Link Only: Cars are the new smoking

This is an interesting post, with a good discussion to boot. I love how people got offended, cause I too do not own a car. I see people who view their car
“as an extension of themselves” (to quote a commenter) as literally offensive.

http://www.squawkfox.com/2008/07/25/cars-are-the-new-smoking/

My girlfriend and I live 3 blocks from the grocery store and we see people drive there from our building all the time. Absolutely fattening is what that is.

Note: I’m a car user when I want to – and borrow and rent when necessary.

The Words ‘Global’ and ‘Climate’ Shouldn’t Lead to Political Babble

I’ve been hearing some chatter, as well as read a little, about the US decision to put polar bears on the ‘threatened’ list. Some of the comments I hear, and from journalists who don’t know shit-all, say that it’s ridiculous because that population is apparently thriving. They can’t believe that the polar bear is a symbol of the threat of global warming, and can’t help but call out the ‘eco-radicals’ on their shenanigans.

Here’s a segment from an “article” I found (among top of Google search, which makes it all the scarier):

“What’s really going on here?

Kenneth Green at AEI exposes the politics behind the eco-radicals’ polar bear campaign and the consequences:

Listing the polar bear as a threatened species would have significant public policy consequences. It would set a new precedent, representing the first linkage of species endangerment with global warming. Such a listing would basically wall off the entire Arctic region to exploration, resource extraction, and development–at least by U.S. companies–and a threatened species listing would give environmental groups the ability to sue future U.S. governments to force them to reverse climate change by whatever means necessary.”

AEI – who chose to ‘expose eco-radicals’ (above) and write about how our bears are ‘just fine’, is funded by Exxon Mobil. Go figure.

I recommend only visiting that site if you want to continue to browse radical conservative shyte. I’ll save you the pain, and here are some comments regarding that post above which I found silly and misguided:

**WHAT?!? The polar Bear population is 5 times MORE than it was in 1960!!! WTF does an animal whose population is INCREASING land on the endangered list?!

**When will people wise up to this global warming farce? What a joke…

**I have lived in Alaska since ‘74 and I can tell you first hand it is NOT getting any warmer here. Of course we are sometimes influenced by the warm currents from the Pacific Ocean and so even in winter we can sometimes have a warm spell. I am all for a little warming, but it a’int happening!

**The polar bears at the Houston zoo do fine in the summer,average temp of around 95 with 90% humidity.

After throwing-up a little, I figured that it needs to be understood that the concern is more than imagery of a warming planet, and an ice-less polar bear (a threatened list doesn’t have the power to influence climate policy, yet): There should be focus on protecting land from further, and unprecedented development. So, lets say all that arctic ice melts back and polar bears die off. Saying that the concern is the bears themselves puts their previous habitat at risk of development free-for-all. That gives us all the more reason to protect what might be a future forest or grassland. Thanks, global warming.

An important step in curbing public opinion is creating a monument that opinions rally around. For example, how much would you care about the Bald Eagle going extinct if it weren’t a symbol of a nation? The bird may be a glorified crow when it comes down to it, but its bold eyes and American-esque wingspan make it a symbol of freedom and power. Like magic, we care.

Can we not leave human development out of at least selected habitats? It seems that when an initiative does so, there’s always a way to complain. We are perfectly capable of turning land into ecological disasters in every-which way, so don’t give me your politics to screw this one up.

Politics and ‘eco-radical’ bashing utterly confuses the situation and makes no sense. We should be seeing the habitat as fragile, and not focusing on just the bears.

The Los Angeles River: Intro to a Case Study in Urban Revitalization

If there is one environmental movement that can gain near-unanimous support, it is the revitalization of visible, past human impact. Climate Change needs evidence beyond scientific fact in order to become a larger accepted issue – there is no doubt about that. But closer to home, something we at least recognize, are mistakes from past undertakings, which today, make sense to pull back in time in order to benefit the future.

This is an introduction to restoration and revitalization, which go beyond just making things ‘pretty’ again; they aim to restore the integrity of once functioning ecosystems.

Engineers look at the Los Angeles River and see an elegant work of design. It does what it was supposed to do beautifully: Keep flood water away from the city. But to many, it’s mostly an eyesore, and they want it to do more than just speed water out to sea. The City of Los Angeles is hoping to redesign some of the 32 miles of river channel that run through L.A. Over the next year, city engineers and consultants will be developing a master plan for the river. (source)

Creating more parks is the primary goal – for human use and enjoyment – and getting communities involved is integral to that goal. Second, is attempting to create functioning systems so that the area of impact can begin to live again, and even attract natural renewal and species diversification. It should come as no surprise that functioning ecosystems and biodiversity are very important to the health of a city. It was the water which flowed through the flood basin that gave the land its original appeal: fertile soils, functional systems and drinking water. But they were constantly meandering and variable steams. So when repeated floods in the 30’s killed as many as 50 people – between the 1950’s and 60’s the Federal Government deepened and reinforced the river with concrete to create the 32 miles of river as L.A. sees it today.

Unfortunately the vital (flood control) areas of the river may never see soil again, and I believe that they are instead choosing parts of the river closer to communities and existing parks to focus their efforts. I’ve read that up to 45 percent of communities (primarily Hispanic) near the River itself have no access, or are not within walking distance to parks of any kind. Many people generally have no way (and hence limited desire) to experience nature as we know it.

For me, this project represents a milestone in the area of restoration of natural systems. Restoration has seen some hard times, primarily due to lack of funding. I see this first hand in the forest industry where standards are designed to be met (and barely), and those rarely include restoration and revitalization of damaged ecosystems. But I now see a revitalization in the field of restoration – especially with increased funding of urban renewal – so seeing a city such as L.A. charge headfirst into such an endeavor is absolutely enlightening.

This massive project is more than just the revitalization of an old eyesore: it is an attempt to reintroduce the beauty of green space and riparian zones, something which many Angelenos are truly unaware of. I plan to follow and occasionally report on the undertaking as it progresses and evolves.

Reviewing Hemp: Sustainability Has Never Looked So Good

Last weekend I began a healthy obsession with Hemp. I finally gave in to buying a stylish, well-crafted (moderately expensive) jacket made primarily of Hemp, then proceeded to research its cultivation and history to learn more about its renowned sustainability and viability as a crop.

Brief History: In the 1930’s the United States outlawed the cultivation of Hemp for all purposes to satisfy a new obsession with the Narcotics Act at the time. Previously, Hemp had been a primary resource for textiles throughout the country, and may in fact have been more popular than cotton. Canada followed suit in 1935 and outlawed its cultivation. Before then, Canada was the main supplier of Hemp to Britain – a major consumer at all levels – as well as a major supplier to the U.S.

That Canadian ban was lifted in 1998. Consequently, there are strict standards to keep the active content THC – tetrahydrocannabinol – below 0.3 percent (to get high one needs up to 5 percent THC). Today there is renewed interest in the cultivation of Hemp in Canada, and the province of Manitoba stands as Canada’s largest supplier of industrial Hemp.

Uses: Hemp is cultivated for (among many other things) oils, grains and fibres, paper, construction and building material, and livestock feed.

Land Benefits and Sustainability: The benefits of Hemp go far beyond how stylish their strong, sustainable, and versatile textiles are. There are huge benefits to the land it is cultivated on…

• Hemp can produce four times as much fibre per acre than trees can, so is a viable replacement to tree farms. The best way to apply this is to grow hemp on already cut (or unsustainable) tree farms.
• Hemp requires much less water, no herb or pesticides because of its natural defense agents, and can out-compete its competitors (other weeds). Cotton on the other hand, is famous for the amount of chemicals and huge amount of water it requires. Overall, Hemp production over Cotton can provide savings of up to 75 percent.
• It is an ideal rotation crop. It has a quick turnover (as little as 3 months), and replenishes the soil admirably for the cycle that may follow.

The benefits and reasons for growing and using hemp are practically endless. My favorites are of course the benefits to the land, its low impact cultivation process, and the fact that it is so very efficient.

As for clothing and style, the culture of Hemp and what it is associated with makes it an attractive consumer product. Although it can be slightly pricey, when your next Hemp purchase lasts so long that you’ll pass it on as a gift to your grandchild – you’ll thank me (and it).

**To finish it off, here are a few extra bits from Yahoo Answers:

“Did you know that in order for Spain, Britain and Holland to establish competitive sea trade routes, (in light of the riches flowing in the 15th century from the Orient to Venice via the silk road), that they relied upon hemp to make them strong canvas sails? It was one of the only materials considered durable enough to weather the rough seas. The word canvas actually comes from the Latin word cannabis.”

“The Constitution was printed on hemp paper as well as the first 3 drafts of the Declaration of Independence.”

Now get out there and purchase – you are the best builders of a market!

Letter to Arbutus

Dear Arbutus,

A wise man once told me, ” If you are in coastal BC, the arbutus is truly the finest tree available. This is not a subjective opinion, but an objective truth. The arbutus is truly one of the world’s great trees.”. In fact, I have two friends from down south who have told me that you are the finest. You are Canada’s only native, broad-leafed evergreen. You lucky, lucky thing.

But wait, I hear that it’s possible we soon all won’t have you? I am truly sorry that some kind of defoliating fungus is stressing you out, especially in urban areas. You can do it…push on my friend!

Arbutus, I find it truly inspiring that you can:

1) Grow in every which direction in order to survive. Apparently, the Coast Salish First Nation honours you as the Tree of Knowledge because you can always find the sun.

2) Shed your bark in the summers to reveal a slick, fresh coat of red flesh.

3) Grow so near the sea, and love that salty air…

When I have the chance I will propagate you, you are a native to my island and I vow to plant you when and where appropriate. British Columbia is definitely a better place with you, so please don’t make like a tree and leave.

Sincerely yours,

Variable Interest

Leave Your Shoes at the Door: Three Ways To Be a Friendly Visitor to Your Environment

When you visit a friend’s place, do you leave your shoes at the door, tread lightly, and attempt to have a minimal impact on the things he or she owns? Or, do you thrash around like a baby, and take and leave what you like?

We are just visitors here, and individually, we come and go. As humans we are increasingly messy and have historically been bad houseguests to our surroundings. Some would say that it is our right – as free-world inhabitants – to consume, affect, and do as we please (see 2^nd to last / 8:14pm comment ) because our time on this earth is to be enjoyed. But, my friends, it is possible to minimize one’s impact by being aware, and simply using your surroundings with compassion. We are visitors here, yet we:

…smear concrete and asphalt like pâtés wherever we see fit. So, use it to walk where it’s pleasant.

Roads and asphalt for the purpose of transport take up to 20 percent of urban space in certain cities in England, while in North America, roads and parking lots account between 30 and 60 percent of the total urban surface. So, who likes to walk? From the same source as above: Walking accounts for 88% of all movement inside Tokyo, while this figure is only 3% for Los Angeles. It’s not your fault that too much focus has been put on the experience of getting somewhere with the culture of personal vehicles, but what you do (we are a market, remember) will have an impact on what is built for your future needs.

Luckily, urban planning and design have put new focus on pedestrian, and car-reducing design. I have always been perplexed by how unpleasant a city can be for the person, and how – clearly – someone would want to spend as much time as possible inside a vehicle.

Overall, the pleasantness of your urban experience will have an effect on how much you walk and bike, but those two options will have a priceless impact on our land and air. Over the course of a month try crossing out up to ten of those normal drives, replace them with that alien, outside experience. Then, choose your next locale based on its non-vehicle options.

… have historically disregarded the need for habitat and nature’s services. So be aware of what has replaced it and the effect on its surroundings.

Along the lines of the above point, city living can be rather unpleasant. Habitat and natural space in a city is not just for increased pleasantries though, it is important to keep hydrology and cycles in its natural state for the sake of the city’s surroundings.

The biggest issue with hydrology is the passage of surface water – as roads and general infrastructure have almost completely bypassed the cycle of water through soils. Being aware of the connection between drains and runoff is important too. In some cities (I see it here in Victoria) storm-drains and gutters will have a little seashell or starfish symbol reminding you that what goes in there sees the ocean or other water next. Just knowing that this replaces soil hydrology is an important first step. The importance of soil is underrated, and we generally don’t know enough about it and our impacts on it. When our city’s roads and parking lots cover up to 60 percent of it, how could we? It is best if we take advantage of any natural space we have, and let the important people know if you need more!

…consume resources like there’s no tomorrow. So reduce waste and be a conscious consumer.

Things are changing fast: people are increasingly environmentally aware, and we have long passed any sort of industrial revolution; but the best time to have an impact by curbing consumption is now, recession-wise, and Dip wise. There is no better time to show resource, material, and crap-you-don’t-need producers that the future of their product is changing. Curbing consumption is the quickest way to a producers heart, especially of the things that will long outlive us – like cars, chemicals and plastics. As a visitor, know that when you leave it is only polite to try to leave as little an impact as possible, especially waste wise.

Companies that produce resource products, logging co’s for example, need to focus on either 1) re-stocking, or 2) restoring sites in light of the fact that there is a tomorrow. Being a conscious consumer is part of the equation too. One should at least attempt to buy the product that took the least amount of fuel to get to you. If that brings down Canada’s timber another notch, so be it: I’ve always been a supporter of corporate sacrifice for landscape positives. There are ways to do it, and consultants like myself need to find the ways to make them viable.

The message is simple and plausible, act the cautious guest. At the risk of seeming morbid, imagine that next to your gravesite (or what have you) when you die lies a pile of things that you have consumed and discarded over your lifetime – especially the non-recyclables. Finally, pass a good ethic to the generation below you, ensuring that they are cautious visitors, that their ‘death-pile’ will be considerably smaller than yours.

Three Baby Steps to Appreciating Land and Resource Use

It’s a big world, shit happens, and life goes on: just three reasons why people feel that resource use and the industry are out of reach. There’s such a massive disconnect between ourselves and where energy and wood is produced (for example) that it becomes very difficult to imagine having an effect on industry. But the truth is that our requests and complaints have a very small effect on their choices; it is about us as a market and the numbers they see in us. Believe me when I say that things only change when we need more, or we need less.

The other day I realized that we are making a mistake in using a name like “Mother Earth.” It implies that it cares for us, that it is nurturing. Our traditional approach with Earth and mothers is that they care for us, and when it gets old and fragile we care for it. I vote for the compassionate approach.

This is our Baby Earth, and these are some introductory baby steps to appreciating what it gives us.

**Appreciating Our Forests: There’s something to say for ‘seeing the forest for the trees’, but it’s hard to see them as anything but a resource when it comes down to it.

• People travel great distances to use them for recreation, this makes them a resource;
• They provide our cities and landscapes with stability. They provide cooling properties to our disturbed land (roads, buildings and pavement); and
• Alongside their products, they provide us with great need for discussion and citizen action. In fact, they bring people together for protest.

Here’s a bit I picked off the net to bring a factoid into this post: Starbucks uses up to two billion paper cups a year, of which 10 percent is recycled. That is not including the cardboard sleeves served with them, another two billion I would assume. Be weary of automatic consumption.

Overall, the best first step is becoming interested. I went ahead and decided that I have a favourite tree here in my city. You don’t have to be such a nerd, but it certainly helps to be appreciative.

**Appreciating Our Freshwater: Water brings to us what we need, takes from our homes what we don’t need, and flows through us day after day. Water is incredibly versatile, and more limited than we like to think.

Almost everything we do on land will have an effect on hydrology, one of nature’s most important systems. Land relies on water, water relies on land. Everything we do that affects its cycle should be taken into consideration.

**Appreciating Generations: Often, when aboriginal communities (and us that work with and for them) create anything that resembles a land use plan, they use what they call the Seven Generations Plan. Simply put, they are considering every move and its effect on the next seven generations that follow. Most importantly, ensuring that there will be resources to care for seven generations from now – pushing us to do our part in sustainability. As a community, and well versed at small-scale resource use, they are much better at ensuring sustainability.

The key to appreciating generational thinking is realizing that resource use and community are so interwoven that they cannot, and should not, be separated.

One of the hardest things to do is imagining what we will be leaving our children and grandchildren. We do – in a very general way – appreciate that what we affect carries on, but we are such an urban species that we feel individually inconsequential. Our effect on the land though, is entirely en masse.

Being aware of land use is easier as we are (after all) terrestrial creatures, but where water is concerned, we are used to its continual availability through taps and pumps. Try counting how many times you flush, shower, wash, rinse, drink and flush again. Think of the deterioration of a resource that needs to be available seven generations from now.

Think Baby Earth, and know its weak points.

Three Lies We Tell Ourselves About Our Environment

You wake up in the morning, roll around for a few minutes, turn off your alarm, and start thinking about breakfast. The first 25 minutes of your morning are a product of habit, a product you’re not about to give up on because it’s too easy to be complacent. Groggy-eyed and empty, you don’t think twice about starting up your car and sitting idle while meddling with your tunes for the ride.

I believe that if we make an honest attempt to fix the little things, break habits, and act responsibly – general populations may adopt a friendlier mindset. Small acts by individuals may seem relatively unharmful, but when North America – at roughly 340 million people – acts in near unison every day, we are no longer individuals.

Lie No. 1: I need my car each and every day. We are Creatures of Habit, and breaking any habit takes a new train of thought. The same way small changes over time may save the forests; one can’t choke a person until she admits that she doesn’t need a car to survive. Being the sole driver of a car each and every morning is completely unnecessary, and often selfish. I don’t even have to know about her problems, the size of the commute, or the horror of public transit. Only that sitting in your car is habitual and relatively destructive.

Without being particularly anti-car, I can say that yes, you consume fuel out of habit which you call necessity. Statistics have shown that while gas prices are getting ridiculous, they have yet to really reflect the cost that includes the cost to the environment – which eventually they will. A carbon tax will start to do that. What will it take for your car habits to finally seem ridiculous? Canadians now spend a good 30 percent of all consumer spending on things vehicle related – the more it costs, the more they spend. Old habits die hard.

Lie No. 2: Paperless is bullshit, and I can’t make a difference. We call our own shots, and believe what we think. While receiving some good advice about my blog from Penelope, she proceeded to announce that paperless is bullshit. I completely agree that paper-free is impossible, but it is by no means bullshit. She was probably alluding to what is called ‘Greenwashing‘; that it is a corporate trick to call something green to reap some other (image or monetary) benefits.

So, an internet (social media) entrepreneur gets to call paperless bullshit? Well, we tend to believe our opinion and then do what we can to back it up. As bloggers we do this. Global Warming naysayers: a prime example. There are two sides funding research about climate change, and each wishes to use it to their own end. Here’s my point: do what is healthy for future generations while the big money battles it out. Global Warming or not, make a point to conserve instead of calling conservation attempts bullshit. A move to paperless over time is absolutely foreseeable.

Lie No. 3: My City is Proactive. You may have seen my post on urban biodiversity, and how I rank urban ecosystems as one of the most important services a city has to offer. This is also true for cities or towns that promote sustainability and a conservation culture.

More recently it is being expressed that moving to a city of choice before a job of choice is good decision making. If you’re living in a city in which you haven’t been pushed to act positively due to public programs, you’re living behind the times. One example I see here in Victoria is Bike to Work Week – the traffic patterns are noticeably different, and the general attitude about it is positive (which is to be expected in a city of 250,000).

I predict that (and we’re seeing it already) the most attractive cities of tomorrow are the ones that are investing in change today. You should feel inclined to walk or bike, in fact you should be compensated. It starts with tax incentives for taking the bus, and continues with feeling the need to experience a natural looking city with nature and green space to offer.

As we manage our lives, we should be managing the environment around us, it’s called Stewardship and it shouldn’t be too difficult. We grew up disconnected from the land culturally; or if we didn’t, then why do we care so much for nice views yet struggle to keep our environment healthy?

batteries to go: now we know

I remember one summer at camp, a councilor gave a few of us goggles and a snorkel each to search for a battery that a kid had chucked into the lake. I guess someone figured that over the years it would leech, and…well, kids would be swimming those shallows for years to come. Good on him or her who had us dive for it. I keep that lesson with me to this day…

So, in changing the battery (a 9V for the active pickup) in my bass guitar, I found myself holding on to that battery. It has now spent a good 3 weeks on my purgatory table, waiting for battery heaven. I think it has arrived…

But who woulda thunked that recycling batteries would be so tough?

*Factoid: Household batteries are responsible for between 50% and 70% of all heavy metals found in landfills. Here. They’re b-b-bad and outdated, keep with Lithium-ion, not even rechargeables.

Anyhoo my friends, I’m not here to give you the rundown on what batteries (or their lead, acids or this and that) do to landfills – but take this information anyway. You may need it once or twice more in your lifetime.

Save a worm or thousand…

Consider Some

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization says world food production must increase by 60% to meet growing demand over the next 20 years. Does the world have enough arable land to do so? Have we enough water? (From New Scientist):

• Every teaspoon of sugar in your coffee requires 50 cups of water to grow it. Growing the coffee itself25 bathtubs of water. requires 140 liters of water, or 1,120 cups. The 250 grams of cotton needed to make a single T-shirt uses
• To produce a kilo of meat, you need eight kilos of grain. To produce eight kilos of grain, you need 12 meters cubed of water. That’s 3,166 gallons of water… to complete that chain to produce meat.

Don’t be scared. Just food for thought. Or water for thought.