Happy Halloween!

I am very very proud of myself for making Halloween costumes that are largely sustainable...as in "taken from my house." With the exception of a toy rifle and a $1 set of antlers from Target, these were totally recession-proof, consumer reuse costumes. This year with the Dubai move, the useless economy, and the election fatigue...it's just too depressing to get excited for Halloween this year.

They are also politically astute. Since I am in Las Vegas to vote amongst other things.... I figure turning my old boarding school outfit into a Sarah Palin impersonation is par for the course. She is by far the reason I will not be voting Republican this election. And also, Andrew enjoys all opportunities to dress up as animals who can talk.

So, without further delay, Caribou Barbie and Joe the Moose!!

I Voted!

Due to Rock the Vote snaffu-ing my absentee ballot....I went home to Las Vegas to vote. I am pretty disgusted with both the Democrats (too far left) and the Republicans (way too far right) and think either choice will make a dog's breakfast of the already broken country, however, our very limited two party system leaves me very little hope. The fact that the election is decided by the Electoral College rather than the popular vote allows me to vote a third party knowing that I sadly won't have a vote that changes anything in the larger picture, so I can at least say I voted for the person I wanted.

But at least I can say Las Vegas has the right idea when it comes to voting! I had meant to go to Whole Foods and vote while buying groceries but happened along a voting center set up in the food court at one of the outlet malls while looking for a camera bag. Stimulate the economy AND vote? Genius! I think if other states would make preparations for early voting they would disenfranchise less people.... Hint. Hint.

World Series...and I'm A Philly Girl, Yo

Rain or shine, we're gonna take it and run with it! Suck it, Mets fans!

LMS Post ~ Recycling in Public On the Rise in NYC!

This article shows a green foot forward for the city of NYC. I know it's small, but you have to start somewhere.

The evil LMS gods just dumped all the commentary I had written on this...grr! Shortworded- this is a good step towards dealing with waste management in public and paid for by budgetary reworking, which is nice.
Recycling in Public On the Rise in NYC!

New York City's eight-plus million residents just got 33 new public places where they can recycle their rubbish, Mayor Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn announced at a press conference yesterday in City Hall Park. The new locations are an expansion of a pilot public recycling program that started in March 2007, when 126 blue and green recycling cans were placed in high traffic areas at 10 sites, finally giving New Yorkers' the chance to do in public what they're required by law to do at home.

Starting yesterday, an additional 105 blue and green bins can be found throughout all five boroughs. The mayor's office stressed that the expansion comes at minimal cost to taxpayers through the use of existing Department of Sanitation collection resources and partnerships with 18 Business Improvement Districts. Bloomberg said yesterday that "the key to maintaining the City's high quality of life—even during tough times—is learning to do more with less. Because of careful planning by the Sanitation Department, this expansion of public recycling will have virtually no impact on the City's budget."

Sanitation Commissioner John J. Doherty told reporters that "last year, the DSNY collected 1.7 million tons of recyclables—about 16 percent of our residential waste." Now the big question is whether New Yorkers can resist the urge to toss their non-recyclable rubbish into these green and blue receptacles. And the new public space recycling locations are...

Brooklyn

* McCarren Park
* Prospect Park (9th Street & Prospect Park and the corner of Ocean & Parkside Avenues)
* Intersection of 5th Avenue & Bay Ridge Parkway
* Intersection of Church & Flatbush Avenues
* Intersection of Adams, Fulton, & Willoughby Streets
* Intersection of Hasting Street & Oriental Boulevard
* Intersection of Avenue S & East 32nd Street
* Intersection of 44th Street & 7th Avenue

Queens

* Astoria Park
* Flushing Meadows Park (Paserelle Circle)
* Intersection of 34th Street & Broadway

Staten Island

* Wolf’s Pond Park
* Intersection of Forest & Bement Avenues
* New Dorp Lane Staten Island Railway station

Bronx

* New York Botanical Garden
* Bronx Zoo
* Intersection of Kingsbridge & Fordham Roads
* Intersection of 3rd Avenue & East 149th Street
* Intersection of Broadway & Manhattan College Parkway

Manhattan

* Outside Whitehall Ferry Terminal
* City Hall Park
* Bryant Park
* Foley Square Park
* Thomas Paine Park
* Intersection of 39th Street & 7th Avenue
* Intersection of East 42nd Street & Lexington Avenue
* Intersection of Essex & Delancey Streets
* Intersection of West 125th Street & Lenox Avenue
* Intersection of West 34th Street & 7th Avenue
* Intersection of West 42nd Street & 7th Avenue
* Intersection of Spring & Wooster Streets
* Intersection of Greenwich & N. Moore Streets
* Intersection of West 72nd Street & Broadway

The existing public space recycling locations are:

Brooklyn

* Front Street in Brooklyn Heights
* 1344 Pennsylvania Avenue

Queens

* Hoffman Park
* Intersection of Main & 38th Streets

Staten Island

* Clove Lakes Park
* Staten Island Borough Hall
* Saint George Ferry Terminal

Manhattan

* Battery Park City
* Union Square Park
* Inside Whitehall Ferry Terminal

And for more information about recycling, visit NYC Wasteless ("Everything you wanted to know about how and what to recycle can be found here").

Reflection Piece for Science of Sustainability: A Look at Hydroponics and Aeroponics

This is a rather lengthy midterm paper written for Science of Sustainability. I have to say that due to some procrastination and a good old fashioned headache, this is not anywhere near even my average work, however, here it is. As it pertains to Sustainable Communities, there is going to have to be a dissolution of the notion that not only is water free and endless, there will also need to be a shattering of the idea of the rural farmer providing food crops for urban centers. There is simply not enough space or fossil fuels to keep up this disconnect.


What technologies/strategies exist to help us meet the water and nutritional demands of the future?

When weighing the most basic survival needs for human life, you can isolate three that are necessary building blocks: air, water, and nutrients (food). Assuming that there is adequate air to breathe, humanity would focus on the latter two items. Therefore, they must accept that food must be determined in terms of water. Without water, nutrients could not be produced. Even if there is a water source, consideration must be made to determine the reservation of as much potable water as is necessary for drinking as potential dehydration is far more expedient for immediate survival than starvation needs. Depending on the nature of the ecosystem, the capabilities for survival choices may vary. They will all, however, require freshwater, which is currently in short supply, estimated to be far less than 1% of global water, even less of which is potable for uses like drinking, cooking, and ingestion (Marris, 2008). This thinking exercise of deciding the path of the most basic human needs is not a difficult one. It is preclusive to another more involved line of questioning; how can nutrients be most effectively maximized in terms of the water available especially when translated to the current and future needs of a growing population in the developed world?

Modern agronomy has transformed farming into a commercial enterprise enabling the multiplication of humanity across the globe. Due to the development of Western economies, there is no longer the single farmer working with his family and his livestock to till the fields and bring his crops to market. Instead there is the commercial farm that dwarfs the original with advances in machinery, land use, fertilizer, and irrigation technologies. The accesses to copious amounts of food have also allowed population to exponentially multiply, also contributing to dwindling water resources.

Increased uses of fossil fuels globally including a heavy use in agriculture and livestock production have given way to global warming. This in turn has increased the difficulties found in traditional agriculture. Rain can no longer be relied upon to irrigate an overheated planet where soil is becoming increasingly dry and erosive (Collins, 2007). Also, due to pollution of other non-saline sources, irrigation sources can become more scarce leading to vital ecosystems being lost. All of these inputs are placing a heavy tax on the land and what may be seen, as increasing land salinity will overshadow a freshwater supply to agriculture. In 2005, it is estimated that “20% of all irrigated farmland in the world, 23% in the United States alone, is affected by salinization” (6, Zhu, 2005). Diamond writes of the problem as it plagues conventional agronomists who utilize drip-irrigation, common in the United States and Australia,

"Irrigation salinization has the potential for arising in dry areas where rainfall is too low or too unreliable for agriculture, and where irrigation is necessary instead, as in parts of southeastern Australia. If a farmer "drip-irrigates," i.e., installs a small irrigation water fixture at the base of each fruit tree or crop row and allows just enough water to drip out as the base of the tree's or crop's roots can absorb, then little water is wasted, and there is no problem. But if the farmer instead follows the commoner practice of "broadcast irrigation," i.e., flooding the land or else using a sprinkler to distribute the water over a large area, then the ground gets saturated with more water than the roots can absorb. The unabsorbed excess water percolates down to the deeper level of salty soil, thereby establishing a continuous column of wetted soil through which the deep-lying salt can percolate either up to the shallow root zone and the surface, where it will inhibit or prevent growth of plants other than salt-tolerant species, or else down to the groundwater table and from there into a river" (401).

These thresholds do not come without a significant price, leading a search for increased alternative agronomic technologies that use less of the aforementioned inputs (land, water, etc.) to gain the same benefits. There is a movement from molecular biology aiming to find a mechanism for increasing the halotolerance of seeds and crops (the adaptation of living organisms to conditions of high salinity) (Zhu, 2005) as well as modification to crops to allow for genetic modification allowing crops to be more productive while using the same amount of water (Marris, 2008). However, methods of agriculture that don’t utilize soil mediums should be expanded simultaneously. Focusing specifically on the developed world in commercial or potential commercial use, two of these alternatives are currently available in the form of hydroponics and aeroponics. These are promising technologies fighting to take hold in a marketplace devoted to economies of scale and maximized yield often at the cost of natural systems.

Hydroponics is a technology of growing plants or crops growing without soil, in either a nutrient-dense mineral solution by itself or in an inert medium providing mechanical support for the root structures in addition to the solution (Jensen, 1997). In conventional farming, soil acts as a conduit to root structures receiving water and minerals. When studied, it was found that with the receipt of these inputs, the soil element was no longer necessary for growth. They may be open or closed systems, however, they typically are cut off from the immediate external environment (indoor facilities) often in the form of greenhouses. This allows the control of water evaporation, regulation of temperature issues that allow for year round growth, and other elemental controls such as pests and weather-related issues such as storms and droughts (Jensen, 1995). These systems allow for minimal water, land, and energy use in comparison to conventional agricultural systems while maintaining a comparable if not superior product.

Beginning and the use of hydroponics can be capital-intensive, however, the payoff in controls and spatial necessities is clear. For the argument of this exercise it is clear that this is a form of agriculture that uses minimal water inputs for maximum nutrient outputs when directly compared to traditional commercial or home agriculture. In addition to the consumption of less water in the initial farming technique, water can also be captured and reused from evaporative sources and from the plant growth infrastructures themselves. Reusing water throughout the system enables for growth that otherwise could not occur with conventional agriculture. The water conservation possibilities via use of treated effluent, collected groundwater, and other gray water (wastewater) sources leave larger quantities of drinkable water available for use outside of agriculture. In some studies, most notably in Tunisian urban farms, using treated wastewater for irrigation purposes has not only been found to be safe, but has also shown higher production yields that those crops irrigated using traditional groundwater sources (United Nations, 1996), which is also the case when using gray water for hydroponic agriculture.

Aeroponics is a method of agriculture utilizing misted nutrient solution in a soilless system, without a growing medium (Barak, 1996). While this system does require the inputs of apparatus growing technologies including a mist system and plants “beds”, it is far less water intensive per square meter that traditional farming and even hydroponic systems. Plants require a mist that is then taken up by their root systems and then metabolized throughout the plant. It has been shown that with the proper inputs, plants can grow to the same size as seen in standard agriculture with comparable if not increased nutrition potential due to the superior method of nutrient transfer via mist solution. It is comparable to hydroponic technologies, however, aeroponics use even less water and do not require a growing medium, allowing for more plants to be grown in a spatial system. This system is currently gaining popularity in urban farming design due to it’s dedication to limited spaces, no use of growth material, and extremely low use of water. It differs very little from hydroponic farming techniques outside of better water utilization and the lack of a growing medium, however, remains less popular commercially.

Both hydroponics and aeroponics stretch the natural constraints of conventional agriculture to meet human needs. Both enable year round production or nutrients as they take away the natural constraints of growing seasons. They both also control for vectors such as pathogens and pests which plague conventional agriculture. This in turn controls and drastically decreases the use of pesticides and herbicides producing a higher quality product in an organic sense making products safer for human consumption. Without the use of pesticides and herbicides, a disconnect in the pollution cycle is created which has plagued modern and conventional agriculture, making the land fallow and prone to salinization, as well as polluting other water sources.

Also, both systems allow for use in densely populated areas, such as urban centers where agriculture is not currently or historically been considered as a pertinent use of land. This will aid the movement of rural and hinterland agricultural forays into urban and suburban centers while not becoming an overwhelming draw on their water systems that could be easily retrofitted to use gray water (wastewater). In essence, the benefits of hydroponic and aeroponic farming are a quality, nutrient-dense product with the use of far less land, energy, and water, all things for which current and future societies will have to develop conservation techniques in an unpredictable ecological environment.


Bibliography
Barak, P., Smith, J.D., Krueger, A.R., and Peterson, L.A. (1996) Measurement of short-term nutrient uptake rates in cranberry by aeroponics. Plant, Cell, and Environ. 19:237-242.

Collins, W. et al. (2007) "The physical science behind climate change," Scientific American, p. 64-73, August.

Diamond, Jared. (2005) Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, New York: Penguin Books.

Jensen, Merle H. (1997) “Hydroponics,” Hortscience, 32:6, October. http://ag.arizona.edu/PLS/faculty/MERLE.html [Accessed 23-Oct-2008]

Marris, Emma. (2008) “More Crop Pet Drop,” Nature, 452:20, March 2008

Urban Agriculture, (1996) The United Nations Development Programme, New York City, Chapters 7, 9.

Zhu JK, Bressan RA, Hasegawa PM, Pardo JM, Bohnert HJ. 2005. Salt and crops: salinity tolerance. In Success Stories in Agriculture. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Autumn/Winter 2005. http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~jkzhu/articles/2005/bohnert.pdf [Accessed 23-Oct-2008]

Procrastination Via Webcrawl

I am tormenting my brain trying to make it focus to write a paper. However, I have always been a deadline-driven worker, even since childhood. I literally cannot even force myself to do anything substantial until I am within hours of a deadline. When I wrote online, this was great, it was all short bursts and deadlines.... Now, not so much. Regardless, this will be a webcrawl of sustainable science, green topics, technology, Sunday headlines, etc. while I force myself to sit at my computer despite my lack of actual work on my paper. Grrr.

Manhattan churches draw more guns off street with "Cash for guns" program ~ I think this is a brilliant program for 2 main reasons: Not only does it empower people to get rid of their guns in a safe "no questions asked" setting, but it also gives cash to people who in this economic decline very badly need it for basic living expenses. I know that it began in Brooklyn, then moved to Manhattan after the original success, but I think that this should be a program financed for all burroughs at incrementally scheduled times. As a taxpayer I would much rather shell out towards guns coming off the streets for people in need than potentially get mugged for that money. I know this in no way fixes the gun problem or poverty in New York, but it is a good start.

Happy Howloween ~ This is just good. I don't care what anyone says, especially at tough times like these, there should be more animals in costume. It just makes good sense.

Eco-Pioneer Builds Artificial Island, Lives There for 7 Years ~ I love this stuff, when people decide to go off the grid and prove that life outside the norm is totally possible and just fine. This vaguely reminds me of my father's attempt to do this when we were kids out in the middle of rural Ohio. I personally would have relished staying in the northwest suburbs of Philly at the time, but moving out to the middle of nowhere and making a go at it is certainly enticing right about now. However, this was before the interwebs, so I'm not sure how long I could go without that...a few hours? Ouch. I should go read some John McPhee books and chill out.

Crate Expectations: 12 Shipping Container Housing Ideas ~ Now this idea I can get down with, as mentioned before. I really want to find out why more people don't embrace the concept of shipping container homes. Especially considering their possibilities! I know it is the American dream to be in a sprawling spacious McMansion, however, I hope this catches on because it is so much cooler and once you see the prototypes, they are just better than any McMansion I can think of (including my own, geez.). I will be focusing more and more on this concept as I would like to design and build one that I could live in in the next 5 to 10 years. For serious.

Some of the following are my favourites:

And here is a link to a container condo development in Detroit. I travel to play rugby with ladies of the Detroit WRFC on occassion, so I have to say this is a great development for their real estate and will hopefully catch on there.

World's Dirtiest BMW M6 Spotted in Dubai ~ I told them they were on notice! Otherwise, I am not even sure why this is news.... Suspect, indeed.



We Can Solve It.org ~ They seem to have a ton of dollars for advertising which makes me suspicious. However, never suspicious enough to get off the couch and go check it out. It's about time I did that. That way, if it is indeed a meritable thing I can make everyone I know go check it out. So, lesson learned, it is a good thing. Largely it starts as a petition process, but they also organize energy events: all in the spirit of forcing alternative energy notices towards government and sparking awareness in said alternatives. What I did really like as that there was a function allowing you to put in your zip code and get all of the events within miles of you to participate in. So there, it is a good thing, you should all go sign up ASAP. I know it is essentially one of the many offshoots from Al Gore's work, but is that really a bad thing as long as it is making an effort or for that matter, a dent in the problem? I think not.

My professor Carol Crawford (INT 525P) is right, the internet is literally endless.

LMS Post ~ The World’s First Wave Farm Goes Live in Portugal

This can be added the the discussion of energy possibilities dependent, of course, on the geography of an area. The photos of the structure are fairly brilliant.

The World’s First Wave Farm Goes Live in Portugal

by Bridgette Steffen
10/23/08

The world’s first commercial wave farm went live at the end of September in Agucadoura, located off the coast of northern Portugal. Designed by Pelamis Wave Power, the farm employs three Wave Energy Converters - snakelike, semi-submerged devices that generate electricity with hydraulic rams driven by waves. This first phase of the new renewable energy farm is rated at 2.25 MW with 3 machines, and the the second phase will add an additional 25 machines to bring the capacity to 21 MW - enough to power 15,000 homes!

We’ve been following the Pelamis Wave Power project since last year and are very excited to see it come to fruition. Each Pelamis Wave Energy Converter measure 140 meters long and 3.5 meters in diameter, so they do take up significant amount of space out in the ocean. Still, the potential from this energy source is huge - the world’s waves are estimated to generate 2 Terawatts of power. To put that in perspective, the US currently has a generating capacity of just over 1 TW.

Pelamis Wave Energy Converters are tethered to the ocean floor by cables and are pointed perpendicular to the coastline. Each device is composed of several sections connected with articulated joints. As the waves roll in past the device, each section is driven up and down, while the hydraulic rams inside resist the motion. This resistance pumps high pressure fluid through hydraulic motors, which drive electric generators, thereby producing electricity. This electricity is then transmitted via underwater cables to the mainland.

Naturally, the amount of electricity generated depends upon the power of the waves at any given time, so like wind and solar energy, the electricity generated is not on demand. It’s an exciting renewable resource however, and Portugal’s new wave farm marks an important first step towards proving the technology, creating demand, and driving down the price. Soon you might see these off your local beach, assuming the conditions are right.

If you’re not one to get seasick, check out the video of their seatrials, which shows the wave energy converters in action.

LMS Post ~ Landmarks Commission Considers Proposal for New South Street Seaport

This article discusses a move to redevelop South Street Seaport....

There currently is a move to, in my opinion, overdevelop South Street Seaport and it is currently being argued by the Landmarks Preservation Commission that this will overwhelm the current historic content of the neighborhood, etc. This seems to me to be another chance for chain shops and boutiques and luxury condos, none of which seems terribly sustainable in turning yet another portion of Manhattan into crappy shopping and unnecessary condoland....


October 22, 2008
Landmarks Commission Considers Proposal for New South Street Seaport

Never mind that mall owner General Growth Properties—the current leaseholder of the South Street Seaport, as well other retail outlets nationwide—has been scrambling recently to refinance massive debt by selling off $2 billion in rapidly devaluing stock. The company is still pushing forward with an ambitious plan (rendered above) to turn the underwhelming Seaport tourist trap into a more vibrant destination, by razing the existing Pier 17 mall, relocating the landmark Tin Building, and throwing up a 42-story waterfront condo/hotel tower, as well as a wood-based boutique hotel and two-story retail structures designed by SHoP Architects.

But first there's the little matter of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, the Community Board, local residents and the formidable Municipal Art Society, which is urging the Commission to reject the proposal because "the proposed tower overwhelms the historic buildings of the district, further severs the Seaport from its history and disrupts the views from and of the Brooklyn Bridge." (MAS provided this graphic, below, showing relative heights of the proposed hotel and other structures in the area)

Curbed sat in on the Commission meeting last night, and reports "the three-hour discussion had plenty of fireworks." During the public testimony, representatives from the Municipal Arts Society strongly objected to relocating the Tin Building because that "would set a troublesome precedent for the preservation movement."

Others called for the preservation of the Pier 17 building—which houses the shopping mall—because it was designed by Ben Thompson, co-founder of The Architects Collaborative. "The quote of the night, however, went to a woman who curtly stated in reference to the mixed-use tower, 'The pseudo-fishnet brings kitsch to a new level.'" Supporters of the project included documentary filmmaker Ric Burns; a woman read his testimony hailing the proposal's "impressive level of imagination and integrity." The Commission will hear more on the plan at a date T.B.D. For now, at least, Pizzeria Uno is safe.

LMS Post ~ 'White Flight' Has Reversed, Census Finds (NYC)

This article may tell us something we all seem to see happening in NYC already....

I find the information on illegal immigrant enforcement interesting, however, am puzzled why 76% of commuters are still driving into the city. That has got to stop. there is no reason to drive into Manhattan at this point, unless you use your car to work (taxi drivers, etc.).

‘White Flight’ Has Reversed, Census Finds

By SAM ROBERTS

Published: September 22, 2008

The proportion of New York City residents who are white and non-Hispanic rose slightly last year, reversing more than a half-century of so-called white flight from the city, according to census figures released on Tuesday.

The share of non-Hispanic whites in the city had been shrinking since at least 1940. As the overall population grew, their ranks declined by 361,000 in the 1990s alone. Since 2000, though, their number has increased by more than 100,000. Half of that increase was recorded from 2006 to 2007.

“The fact that it is not going down is the news,” said Joseph J. Salvo, director of the population division at the Department of City Planning. “The increase is small, but the relative stability of the number and percent is meaningful.”

He described the turnaround as a testament to the city’s “diversity and ethnic heterogeneity” and said it “sets New York apart from many other older cities where this is not the case.”

Andrew A. Beveridge, a demographer at Queens College, called the apparent trend a potential “harbinger of racial equilibrium.”

But he cautioned that it could be short-lived given the turmoil on Wall Street, because “a lot of the non-Hispanic whites are plainly associated with the financial community.”

Meanwhile, the influx of Hispanic people, who have fueled New York City’s recent population explosion, has leveled off since 2006 as the pace of immigration has generally slowed nationwide. According to the Census Bureau’s estimates, the share of Hispanic people in the city in 2007 dipped, if barely, for the first time in decades — a decline that was more pronounced in Manhattan and Brooklyn than in nearly any other county in the country.

Hispanic people account for 27 percent of the population. Asians, who account for nearly 12 percent of New Yorkers, had been the fastest-growing group in the city, but were outpaced last year by non-Hispanic whites, who inched up past 35 percent of the population. The proportion of blacks dipped to 23.5 percent.

While the foreign-born population nationally advanced to 12.6 percent (the highest percentage since 1920), a record high of more than 38 million, from 2006 to 2007, the number of immigrants declined in 14 states, including New Jersey and Connecticut.

Nationally, the number rose by about 512,000 in 2007 compared with an annual average increase of nearly a million since the beginning of the decade. New Jersey and Illinois fell from the list of states with the biggest gain in immigrants, displaced by Arizona and Pennsylvania.

“New York City may be drawing in fewer fresh-off-the-boat — or, more accurately, fresh-off-the-airplane — Hispanic arrivals,” said Nancy Foner, a sociology professor at Hunter College. “At the same time, there’s been movement out of New York City among longer-term Latino immigrant residents to suburbs, exurbs and even further afield in search of cheaper housing and better schools and in response to job opportunities elsewhere in the country.

“Even when economic times are rough in New York, they are even more difficult in the Caribbean and Latin America, so people there still want to come to the U.S.,” she said. “And many continue to head for New York, where they have friends and family. And jobs, although perhaps less plentiful and harder to get, are still available.”

The Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey of social, economic and housing statistics also found that about half the residents of metropolitan Los Angeles and Miami over age 5 (and about one in five Americans in that age group nationally) do not speak English at home and that about 31 percent of immigrants were born in Mexico.

Median home values rose in price by 2 percent from 2006 to 2007, the lowest increase in several years, the survey said. Homeowners with mortgages in California and New Jersey recorded the highest median monthly housing costs ($2,314 and $2,278, respectively).

The share of owners and renters paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs generally dipped in New York City and rose in the suburbs.

Even with gas prices more than doubling from 2000 to 2007, the proportion of commuters driving to work alone in 2007 — 76 percent — remained the same as when the decade began.

As for the decline in the pace of immigration, demographers attributed the decrease to several factors, including stricter enforcement against illegal immigrants and the beginnings of a recession that dissuaded some people from coming to America and drove others to return home. An analysis by William H. Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, found that of those 14 states, seven recorded losses among Hispanic immigrants and 10 among Asians. In several, including Connecticut and Illinois, the number of foreign-born whites declined.

Dr. Frey found that the influx of Hispanic immigrants declined last year to about 350,000 from more than 500,000 annually during the rest of the decade so far.

“Over all,” he said, “these trends reflect a reaction to employment downturns in previously fast-growing states that provided jobs in construction, retail and meatpacking, like Colorado and New Mexico, as well as poorer job prospects in traditional magnet states like New Jersey, Florida and Illinois.”

“More so than in the past,” he said, “it seems that the geography of immigrants has been determined by the economy.”

Jeffrey S. Passell, senior demographer of the Pew Hispanic Center, said the slowdown appeared to mirror a similar decline earlier in the decade and may have accelerated since the 2007 American Community Survey.

“What we saw in 2002 was a drop, especially in Mexican immigration and especially illegal — 30 percent or so, and we attributed it mainly to the economy,” he said.

Yet Another Reason I Will My Heart to San Francisco

San Francisco has Prop H, San Francisco Clean Energy Act on the ballot this November 4, 2008. This bill will be a significant step towards sustainable energy sans fossil fuel dependence. And here in New York, I can't even get Con Ed to let me buy "green energy."

Official Website: http://www.sfcleanenergy.com
Donate: https://secure.blueutopia.com/sfcleanenergy/contribute/
New Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/yesonh
Petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/cleanenergysf/

Proposition H, San Francisco Clean Energy Act submits to the voters on Nov 4, 2008 a ballot measure that amends the city and county charter to require the city to transition away from fossil fuels and towards 100% clean, sustainable energy production at affordable rates by 2040!

Prop H ensures clean energy mandates of:
-- 51% by 2017
-- 75% by 2030
-- 100% by 2040
------------------

CLEAN ENERGY:
The Clean Energy Act will ensure that San Francisco will build enough solar, wind power, and conservation projects to give the City 100% clean energy within just three decades. It will make San Francisco a worldwide leader in the fight against global warming and catastrophic climate change. Greenhouse gasses from our energy supply are the greatest source of carbon emissions on the planet. The time to go clean is now!

CLIMATE CRISIS:
The San Francisco Clean Energy Act is a strong response to global warming. Already the writing is on the wall: melting polar ice caps, record temperatures, extreme weather patterns. We are on an unsustainable collision course with nature that could lead to our ultimate destruction unless our generation acts quickly and decisively to change the course of history.

GREEN ECONOMY:
The San Francisco Clean Energy Act will make San Francisco the hub of the new green economy and generate thousands of jobs in the emerging clean energy industry. It requires a Green Jobs workforce development plan to train and employ workers building the City’s renewable energy infrastructure. Now is the time to usher in the Green Economy in San Francisco.

Endorsements here-- http://www.sfcleanenergy.com/2008/endorsements/

Leaf from Eagle Rock Park in Seacliff...

Bees Without Borders is Sitting in My Kitchen?!?!

So I happened upon this Bees Without Borders video on Time Magazine's website and when watching it, realized that I sampled and then purchased some of their honey at the infamous International Pickle Day on 9/14/08. Who knew?! I thought I was supporting local business, honey making which is vital to agriculture, etc. etc. If anyone doesn't understand that every third or so bite we eat is supported by pollination, they need to get on their science.


What I did not know was that I was supporting the organization which teaches beekeeping to cultures all around the world to propagate fair trade in a nonperishable product that can be produced with little funds, regardless of gender, and add a sustainable source of income to people in poverty. Guess I know where I'm purchasing my honey from now on....

VIDEO


"The only reason for being a bee that I know of is making honey....and the only reason for making honey is so I can eat it. " Winnie the Pooh in A.A. Milne's 'The House at Pooh Corner'

National Campus Sustainability Day at Pratt

I really really wish I had not been knocked out by the flu, causing me to resemble a gooey melting wool sweater tossed on the couch. I wanted to go and take tons of photos and double check all the ideas on low calorie and local foods and be exposed to lots of things and ideas and people that I otherwise would not stumble upon assembled so nicely in one place. Didn't happen. Rats.

LMS Post Response to Momentum Slows for Alternative Energy

This post was in response to the NY Times article "Alternative Energy Suddenly Faces Headwinds." My response was directed at biofuels and ethanol production as it had been my assignment to present to the class on this topic the night before in Science of Sustainability class.

I know this may not go directly to Wall Street's trickle down, however, it does deal with a $300 billion dollar bail out this past summer for agriculture, much of it to monocrop corn. As many of you heard in Science of Sustainability last night, our group discussed biofuels, and I really feel that there is a massive public misconception about how this is going to save out automobile dependent lifestyles. I think that it merits noting the record of how both candidates feel about supporting more bailout subsidies for ethanol. Obama supports the subsidies as of now despite environmental scientists pointing out that corn is not the answer. McCain at one time heavily supported them (A view that may have led to extensive bailouts this past summer.) and now states that he does not support any agricultural subsidies for ethanol or otherwise.

Either way, to me it seems like the battlefield over farm state votes is making this more an issue that is getting far less press, what do do about the skyrocketing prices of corn and other grain commodities due to the misappropriation of funds towards agronomy rather than towards the development of technology to use cellulose-based ethanol/biofuel. Also, no one is discussing how ethanol and biofuels are not a clear substitute for gasoline and that currently the energy net is arguably not a positive one depending on whether coal or natural gas are used in prodution. Also, the fact that engine technology does not allow use of straight ethanol, but rather of gasoline mixed with ethanol (E85), in current engines, or that we do not have an endless supply of natural gas in this country (needed for production), leading us to have to potentially import what we need from Canada....

Basically, it comes down to a push for agriculture which is water intensive, fertilizer heavy, fossil fuel laden, and takes food out of the mouths of those in poverty, a number which is exponentially rising both in the United States and globally. What it should be is a push for the technology to use other available naturally occurring sources of cellulose and an energy message to Americans to make a sharp cutback on their gas consumption instead of coddling them over rising prices and promising a future of gasoline independence which ethanol cannot realistically deliver in order to gain votes. And a sharp kick in the brain over how potable water is not endless when you turn on the tap wouldn't hurt either.

LMS Post Response to Green Guru Gone Wrong: William McDonough

The following it a response to this posted article link concerning William McDonough's business statements. These are excerpts from said article:

No one has migrated from the fringes of enviro-geek design to the soft spotlight of pop culture as gracefully as McDonough. Long before the word "sustainability" was part of the average CEO's vocabulary -- and before, as McDonough puts it, "LEED [the green building standard] was even a twinkle in somebody's eye" -- he had begun postulating a third industrial revolution, one with the potential to transform how goods are made, cities are built, and literally everything is broken down and reused. His radical cradle-to-cradle philosophy demands that every product be designed for disassembly at the end of its lifetime, either returning harmlessly to the soil or going back into a "closed-loop industrial cycle" to be reused. With mainstream America beginning to see that we may have a planetary problem on our hands, McDonough has come to be seen as both a prophet and a savior. If only it were that simple.

...

As someone who believes that "commerce is the engine of change," as he puts it, McDonough has never confined his ambition to the high plains of principle. The virtue of his cradle-to-cradle idea is that it offers a virtuous result -- infinite abundance with no waste -- through an unabashedly commercial channel, namely manufacturing. If he could establish himself in that chain as the arbiter of clean products, there is no limit to what it might yield -- for everyone. "The faster and larger our business grows," he told me, "the better the world gets."

...

McDonough did begin taking steps several years ago to formalize cradle to cradle as an official certification, essentially a LEED-style rating system for product design. He developed 35 criteria -- from toxicity to renewable power to social fairness -- and began charging companies between $5,000 and $20,000 per certification. Every time he certifies a product, whether as simple as a diaper or as complex as a new office cubicle, he records each of its ingredients' "cradle to cradleness" in a master database. Ultimately, his plan is for the data to become a sort of Human Genome Project for chemicals.

And my response to the original post:

While I feel that he has a right to profit off his work or inventive patenting like anyone else for any other work product, I really feel like if the spirit of his work is in the capacity of benefiting the marketplace and also the world, he may need to step back and note that frankly, many of his ideas cannot come to fruition on a mass scale if they are financially infeasible for a majority of the public/world/market. Maybe if this were 1970 and he were starting out with this sort of mindset he could get farther on his royalty desires, but now that there is an actual urgency, he really stands to jump the shark, if you will, on his importance. I am typically as capitalist as the next pig, and don't want to take away from all of the wonderful and historically meaningful things that he has done, but this just seems highly unrealistic and ethically hypocritical point for him to push not only in the current economic crisis but also in the global crisis.

Dubai, You're on Notice!

My husband, whom I am none too happy with at the moment, screwed up some paperwork on his work visa (he's British) and is now being shipped off to Dubai by his company, where he is an acoustic consultant. While I can certainly rant at him for being a complacent dunce (the British way...grrr!) in this fiasco, I am equally annoyed at the economy in general, the boom and bust nature of the recent construction market in New York City, but I am more just glad that somewhere on the planet there is still a market so rich that they are tossing around cash like peanuts and he can go work there. Trust that being in grad school and people wanting all the nutrition information and diet plans for free is not exactly paying the bills, so someone's got to get that done. So from here on out, I am going to do a little detective work on good old Dubai, see what makes them tick.

Dubai, you're on notice!

LMS Post Response to Free Bikes on Campus

The following was made in response to the concept put forth in this article from the NY Times online concerning universities making bikes more accessible to students to cut down on the use of cars on campuses nationwide. That original topic began discussion on bikes being available to the masses in urban centers like Paris and this is my portion of the response to that string.

Like Paris, Barcelona has an amazingly popular system of public use bicycles with the self-service system of payment and bike release. I did an entire photoset of the bike racks in both systems with historical landscapes behind them last fall. I really don't see why this is not more adaptable to NYC or other U.S. cities. I feel like public perception of these things in the United states is the largest barrier, which is a sad excuse for this system not thriving here as least in major urban places.

As for the use at colleges...I wish this had been an option at my undergrad. We were not supposed to have cars on campus but everyone did. We also did not have a very friendly system for bike storage which ranked as a large reason why people just did not bother. There were no racks at school buildings or even dorms, however, leaving to thefts, and less effort by administration as they stressed the whole campus is all walkable (People still drove though.). I think I smell an alumni email to my undergrad coming...

Does anyone know what happened to the petition for more bike racks at Higgins? Of all the buildings at Pratt, that one should be leading the way on this topic.

Bikes for use in Paris, November 2007.

Reading Comments for Science of Sustainability Week 7

In "More Crop Per Drop," by Emma Marris, in Nature I have to say that I am aggravated right off the bat by the “We know there is a problem. However…” platform. However, due to this specific topic perhaps being the focal point of my academic endeavors at the moment, I stuck it out. The fact that agriculture is the single largest use of potable water on the planet by humans, it is a topic that bears extra study and focus in overcoming. Unfortunately, I feel that while there should be focus on the use of better agronomic techniques in developing countries, there should also be a focus on moving from large-scale commercial farming in developed countries. There needs to be a concerted shift towards the use of techniques such as hydroponics, which use approximately 70% less water than traditional agronomy and render the remaining water from growth to be reusable, where all water is lost in traditional agronomy. Further than hydroponics, aeroponics use approximately 70% less water than hydroponics with all water reusable after use. I feel like these are technologies that are future growth for giants like Archer Midland and others, if only they would make the decision to change. “A Long Dry Summer,” by Quirin Schiermeier, with the explanation of how rainfall modeling is a less than exact science also supports this. The fact that “rainy season” no longer means any rain may hit the ground at all is depressing on a level I cannot adequately put into words.

However, I digress and make note of seed giants like Mosanto and their arguments concerning how genetically modified seeds are the wave of the future and while that may or may not be true, must agree that unless they can be modified to be drought resistant, they really are not the effective biotechnology that developing countries so badly need as they are often where water dependence is climate affected in the form of storms and droughts. Also, the issue of water intensive commodities such as beef, need to be reckoned with. While countries (like Jordan, mentioned.) may choose to import water-intensive foods to allow for their own focus on other crops or commodities, there should be more countries taking these steps at the government to the household diet level. The lackluster to nonexistent level of care from the United States about these things is not only embarrassing but disheartening.

LMS Post ~ Discussion of Term Limits

This article discusses the heated nature of the term limits argument currently facing New York City (Council) in the form of a potential third term run by Major Bloomberg.

Personally, I say let the people decide democratically in the form of election, however, as democratic as that is, everyone is entitled to their position on the idea.

NY City Council holds raucous hearing on term limits

BY MICHAEL FRAZIER |michael.frazier@newsday.com

October 17, 2008

The anticipated raucous debate over extending term limits featured the same arguments reiterated for hours yesterday in the first public hearing held by the City Council.

Three hours passed before two city residents got a chance to give their opinions on Mayor Michael Bloomberg's bill, which would extend the city's term-limit law from eight years to 12. A second hearing will be held today.

Spirited discussion between former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and Councilman Charles Barron (D-Brooklyn) kicked off the mostly quiet meeting.

Cuomo, a longtime foe of term limits, said the cap undermines good government because it assumes that four or eight years are enough for an office holder, or that someone new would automatically be better than the incumbent.

"Both are neither provable or intelligible," he said. "There's a much more intelligent way and a much more obvious way to remove officeholders and [who] the voters believe should be replaced. You let the voters make the decision in what's called an election."

Cuomo added, "I know it works. It made me a private citizen in 1994."

But Barron scoffed at the notion that term limits are useless.

"You got a lot of nerve," he said, drawing cheers and applause. "How dare you come before this body and say term limits don't work? That's an insult to every one of us sitting here that came in through term limits."

Barron also said incumbents - good or bad - are historically difficult to oust, further highlighting the need for limits. Cuomo agreed about the incumbents issue but maintained elections serve people better than terms.

Bloomberg did not attend the hearing. He instead focused on recruiting supporters to attend the hearings.

"We're out there trying to campaign," he said after an unrelated news conference in Times Square. "We've got to get as many people to come and testify on both sides of any of these controversial things. ... And I will say I've made calls to people and asked them to come and testify, and every single one of them said, 'I'd be thrilled to come.'"

Bloomberg supporters maintain he's the best candidate to lead the city through tough financial times, while opponents say voters have already decided the term limit issue. Voters twice supported term-limit initiatives in the 1990s.

The earliest the 51-member council could vote on the issue is next Thursday. Two-thirds of the body will be forced out by term limits at the end of next year.

The city Conflict of Interest Board ruled Wednesday that the council could vote on the mayor's bill, though it may be viewed as a personal benefit. The ruling was in response to a complaint filed last week by some council members.

LMS Post ~ Monsanto and Michael Pollan Talk About Creating a World That Can Feed Itself

This is a video of Michael Pollan discussing food security issues. If you click on the link back to the original article the list of topics at the bottom of this post are there. They discuss hormone use, organics, sustainability, etc. Ideally, I hope to go through all of the links eventually, however, with the current inundation of readings and links from classes, I am certainly short on the time and energy for this to happen soon.

Monsanto and Michael Pollan Talk About Creating a World That Can Feed Itself
by Jasmin Malik Chua, Jersey City, USA on 09.23.08



Michael Pollan and Hugh Grant (president and CEO of Monsanto, not the floppy-haired British actor) on the same panel? Bring it. In this 36-minute video, taken on Sept. 17, 2008, Pollan, Grant, and Sonal Shah, a development expert at Google.org, talk about the sustainability of food production.

Held on the Google campus, the panel was moderated by Larry Brilliant, executive director of Google.org, who became friends with Grant after the two visited the Doomsday Seed Vault in Norway.

Monsanto: Double yields in 20 years
Grant, who presents Monsanto as a charitable outfit for the better good, is all about the numbers, insisting that the way to solve the world's food problems is to double yields over the next two decades, while reducing water and fertilizer usage. His solution is for us to bulldoze our way out of a potential food-shortage quagmire by planting genetically modified seed. Of course.

Pollan: Create a better food-distribution system
"Yield of what?" Pollan shoots back, noting that Monsanto's history has been growing crops, such as corn and soy, for raw materials, not for human consumption. He also says that GMO crops are not exactly renowned for their high yields and that one of the ways to ensuring food security is to allow farmers to save seed, something Monsanto takes a dim view of.

Another wrinkle in Monsanto's yield-doubling utopia is the fact that producing enough food and getting them into the hands of people are two separate problems, he says. Despite bumper agricultural yields in the United States, for instance, there remain some 35 million Americans Pollan categorizes as "food insecure".

More on Michael Pollan
Video: Michael Pollan, Taking a Plant's Perspective
Michael Pollan: Read it and Eat!
Biofuels, Food, and Sustainability Examined: Michael Pollan Interviewed by Yale Univ.
Michael Pollan on What Sustainability is Really About
Michael Pollan: The Government Makes You Fat
Quote of the Day: Michael Pollan on Eating
Michael
Pollan On Organics at Wal-Mart

More on Monsanto
Monsanto Dumping Bovine Growth Hormone
Monstrous Harvest: "The World According to Monsanto" Movie Review
Wal-Mart To Monsanto 'No Thanks For The Bovine Growth Hormone
Monsanto pays $1M for GMO bribe
Business Week on Monsanto, Pickens
Monsanto House of the Future
Monsanto’s Monopoly Challenged in Munich
Battles over Bovine Growth Hormones
Got Hormones? - Hormone Free Milk Not Healthier After All

Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:

• Michael Pollan Proposes A "Sun-Food" Agenda In Open Letter To Next U.S. President
• Fuel Poverty in UK, Government Faces Court Action VIDEO >>
• Closing the Global Digital Divide: Technology for Developing Countries
• Filmmakers Wanted to Showcase Water Problems at Istanbul Forum

LMS Post Response to Food Fights Comments ~ "Farmer in Chief"

A few of the students in my class know that I am an R.D. and will direct food or health related questions towards me. It's nice that someone thinks I am worth some sort of point of view in these discussions, as I really don't get that impression in class in the slightest. But I digress...in the form of an answer to someone's post concerning the amount and quality of fat in school lunches and it's direct weight on performance.

Posted comments stemming from the link to the article "Farmer in Chief" from the NY Times Magazine. Here is the first paragraph of this article, an open letter:

Dear Mr. President-Elect,

It may surprise you to learn that among the issues that will occupy much of your time in the coming years is one you barely mentioned during the campaign: food. Food policy is not something American presidents have had to give much thought to, at least since the Nixon administration — the last time high food prices presented a serious political peril. Since then, federal policies to promote maximum production of the commodity crops (corn, soybeans, wheat and rice) from which most of our supermarket foods are derived have succeeded impressively in keeping prices low and food more or less off the national political agenda. But with a suddenness that has taken us all by surprise, the era of cheap and abundant food appears to be drawing to a close. What this means is that you, like so many other leaders through history, will find yourself confronting the fact — so easy to overlook these past few years — that the health of a nation’s food system is a critical issue of national security. Food is about to demand your attention. ...

My answers as posted:

Amanda, I certainly want to answer you on the concepts of fresh ingredients in promoting health and performance. And while a leaner and more clean fat approach is certainly a start and shows results, it merits mention that the techniques of farming and regionality that Pollan refers to are often with less antibiotic use and food served with the aid of fewer preservatives which is another factor being studied in the diet changes in elementary and high school children. Due to a very very busy work day, I will find you a few studies on it tomorrow and post them. Also, I will be happy to direct you to some information on the burgeoning problem of the "certified organic" standard v. local foods.

However, if you have not read Michael Pollan's books: The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural history of Four Meals, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto, The Botany of Desire: A Plant's Eye View of the World, or his earlier works, you should pick one up at the library and read it. His name will most definitely come up repeatedly in the media as a purveyor of a more sustainable move of the human diet. With the growing importance of water conservation, carbon neutrality, and self accountability in areas like personal consumption choices, hubris and ignorance about livestock and agricultural is really going to come to the forefront. Unfortunately, the food lobbying in this country as well as the strong farm-state coalition will assuage these issues as much as possible (as evidenced in this past summer's farm $300 billion bail outs). It really will come down to personal choices and localized food movements to get these concepts like that have been recently addressed by the UN on lessening meat consumption. Regardless of anyone's enjoyment of meat, there is literally no argument that it is, as the industry is today, sustainable. And frankly, there is no medical need for humans to eat meat so that will never be an issue in this argument.

While I often recommend to my patients that they lessen the meat and change the type of meat in their diets, those are usually health or weight management issues. Frankly, for all other healthy people, it needs to be a choice based on logic that the industry is pushing out fossil fuels, eating up land, and wasting a disgusting amount of potable water and a meat-reliant diet is at this point, selfish and unnecessary. So yes, Meryl, I think that this should be a political issue of regulation and that if people want to eat meat, they should have to really pay the actual cost of it. Eating meat at each meal or everyday is kind of like driving a Hummer to run your errands; It's wasteful and just because you are "allowed" doesn't mean you should. Eating less meat and researching what you're eating is going to begin to look like the seafood industry where people check their Monterrey Bay Aquarium fish lists to determine whether they should order something from a menu.

If anyone has any questions re: the nutritional need of meat in your diet, feel free to email me. Apologies that I have to answer clients first, but I will try to answer your questions as quickly as possible with supporting evidence.

Meat Contributes to Climate Change
UN on Livestock production of fossil fuels being worse than automobiles
FAO Information on Meat and the Climate
Livestock Creating too Much Nitrogen
Livestock Use of Water Statistics

LMS Post ~ Cut the Sprawl, Cut the Warming (in CA)

This article discusses of some changes in CA zoning law to encourage public transit and slow down sprawl.

I know that these are zoning laws with goals in place by 2020 which seems very far off, but hopefully they will become standard in other states and will start showing effects far before the dates projected. Anyone who has ever lived in CA knows what a commuting nightmare it can be and if changing zoning laws for developers begins to make living and working within the same area more feasible, it is a welcome change. Hopefully, though, this will not spur too much new construction and rather will encourage retrofitting or reuse of current structures and spaces. Also, the promise of more mass transit is very necessary as there are few cities in CA that you can realistically live and work in without the use of a car. Overall, I think it is a positive move.

Cut the Sprawl, Cut the Warming

Published: October 6, 2008

For years, while Washington slept, most of the serious work on climate change has occurred in the states, and no state has worked harder than California. The latest example of California’s originality is a new law — the nation’s first — intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by curbing urban sprawl and cutting back the time people have to spend in their automobiles.

Passenger vehicles are the biggest single source of carbon dioxide in California, producing nearly one-third of the total. Meanwhile, the number of miles driven in California has increased 50 percent faster than the rate of population growth, largely because people have to drive greater distances in their daily lives.

The new law has many moving parts, but the basic sequence is straightforward. The state’s Air Resources Board will determine the level of emissions produced by cars and light trucks, including S.U.V.’s, in each of California’s 17 metropolitan planning areas. Emissions-reduction goals for 2020 and 2035 would be assigned to each area. Local governments would then devise strategies for housing development, road-building and other land uses to shorten travel distances, reduce driving and meet the new targets.

One obvious solution would be to change zoning laws so developers can build new housing closer to where people work. Another is to improve mass transit — in woefully short supply in California — so commuters don’t have to rely so much on cars.

The bill contains significant incentives, including the promise of substantial federal and state money to regions whose plans pass muster. In addition, and with the consent of the environmental community, the state will relax various environmental rules to allow “infill” — higher-density land use in or near cities and towns.

The bill’s architect, State Senator Darrell Steinberg, worked closely with developers and environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council. The measure is the latest in a string of initiatives from the California Legislature, including a 2002 law that would greatly reduce carbon emissions from automobiles, and a 2006 law requiring that one-fifth of California’s energy come from wind and other renewable sources.

Given California’s size, these and other initiatives will help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Even more progress would be made if others follow. New York and 15 other states have already said they will adopt California’s automobile emissions standards when the federal government gives them the green light — which the Bush administration has stubbornly refused to do.

There is, of course, no substitute for federal action or for American global leadership on climate change, both of which the next president will have to deliver.

Reading Comments for Science of Sustainability Week 5

"A Plan to Keep Carbon in Check" states the obvious about how we are busting out record numbers of carbon and how it is triggering severe climate changes of which are relatively impossible to predict the extreme nature. If the current level of growth is adhered to, a doubling effect is estimated to occur by 2056. Even with a leveling off of this churning out of carbon, these severe changes will occur although they may be mollified by a tapering now and a more exceptional lessening later. The goal is to keep carbon measurements in the atmosphere under 560 parts per million. The U.S. is currently dropping their emissions percentage, but how will it be possible to communicate this need to developing countries and countries that don't feel a need or a pressure to change their current methods of carbon creation? There are a few interesting concepts examined here.

One of these, the "wedge" theory in which the authors give 15 proposed ways to lessen carbon emissions leads me to some concepts/questions I would like to learn more about: (wedge #) 3. Why is electrical transmission and conservation focused on with more efficiency? If we know that an estimated 70% of all energy is lost purely in transmission, why is there no focus on cleaning up this percentage? 4. How difficult is CCS and how difficult is it to regulate this technology? 7. Why is there such a lag behind hydrogen-fueled cars? Is it simply an expense factor or is this another example of car manufacturers sitting back and ignoring the need for such models? 9. Why not more nuclear? If all of these emissions are wreaking havoc in the atmosphere from construction, why has this need for such facilities not been addressed as a higher priority than residential building? 10. Why is the government not more adamant about the use of wind capture? On the principle that all land in the United States is able to be taken by the government for use, why is there not more of a drive to populate or have land set aside for wind power use? 13. Why do the authors feel that ethanol is such an answer? Yes, it does stave off carbon emissions in theory through the use of ethanol, however, it turns monoculture into a factor and create a drain on food security. Why is this so much better than other options? 14. An end to deforestation? Really? I think we all could say that's a no-brainer.

Lastly, I will make a small comment on the photo on page 2. On the one side is a dystopian place filled with black rainy skies and endless congestive industrialization. However, the seemingly apocalyptic state still allows for so many cars on the roads; the inching of the metal coffins down the freeway. Then on the other side is a healthy stream of Deloreanesque mobiles and sunny skies with the futurist's true love, the monorail. All they really left out was the hovercraft. I think if there was an offer of a hovercraft, all of this would go much more smoothly.

In "How Urgent is Climate Change?" there are some explanatory attempts for the scientific consensus paper that may not have occurred to the average layperson all of which personally makes me feel bad for the dead horse effect going on for me in this line of articulation. And not so shockingly there is a call for immediate action, which I feel not many people ever really read or hear. There is much discussion of the lack of knowledge about lag times on various global phenomena such as ice sheet melting, sea level risings, and warming in general. It seems that the Summary for Policymakers put out by the IPCC is not nearly as widely read as it should be if the best representation of polar bears we may have in 10 to 20 years will only be on Coca Cola commercials during the holidays. Then once again there is the graph of the climate temperature change with what I can only describe as the ironic use of "Pessimistic" and "Optimistic" temperature rise against actual.

Ideally, I would have known the interactive nature of "The Climate of Man - III" and "A Plan to Keep Carbon in Check" before reading them. Then I could have staved off the defeatist nature of my questions on the wedges being answered so pointedly. I like the application that Kolbert makes by using an actual on the ground interview approach. It is also a gesture to how many countries such as the Netherlands are making a genuine effort to solve their global warming fallout issues before they truly become dire. The unsustainability of their water management system is not a small issue in a country that is a quarter under sea level. Also, I would like to further research Paul Crutzen's concept of the Anthropocene and do some refresher research on the other eras to see how their ecosystems functioned or did not function so well. Also, Kolbert makes her point that carbonation of the atmosphere is not reversible. Then there are the theories behind Socolow's earlier wedge strategy and I have to wonder with his optimism that all of these things can be done, how that is possible with the assumed reality that Kolbert weaves: #10. The United States would need a million turbines in order for wind power to make a difference at the proposed level. #9. The exceptional problems associated with nuclear power include the storage of waste, maintenance, radiation, policy, etc., not to mention that it would take a doubling of the capacity of the existing facilities in order to make this wedge a reality. This article, although disturbingly well-written, took the proverbial wind out of the sails of Socolow's article.

Kittens Against Plastic: Cheeto Beans

Since his early kittenhood, young Cheeto Beans has shown an affinity for green living with his love of reusable shopping bags. Here he models a green bag from the London Zoo. Makes you want to go adopt one of the bazillions of kittens out there who need homes and well as never use plastic again, doesn't it?

Also, clearly, I am OCD and line up all of my spices on the counter by category and fullness of container...

Summary of September 2008: A Month With NO MEAT

This is published also on my food/nutrition/photo blog Babes in Foodland.

So, I kind of made it through the month of September without incorporating meat into my diet. I know some people think I cheated since I ate eggs and they debate that they are meat, but until they get their Registered Dietitian's licensure, they can basically suck it. I am going to break this into a few categories as there is so much concept in this process that needs to be somewhat organized.

The Math ~ These facts can stand on their own. They do not need to be supported by any nutrition information whatsoever, it's all math and science. HA!

In order to produce one pound of edible meat (without bone, etc.), approximately 5,000 gallons of water must be used. Therefore, you could say that you could either shower for a year or eat a pound of meat. If I were to eat an average of three servings of meat a day (not counting fish, obviously), that would be nine ounces of meat. Therefore over 30 days, that would be approximately 17 pounds of meat, which equals 85,000 gallons of water, or 17 years of showering. Compare it to 25 gallons for the production of one pound of grain. Replace my 17 pounds of meat with 17 pounds of grain and you only net 425 gallons of water in production. In a water conscious world (which is what we should be living in, forget oil), meat consumption should plummet. Don't even get me started on the the CO2 savings here. People, get educated! It's in the numbers.

Here's another number: 149 lbs. (67.7 kg.). This is my weight at the beginning of September. Having recently fractured my skull, I gained a few pounds not being able to work out and I maintain that a quick way to shed some of that weight is to drop meat from your diet. People assume that being turned into a carboholic will keep that weight on, but that did not seem to be the case. I went from eating pasta once every 2-3 weeks to sometimes twice a day. I still don't really like potatoes or bread, but because I was making things for Andrew, I had quite a bit myself. And we went through a straight liter of olive oil in 30 days. And I lost almost 6 pounds (4% of body weight), and trust that I have been doing about nada in the exercise department. There are pants being brought out of storage.

What Worked?

• It was a Godsend that this month was a great harvest month for the Greenmarket in the New York Metro area. There is literally no reason that you should be without vegetable choices since they are all around the city and have plenty of options. Luckily, I am schooled in doing more than making salads, although I have to say, those were some good heirloom-type salads I had.
• Debbie Meyer Green Bags! These things work on the simplest concept that the bags are treated to wick away that pesky ethylene, a chemical compound which hastens the ripening of fruits and vegetables. These bags allow your vegetables to last so much longer! Totally worth it and at your local Tarjay.
  
• Cooking Light has long been one of my favourite magazines for recipes. I am much more visual a learner than any other sort, so their having photographs to accompany their recipes is a huge help! I am letting my subscription go as it is a waste of paper seeing as their site has all their recipes in their database. I know that website aren't run on unicorn farts and rainbows, but still...less wasteful. I look something up at least once a week on there...pickles, potato salad, you name it.
• I may have fell more in love with Morningstar Farms fake meat (analogs). I know they are a company pretending to be small and cute and organic when they are really just a subsidiary of Kellogg Company, but they do have some tasty stuff that fills in the gaps where meat would have otherwise likely been the option du jour. Given better selections of meat analogs, I would hope to find a less corporate producer. Drop another scoop in the moral chore bucket.
  
• Andrew also gave up meat this month. His agenda was not the same as mine, but it is easier when the kid you are sharing the table with is not heffing back a slab of ribs or two dozen ribs. Trust.
  

What Didn't Work?

• I think the first big problem with NO MEAT month for me was that it coincided with the beginning of the fall semester for grad school and for the rugby season. I just did not often make the effort due to a lack of time or a lack of energy to make as many meals as I really should have. And then once I ran out of Easy Mac....
  
• My worm box died while I was on vacation. This made me feel kind of like a total wastoid for just throwing out my organic waste and once again made me want to move to San Francisco where the municipal garbage service picks up compost materials for you. Geez, Bloomberg, why don't you get on it.
  
• My friends are kind of dicks. I think that it is largely American hubris that people think their ways of living are superior to other people's or that they should be shooting off their opinions on anything. I do often pass judgment on what people eat as a function of being an R.D. but at the same time, it is likely solicited. Let's just say, there are people I think less of now with their "But meat is good, " and their "You're such a hippie." No, I am just brighter, more principled, and better educated than you.
  
• Living in the ghetto is in no way food friendly. The "grocery" stores here maintain very little edible produce (even less edible meat to be honest) and are only good for packaged basic foods. Tragic. We wonder why diabetes is rampant...even outside of personal accountablity. But I guess I would never invest in this neighborhood given the chance either to be honest. Damn.
• Vegetables are actually more expensive than meat. This is such a mindfuck of a concept. They take far less cost of production, water, labor, etc. This is truly sad and wrong.
• Companies need to be more straightforward in their packaging. When I pick up a can of vegetable soup...I want it to be all vegetables. I don't want to have it already in the pan heating and then read the label and find a meat composite somewhere down the line of the ingredient list. Bad Progresso, bad!!
  

What did I miss?

• Maruchan Instant Lunch Chicken Ramen cups
• hot wings (Largely, with Poon at the Lion's Head. I should have taken rugby and football seasons into account here, clearly.)
  
• PD II's ribs (Doubtful would I miss any other ribs or any other rib sauce.)
• shrimp (Now not to be eaten since they are on the don't buy list. Thanks Monterrey Bay Aquarium!!)
• sushi (Sweet lord in heaven did I have a problem with this. Maybe it was my body trying to react to the mercury shortage in my system? Although sweet potato tempura rolls are acceptable, I guess.)

In summary, I will resume eating sustainably farmed/fished animal sources. Yes, this will mean a little more work on my part, more questions asked, etc. I will likely have one serving a week of the following: poultry, red meat, fish. Andrew has decided he will bring back fish, occasional poultry, and no red meat. Every few months we will go back to lactoovovegetarian status for a month or two to detox ourselves and feel less like all the other self-centered people polluting the earth so they can have a cheap cheeseburger.