Community · Eco-Chick

Browsing all posts tagged with community

The Men of Real Climate

For anyone who’s interested in learning about “climate science from climate scientists,” Real Climate is a good resource. Contributors are all experts in their fields–ranging from geochemistry to oceanography–and include lead authors on chapters of the IPCC TAR (Third Assessment Report, 2001).

I like Real Climate for a lot of reasons. Most importantly, every time I read a post, I imagine the writer throwing off the shackles of academic jargon, bellowing and yawping, “Annals of Paleoclimatology, ye shall bind me no more!” and then sitting down with a smile on his face to write something comprehensible and lucid. And these guys are actually pretty of funny in a nerdy science kind of way. The April Fool’s post, “The Sheep Albedo Feedback,” made me laugh.

On a serious note, I think that Real Climate is doing something important. Recognizing the communication breakdown between the scientific community and the public/media, the contributors are walking down the steps of the ivory tower and out the front door in order to talk to the rest of us. Their response to media coverage—such as NASA scientist Gavin Schmit’s post today—is particularly interesting since we typically only get the colorful quotes or sound bites.

Although I think that there are limitations to science, I also think that we owe a debt of gratitude to the men and women who have devoted their careers to understanding the complexities of the world around us. I’m not talking so much about the scientists who go to bed with Big Business (pharmaceuticals, military, etc.); I mean the more independent scientists who risk their funding and their careers in order to bring us the truth.

business, car, community, farm, interview, media, military, Vote, women

Deep Economy: Q&A with Bill McKibben

1 Comment

by Brianne Goodspeed · 04/05/07

When Bill McKibben wrote The End of Nature in 1989, it was the first popular press book to address global warming in a meaningful way. Since then, McKibben has not only carved out a career as an environmental journalist; he has become one of the most steadfast and trustworthy voices in the arena.

McKibben is currently at work promoting Step It Up 2007—a decentralized protest calling for Congress to introduce measures to cut carbon emissions 80% by 2050—which will take place on April 14 in over 800 locations across the country.

In his latest book, Deep Economy (Henry Holt, 2007), McKibben submits that we’re past the point of changing our light bulbs and hoping for the best. Instead, it’s time to challenge the prevailing economic ideology of “More is Better,” with local yet systemic alternatives.

McKibben recently took some time from his work to discuss Deep Economy with Eco-Chick.

Eco-Chick: How does the idea of deep economy differ from the idea of local economy?

McKibben: Local economies are the main prescription, I think, for dealing with the deep problems of our current system—that it’s driving the Earth off an ecological cliff, and that it isn’t making us as happy as it seems to. We’ve thought much too shallowly about what we want out of the economy: not simply more, but a satisfying and workable world.

Eco-Chick: In Deep Economy, you say that it’s time to move beyond “More is Better,” but qualify that by saying, “researchers report that money consistently buys happiness right up to about $10,000 per capita income, and that after that point the correlation disappears…” (41). Do you see environmentalism as something of a class privilege? If so, do you think that has been sufficiently recognized by the environmental movement?

McKibben: I think that not caring about the environment is a kind of class privilege. The very poorest people—in this country and around the planet—feel the effects of the damage more than the rest of us do. (Go to New Orleans to see what I mean, and after that Bangladesh.) The onus on cleaning up should fall most heavily on those of us who have made the most mess—in this case, by pouring CO2 into the atmosphere, carbon that is directly related to our consumption. And we shouldn’t point too many fingers at China for their carbon emissions, not while our per capita emissions are four times greater. Instead, we need to figure out how to re-engage with the rest of the world to help them develop on something other than our energy path.

Eco-Chick: Since the Democrats took control of the House and Senate last November, many Americans have expressed hope that Congress will finally address growing public concern about global warming. However, you note in Deep Economy that unless we also critically examine our marriage to economic growth—something the Democrats have failed to do—we cannot expect to arrive at meaningful solutions to climate change and other environmental crises. What, if anything, can we reasonably expect from the Democratic Party, both in Congress and in the upcoming Presidential election?

McKibben: I hope that the Democrats will set targets—dramatic and ambitious ones—somewhere near the scientific mandate. At stepitup07.org, we’ve been saying 80% cuts by 2050. If that happens, it will help set in motion the train of events that will, hopefully with enough speed, wean us away from a world of fossil-fueled hyper-growth and towards something more durable. Congress won’t vote against growth. They may vote for higher energy prices (under some guise like cap and trade), which will then help lead us in saner directions. But an awful lot of the work is going do have to be done on the local and state level.

Eco-Chick: As I read more about local economy and, specifically, local food production, it seems to me that the discussion might need to include a reconsideration of the traditional gender roles that Americans have challenged in recent decades. In other words, the move from processed food to fresh, locally grown food requires that there be someone cooking in the kitchen. Do you think that this is part of the dialogue or is it a non-issue by this point?

McKibben: What can I say? At our house, I do the cooking. I guess I don’t think that cooking is such a bad thing—better for your body, for the planet, and probably for your mood than subcontracting it to some fast food kitchen. The fact that we’ve largely forgotten how to cook is a problem, and if we relearn, I sure hope it won’t be attached to gender as it has been in our past.

Eco-Chick: Likewise, does the idea of deep economy suggest that we might need to reconsider the roles that children and grandparents can play in a family and a community?

McKibben: Yep. Children and grandparents are now viewed as slightly problematic since they’re not contributing to economic growth. But any sensible community anywhere in the world has knit [children] into the fabric of real life—not by “child labor,” but by allowing ways that they can help. And it’s the same with grandparents.

Eco-Chick: Your research for Deep Economy took you to India, China, and Cuba, as well as cities and towns across the U.S. To me, one of the elephants in the room is that many of the most committed, knowledgeable and active environmentalists (those who would be most open to the idea of deep economy) are also people who love to travel, partly because they appreciate seeing alternatives to their own ways of thinking and living. Is there a way to reconcile travel and deep economy? Is it enough to buy a hybrid and carbon credits? Or should we heed poet Gary Snyder’s advice and, “Find your place on the planet, dig in, and take responsibility from there”?

McKibben: I think that Snyder is basically right. One of the hypocrisies of my life is that I spend a great deal of time traveling to tell people to use less carbon. I hope I end up a few gallons to the good. Of course, I buy carbon offsets, but that’s fairly token. My real joy is to stay and home and my favorite vacation of recent years is described in a book called Wandering Home, about a three-week backpack trip across my home county.

Eco-Chick: Deep Economy is dedicated to Wendell Berry. What influence has he had on your work?

McKibben: I read him first at an impressionable age, and he shocked me out of believing that the conventional wisdoms of the world were, in fact, so obvious. As I told him recently when we shared a stage, he completely changed the course of my life, and for that I’m about 85 percent grateful.

Eco-Chick: It’s been 18 years since you published The End of Nature, the first popular press book to address global warming (as far as I know). What has changed—in terms of scientific knowledge, public and government action, and your own concerns about the issue—since then? Are you satisfied with how we are responding?

McKibben: The science has gotten steadily grimmer. We didn’t understand how finely poised the Earth’s physical systems were, so we’re seeing huge responses to warming (such as Arctic melt) sooner than we would have expected. The political response—especially in this country—has been slower than I would have thought. The last six years have been totally and completely wasted, and they were important years. At the moment, though, I’m feeling a little optimistic. The response to stepitup07.org has been so much larger than I could ever have guessed and I think that we’re finally nearing a tipping point.

arctic, atmosphere, book, books, car, carbon, children, cities, cleaning, climate change, community, consumption, dress, driving, Eco-Chick, emissions, Energy, Events, fabric, fall, farm, fast food, Food, Global Warming, Home, India, labor, local, local food, locally grown, mckibben, mom, New Orleans, party, processed food, solutions, Target, Tea, travel, Vote, waste

Ocean Acidification: Another Symptom of Global Warming

3 Comments

by Jennifer Veilleux · 03/29/07

I attended the 8^th Annual Roger Revelle Commemorative Lecture at the Smithsonian on March 5^th entitled “What Corals Are Dying To Tell Us About CO₂ and Ocean Acidification.” Ken Caldeira, the presenter, spoke to about 500 people in a packed auditorium about the current trends worldwide in coral reef health. He expressed concern that although popular media talks about the effect CO₂has on the air, there isn’t much spoken about the effect CO₂has on the oceans. And the oceans are not an indefinite sink for CO₂.

Carbon Dioxide deposits in the oceans and the molecules bind with the water molecules to create Carbonic Acid. If there is too much Carbonic Acid, it can change the pH of water and is corrosive to the shells and skeletons of marine organisms coated or composed of calcium carbonate, such as corals. The acid literally eats away at the organism.

Why is this important? As pollution increases in our global ecosystems, biodiversity is reduced and food chains can be disrupted. In the case of corals, they are the food source, breeding ground, and home for a whole system of organisms, the diversity of which is sometimes compared with rainforests. If the current deposition trend continues, oceans will loose not only corals, but the ecosystem that corals sustain as well.

Visible loss of coral has been recorded worldwide. Though CO₂exacerbates the destruction of corals, it is not the only factor. Eutrophication, temperature changes, and human development have also taken their toll. It will take tens of thousands of years for the oceans to recover chemically to normal levels. The current situation of CO₂deposition in the oceans can be compared with the meteorite theorized to have hit in the Yucatan 65 million years ago that caused a great amount of chemical change in the ocean (along with temperature change) and resulted in a biological impact from which the corals did not recover for 10 million years.

The solution offered by Dr. Caldeira was two-fold. More research must be done on the oceans, we currently know so little about the effects of long lasting events. And we must change our current energy production and consumption. The average American is responsible for producing 120 pounds of CO₂ per day, 40 pounds of which deposit in the oceans. This is five times the global average. Natural release of CO₂is 50-70 times less than this. This is yet another reason we as a global community need to take energy production alternatives seriously and move away from our dependency on fossil fuels.

For more information on corals:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2006/03/coral_reefs_faq.html

http://www.llnl.gov/str/Duffy.html

http://oceanacidification.wordpress.com/

biodiversity, car, carbon, community, consumption, Energy, Events, Food, fur, garden, Global Warming, health, Home, media, News, oceans, pictures, Pollution, rainforest, reduce, water

Oscars Still Light Green

3 Comments

by Starre Vartan · 02/26/07

Well, the Oscars are over, and while there’s just no way that a party this big can be environmentally-friendly, efforts were made to make this Oscar greener than ever (though the website doesn’t detail exactly how impacts were reduced), it says:

This year, the Academy, the Oscar telecast producer Laura Ziskin and the entire production team endeavored to select supplies and services with a sensitivity toward reducing the threats we face from global warming, species extinction, deforestation, toxic waste, and hazardous chemicals in our water and food.

Independently, some stars did try to reduce their impact where they could, most notably by getting to the big event in a hybrid or other kind of alternative transportation (I’d love to see biodiesel shuttle buses in the future!), in a campaign by Global Green called Red Carpet/Green Cars.

And of course, Al Gore’s speech got a lot of claps and supportive hollers at the party I went to last night. Serious….and funny!

From this Reuters article, following is a list of some of the leading green celebrity players (and I have to mention, where are the women? This list is really dominated by the guys….):

- ROBERT REDFORD: 30 years on board of Natural Resources Defense Council,
founder of Sundance Preserve, winner of 1993 Earth Day award, 1987 United
Nations Global 500 award. In April 2007, launches weekly three-hour slot
called “The Green,” dedicated entirely to the environment, on his Sundance
TV channel.

- LEONARDO DICAPRIO: started the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation in 1998 to
promote environmental issues, drives a hybrid car, currently writing and
producing a feature length documentary on global warming called “11th Hour.”

- BRAD PITT: co-creator of design competition to build 20 affordable,
reduced energy, environmentally friendly homes in New Orleans.

- STING: founder in 1989 of Rainforest Foundation to protect rain forests
and their indigenous peoples.

alternative transportation, awards, biodiesel, brad pitt, business, car, carbon, cars, celebrities, climate change, community, conservation, corn, deforestation, design, diesel, earth day, emissions, Energy, farm, Food, gadgets, garden, Global Warming, Hair, Home, liver, Los Angeles, media, Music, New Orleans, News, oil, party, produce, rainforest, reduce, resources, restaurant, singer, skin, spa, sport, Tea, transportation, travel, tv, urban, waste, water, whales, women

Luminous Fish

1 Comment

by Brianne Goodspeed · 02/19/07

This afternoon I managed to catch MR2, the radio show of the Massachusetts Review, broadcast from WMUA at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. The guest was Dr. Lynn Margulis, there to talk about her latest book, Luminous Fish, just released from Vermont-based independent press Chelsea Green.

Margulis is best known for her theory of endosymbiosis and her contributions to the Gaia hypothesis. Margulis is also known, however, for criticizing the scientific community and the culture at large for accepting the narrowness of anthropocentrism, sloppiness in the popular press, and crookedness in the medical establishment. Her voice is refreshing at a time when many scientists are too specialized and fearful that they’ll lose their funding for their work to be as influential or relevant as it might otherwise be.

Lambasting the medical establishment, Margulis said today, “I think medical science is as big a contradiction as military intelligence.”

During an interview last October during the Bioneers by the Bay conference, she said, “To think that there is something special or chosen about people is part of the human delusion. Without human delusion we wouldn’t have six thousand million people on Earth and only 10,000 chimps…We expand by bringing our habitat to places it shouldn’t be, it never was.”

For anyone in the New England area, Dr. Margulis will be reading from Luminous Fish tomorrow night (Feb 20) in Memorial Hall at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst starting at 7PM.