is the second largest household expense for America’s workers, along with the fact that most commuters drive to work alone, provisions to increase commuter subsidies for public transportation and to provide cash benefits for carpooling are very important.  They provide strong incentives for people to adopt behaviors that protect the environment, reduce our carbon footprint and successfully live green, be green.

Sources for this Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/how-congress-shapes-your-commute/2011/10/19/gIQA7GHOxL_blog.html
http://odenton.patch.com/articles/marc-commuters-could-benefit-from-fiscal-cliff-deal

 

 

Green Living– More An Obligation Than A Choice

by

On this good green news Monday, LGBG has opted to use this opportunity, in light of the tragic events at  Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, to reflect on the meaning and obligation of green living.  We know that green living means different things to each of us, from protecting the air, land and water to recycling and not polluting to eating healthy diets and getting exercise.  No matter the individual perspective towards green living, I think it is safe to say that there are basic tenets central to our understanding of green living.  They are as follows:

  • The choices made by any one individual affects all of us.
  • The choices we make today will affect us at some point in the future.
  • When we speak about saving the planet or the environment, we are talking about saving ourselves.

With this understanding, it is important for everyone to make living green an obligation, not a choice.  The greatest obligation we have is to our planet and to our children, each and every one of them.  They are the future of this land and as stewards of the Earth, we are obligated to deliver to them a clean, healthy environment.  It is our responsibility to love and protect our young and to do all that we can to ensure that they grow up to be healthy, happy and prosperous adults.  To that end, we are obligated to educate them.  We send them out to school each day with the expectation, and a very reasonable one, that they will return home to us.  In turn, our government has an obligation to provide a safe learning environment for our children and a guarantee that they will be protected and will be returned to us at the end of the day.

A major concern of green living is the safe and environmentally friendly design of buildings, and the conversation regarding this matter must be a top priority.  It is urgent that city planners, engineers, environmental consultants and elected officials design and build schools that are safe and secure from intruders, with the staff and technology to monitor all visitors and deny admission to anyone perceived to be a problem or who pose a potential danger to staff or students.  We know that buildings can be designed to be secure as our prisons are secure on any level that we need.

We also must address the safety of our society, especially our children, from a health perspective.  This begins with coming face-to-face with the issue of mental illness.  We need for every citizen to have access to health care.  This goes a long way to aid in the identification of people, young and old, with mental health or emotional problems, which apparently is a substantial portion of our population as evidenced by the widely used mental health diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder , bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.  We must provide treatment for these individuals, just as we would for people with cancer, heart conditions, arthritis autism or any other physical anomaly.  A change in attitude that regards mental illness as a sickness will help families to come forth and seek help, rather than hiding these conditions so that a loved one will not be made to feel like a pariah in the community.

Green living obliges us to raise our children to respect our environment and the other people and animals who occupy this space with us.  Our choices on how we treat our children, what we feed their minds and bodies, and the examples that we set for them to follow will determine their physical and emotional development and well-being.  We must teach them to be kind to others and to never be a bully to any person or animal.

If we all accept green living as an obligation, not a choice, we can take a major step forward to heal from these recent tragedies and move forward to save our planet and our children.  Let’s all respond to the call of duty to live green, be green.

On Children by Kahlil Gibran

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,
and He bends you with His might
that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
so He loves also the bow that is stable.

Description unavailable

Description unavailable (Photo credit: theloushe)

LGBG Spotlight: No Water-No Life — On a Green Mission

by

In keeping with our mission to educate, inform and share all things green, LGBG is proud to recognize organizations that we feel are employing exceptional and unique approaches to accomplish their goals.  This week, we salute No Water – No Life (NWNL).  LGBG would like to thank Alison Jones, photographer and project director  for taking the time to share information with us about this very special organization.

NWNL is a very special project that uses photography, scientific research and stakeholder knowledge to raise public awareness on the importance of freshwater resources, the potential dangers associated with water degradation and the opportunities to manage these resources.  This organization is exceptional and noteworthy because of its unique approach to its mission.  NWNL has adopted a simplistic primary focus, namely watersheds.  It then uses beautiful and intriguing photography and videography to illustrate its premises.  We all know that “a picture is worth a thousand words” and NWNL’s pictures prove this point.

This project has cleverly selected six case study watersheds that document “current universal threats to freshwater systems,” and with the employment of photographers, scientists and interns, the team works to develop solutions to existing problems relative to water.  The background of the individuals involved in these projects range from natural resource management, conservation biology, restoration ecology, forest ecology, environmental education and conservation photography and videography.  To date, the NWNL teams have conducted 15 expeditions in the United States and Africa, with 5 more to go.

The NWNL team maintains the highest ethical standards in its research and photography practices, ensuring that the welfare of the ecosystems are maintained.  The photographers go to extreme lengths to respect the “rights, customs and values” of the stakeholders in the watersheds visited.  Also, whether on expeditions or within their offices, they strive to cover their carbon emissions.

LGBG invites you to visit the No Water – No Life website at http://nowater-nolife.org/index.html to learn about this organization and to peruse its stunning photographs which convey to the viewer the feeling that protection of the world’s watersheds is indeed a worthy cause.

No Water – No Life is a globally focused project that documents the availability of freshwater resources, raises public awareness and provides education to stakeholders through publications, lectures and exhibits to foster partnerships globally.  With the understanding that water is the key to life, NWNL truly is a dynamic force and a wonderful asset to our journey to live green, be green.

Photograph of Raritan River, copyright Alison M. Jones

Sources for this Article:
1.  Interview with Alison Jones, project director
2.  http://nowater-nolife.org/index.html

Celebrate With A Green Christmas Party

by

Today for good green news, let’s talk about holiday celebrations.  Now that the Christmas shopping is well underway and the decorating is complete, we can turn attention to planning a green Christmas party.

The first order of business is planning the theme in terms of color, linens, place-setting, etc.  This year, try to avoid using disposable plates and cutlery, or if that is not possible, try to use green brands.  There are a number of websites that offer eco-friendly party ware, and also Party City stocks some green items.

When it is time to shop for food for your party, please remember the local merchants.  This is a great time to visit the local butcher, who is an expert at filling your meat orders based on expected attendance and who is more than willing to order specialty items for your holiday parties and feasts.  Also consider purchasing fresh fruits, vegetables and nuts from local vendors.  This is an excellent opportunity to support the local economy.  When planning your party menu, remember that the more you serve, the more people will eat and drink.  Try to limit over-consumption by using smaller plates to limit portion size and by limiting the available items on the menu.  Add a special touch to your holiday fare by including dishes with less meat and more vegetables, and be more than happy to provide the recipes to visitors when they ask for them.  This is your opportunity to demonstrate how appetizing a green diet can be.

No Christmas party is complete without spirits– the alcohol kind.  This year, visit your local beer crafters and distillers for great suggestions on items to serve.  Remember that you can get good beer and wine from home in any state in the United States.  A great place to start your search is http://www.distilling.com/PDF/craft.pdf and http://www.chamberstwines.com/?aspxerrorpath=/Article.asp.  On the latter site, you can find information on natural and organic spirits.  Also, check out our earlier blog on drinking green at http://livegreenbegreen.com/2012/06/18/drink-green-eat-green.  For a special added touch, considering serving a signature drink.

Also,  here is a good site for some ideas.

For a few housekeeping matters, when inviting guests to your holiday party, use telephone and electronic messages to reduce the use of paper.  The use of electronic messaging and invitations also carries a built-in method to monitor the RSVPs.  Secondly, plan ahead to recycle when cleaning up after the party.

It's just around the corner...

It’s just around the corner… (Photo credit: ecstaticist)

Christmas celebrations present wonderful opportunities to visit with family and friends.  Party hosting can be hectic, but with a little planning and research, party preparation can be less stressful, thrifty and green.  This Christmas let’s party green, live green, be green.

FDA Poses A Threat to Green Living

by
Food and Drug Administration logo

Food and Drug Administration logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As evidenced by the frequent news reports on outbreaks of food-borne illnesses and now hospitalizations and deaths from contaminated medical products, it is apparent that there are major problems within the ranks of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Some policy analysts attribute the FDA’s deficiencies to “the haphazard manner in which it has grown”.  The agency began operations in 1852 with a single chemist working within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and operated without regulatory duties until 1906 when news stories about horrible conditions at food-processing plants became the rage.  The public uproar from these graphic stories culminated in the passage of the Federal Food and Drug Act.  Future instances of health disasters in 1937 and again in the 1950s and 1960s heightened awareness of the need for the FDA to have greater oversight of the food supply and led to the passage of laws regarding pesticides and food and color additives.  It is important to note that the FDA still shares the responsibility for the nation’s food supply with the USDA, with the latter agency overseeing the safety of meat and poultry, and the former assuming control of the rest of the food supply.

Repeatedly in reports by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the FDA has been noted to have “systemic problems . . . that threaten the health of anyone who consumes food in the U.S.”  These problems include, but are not limited to:

  • An ineffective and confusing inspection process.
  • Poor performance in addressing overuse of antibiotics in livestock feed.
  • Lack of scientific capacity for the agency to do its job.
  • Failure to take enforcement action in more than half of its uncovered violations.

A review of articles and news stories regarding the activities of the FDA reveals that the agency’s inspection and investigation work is severely flawed.  Routine inspections are limited and audits sometimes are performed by third-party auditors who advertise work at an”unbelievable price” and give out “superior ratings”.

One major area of concern with the FDA is oversight of seafood sold in the United States.  More than 84% of our seafood is imported, with 50% of it coming from Asia.  These fish farmers produce large volumes of seafood, including shrimp, catfish and tilapia in polluted and overcrowded ponds and then use antibiotics and fungicides to sterilize the seafood to pass inspection in this country.  Amazingly, the FDA is charged with keeping these very same ‘drug-tainted fish” out of the food supply, but as the GAO reports, the agency is failing to do this and really is not even trying.   In 2009, the FDA tested only one out of every 1000 imported seafood products for 16 different chemicals.  Reports indicate that Canada tested 50 of every 1000 products for more than 40 different chemicals, and Japan tested 110 of every 1000 products for more than 57 chemicals.  In addition to posing a health threat to people who eat seafood, the actions of the FDA threaten the very existence of domestic seafood farmers, who must compete with foreign counterparts, who employ cheap labor and who get away with using chemicals that are banned for use by seafood farmers here.

The failure of the FDA to do its job puts the life of every American at stake.  For those of us trying to live a green life and eat healthy, this news is particularly unsettling.  Every citizen has the right to a safe and healthy food supply.  The federal government is obligated to perform dutifully regarding this.  We must stand together and demand effective oversight of the nation’s food supply so that we can live green, be green.

PTC Stirs Evil Wind Debate

by

In a statement released earlier this week, a bipartisan group of legislators from both the Senate and House of Representatives warned that the expiration of the wind protection tax credit (PTC) would result in the loss of a substantial number of manufacturing and construction jobs, thus triggering a great debate on the relevance of this credit and the efficacy of wind energy.  The PTC “subsidizes new wind generation by 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour of wind electricity produced”.  If this credit is not renewed by Congress, it will expire at the end of the year.  The impact of the threat of expiration of this credit already is being felt as wind companies are pushing back projects and laying off workers because of the looming uncertainty of federal funding.

After reading articles and blogs on this subject, I could not help but notice some of the comments made by other readers, many of which were constructive, but others, concerning.  I use the term “concerning” because I see that in most debates or discussions regarding green initiatives, education and understanding of the issues, or the lack of such, clearly guides the dialogue on these topics.

Living green and understanding the need to effect environmental change requires education.  Research and development and technological advancement enable scientists to find solutions to cleaner and efficient energy.  This definitely comes at a cost, albeit a worthwhile expense.  The push to advance science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in schools today recognizes the benefits of providing opportunities for students to explore new ideas and new worlds related to science.  Education programs, such as STEM, provide a bridge from the old to the new and are so important because they enhance vision, which is a key ingredient in the success of any scientific venture.

Unfortunately, there are many diehards in this country, who are resistant to change, even if it is for the good of people and the environment.  The green movement should not and cannot be dragged down by resistance to change, and modern technological solutions to energy problems should be welcomed, especially in the face of scientific evidence of looming catastrophes relative to climate change directly attributed to human behavior.  This negative mindset is not new in America as history gives us many instances of innovative ideas that prevailed but were met with great resistance.  An immediate example that comes to mind is the case of Henry Ford, who was successful in mass marketing the gas engine automobile in a time when many Americans would have settled for “faster horses“.  In the same spirit of Henry Ford, the green movement must promote efficient wind energy solutions as the future of our nation rather than “clean oil” solutions as suggested by some people.

Another major issue with detractors of wind power, who would be happy to see the credit expire, surrounds the willingness to destroy the job market.  Job creation is crucial to the recovery of the economy, and the market in wind energy projects presents the opportunity to add jobs.  This is especially good for veterans because “work in wind energy offers vets the opportunity to use a wide variety of skills they learned in the military, such as risk analyses, problem-solving and contract negotiation. . .”  So many of us voice our appreciation for the sacrifices of veterans and their families to protect us, and the promotion of wind energy projects through the PTC presents opportunities to reward returning soldiers with jobs, rather than just handshakes and pats on the back for their service.

Another potential base of support which needs to be tapped for wind energy advancement in this country is couples with young children or who are planning to have children.  Today’s energy solutions will frame your children’s tomorrow.  Living green should be the top priority on your agenda so that you can ensure a safe and healthy environment for your children.  Issues of renewable energy, such as wind power should become routine in articles in parenting magazines and blogs designed to educate families on living healthy.

The time is running short to extend the PTC.  As Congress haggles over the many issues dangling on the fiscal cliff, it is urgent that supporters of the green movement band together and speak up to protect the PTC so as to ensure the advancement of wind power as a viable source of energy in America.  We cannot allow the defeat of innovation technology such as this that enables us to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_21990652/four-governors-including-hickenlooper-urge-renewal-wind-power-credit

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/11/30/us-veterans-fight-for-wind-jobs-as-tax-credit-hits-the-cliff/

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/08/henry_ford_never_said_the_fast.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/wind-tax-credit-fiscal-cliff_n_2207581.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green

Wind Energy

Wind Energy (Photo credit: janie.hernandez55)

 

U.S. Holds To Current Climate Goals at Doha

by
Kyoto Protocol Convention

Kyoto Protocol Convention (Photo credit: Marufish)

The opening sessions of the United Nations Climate Change meeting in Doha, Qatar witnessed the United States resisting pledges of steeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.  U.S. Deputy climate envoy John Pershing stated, “President Obama was sticking to his 2009 goal of cutting emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020″.  Even that target was rejected by the U.S. Senate.

The United States’ refusal to back the Kyoto Protocol has been joined by China, Russia, Japan and Canada, leaving the European Union and Australia as the larger countries supporting the pact, along with ore than 100 developing countries and Kyoto backers.  The recent protocol dropouts agree with the position of the United States that “it is meaningless to extend cuts under Kyoto when big emerging countries have no curbs on emission”.  It is for this very reason that the United States never ratified the Kyoto Protocol.  The worry here is that without extension of the Kyoto Protocol, there only would be national actions without any legally binding UN pacts.

With the devastation of Hurricane Sandy and its ever-increasing price tag still on the minds of Americans, along with the acknowledgement of key political figures that climate change and global warming are harsh realities that need urgent attention, it is evident that Americans are ready to tackle these issues.  Additionally, President Obama pledged to do more to address the issues of climate change in his second term.  With or without the Kyoto Protocol, it is important that we as citizens educate ourselves on the issue of global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, keeping dialogue on the forefront.  More than ever, we must demand that our elected officials commit to plans to upgrade failing power grids and outdated infrastructure and to implement solutions for cleaner and more efficient energy.  Now is the time for America to take the lead and be the driving force to effect change so that we live green, be green.

Source for this article:

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/us-holds-to-climate-goals-despite-poor-nations-pleas-2012-11-27

 

The Economic Case for High Speed Rail in America

by

An economic case for high speed rail in America: We, as Americans, tend to have an inherent belief that America is the greatest nation on earth. The metric used to arrive at this belief is typically not one based on stats, figures, or data, but on a sincere love for this country. While there is nothing wrong with loving one’s country, there is something inherently wrong with allowing love to blind us from the facts. Across a multitude of metrics, America falls short of the number one spot. Two of those metrics coincide both in reality and in the reason for this blog; green energy and high speed rail. When discussing the implementation of high speed rail in America there are two numbers to take into account: The roughly $2.2 trillion in infrastructure investments[1] neededby America and the unemployment rate for October 2012, which was 7.9%[2].

Before explaining the need to initiate the implementation of high speed rail in America, we first must define the term itself. The definition of high speed rail varies in the international community and within the United States. The International Union of Railways defines it as systems of rolling stock and infrastructure which regularly operates at speeds of 155 mph on new tracks, while only at 125 mph on older tracks.[3] In the United States the definition tends to vary, with the accepted minimum being 90 mph. A major argument that is used against the implementation of high speed rail in America is that the nation is too large and that it would be too costly. However, while a national high speed rail system would be the end goal decades down the line, it is not the main aim of high speed rail. High speed rail would be used as a viable option to connect “mega-regions” throughout the United States. Mega-regions are defined as large-scale economic units of multiple large cities and their surrounding suburbs.[4] The mega-regions within the USA are responsible for over 75% of our economic activity.  These mega-regions extend over vast areas, ranging from Boston to D.C. and from Pittsburg to Chicago. This writer can attest to the pains of driving from NYC to Washington D.C.

The economic opportunity provided by such decreased times is quite obvious at first glance. The most noticeable is Philadelphia becoming a suburb of NYC.  It then would take me roughly five more minutes to travel to NYC by train while only living within fifteen miles of the city. Many will note that the Acela train, operated by Amtrak, already runs the north-east corridor route. The Acela, despite having limited speeds for most of its journey, as well as no dedicated track, can be deemed a success story. From 2000 to 2010, ticket revenues on the Acela line grew by 87%. Furthermore, despite only accounting for 10% of Amtrak’s ridership, the Acela line accounted for 25% of ticket revenue.  It comes as no surprise then that Acela has the best revenue of any of the Amtrak lines.[5] The success of the Acela line demonstrates both the restrained demand for high speed rail and its viability as a transportation system. Still, some question if high speed rail is worth it. Within the Stimulus, the Obama administration guaranteed money for the purpose of the creation of high speed rail. However, in several cases Republican governors refused the funds on ideological grounds. If we are to look back into history, what would we say to any governor who refused the interstate highway system? We would likely call that individual a fool and rightfully so. High speed rail has the opportunity to be the interstate highway system of the 21st century.

My final point is perhaps a bit existential, but nonetheless is one I feel must be addressed. I began this post discussing the notion of America being the greatest nation on earth.  There is a bridge in Trenton, NJ with the following inscription: “WE MAKE IT, THE WORLD TAKES IT”. To those of my generation, this may seem somewhat ironic; however, this was not always the case. America is still a manufacturing superpower, but it has lost ground. Now we must approach this realistically and recognize that a great deal of our manufacturing success came from the devastation unleashed on the rest of the world during WW2. However, we must also recognize that the demise of American manufacturing is not solely due to the rise of the rest of the world. We celebrate the resurgence of the American auto industry and lament the reign on imports over the past several decades. Yet, we are never told that the manufacturing system that caused Japanese imports to dominate world markets was first offered to American manufactures. Our country turned it down and the rest is history. America’s dominance of the global economy has much to do with the timely decimation of others, but just as much to do with what we produce.  When we look back on times of American prosperity, we find that it was the United States that was manufacturing the world’s most advanced technologies, while inventing many of them at the same time. At some point in time this all changed, and we have witnessed the decline ever since. We decry that supposedly all of our good are made in Mexico and China, yet we must recognize that most of those jobs are not coming back. This must be an accepted reality. If people are already frustrated at t-shirts and iPhones made in China, what happens when it’s our nation’s mass transportation system? Around the world millions of people are being pulled out of poverty and nations that were once written off are becoming some of the most economically developed in the world. Within a decade we will see an explosion of people in the middle income range around the world. High-speed rail has already proven to be a success in Europe, Japan, and China. No doubt others will seek to emulate this success. So where will they turn? The answer can be America, and this country will be able to solve a multitude of our other problems, such as unemployment. Americans tend to hold the attitude that if you are not first, then you are last. In the case of the hegemonic power of the 21st century, whoever dominates the green market will keep or gain that mantle.

[1] http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

[2] http://www.bls.gov/cps/

[3] http://www.uic.org/spip.php?article971

[4] http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2009/05/mega-regions-and-high-speed-rail/17006/