Environment

Global warming, healthy food, clean water, population control, and nature protection. Comprehensive coverage on Environment here.

50 Things Restaurant Servers Should Never Do
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM.

The New York Times has a blog post up now (part 1 of "100 Things") that outlines the best etiquette for restaurant employees. And no, this is not a 'remember to wash your hands' or 'don't spit in the food' kind of list -- it's a bit above that. Having worked only briefly in food service at one of my first jobs, I have to say that being a great server is really hard and I definitely notice and appreciate immensely when it is done well.

I agree with just about everything on the list except for number 6: "Do not lead the witness with, 'Bottled water or just tap?' Both are fine. Remain neutral." Actually, unless you are some place where the tap water is not drinkable, then I'd say, ditch the bottled water, like so many high-end (and other) restaurants are starting to do. It's better for the environment and often is actually better quality water, too.

Here's one of my favorites from the list: "If someone likes a wine, steam the label off the bottle and give it to the guest with the bill. It has the year, the vintner, the importer, etc." I've never seen that done before, but I'd be super impressed!

Here's a couple more good ones:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

University Of Kentucky Approves New $7 Million Industry-Funded Dorm Named After Coal
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on October 28, 2009 at 9:15 PM.

You can’t make this stuff up, as this Think Progress repost makes clear.

A group led by Alliance Coal CEO Joseph Craft recently proposed donating $7 million to the University of Kentucky for a new dorm for the men’s basketball team. The catch, however, is that the dorm would have to be named after Craft’s true love: coal. The proposed change sparked intense protests from local environmentalists and students. One professor said that as universities become “models for new energy sources,” putting “coal” on a prominent building could “make it difficult to attract top students and faculty members to the university.”

[JR:  Yes, coal industry will spend millions for a new dorm -- and yet Massey Energy refused to fund a new school so students can move away from coal processing plant!]

Yesterday afternoon, the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees voted 16-3 to approve the proposal for the new dorm, which will be named the “Wildcat Coal Lodge.” Significantly, two of the “no” votes were from faculty representative Ernie Yanarella and Student Government President Ryan Smith, who said he opposed the motion “as a voice for the student body.”

Students in the audience were reportedly not allowed to speak at the meeting. After the vote, people began chanting, “Move forward, not backward,” forcing the trustees to temporarily recess. More on the events at the meeting:

The vote set off shouts from about 30 protesters, mostly students, who attended the meeting.

“Big Coal is about to go down, and the university’s going down with them,” said Cor de Jong, who described himself as “a Lexingtonian and a basketball fan.”

A statement from students was passed out to board members moments before the vote. “They did not read our statement,” said Katie Goldey, a senior majoring in international studies. “They weren’t even given a chance to read it.”

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Sorry Deniers, There's No Such Thing as 'Global Cooling'
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 28, 2009 at 11:15 AM.

The latest plot by some global warming deniers is to push a bogus 'theory' that the earth is actually cooling, instead of warming. But the AP's Seth Borenstein took the hot air out of their sails. In his recent story, Borenstein explains that the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians to see what kinds of trends they found. "The experts found no true temperature declines over time," he reports. Instead, they found "a distinct decades-long upward trend," which of course has been backed up by the world's leading scientists for years.

So who's behind the global cooling charade? You may be surprised. The BBC recently ran a poorly researched news story and so did the New York Times' Andrew Revkin. But the most attention lately has come from the new book, Super Freakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. The authors wrote, "Then there's this little-discussed fact about global warming: While the drumbeat of doom has grown louder over the past several years, the average global temperature during that time has in fact decreased."

Since publication one of the authors has tried to explain that they were really just being ironic -- and they don't actually believe in so-called 'global cooling.' But the book is so rife with scientific errors (as Joe Romm explains in great detail) that their 'irony' just isn't a valid excuse.

Borenstein points to a better explanation from a climate scientist at the DOE's Lawrence Livermore Labs, who said it was "'a concerted strategy to obfuscate and generate confusion in the minds of the public and policymakers' ahead of international climate talks in December in Copenhagen."

Good thing that reporters like Seth Borenstein are still doing their job and actually reporting on the science. The last thing we need before Copenhagen is more media misinformation.

Lindsey Graham Drilled by Big Oil
Posted by Steven D., Booman Tribune on October 23, 2009 at 8:46 AM.

Republican Senator from the Great State of South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, apparently isn't chummy enough with one of the major constituencies of the Republican Party. Neoconservatives? No, not them. Religious Fundamentalists? Maybe, but he's still talking the talk. Glenn Beck and the tea-baggers? You betcha, but that's not the group that he's really offended. Offended enough that they are running advocacy ads against him in his home state. No the group that is really pissed off at Senator Graham is the group that thought he was always in their hip pocket, bought and paid for, as it were: Big Oil: 

WASHINGTON -- A Washington advocacy group with close ties to Big Oil started running ads Thursday on South Carolina radio stations, targeting Sen. Lindsey Graham for supporting taxes on carbon emissions.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Limbaugh Calls for NYT Environmental Writer to Kill Himself
Posted by Tara Lohan on October 21, 2009 at 9:05 AM.

Once again, Rush Limbaugh is stoking the fires of hate. Yesterday he told millions of his listeners: "Mr. Revkin, why don't you just go kill yourself, and help the planet by dying."

He's talking about Andrew Revkin who writes the Dot Earth blog for the New York Times and is a prominent environmental writer.

What got Rush's pants all twisted? Some commentary Revkin had given at a symposium discussing the environment and population growth. Revkin explains on his blog, "I had talked, in part, about recent studies concluding that programs offering family planning information and services to women seeking smaller families, in essence, had a climate value by avoiding emissions of greenhouse gases that would come with more kids."

Revkin took the ideas forward and mused about what he saw as a "thought experiment" -- meaning something hypothetical to get us thinking.

I've written quite a bit about whether markets in carbon credits earned by cutting, avoiding or absorbing such emissions -- whether from avoided deforestation, tree planting, or leaving oil in the ground -- are credible, sensible or doable. So I mused on whether the next logical step, in a world increasingly fixated with carbon markets, would be carbon credits for avoided kids. This is something particularly relevant in the United States, which -- nearly unique for rich countries -- has a fast-growing population and very high rates of emissions per person.

As I put it in the Wilson event: "Should you get credit -- if we're going to become carbon-centric -- for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three. And obviously it's just a thought experiment, but it raises some interesting questions about all this."

Of course Limbaugh, unable to grasp the concept of "thought" took Revkin's comments, doused them in gasoline and set them on fire. Limbaugh equated Revkin to the 3-, 4-, and 6-year olds (that he believes) are recruited to the jihad and compared talking about climate change solutions to strapping yourself with explosives.

Here's Limbaugh's take:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

No Impact Week Has Begun: How Am I Doing?
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 20, 2009 at 10:54 AM.

As I wrote last week, I'm participating in a week-long "no-impact" challenge inspired by Colin Beavan's "No Impact Man" project (book, blog, and film) and is done in conjunction with the Huffington Post. This "carbon cleanse" week, as it has been dubbed, kicked off on Sunday.

The first day was dedicated to thinking about consumption. How much do I need to buy for the week -- what can I borrow or do without instead? This seemed like a relatively easy way to kick off the week, besides food, I generally don't buy much in an average week. That was until I realized that three of my closest friends are celebrating birthdays this week, including my partner.

So, what to do? Here's a few ideas that I came up with. I know there are loads of really crafty people out there that have absolutely no problems just stitching together something for their loved ones, but unless my friends would like a blog post, they're out of luck on my end. Here's what I can offer though. I have lots of books, some of them really good, and I think a few of those would make an excellent gift. And although we are encouraged this week not to purchase anything, I did get one friend a gift certificate to a favorite restaurant in her neighborhood that serves delicious local food. Other ideas -- having some prints made of photos I've taken, baking a loaf of monkey bread (if I can convince one of my Southern buddies to give me his recipe), and planning a super beautiful nighttime bike ride through San Francisco.

In additional to just thinking about what I am buying, this consumption thing has also gotten me thinking about what I already have. What clothes, shoes and dusty camping gear can I donate some place? Are there electronics we aren't using that can be given away or taken to an e-recycling center? Are there other ways to minimize stuff?

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Is This 12-Year-Old the Next Michael Pollan?
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM.

It was extraordinarily refreshing to read a recent guest post (What the Heck is ProFood Anyway?) on one of the great food blogs, Every Kitchen Table. The author explains exactly what this new word, ProFood, is all about and why it's important we care. And better yet, this author, Orren Fox, is only 12 years old.

He says delightfully cute things like, "To be ProFood means you are FOR food. That sounds funny, but what I mean is that you think about food, you care about food and you will make an effort for good food. I am also Pro chocolate and Pro Red Sox."

While I may disagree with the Red Sox part of his assessment, he's spot on with everything else. Like calling out this country for being not being very ProFood right now:

People don't really think about food, we expect it to taste good, be available all the time, be convenient, be safe to eat and I guess not cost too much. People don't value good food. It seems as if people are always trying to find the cheapest food, not the best food. I think people might care more about the quality of the gas they put into their car than they do about what ingredients they put into their body. I don't think most people would say they are ProFood.

If America were ProFood we wouldn't accept food with dangerous ingredients in it. Unfortunately there are chemicals in our food that aren't good for us kids.

Well said, Orren. He's also got some great tips:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Vote Now and Ensure $5,000 for Sustainable Energy and Economic Opportunities for Coal Country
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 14, 2009 at 4:35 PM.

It's not every day you can help some incredible visionaries get $5,000 just by doing exactly what you're doing now -- sitting in front of your computer. With you a few clicks you can vote on the Brighter Planet web site to award a grant for Sustainable Energy and Economic Diversification in the Coal River Valley in West Virginia.

This group is neck-and-neck for the prize money and the voting ends today, so take a few minutes and help make a difference.

Why is this important?

The Coal River Valley is at the epicenter of coal extraction in Appalachia. Ravaged by crushing force mountaintop removal and the corroding effects of black lung and industry-related ailments, community members in the Coal River Valley are ready for something new. Coal River Mountain Watch's mission is to end mountaintop removal and create a sustainable economy in its place. The Sustainable Energy and Economy Diversification program is working towards the second part of CRMW's mission.

What's the money for?

Despite the economic hardship and environmental degradation in this region, many of the elements of a sustainable economy are alive and well in the folk traditions of local residents. The SEED program seeks to combine these common sense traditions and ethics with 21st century concepts of sustainability and appropriate technology. Between November 2009 and August 2010 we will interview community members, identify community-led entrepreneurial projects, select five projects to support, document our work on the website www.journeyupcoalriver.org and adapt our results as lesson plans for distribution in regional high schools and colleges.

By creating economic alternatives, and presenting them in an educational format to a wide audience of young people, this project will reduce local economic dependency on fossil fuel extraction and help educate a new generation of sustainability and justice minded Americans.

Yes, we want to end the destructive practice of mountaintop removal mining, but it's also important to make sure the people of West Virginia have viable economic opportunities that support a clean environment. Get involved. Vote (you get 3 votes for each email address). Voting ends soon, so go and do it and do it now and tell your friends.

If you need to know more about how this area has been affected by mountaintop removal mining, check out this video.

Join Me for the No Impact Week Challenge
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 12, 2009 at 12:00 PM.

Next week I'm going to be participating in a little bit of an ecological/social experiment and I'm hoping you'll join me. By now you've likely heard about 'No Impact Man' Colin Beavan. Along with his wife and daughter, Colin and his family embarked on a year-long project to try to minimize their impact on the environment -- this included eating only local food (which meant no eating out and no coffee); only pedaling or walking to their destinations; not buying stuff, including no more clothes shopping or purchasing cleaning products from the store; no producing trash; and for about half of the year, not using electricity in their home (which was a New York City apartment).

Their project was a blog, a book and then a movie. And now, it's a challenge to us. For just one week you can participate in a modified version of Colin and his family's year-long adventure. There are a full set of instructions, here. But I'll run through the basic premise. I'll also be participating myself and blogging about the ups and downs of my week and I'd encourage you to do the same.

The week-long project, which is in partnership with the Huffington Post, starts on Sunday (October 18) and each day throughout the week a new concept is added -- so don't worry, you won’t have an abrupt lifestyle change all at once. Here's the basic plan: Sunday is consumption, Monday is trash, Tuesday is transportation, Wednesday is food, Thursday is energy, Friday is water, and on the weekend you are to spend one day as a day of volunteering in your community and one as an eco-Sabbath -- a time to unplug from everything.

If this sounds a little overwhelming, take a read through this guide -- it details how to do things step by step and helps provide tips and resources. The most important point of all this is not to see how much you can give up or get rid of in a week, but to actually stop and think for a little bit about your footprint on the environment and the resources that you are using. The project isn't really about eco-extremism but about asking people to be conscious of their impact. And for one week that sounds pretty manageable, right? Here's where you can sign up.

I'd love to hear from you if you are taking part. You can email me throughout the challenge at tara@alternet.org and let me know if I can share your thoughts and experiences with our readers.

Two Pounds of Beef Produce the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a Three-Hour Drive
Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet on October 8, 2009 at 4:00 PM.

New Scientist: "Meat is Murder on the Environment" ...

A kilogram of beef is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions and other pollution than driving for 3 hours while leaving all the lights on back home.

This is among the conclusions of a study by Akifumi Ogino of the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Tsukuba, Japan, and colleagues, which has assessed the effects of beef production on global warming, water acidification and eutrophication, and energy consumption...

Their analysis showed that producing a kilogram of beef ... is responsible for the equivalent of the amount of CO2 emitted by the average European car every 250 kilometres, and burns enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.

Hat-tip to Ezra Klein, who anticipates the inevitable cries that these kinds of studies set the stage for the proverbial jack-booted thugs to take away Americans' God-given right to a nice Salisbury steak:

As always, the issue isn't that people shouldn't eat burgers. They should just know what's entailed in eating that burger. Plenty of folks are appalled to see a living room light left on but would never think to trade the cheeseburger for a grilled cheese.

I absolutely love meat, but don't want to live my life oblivious to the real costs of its production.

Coal is Too Dirty Even for College -- New Campaign Targets Polluting Schools
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on October 7, 2009 at 6:15 PM.

Hopi Tribe's Message to Sierra Club and Other Enviros: Keep Out!
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 2, 2009 at 5:19 PM.

This is sad on many different levels. The Navajo-Hopi Observer reports:

The Hopi Tribe has a message for the Sierra Club and other environmental groups: Keep out!

That is the response of the Hopi Tribal Council on Monday to what it says has been continuous concerted attacks from local and national environmental groups "bent on advancing their interests and agenda at the expense of the Hopi Tribe and its sovereign interest."

The council wants the Sierra Club and other environmental groups and on-reservation organizations affiliated with these groups to know they are not welcome on the Hopi Reservation, declaring them persona non grata - no longer favored or welcome.

Apparently the conflict is over a coal plant. Here's more:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »