Responses 6-10

Article 6-
The article, Getting Real About the High Price of Cheap Food, was very well written. Not only did the author, Bryan Walsh, talk about the problems with concentrated-animal feeding operations (CAFOs), but he also gave a few ideas to remedy the situation.
When you think about where the pork you are eating for dinner came from, you think of a few pigs wallowing in the mud, eating from a trough. You don’t picture a bunch of pigs, in a pen, packed in so tightly that their tails have to be cut off so the other pigs won’t eat them. After learning this, it may take you a few moments to think about all of their waste and where it has to go, and from there, you start to wonder about the antibiotics that are given preventively to the pigs to stop any infection that may occur. They do not actually treat the sick pigs, as there are too many to give each a thorough exam. So, they are given preventatively. This is how cheap meat is made.
Most of the options for change, that Bryan Walsh gives us, involve changing the general public’s frame of mind. We need to stop worrying about the cost of food and start worrying about unhealthy food’s effects on our bodies. I think this may not be realistic, judging by the U.S.’s obesity rate. Another idea is to appeal to the local stores to carry organic foods. This may be the better way to approach the problem, by making it more accessible to consumers, it raises awareness and, hopefully, increases demand for a better way of life.
Works Cited
Walsh, B. (2009, 08 21). Getting Real About the High Price of Cheap Food. Retrieved 02 22, 2012, from Time Magazine Health: https://classes.uaf.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_103307_1%26url%3D

Article 7-
In the article, Sperm Whales Bear Testimony to Ocean Pollution, Dan Ferber talks about the persistent organic pollutants (POPs) that are being found in the skin and blubber of sperm whales around the world.
Using a crossbow to shoot an arrow at the whale, a small core of skin and blubber is taken to test at the lab. These whales are still seemingly unaffected by the pollution, but because it is stored in their fat, they are able to test the concentrations of the POPs they are exposed to.
Sperm whales are great for this test because they migrate all over the world. They can also dive to depths of over 3280 feet for up to an hour and a half. The females live closer to tropical waters, but the males will migrate as far north and south as the ice shelves. (Kerry, 2012) Due to their large migration patterns, they travel through different currents, picking up many different types of pollutants.
What the scientists found is that all the whales tested had some trace of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), but the whales near the Galapagos Islands had the highest concentrations. These PAHs are thought to be responsible for causing cancer in humans, but the effects in whales are unknown. Although PAHs are caused from burning coal, gas and oil, it is also excreted from volcanoes and wildfires. So it is not just human pollution that causes this to become airborne. (Parry, 2010)
Regardless of the causes for the pollutants to exist, they are still not healthy, and are finding their way into the blubber of whales and, more than likely, into the fat of other animals.
Works Cited
Kerry, B. (2012, 02 24). Sperm Whale, Physeter macrocephalus. Retrieved 02 24, 2012, from Animals: Nat Geo Wild: http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/sperm-whale/
Parry, W. (2010, 12 13). Sperm Whales Show Signs of Toxic Contamination. Retrieved 02 23, 2012, from Live Science: http://www.livescience.com/10875-sperm-whales-show-signs-toxic-contamination.html
Ferber, D. (2005). Sperm Whales Bear Testimony to Ocean Pollution. Science Now, 2-3.

Article 8-
The article, Eating Mercury, by Alexandra Gross was, in my opinion, a waste of time. Gross talks about a small study done in 2009, which tested the mercury content in some of the food products on our grocery store shelves. The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) performed this study. They claimed that high fructose corn syrup is the culprit, but not all of the products tested contained mercury. They think the mercury got into the food during the production of caustic soda using mercury-cell technology on old equipment.
The first thing I did after reading this was to start doing research on the effects of high fructose corn syrup. It is actually quite difficult to find an unbiased website to get solid information from. The general consensus seems to be that there isn’t enough research to make a good decision, but sugar, in general, should be limited.
So, it stands to reason, if there is not enough data about the effects of high fructose corn syrup, there will not be enough data on he mercury found in some, not all, of it. This article stated as much, but also pointed out that Quaker Oat bars will not be pulled after this study was published. This was not supposed to be counted as a full-scale study, so why would they pull their bars when they do not know how accurate the information was?
What needs to happen is that another study needs to be performed. It doesn’t do any good to say that mercury was found in some food, but not all of it, without doing more research. There’s not enough here to do anything about it. There’s only enough to make a person paranoid and scared about it.
Works Cited
Gross, A. (2009). Eating Mercury. E: The Environmental Magazine, 20(3), 19-22.

Movie-
The movie King Corn was a great documentary about where our corn comes from and where it goes after it’s grown. Ian and Curt are two friends from college, whose great-grandparents came from the same small town in Iowa. They find someone in Iowa who will let them farm an acre of land and then they farmed it. The fact that these two friends actually grew an acre of corn and followed it to the end result was great to watch.
It was nice that they incorporated the effects of cows only eating grain into the movie. I assumed the movie was just about all of the places where corn is found, but I was happy to find out that they incorporated the bad things into it as well. The movie was unbiased and very informative. The low cost of corn was discussed, as were the farmers and how farming has changed over the years.
Immediately after watching this movie, I called my husband and told him he needed to watch this. Every time I watch, or read something about how cattle is raised, I make my husband look at it. This movie actually made more of an impact than any other because they effectively addressed all of the facts, good and bad.
Works Cited
Woolf, A. (Director). (2007). King Corn [Motion Picture].

Website-
The website, Earth911.com is a great reference for ways to recycle. There are tabs that list how to recycle, why to recycle and news about recycling. The website is not only about ways to recycle, it also talks about problems with our environment that can be solved by recycling and how to live “green”.
My favorite part of the website is the tab that helps you find a local recycling option. The search is great because you can search by location and by the type of item to be recycled. This is helpful to me because I just moved to Fairbanks and I do not know where the closest recycling center is. I feel guilty every time I throw away a can or a newspaper. Now I know where to go.
Another area of the website that I liked was, 10 Things You Never Knew Were Recyclable. There are some great ideas for recycling and then they actually give you the names of the websites to find out even more information.
Overall, this is a very good website with a lot of valuable information. Earth911.com is easy to navigate and a great place to get information on recycling, going “green” or even just trying to make a small difference in the way you live. After reading this, I’ll be starting a composting bin and I will start taking my recyclable products to the appropriate place.

Works Cited
Earth911. (2012). Retrieved 02 26, 21012, from http://www.Earth911.com

Research Proposal and Outline: Topic Change: Organic Farming

Although there are many choices in a grocery store, organic foods should be seriously considered over inorganic produced foods because organic farming reduces chemical pollutions, animal pollutants, and preserves our lands and plants species.

  • Chemical
    • Herbicides
      • Nonorganic solutions
      • Organic solutions
    • Pesticides
      • Nonorganic solutions
      • Organic solutions
    • Fertilizers
      • Nonorganic solutions
      • Organic solutions
  • Animal
    • Types of animal agriculture
      • Cattle, pigs (pens)
      • Chicken (coupe)
    • Animal Waste
      • Feed farms
      • Organic farming
    • Impact of sources of feed
      • Corn fed
      • Grass fed
  • Crops
    • Soil nutrients
      • Inorganic farming methods
      • Organic farming methods
    •  GM’s and Organic
      • What is GM crop
      • Organic crop standards
    • Relevance of no GM crops
      • Plant mixing
      • Food chain effects

Responses #6-10

Article #1

The article Eating Mercury by Alexandra Gross is aimed at the growing number of people who eat High Fructose Corn Syrup or HFCS. The article reveals the results of a study that found levels of mercury in a majority of food containing HFCS. While the FDA has released standards for seafood mercury levels there are no standards and no investigations into the levels on mercury found in other foods. The article’s effectiveness is limited by the scarcity of studies on this topic. With only a couple of studies there is room for argument from the food companies who are focused on their bottom line. These arguments would quickly put to rest if more research was found and the FDA acted on the new information.

The only part of the environment that is directly affected is the human population. The health concerns and toxicity of mercury has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, so humans are at risk.  However, the mercury will eventually find its way to the environment and will pollute but this will take a long time to have any large lasting effect. The effects of mercury on the human body would also be a consideration that warrants further research. How much mercury does it take to harm the human body? Is there enough in the food to cause problems? These questions would solidify the arguments made by Mrs. Gross.

 

Article #2

Captain Charles Moore by Nell Greenberg is an interview for anyone interested in the life and views of Captain Moore, who is the man who discovered the Pacific garbage patch. The article is just a series of questions answered by the Captain about his discovery and the problems and solutions for cleaning up the mess humans have created in the middle of our ocean. The article focuses on the toll the plastics have on the environment and its inhabitants. The author asks good questions that lead to interesting answers from Captain Moore and an overall engaging dialog.

The environment has already suffered greatly from the pollution caused by humans. The cultural obsession with plastic has led to massive amounts of waste that has to go somewhere and ends up in our oceans. Now some can say, “The oceans are so vast; can some plastic trash ever have an effect on anything?” The problem is the plastics absorb other chemical pollutants and sea life eats the plastics and the pollution works its way up the food chain gaining potency with every step. Soon, if not already, our seafood will contain plastic leftovers and we will be directly affected by the environmental contamination. It would be interesting to see how much of the sea life and our seafood already has chemical contamination.

 

Article #3

City of the Future by Carolyn Fry is a detailed look at the tech behind a self-sufficient community in England who aims to supply their own energy using non fossil-fueled methods. Anyone with an interest in living more environmentally friendly would appreciate the efforts of this city of the future.

If every building in the world became self-powered or even tried to lessen their carbon foot print the effect on the environment would be enormous. Small changes and new technologies used in new construction will have lasting positive effects on the environment. Some more detailed information about the technology utilized would increase the effectiveness of this paper.

 

Video

The movie Food Inc. directed by Robert Kenner, offers a revealing look at the American food industry. This film is for anyone who eats and wants to know what goes into the food. The film serves to peel back the veil that hides the food industry from the public eye. The people behind the film just show the secrets of the food industry then allow the viewer to make their own decisions before offering reasons for hope and actions that can be taken by consumers. The director is effective in showing the hidden side of food production through the use of many separate scenes addressing different types of food or hazards and problems caused by a certain food process. Each scene can stand on its own as a short clip and all together they give the viewer a diverse set of perspectives on which to base their personal views.

The environment is suffering from the new and “improved” ways of creating food. The mass use of chemicals releases toxins that are not fully understood into the environment. Genetic engineering has created new plants that are not natural and that mess with the delicate balance of the local ecosystem. The animals that are raised to become food are treated worse and worse as the focus becomes more on the quantity instead of quality. These animals produce massive wastes that pollute the land. Even the final product, food, is hurting the environment. Cheap food does not mean good, efficiently made food. One could argue that the positives created by this low, low price of food outweigh the harm to the environment. From a purely cash view this seems true, however, economics factors in the costs to the environment and when that is considered the argument is invalid. More research on these costs to the environment and our future would greatly help with refuting this and many other counter arguments.

Reading Responses #6-10

Article 1

Kathy Freston wrote an article named “Vegetarian is the New Prius.” Walsh’s article discusses environmental risks involved with mass production of livestock. The article takes a new look at an old problem. The problem is global warming and the production of greenhouse gases.

Her article examines how people are very aware that driving large trucks and Sport Utility Vehicles and consuming fossil fuels produces volumes of Carbon Dioxide. However, what many people do not realize is that the production process of raising, butchering and transporting consumer meat products actually produces more carbon dioxide as well as more harmful greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.

Freston’s article provides numerous statistical facts to back up her position on global warming. His article is easy to read and although it contains statistical data, it does not overpower the reader with too much data. The article is well written and does not preach to the reader. The article merely informs the reader of the dangers of the mass meat production processes and provides alternative ideas on food consumption such as vegetarian diets.

Additional investigation into this subject should include data concerning the volumes of greenhouse gases produced and whether or not this is limited to mass production facilities. Information regarding the greenhouse gas production at small scale meat animal production facilities and private farm production. Also, numbers regarding the volume of forest land being destroyed in order to provide farm land would be useful.

Overall this article is well written and leaves the reader wanting more. This would be a good topic to continue to research.

Article 2

The online periodical The Guardian has an interesting article called “German blue chip firms throw weight behind north African solar project.” This article is written by author Kate Connolly. This article discusses the upcoming plan for numerous European firms to construct large scale solar energy facilities throughout North Africa. These facilities would generate solar electricity and then via large transmission lines, ship the energy throughout Europe.

Connolly’s article contains interesting data that shows the vast amount of energy available throughout North Africa. Just a fraction of this energy could be harnessed and used to power most of Europe.

This article provides only an introduction to this energy project. Further questions to be considered could include the issues in constructing these solar facilities in countries that are currently racked with riots and violence. Are these sites going to cause issues with local tribes or populations? What sort of protection are the transmission lines going to need? Will these facilities provide energy to local populations and cities in Africa or will all energy be shipped to Europe? This article brings up numerous interesting questions that could be investigated.

This article is well written and very interesting. It would be nice to see additional data and further investigation into this subject. This article brings up questions as to why the United States and other nations have not considered investing in this type of green energy. Small scale facilities do exist in the United States but nothing to the scale as the proposed facility in North Africa. Overall this is a very interesting article.

Article 3

Bryan Walsh wrote an article for Time Magazine Health called, “Getting Real about the High Price for Cheap Food.” The article discusses the environmental effects of mass production of consumer meat products. Mass production of meat produces high volumes of waste which can easily enter waterways and eventually make its way to the ocean where it kills off vast numbers of wildlife. In addition to this waste the concentrated living conditions of the animals to be butchered is equal to animal abuse or neglect. If a family pet was kept in these conditions it would be considered animal abuse. Because it is a food animal it is considered okay.

This article also covers an issue that is commonly overlooked when looking at this particular issue. Where does the food for the butchered animals come from? The corn used to feed this concentrated high number of livestock is commercially grown in farms across the nation. To get a high enough yield this corn crop is often fertilized and modified to produce high volume. Not only does this process damage the land but runoff can deposit pesticides and fertilizers in waterways which in turn damages the ocean.

This article is very interesting and well written. Walsh adds enough statistical data to back up his ideas but not so much data as to confuse the reader or become boring. This is a well thought out article which brings to mind concerns and fears about buying meat at the store again. This is an interesting and terrifying topic.

Website

The website http://www.terracycle.net is an interesting website dedicated to recycling items that were previously sent to landfills. This website provides methods of collecting and sending this waste to be recycled, remanufactured or reused. Interestingly enough the teracycle company was started by a college freshman back in the early 2000s and is now a multinational fast growing company. It just goes to show that anyone can make a difference.

Other aspects of this website that are nice are the counters at the top of the screen. There are three counters. There is a counter showing the number of members collecting trash, the waste units of trash collected and the amount of money raised for charity. These counters show that change is possible. At the last count http://www.terracycle.net had nearly 27.5 million members that had collected around 2.2 billion waste units of trash and contributed nearly $3.7 million dollars to charity! That is a pretty decent record for a company started by a college freshman.

Terracycle.net also has incentives. Trash collectors can receive cash or points for every piece of trash collected. Trash collectors can get paid to collect everything from candy wrappers, use cell phones and cereal bags to plastic bottle and outdated digital cameras. The possibilities are endless with this company.

The website is well built. It is easy to navigate and interesting to read. It is visually stimulating yet it does not overpower the viewer with too many color schemes and flashy advertisements. The website’s counters show the viewer what progress is being made as well as providing an optimistic outlook at recycling, which is a losing battle with today’s wasteful society. Overall it is a great website and a great project.

Video

The movie “The Future of Food” was both very interesting, and extremely terrifying. The film delves deep into the world of biotechnology and the gene manipulation world of vegetable crops. The movie discusses the moral and financial shortcomings of big corporate companies patenting vegetable seeds that they have genetically manipulated.

The movie follows several farmers through their struggle big corporate biotechnology companies. It discusses how innocent farmers are attacked and sued by these large companies for patent infringement when out of control genetically modified vegetable begin to grow on their property. As terrible as this scenario actually is, this seems like a plot from a cheesy 1950s horror movie. But in reality this scenario is playing out all over the United States as hundreds of farmers find themselves in the crosshairs of big biotechnology companies and their runaway genetic experiments. As if this wasn’t bad enough, these large biotech companies are churning out genetically modified vegetables at an alarming rate and shipping them off to our neighboring countries and effectively spreading these genetically modified vegetables across the globe.

The video further discusses the physical harm some of these genetic experiments can cause people in the form of severe allergic reactions and other physical ailments. In addition to the dangers in these plants themselves, chemicals needed to contain these herbicide resistant vegetables are more dangerous than most chemicals used in the past. Genetically modified vegetables once concocted to grow faster and bigger and be herbicide resistant are now being fought with super-powerful defoliants similar to the Vietnam-era Agent Orange.

On top of all this these vegetables are breeding with traditional vegetables and their growth is quickly spiraling out of control. These genetic vegetables are quickly taking the world down a dark and dangerous path that could lead to no vegetables at all.

This video portrays the horrors and dangers of modifying our food to make it grow faster and bigger. It shows the dangers of eliminating the genetic diversity of a plant species in favor of one genetically modified super vegetable. This video is well filmed and edited and easily understood by the average person. The movie is not preachy or overly scientific. It is in this simple informative manner that the viewer finds the terrifying reality that is the world of genetically modified vegetables that are finding their way onto our dinner plates.

Essay 2 Thesis Proposal Duckworth

Spring 2012

Essay 2

Tongass National Rainforest

Unification from the Saw Blade to the Sea

Thesis: Although Tongass National Rainforest seems to have a ceaseless supply of timber, an overabundance of wildlife, and plethora of suitable hunting grounds, the timber has its own unique time frame, including: Mass quantity of loggers depleted the amount of timber, diminishing amount of wildlife habitat and hunting grounds.

Spring 2012-Response 6-10 Duckworth

Spring 2012

Response 6-10

Environment

Article 1

In Don Young’s article called, “Oil Exploration Can be a Boom to Alaskans and Environment”, he tries to persuade Alaskans who want to expand from living in Third World-like communities to the Greater Alaskan population to people in oil industries. In his opinion, he views using oil to bring more opportunity to these specific rural communities because of the way Alaskans like to have oil as a resource.

This article was ineffective due to its opinionated statements making it less believable. This implies that the federal government is taking a natural resource/ taking land and using up natural wildlife to benefit them. On the one hand, the government is using the land to benefit Alaska as well as the federal government. On the other hand The federal government is taking away the gorgeous wildlife that Alaska has to offer. I would more closely examine problems that could come up if oil was being transported such as by ship or by land, if the ship wrecks or if there is a whole in a pipeline.

Article 2

In Dan Ferber’s article, “Sperm Whales Bear Testimony to Ocean Pollution”, he tries to inform people who are interested in the marine wildlife to students  who are studying the toxic waste being put into our world’s oceans to people who want to improve what mistakes have been made in the process of chemical waste. The main idea for this article would be watching what types of chemical waste we put into our oceans as well as what we use in our world and how the chemical waste is traveling throughout the oceans.

This article is efficient due to the fact that sperm whales are being harmed by the assortment of chemical waste that their swimming through/ living in everywhere, it also shows how far chemical waste travels through ocean currents. The implication would be the chemical waste that is being transferred all over the world through ocean currents and its effecting the wildlife. Well the counter arguments would probably be where would the chemical waste go, if not into the oceans? If I were to pursue this issue I would go more in depth into the impact this has on the food chain as well as marine ecosystems.

Article 3

In Alexandra Gross’s article, “Eating Mercury”, she wants the general public to know that High Fructose Corn Syrup contains mercury, which is in everyday condiments.  The main objective of this article would have to be that High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is in over one-third of grocery products, which contains a high amounts of mercury, this could cause mercury poisoning from adults to new borns.

This article is effective due to the multiple resources as well as the facts and evidence provided by these credible sources. The Problem of mercury in fish and shellfish has not been fully addressed at this current time, which means testing of fish should be conducted to fully examine effects regarding health concerns. The probability  that the total mercury level stands for mostly inorganic mercury, which doesn’t present a health hazard because it is poorly absorbed when ingested. I would research the amount of mercury in fish and shellfish, as well as what it does to the marine ecosystem.

 

 

Website 1

On the Biodiesel the authors are addressing the general public of ages 16 and above. The important factor here is to validate the significance of using biodiesel as a fuel rather than petroleum diesel to fuel cars.

This website is extremely effective because it not only defines what biodiesel is, but it also explains the positive impact the use of it has on the environment. Due to the fact that biodiesel is made from renewable resources and has lower emissions than petroleum diesel, it is actually better for the environment. This website shows the significance of using biodiesel as a fuel. Pros for the use of biodiesel include: better for the environment, lower emissions, less toxic than table salt and its made in the USA from renewable resources, making us less dependent on foreign oil. Cons on the other hand include: it needs to be directly bought from petroleum distributors, biodiesel producers and marketers, or at a small number of public pumps across the nation.

Website 2

In the “About a Local Burger” website, the authors are trying to appeal to people of all ages because the Local Burger addresses needs that a variety of people have. The authors aim to show that there is a fast food restaurant that can serve delicious food that meets the health needs of various people and supports the surrounding community.

The website is fairly effective because it provides a convincing background about the Local Burger establishment and its mission. It is a positive impact on the environment because it supports local farmers, it fights for humane treatment of animals and workers, and their recycling efforts are visible in the dining room, and disposes of the organic waste properly. At the same time the food is delicious and nutritious. There is only one con about this would be the limited location of just one Local Burger in the United States which makes it hard to visit.

Response #6-10

ARTICLE #1

The article “Electric Bugaboo” by Tim Dickinson tells of the struggle to get started with renewable energy here in the United States.  It would seem natural to believe that the biggest obstacles standing in the way for renewable energy construction would be large corporations that supply energy already, coal and oil.  The shock this article brings is that others how promote “green” ways are the biggest obstacle.  How can we move on with growth in sustainable energy when some of those who should be in support for sustainable energy are against the construction for that renewable energy?

The problem may very well have its roots in the fight environmentalists have been engaged in for so long.  Dickinson relays the idea that the fight isn’t against renewable energy, but instead for against the idea of “big”.  “Big” is associated with bad for many who have been fighting for the safety of the environment.  Now that renewable energy can be produced on a “big” scale some environmentalists are fighting the installation of things like “big solar and wind farms” from being developed.  Those who are environmentalist fighting against “green” energy are doing so because they believe that they are protecting the environment of the areas that would be sites for solar panels and windmills.  These fighters seem to be missing the big picture, and that is the message Dickinson is trying to convey in his article.

Now the fight for green has put environmentalists against environmentalists.  The ones opposed to “big” installations of solar panels or windmills on a stretch of land desire smaller approaches to the energy issue; the idea of solar panels on roof tops are more along the lines of what the environmentalists in opposition to large scale want to see happen.  Their dreams of roof top installations for solar panels are dreams only.  There is a more messy problem with trying to get people to convert their roof tops to solar than having a solar panel field.  There are issues like; the cost of converting, the maintenance, who uses the energy, whether or not people will be compensated, if regulation would be needed, trees in the way of some roofs, if regulation was necessary there is the issue of personal property, rights, and privacy, and the list could go on.  These fields of wind mills and solar panels would be constructed with the surround area in mind, and causing the least amount of damage possible.  That is a much better alternative to things like more oil rigs or coal mines.  When renewable energy is widely available it can make oil and coal less necessary, and cutting back on environmentally unsound energy will result in less impact on the environment overall.  This is the big picture, now if only we could all see it together.

 

ARTICLE #2

Mike Rdsenwald’s article “Fast Food” gives a quick glimpse, not of food but of a biodegradable car.  The article provides a short list of components of the car and what was used to construct those components.  The seat, steering wheel, body, and brakes were all made from recycled or biodegradable materials.  The fuel used for the vehicle is also recycled; the fuel is a biodiesel fuel consisting of cocoa butter and vegetable oil.  The author states that vegetable oil from making fish and chips has been recycled to be used as fuel for the car.  Rdsenwald makes it a point to let readers know that the car performs well and even goes fast.

The purpose of the article is to make people aware that such a car exists.  Perhaps Rdsenwald hopes that people will have enough interest in this car that it will help keep projects going to eventually mass produce vehicles for the public, with this car as the fore runner.  Other than listing the innovative and environmentally friendly aspects of this car, there is no evidence that the author’s intent is to provoke such an interest.  If the intent of the article is simply to give a glimpse of an interesting new technology for a car, then it does so just fine.  Any stance the author takes about this technology is implied through all of the positive attributes listed.  The car certainly seems very environmentally friendly from materials used to make the parts to the radiator to the fuel the car runs on.

What then are the drawbacks?  The author neglects to inform readers of any possible negative aspects, only listing all positive features.  One counterargument could be based on the subject of the car’s fuel.  Where will people be able to purchase the fuel?  Would there be enough recycled fuel to feed the need for fuel?  If not, then what could be the environment impact of producing vegetable oil for fuel?  It is clear that the fuel issue would certainly need further research in order to determine just how environmentally friendly it really is.

 

ARTICLE #3

“Eating Mercury” by Alexandra Gross is an article presenting information about mercury in foods we may very well eat.   Although it seems that fish is commonly known to have mercury and the mercury in fish can affect a person’s health, it is not well known that we may be ingesting mercury with other foods we consume that have no fish or other seafood present in the ingredient list.  Instead of fish or seafood being the source of the mercury addressed in the article it seems that high-fructose corn syrup is the culprit.  Gross tells us that not only have levels of mercury been found in foods containing high-fructose corn syrup, but that these same foods have not been removed from the shelves.  Companies implemented in the study reported by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) contest that the findings are not viable.  Another reason given by Gross that these foods have not been removed from shelves is that the mercury in the foods in question would not be organic mercury, which is the mercury known to cause adverse affects on people when the levels are too high in their bodies.  The mercury in foods containing high fructose corn syrup would be inorganic, and not as easily absorbed in our bodies.

The intent of this article is certainly to inform any possible readers of what could be in the next bite of food they take.  There should be an outrage that something is being found in our foods which is not meant to be there in the first place.  “Eating Mercury” shows the disconcerting side of mercury found in foods containing high-fructose corn syrup and balancing that information with the fact of which kind of mercury it is addressing, organic versus inorganic.  Either way, the author brings the reader back to the point that this should not be in our foods and we should care that it is.

More research should be done on these foods as to whether or not they do contain mercury.  One of the arguments presented by companies implemented in the study is that the study itself cannot be considered conclusive evidence.  An untainted and unbiased study needs to be done on the foods listed as containing mercury as well as any other food containing high-fructose corn syrup.  High-fructose corn syrups should be put to the test as well, if not above the foods that list high-fructose corn syrup as an ingredient.  The study high-fructose corn syrup from the different plants that produce the product will help confirm whether or not it is the high-fructose corn syrup that is the culprit in the mercury case in the first place.

Regardless of the fact of whether or not the inorganic mercury would have negative health effects on people is irrelevant to the fact that is simply does not belong in our food.  Even more, standards are set for mercury in other sources and there is no scientific way to prove that inorganic mercury will not cause any health issues in people.

 

WEBSITE

The site Guerrilla Gardening seems to be aimed primarily at people in Europe.  At the top of the home page there is a paragraph with an explanation of how the concept started.  The website’s author states that he began his project around London.  The main idea of the website and the project is to be a “growing arsenal for anyone interested in the war against neglect and scarcity of public space as a place to grow things, be they beautiful, tasty(or both!).”

The website is effective in the fact that it shows viewers many different ideas and places that “Guerrilla Gardening” has taken place.  The website gives lengthy stories, but they are encouraging and inspiring.  The concept of beautifying areas that lack growth of vegetation is inspiring and a great way to get people involved with the desire to have plants around.  Growing plants is probably one of the best ways to get people interested in natural environments as well.  I would love to say that “Guerilla Gardening” can do only good to the environment and no bad, but there are some precautions that should be addressed.
The most serious matter would be introducing a plant that would have a negative impact.  The negative impact that would be very damaging would be to introduce a new plant to an area that would aggressively spread.  An aggressive plant could start choking out indigenous plants, and rather than add beauty it would be a rampant nuisance.

The website fills a niche by providing an inspiration to make areas beautiful.  People react to what is around them, and beauty can have a positive effect.  Using plants to achieve this goal is an added bonus.  Just be sure that plants being used are safe.

VIDEO

The Future of Food blew me away.  The main issue of the film was genetically altered food plants.  The movie also addresses issues with patents on seeds/plants, and the negative impacts of both issues.  The movie tells how plants are genetically altered and the reasons behind how it got started along with why it continues.  Patenting seeds become a side effect of the genetic altering science.  I feel this is a must see video for everyone.  There are more issues to address than the two listed here in this review, and I feel that viewing the movie is the best way to be filled in on everything this movie touches on.  This review will stick to genetically altered plants.

Although I feel that the main point of the movie is about genetically altered plants, this movie encompasses not only the alteration but all that has come with genetic altering.  First, a plant is being changed and it is not happening in a natural way.  Plants naturally evolve on change throughout time.  Plants can become domesticated through practices to help cultivate the plants and crosspollination can create different plants.  The idea of genetically altering plants takes the natural process out and injects laboratory science.  The movie does an effective job at presenting the issue of genetically modified plants.  The movie does move into different issues that all have roots in genetically modifying plants.  Perhaps The Future of Food is meant to have its audience see the big picture rather than just focusing on one small part.  There is more that needs to be addressed than genetically modified foods on our plates.

When addressing the genetically modified plants, we come to an environmental issue.  As these plants are being used they are also being spread.  The movie gives instances when seeds of genetically modified plants have germinated in areas other than where the original plant was grown.  This means that these plants can be spread and cross with organic natural plants, and poses the threat that one day there may no longer be any organic plants to harvest.

Responses #’s 6-10

Video: The Future of Food

This documentary attempts to explain to the food consuming public a fraction of the science behind genetically modified foods. In the film, narrators take a tone aligned with conspiracy theorists with an objective of uncovering a lie perpetrated against the people who have consumed foods under false pretenses. While the film seems unnecessarily dry and unmoving, director, writer and producer, Deborah Koons Garcia gives us an effective and educational introduction to GMOs. The science that created genetically modified foods and some of the politics involved in the production of them are highlighted items.

The Future of Food references an attempt made at a “green revolution”, the goal of which would be to end hunger in the world by science that would create such an abundance of food that no person should go hungry. The genetically modified food however would create monocultures of food that proved to be extremely susceptible to insects and disease. To combat this barrier would mean bringing on a barrage of pesticides and herbicides, some of which proving to be historically disastrous to the health of the environment.

Another important element of this film is it’s focus on companies who stood to profit from science used to combat the pests and illnesses of crops, and their patents on these products and for the first time actual seed. This patented seed had huge effects on farmers and crop diversity.

The Future of Food does not speak much to the merits of the initial intention to create enough food for people, and what potential good the creation of GMOs has done in the world in terms of hunger. One question after watching the documentary for the view might be: What are the barriers for the more idealistic farm? In a genetically diverse, organic, buy local food market, how are the working class served as well? If GMOs were no more today in this world, what would the implications be for populations on public assistance, or school food programs, or any other social service attempting to feed people only by subsidized means?

 

Garcia, D. K., Hillgrove, V., Boekelheide, T., Hansen, M., Pusztai, A., Pollan, M., Muldavin, J., … Lily Films. (2007). The future of food. Mill Valley, Calif.: Lily Films.

 

Website: National Geographic-The Green Guide

The National Geographic operates an intricate online magazine dedicated to environmental wellness in one’s everyday life. This website provides news on current events in the world of environmentalism, and informative quizzes designed to test the visitor’s knowledge on questions about plastics, energy usage, water source sustainability, and the like. Much of the information provided on the website is regarding environmental vacationing, how to make your home more green, and buying guides. The extent of focus that the website puts on the aforementioned items leads one to believe that the intended audiences are middle class homeowners and consumers. The Geographic’s assumed objective is to bring environmentalist referrals to their audience, and in this effort they are certainly successful. Although many consumers may not be able to afford green vacations or own their home in which to pull every environmental bell and whistle, the website is also valuable in that it’s lessons are more far reaching. Everyone uses light bulbs and charges their cell phones, and there is also plenty to learn regarding the simpler, or more everyday, things in life.

It’s news and article links also follow the National Geographic’s golden standard in terms of intrigue and clarity. If there is a niche filled by this website it would only be one created by the National Geographic themselves, as they have been a dynamic force in global awareness for generations. These generations have seen the world grow smaller and smaller through communications and the world wide web itself, therefore it seems extremely fitting for this website to be administered by such an appropriate organization.

 

http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/green-guide/

 

 

Article 1: German blue chip firms throw weight behind north African solar project

 

In this article from 2009, journalist Kate Connolly reports from Berlin to readers of The Guardian about a group of large companies and their discussions regarding their investment in Europe’s alternative energy future.

Connolly’s reporting seems effortless as she describes some of the complexities in Germany’s largest energy company’s plans to branch forward into a greener future for energy production by exploring ways and means to harness a fraction of the solar energy potentially produced in Africa and transporting for use in Europe.

Spokespeople for the large organizations are cited in discussing some of their motivations and concerns as this is being discussed only months after a catastrophic global economic meltdown in 2008. Recovery from the economic collapse was only being spoken of in terms of hope for years to come, so it could seem strange to read about businesses meeting to discuss investment in new ideas. However it appears to be quite the noble cause as the investment implies environmental protectionism and a focus on shifting fuel habits towards the use of renewable resources. One person involved in the meetings is referenced as supporting the efforts to transport or produce solar energy but not the idea of these very large companies being in charge of it. Perhaps to this global citizen a move towards renewable energy is also somehow linked to sustainable community and smaller investments.

It would be interesting, now that it IS the future, to see what came of these meetings and what is happening now with the solar energy potential in the northern part of the African continent, and who is leading the way.

 

Connolly, K. (2009, June 16). German blue chip firms throw weight behind north African solar project. Guardian.co.uk

 

 

Article 2: Oil exploration can be a boon to Alaskans and environment.

 

United States House of Representatives member Don Young, resident of Fort Yukon, Alaska appeals to readers of the Christian Science Monitor more than fifteen years ago as our government was beginning to consider options to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge is just a part of the land that Alaska and the US hold aside as untouchable by industry in an effort to protect portions of the wilderness left pristine after oil companies have succeeded in conquest upon much of it for the sake of fossil fuels and revenue.

Mr. Young is effective as he argues that the impact of exploration or drilling in this part of the world would be minimal in terms of wildlife and could hold monetary potential for the sufferers who still don’t have plumbing. While he is able to scale down the nervousness felt at the mention of drilling in ANWR, it seems untruthful when he claims that not one animal has been injured or killed in the drilling and harvest of oil on the north shore of Alaska. There are indirect consequences not being considered, most obviously the effect that global warming has had on many species in the region, and that global warming is a sadness perpetrated by humanity’s hunger for the same fossil fuels the congressman argues will result in positive consequences for Alaska’s Native people. In pursuit of a bigger understanding around this issue, some useful questions might be: Which Alaska Native communities have had the greatest economic gains from the Alaskan oil industry? What do these communities see as the pros and cons of having these funds and at what expense?

 

Young, D. (1995, October 13). Oil exploration can be a boon to Alaskans and environment. Christian Science Monitor. p. 18.

 

 

Article 3: Eating Mercury.

 

Just in case there needed to be another reason not to eat foods containing high fructose corn syrup, we have one now courtesy of Alexandra Gross and E. magazine. Gross reports to mindful eaters that alongside obesity and diabetes, consumers of packaged foods preserved and sweetened by this very popular ingredient should now also consider that corn syrup has shown in tests to contain mercury, which is a neurotoxin in humans.

Mercury occurs in many fish, so much of the caution recommended to people regarding possible mercury poisoning has been soely foucused on moderation in consumption of those foods. However this article claims that during tests, an alarming number of syrups and condiments also contain the poison and that people are eating it up without warning. Those either conducting the tests or whistle blowing the FDA, however, are clearly with motive as the particular group cited is an agriculture watchdog group, and claims regarding the FDA’s knowledge of such scandal are made by a former employee.

Even so, if an even moderately careful eye is kept on the harmful effects of this extremely popular sweetener, it’s neither hard to imagine or surprising that high fructose corn syrup could likely be contaminated with a toxin like mercury. The link that chains together GMOs, modern agriculture, corn syrup manufacturing and harm done to the earth and air is strong and well documented.

Since this article is several years old one might be curious as to how many of the supposedly contaminated foods have still not expired on the shelves of convienient stores across the country.

 

Gross, A. (2009). Eating Mercury. E: The Environmental Magazine, 20(3), 19-22.


 

 

 

 

Girard Gaul- Response #6-10

Vegetarian is the new Prius

Kathy Freston’s article, Vegetarian is the new Prius, is aimed at health conscious adults that are interested in being green or reducing their impact on the Earth. The article highlights the fact that while some measures are being taken to become greener in the form of updated homes or environmentally friendly cars, one of the largest green problems lies within society as a whole, not as individuals. Freston examines the growing demand for poultry and beef products in our nation and what that demand is doing to our environment.
The fact is that being green isn’t just about driving the right car or putting in better windows, there’s much more to it. One third of the greenhouse gases produced are methane and nitrous oxide since the industrial revolution. A large part of these contributions come from agricultural farming of animals and their digestive track. 37% of our methane and 65% of our nitrous oxide comes from these agricultural farming processes.

The article is effective in the sense of raising general awareness about the subject. While many people look to cars and factories as the largest offenders in producing greenhouse gases many tend to forget about farming. To ask or require people to switch to a vegetarian diet in an effort to reduce the total output of greenhouse gases is ridiculous. Luckily this article isn’t asking that, it’s merely bringing light to a cloudy subject.

If current meat consumption rates grow as they have been, the U.S. will be writing a check that our environment can’t cash. Americans as a whole already have a problem with overconsumption; they need to begin to address their actual consumption needs as well as their health. By switching half of their diet to a purely vegetarian diet, America as a whole could cut our agricultural demands for meat in half.
There are no counter arguments addressed in the text, but there are a few popular counterarguments. The first counterargument that many people throw into the ring is that it is not natural for humans to exist on a purely vegetarian diet. This in itself is true, however due to the increases in technology, humans can now survive without meat with the use of supplements and vitamins. Certain things such as iron and creatine are normally extracted by the human body from red meat, but with a simple supplement these could be replenished in our diet.
I would research the actual level at which greenhouse gases are being produced and which percentage of that comes from agricultural farming. It would be important to break this down in an effort to define exactly where these gases are coming from before placing blame or coming up with a resolution. It is apparent that our farming processes are causing a significant level of damage to our environment, but the industry as a whole needs to be examined, not just the section producing chicken and beef.

Getting Real About the High Price of Cheap Food

In Brian Walsh’s article, Getting Real about the High Price of Cheap Food, he trains his argument toward adults with a moderate to high level of intelligence. To understand the meaning of the high price of cheap food one must understand what the real costs are to our nation and Walsh does a fine job of explaining them. The people in Walsh’s target audience are likely health conscious and environmentally responsible.

The point of Walsh’s article is that while we are able to produce unlimited supplies of food for our nation at low prices we are doing so in horrible, dangerous ways. The methods currently being used to produce pork and chicken as highlighted in the article focus on densely packing large numbers of animals into spaces so small they can’t move. By putting so many animals together in such tight spaces it is impossible to clean the environment properly. This lack of cleanliness gives way to a nutrient rich environment where germs and bacteria grow and fester. As pointed out by Walsh in the article, companies are pumping the livestock with antibiotics in an effort to combat the disease rich environment and keep their product healthy. Where do all these antibiotics go when all is said and done?

Large in part most of these antibiotics are passed on to the consumer when we cook and eat these animals. These antibiotics end up in our bodies and begin to change our health without our recognition in the form of stealth substances. Antibiotics aren’t the only stealth substances that we are finding in our foods these days, many commercially grown animals are pumped full of hormones in an effort to reduce growth time and increase the size of the animals beyond their natural boundaries. These hormones get passed on to us as well when we consume these commercially grown animals.

The problems with the food itself is only half of the issue that Walsh brings to the table. The other issues that are addressed are the secondary results of producing such large numbers of animals on a commercial scale. Walsh examines the expansive cesspools of manure that stream from these factories and stretch alongside our neighbor hoods. These cesspools offer a scent unique to the interior of an old outhouse on a hot Tennessee summer day. The neighboring residents are bathed in this gut wrenching, putrid stench, all so that America can add bacon to their Double Quarter Pounder for only 49 cents. The waste by products of these farming operations are creeping into our ecosystem and disrupting everything in it’s way. If America’s addiction to low priced meat products isn’t dealt with, we could be looking at eating ourselves out of a home in the foreseeable future.

The article is effective because it reaches out to readers on an individual level. Many readers feel they are incapable of making changes that matter and believe that they need to join a large movement or organization in order to make a difference. This article highlights the possibility and level of impact that several people can have if each an every one of them changes their life slightly. These changes aren’t so large that people’s lives will be changed dramatically, in fact most people’s lives will become easier as they reduce the amount of meat they consume.

Walsh makes the implication in his article that if consumption rates continue to grow at their current levels we are going to eat ourselves out of a home. Walsh states that Americans, “face a future of eroded farm lands, hollowed-out countrysides, scarier germs and higher health costs”, and these are only the beginning. No one knows the full extent to which our country will suffer if we continue to consume at our current level. In order to save our planet and ourselves we need to take a look at farming sustainably.

There are no real counterarguments to the problems addressed in this article. The only real counterargument that can be presented is the value of low priced food for the citizens of this country. While it is important to provide affordable means by which people can survive there is a difference between eating for survival and eating for pleasure. A large part of our meat consumption comes from eating specific foods for pleasure, not out of a necessity to survive. In order to change the way in which we produce our foods, we need to change the way in which we create demand for our foods.

If I were to pursue this issue I would continue on to research the health benefits of several different diets and compare them to one another. I would begin by looking at diets that are high in poultry, beef and dairy products and compare them to diets with low levels of those items. By comparing caloric values and fat contents simple inferences could be made as to which was the healthier of the two. After identifying the healthier of the two I would research recipes that fit the parameters of the healthier diets and show my audience the potential that healthy eating can have.

Nothing Wasted, Everything Gained

The audience being targeted is an adult audiences that cares about renewable energy being developed on a new level. The target audience is conscious about the effects they have on the environment and want to find new ways in order to reduce the overall impact they have on the environment. This specific group isn’t necessarily specific in their demographic make up. This is a group consisting of college students, well educated middle class workers, affluent upper middle class individuals with the means to afford new technology and many more.
The main point of the article is that even in the most inhospitable environment humans can thrive in an environmentally friendly manner with the use of technology. These scientists took the idea that one day due to massive population expansion mankind is going to be forced to start settling down in previously uninhabitable areas. This group of scientists consisting largely of engineers and soil chemists took the idea that a community could be created with the use of the appropriate technology that had a zero emission impact on the environment. By creating Gaviotas and maintaining it, this group has shown the world that the future truly lies in technological advancements for a greener world.
The article is effective in educating the audience about the successes that have been made in creating zero environmental impact establishments in which people can settle down. The search for zero impact cities started when greenhouse gases were first identified as a potential source of our planet’s warming trend. Ever since scientists have been searching for ways in which to reduce the total output of greenhouse gases that humans are producing. Many scientists have focused on reducing the total output that vehicles have in regards to greenhouse gases, but the total output is much larger than vehicles alone.

Energy production contributes a large amount to the total production of greenhouse gases by the United States. In Gaviotas the energy is produced by wind generators and solar resources which eliminates any and all carbon production which contributes to the zero impact society that has been developed at Gaviotas. America needs to take a look at Gaviotas and use this establishment as an example of what society could achieve with the proper implementation of green technology. Alaska has traditionally been reliant upon fossil fuels as a means of supporting their energy needs, but green energy production is now being explored and developed as a sustainable means of energy production.

If more investment is directed toward green energy production and green technology we can develop a world that runs on zero emission energy. With a large percentage of the U.S.’ s pollution stemming from energy and product production a zero emission energy source could cut our level of pollution dramatically. While most businesses have been focusing on the bottom dollar, the environment has been taking a dramatic blow at the expense of progress. By turning our focus away from progress and putting more of our focus on becoming environmentally friendly we can extend the amount of time we have in this world.

Critics of green energy and green technology like to remind the public of the cost to implement them and focus on the economic unfeasibility that green technology has to the public. Green technology however can’t be looked at in the same light at traditional technology, they are two different subjects. When looking at green technology compared to traditional technology you have to look at secondary benefits. If an organization is looking to use alternative, “green” products in their production process they can’t simply look at prices across the board. Green products may offer secondary benefits that outweigh the price difference such as: extended returns on investment (renewable energy sources), reduced environmental impact (environmentally friendly compounds vs. toxic/ synthetic compounds), increased goodwill (public approval for reducing one’s environmental impact), and increased social/ethical responsibility.

If I were to pursue this issues I would research other organizations that had implemented these or similar technologies in an effort to make their community more sustainable. By looking at other communities in comparison to Gaviotas an individual can see what works and what doesn’t. In an interview with Paolo Lugari in the book, Gaviotas: A Village to Reinvent the World, Lugari talks about Gaviota’s approach to solving technological problems and coming up with green solutions. Lugari says that the approach of Gaviotas is to incorporate everyone into the idea generating process instead of utilizing the traditional top-down approach that many communities have. By incorporating everyone a community can be sure to generate the best possible answer.

All the answers in this document were in response to the article, Nothing Wasted, Everything Gained, by Alan Weisman.

Web Site: Guerrilla Gardening

This website is devoted to people all over the world that are trying to make a small local difference for the environment. This website isn’t strictly for adults (some contributors guerrilla garden with their children), however most of the contributors are adults. The developers created an open source website that allows users from several different countries in several different continents to post and show off the difference that they are making. Most of the users on the website pick vacant lots or small run down abandoned flower beds in which to plant a couple different types of flowers or plants. While the overall impact on the environment is minimal, these people do make a difference on a local level.

The main focus of this website is to get people involved with contributing to their environment on a local level. Many people are constantly looking for ways in which they can contribute to the environment in a positive manner. The guerrilla gardening website gives people a cheap and affordable option in contributing to the environment. By turning abandoned flower beds and vacant lots into eye pleasing mini gardens or flower beds more people become interested in the environment and what these mini gardens represent. By raising awareness in the general public and showing what a difference a little elbow grease can do, many people become motivated to do something themselves.

This website fills a niche desired by everyday men and women that want to participate in something larger than themselves. These are people driven to make the world they live in a better place, one pedal at a time. The good aspects of this site are that it is easy to join and post on the forum and it’s easy to access. Some sites make joining a long process and posting on the site even harder. This deters users from accessing and utilizing the site. The negative aspects are that until this class I had never heard of it. To be truly effective and reach more people the site needs to do more advertising.

Video Response: King Corn

The video I reviewed was the film, King Corn, a film about the modern corn industry. In the movie two college graduates, Ian Cheney and Curtis Ellis, go to Iowa to learn the process of growing, harvesting, selling and consuming corn. Their goal was to understand the entire process of corn production, all the way from seed to stalk and to do this they persuaded a farmer to help them. In the film the farmer allowed them to plant corn on a one acre parcel where they tended it until it was ready o be harvested. Once the corn was harvested they try to find the end-users of corn in America.

Ian and Curtis find that corn is being turned into all sorts of potentially dangerous products and substances for Americans. These products aren’t dangerous in a direct manner, but they are causing Americans all sorts of problems. Corn is being used by many manufacturers to sweeten food and drink such as candy and soda even though our country is facing an obesity epidemic. Corn is also being poured into feed troughs throughout America in an effort to drive down costs of meat production on several levels, all the way from pork, to beef, to chickens. By restricting these animals to a limited corn based diet we are taking them off of their natural diet and essentially creating all new types of animals. While this is a theory and hasn’t been proven it is a serious enough matter to be investigated.

What would happen to these corn supplies if a rouge epidemic wiped them out? Where would our food supplies be and what would be the effect on Americans and their diet? What if the government stopped subsidizing the production of corn? Where would that leave farmers and the corn supply of America? These are all important things to consider when looking at the production and use of corn in modern America. Balance is important whether it be in our diets or in our national economy.

Responses #6-10

Responses #6-10

Article #1

As Bob the Builder would say, “Can we do it? Yes we can!” We are all responsible for the changes that need to be done to ensure that life here on Earth is the best it can be. In an interview done by Nell Greenberg, Charles Moore tells how while sailing his boat from Hawaii back to California he came across a very disturbing display of garbage in the middle of the sea. Moore gives a very scary account of how plastic trash has been deposited into the oceans from every country on earth and is now becoming a devastating part of the not so natural oceanic food chain. There are many factors to how and why these plastics are getting into the ocean system. By looking at how the products that are packaged we can cut down on the amount of plastics used. Moore made an observation on how the wonderful sandy beaches of Hawaii will become not sandy beaches but plastic beaches. With research that Moore has done on the trash he has collected along with tiny fish that were caught in his nets, he has found with every passing year more and more plastic particles that are making their way into the natural food chain. Not only is it affecting the food chain of the ocean but since people are consuming more and more fish every year there is a great possibility that we are being affected as well. By buying products that are packaged in as little plastic as possible will help to keep the plastic that goes into the garbage out of the ocean and not in our fish dinner that might be eaten tomorrow night.

References
Greenberg, N. (2009). Captain Charles Moore. Earth Island Journal, 24(1), 47-50.

Article #2

If Alaskan Natives can find a way to coexist with nature and be able to bring their communities into the 21st century by allowing oil exploration in the Arctic why should the government have such a big issue with it? With the work that is being done on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has not been a cause for concern because of the quality in which the oil companies are drilling. They take great concern for the environment and how the work they do affects the wildlife in the area. In the article Oil exploration can be a boon to Alaskans and environment by Don Young he points out with the oil that can be drilled in the Prudhoe Bay area it can bring a considerable amount of oil to the United States oil production without having to import. Young also points out that if the companies are allowed to go at a safe pace that will ensue then safety of the animals and the land both oil rigs and wildlife can live harmoniously. But if the government gets involved there could be an issue of another oil embargo like there was in the 1970′s which could cause undue stress on safety issues that the Alaskan Natives have put into place to make sure their livelihood is made a priority and that of the natural habitat and the animals. If something works why change it? The need to improve everything for the future does not need to apply to every aspect of life. In this case slow and steady is the way to run this course with the least interference from the government to regulate production time frames. There are enough people who are looking out for Alaska’s wellbeing to keep regulation in check.

References
Young, D. (1995, October 13). Oil exploration can be a boon to Alaskans and environment. Christian Science Monitor. p. 18.

Article #3

Many people in the United States have heard that the leading cause of the devastating green house gases that are produced come from animal farms not from cars. This can be kind of hard to believe when you look around and see how bad traffic is getting. According to the article Vegetarian is the New Prius by Kathy Freston she informs us how just by switching our diets to a vegetarian one can cut down the amount of methane gases that are released into the air. By not eating meat the demand will decrease creating a decrease in the amount of animals that are raised each year. A study done by the U.N. shows that a fifth of all methane gases that are created are produced by the livestock that is raised for our food. This to me is not that hard to believe having grown up in one of the livestock capitals of the U.S., Weld County Colorado. The smell, as a farmer friend of my family says is one of money. The one thing that I think we should look more into is the idea of as many have said of our diet is to eat things in moderation. I feel instead of going completely vegetarian and putting countless livestock farmers out of business look into organically grown meats such as chickens and cows that have been raised free ranged locally to where you live cutting down on transportation emissions. Buy from local butchers as well instead of from large corporate grocery stores. Help to bring jobs back for local farmers instead of making them go bankrupt instead. This article has a lot of good points but we all need to do our part to help our communities thrive by getting back to the way life should be lived.

References
Freston, K. (2007). Vegetarian is the New Prius. Huffpost Healthy Living.

Website

http://www.biodiesel.com

On the website Biodiesel they explain the many myths and facts about this alternative fuel. I was very impressed by how they are very interested in getting kids involved in how this fuel works. They explain how one myth behind biodiesel should be looked into a little bit closer. The myth that it takes more energy to produce biodiesel then you get from the end product is one I was always told and one reason I thought it was only a pipe dream, but with scientific proof and facts they explain that myth and many others. They have an area where you can see the latest news regarding biodiesel and also have where you can find out where to buy biodiesel. With the many resources found in on this website it is very helpful tool for anyone looking for answers to questions they may have had regarding biodiesel. I know the questions I have had I found answers to. The one thing about biodiesel that I have always found to be very unique is the smell when it is being burned as fuel. A city bus in Ft.Collins, Colorado has for many years now been running on biodiesel. When driving downtown and you pass this bus you get an instant craving for french fries. Not sure if this is the best thing for those looking to keep their diet but to me it smells better than the alternative. With all the ways we can help decrease our carbon footprint biodiesel might be a good way to start.

Video

Collapse

Many people still look at guys like Michael Ruppert. He may be a little eccentric with bow he goes about telling people about his findings but he isn’t really telling us things we don’t or shouldn’t already know. For years we have all know that oil or fossil fuels are not a renewable resource and that one day the wells will be dry and the oil will be gone. Fortunately that day is not here yet and we have a decision to make on how we are going to go forward from here. As Ruppert explains in the video Collapse everyone around the world is responsible for using approximately 85 million barrels of oil a day and since most wells have reached their peak oil point we are all on downhill slide to where we need to figure out how to transition from fossil fuels to an alternative source of energy. According to Ruppert the only alternative energy sources that are in a sense renewable are solar and wind. The only issue with these sources of energy is that the the power that is generated goes to the closest homes first and the remaining power goes from there. Communities across the country need to pull together and find a way to form small energy powerhouses to support their area. Also learning the fine art of farming and learning to raise animals for food is a must. To ensure, as Ruppert put it, in order to survive the transition phase we need to help those directly around us first. This video really put into perspective how important it is to get back to nature to make sure future generations are able to enjoy our home too.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 38 other followers