Final Draft- Corporations and America

The purpose of a corporation is to provide profits for shareholders and stakeholders. The shareholder possesses a part of something, while the stakeholder has an interest, in the non-financial sense of the term, in something. Although a shareholder’s liability for the company’s actions is limited, the shareholder may still be liable for its own acts. A corporation is a legal person under the law; views of a corporation typically are of fictional person and moral person. While the corporations of America believe they are helping Americans with cutting cost on productions, they are really doing more damage by causing damages to everything they touch.

It is the moral responsibility of the firm’s supervisors to strike a suitable stability among the shareholders, employees, suppliers, customers, and the communities in which the firm operates interests in directing the activities of the firm. A corporation has six priorities when thinking about producing profits: consumers, employees, the environment, potential investments, global competition and their environment, and civic policy.

The beginning of the industrial age brought big corporations like U.S. Steel, General Electric, Sears, Roebuck and Co., and Bayer AG. Yet with any new entity came issues. In the landmark 1886 Supreme Court case Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific, a railroad company withheld a payment taxes in California, arguing that to treat the corporation differently from everyone else violated its constitutional rights. The question was raised of whether corporations were actual persons.

In reality a corporation is in the position of profits for self interest, no matter who is governing it. It’s all bad apples, not just a few. In popular belief many corporations would like to put a monopoly on any industry it’s got its hands on, no doubt. If it weren’t for the government maybe we probably have issues globally similar to the Enron scandal happening everywhere.

Currently, “companies have a lot more to lose today than even 10 years ago, simply because of the potential for being caught and exposed…”.¹ So in every right a corporation ought to act according to different aspects of corporate practice and governance, law and ethics involved in business. It goes without showing not everyone follows the law, there are plenty of recent corporate scandals in the USA and elsewhere the have led to the re-examination of standards for the governing of corporations.

Should a corporation be productive at all costs?

Analyzing this question for shareholders would be quite blunt, yes! Yet, for those activists who share their lives with being as environmentally conscientious would believe it’s against odds to commit to this. Not only are the environments of the world being contaminated by corporations but people and animals are as well.  The poor labor practices in developing countries, the embarrassing wages, and the ages of these workers all sacrifice their lives to manufacture goods for the exportation of these goods in unfair to many.

Natural resources are another grand issue with corporations; they want to take over everything. If it were up to a corporation they would allow the privatization of these publicly held businesses. Profit, profit, and profit in the eyes of corporations; this is all they visualize.

On page 61-62 of The Corporation, Bakan states a horrible tragedy that had happened to a woman and her three children while driving in her Chevrolet vehicle. The woman was involved in an accident and it deeply burned her and her children, and it was all due to the irresponsibility of General Motors (GM) and them wanting to save money. The family of four went to trial against GM, and “After a lengthy trial the jury found that GM had dangerously positioned the fuel tank to save costs”.² The family suffered deeply, all due to the “savings” that GM wanted to profit off of. This is the type of incident the world needs to prevent. An analysis of this story should not be overlooked.

Social Responsibility of Corporations

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) should be known for the community developmental projects that they are associated with in their areas. CSR in a corporation should never be compromised, although there are those leaders who set out to fail, organizations need to consider the interest of society and that is by taking responsibility for the influence of their activities on their consumers, employees, shareholders, and especially their stakeholders as a well as the environment in their area.

Although, we the people do not always have a great sense of what each other needs, scandals from corporation is a great damper on our society. From the top of a corporation to the consumers who buy and are pleased with products from that company, money to pay for the legal issues is never anticipated.

Low Prices Everyday

Wal-Mart promises “low prices everyday”, or so that is what a person would see when walking into a chain store and viewing their displays. People pay a hefty price for these everyday low prices, the gasoline has gone up, the truckers are on strike, the economy is not looking so good, and we are still in the market for buying goods. Corporations like Wal-Mart are ruining society as a whole, not only by its existence but its practices. Although their stocks are up and rise every so often, should we be on their “team”? Investing in blunt lies that we will see in our future economy.

Should we side with a “psychopath?”³

Bakan uses this descriptive word for a corporation. Ethically speaking, a business should know what is does and the executive should be able to explain the every move and why. In Bakan’s The Corporation, a corporation is described to have the tendencies of a psychopath, and that its main goal is to create profit. If this is correct, where the ethics for its employees? Should they as well work unethically? Perhaps do as the company they work for and produce profits for themselves? Many could imitate the business in which they work for and it’s a fact many have everywhere in this world of profit making greedy business people. Maybe employees solicit company information to competitors for profits and this leads to the globalization of other businesses.

Do we as an individual have the tendency to exploit others for profit? Or does a corporation have the ability to exploit its workers for profit? Overseas production does just this, exploitation. No matter if a profit increases a corporation does not have the right to exploit human beings.

Morale obligations

A business can flourish and become successful. Does it have to commit such crimes to communities and its citizens for it to grow? No, a commitment is made to society to provide for the people, it can go through with its promise and obligations. Jobs in what the economy needs at this moment, outsourcing is hurting main stream society a great deal. Corporations can help by keeping hopes alive by hiring without discrimination and serving people for the good.

A nation should be comfortable in its own companies and not feel betrayed. Should corporations see “Shareholders… that have disappeared from the corporations they owned”⁴, what sense would this make, if all monies have been placed in this one corporation for it to just be left desert. Would this help a community? Deserted Wal-Marts plagued the U.S., due to their much larger and produce department upgrade. A smart corporation would make use of this, not abandon it, leaving a community bear of what was once the talk of the town.

Did the corporations stand up to what they promised to the communities?

An abandoned Wal-Mart is useless as well as any building. Corporations ought to make profits of this. Keeping the moral of employees and exploring new territories maybe a new marketing tool for big corporations like Apple, Nokia, and Sony. New jobs is what many companies promise, yet they are out of the area once a new and up coming neighborhood is constructed. A commitment that let people down is what many corporations are know for, and they are finding new ways to make those lost profits.

What is Next?

Will outsourcing be the death of employment here in the U.S.? Although many U.S. corporations do begin their life’s here in this beautiful nation, somehow the word is out that profits are out there in other countries, the only inconvenience is the exporting back to the U.S. Hopefully, with this new election coming up, they will address this issue. Gawd only knows if the people of the U.S. will have plentiful of jobs, due to more power plants, factories, and the growth of more corporations in our communities.

Sources:

1.  Dale Neef. Managing Corporate Reputation and Risk: Developing a Strategic Approach to Corporate Integrity Using Knowledge Management. (Amsterdam, Boston Elsevier, 2003.)

2.  Joel Bakan. The Corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. (New York, Free Press, 2004.), 61-62.

3. Joel Bakan. The Corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. (New York, Free Press, 2004) pg. 15.

Research Final Draft 2: The Situation in ANWR

Since the discovery of oil, humans have industrialized at an explosive rate. It has allowed the creation of great cities and has been the downfall of many people. It has fueled wars, forged corporate alliances, created empires and destroyed those foolish enough to speculate in the venture. It may ultimately destroy civilization as we know it if something is not done. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR, for short, is a wildlife reserve in Alaska that contains billions of barrels of oil underneath its surface. While drilling in ANWR will not save the world from the potential economic meltdown caused by peak oil, it will buy us some time until we can figure out a real solution to this dilemma.

The first oil well was dug in 1859 by Colonel Drake on Watson’s Flats near Titusville, and the oil market didn’t start up until the latter part of 1860, when speculators in the area drilled other wells and increased production in an effort to make money. The first barrel of oil sold for around twenty dollars to an experimenter who was interested in the value from it. Thereafter, the price dropped from twenty dollars a barrel to $3.50 a barrel, and then do a dollar, and then fifty cents. As production increased, the price fell. The first wells that were drilled pumped oil at a rate of 10 barrels per day, but in 1861 some deposits were found that spouted oil from the ground at rates of 300 barrels to 2,000 barrels per day. This knocked the price down further to 25 cents a barrel, and finally to 20 cents.

At this point in time the market was immature, and the oil business disorganized. Lack of storage and production controls meant that a lot of the oil was wasted and ran off into the creek. However, in 1862 demand for oil increased to a point that the surplus was absorbed, and the price of oil slowly rose from 20 cents to $2.50, with production at 2.6 million barrels (“How the Price,” 1882).

Understanding this cycle of supply and demand of oil is a key to understanding why depending on it will lead us to destruction. Oil is a limited resource (Wood, 2009). In actuality, oil production runs along a bell curve. (Savinar) When a new well is drilled, the productivity of it increases until the reservoir is half depleted, and then it starts producing less. This concept is known as peak oil. (Savinar) As oil reservoirs run low, they will produce less. Less supply with the same level of demand will lead to higher prices.

The problem with peak oil is that as oil supply declines naturally, the demand for it will not. An increase of just 5% can lead to a high increase in the price of oil, as much as 300-400%. This is what happened to America the past few years. Prices dropped somewhat when Americans defaulted on loans, causing a recession. This recession caused less demand for oil (Savinar).

Oil is a form of energy. It is easy to harvest, store, and refine. It can be used to make products or provide power to the things we use everyday. It is not so much that we are reliant on oil as it is that we are reliant on energy. As technology becomes more and more a part of life, so too does our reliance on energy. Oil is simply abundant and versatile. Not only has its use pervaded the labor market, but the financial sector is indirectly tied in because finance supports labor. Loans are made on the premise that the economy will continue to increase its productivity, and so far, it is oil that fuels this productivity (Savinar).

Oil is found underneath the ground. Drill sites can be located either on land, or at sea. The first wells were dug at random by speculators called wildcats (“Oil: probing the,” 1974). These speculations generally ended up in bankruptcy, since drilling a well is expensive, Recent innovations in technology have made it possible to determine the exact locations of oil reservoirs, and the number of barrels they contain.

One such reservoir is the ANWR Coastal Plain, a 1.5 million acre area, although the area that would be affected would only be about 12,000 acres. It is estimated that there could be as much as 3.2 billion to 9.2 billion barrels of oil in the Coastal plain (“Oil exploration can,”). While that won’t save us, it will help ease the burden on the oil crisis that the world is facing today, at least for a little bit.

Drilling in Alaska is very safe, statistically speaking. While the state has had oil spills, such as the Exxon Mobil spill in Valdez, the Prudhoe Bay has not had a spill in over twenty years (“Oil exploration can,” ). That is a very impressive track record. Furthermore, only a small portion of ANWR will be developed for oil use. This means that a lot of it will remain untouched and unharmed. With the technology at hand today, it is conceivable that this can be done safely.

Oil is not renewable. It represents an energy savings over several billion years from a time when humans hadn’t discovered it and planned their day around the light and dark cycles, and their workload based on the power that could be mustered from many people acting in unison. In the two hundred years since humans have discovered oil, it is has taken them much farther than they could ever imagine, but this energy savings spending plan is quickly catching up in numerous ways, which will prove disastrous if something is not done.

As noted. Oil production follows a bell curve (Savinar, Matt). This means, for example, that a well that started in 1970 and reaches its peak of production in 2000 will produce just as much oil in 2030 as it did in 1970. Demand for oil, unfortunately, does not follow this same trend. This presents some very important issues that need to be addressed if the world is to survive the energy bubble.

Combusting oil releases carbon dioxide and other harmful chemicals into the atmosphere. It is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation accounted for 27% of Greenhouse gas emissions in 2003, and 24.8% of Greenhouse gas emissions in 1990. Greenhouse gas emissions from all other sectors increased 9.5% in the same frame of time (“Greenhouse gas emissions,” 2006) .

Oil is not the only form of fossil fuel that is burned in abundance. Another form is coal. In fact, over 50% of electricity generation is powered by coal, and coal accounts for 94% of greenhouse gas emissions from electricity production (DOT, 2009).

Nuclear Energy doesn’t produce greenhouse gas emissions, at least, not directly. Mining uranium uses fossil fuels because the vehicles that mine and transport the uranium still run off of fossil fuels (Savinar). However, using uranium as a source of power is clean and efficient. It is also very safe. No meltdowns have occurred in the United States, while a few have occurred in other countries, often to devastating effects. Chernobyl is one such example, where a few of the reactors had a blow out which devastated the surrounding area and contaminated an even larger area. The effects of Chernobyl can be seen even today (“Testimony report,” ).

While nuclear energy is safe, a big part of this safety comes with intricate care in its handling (Schrock, 1998) . Uranium is highly radioactive and has a very long half-life. Using uranium fuel creates a waste product that must be handled with extreme care because of its radioactive properties. This usually involves large concrete bunkers that must remain in place for an indeterminate amount of time as the radiation slowly dissipates based on its half life. Fortunately, there may be a better solution, and that is renewable energy.

Renewable Energy is energy that is harnessed through the earth’s natural environment either through wind, sun, geothermic, or tidal power. It is energy that, once the infrastructure is in place, is very cheap to maintain compared to fossil fuels, which must be mined. Solar panels, for instance, once erected, create no pollution or other byproducts (“Renewable energy defined,” 2009) .

This definition can be attributed to growing ethanol out of corn. Unfortunately, while renewable, it is not sustainable because corn still requires fertilizer created from fossil fuels to grow (“Renewable vs sustainable,” ). As such, it should be noted that the renewable in this article is being defined as renewable and sustainable.

Twenty German companies (Connoly, 2009), and a city in Sweden (Fry, 2009)., are just two notable notable examples of people utilizing this technology.

The German companies have formed a corporate alliance to for a massive solar power initiative in the Deserts of North Africa. If successful, Europe could be solar-powered within ten years. The project, called Desertec, is estimated to cost around 400 billion euros, or about 590 billion American dollars given the rates as of December 10, 2009 (“Currency calculator,” 2009) .

If Europe can be powered entirely by the sun, than an entire continent’s worth of current and projected pollution output for power usage is zero. With the momentum gathered after the initial investments into renewable energy, it could be possible to invest into more infrastructure that could power other continents, or bring renewable energy to other sectors of our environment. Power generation is only one aspect of energy.

With the suburb in Malmo, it is possible to design future cities in such a way to have little or no carbon footprint, which can go a long way considering that the world’s population is constantly expanding and that there are several countries who are still developing.

Transportation and electricity generation is still largely driven by fossil fuels. This means that to make the aluminum necessary for a windmill, fossil fuels must be burned through either generating power to the aluminum plant or transporting the materials necessary. Mining the components necessary also uses fossil fuels. (Savinar).

These problems are temporary, but are issues that need to be addressed. The most important issue will definitely be converting transportation to renewable energy sources. Simple batteries will not work, as they are still charged by coal and oil burning plants (Savinar). A better option would be solar panels on the car ((Woodyard) , or, if at a place of residence or business, solar panels could be built on top of the home or parking lot, and the car could be plugged in.

Solar energy, unfortunately, only works when the sun is out. Cloudy days, or nights, render the technology ineffective.

Wind plants can only work when the wind is blowing. For some areas, wind power is a great advantage because it is always windy. Wind power will not work in other areas due to lack of wind speeds year round.

Tidal energy is much the same way. There are hydroelectric dams that harness energy from rivers and the output can be controlled by allowing only a certain amount of water to flow through

The world is far too industrialized to go back to the way it was before oil was discovered, and yet, this valuable resource will not last forever. Since it is impossible to go back, the only solution is to push forward into a new era of energy, one that is renewable and clean. since this technology is not yet perfected, it is imperative that drilling for oil be carried out while it is still possible in addition to finding a means of not having to use any of it. Doing so is quite paradoxical, but the world has always worked in a paradox. Stagnation is failure. Bold, new endeavors will save the world from economic collapse.

