Wednesday, August 29, 2018

Big Environmental Rollbacks Are Pending. Here’s How You Can Weigh In.

"Voices must be heard," indeed!
==
It’s one of the most consequential environmental rollbacks proposed by the Drumpf administration: an overhaul of fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks that would significantly weaken one of former President Barack Obama’s signature policies to combat global warming.

Now, that proposed rollback is going to the American public — that could mean you, dear reader — for a period of public comment.

But do public comments make a difference? And how exactly do you get involved?

One former official with broad experience of the rule-making process, Margo T. Oge, who led the transportation and air quality office at the Environmental Protection Agency, said that hearings can leave a lasting impression on officials. That’s because they give the public a chance to interact with representatives from industry and other groups, like environmental organizations.

Ms. Oge recalled a public hearing that included the mother of a child with severe asthma sitting next to an oil executive. The proposal in question was to reduce sulfur in diesel oil, a measure designed to prevent respiratory and other illnesses, especially asthma in children.

The oil executive spoke first, and complained about the costs of meeting the standards.

Then the mother stepped up to speak. “She recounted how many times a year the child ended up at the hospital with asthma attacks, and was unable to play outdoors when air pollution was high,” Ms. Oge said. “You could see how uncomfortable the executive became.”

The government is legally required to respond to what it hears from the public — if not to individual comments, then to the main issues raised in them.

David Friedman, a former acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, pointed out that if the Drumpf administration’s rollback is challenged in court, as expected, public comments — both for and against — will most likely become evidence in the case.

“If the courts determine that regulators didn’t take public comments into proper account,” Mr. Friedman said, “they could overturn the rule as arbitrary and capricious.”

There are two ways to make your voice heard. You can travel in person to a daylong public hearing in late September at one of three locations. The hearings start at 10 a.m. local time and continue until 5 p.m. or until everyone has had a chance to speak.


Sept. 24 at The Grand, 1401 Fulton St. in Fresno, Calif.


Sept. 25 at The Dearborn Inn, 20301 Oakwood Blvd. in Dearborn, Mich.


Sept. 26 at the DoubleTree, 1 Bigelow Square in Pittsburgh

If you want to speak at these meetings, remember to register at least 10 days in advance by writing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s point person for the meetings, Kil-Jae Hong, at kil-jae.hong@dot.gov. There’ll be a lot of speakers, so plan to limit your comments to about five minutes.

Alternatively, you can register your opinion by submitting a written comment. If you plan to do so, make sure you meet the Oct. 23 deadline. (For more information, you can revisit our extensive coverage of the emissions rules rollback.)

“It’s one of the hallmarks of our democracy that when we make regulations, we hear from the American people,” Mr. Friedman said. “It’s enshrined in law that public voices must be heard.”

(continues, nyt)

Monday, August 27, 2018

Quiz Aug29

LISTEN: Ellis 1-2

Write your answers down on a sheet of paper and bring it with you to class Wednesday. Claim a base for each correct answer (and a run on the scorecard for every four bases, up to 5 runs per class). Also claim a base for each posted alternate quiz question, discussion question, response to a discussion question, other comment, or relevant link, and claim a RUN (4 bases)  for posting a weekly 250+ word essay on the relevant topic of your choice. Keep track of everything you post in a dated personal log that will be collected later. 

Write your answers down on a sheet of paper and bring it with you to class.

1. (preface) What's the author's goal?

2. When did the term "anthropocene" first appear in print? 2

3. What is "the basis for marking new intervals of geologic time" (and thus the rationale for dubbing our time the anthropocene, the "age of humans")? 3

4. What was Archbishop Ussher's errant calculation? 5

5. How did Darwin birth a new origin story, and what did it imply about life? 9

6. When did homo sapiens appear, on the cosmic calendar? 11

7. What's the IPCC? 13

8. Who wrote The End of Nature? 14

9. Who was the first scientist to propose that the Earth's functioning as a system was transformed by the emergence of the biosphere? 18

10. What is the Gaia Hypothesis? 18

11. What changed everything? 21

12. What did Charles Keeling publish in 1960? 25

13. Who was Rachel Carson, and what did she document? 29
==
And here's a bonus quiz on the scorecard game, etc.

1. Name two of the ways you can earn a base in our class. (See "course requirements" & other info in the sidebar & on the syllabus)

2. How many bases must you earn, for each run you claim on the daily scorecard?

3. How do you earn your first base in each class?

4. Can you earn bases from the daily quiz if you're not present?

5. How can you earn bases on days when you're not present?

6. What should you write in your daily personal log?

7. Suppose you came to class one day, turned on the computer/projector and opened the CoPhi site, had 3 correct answers on the daily quiz, and had posted a comment, a discussion question,  and an alternate quiz question before class. How many runs would you claim in your personal log and on the scorecard that day?

8. How many bases do you get for posting a short, relevant weekly essay of at least 250 words?


9. What are Dr. Oliver's office hours? Where is his office? What is his email address?


Discussion Questions:


  • Do you care about "a better future for the age of humans"? Why or why not?
  • Is it accurate to interpret the legacy of Copernicus and Darwin as our demotion to "just another animal on just another planet..."? 1
  • Does an Age of Humans necessarily mean the end of nature? 
  • Is the Anthropocene a "2d Copernican revolution"? WouAdd ld that be a good thing?
  • Do you accept science's "origin story" as the best we have? 6   Is it compatible with others? 
  • COMMENT: What do you think of Stewart Brand's statement that "humans are gods and have to get good at it"?
  • "Biology takes her time from geology." 9  What does that mean? 
  • "What does nature even mean in an age of humans"? 15
  • Should we take the Gaia Hypothesis literally? Or is it a metaphor? For what?
  • (Add YOUR discussion questions...)

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Introductions

Let's introduce ourselves, Fall 2018 Environmental Ethics collaborators.

I invite you all to hit "comment" and reply with your own introductions, and (bearing in mind that this is an open site) your answers to two basic questions: Who are you? and Why are you here? (in this course, on this campus, in this state, on this planet...) 

And also, in keeping with this semester's course theme: what do you think you can do personally, and we can do collectively, to reverse or contain the long-term harm of anthropogenic climate change? Are you hopeful, despairing, fatalistic, indifferent, or whatever, with regard to the eventual prospects for life on Earth?

My philosophical hero William James said that's our one "really vital question." He also said that "shipwreck" is among our clear possibilities, though his pragmatic philosophy was an attempt to suggest alternatives. Our course is an attempt to decide whether the hopeful alternatives are still realistically possible. If you don't have a response to this question yet, I'll push you to come up with one by the time this semester ends. 

Our first class meeting on Monday will consist mainly of introductions and a heads-up that this is an unconventional course in ways I hope you'll find delightful, instructive, and rewarding. If you don't like to move, breathe, and converse in the open air on "nice" days, this may not be the course for you. But if you don't especially like the conventional lecture-style academic model in which I talk and you scribble silently in your seats, it may be just what you're looking for.

We'll not go over the syllabus or get bogged down in the nuts and bolts of course mechanics on Day #1, there's plenty of time for those details later.

Meanwhile, peruse the blogsite and syllabus (linked in the right margin) before next class and let me know what's unclear. And read your classmates' intros and post your own.

I'm Dr. Oliver. I live in Nashville with my wife, two dogs we "rescued" in May (Pita and Nell) and a cat (Zeus). Older Daughter lives in Illinois. Younger Daughter is a college sophomore.



My office is 300 James Union Building (JUB). My office hours are Monday and Wednesday 4-5, & by appointment. 

On nice days office hours may be outside, check my office door for details. I answer emails during office hours, but not at all on weekends. Surest way to get a quick response: come in or call during office hours.

I've been at MTSU since the early '00s, teaching philosophy courses on diverse subjects including atheism, childhood, happiness, the environment, the future, epistemology, metaphysics, Anglo-American philosophy, consciousness, evolution, and bioethics.

My Ph.D. is from Vanderbilt. I'm originally from Missouri, near St. Louis. I was indoctrinated as a Cardinals fan in early childhood, so I understand something about religious zeal. My undergrad degree is from the University of Missouri ("Mizzou") in Columbia MO. (I wish my schools weren't in the SEC-I don't approve of the inordinate emphasis on major collegiate sports culture or football brain injuries, as I'm sure to tell you again.)

My philosophical expertise, such as it is, centers on the American philosophical tradition of William James and John Dewey. A former student once asked me to respond to a questionnaire, if you're curious you can learn more about me there.

What you most need to know about me, though, is that I'm a peripatetic and will encourage you all to join me in that philosophical lifestyle as often as possible during discussion time. (If you're not sure what peripatetic means, scan the right sidebar or read the syllabus or ask me. Or look it up.)

I post my thoughts regularly to my blogs Up@dawn and Delight Springs, among others, and to Twitter (@osopher), and am continuing to experiment with podcasting as a classroom tool this semester. Follow me if you want to.

But of course, as Brian Cohen said, you don't have to follow anyone. (Extra credit if you get that reference... and real extra credit if you realize that my "extra credit" is usually rhetorical.) However, if a blog or podcast link turns up with the daily quiz (which will always be posted on this site no later than the night before class), you might find it helpful to read or listen.

Enough about me. Who are you? (Where are you from, where have you been, what do you like, who do you want to become,...?) Why are you here? (On Earth, in Tennessee, at MTSU, in philosophy class)? Hit "comments" below and post your introduction, then read your classmates'... and bear in mind that this is an open site. The world can read it. (The world's probably busy with other stuff, of course - Drumpf and Kardashians and cooking shows and other examples of what passes for "reality" these days.)

Monday, August 20, 2018

Searching for Language to Capture How Climate Change Has Altered Our World

A drowned world: It’s an ancient fear and a very old story. Noah and his biblical flood, a tale likely descended from the even older story of Utnapishtim in the “Epic of Gilgamesh,” but there is also Da Yu and the flood that supposedly inspired China’s imperial feats of hydraulic engineering, Brahma and Manu, and, perhaps oldest of all, the 10,000-year-old tales of certain indigenous peoples of Australia, who sing of homelands lost beneath the rising waves at the end of the last ice age. Most of these tales take the form of a warning and an elegy, and now Elizabeth Rush’s deeply felt “Rising” joins that long tradition.

This is a book about language, first and foremost, a literary approach to a real-world problem. So while facts and figures do find their way in, conveying how fast the waters will rise or how far the sea may ultimately intrude, they are not the main focus, unlike, say, in Cynthia Barnett’s illuminating and gorgeous “Rain: A Natural and Cultural History.” Instead, this book is interested in a new vocabulary — using words like “rampike” (a tree killed by saltwater intrusion) or the naturalist’s lingo of tupelo, catbrier and bull (rush, not animal). As Rush argues: “I believe that language can lessen the distance between humans and the world of which we are a part; I believe that it can foster interspecies intimacy and, as a result, care.”

Just as a wetland can adapt to rising sea levels through the process known as accretion — the slow buildup of organic material as the marsh lives and dies — so too does the accretion of detail here help make the case that the seas have already risen as a result of human-driven global warming, affecting Americans who confront this change on every coast with feelings of loss, fear and confusion. Even the maps have changed; in the most recent government surveys, Louisiana has shed the names of 31 bayous and other coastal features. Those bayous have slipped beneath the waves of living memory, along with some 1,900 square miles of land...

(review of RISING: Dispatches from the New American Shorecontinues)

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

"Anthropocene" film-trailer







TED Talks on the Anthropocene... (if you watch one, post a comment/review...)

Our Hubris Will Be Our End https://nyti.ms/2Mw7ScM

Andrew Revkin, Embracing the Anthropocene

Long Now (@longnow)
"We live now in a different world." Trailer for #Anthropocene, long-awaited film by past #LongNow speaker ⁦‪@EdwardBurtynsky‬⁩ & director #JenniferBaichwal completing their epic trilogy. ⁦‪@anthropocene‬⁩ debuts next month ⁦‪@TIFF_NET‬⁩ youtube.com/watch?v=44RYqg…

The New Yorker (@NewYorker)
How climate change contributed to this summer’s wildfires: nyer.cm/6XoWzkw pic.twitter.com/fsO6lOln9L
Andrew Revkin (@Revkin)
Transcript & links to come, but here's my #WITHpod chat with ⁦‪@chrislhayes‬⁩ on 30 years of reporting on the scariest facts about climate change that no one likes to focus on, on the #expandingbullseye, on our inconvenient minds...

And it's fun! Really. art19.com/shows/why-is-t… pic.twitter.com/oCLMCzioZG
Andrew Revkin (@Revkin)
"Jim Hansen is pro nuclear, Bill McKibben is pro renewables... They found a way to tie themselves to the same fences at the White House and not argue with each other about their visions of the solution. But most of the community around this issue hasn't figured that out yet."
Long Now (@longnow)
Kim Stanley Robinson talks #geoengineering: "We need to choose to put science, technology, engineering and medicine to good human and biosphere work" huffingtonpost.com/entry/climate-…
Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders)
What Trump and his friends in the fossil fuel industry are doing is criminal. pic.twitter.com/9asCd1HjPl
A disturbing video from the Weather Channel - "Exodus: Never the Same Year" (Thanks, Don):

https://weather.com/science/environment/video/exodus-never-the-same-every-year


Are we like dinosaurs, gently warming?

Nigel Warburton (@philosophybites)
Lessons about the nature of mass extinction. Are we like dinosaurs in a pan that is being gently warmed? ⁦‪@bbosker‬⁩ ⁦‪@TheAtlantic‬⁩ theatlantic.com/magazine/archi…


1. YEAH, COULD WE?
 


Here’s the reality: There is an overwhelming consensus among climate scientists that our climate is changing and humans are to blame. When we burn fossil fuels, we pump heat-trapping gases into our atmosphere that cause temperatures to rise. And just like the health of our families, climate change should never be a partisan issue! Get the facts in our free Climate 101 e-book.

2. NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON HAS QUESTIONS READY TO ASK ALIEN LIFE
 


As climate scientist Dr. Michael E. Mann told Climate Reality in an interview last year, “There is no longer a worthy debate to be had about whether we have a problem. There is a worthy debate to be had about how we go about solving that problem.”

3. HE’S NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO WONDERS WHAT EXTRATERRESTRIALS WOULD THINK
 

Monday, August 13, 2018

Frankenstein for our times

Five Books (@five_books)
"Frankenstein is really a novel for the Anthropocene—the idea that humans have fundamentally changed the environment, and that we are now having to live with the consequences."

⁦‪@Prof_Nick_Groom‬⁩ explores five unusual Gothic works fivebooks.com/best-books/the…

"A Community Cracked Open by Fracking"

Any ideology operating under the seismic pressures of the actual world will reveal a seam of inconsistency, a line of vulnerability running through it like a stress fracture. Free-market conservatives, for instance, have tried to square their support for big business with their professed fondness for little communities, sometimes by suggesting that the interests of both are one and the same.

Eliza Griswold will tell you what happens when they’re not. Scratch that: Eliza Griswold will show you what happens when they’re not. Her sensitive and judicious new book, “Amity and Prosperity: One Family and the Fracturing of America,” is neither an outraged sermon delivered from a populist soapbox nor a pinched, professorial lecture. Griswold, a journalist and a poet, paid close attention to a community in southwestern Pennsylvania over the course of seven years to convey its confounding experience with hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a process that injects water and chemicals deep into the ground in order to shake loose deposits of natural gas.

Considering the animus and hardship described in this book, the title sounds almost cruelly ironic, but it comes from the land itself. Amity and Prosperity are the names of two towns in Pennsylvania’s Washington County, where “the history of energy extraction is etched into Appalachian hollows.” The people there are no strangers to industry, including its boons and disasters. Coal, steel and now natural gas: To suggest that the county’s residents have just been bamboozled by greedy industry sounds to them like the bleating of condescending elites and, for a number of locals, simply untrue. Some families have suffered while others have thrived. What Griswold depicts is a community, like the earth, cracked open.

Griswold arrived on the scene in 2011, a little more than halfway through the decade of the gas rush, when technological advances made fracking cheaper — economically speaking, that is. The ecological costs have proved to be quite dear. (continues)

Erle C. Ellis (one of our authors) asks: What kind of planet do we want to live on?

Science Alone Won’t Save the Earth. People Have to Do That.
By Erle C. Ellis
Dr. Ellis studies the ecology of human landscapes.
This planet is in crisis. The safe limits within which human societies can be sustained, the earth’s “planetary boundaries,” are being exceeded, a path leading inevitably toward collapse. The experts have spoken. Only if humanity heeds the science, reverses course and lives within earth’s natural limits can disaster be avoided.

Or maybe you believe the opposite: that human ingenuity can continue to overcome those limits, that there is no need for environmental concern.

Both miss the point. In the age of humans, the Anthropocene, there is no safety in natural limits. Or in overcoming them. For those reasons, we should put the idea of limits off limits.

The question is not whether two degrees of warming is riskier than 1.5 degrees (of course it is), or whether we are using, as some claim, more than one earth’s worth of resources per year (of course not), or how many extinctions per year are sustainable without a collapse of human societies (why allow any at all?). The real question is how we better negotiate among ourselves, across all our many diverse peoples and cultures, so that we can navigate together toward the better futures we wish for, in our different ways... (nyt, continues)

Tuesday, August 7, 2018

The whole earth, from a San Francisco rooftop

Watch the Virtual Reality Recreation of the LSD Trip That Inspired the Whole Earth Catalog
In the spring of 1966, Stewart Brand did 100 micrograms of LSD and sat on top of a roof in San Francisco.
Perched there, he looked toward a curved horizon and imagined the spherical Earth and just how limited resources on our planet are. Out of that psychedelic drug-induced vision, he developed the Whole Earth theory. He campaigned for NASA to release satellite images of the Earth, and created the influential and generation-defining Whole Earth Catalog...
See the VR recreation (with Stewart Brand's narration) here

Friday, August 3, 2018

An antidote to climate despair

If you need an antidote to climate despair, this is *exactly* what you should read. Kudos to for writing words we all need to hear: When the habitability of the planet is on the line, there is always, always something worth fighting for.


Bill McKibben (@billmckibben)

Earth Day Network (@EarthDayNetwork)
Don't think you can do anything about climate change? Think again. Use our carbon footprint calculator to find out what kind of mark you're making -- then make steps to tread more lightly. earthday.org/take-action/fo…#ActOnClimate

Clock of the Long Now

Why did we build a clock deep in a mountain to tick for 10,000 years? This short and sweet video explains why: