Environmental rock stars talk before the walk

Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein, and others at the Talk before the Walk, the night before the 9/21 climate change march in NYC:

Environmental Enlightenment

Part 1

The many categorical ways of approaching climate change is currently a never-ending roll down a metaphorical mountain. A mountain that outlooks an even worse horizon, like the panning of the screen of Frodo in Lord of the Rings as he comes closer to Mount Mordor. Laughably, this planet goes through wave after wave of activism on top of differentiating theories that explain how we got to this point in our worlds ecological demise. Generations following past presence of habit formed a horrible idea in which the results have ended up pushing the human touch on nature to a boiling point, literally. So many problems have risen due to the ignorance of not facing an ecological disaster such as global warming, ice caps melting, etc. What we need isn't another policy on oil or natural gas consumption, alternative energy devotion, or the likes of anything revolving around this tight circle of movement, rather we must all come to the same conclusion on sacrificing short term goals for long-term. It's not the selfish devotion to drilling for that sweet black liquid offshore, causing catastrophic malfunctions of brittle ecosystems, it's not embarking on straining, costly campaigns to end pipeline creation, it's the fact we all must get the same idea as those ecosystems of community like that of trees, those that span lifetimes of age, with interconnected webs of networks larger than states, wide. A change, mattering not to how or what, but when. Our time on this planet has been running on E for a while now, so what will it take to compromise that short for long, that comeuppance of integrity from not just a few but from all. This outlook spans many alleys and endless discussion, those who agree or disagree with the fact that this planets changing for the worse, and has been, shouldn't be a political debate or something simple to agree you with your relatives at the dinner table. We must understand all that is available to be understood so that someday, whether it happens in 5 or 50 years, will better our decisions on understanding that we aren't a part of this planet just because we can be, but that we can leave it for later generations. Because of this overabundance of information on this topic, we look at 'Oil and Honey' by Bill McKibben, as well as selections from Naomi Klein's 'This Changes Everything'. From communal living to activism both domestic and abroad, we are going to understand the broader picture that is environmental ethics, concern, and rehabilitation, or at least a small glimpse of it to better our individual associations with the planet that houses us graciously.  

Our first look into one of the many outlets of idealism towards a better, much more cleaner tomorrow is illustrated in Bill McKibbens 'Oil and Honey'. In it he details things like bee farming, silent calls of despair from mountain tops and tree removal, even the eventual uprising of an organization he founded (350.org), who is on the forefront of one the latest disasters facing not only this planet, but the United States. That disaster is the XL Keystone Pipeline, which, if approved, would go from the tar sands of Alberta, all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico. The reason being that not only would wildlife be affected all through the projected pipeline area but as well as human beings that are in the pipelines path. But XL isn't the only thing 350 is pushing its focus on, the organization has spread its wings all over the planet.  Bill didn't know the break-though his organization would make early in its life and through the 2000's and on. He seemed scared of what would become of him; being a writer, a good one at that, first, then an activist second, was his main idea, but because of how important people saw this organizations outlook on how government needed to re-regulate what had been broken not so long ago, McKibben was outright intimidated by himself. Not in it that made us think that he couldn't or wouldn't handle his circumstance, but that there was definitely an outlet needed. On top of visiting his peaceful places up in the mountains in the Northwest, he befriended a beekeeper from Vermont. Bill paid for this plot of land to loan to the beekeeper on an attempt to start something small, eventually a self regulating piece of property that this man was caretaker for. Bill came around every once in a while if stressing about getting all these people out a jail after protests in D.C. to stop XL from being signed in the White House to bigger picture ideas outside the country as well. The reason I feel that the whole idea of keeping to a small piece of land and starting a bee farm on it showed that this idea of communal living was a possibility to start a new wave of activism from spending so much on things wanted and going back to creating your own needs. The books title was just a commitment to deriving ideas from not only protesting big oil but even relating comparing a bee colony to capitalism itself. Bill used the efficiency of these bee's do what they did, day in day out, creating a whole organized community, taking care of their queen, and surviving long plights of cold through the Northern winters. What he was saying was that because the bees did their jobs so great and efficient, he saw people in big corporations were doing the same thing. Creating a product so efficient that it got in the way of the long term picture. Big Oil in comparison shows a never-ending (or so it seems), churning cycle of making as much as money as long as possible without any consequence. But what was awesome about the bee's after many generations of colonies adapting to their specified conditions, the beekeeper started seeing something quite interesting. The bee's started surviving over those intense winters. He started selling these specialized queens of these current generations for profit; this was the first time a northern beekeeper was able to see the outcome that had eventually brought itself to fruition. I find that it’s a pretty good prediction of what one way we, as humans, will be able to do for ourselves. To better our current situation by creating a self sustainable ideal of community. Less pollution, less waste, less worry for the future. As we discussed in our meeting, an idea must be all together had and acquired throughout all not just a few, like those 4-5 who started 350.org not knowing what the future would even hold for them. Again, only a small idea of current waste management, the idea is still there to understand that this enlightenment must be had, not by the political elite, those in extreme wealth too uninterested of the average person, but the general population. Because global warming is too touchy of an issue in politics that our leaders are obviously not interested in the rights and freedoms of those who they supposedly lead, we must all let it be heard, that the future of ourselves and our, hopeful, later generations have been in danger for far too long. McKibben showed us the comparisons and contrasts of that of bee's and oil corporations on top of knowing an idea bigger than just a few must acquire in themselves, but his role in activism obviously was given to those who were better equipped. His colleagues knew he did a beautiful job in starting a new environmental movement that has starting chugging along at slow, but steady, speed. His book was not a slap in the face but definitely a step toward the path that Naomi Klein in 'This Changes Everything', was wanting to push us, forcefully, down to show us that we can no longer just sit and twiddle our thumbs over what could have, and will be. 

Websites and information used for paper

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters

http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/agriculture.html#impactslivestock

http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/agriculture.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-greenhouse-hamburger/

http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/ffarms.asp

http://www.sustainabletable.org/266/air-quality

http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/nspills.asp

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/15/opinion/the-epa-backs-off-on-factory-farms.html?_r=0

Info on grass fed vs. corn/grain comes from basic knowledge from my family farm and grandparents.

Some knowledge on natural and organic products comes from working at Whole Foods Market.

I just want to say, my grandmother owns cattle and has ever since I can remember so I grew up learning about them and how they need grass. When I was little I thought every farm was like my grandparent’s farm. Someone has created essentially a small factory farm right up the road from my grandmother’s. It is in the middle of an old coalmining field and there are no trees or shelter for the cows. It is the saddest thing I have seen in a while. Also, my grandmother’s cattle got pink eye this past year, which is passed only through other cattle. They had no idea how the cows got it but it is likely through this factory farm of “angus” cows.

Environmental problems of mass farming

            Each year Americans eat roughly 270.7 pounds of meat, which is about 8.5 billion pounds of meat. But the EPA says more than 37 million tons. What most people don’t see when they are eating let’s say a quarter pounder is that to make in that one “meal” you are actually consuming fossil fuels. And the fact that cows let out methane gases when they digest their food is even less thought of.

            Because so many animals produce methane when they digest, they account for between 14 and 22 percent of the roughly 36 billion tons of carbon emission and other greenhouse gases produced each year, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The EPA states that an increase in Carbon Dioxide could increase productivity in livestock animals, such as cows, pigs, chickens, and so on. This increase could be looked at in a good way but there is a high likelihood that it would decrease the quality of the animals’ meat. This could possibly be due to the fact that cows and other animals would have to begin eating more foods, which would lead them to have to digest more and would produce more methane gases.

            Another thing that contributes to the production of more methane gases is the grain animals are feed while living in factory farms. There is a debate that has been going on for awhile between grass fed animals and grain fed but it all boils down to one thing: what can they digest easily? Basic research of cows, or just spending time on a farm, will show you that cows eat faster when they are eating grass compared to grain or corn. The corn that is fed to cows is very tough and usually not meant for even human consumption, unless it is ground in to corn meal and other types of corn products. But cows are not designed to eat this so why feed it to them? Because it is cheap and grass or hay may not be accessible in a place that is just simply concrete slabs.

            Grain is so cheap and so fattening for cows that they can be fully grown and killed in about 14 months, give or take depending on where they are. That’s a huge difference than the lifespan that they should be having, which is about 15 years depending on the type of cow. But a cow has to reach a certain weight for it to be ready for meat production, again depending on the type of cow. But this just means that people are finding other ways to make the cows meatier and it does tend to make the meat tougher than grass fed is. But that doesn’t mean there is more of a call for grass fed, generally speaking people don’t care. More and more Americans are eating their weight in meat each year.

            There had been a decline in heads of cattle over the years but that is possibly only due to the fact that people are using more of the cow now than they use to. But this decline is being fought with the growth of factory farms and the use of mass production to get every thing humans can out of things. It is not known exactly how many factory farms there truly are, some say 20,000 in the United States back in 2009 but that number grows every day, and it’s clearly noticeable. Throughout the world rainforests are being cut down to make more pasture land for even more factory farms. So that makes many wonder why cut down something that is good for the planet and replace it with some thing harmful?

            There’s truly no real answer to that question, at least for now. May be people are just too greedy. They can’t really be that hungry. And they clearly are not thirsty for water. Water and air pollutants are other issues in the factory farm debate. They create so much animal waste that it surpasses human waste. The EPA estimates that factory farms produce anywhere between 500 million and 1 billion tons of manure, that’s about three times as much as humans in the United States produce. This amount does change with different organizations. And all of that manure is going in to the waterways that the EPA is supposed to be protecting. 

            As of early 2014, environmentalists were still urging the EPA to set stricter regulations on factory farms. But right now factory farms are being allowed to keep the tanks, or even lagoons, full of manure next to the buildings and places that animals are kept and people are continuously working at. This is obviously not very healthy as the animals and people are breathing in the gases from the fumes, which any smart meat eating person would know is clearly going in the very meat you are about to consume. This is not just about the pollution to the animals’ and the people breathing in so close of proximity to the tanks, but it also affects any one who lives or works in a close range of these farms.

            There are so many different types of air pollutants from these farms that it is clear that the workers and people living near them will get extremely sick. Factory farm air pollutants are responsible for health issues such as asthma, bronchitis, irritation to eyes and skin from ammonia from the animal waste, and so on. Almost 70 percent of workers experience a form of bronchitis from working on the farm. There have been at least 12 documented cases of workers dying from the gases in certain parts of the farms, most likely the manure pits. And communities near the farms have experienced respiratory problems and even diarrhea in some cases.

            Not only do factory farms cause significant air pollution problems they also cause problems to the waterways.  These farms have to put their manure somewhere so they often put them in either tanks or in lagoons, which are open to the air and effect the ground water. These lagoons are often at least as big as a football field and can easily leak and spill over in to waterways. These spills and leaks have been attributed to killing 10 million fish in one accident and causing fish industries to slow down.

            It is not just the manure that can pollute the waters around the farms. Some farms are even allowing cow carcasses to sit around on the properties rotting and letting them leak in to the waterways, according to the NRDC. But animal waste can do more damage than just killing fish. Manure has been linked to creating dead zones in some of the oceans around the world, meaning that no life can even be created there. This is a scary thought now that more of these farms are being created throughout the world.            

            But the truly scary thought is that there are hardly any regulations to these types of farms and the majority of people don’t seem to be truly noticing the problems that go along with allowing these farms to exist. But there are some people who are trying to make the lives of these animals better and to make sure that they are putting something “good” in to their body. More people are requesting to eat grass fed beef, which is better for the animal but some people still don’t realize that even if that animal is fed grass it may not have a truly happy life. And people are so use to how cheap regular, grain fed beef is that they get upset when they see the price difference of the town. But there are no regulations for meat that are to be upheld by the USDA. The only thing that is truly regulated is organic foods, which cannot be labeled organic unless they have gone through a certification.

            Currently, factory farms do not have to tell communities where they exist and which water sources they should avoid. It is easy to spot some of these farms. Purdue is a major fact in this. Driving on any US highway in Kentucky and not spotting one of their large chicken homes is a feat in and of itself. But the communities around these places don’t think twice about them. They swim in the water near them and live across the street from them. People simply don’t think about what they have to live with. And they probably don’t think about that nice lake over there and what’s really in it. But the simple truth is the people should have to wonder about what is going on. They should be informed by these farms.

            There has to be more regulations for these farms and they must obtain permits before allowing manure to spill over and infect the community’s water. Most farms do not pay for the clean up of these spills either and do not pay for the hospital bills that people have to pay because they have bronchitis or something even worse. These farms simply aren’t taking responsibility for their actions and it is time to demand they do.

            Currently, factory farms can pop up where ever they can, depending on county land regulations. So locals and their governments are not informed and have no say in whether or not to allow a farm to be built in their community. And the locals are not told how they dispose of any thing. May be these locals don’t care and would prefer not to know but they should know so they can take precautions. The locals should be allowed to say when a farm is in a violation or not. But currently, there is no regulation for that.

            Of all the things a local community could do to make these farms safer for everyone is demand that they try to reduce their use of pathogens in a more environmental way. That is one thing that makes these farms so dangerous; they are in no way environmental. No matter how much they want to claim their meat is natural or organic. But there are better ways to making sure that you have good clean meat than allowing yourself to accept that someone like Purdue has become a natural company.

            Many people think it is enough to simply buy meat that is natural when in reality this is just another wording for a over crowded animal, in some cases. There are no regulations for the word natural. The animal can simply be fed grain with natural ingredients that are found in the natural world. But this doesn’t mean the feed was made for that specific animal or that it should eat it. So these farms can use these grains and still call their product natural. This is not really a very ethical way of thinking on their part and it is honestly sad to have to believe this.

            America is a label looking country. We love to read them no matter what they say, even if we can’t understand half of the ingredients. But we don’t read the ingredients on meat because we can’t be sure what those animals are being fed. That’s why your best bet, if you are very cautious of what you eat, is to go to a farmers market and meet with the farmers who sell meat. They usually can tell you all about their practices, right down to how they kill the animals. Plus, it’s nice to have a friendly face behind your meals. There is a very obvious taste difference in a burger made from grass fed beef and grain fed beef, as stated before. But what is really the difference between some grass fed beef and organic grass fed beef. Well one has gone through a certification process and paid a lot of money when they other has not yet, depending on where you are getting your meat of course. Generally speaking these cows have had good lives, if you have researched the company they are coming from well enough, and you can feel a little more environmentally ethical while eating their burgers.

            But there still aren’t enough regulations on why these farms are being allowed to operate the way they do. Perhaps it’s because America is a place that wants things and for very cheap and doesn’t care if it is going to harm them in the long run. But hopefully one day more people will demand that the EPA have regulations be set in place for these farms so that they Earth isn’t harmed more because of them.

Right Livelihood

A note from Bill McKibben, Right Livelihood Award winner and former chairman of the board:

Dear friends,

My wife Sue and I are in Sweden this week—the Swedish Parliament is honoring me (which really means all of you) with the Right Livelihood Award, the so-called “alternative Nobel Prize.” We’re in good company—the other honorees are veteran human rights activists from Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and some guy named Snowden.

The trip comes at the end of a remarkable autumn, which has given me much to think about. The great People’s Climate March in New York happened 25 years to the day after the publication of The End of Nature, the book I wrote when I was 28 years old, and the first book for a general audience about climate change. That sea of people—and the pictures flooding in from other marches around the world—made me feel as hopeful about our prospects as any time in that quarter-century.
We’ve helped build a movement, that’s the key thing. And it’s beginning to make a dent—by the time that day was over (and remember that it ended with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund announcing their divestment from fossil fuels) I was letting myself think that we’d seen the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel industry.

Which doesn’t mean we’re guaranteed a victory, of course.  Unless that end to coal and oil and gas comes swiftly, the damage from global warming will overwhelm us. Winning too slowly is the same as losing, so we have a crucial series of fights ahead: divestment, fracking, Keystone, and many others that we don’t yet know about.

That means we need to be at our fighting best, which in turn explains why I’m stepping down as chair of the board at350.org to become what we’re calling a “Senior Advisor.”  If this sounds dramatic, it’s not. I will stay on as an active member of the board, and 90% of my daily work will stay the same, since it’s always involved the external work of campaigning, not the internal work of budgets and flow charts. I’m not standing down from that work, or stepping back, or walking away. Just the opposite.

But no one should run a board forever, and so I think it’s time someone else should be engaged in that particular task, leaving me more energy and opportunity for figuring out strategies and organizing campaigns. And also more time and energy for writing, which is how I got into all of this in the first place.
Anyway, that writing and strategizing will probably go better if I’m home once in a while. The constant travel of the last 7 years has helped a little, I hope, to build this movement, but I’m ready for a bit more order in my life. I’ll still be there when the time comes to go to jail, or to march in the streets, or to celebrate the next big win on divestment. But I’d like to see more of my wife.

I’m proud of the way we’ve grown as an organization, big enough to be running successful campaigns all over the world, big enough to be helping spearhead the People’s Climate March or playing our part in battling pipelines, mines, and wells from Alberta to Australia -- and big enough to be building the climate solutions and political will necessary to take on the power and money of the fossil fuel industry.
That size and complexity means we need a board chair who is as good at dealing with organizational budgets as carbon budgets. KC Golden will be taking over on an interim basis—he’s a remarkable organizer from Seattle, and his big-picture thinking on what we really need to do to win this fight has been a guiding light for the climate movement for years.

And 350.org is blessed with an amazing staff, including the crew of then-young people with whom I launched the group back in 2007. They are less young now, and they’ve turned into some very talented organizers.. Over the years, they’ve expanded our team to include some of the wisest and most passionate climate activists in the world. Our goal, always, has been to build campaigns that volunteers around the planet can make their own, and that’s what we’ll keep doing.

In truth, it’s been the great joy of my working life to be a volunteer here at 350.org, just like all of you. I’m looking forward to the next 25 years—the quarter century that will decide whether we make progress enough to preserve our civilizations. Together we’ve built a movement; now, together, we’ll deploy it to confront the greatest crisis we’ve ever faced. 2014 will be the hottest year in the planet’s history; that means we have to make 2015 the politically hottest season the fossil fuel industry has ever come up against, and 2016 after that, and….

We have found our will to fight, and that gives us a fighting chance to win.  I’m happy to be here in Stockholm accepting this prize on our behalf, but for me it will be the biggest honor of all simply to be shoulder to shoulder with you as we go into battle.

Bill McKibben

P.S. Today is "Giving Tuesday", which is a charitable rebuttal to the madness and materialism of "Black Friday". I just donated the money from the Right Livelihood award to 350. If you feel motivated to join me and chip in a few bucks, click here: act.350.org/donate/giving_tuesday/. And while money's important, it's not as important as your skills and talents. Let us know the ways you can help build this movement by clicking here.

Solar & wind starting to win?

For the solar and wind industries in the United States, it has been a long-held dream: to produce energy at a cost equal to conventional sources like coal and natural gas.

 

That day appears to be dawning.

 

The cost of providing electricity from wind and solar power plants has plummeted over the last five years, so much so that in some markets renewable generation is now cheaper than coal or natural gas...

 

(continues)

Naomi Klein's "This Changes Everything"

“Every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be habitable.” Thus spoke President Kennedy in a 1961 address to the United Nations. The threat he warned of was not climate chaos — barely a blip on anybody’s radar at the time — but the hydrogen bomb. The nuclear threat had a volatile urgency and visual clarity that the sprawling, hydra-headed menace of today’s climate calamity cannot match. How can we rouse citizens and governments to act for concerted change? Will it take, as Naomi Klein insists, nothing less than a Marshall Plan for Earth?

“This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate” is a book of such ambition and consequence that it is almost unreviewable. Klein’s fans will recognize her method from her prior books, “No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies” (1999) and “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism” (2007), which, with her latest, form an antiglobalization trilogy. Her strategy is to take a scourge — brand-­driven hyperconsumption, corporate exploitation of disaster-struck communities, or “the fiction of perpetual growth on a finite planet” — trace its origins, then chart a course of liberation. In each book she arrives at some semihopeful place, where activists are reaffirming embattled civic values.

To call “This Changes Everything” environmental is to limit Klein’s considerable agenda. “There is still time to avoid catastrophic warming,” she contends, “but not within the rules of capitalism as they are currently constructed. Which is surely the best argument there has ever been for changing those rules.” On the green left, many share Klein’s sentiments. George Monbiot, a columnist for The Guardian, recently lamented that even though “the claims of market fundamentalism have been disproven as dramatically as those of state communism, somehow this zombie ideology staggers on.” Klein, Monbiot and Bill McKibben all insist that we cannot avert the ecological disaster that confronts us without loosening the grip of that superannuated zombie ideology.

That philosophy — ­neoliberalism — promotes a high-consumption, ­carbon-hungry system. Neoliberalism has encouraged mega-mergers, trade agreements hostile to environmental and labor regulations, and global hypermobility, enabling a corporation like Exxon to make, as McKibben has noted, “more money last year than any company in the history of money.” Their outsize power mangles the democratic process. Yet the carbon giants continue to reap $600 billion in annual subsidies from public coffers, not to speak of a greater subsidy: the right, in Klein’s words, to treat the atmosphere as a “waste dump.”

So much for the invisible hand. As the science fiction writer Kim Stanley Robinson observed, when it comes to the environment, the invisible hand never picks up the check.

Klein diagnoses impressively what hasn’t worked. No more claptrap about fracked gas as a bridge to renewables. Enough already of the international summit meetings that produce sirocco-quality hot air, and nonbinding agreements that bind us all to more emissions. Klein dismantles the boondoggle that is cap and trade. She skewers grandiose command-and-control schemes to re-engineer the planet’s climate. No point, when a hubristic mind-set has gotten us into this mess, to pile on further hubris. She reserves a special scorn for the partnerships between Big Green organizations and Immense Carbon, peddled as win-win for everyone, but which haven’t slowed emissions. Such partnerships remind us that when the lamb and the lion lie down together, only one of them gets eaten. (continues at nyt Bk Rev)

Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story

Continue reading the main stor

How to grow green energy along with endowments

Maybe this is the pitch MTSU President McPhee needs to hear, to be persuaded to sign the (college & university) Presidents' Climate Commitment pledge.

How about if colleges and universities could grow, rather than subtract, from their endowment money by making their campuses more environmentally friendly? 

Mark Orlowski is founder and executive director of the Sustainable Endowments Institute. He has an online system to help schools track ways that they can get financial returns, not just through stock and bond markets, but through energy efficiency.

His project, the Billion Dollar Green Challenge, and online platform (GRITS) help universities take their operating cash or endowment, upgrade the energy efficiency of campus buildings, and get a bigger return in savings than the stock market would earn them.

The Green Revolving Investment Tracking System (GRITS 1.0) is designed to manage every aspect of an institution's green revolving fund (GRF), including aggregate and project-specific financial, energy, and carbon data. It also helps track and manage projects, as well as reports on environmental benefits and financial return.

How to grow green energy along with endowments | Marketplace.org

Judging Robin Attfield's book by its cover

I've been postponing a final decision on which of innumerable possible texts would most salubriously complement the two I'd already selected for our impending Fall course on environmental ethics and sustainability.

I'd already picked Bill McKibben's Oil and Honey because it looks back at the recent history of environmental activism and forward to the more locally-and-globally sustainable patterns of living such activism was always supposed to enable.

And I'd picked Ed Wilson's The Creation because we can't reasonably hope to sustain life in a climate of polarized hostility over matters extraneous to our shared interest in survival. Environmental sustainability must transcend ideology and religion (and irreligion). 

So yesterday I finally settled on Robin Attfield's freshly-revised and updated text. There's plenty here about sustainability and our responsibility to the future of life. There's defense of "biocentric consequentialism." There's an attempt to "foster the kind of campaigning" on behalf of the environment that moves us beyond the academic ivory tower and into the streets with McKibben and friends. There's a generous and helpful bibliography, including the web. There's "music for environmental ethicists." And there's the transatlantic perspective provided by Attfield's residence at Cardiff University.

But if I'm being entirely honest, one compelling reason for my selection of this text is the walkers on the cover.  That's the picture of sustainability.

Sustainable transport

TED speakers imagine a future of transport that's faster, cleaner, and just plain cooler: listen...

One of the talks on this theme is the NYC transport commissioner's account of how she made her city safe for pedaling. If they can do it there, we can do it anywhere.

More on sustainability here.

(Note to my school administration: why don't we make a deal with Nissan, up the road, for a faculty-available fleet of Leafs and a place on campus to charge them?)

1 in 100

That's how many doctors and climate experts will advise you to "wait and see." But they don't have a waiting list.

A 'Good' Anthropocene?

Branding matters, say sustainability advocates.

['Anthropocene'] brings the Human and the Natural together into a single temporal and spatial unit: the planet as defined by human activity (and interactivity with it). It is, in this sense, like “globalization” but larger, with ecology now woven into this global frame. For environmental humanists (among others) it lends the credibility of science (geology!). For earth scientists, it expands their purview to include the human. These are all clear gains and make the term worth supporting and working with. Any effort to bridge the “two cultures” divide in a way that recognizes both human agency and material reality is a good thing...

Exploring Academia's Role in Charting Paths to a 'Good' Anthropocene - NYTimes.com

Cosmos on the climate crisis

We might, unfortunately, be one of those "civilizations that self-destruct," in Tyson's words. Here's Tyson's big statement about it: 

TYSON: In one respect, we're ahead of the people of ancient Mesopotamia. Unlike them, we understand what's happening to our world. For example, we're pumping greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, at a rate not seen on Earth for a million years. And there's scientific consensus that we're destabilizing our climate. Yet, our civilization seems to be in the grip of denial, a kind of paralysis. There's a disconnect between what we know, and what we do...

"Cosmos" Explains How Global Warming Threatens Civilization as We Know It | Mother Jones

Environmental Ethics and Sustainability

Coming to MTSU, Fall 2014-

Beyond Activism: Environmental Ethics and Sustainability

(PHIL 3340-001, Environmental Ethics MW 02:20 – 03:45 JUB 202)

The modern environmental movement has been with us in one form or another at least since the first Earth Day in 1970, if not longer. (Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, 1962, is another significant modern marker.) It has achieved undoubted success in elevating the awareness of many to our profound obligation (in Carl Sagan's memorable words) to "preserve and protect the Pale Blue Dot, the only home we've ever known." 

And yet, many "friends of the Earth" find themselves deeply frustrated by encounters in the wider culture with apathy, indifference, ignorance, misinformation, and hostility concerning environmental issues, and dire reports like that of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):

Climate change is already having sweeping effects on every continent and throughout the world’s oceans, and the problem is likely to grow substantially worse unless greenhouse emissions are brought under control... ice caps are melting, sea ice in the Arctic is collapsing, water supplies are coming under stress, heat waves and heavy rains are intensifying, coral reefs are dying, and fish and many other creatures are migrating toward the poles or in some cases going extinct... 

In this course, we'll ask what it may take to move the conversation beyond passionate but still-relatively-marginal activism, towards a more widely shared understanding that everyone has a vital stake in fashioning truly sustainable ways of living on Earth.

One answer: work to enlist community leaders and campus power-brokers, including university presidents, as allies in the public battle for hearts and minds. We'll look for practical ways to "think globally and act locally" on our own campus, and beyond. 

Required texts:

• Bill McKibben, Oil and Honey: The Education of an Unlikely Activist - "Sometime in the course of the past decade I figured out that I needed to do more than write—if this fight was about power, then we who wanted change had to assemble some. Environmentalists clearly weren't going to outspend the fossil fuel industry, so we'd need to find other currencies: the currencies of movement. Instead of money, passion; instead of money, numbers; instead of money, creativity... But if you've built a movement, you've eventually got to put it to work. And now 'eventually' had come. Education needed to yield to action..."
• E.O. Wilson, The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth - "Forget about life's origins, Wilson suggests, and focus on the fact that while nature achieves "sustainability through complexity," human activities are driving myriad species into extinction, thus depleting the biosphere and jeopardizing civilization. Wilson deplores the use of religious belief (God will take care of it) as an impediment to conservation..."
• Environmental Ethics: An Overview for the Twenty-First Century [Paperback] Robin Attfield 978-0745652535 ...advocating biocentric consequentialism among theories of normative ethics and defending objectivism in meta-ethics. The possibilities of ethical consumerism and investment are discussed, and the nature and basis of responsibilities for future generations in such areas as sustainable development are given detailed consideration. Attfield adopts an inclusive, cosmopolitan perspective in discussions of global ethics and citizenship, and illustrates his argument with a discussion of global warming, mitigation, adaptation and global justice. The revised edition features a new chapter on climate change, new treatments of animal issues, ecofeminism, environmental aesthetics, invasion biology and virtue ethics, and new applications of the precautionary principle to fisheries, genetic engineering and synthetic biology. The glossary and bibliography have been updated to assist understanding of these themes. The text uses a range of devices to aid understanding, such as summaries of key issues, and guides to further reading and relevant websites. It has been written particularly with a view to the needs of students taking courses in environmental ethics... $25.19

Possible additional texts:

• Elizabeth Kolbert, The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History - If extinction is a morbid topic, mass extinction is, well, massively so. It's also a fascinating one. In the pages that follow, I try to convey both sides: the excitement of what's being learned as well as the horror of it. My hope is that readers of this book will come away with an appreciation of the truly extraordinary moment in which we live."

• John Ehrenfield, Flourishing: A Frank Conversation about Sustainability - "Present-day efforts at sustainability, and indeed society's foundational values themselves, have been corrupted and subverted by utilitarian values that turn them into a marketing pitch. In drifting toward unsustainability we have lost our vision... 'Sustainability still has not entered our consciousness, in spite of the torrent of its use and that of its distant cousin,green'..."

• Worldwatch Institute, State of the World 2014: Governing for Sustainability - "Citizens expect their governments to lead on sustainability. But from largely disappointing international conferences like Rio II to the U.S.’s failure to pass meaningful climate legislation, governments’ progress has been lackluster. That’s not to say leadership is absent; it just often comes from the bottom up rather than the top down. Action—on climate, species loss, inequity, and other sustainability crises—is being driven by local, people’s, women’s, and grassroots movements around the world, often in opposition to the agendas pursued by governments and big corporations..." 

• Carl Herndl, Sustainability: A Reader for Writers - "focuses on the timely and vital subject of sustainability, examining the latest research on economics, society, resource planning, and the environment. It takes on key issues including climate change; food, water, and soil; energy and resource management; and trash. The articles embody a range of experiences, ideas, and strategies-from scientific research and engaging questions to poetic reflection and powerful arguments."

• Ecological Ethics [Paperback] Patrick Curry 978-0745651262 ...He discusses light green or anthropocentric ethics with the examples of stewardship, lifeboat ethics, and social ecology; the mid-green or intermediate ethics of animal liberation/rights; and dark or deep green ecocentric ethics. Particular attention is given to the Land Ethic, the Gaia Hypothesis and Deep Ecology and its offshoots: Deep Green Theory, Left Biocentrism and the Earth Manifesto. Ecofeminism is also considered and attention is paid to the close relationship between ecocentrism and virtue ethics. Other chapters discuss green ethics as post-secular, moral pluralism and pragmatism, green citizenship, and human population in the light of ecological ethics. In this new edition, all these have been updated and joined by discussions of climate change, sustainable economies, education, and food from an ecocentric perspective.

  This comprehensive and wide-ranging textbook offers a radical but critical introduction to the subject which puts ecocentrism and the critique of anthropocentrism back at the top of the ethical, intellectual and political agenda. It will be of great interest to students and activists, and to a wider public... $23.38 
• Environmental Ethics: An Overview for the Twenty-First Century [Paperback] Robin Attfield 978-0745652535 ...advocating biocentric consequentialism among theories of normative ethics and defending objectivism in meta-ethics. The possibilities of ethical consumerism and investment are discussed, and the nature and basis of responsibilities for future generations in such areas as sustainable development are given detailed consideration. Attfield adopts an inclusive, cosmopolitan perspective in discussions of global ethics and citizenship, and illustrates his argument with a discussion of global warming, mitigation, adaptation and global justice. The revised edition features a new chapter on climate change, new treatments of animal issues, ecofeminism, environmental aesthetics, invasion biology and virtue ethics, and new applications of the precautionary principle to fisheries, genetic engineering and synthetic biology. The glossary and bibliography have been updated to assist understanding of these themes. The text uses a range of devices to aid understanding, such as summaries of key issues, and guides to further reading and relevant websites. It has been written particularly with a view to the needs of students taking courses in environmental ethics... $25.19

• Ecotopia Emerging by Ernest Callenbach (1981) This prequel to Callenbach's classic Ecotopia is a multi-stranded novel that dramatizes the rise and triumph of a powerful American movement to preserve the earth as a safe, sustainable environment. The story springs from harsh realities: Toxic contamination of air, water, and food has become intolerable. Nuclear meltdowns threaten. Military spending burdens the economy. Politicians squabble over outdated agendas... 978-0960432035 

• Future Primitive: The New Ecotopias (1997) by Kim Stanley Robinson (Editor) Ernest Callenbach's classic novel Ecotopia sparked a movement that is growing rapidly around the world. Ecotopians embrace high technology as a a tool for preserving and living gently within the natural environment of Planet Earth... Kim Stanley Robinson has gathered here in this volume bright tales... 978-0312863500

• The Bridge atbther Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability by James Gustave Speth 0300151152 How serious are the threats to our environment? Here is one measure of the problem: if we continue to do exactly what we are doing, with no growth in the human population or the world economy, the world in the latter part of this century will be unfit to live in. Of course human activities are not holding at current levels—they are accelerating, dramatically—and so, too, is the pace of climate disruption, biotic impoverishment, and toxification. In this book Gus Speth, author of Red Sky at Morning and a widely respected environmentalist, begins with the observation that the environmental community has grown in strength and sophistication, but the environment has continued to decline, to the point that we are now at the edge of catastrophe.
  
  
  Speth contends that this situation is a severe indictment of the economic and political system we call modern capitalism. Our vital task is now to change the operating instructions for today’s destructive world economy before it is too late. The book is about how to do that.                                                                                                                                                            For more info, contact Dr. Phil Oliver - phil.oliver@mtsu.edu.

IPCC's new report

Here comes trouble.

Climate change is already having sweeping effects on every continent and throughout the world’s oceans, scientists reported on Monday, and they warned that the problem was likely to grow substantially worse unless greenhouse emissions are brought under control.

The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that periodically summarizes climate science, concluded that ice caps are melting, sea ice in the Arctic is collapsing, water supplies are coming under stress, heat waves and heavy rains are intensifying, coral reefs are dying, and fish and many other creatures are migrating toward the poles or in some cases going extinct... (continues)

Panel’s Warning on Climate Risk: Worst Is Yet to Come - NYTimes.com