Connoly, Kate. (2009, June 16). German blue chip firms throw weight behind north African solar initiative. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/16/solar-power-europe-africa

Currency calculator. (2009, December 10). Retrieved from http://www.x-rates.com/calculator.html

DOT. (2009). Executive summary. 2009 U.S.. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report, Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html

Fry, Carolyn. (2009). The City of the future. (48), Retrieved from www.theiet.org/engtechmag

Greenhouse gas emissions from the u.s. transportation section: 1990-2003. (2006, March). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/420r06003summary.htm

How the price of oil fluctuated for twenty years. (1882, November 23). The New York Times,

Oil exploration can be a boon to Alaskans and environment.. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=11&sid=64ec3f64-6a1f-4386-8fc5-aaf00c02bdf9%40sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=9510300158#db=aph&AN=9510300158

Oil: probing the last frontier. (1974, March 11). Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,943557,00.html

Renewable vs sustainable. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.divorceinfo.com/letthesunwork/challenge/renewablesustainable.htm

Renewable energy defined. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.treia.org/mc/page.do?sitePageId=49495

Savinar, Matt. (n.d.). Peak oil, matt savinar, life after the oil crash. Retrieved from www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

Schrock, J. (1998, November 23). Nuclear power: a clean, safe alternative. Retrieved from http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/BSSPapers98/schrock/schrock.html

Testimony report. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/chernob/read13.html

Woodyard, C. (n.d.). Automakers install solar panels on such cars as prius, Audi a8. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009-01-19-solar-panel-cars-automakers-prius_N.ht

Wood, C.C. (2009, October 27). Peak oil is a serious business contingency planning issue. Retrieved from http://kickingthegasoline.com/contingency-planning/peak-oil-is-a-serious-business-contingency-planning-issue/

Kelly Carr: Final Draft: Beef, It’s Whats for Dinner

“A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage.” (Presidential Campaign Slogans 2009) This was the 1928 Presidential campaign slogan for Herbert Hoover.  Currently a person who comes across this quote would think that it’s not that big of a feat to achieve this goal because we’re so desensitized with meat consumption.  Yes, Hoover might have been referring to financial security and the wellbeing of the economic environment, but it’s not hard to draw other conclusions from this statement.  It’s unheard of to have people going without meat daily throughout the world, especially in the United States. Not only is the world consuming more meat, but also we’re consuming more food altogether and using up much more natural resources which leads to many unnecessary harmful emissions being released into the atmosphere.  These harmful emissions are having damaging effects that may be irreversible.  Meat consumption is on the rise throughout the world and detrimental effects are being inflicted on the planet.

“Meat production is projected to double by 2020 due to increased incomes, population growth, and rising per capita global consumption of meat.” (Mooney 2006)  In 1961, the United States consumed 16,867,139 metric tons of meat.  By 2002, meat consumption had sky rocketed to 39,716,290 metric tons.  (Earth Trends 2007)  That is a difference of 22,849,151 metric tons in about 40 years.  Coming across such alarming results throws up a red flag for me.  What about our children?  In 40 more years, I’ll hopefully have grandchildren by then and I would be terrified to see the current standing of our environmental health and the effects it will have on future generations.  Technology is a main reason for such a growing appetite for meat.  Not only is it easier to raise these animals at an unnatural and unprecedented rate, but also our Earth cannot tolerate such harsh measures because of how unnatural it is.  “These trends will have major consequences on the global environment-affecting the quality of the atmosphere, water, and soil due to nutrient overloads; impacting marine fisheries both locally and globally through fish meal use; and threatening human health, as, for example, through excessive use of antibiotics.” (Mooney 2006).

Many people might argue that the world is facing global changes because of major crop production but these two factors go hand-in-hand.  Yes, corn crops produce a ton of carbon emissions, but so do the grains that we produce for our livestock.  It would be much more reasonable and economically rewarding to farm something that is more efficient, such as smaller animals.  Chickens and turkey farms don’t consume as much grain as the average cattle farm, so it would be a great idea to give the environment a break and once again, be reasonable.  “The link between grain and meat boils down to the following equation: it takes up to 8kg of animal feed to produce 1kg of beef.” (Bond 2008).  Not only are we having excess in agricultural crops for human consumption but also now we’re adding that to the surge in animal engineering.  It’s a never-ending cycle because we constantly are adding on to the mistakes we’re making.

Along with the tie between crop production and our meat consumption, there’s also a link between a water shortage throughout the world and the high meat diets we all choose to keep.  Cattle is the biggest culprit to water consumption in animal farming.  They consume much more than your average turkey or chicken farm.  “Animal production, including aquaculture, is a major water consumer. For future developments in animal production, water is in many situations a more serious constraint than land or space for increasing production.” (Verdegem 2006)  This being said, it’s important to keep the issue of water in the back of our heads when we go about buying our meat products in the store, not so much our daily domestic behaviors because those don’t in fact have as much of an impact.  Have you ever thought about how much water runs through all of these animals daily, not to mention yearly?  It’s almost unfathomable.  “According to international water expert Professor Frank Rijsberman, a person’s diet, not how long they spend in the shower, is the main determining factor in per capita water consumption, with meat requiring vastly more water to produce than most other food.” (Rijsberman 2004).  So next time you’re showering, you shouldn’t sweat the extra minute or two you spend washing your hair, you should be concerned about the hamburger helper sitting in your refrigerator.  “So the diet of a typical meat-eater comes courtesy of about 5400 liters of water a day, double that of a vegetarian getting the same nutritional value.” (Rijsberman 2004).  Many places in the world such as China, Africa, and places in the Middle East are all facing drastic water shortages already.  A common misconception is that there isn’t enough actual water, but that’s not the case.  It’s the fact that the water that is available to these areas of the world is so toxic and not consumable that it becomes an issue and people aren’t able to utilize it for their daily needs.  Runoffs from farms and meat factories leak into water reservoirs and contaminate them until the water itself is unusable until it is refined.  In reality, one of the major complications with our environment all comes down to how many animals we are consuming annually, if not daily.

Another issue with water shortages from over consuming meat has to do with a very delicate issue.  Hypoxia is defined as an inadequacy in the oxygen reaching the body’s tissues.  Fish are constantly facing this issue because of contaminants leaking into freshwater areas and the carbon buildup that takes away from dissolved oxygen in the water, which the fish need to survive. (Pollock 2007)  “A study by the US-based World Resources Institute shows that the rise in meat consumption and demand for fossil fuels is a direct cause of oxygen depletion in the world’s coastal and freshwater areas… close to 500 coastal areas now suffer from hypoxia.  The number is expected to rise.” (SOS Global Warming 2009)  This has to do with all meat production and animal factories around the world.  The article also mentioned that “factory hog farming” is having a major effect on the environment.  The pig manure completely toxifies the environment.  “One swine operation in the Black Sea region that is now closed had more than 1 million pigs and generated sewage equivalent to a town of 5 million people.” (SOS Global Warming 2009)  After the fish die out or start to deplete, we will deplete as one.  There will be no more countries pointing fingers because pointing fingers always ends up with three pointing back at you.  We are all in this together and we need to start facing the facts and looking at the numbers, because they’re alarming and are mirroring our fate if we don’t take care of our home.  As I mentioned before, we are all in this together.  We need to stop looking at individual countries statistics and evaluate the numbers globally.  I could throw a bunch of numbers around but the bottom line is that it’s over-the-top, and something needs to be done.

As an example to cutting down on meat consumption, people can start slowly by easing up on beef production.  Beef has massive effects on the environment, such as eroding away soil, global warming, and methane gas emissions.  “Beef production can lead to global grain shortages and decreased food security for poor people who have to pay more for their basic diets.” (Kasa 2008)  Ironically, we are growing food for our food while the actual human population of the Earth deteriorates in some areas.  If people are starving because the cows are eating their food, there is obviously something very wrong.  Along with this, “beef production is labor extensive and land extensive, resulting in few jobs for poor rural populations.” (Kasa 2008)  Not only is it morally wrong to be raising cattle in this fashion, but also it’s also not good for an individual to consume that much beef.  Beef is higher in fat than say, fish or turkey, so it’s not a stretch to say that obesity will continue to rise which will lead to more food production which inevitably leads to more cattle.  If more people could try to utilize protein-rich vegetables or protein substitutes, they would still be getting the same vitamin intake, just in different and more environmentally friendly ways.  Fish is a very good option as well, it’s a lot less damaging to the Earth to consume fish and cheaper for the economy.   It’s a vicious cycle, and the only way to stop it is to take an initiative and accept change.

As an incentive to cut back on meat consumption, people should try to educate themselves on the benefits of a meatless or very low meat diet.  “Researchers from Britain and New Zealand compared 6,115 vegetarians in the United Kingdom with 5,015 meat-eaters over a 12-year period… those who ate a meatless diet had a 40% lower risk of dying from cancer and a 20% lower risk of dying from any cause, including cancer, than those who consumed meat.” (Harvard Health Letter 1994).  Vegetarians tend to have very low body fat percentages and less heart problems.  On top of this, you’re not consuming the massive amounts of chemicals that are injected and fed to these animals daily.  There have been some recent studies showing that the reason people are developing cancer is because of what we put in our bodies.  From this it’s not hard to draw our own conclusions that animals that are genetically engineered might alter our cells once we ingest them.  “Environmental factors such as diet are associated with cancer risk.  The intake of meats, such as beef, varies 3-fold across the world—consumption is highest in developed countries…approximately 35% of cancer can be attributed to diet, similar in magnitude to the contribution of smoking cancer.” (Genkinger 2007)

Meat consumption is something that has been on the rise for decades and is currently out of control.  We have almost tripled our consumption of meat in the last 50 years.  That is unacceptable and should be altered quickly if we wish to sustain life.  Recent studies have been coming out and people are becoming much more aware of the health of our planet.  There are signs that we all see daily and seasonally that are throwing red flags up for health officials and scientists all over the world and at least we’re slowly starting to acknowledge the damage we have inflicted on ourselves.  Animal agriculture and farming has spun so out of control that it’s hard to remember times when a meal with meat as the main component was a treat.  That is the mentality we need to all adopt, that meat is a treat and that it is something to be valued rather than abused or overused.  If we must eat meat and not substitute it for healthier options such as protein-rich vegetables, than we at least need to calm down the demand for it.  Meat consumption affects everyone in a negative way and is going to ultimately make a huge difference in the physiological aspect of our environment.  The atmosphere is breaking down which leads to global warming and other complications throughout the world.  People are starting to realize this and there are some that are making changes although it’s minor when we compare it to the rest of the world as a whole.  There are guidelines to meat consumption being put in place to educate people on the amount of meat they should be consuming regularly.  It’s a common fact that people shouldn’t consume more meat in a sitting than a deck of cards, let alone in one day.  If we all could use this measurement and apply it to our daily lives we would be doing the world a great service and a service to ourselves.  Simplicity needs to be on everyone’s mind during this time as well as in the future.

References:

Bond, M. (2008) The Trouble With Meat. Engineering and Technology. 3(11) 16-19. Retrieved on December 5, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (17509637)

Genkinger, Jeanine. (2007) Meat Consumption and Cancer Risk. PLoS Medicine. 4(12) 345. Retrieved on December 7, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (15491277)

Harvard Health Letter. (1994) Eat Your Vegetables. 20(1) 8. Retrieved on December 8, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (10521577)

Kasa, Sjur. (2008) Globalizing Unsustainable Food Consumption. Globalizations. 5(2), 151-163. Retrieved on December 6, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (14747731)

Pollock, Mike. (2007) The Effects of Hypoxia on Fishes: From Ecological Relevance to Physiological Effects. Environmental Reviews. 15(1), 1-14. Retrieved on December 5, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (11818700)

Rijsberman, Frank. (2004) Meat Diets Drive Water Consumption. Ecos. Issue 122, p.7. Retrieved on December 7, 2009, from Academic Search Premier (03114546)

Verdegem, M. (2006) Reducing Water Use for Animal Production through Aquaculture. International Journal of Water Resources Development. 22(1) p.101-113. Retrieved on Dec. 11, 2009 from Academic Search Premier (07900627)

1928 Presidential Campaign Slogans. (2009) Retrieved Dec. 8, from website: http://www.presidentsusa.net/1928slogan.html

Mooney, Harold. (May 31, 2006.) Consequences of Increased Global Meat Consumption on the Global Environment. Retrieved December 8, from Stanford University website: http://fsi.stanford.edu/research/2181

Earth Trends The Environmental Information Portal. (2007) Meat Consumption. Retrieved December 4, from http://earthtrends.wri.org/searchable_db/index.php?step=countries&ccID%5B%5D=5&allcountries=checkbox&theme=8&variable_ID=192&action=select_years

SOS Global Warming Meat Consumption Devastating World’s Waters. (July 24, 2009.) Retrieved December 7 from http://suprememastertv.com/sos-global-warming/Meat-consumption-devastating-worlds-waters.html

Revised Essay # 3- Book Review- Food, Inc.

                The opinions I have expressed in this essay originate from the knowledge I gained from reading “Food, Inc.” by Karl Weber. I have also watched the companion film by Robert Kenner. The knowledge I gained from these was both shocking and empowering. I am not comfortable with the lack of knowledge about our food industry which is why I have researched and concluded that changes need to occur in both my lifestyle and the food production methods of our industry. Many of us are completely unaware of how our food is raised, processed, and what ingredients are included in the final product. Sadly, I believe that many people are content with not knowing.

                Factory farms are industrial-scale facilities where tens of thousands of animals are crowded together in tight conditions, making it difficult for them to carry out normal behaviors like grazing, rooting, and pecking (Weber, 2009). It is common knowledge that a large majority of our country’s meat is raised on factory farms. An argument was brought to my attention that we should not condemn farmers when it is indirectly our fault that animals are being raised in this manner. In the farmer’s defense, factory farms are the only way to keep up with our country’s demand for meat products. We have the power to change the conditions by which animals are raised simply by altering our demands. If we demand animals that have been fed naturally and raised to live a normal lifestyle that is what we will receive. Animals raised on factory farms have low doses of antibiotics mixed in with their food and water to promote growth and to preempt out disease outbreaks (Weber, 2009). When I first read the terms low doses I figured that the antibiotics weren’t a large issue. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, seventy percent of all antimicrobials used throughout the United States are fed to livestock. Furthermore, these antibiotics account for twenty-five million pounds per year which is more than eight times the amount used to treat disease in humans (Weber, 2009).

                Processing of our food begins in the fields. Workers are also paying the price of the tunnel vision that the large corporations have for their profit. The rate of death due to heat stress for farm workers is twenty times greater than for the general population (Weber, 2009). The large corporations in charge of the fields should ultimately pay the price for the farm worker deaths yet this is not the case. Our society has created an agricultural system that shields major corporations for their actions and inactions (Weber, 2009). I think the saddest part about our agricultural system is that the smallest firms involved are the ones to take the blame when in reality; they are not entirely at fault. Farm workers are receiving minimum wage due to the growers that employ them experiencing “a historic squeeze” in prices from the retailers who purchase their produce (Weber, 2009). A common argument that I have been faced with is the question of why anyone would fight our government over issues that are occurring with illegal immigrants. I agree with points that arise with this argument, however, our country demands cheap food and the leading reason for our low food prices is low labor costs. An estimated fifty percent of farm workers are not authorized to work in the United States (Weber, 2009). Friends of mine wonder how such a large number of people can slip through the cracks of our government immigration policies. In reality, these workers are not slipping through the cracks. The United States approved guest programs specifically to address the farm labor needs. These policies are the roots of Mexican migration patterns (Weber, 2009). With the way our American economy has decreased, I think it would be ideal if large corporations would employ American farm workers but this is unrealistic. It is common knowledge that large corporations employ immigrants because the employment laws of our country do not apply to them. In turn, the large food production corporations are getting away with immoral employment practices.

                Why do we need food? Every living thing on Earth needs food for the nutrient intake. What if nutrients are not all that we are ingesting? A question that we need to ask is whether or not all ingredients present in our foods are beneficial to our health. Our country should not need an outbreak of E. coli or Salmonella to be conscious about what is really in our food. I was told by a friend that I will never be satisfied with our food industry because I warn of microbes and of antibiotics. My answer is simply that we should not have to choose between disease and antimicrobial resistance. There are other options. The Food and Drug Administration as well as the United States Department of Agriculture have approved factory farms to use hormones to promote growth and milk production in beef and dairy cattle, respectively (Weber, 2009). Again this is a result of high demand for beef and dairy products. Products are available where hormones and antibiotics are not used. I drink Horizon brand milk. It states right on the carton that their “farms produced this milk without antibiotics, added hormones, pesticides, or cloning.”

                A common argument against eating healthy is the monetary cost, period. I have not heard anyone disagree with the fact that eating fast food is unhealthy for our bodies. At what point is the cost of our health too high? I choose to spend the money on healthy food now rather than on doctor’s bills in the future. I am not suggesting that everyone only eats on hundred percent organic but I do believe that people need to be more conscious about what they are ingesting. An estimate by the Centers for Disease Control says that one-third of American children born in the year 2000 will develop diabetes. They will develop this as a result of poor diet and lack of exercise (Weber, 2009). I believe this estimate shows that we need more knowledge of our food not only for our health but for our children’s health.

Revised Essay # 2- Proposal- The Ultimate Solution

The Ultimate Solution

 

                Biotechnology is defined as the use of living organisms or other biological systems in the manufacture of drugs, other products, or for environmental management (Dictionary. com).  All though there is plenty of controversy over genetically modified foods; I believe this new technology could serve as a solution to our world’s problems, which include nutrition deficiencies, product contamination, and pollution. I will discuss many of the risks and rewards of using biotechnology in our food production yet ultimately I feel that it is a positive movement forward for our world and the people that reside here. Using biotechnology can do this by creating products that are improved nutritionally, lowering the financial and environmental costs of food production, and improving the microbial processes used by farmers.

                There are many positive nutritional advances when using biotechnology to create genetically modified foods. Our country, in particular, could benefit from foods with lower fat content. Plant scientists have decreased the total amount of saturated fatty acids in some vegetable oils. These are already on the market available for purchase (Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) ). These oils could be used by restaurant chains to reduce the already high fat content in fast food. The genes of flowers were introduced into the genes of a grain of rice, creating Golden Rice (Weber, 2009). Combining the genes gave the rice a higher content of Vitamin A. Golden Rice developers further improved the rice by mixing in two other genes that increase the amount and digestibility of Iron. (BIO) After take a nutritional course I gained the knowledge that the majority of my class, including myself, was nutritionally deficient. Being able to gain a higher nutritional content while leaving our diets unchanged is beneficial to our overall health. The researchers at Purdue University along with the U.S. Department of Agriculture have created a genetically modified tomato with three times as much Lycopene as a regular, unmodified, tomato. Lycopene is an antioxidant that has been associated with Prostate cancer, Breast cancer, and “bad cholesterol” blood levels. The more Lycopene consumed is associated with lower levels of the above (BIO). Animal scientists are creating meat products such as beef with a lower fat content and pigs with a higher meat-to-fat ratio (BIO). These would absolutely be beneficial for Americans because we have diets that are very high in meat content. I eat moose meat rather than beef simply because it is leaner.

                The food production methods throughout the world, especially in the United States, have high financial costs as well as environmental costs. In 2008 biotechnology based crops raised 9.4 percent, reaching 309 million acres. Also in 2008, it was recorded that 13.3 million farmers throughout 25 countries are using agricultural biotechnology. The majority of these, 90 percent or 12.3 million are resource poor farmers throughout 15 developing countries (BIO). These statistics show how many people have realized the positive effects of using biotechnology in our food production. Some genetically engineered plant products require significantly less chemical applications during growth which results in less environmental impact during production (Tietyen). Many of the food crops require less chemical applications due to built-in insect, disease, and herbicide resistance (Tietyen). The less chemicals that are sprayed on food during production is beneficial because it leaves less chemicals to be ingested by humans and less chemicals that could possibly leach into the groundwater. Corn is commonly modified with a gene from the bacterium Bacillus Thuringiensis. This results in a plant that kills maize-devouring caterpillars without the use of chemicals (Koerner, 2003). Ninety percent of Hawaiian papayas are modified to ward off the Papaya Ring Spot Virus (Koerner, 2003). People should accept the food production advances through biotechnology because they result in less contaminated products and less labor hours due to the lack of chemicals needing to be sprayed. Other than products that require no chemicals, researchers are working on plants to detect environmental challenges. The scientists at Penn State are working to understand how plants sense and respond to insects, diseases, and drought (Schultz, 2003). If they succeeded they may be able to develop plants that “tell” farmers where and when these problems exist (Schultz, 2003). This would be a substantial step forward with controlling the use of chemicals because the farmers would be able to isolate the problem to a certain section of vegetation, thus only spraying chemicals where they are needed, rather than on an entire crop.

                Today scientists are capable of identifying genes that are responsible for many specific characteristics such as disease resistance and nutrient composition and are able to transfer them into another organism (Tietyen). Many dairy cows are injected with hormones to promote milk production. The FDA first approved the production of a microorganism to make a hormone needed for the dairy cows. These genetically modified bacteria can produce large quantities of the needed hormone for injection. This hormone increases milk production by ten to fifteen percent (Tietyen). Many pathogens produce toxins in crops. Insect-resistant corn sustains little insect damage resulting in no fungi and mold infections. This results in lower toxin levels, which can be fatal to livestock, thus benefiting farmers (BIO). Any product of biotechnology that decreases microbes found on animal products and crop plants will significantly improve the safety of raw materials that enter our food supply (BIO).               

                Apart from improved nutrition content, production costs, and microbial processes there are concerns with allowing biotechnology to interfere with our food production methods. Two primary issues for food consumers include the potential introduction of food allergens and marker genes that would increase human resistance to antibiotics (Tietyen). If the transfer of a known allergen occurs to a food source that is not normally associated with that allergen then accurate labeling is required. Some products have been pulled from the review process because of the high concern (Tietyen). All though the antibiotic resistance of many microbes is of great concern, there is no current scientific evidence of increased antibiotic resistance due to genetically modified foods (Tietyen). People are also concerned about the environment and the introduction of “super” weeds that are herbicide resistant or that are harmful to insects. Data is currently being collected about both of these issues (Tietyen).

                Allowing and utilizing biotechnology throughout our food production methods will help solve the pollution problems and nutrient deficiencies across the world. As people do with medical practices, we need to weigh the risks with rewards of biotechnology. I have presented many rewards with very few risks which leads me to believe that biotechnology is a logical step towards an ultimate solution.

 

Sources

 

Tietyen, J.L; Bessin, R.T.; Hildebrand, D.F. (n.d.) Food Biotechnology. BREI-3. Retrieved on October 25, 2009 from http://www.ca.uky.edu/agc/PUBS/brei3/brei3.htm

Biotechnology Industry Organization. Food Biotechnology. Retrieved on October 26, 2009 from http://bio.org/speeches/pubs/er/food.asp?=yes

Biotechnology Industry Organization. More Farmers Choosing Biotech Crops. Retrieved on October 26, 2009 from http://bio.org/foodag/Plants/isaaa09.asp?=yes

Schultz, Jack; Raina, Ramesh. Researchers Developing ‘Sentinel Plants’ To Warn Of Bioterrorism. Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences. Retrieved on October 29, 2009 from http://aginfo.psu.edu/news/2003/3/sentinel.html

Koerner, Brendan. May 22, 2003. How Much of Our Food Is Bioengineered? Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC. Retrieved on October 30, 2009 from http://slate.msn.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2083482

Weber, Karl. Food Inc. A Participant Guide: How Industrial Food is Making Us Sicker, Fatter, and Poorer. And What You Can Do About It. Participant Media 2009. Published by Public Affairs.

Essay 1 Revision: The Silent Spring Within Us

Who among us does not enjoy a walk among pristine wilderness, uncompromised by human waste and destruction? The untouched wilderness is quickly vanishing as we squander our gifts on the production of harmful chemicals and toxic wastes. Rachel Carson became a witness of the use of DDT, chlordane, heptachlor, dieldrin, and aldrin and wrote “Silent Spring” in the hopes of alerting the public to the true harm these insecticides have on the environment, and human beings. The result of her work was an environmental movement that changed the way the public viewed insecticides and began the slow process of altering government and corporate policy. Carson’s work is timeless because she spoke of our “right to know,” about toxic chemicals that we may be succumbed to and our responsibility as humans to understand our place in the natural world. The diverse, credible evidence she draws from varied sources becomes cohesive to the common reader through her excellent command of prose and her continuous emphasis on human involvement in the environment. Carson’s ability to draw from multiple sources provides the credibility her bold statements require. Without her blend of sources many critics could argue that her point of view is biased towards a certain perspective. However her textual support extends from scientific journals, quoting professionals in multiple fields, newspaper articles, to government studies. The spectrum of evidence clearly demonstrates her passion for alerting the public of the damage of insecticides through thorough research. Many readers can appreciate Carson’s diligence in assembling such a diverse array of facts and her persistence in alerting the public of the science of insecticides. In any one chapter she blends both government studies with independent researchers, presenting both her argument and its counter-arguments. In doing so the public is presented with more than one perspective and takes away a greater understanding of the harms of insecticides and the argument for them. She wisely wrote “This is an era of specialists, each of whom sees his own problem and is unaware…. of the larger frame” (pg. 13). Carson skillfully guides readers through the facts of multiple specialists and fits them together to present a strong argument against the use of harmful insecticides. Despite Carson’s range of evidence she consistently links it to human carelessness, ignorance, and “our goal of the conquest of nature.” Believing that our goal is ultimately destroying the world around us, Carson incorporated many examples of our failure to successfully eradicate pests and the costly consequences that often occurred. The result is an articulate display of nature’s interconnectedness as well as the toll of insecticides on human beings. Carson believed we should act with “full awareness that what we do may have consequences remote in time and place” (pg.64). However, her examples of human harm and death and her continuous effort to link her evidence to the concerns of the modern citizen is what truly motivated the public to take action against insecticide usage. In order to engage citizens of her time she often compared the fears of radiation to the growing fears of poisonous chemicals being dumped into our environment. She also devoted an entire chapter to the effect of insecticides on the health of human beings. The entire first chapter paints a picture of forests “deserted by all living things,” and silence that “lay over the fields and woods and marsh,” all because “the people had done it to themselves” (pg. 3). Carson set the scene of the first chapter in a classic American town to bring home the true horror of our chemical production of insecticides, and to once again demonstrate our implications in the world around us. Much like the fictional first chapter, Carson’s book contains powerful diction and poetic prose that truly illuminates the scenes of destruction or pristine beauty she wishes to convey. The paradoxical settings presented in the first chapter with “maple and birch (that) set up a blaze of color” (pg. 1) and roadsides “lined with browned and withered vegetation” (pg. 3) whet the reader’s appetite. Carson does not stop at fiction but continues to realistically present the actual horrors of destructive insecticides. By blending her love and skill for English and Biology she ultimately creates a masterpiece readable by a much larger audience. Not only does she clearly define “terms of reference, so commonplace to the chemist or the pharmacologist” (pg. 21) but she guides us through the facts that would otherwise be overwhelming and uninteresting. The overall result of her hybrid text does wonders for the reader’s soul. Her prose provides us with the long lost passion humans possess towards nature’s beauty that has inspired us for centuries and her explanations of scientific phenomena at once alerts us to our connection with nature and our possible destruction of it on the microscopic and macroscopic level. Throughout her novel “there runs a constant theme, the awareness that we are dealing with life” (pg. 296). This idea is imperative to her work because it is the central theme that transcends time and is applicable to every generation that reads her novel. However her ideas evolve from this simple idea of preservation of our natural ecosystems to a much newer perspective of human responsibility. It is our sole responsibility to be conscious of our implications and the magnitude of our powers. “Man-acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world” (pg. 5) and the outcome can be destructive or inspirational. If we spent more energy learning and understanding nature perhaps our race would be better off in the future. However it takes more than scientific insight but involvement of the citizens. This is where voices like Rachel Carson become important to the betterment of mankind. Her undisputable arguments not only create passionate awareness and force us to view our mistakes but she offers words of direction and hope. Her solution was one of simple means. Only through knowledge of our environment and active pursuit by citizens can we hope for a better future. Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. 2002 ed. 1962. New York City: First Mariner Books, 2002. Print.

Essay 3: Revision

To’Mika Cooksey

English 213

Essay #3-Book Review

LOOK OUT, RUN, HERE IT COMES: DEATH IN A BAG

Now that I have your attention, you are probably wondering what I’m making such a big deal about, well it’s something you probably see everyday or enjoy everyday-fast food.  Fast Food has become an incredibly huge problem, and author Eric Schlosser expresses this in his book Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of All-American Meal.  Who would think that food would become such a huge social problem that it would affect people, but the environment as well? Well he does and he expresses this in his book.  He explores the depth of how fast food is made, even breaking it down process to process, and giving us statistics from thirty years ago to now.  Schlosser hits the nail with this book by giving light to fast food and how its affecting our nation and consumers need to stand up and be responsible for their choices.

In his book, he discusses the rapid increase in fast food, and restaurants being open. He even compares how money on food is being spent now, then it was being spent about thirty years ago. He also discusses the effect of soft drink, and how it is effecting our youth. Many companies are advertising directly to our children from teenager to babies. Soft drinks can account for your full amount of calorie intake you should have in a day excluding any food. He discusses about past and future consumption of soft drinks within our youths and consumption of soft drinks within babies. Their is even a advertisement with different companies putting their brand in schools. This is just instilling their brand into children so they can continue with that brand for years and years.  It not only teaches children about new things but get them accustom to it so they tend to use it all the way into adulthood.The brands have took such heavy control that children will nag for the item, which lead the parents to give it to them to stop the annoying behavior. Companies even go as far as researching children activities and programs to input them in their company. They do this by offering children toys that you normally don’t see in stores, changing the food to famous children characters, and advertising in most watched children programs.

He also discusses slaughterhouse and their impact on people living around their areas. Not only do they produce horrible smells but can cause damage to the people around them.  On top of that, there is  triple as many animals then before  being killed in one hour. He does something I never seen before and goes into detail about the whole process of make an animal a package commodity in a supermarket. The process is not only mouth-dropping and breath-taking, but also you learn that many of the workers are from other countries. When one becomes injured, their injuries are not treated properly, and they are actually condemned for getting hurt causing many employees to keep injuries a secret. He also describes individual jobs within the process that makes one think about how people can deal with their job on the daily basis.  One will learn that the food gets their taste  from secret labs that specialize in making formulas for the food we eat. They can make something pale taste like an apple in a matter of seconds and ingredients. These companies are considered legal and do not have to reveal how these formulas are being made nor confide in the consumer about the techniques used to make the food.

The largest fast food company is discussed heavily with him stating how one in eight American has worked for McDonald. This shows not only how powerful but also how popular this brand is to America. Fast Food Chains have to  take responsibilities for their role in the increase level of obesity. Even through several fast food restaurants are trying to offer healthier choices in their menu, they still have not tried to substitute their unhealthy products with better choices. Even if someone wanted to eat a healthier choice they can not help but see that a salad is probably triple the amount of a double cheeseburger. So it makes the consumer feel like they are being punished for making a wiser decision, and having to pay for it. This shows overall that they our in in for the money and that nothing will change until consumers demand a change.

Not only that but no one is forced to eat at these places that people keep writing about. McDonald’s, Taco Bell, KFC, Burger King can advertise every hour their different products they have to offer. But it is up to us the consumers not the makers to determine if this food really worth eating, gaining weight, and putting our health at risk for. It is our job to find out where these products are coming from and their nutritional facts. Until someone says they want to know how the meat was produced, and what affects will it have on one’s health, then McDonald’s is not obligated to tell everything about their products from where it comes from, to how its made, does it affect the economy, and how eating their food everyday produce consequences that can affect ones health. Not to be on sides but the fast food can only be held accountable for some of their actions the rest falls on the consumer. If parents would become more conscious of this advertising that seems innocent they would realize that companies are directly advertising their product to their children; that the child would not know that McDonald’s had a new toy for the new cool movie coming out had it not been advertised on a popular children channel for them to see. Into we start to question what we are eating, and start doing more research instead of assuming everything we are eating is fine then company will continue to make these products. We consumers make a demand for these products and that is why they continue to be made, and until we demand for better products than fast food will still continue take over the nation.

Essay 2: Revision

To’Mika Cooksey

English 213

Essay #2

Even three-year olds can help save the world

Fairbanks, AK might seem like a small city, but it still has its problems like a big city. One of the problems is recycling- which is a process where used materials is made into new materials. It basically prevents useful materials from being wasted, which overall helps the environment. However, Fairbanks is not a key player in this recycling game at all.  Fairbanks is wasting useful materials by not implicating recycling around the city; and with air pollution, global warming, etc being many of our problems; we should lead by example by starting with recycling by setting up more recycling centers, bins, and information in different areas around the city.

If you look around the town of Fairbanks, you will notice very few recycling incentives. When people go shopping the bags provided by the store from every trip are just being throned away. Most business has just regular trash cans that are not implicating any type of recycling. At stores where computer inks are being sold, they tend to not have recycling methods for empty ink cartilages. There is over a dozen fast food or restaurants that use quite a bit of paper and plastic along with the movie theater that just throw these items away.

All of these items are going into one place-landfill, not only the fact that landfills are becoming harder to find, but the fact that we are filling them with useful materials is saddening. I never fully realized how much materials we wasted until I clearly thought about it. When we throw away grocery store bags, ink cartilages; fast food paper bag, cups, and wrappings; movie theater paper bags and cups, candy boxes; boxes and cans the food we eat come out of, tags we remove from our clothes; clothing, towels, wash cloths  that are torn or old; balloons from birthday parties, electronics that no longer work, etc., we are not just throwing away items we no longer want but items that can be reused for something else.

In case you did not know, Fairbanks is receiving some of the consequences of the nations global warming by the glaciers melting, our wildlife being endangered, more forest fires than ever, etc. True, we our not the only factors, but it’s about time we stand up and be leaders. There is no better way of us doing this then by starting with something easy to do, recycling.  Not only is it easy but it encourages other places to follow along with the trend. The law can’t make people perform this but there are many things that can be done that can influence people’s decision.

A lot of people do not fully know what recycling is and its effects. We can show more commercials that basically implement that recycling is a process of taking used materials and making them into new materials that helps reduce waste, energy, and pollution.  Recycling also helps reduce landfills and their cost, and just about anything can be recycled such as concrete, batteries, clothing, ferrous, glass, paper, plastic, etc. All these items have to be sorted into a particular group before they are recycled.  Just like the fire department has their own mascot “Smokey the Bear”, recycling can have its own mascot since cartoon tends to attract and entertain most people.

School cans show films to students about recycling, and show them how to properly dispose of used materials through sorting of recycling bins. These films can be showed even at elementary school since this is the next generation. Places ,such as Wal-Mart, has already started the trend, and the trend can continue if more places around the city started.  Even if place start doing this they have to advertise because the average consumer does not pay attention.  The city should go ahead and implicate the tax on bags which is just going to encourage people to buy reusable green bags that usually break less and carry more stuff. More than half the stuff we dispose can be reused it’s just the problem of getting it to the allocated place.  The city can start a better recycling program that picks up more recycling goods so that it doesn’t burden people with finding a place and loading their vehicle up going to these places.  Instead of going door to door they can ask that people have the items sorted and put at the curb for pickup on certain days. Sorting I agree is time-consuming and instead of sorting we can put all items in one bag as long as they are not messy such as clothing with paper cup rinse out, and old pots and pans rinsed out, etc.  People can agree for a very small tax that will allow for more recycling faculties to be operated and recycling services.

This might not seem like a big deal and might make you wonder how this can really help.  But every time you throw something away think about if it goes in the list of things that can be recycled.

Concrete

Batteries

Biodegradable Waste

Clothing

Electronics

Ferrous

Aluminum

Glass

Paint

Paper

Textile

Timber

Tires

When you think about it almost everything can be recycled and this will in the end cut down on landfills and pollution. Paper alone saves about 70 percent of air pollution by itself. We have to start somewhere, so why not with recycling.  When you think about it even a three-year can understand put a paper cup in the trash can that says paper on it.

References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recycling

http://earth911.com/

Essay 1-Revision

The Hungry Cause/Effect-“The New Killer of the Century: Fast Food”

By: To’Mika Cooksey

English 213-Essay #1

Food is one of the main necessitates we need to survive. Food main goal is to provide our body with vitamins, minerals, and sustenance. Food is now a high risk necessitates because of new technology and the over-consumption of it.   The way food is being made is so harmful that it is causing many people to become unhealthy and people our now starting to die from food. Many things our contributors to the food epidemic like new farming techniques, and these new contributors  are causing uncontrollable eating habitats that are causing people to overlook their health for the sake of a taste and price.

About every year approximately 300,000 adults die from unhealthy eating conditions, and about 2/3 of adults are overweight and 1/3 is obese. One may ask why this number is so high, and what contribute to this factor. Simply it is the way we manufacture food and distribute it. The government has approved subsidies that provide food for these mass amounts of animal that are raised to be slaughtered. Which allows farmers to raise an unlimited amount of animals; the problem with this is the foods used to feed these animals are unsafe filled with harmful chemicals, which in return is making the food we eat unhealthy. Farmers also use medicine to help the animals stay alive and live in tight cornered conditions, but the medicine is making more deadly organisms that can be spread from animals to humans. Well, what about the healthy food, well the government is not spending as much money on these foods. So they tend to have higher prices than a fast food burger.

The food is sold at ridiculously cheap prices, so that it allows the consumer to buy more food then ever before. The problem with this is people have made a decision to eat more food than necessarily since they can afford to eat “unhealthy”. People’s intentions are not to eat unhealthy, but when offered the choice of tasty, cheap food rather than a little higher in price salad people tend to take the easy made and quick to get hamburger.  Since many people are on a rush or prefer to eat an already made meal, the salad is easily pushed to the side. Most of these foods are double the portion and that means double the calories. The effect of this is people becoming more overweight and obesity levels at the highest levels ever. Obesity can overall cause type 2 diabetes, heart disease, strokes, cancer, liver disease, asthma, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, arthritis, etc.  These eating habitats do not usually stay with one person; they usually get past on to younger generations. Where as people teach their children these unhealthy eating habitats.

I  have decided to break down the truth of the unhealthy eating habits that many people are accustom to. First one must know that a  typical diet for a woman should be 1400 to 1500 calories intake and a man about 1700 to 1900 calorie intake.  So I will use the most popular fast food restaurant McDonald- with nutritional facts straight from their website- to demonstrate how this really affecting people.

McDonald

Breakfast

Egg Muffin: 300 calories

Hash Brown: 150 calories

Strawberry Jelly: 35 calories

Small Orange Juice: 140 calories

Total: 625 calories

Lunch

Hamburger: 250 calories

Small Fries: 230 calories

Small Coke: 210 calories

Total: 690

Dinner

Quarter Pounder: 410 calories

Small Fries: 230 calories

Ice Cream Cone: 150 calories

Small Coke: 210 calories

Total: 1000

Grand Total: 2315 calories

Even if you only eat one of these meals a day, you have still eaten about 40 percent of your calorie intake in one sitting and you still have not influence any fruits and vegetables in your diet. Yes, it is true meat has the highest level of protein but with 520 mg of Sodium in a hamburger this offset that protein.  Fruit and vegetables do a lot of things that the burger and a shake just can’t do, for instance provide fiber, water, vitamin c, vitamins, minerals which reduce stroke, cardiovascular diseases, stroke( pretty much everything that fast food can cause).  Some more shocking news is that half of our plate needs to be  filled with vegetables while 1/3 should be meat and the other half would be your other side. (Which you can ask any nutritionist or dietitian)

Farmers being able to produce more food than ever before, because of the help of government subsidies and unconcerned consumers. We now have double-portion unhealthy food sold at very cheap prices which is causing for our obesity level to increase quickly.  This is not only affecting adults but also innocent children who have no ideal what they are learning is poor eating habitats. The food world is no longer a ways of surviving, but a way of early dying.

References

Walsh, Bryan. (2009). Getting Real About the High Price of Fast Food. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from                             http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1917458-1,00.html.

Predit, Robert. (2008). Obesity Rates Up in 37 States: Report. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from                                                  http://news.health.com/2008/08/20/obesity-rates-37-states-report.

Rea, Caroline. (2007). Obesity. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from,

http://health.yahoo.com/obesity- overview/obesity/healthwise–hw252864.html.

McDonald’s Corporation (2009) Nutritional Facts, Retrieved October 1, 2009, from                 http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/nutrition_facts.html.

Research Essay Final Draft-Making the Earth Smile

To’Mika Cooksey

English 213

Research Essay Final Draft

Making the Earth Smile

There are many problems going on the world that are affecting us more than ever. This list includes many things like global warming, food industry, pollution, wildlife conservation, etc, but  I decided to talk about something different: recycling. It didn’t appear to me that recycling was such a big issue until I started to take notice of things around me. For instance, at work we print over a hundred documents a day and throw away just as many.  When going to the dumpster you will see things such as old toys, furniture, clothes being tossed away, and when you look in your own trash cans you will see bottles, paper, wrappers, boxes, plastic, etc.  Everyday something is being tossed out and causing us to develop more landfills and cause more pollution because we are not thinking about better methods to get rid of waste, such as recycling. Overall, Recycling frees up space in landfills, limits pollution, helps the environment, and preserves the Earth. Recycling is a powerful tool that is one step further to helping preserve the environment but more information about the technique and the overall good along with people following others by taking more social responsibly will take this tool to its fullest level.

What is Recycling-My own definition would be using everything possible to create less waste, pollution, and unnecessary creation of new products. The next question would have to be how can you recycle? This method is so versatile because there is so many ways to recycle that many people wouldn’t even think were necessary recycling or think of period. A lot of these methods come from people researching and studying different methods to solve problems they feel our affecting the world. Matthijs Vogels decided that he was tired of wasting left over food and tried to find different method to utilize this food instead of just throwing it away (Walsh, 2008). So after several different experiments, he developed a new company called   that has done things like use coffee grounds and herbs to bowls, plates, and containers (Walsh, 2008). There are also people in corporate office who are trying to do things to help with the environment. Michael Han, CEO of Envion, has also made a creation of turning plastic into oil that can be used for fueling vehicles, diesel generators, and aircrafts (McConnell, 2009). For the leftover material that can not be used can be melted and made into dust and put in landfills that not only reduces waste but is helping with pollution by not generating smoke into the atmosphere (McConnell, 2009).Scott Saunders, CEO of KY, has also contributed to the cause by making a ways of recycling polypropylene plastic to make paint containers and molded products, this process is actually being done in Alaska (McCoy, 2009).

Another method is to repair something instead of automatically throwing it away (Cossham, 2008). When people buy stuff this lets manufactures know that there is a demand for this product, which sometimes cause for new products to be unnecessarily created. We usually focus on repairing bigger items such as cars, houses, airplanes, elevators, etc  but we never think about repairing little stuff like toasters, remotes, electronics, clothes, handbags, etc (Cossham, 2008). The saying “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it” might need to be tuned-up to include “but if it is broken, try to fix it, before you toss it”. People’s first impulse to something that is broke or different condition than it usually is in is to just throw it away and buy it again. People have many excuses for why they do this, like I have too many other things to do, or I don’t have time to fix things, or I do not know how to fix this and the list goes on and on. I would sums this all up to be just excuses and not thinking about the consequences of their actions. We have too many resources (specialties shops, public libraries, internet help sites) that there really is no reason why people can not attempt to try to fix things. Where I am getting at is what if people actually tried to fix things and keep a log of it and see how much money they have saved along with knowing they also helped with the environment.

There are many things that can be savages instead of tossed out, such as a blouse that are just missing a button; you can buy a sewing kit which you can use over time and can also be used on other things like pants, jackets, pillows, blankets, etc instead of buying a new shirt.  Even a broken laptop can be fixed, because the new laptop you are thinking about buying is not guarantee to never break down; by fixing the laptop you have already helped in minimizing waste.  Repairing a laptop just allows you to keep the same laptop and having an option to just add upgrades along the years (Cossham, 2008).  However, there are many people who prefer to get newer computers or even change brands, but there is also several websites (Earth 911) that people can donate their old computers too. People can also help in another way by letting others know what they have done with their old computers and encouraging them to do the same thing with their old computers (Rhey, 2008). There is also another method that can be used which is called substitution. Substitution is simply doing something like using ceramic mugs and plates instead of paper plates and cups since manpower still has to be used to recycle these items (Cossham, 2008). Instead of always using a fresh sheet of paper, you can use the back of an already used piece of paper and crossed out the side you no longer need anymore (Cossham, 2008). However, there are things that can not be substituted or fixed which tend to be things that you just do not want anymore. Things that you no longer want or need you can donate these to different facilities such as churches, libraries, help center. You can even sell these items on different website like Amazon. Com, eBay, and Overstock or even have a yard sell.

There are many different kinds of waste and one of them causing a lot of problems is E-Waste, which is electronic waste that produces 20-25 million tones of waste a year (Robinson, 2009). E-Waste not only has valuable metals but has environmental contaminants, and burning this waste just generates chemicals (Robinson, 2009). These chemicals can cause health effects, and contamination that can also go into the water and food chains (Robinson, 2009.) These waste contaminants can affects communities and products such as drinking water, food, and exports (Robinson, 2009). Companies, like Best Buy, Sharp, Panasonic, Toshiba,  our now helping with recycling by offering free recycling of their product or charging a small fee; some states our even passing laws about electronic-recycling (Consumer report, 2009). Organizations such as EPA our even making programs that promote the benefits of recycling electronic s and the safely hazard it cause (The Nation’s Health, 2009). Consumers are not the only people who can limit E-Waste, but ICU (Intensive Care Unit) can also recycle about 60 percent of their waste with information and training (McGain, 2009).

All of these wastes from electronic to trash go in one place-landfill. Right now, there is currently some research being done on landfills, and how all the waste is not always ending up where it is supposed to be. These researchers our finding volunteers who already disposing items and taking them off their hands and putting tracing devices on them.  Then they are disposing the items in the trash like ordinary, and they following the path of the items. They our finding through research that trash is not be being dispose of properly and flowing  into the waters and stay in the water for weeks at a time. They even had items that traveled for months. The purpose of this research is hoping to convince people to minimize their waste and be more concern about what they waste (Oppmann, 2009). Recycling can start off at something small like taking empty plastic bottles to recycling bins, or buying reusable ink cartilages. People can also help by spreading the world and starting groups that can help with recycling pick ups and passing along information about recycling (Synder, 2009).

There our some things being done about information being spread across about recycling. There is a videos being made about landfills and revealing the real truth about them (Owens, 2009). Schools are now competing with each other with a program called Recycle Mania that encourages students to recycle and reduce. Countries are now requiring that products are being made easy to take apart and recycle, and newer laws our being made to determine what can and cannot be discarded (Brown, 2009). Airlines are even taking a dab at recycling by reusing and salvaging pieces of aircrafts (Brown, 2009). Something that seems very helpful is the opening more recycling centers in local areas which is promoting recycling and encourages people around to start doing it (Hillhouse, 2009). Many things are being done to make this issue more aware, but people are going to have to take more social responsibility. It is not going to happen over night, but all it takes is an initiative and continuing pattern.

There our some things being done about information being spread across about recycling. There is a videos being made about landfills and revealing the real truth about them (Owens, 2009). Schools are now competing with each other with a program called Recycle Mania that encourages students to recycle and reduce. Countries are now requiring that products are being made easy to take apart and recycle, and newer laws our being made to determine what can and cannot be discarded (Brown, 2009). Airlines are even taking a dab at recycling by reusing and salvaging pieces of aircrafts (Brown, 2009). Something that seems very helpful is the opening more recycling centers in local areas which is promoting recycling and encourages people around to start doing it (Hillhouse, 2009). Many things are being done to make this issue more aware, but people are going to have to take more social responsibility. It is not going to happen over night, but all it takes is an initiative and continuing pattern.////////ajbjie;ojo//////<

Works Cited

S. Kirk Walsh., (2008), Reuse, Recycle, Reheat, New Your Times Magazine, page 28, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Cossham, John., (2008), Reuse, repair, recycle—and try buying nothing at all, Community Care, Issue 1749, page 34, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Robinson, Brett H. (2009), E-Waste: An assessment of global production and environmental impacts, Science of the Total Environment, Volume 408 Issue 2, page 183-191, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Consumer Reports (2009), Where to recycle electronics, free, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

The Nation’s Health (2009), EPA urges consumers to recycle, buy energy-efficient televisions, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

McGain, F., Story, D., Hendel, S., (2009) An audit of intensive care unit recyclable waste, Anaesthesia, Volume 64 Issue 12, page 1299-1302, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Owens, Patricia Ann (2009), Lessons from a Landfill: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, School Library Journal, Volume 55 Issue 7, pages 45-46, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Diverse: Issues in Higher Education (2009), On Your Mark, Set…Recycle, Volume 26 Issue 17, page 5, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Brown, Lester R (2009), Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Rethink, Mother Earth News, Issue 235, page 16-17, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Oppmann, Patrick (2009) Tracking a trail of trash in the Pacific Northwest, CNN

McConnell, Dugald (2009) Entrepreneur says he strikes oil with our garbage, CNN

Snyder, S. James (2009), Power of One, Volume 174 Issue 21, page 72, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Rhey, Erik (2008), Recycle Your PC the Right Way, PC Magazine, Volume 27 Issue 5, page 90-91, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

McCoy, Michael (2009), No Second Life, Chemical & Engineering News, Volume 87 Issue 11, page 30-33, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Hillhouse, Joanne C (2009), Caribbean Center for Recycling, Volume 61 Issues 6, page 5, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier