For millennia, flags, banners, and standards have been points under which causes have coalesced and people have united. Now the entirety of Planet Earth and all of its inhabitants may have a single flag to call our own.

Oskar Pernefeldt, a student at Beckmans College of Design in Stockholm, Sweden, has created a banner to represent the entire human civilization and the rock we inhabit. It features simply seven interlocking rings on a blue background. Pernefeldt envisions this flag on the flight suits of astronauts, being waved at sporting events, or being hung outside one’s home.

Pernefeldt’s flag design. Courtesy of Oskar Pernefeldt/flagofplanetearth.com via Wikipedia.

On the official website, Pernefeldt points out that space missions thus far have represented the particular nations that have launched them; but such actions are representative of Planet Earth itself. One might further this argument by pointing out the collaborative nature of such things as the International Space Station, or the rise of private space agencies that do not necessarily have a nationalistic agenda. In addition, Pernefeldt feels that this flag would be the most suitable one to headline the possible Mars colony in the near future.

While the grand symbolism of the flag suggests an end to the squabbles and struggles that have plagued human civilization for so long, to be replaced with a harmonious and symbiotic cooperative way of life for all civilization, the more immediate practicality of the flag with regard to space missions is evident. Supposing, in our ever increasing and geographically expansive travels into the depths, we encounter other life that asks from whence we came, Pernefeldt poses hypothetically. We would simply point to the Earth, as opposed to attempt a complicated explanation of national divisions and identities. A resident of another planet may not immediately care with what subdivision an Earthling identifies himself, but simply what planet.

There are strong environmental themes and metaphors in the flag. The seven rings represent the seven continents and, as the designer explains, they form a flower at the center, which is a symbol for life on Earth. Further, the rings are connected to each other, demonstrating the interrelatedness of everything on the planet. Finally, the blue stands for the oceans. Yet the structure is such that the seven rings together can be looked at as the planet itself, and the background the Universe.

Many national flags represent that nation’s history and heritage. The stars and stripes of the American flag are an obvious example, remembering the original colonies and the present states. Considering the diversity of the inhabitants of Planet Earth, pinpointing an international identity is quite a challenge. One thing that we all share is the environment. The fragile Earth and its ecosystems are a concern with which everybody is–or ought to be–involved. It is something that affects us all, and is a universal source of beauty, tranquility, and happiness. We all owe our existence and health to the bounties and life-giving forces of the environment.

The efforts to pursue more sustainable lifestyles transcend national borders, languages, and cultural barriers. It is something to which all people can aspire regardless of their religious or geographic orientation; embodying these themes in a planetary flag is an ingenious move. There are no moves to officially adopt this flag for its purpose, and there is likely much time before it ever could be planted on foreign cosmic soil in the name of a united human race. Yet it already sends a powerful message of cooperation in the name of environmental conservation. To these ends, it may already be a rallying point.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Can a Flag of Planet Earth Unite the World Beyond National Boundaries? appeared first on Law Street.

“And then one day…an eruption of liquid rock occurred…It threw forth the same kind of rock, with the same violence, and through the same vents in the earth’s core. But this time what was thrown forth reached the surface of the sea. There was a tremendous explosion as the liquid rock struck water and air together. Clouds of steam rose miles into the air. Ash fell hissing upon the heaving waves. Detonations shattered the air for a moment and then echoed away in the immensity of the empty wastes.”

Legendary author James Michener’s eloquent words describe the formation of the islands of Hawaii–the powerful volcanic activity that over the course of millions of years sent a column of rock from the seabed to the open air. Now, off the coast of Japan, it occurs once more.

In November 2013 a small speck of material breached the surface of the Western Pacific Ocean. In the last year and a half, it has widened to nearly 0.95 square miles and the volcanic cone stands several hundred feet tall. The size of the island is expected to slow and be limited, not by the amount of lava that spews forth, but by sea activity; there are already signs of erosion and formation of beaches at the edges of the island. As it stands, this is impressive enough: a modern, visible manifestation of the geological cycle, as some islands and sections of continents erode and disappear, and other brand new ones form right before our eyes.

But there are many more impressive processes that are about to occur on this island–Nishinoshima–that are of major scientific value. As it stands, the island is barren rock. Much of it is still steaming, as the volcano continues to erupt. But once it settles down and begins to cool, it will serve as a good spot for birds to rest. When they do, they will inevitably deposit feces, feathers, vomit, and material that they have unconsciously carried from elsewhere. This can include seeds and fertile soils. Some seeds are specifically designed to float on the wind or surface of the water and may arrive there on their own as well. Therefore, scientists intend to closely monitor the island as it hosts and begins to produce life of its own. The initial sparks and subsequent development of an ecosystem is something rarely observed and studied.

It is important to scientists that anyone who goes to the island is cautious not to accidentally carry with them any kind of outside material or life that could influence the early evolutionary process. Evolutionary biologists have raised this concern, as the first people to set foot on the island are likely to be geologists and vulcanologists, who do not have the same foci and concerns. Obviously at this point and for the foreseeable future the island is off limits to civilians and tourists.

Birds are vital to the development of island life. Courtesy of Ville Miettinen via Flickr.

The island chain of which Nishinoshima is a part is already known for a variegated and fascinating ecosystem. The Ogasawara Islands are a UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural) World Heritage Site. Nishinoshima is therefore on track to be protected and preserved for the sake of humanity’s heritage. This in and of itself, in addition to the fact that it may be absolutely beautiful there in due time, could result in a vibrant tourism industry. Economic interests aside, in the meantime it will be fascinating and moving simply to watch the island develop and flourish, a tangible indication that the Earth around us is active and alive.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A New, Beautiful Island Has Formed in the Pacific appeared first on Law Street.

The entire environmental movement can be partly attributed to Rachel Carson’s 1962 book “Silent Spring.” Her revelatory research shocked the world in its vivid and ominous accounts of the agriculture industry and the use of pesticides–DDT in particular. The damage to the environment and human health that these things may induce terrified readers and rallied a series of organized movements to raise awareness, address these concerns, and campaign for improvements in these sectors. But toxins and threats to our health endure, and in many other forms.

While DDT itself is now rare in 2015, there is a plethora of pesticides, insecticides, fungicides, and other chemicals that are sprayed on crops in abundance. This series of practices has contributed in part to recent movements in favor of more organic foods, grass-fed beef, locally raised products, composting and rooftop gardens, and other methods that speak to a decentralized, localized, and more natural approach to food production. Another potential means of addressing the need to grow crops while pressed to not use so many chemicals is by making changes to the DNA of the plant. For example, a strain of corn might have a gene introduced that makes it immune to a particular disease or attack by certain insects. Yet even in this arena, there is debate as to the healthfulness and safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Food itself is not necessarily the primary source of toxins in the food industry or elsewhere in our day-to-day lives. Recent questions have been raised about poly- and perfluoralkyl substances, or PFASs. These things do manifest themselves in the food industry, mainly as non-stick coatings as can be found in pizza boxes and teflon cookware. Fortunately, the latter product is on the decline. Yet PFASs are also used in carpeting, electronics, sleeping bags, footwear, and a massive assortment of very common products. You can see a more thorough list here.

This line of chemicals is important to making these products durable and useful over a long span of time. But it begs the question: must it necessarily be these chemicals in order to make these products viable? On the other hand, the health concerns are very recent and require much more research in order to determine the degree of their toxicity. Many questions are still up in the air. In the meantime though, some people question their continued use while the thorough answers are sought, considering that doubt has now been cast on them.

Some Studies suggest that these chemicals may linger in the bloodstream and contribute to the development of thyroid disease and kidney cancer. A doctor involved in this study explained that, considering some of these chemicals are related to others that are known to be carcinogenic, one must prove that they are safe before using them. Rather, we have already made the error of implementing them before we had enough information. In this sense, “innocent until proven guilty” does not apply; the product should be absolutely safe before it is used. While studies continue, experts suggest people try to avoid PFASs when possible. But considering how prevalent they are in the market, this is an immense challenge.

The food and consumer sector is not the only source of widespread and unavoidable contaminants. During the course of the several thousand nuclear bomb tests on the planet, particularly in the early stages of the Cold War, a heavily radioactive isotope called Strontium 90 was released in massive quantities. It seeped into the water, soil, and plants, and subsequently found its way into the bodies of human beings. There was so much of it released, it is widely argued that now there is a degree of Strontium 90 embedded in the bones of every human being on Earth, even the ones born long after the spike in nuclear testing ceased. Strontium 90 has been linked to various forms of cancer and leukemia. It is as if to say we have permanently poisoned ourselves and there is nothing we can do to remedy it.

While some of these issues are quite ominous because we are relatively helpless, hopefully some of the other toxic and unhealthy products and chemicals can be swapped for safer alternatives.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Think DDT Was Bad? Toxins Are Everywhere Today appeared first on Law Street.

New York state Governor Andrew Cuomo recently announced the New York State Lights Out Initiative, which is a program that couples with the Audubon Society’s efforts to reduce the light pollution that disorients birds during peak migration seasons. From April 15–May 31 and August 15–November 15 state owned buildings will turn off non-essential outdoor lighting from 11 PM to dawn. This small measure will make a big difference directly for the birds, but will also have many indirect implications in favor of conservation efforts.

A phenomenon called Fatal Light Attraction causes migratory birds, who often navigate with the stars, to become disoriented due to all the specks of light on the ground. Estimates suggests that between 500 million and one billion birds die annually as a result, mainly through flying into windows, walls, or the ground. These are direct deaths; considering that these birds are on their way to breeding grounds at the time, one can argue that the damage to their populations reverberates in the form of a lesser amount of breeding and eggs produced.

Image courtesy joiseyshowaa via Flickr

In addition to the mandatory outdoor light cutbacks, many buildings are being encouraged to draw their blinds and reduce indoor lighting when possible as well. Furthermore, private citizens are welcome to participate in any or all of these measures. It is also worth noting, from a non-bird but a general conservation standpoint, that these actions will reduce the consumption of electricity for a substantial amount of hours over the course of many months. This in and of itself is a gain as well.

As a supplement to the Lights Out measure, Governor Cuomo launched an I Love New York Birding website; a site with a plethora of information regarding bird watching techniques, ideal locations, and other information of a relevant nature. This way, people can become more educated on the importance and beauty of our birds and become more engaged with nature.

Direct engagement with nature by the populace is one of the most important measures that can be taken in the name of conservation. In addition to the increases in pollution, consumption, and other ailments of modern society that directly damage the environment, when people tend to feel more detached from the natural world it indirectly suffers from that attitude. The more people feel that nature is all around them, interact with the ecosystem, or spend time immersed in nature, the more likely they are to value and protect it. This is not an abstract theory. A study by Cornell University demonstrated that bird watchers are among the largest demographics to support conservation. While factors such as age, education, and political ideology played roles as well, they were dwarfed by influences that involve direct interaction with nature.

Image courtesy of the U.S. National Archives via Flickr

Thus the Lights Out initiative targets one of the key draws to conservation. Yet one does not have to be a bird watcher in order to care about the environment and take measures in its defense. While other outdoor activities such as hiking, biking, and water sports may also lend themselves in a similar fashion to a conservation ethos as bird watching does, any sympathetic sentiment is productive to these objectives. In the meantime, the actual act of turning off these lights will certainly benefit the local bird populations. This is a great program, and hopefully it becomes a tradition.

Feature image courtesy of [Chris Goldberg via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lights Out: These Small Steps Help Conservation Efforts appeared first on Law Street.

The death toll from the recent 7.8 magnitude earthquake in Nepal has surpassed 7,000, with at least 14,000. Recovery efforts have been underway for the last week. As people attempt to repair the damage and their lives, we should reflect on the implications of this disaster.

The bulk of the damage, casualties, and relief efforts are centered around the capital city of Kathmandu. Thousands of people have been left homeless and are forced to sleep and wait outdoors, as open spaces seem to be the only places that are safe from aftershocks. Because relief organizations are short on tents by the hundreds of thousands, they are exposed to the rain, cold air, and other elements. Furthermore, hospitals are not designed to accommodate for the scale of injuries. A 120-year-old hospital building was forced to relocate its patients elsewhere for operations.

Another long-term concern is Nepal’s economy. Many temples and historic sites have collapsed from the quake, which not only is spiritually disheartening for the nation’s religious population, but those sites have served as attractions for tourists in the city. In addition, the 2015 climbing season at Mount Everest is over, as climbers died in earthquake-induced deadly avalanches. At least 17 people died there, with dozens more injured and missing. While some climbers have been rescued by helicopter, others were trapped too high on the mountain, beyond the reach of air rescue. Yet they were hard pressed to descend on their own because the avalanches and quakes restricted access to their normal climb and descent routes.

Ongoing aftershocks continue to jar rocks and snow from the mountain, making rescue efforts difficult and dangerous. This disaster has already surpassed last year’s avalanche that killed 16 people as the single deadliest event on Everest, and it is expected to continue to worsen. Furthermore, it is unclear at what point climbing will resume and what form it will take; the damage from the quake and avalanches may have altered the topography of the mountain, which would force a readdressing of climbing routes, number of climbers that can be accommodated, and other details of this nature. Climbing Everest is one of the primary sources of tourism and income for the nation.

Most of the modern structures in the city of Kathmandu, while damaged, remained intact; on the other hand, most of the damage inflicted was on the old, poorly constructed brick buildings in the urban area. The city, region, and nation are generally hampered by poverty and have undergone substantial increases in population, experience poor coordination in building, and often do not adhere to building codes. These things make the region much more vulnerable when disasters of this caliber occur. It is quite similar to the 2010 earthquake in Haiti. That one was also quite large in strength, registering at a 7.0 on the Richter Scale, but the death toll is estimated as high as 220,000. This catastrophic figure is due to the extreme poverty, poor building, and insufficient infrastructure that is rampant in Port-au-Prince. Conversely, the strongest earthquake on record, the 1960 9.5 tremor in Chile, resulted in approximately 2,000-3,000 deaths. The difference, journalist Jerry Thompson argues, resulted largely from more sophisticated building techniques, more preparedness on the part of the populace, and better organized rescue services in this more economically developed nation.

Poor quality building in Kathmandu. Courtesy of Oliphant via Flickr.

Thompson has also written about a massive subduction zone fault line near the North American Pacific Northwest coast. He suggests it is overdue for a massive quake, which would induce an enormous tsunami that could cause untold devastation in the area. We might say that Nepal is fortunate to be landlocked; in the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, most of the deaths occurred as a result of the latter disaster rather than the former. The Fukushima nuclear meltdown was also spurred by the tsunami and not the quake itself. Understanding the functions of the natural world and that these two events may go hand in hand may lead to more foresighted planning.

There may be additional non-human damages that result from such problems. For example, the 1906 San Francisco earthquake did not cause as much damage as the fire that followed, which nearly gutted the entire city. The fire sprung up in many areas at once, largely due to a combination of broken and leaking gas pipes interacting with sparking downed power lines, and proceeded to devour the largely wooden buildings. It became clear even to the people at the time that the damage and deaths were due to poor planning on their part; nature was not to blame. Yet nature suffered nonetheless. The poorly built water supply system failed, and a beautiful valley in Yosemite National Park drowned as dams were built to meet the city’s water needs.

We must come to understand that we are a part of the Earth, not occupiers of it. Natural disasters will occur, and there will be fatalities. But they do not need to be as horrific as they are. The massive inequalities in wealth, technology, and living standards throughout the world have reared their ugly heads during disasters like this. It is encouraging to see so many other nations and organizations rallying to assist and support, but addressing the underlying problems that are ever present would be productive for societies’ lived experiences year round as well as in times of crisis. The tragedy in Nepal reminds us of the lesson that we have failed to grasp: since these forces are too powerful for us to control, and to an extent–since tectonic activity is vital to all life and the planet itself–should not be controlled, we must learn to live with them safely and intelligently.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Some Cities Survive Natural Disasters Better Than Others For This Reason appeared first on Law Street.

We all know that BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in April, 2010 was one of the worst spills to date. But the accident continues to have ramifications and inflict damage on the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems there. In light of these findings, advocates are hoping to address cleanup and drilling policies and procedures and hope to make improvements or change the practices entirely.

A place called Cat Island in Louisiana used to be a major nesting ground for multiple species of birds. The oil spill poisoned the vegetation there, which has continued to die off. In so doing, the root system disappeared, leaving the soil vulnerable to erosion. In fact, over the past five years the island in its entirety has all but disappeared. The birds that nest there have it imprinted in their DNA to do so; it is instinctual to go there and nest. If the island disappears, they will not seek out a new site, they simply will not breed. Although the species may have survived the initial spill, they still face severe threats to their survival. As it stands, the reduced surface area of the island has increased competition and lessened available real estate for nests; essentially, they reproduce in fewer numbers already.

The extent of the Deepwater Horizon spill. Image courtesy of SkyTruth via Flickr

While birds and their black oil slick-covered feathers may be one of the most visible manifestations of a spill, additional long term studies have demonstrated that many types of fish are threatened in more indirect ways as well. Oil damage can cause birth defects and irregularly shaped or mis-beating hearts in baby fish. This means that they can die younger, or can suffer due to a lessened ability to catch prey or escape from becoming prey themselves. Some of these conclusions have come from long term studies following up on the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989. Pacific herring, for example, collapsed in the Prince William Sound in 1993 and have not returned. As always, this is problematic not just for the sake of saving fish and bird lives, but because these species play intricate roles in the health of very complicated ecosystems. The Pacific salmon run is vital to bear populations and the quality of the dense Northwestern forests themselves. In addition, fishing and economic interests are at stake for people who work in those industries.

The process of marine snow involves organic matter such as phytoplankton drifting down from the upper layers of the sea into the depths. This is an aspect of transferring energy and photosynthesized material from the sunlight rich surface to the darker waters, and serves as an important link in the food chain. But when oil is introduced, it fuses to these particles and finds its way to the deep water in what is called a dirty blizzard. This means that an oil spill does not just glide across the surface of the water and endanger creatures near the top, but more deeply affects ocean life. More living things are endangered as they are coated in a layer of oil. In addition, limited human access to these regions means that this aspect of a spill is much more difficult to clean up.

Damage extends far beyond what is visible at the surface. Image courtesy of Green Fire Productions via Flickr

These three studies are among many that catalogue the long term damage inflicted by the Deepwater Horizon spill. Because the results may influence what BP will be required to continue to pay in damages, the company has disputed the validity of them all.

Researchers at the University of Wisconsin recently released a series of papers detailing studies that produced an oil repellant material. In one test, they coated wire with the material and then poured on a mixture of water and motor oil. The water ran off and the oil clumped together, easily removed. The presumed application of this discovery is that it will make clean ups of oil spills easier. Yet there are two ways in which this breakthrough falls short. The first is that while cleaning up a spill may be easier and faster, that does not detract from the damage that it may inflict when it occurs. Secondly, it would be best not to think of it as a get out of jail free card, in the same manner that some seem to think that recent proposals regarding climate engineering mean that we can continue with our ways and inflict as much damage as we please because we can presumably go back and repair it later. Rather, we need to address the problem at its source.

Are we supposed to coat all manners of wildlife with oil repellant material? Image courtesy of Louisiana GOHSEP via Flickr

The Obama administration is about to establish new safety regulations for offshore drilling. Over the course of the previous five years, other responses to the BP spill have included new standards for the casings of wells. This, being the third safety proposal since the incident, would deal with measures to prevent blowouts. These moves are intended to prevent an accident like Deepwater Horizon from occurring again, especially since the administration has been reviewing proposals to begin further offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Chukchi Sea off the coast of Alaska. But an investigative panel determined that the chief cause of the Deepwater spill was not the blowout but a wide ranging occurrence of oversights and improper adherence to regulations. Thus the very process by which offshore drilling is pursued is flawed and in need of revamping. But is this the true source of the problem either? As a spokesman for the Natural Resource Defense Council stated, “Industry and government have taken measures over the past five years to reduce some of the risk in what is an inherently dangerous operation at sea. that’s a far cry from saying it’s safe…”

A 2013 spill burns near New Orleans. Image courtesy DVIDSHUB via Flickr

Thus the very nature of offshore drilling is a problem, and going back further still, our continuing reliance on fossil fuels is a problem. As oil pipelines continue to burst and fracking continues to contaminate water, offshore drilling and the environmental risks therein are yet another manifestation of some of the things in need of complete change, not just tweaking or improvement.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Long Term Damage from Oil Spills Shows Need for Changes appeared first on Law Street.

Images of deforestation are among the most striking when it comes to addressing human impact on the environment and all the problems that follow. Similarly, endangered animals are constantly in the conversation and the need to enact more protections and conservation measures remains pressing.

Read More: Endangered Species Protections: Are We Doing Enough?

Yet what tends to be overlooked is that from both an ecological and human policy-related standpoint these things are deeply interrelated. When we consider how to protect and improve our forests and our biodiversity, we should think about them in tandem.

Among the innumerable reasons why maintaining forests is important, one is that they store carbon. Having it naturally contained in the biomass means that there is less in the atmosphere; forests help keep greenhouse gases and climate change in check. But, as has been a topic of conversation for decades now, some of the most substantial ones, such as the Amazon Rainforest, are in danger. A 30-year study by the University of Leeds concluded that the unnaturally large amount of carbon in the atmosphere has accelerated the lifespans of trees there. This means that they die younger; high tree mortality is an unexpected contributor to the shrinking of the rainforest. It is not just a matter of logging and increased building. With a higher tree mortality and a decreasing range of the forest, the amount of carbon the rainforest can store has been overtaken by the amount of fossil fuel emissions in Latin America.

Courtesy of CIFOR via Flickr.

Another consequence of deforestation is the loss of biodiversity that resides therein. It has been determined that there exists a “threshold” for forest cover, and if it is surpassed then the loss of species accelerates in quantity and geographic spread. Most surveys tracking deforesting activity indicate that thresholds are drawing quite near or have recently been surpassed. The problem with the way this issue is approached is that Brazilian law applies activity to individual farms and their property. Rather, due to the more complex nature of animal geographies and forest topography, policies need to take into account particular regions in the rainforest.

This concept is further complicated by the interrelatedness of forests and animals. It is not just a matter of aesthetically preserving animals, but they play an integral role in the health of the forest itself. Similar to how bees have a key function in floral reproduction because they distribute pollen from plant to plant, large animals spread around tree seeds as they go about their business. Big mammals in particular tend to have a wide range, traveling far in search of food and marking their territory. As forests and animals affect each other reciprocally, damaging one invariably damages the other, which in turn degenerates the other further and onward in the vicious cycle. This is another series of reasons why the New Jersey bear hunt ought to be rethought.

Courtesy of laurence_baulch via Flickr.

These problems are not restricted to the Amazon and Latin America. The national park system in the United States is primarily designed to preserve scenic natural wonders. Yet a new study demonstrates that the locations of these parks do not line up with the general locations of biodiversity in the country that are in need of protection. The bulk of parks is concentrated in the American West, where the lands are relatively sparsely inhabited compared to the East, South, and Appalachians, which contain many “unique or rare species” whose interests are not properly addressed. It is in these geographic regions, researchers explain, that the majority of the continent’s endemic species are located. Meaning that they are not found elsewhere in the world or in other habitats, endemic species play an vital role in the health and operations of their ecosystems. Once more, if they become too severely threatened and begin to die out then the surrounding forests and general environments themselves, and subsequently human health, are likely to degrade substantially.

In addition to striving to protect the correct and most vulnerable areas, there are generally speaking two measures we can take in order to avert crises. The first is to pursue development in a more conservation-oriented fashion. Laying down specific ground rules when pursuing building projects, especially roadways and infrastructure, can help decrease the amount of destruction that follows. This way, as representatives of the plan have put it, “We’re not anti-development, we’re anti-environmentally destructive development.” The second course of action is to actively attempt to restore forest cover. Leading the way in this endeavor is China, whose Three-North Shelter Forest Program is creating a corridor of trees intended to diminish expansion of the Gobi Desert. Reducing desertification will also ensure there is more farmable land, which is obviously in human interest as well.

We have been talking for a very long time about saving the trees and preserving the rainforest. But there is a lot more at stake than symbolic environmentalism or ensuring there is enough oxygen to breathe. Carbon storage, wildlife habitats, anti-erosion, anti-desertification, and many other things on a long list are at stake. Addressing these concerns, while also thinking about the status of many animals, will help to improve the condition of both as well as the many interrelated factors on the Earth.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Why Protecting Forests and Animals Should Be the Same Mission appeared first on Law Street.

One of the most hazardous locations for one’s lungs is Texas. A site of many refineries and factories, the state already presents itself as a major emitter; but its activity exceeds the second ranking states by a wide margin. For example, nitrogen oxide emissions from smoke stacks and vents surpass number two ranking Pennsylvania by more than 60 percent, and tonnage of volatile organic compounds eclipse number two Colorado by more than 44 percent. If this is not enough, many state officials are siding with the industries themselves in an attempt to combat the implementation of tighter emissions regulations. Their testimonies argue that toughening up the standards will be too expensive and not necessarily beneficial to public health.

This conflict extends far beyond the Lone Star State. The Supreme Court itself is locked in a debate as to what measures are necessary and how much they will cost. Dissenters argue that the Obama Administration’s latest initiatives via the Environmental Protection Agency do not contain a cost-benefit analysis. The argument leans on wording in the Clean Air Act, which stipulates that regulations be “appropriate and necessary.” But who has the right to unilaterally determine what is appropriate and necessary? A rough estimate at a “quantifiable” benefit estimates that 11,000 unnecessary deaths can be prevented each year. Calculations diverge as to the monetary expenses and savings; one concludes that $9.6 billion in expenses will result in $6 billion in savings, while another maintains that those same costs can result in up to $30-90 billion in savings. These numbers should not be the focus of the decision, though. If thousands of people might live on who would otherwise die, this should be justification enough to implement the necessary measures.

Henan Province, China. Courtesy of V.T. Polywoda via Flickr.

Ozone and air contamination are a widely pervasive problem; the lives that potentially could be saved are not just in urban areas. Gases and ozone emissions are not stagnant; many studies and measurements have found excessively high air contaminants in rural and wide-open areas such as the Colorado mountains and the Native American reservations in Utah. In addition to the problem of poor restrictions on emission, the standards as to what technically constitutes contamination or poor air quality are too lax. For this reason, non-emitting areas are facing health risks that are not legally deemed as such.

Air pollution is a perfectly remediable problem. In the early 1900s, the great steel city of Pittsburgh rivaled Victorian London for poor air quality. But a series of laws and regulations and more efficient use of fuel led the city to be declared one of the most livable by the 1980s; the characteristic smoke and pollution cleared away almost entirely. A more poignant example is Japan. A system of local governments responding to local concerns but acting seamlessly with national and international-level reform efforts enabled the country to curb pollution without derailing economic growth. In fact, considering the incentives to invest in research and new technologies, the formulation of new overseeing agencies and subsequent job creation, by 1980 air pollution control became a profitable industry itself!

This is perhaps one of the most frustrating aspects of the debates in the Supreme Court right now; all the concerns about cost effectiveness and damage to industry and the economy are based on perceptions of the status quo. People seem to be under the impression that the objective is simply to cap emissions while maintaining all the other aspects of day-to-day life and commercial activity. Rather, as demonstrated by the multi-layered action of Japan, it is a complicated process that requires commitment by many parties, but ultimately a worthwhile one because it is clearly doable and benefits not just the health of the people but can be financially desirable, as well.

This past November, an interesting thing occurred in Beijing. In anticipation of the arrival of many world leaders for an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting, the government mandated a six-day vacation for urban residents, which included traffic restrictions and the closure of factories in an attempt to clear the smog. It was a monumental success; in less than a week, what came to be labeled as “APEC Blue” dominated the skies. The striking effects of this action has galvanized progressive voices and demonstrated to the nation and world that there is a plethora of options from which we can draw that quite effectively address the problem.

Courtesy of Nicolo Lazzati via Flickr.

Air pollution is one of the most visible and widespread consequences of industrialization, rampant consumption, and natural resource use. It may not have as immediate or drastic consequences as some other environmentally related challenges, but it certainly is dangerous. Most importantly, there are so many things that we can do to address it, which may be surprisingly effective and rapid in doing so, while at the same time improving our own habits and ways of life.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Beijing Knows How to Curb Its Air Pollution, So Why Doesn’t Texas? appeared first on Law Street.

On a chilly morning in early 1848, a member of a surveying team stands ankle deep in a small stream in Upper California. Noticing some shiny specks at his feet, he picks one up and stares as it glitters yellow in the sunlight. In the world famous gold rush that followed, prospectors early to arrive were able to literally pick up handfuls of gold from the riverbanks. As 49ers swarmed the West Coast, they eventually had to resort to sifting, and by the end of the rush the only gold that remained had to be mined and blasted out of the mountains using heavy machinery and corporate funding. Now some projections suggest that a global scale version of this phenomenon is drawing near, as the Earth is running out of gold and other metals and minerals so highly prized by our society.

Goldman Sachs suggests that there are only twenty more years worth of mineable gold, diamonds, and zinc, and forty years of platinum, copper, and nickel. The quality of the metals and the yields per ore discovery have also declined significantly in the last half century. So what might some consequences be? The gold mining industry will be hard pressed to maintain its profit margins if there is less and less to find, and there may be increased competition to find what does remain. Naturally, the prices of gold could rise exorbitantly.

The United States economy has been off the gold standard for quite some time. Gold crowns in our teeth can be substituted with other materials. There are many other uses for gold, including medicine, aeronautics, and electronics. But it is not the only material that can serve these purposes; it is replaceable for almost any desire except for aesthetics. The aesthetic value is really the only reason that we keep it around.

Gold is only valuable because we say so. Whether it regards the gift (or curse) of King Midas, huge piles of gold bars stashed in a hidden cave in the desert, or a pirate’s chest overflowing with coins, we have been producing imagery glorifying gold and telling ourselves stories about it for millennia. A perceptive episode of The Twilight Zone, “The Rip Van Winkle Caper,” tells the story of a group of bandits who put themselves in suspended animation for one hundred years under the assumption that upon reawakening, the value of their recently stolen mounds of gold will have increased by a tremendous amount, allowing them to live like kings. As characteristic of the show, twists ensue that demonstrate how the value we place on gold is a cultural construct rooted in time and place.

The striking death mask of the legendary King Tut. Courtesy of Bjorn Christian Torrissen via Wikipedia

Diamonds are also among the most highly coveted objects on Earth. In this case, the global cache is actually quite far from drying up. Rather, this industry is dominated by corporate control and its imposition of artificial scarcity. Several particularly large and powerful diamond companies have corked the bottleneck where diamonds enter the distribution channels. By opening and closing the gates as they see fit, they control the amount of diamonds that enter the market, enabling them to drastically increase the going rates for the stone; the rarity that consumers perceive is fabricated. Because of this concept, arguments that diamonds are running low are relative.

Though it has been an ever improving process for over two decades now, the man-made manufacture of diamonds is a growing industry and controversy. They are literally grown in ovenlike contraptions. This is not comparable to costume jewelry, which is fake. These are real diamonds produced under artificial circumstances. This is the second reason why diamonds are not necessarily running out. Yet the process has met much criticism, suggesting they are still not real diamonds because they did not come out of the Earth itself. They are not the “stuff of stars”; the remnants of the dense cores that blew out into the Universe in a fantastic supernova. They lack the mystique that makes a diamond truly valuable and beautiful.

A man-made diamond. Image courtesy of Steve Jurvetson via Flickr. 

On the other hand, we have heard a lot about “blood diamonds” and the extreme violence and poverty in Africa and elsewhere that results from the diamond mining process. Horrific slave-like conditions exist where people are forced at gunpoint to spent a prodigious amount of time, after being poorly fed and sleeping in insufficient facilities, to dig and sift through the muck. They are beaten and harassed, and have no way out or future to look forward to. If they are lucky enough to find a piece of the rock, they receive a pathetically small payment, especially when compared to what it will eventually sell for. This industry often purchases weapons and fuels gruesome civil wars in turbulent African nations. Even when restrictions on blood diamonds are made clear, smuggling of the product from unregulated countries across the border into the more heavily monitored ones occurs relatively openly. Presumably the industry is simply too profitable to effectively curtail in the name of human rights. Flooding the market with those synthetically produced, or, “cultured” diamonds, could in part serve as a means of addressing this series of problems.

Once more, as with gold, our interest in diamonds is largely a cultural construction. A pair of striking tales from recent history highlight how entire societies can be sucked in. The mammoth diamond corporation De Beers went on a media and marketing frenzy in the United States in the 1930s, introducing the diamond ring as the central element of an engagement and a symbol of the relationship, sexuality, and commitment. Now most people would agree that a proposal is incomplete without one. The diamond trend even caught on in Japan, where there had previously been very little cultural significance given to diamonds.

Image courtesy Jonathan Khoo via Flickr

Gold, diamonds, and other shiny things that we like may or may not become more difficult to come by in the near future. Purchasing these items are based on the ways we think about ourselves, our societies, and our environments. For better or worse we ascribe aesthetic or monetary value to things that might not deserve it, and then we must pay the price.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is the World Running Out of Precious Metals and Gems? appeared first on Law Street.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that a large swath of the Pacific Ocean in British territory will be delineated for protection. Focusing around the Pitcairn Islands in the center of the South Pacific, this reserve will be larger than California and represents a very momentous step forward in conservation.

Beneath the unassuming Pitcairn Island lies an aquatic wonderland. Courtesy of Fotorus via Flickr.

The marine habitat in this region is a thriving and delicate ecosystem. Due to its remoteness, human impact has been minimal; scientists are under the impression that there exist here a substantial number of species yet to be discovered. Furthermore, there are coral reefs, submerged mountains, and water quality of a cleanliness difficult to match elsewhere on Earth.

Prior to the designation as a reserve, threats to the health of the place loomed as illegal fishing activity has been drawing near in recent years. Seafloor mining is also now out of the equation. Old fashioned, low-scale fishing by the 60 or so residents of Pitcairn Island itself, most widely known as the settlement site of the mutineers in Mutiny on the Bounty, will be permitted.

So why is protecting this region such a big deal? First of all, for the sake of the locals and for the British government, the pristine, beautiful region is now guaranteed to remain so, and tourism is expected to increase. The Pitcairn Island is so remote that it is not often that people venture down there. In fact, National Geographic Explorer Enric Sala pointed out that between boats and planes it takes most people longer to arrive there than at the Moon. But applying this protective title increases its appeal. Furthermore, the loss of about $30,000 per year in fishing licenses would be easily recovered by tourist revenue and the benefits of being designated an Exclusive Economic Zone.

The Palmyra Atoll in the Central Pacific. Courtesy of USFWS-Pacific Region/Jim Maragos via Flickr.

Anything that can be done to preserve the health of an ecosystem is desirable. Just because the region around the Pitcairn Island is remote does not mean that any damage it might suffer would not affect other areas on the planet. We have already seen how human beings themselves, in addition to both aquatic and land-bound biodiversity, face threats from accumulating plastic in the oceans. A complex chain of relationships means that even a slight disturbance can cover large geographic and biological distances.

It is more difficult to think of a distant and highly inaccessible portion of the ocean as needing protection from humans, or as being vulnerable to human activity, as it is to regard portions of the land such as rainforests or mountain ranges as such. While we more easily and often see the consequences of our actions on land, we are more detached from the oceans and conditions in the water, both geographically and mentally. For this former reason, the last century has seen the creation of a wealth of national parks, UNESCO biosphere reserves, and vocal conservation organizations. These policies have done many great things to advocate for the health of the land, but only just recently have these motivations extended to the seas.

Marine reserves are oceanic equivalents of national parks. They are protected areas, encourage people to come see their beauty, and make statements as to the importance of our environments. The new Pitcairn reserve represents one of the largest manifestations of that sentiment, spreading environmental awareness and conservation to the farthest corners, yet equally interconnected, portions of the globe.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Part of the Pacific is Being Legally Protected; Here’s Why It’s Important appeared first on Law Street.

Lower Manhattan is a landfill. Composed largely from earth excavated during the subway construction process, it is an unnatural geographic feature and prone to flooding, as Superstorm Sandy demonstrated. In the ominous projections regarding melting ice caps and rising sea levels, it is one of the first places predicted to be inundated. In the 21st century, new plans to expand New York City continue to raise concerns and are questioned by environmental groups, as exemplified by the proposal for the offshore Hudson River Park, dubbed Pier 55.

Former head of Paramount Pictures and Fox, billionaire Barry Diller, is the primary promotor of this project and has pledged over $130 million to its construction. The 2.4 acre park would include concert venues, restaurants, walking and bicycling paths, and lawns. It would sit on a series of pillars standing between 15 and 70 feet above the surface of the water.

Many people are concerned, however, with the opaque manner in which the project is being pursued. Many details have yet to be disclosed to the public and to organizations that have raised concerns, raising questions as to the motivations for the park and the nature of its accessibility. That is to say, private control of public space is a contradictory concept and inhibits the true nature of an area that is apparently intended to be for the enjoyment of the people.

Furthermore, environmental groups are highly concerned as to the ramifications of the park, which would be built in a part of the Hudson River that is a marine sanctuary and spawning ground for striped bass. The Hudson River conservation organization Riverkeeper is worried that driving down pylons could disturb sediment and that the shade cast by the park would affect the behavior of fish and ecosystem dynamics. Yet the trust claims that the height of the park, facilitated by the use of the pillars, would allow for sunlight to reach the water. Furthermore, this park would not entirely be a brand new piece of construction dropped down in the middle of the water. Rather it is to be placed in large on the site of the previous Pier 54, which was once a dock for ocean liners including the Lusitania but has since fallen into disrepair and is collapsing into the river.

The Cunard Line’s arch at Pier 54. Courtesy of jim.henderson via Wikipedia.

Pier 55 requires approval from the Army Corps of Engineers and the New York Department of Environmental Conservation before construction can begin as scheduled in 2016. Yet these reassurances fall somewhat flat considering the knowledge that the trust submitted an environmental assessment form as opposed to a full environmental impact statement. While it points out that its report contained over 200 pages, it nonetheless had fewer requirements to answer. This ties into the opacity of the project, raising suspicions.

Diller was the primary benefactor of the High Line as well, another project that converted decaying urban space into productive real estate for the enjoyment of the public. Plans to build a Low Line park underground at the previous site of a trolly terminal on the Lower East Side have so far been met with much excitement. On the surface, Pier 55 seems like an altruistic and productive idea. But the fact that it is indeed on the surface raises a new set of concerns. Building in the water is far more complicated that revamping an old site on the land. The dialogue needs to be more productive before this project gets started; hopefully in the months to come questions will be answered and all parties involved will be reassured that this plan will work. The pier seems like a good idea and looks like it will be a fun place to visit once it is completed; as long as it does not inflict environmental damage, hopefully it will come to fruition.

You can check out more information and see a photo gallery of the proposed Pier 55 plans by clicking here.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Hudson River Park Development in NYC Raises Questions appeared first on Law Street.

Dogs may be our best friends, but some people take interest in far more unusual choices for pets. Whether it be driven by a desire for a display of status, a sense of adventure, or simply an interest in doing something different, keeping exotic pets presents a series of problems.

Exotic pets by definition come from a different ecosystem, and they pose the threat of carrying with them invasive species. An East Asian fungus threatens to wipe out American salamanders. This fungus arrives in part on Chinese fire belly newts, which are particularly popular and are imported into the United States by the hundreds of thousands annually. Salamanders play an underappreciated and barely visible yet vital role in the environment. Keeping specific insect populations in check, they subsequently serve as food for certain rodents and small predators that in turn operate in important manners. Each animal is an important link in a chain, the removal of which could induce a fracturing of the delicate structure.

Snakes are another common type of exotic pet, relatively popular in Florida. It is unfortunate how frequently one hears a story on the news about a pet snake escaping. Something like a python is huge and powerful, and can turn on its owner or on people whom it may come across as it flees. Small children and other pets, like small dogs, are susceptible. I know someone whose friend had a pet python that escaped. She said that one day they flipped open the toilet lid and found it in there. This must surely have been quite a shock, and is a very unsettling place to find a dangerous wild animal! Furthermore, because snakes of this kind are predatory and already at the top of the food chain, introducing them into an environment of which they were not previously a part can be just as damaging as the salamander situation. In this case, though, the snake itself is the invasive species, multiplying out of control as there is nothing to keep it in check, while feeding unchallenged on the prey of its choice, potentially endangering the populations of those animals.

Courtesy of Katy Warner via Flickr.

The reason that animals like pythons have a tendency to escape and are quite capable of subsequently surviving is that they are wild. Ancient humans were only able to domesticate fourteen species of large herbivorous animals: sheep, goats, cows, pigs, horses, Arabian (one humped) camels, Bactrian (two humped) camels, llamas, donkeys, reindeer, water buffalo, yaks, Bali cattle, and the mithan, which is also something of a relative to cattle. The primary means by which humans did this was to tap into their social structure. Horses, for example, live hierarchically. Therefore a human must replace the alpha male at the top of the pyramid and the rest of the group will follow. It is worth noting that wolves also have a hierarchical social structure. Thus one will notice that dogs are more naturally submissive to humans than cats, whose relatives and ancestors do not adhere to these same patterns.

It is more complicated than that, though. Some relatives of domesticated animals cannot be domesticated for other reasons. For example, zebras simply cannot be saddled, ridden, and trained the way horses can. Although they have the same hierarchal social structure as horses, other factors including diet, complications over captive breeding, or genetic traits tied into disposition or a propensity to panic will render an animal non-domesticable. Any individual trait, much less a combination of them, will yield this result, making an animal unsuitable to be a pet.

Ethical questions also present themselves with regard to keeping wild animals as pets. Aside from farm foul, no other type of bird is domesticable. Yet these are not uncommon sights in people’s homes. Having the ability to fly, birds possess a supreme gift of nature, one that mankind himself has dreamed about and aspired to throughout his existence. Nonetheless we selfishly deprive pet birds of it so that we can look at them while they sit perched in a small cage, denying them the ability to do what they are built to do.

Courtesy of elwarren via Flickr.

On a similar note, no types of predators should serve as pets either. In a somewhat Hollywood-esque conceptualization, we think of keeping something like a tiger as a pet as a demonstration of machismo and power. High-ranking antagonists in movies threaten to throw their adversaries to their vicious tigers like slabs of meat. But just the same as birds and their desire to fly, an apex predator is driven by its genes to hunt. We can poetically describe the action of handing a hunter its food instead of letting it pursue the hunt itself as killing its soul, but in a sense this is what is occurring. Whatever concepts of status we might procure are not worth the price of the damage consequently inflicted on such an animal. In addition, animals like this hold an appeal because of their wildness. If we take that away we negate its very mystique.

Once again we are attempting to tame aspects of nature that are beyond our control, with damaging consequences. We do not need to imprison wild animals in our homes in order to appreciate them. It would be much more productive to environmental consciousness to instead journey out into the wilderness ourselves and see them in their own element, where they belong.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Owning Exotic Pets is Dangerous and Unethical appeared first on Law Street.

Rising populations and increasingly heavy use of technology is causing a global food crisis. But starvation isn’t the issue at hand; it is waste. The amount of food that is wasted worldwide costs a huge amount of money, fills landfills, and emits methane gas. The process of producing and delivering food in the first place induces environmental damage and displaces people and animals. This complex and interconnected system requires attention on multiple levels if we intend to avert a slew of catastrophes.

Similar to the problems with water, the primary problem with managing and consuming food is not scarcity but distribution imbalances. People starve in many places around the world, while others gorge themselves on conspicuously lavish meals that they do not intend to finish. In fact, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimated that the food discarded by retailers and consumers in the most developed counties would be more than enough to feed all of the world’s 870 million hungry people. Some suggest that the economic ramifications of wasted food reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars. An additional scientific conclusion includes the fact that the amount of methane gas emitted by decomposing food in landfills is only surpassed by national emissions of the United States and China.

Courtesy of Bill McChesney via Flickr.

Considering these ominous statistics, some say a solution is to refrain from eating meat. The meat industry requires large swaths of land to raise animals, huge amounts of food to feed to them, and enormous quantities of water to grow those crops in the first place. This resource and energy intensive process thus draws in many sectors in order to be possible. While this decision may help reduce demand for such environmentally threatening foods, there are many other products that we eat whose production is costly. For example, one of the most common ingredients in many foods, especially packaged and frozen ones, is palm oil. The price for the acquisition of the substance includes heavy deforestation in Indonesia and Malaysia, which displaces indigenous people, releases stored carbon into the atmosphere, and threatens already critically endangered animals such as Sumatran rhinos and orangutans, Asian elephants, and leopards.

Courtesy of David Ellis via Flickr.

The overall production and distribution processes of the industry is one of the primary concerns at play. Thanks in part to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, one of the sparks of the environmental movement in the 60s, we are quite familiar with all the problems associated with spraying chemicals, pesticides, and DDT. It has already been established that pesticides and deforestation are endangering butterflies; however, they are still widely used in the agricultural sector. A relatively recent possible solution involved genetically modified crop seeds, which provide the subsequent plants with an incorporated pesticide that attacks the nervous system of pests such as root worms and flea beetles. It is becoming evident that these plants are dangerous to other types of insects as well, particularly bees. This could be catastrophic. All mosquitoes do is spread diseases; the world could do quite well without them. Bees are another story. They are pollinating insects; they provide a crucial component to their ecosystems, allowing plants to reproduce, flourish, and anchor the food chains built above them. Furthermore, even farmers often rely on bees to help pollinate their own crops.

Courtesy of Brian via Flickr.

In addition to addressing these large-scale global patterns of production, there are many things that vendors and consumers can do to alleviate the situation, particularly with regard to food waste. Composting is becoming more and more common, which helps insofar as reducing the amount of food thrown away; rather it puts it to productive purposes in fertilizing soil in which new plants can be grown. As this occurs on a local level, it also reduces pollution that results from transportation challenges. In an effort to reduce waste, KFC restaurants in Britain will begin making their coffee cups out of an edible sugar paper and white chocolate. While this reduction in waste is not specifically with regard to food, it is a nice idea and a good starting point.

Ultimately neither of these things will resolve the wide ranging set of challenges we face with regard to the food sector. Yet they help us think about our consumption habits and the environment around us. The decisions we make as consumers are vital to addressing wasted food. Our habits, lifestyles, values, and expectations play a substantial role in the patterns of the industry. Therefore we have plenty of opportunities to act productively and affect change. The first step? Don’t bite off more than you can chew.

For more information on how you can make meaningful changes in your own life, here are some helpful tools:

• The Waste Free Kitchen Handbook, written by a project scientist at the Natural Resource Defense Council and coming out in May 2015.
• End Food Waste: Website with relevant information and activist campaigns.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Challenges of Food Production and Consumption appeared first on Law Street.

Hammers swinging and chisels carving, the great arched stone structure rises from the ground. It is 54 AD, and the Aqua Claudia is nearing completion. One of many aqueducts in central Italy, this structure would provide clean and running water to the city of Rome. In the centuries to follow, Rome’s health, trade, and population would boom, propelling it to the pinnacle of greatness in the ancient world. Water has always been vital to the prosperity of human civilizations. As the world globalizes and markets become integrated, we continue to face challenges with regard to water in 2015. Scarcity, abundance, economic forces, and technology all play concerning roles in our need to more effectively manage our water, vital to not only our prosperity but our survival.

An ancient Roman aqueduct. Courtesy of Wolfgang Staudt via Flickr.

Some arguments suggest that scarcity of a resource is paradoxically beneficial, as it pushes people to band together and cooperate in an attempt to secure their needs, ration what they have, and communicate. However, this is overly optimistic; scarcity is tied to violence. While in the modern era this does not necessarily involve resource wars–as in countries fighting each other over access–it often involves internal struggles and alienation of groups. For example, powerful people gain more power by governing access to a scarce resource. In this sense, the issue is largely one of distribution. This is one of the primary concerns with any resource in global politics; whether regarding countries in the developed world in relation to those in the underdeveloped world, or rich and powerful people in relation to the poor and marginalized ones within the same country, some groups enjoy lavish abundance while others go wanting. There remains plenty of water to go around, it is just a matter of who gets it and how.

Another reason why distribution is a challenge is because of poor infrastructure and economic vectors. Already facing energy shortages and blackouts, officials in Pakistan predict a water crisis on top of what will arrive soon. A significant cause of these concerns is mismanagement; thus poor distribution methods and insufficient economic structures disallow the huge population from receiving the water it needs. Of course there are also climate change-related factors involved, but a properly organized system would be able to account for these dynamics to some degree, as well.

Pakistan’s Water and Energy Minister, Khawaja Muhammed Asif, is of the opinion that the country’s resource challenges are largely due to internal behaviors, stating, “There is a national habit of extravagance.” This means that some people are using a huge amount of water unnecessarily, while others are thirsty. Furthermore, New York Times writer Salman Masood points out that water politics have been tied into jihadist activities; Islamist militants regularly accuse India of denying Pakistan its rightful water, and the leader of the 2008 train attacks in Mumbai often cites these perceived dynamics as one of his primary grievances. However, Masood continues, India’s water storage infrastructure is leaps and bounds superior to that of Pakistan, containing over three times the capacity to save it for a not-rainy day.

The Indus River, lifeblood of villages and civilizations. Courtesy of indiawaterportal.org via Flickr.

There exist many proposals regarding what to do about water shortages and accessibility. One such idea involves towing icebergs to locations in need, but this is highly impractical. In addition to the high costs of such an operation, large amounts of the iceberg would melt in transit, and this delivery system does not address the endemic structural deficiencies.

Another idea involves desalinization plants. These draw on the enormous quantities from the oceans, as otherwise only three percent of the Earth’s water is fresh. This process has some benefits, drawing from the seemingly endless supply, but it is also very expensive to put into play and operate. Furthermore, it is often not wisely appropriated. There has recently been a debate over whether to build a desalinization plant in New York’s Rockland County. The primary motive for resistance is that there is simply no need. In addition to the fact that the region receives a high amount of rainfall, water consumption has actually been dropping as water-using technologies such as washing machines and toilets have become more efficient. Constructing the plant would cost $150 million unnecessarily. Furthermore, it would desalinize the briny water from the lower Hudson River, where it meets the ocean, which could be potentially damaging to the estuary life. Most desalinization plants draw directly from the sea.

A desalinization plant in Spain. Courtesy of James Grellier via Wikipedia.

This debate is a product not of scarcity but of abundance; there is plenty of water to go around so the desalinization plant is unnecessary. But economic structures and finances abound, so additional challenges arise. In most parts of the United States, water is so abundant and the physical infrastructure and economic style for delivering it is so effective that water is often wasted. It is so inexpensive that there is little incentive to conserve. But the problem goes far beyond household consumption. Over three quarters of all water use in the United States occurs in the agricultural industry. Flooding fields, using enormous sprinklers for hours at a time, and other inefficient means of irrigation and watering abound because there is so much water and no consequences for using it all.

It is somewhat ironic, then, that on a national scale we care so little about using our water but are very aware of its purity, content, and condition. Several weeks ago, some oil from a spill was found in the Yellowstone River. This serves as drinking water for many people, as well as plays a vital role in the delicate ecosystem of the region. The spill came from a burst pipeline, fueling further concerns about the safety of this delivery system. Just recently, President Obama exercised his veto power for the first time in five years by striking down the necessary legislation to make the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline a reality.

Whether there is not enough water and methods of procuring it must be hammered out, or there is an abundance and measures to regulate and protect it must be put into place, effectively handling water is the key not only to prosperity, but to survival.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Challenges of Water Management and Consumption appeared first on Law Street.

A relatively new concept regarding how to address large-scale environmental concerns has been popping up in the debate lately. It’s called “geoengineering” and it involves deliberate human actions intended to remedy global warming. There are many potential problems with this concept, and hopefully it never comes to full fruition.

Geoengineering leans on technological intervention intended to stabilize the climate and reduce the effects of human-induced global warming. For example, there have been several proposals as to how to remove carbon dioxide from the oceans, such as introducing large amounts of lime, as well as enveloping the planet in a layer of sulfate in order to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface.

Problem #1

Assuming people are finally coming around to the idea that human society has been playing a negative role in climate change, geoengineering stands as a human role in seeking to fix it. Much environmental damage resulting from human activity over the centuries has partly been a consequence of mankind’s hubris, or idea of superiority over nature and ability to tame, control, and manipulate it to his advantage. Geoengineering is no different; while it may be a concept with good intentions, it is born of a line of thinking that has already proven itself to be problematic and damaging; there are many reasons to be concerned that these steps would cause more and unforeseen problems.

Intentionally enveloping the planet in anything sounds like a bad idea. If part of the reason why we continue to damage the Earth is that we still do not fully understand its environments and ecosystems, meaning that we are not yet able to live harmoniously with it, then directly intervening could cause immediate problems because we simply do not know what we are doing.

Earth’s thin atmosphere. Courtesy NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center via Flickr.

Problem #2

There is no substitute for reducing emissions and pursuing more sustainable lifestyles and societies. Geoengineering might be thought of as a get-out-of-jail-free card; we enter into a vicious cycle of causing damage and attempting to fix it without addressing the real causes of the problems in the first place. Some people counter that it could spark investments and more attention to innovative scientific research, but those things can also be accomplished with a more wholehearted pursuit of sustainability and conservation.

A severe drought in Australia. Courtesy of Vicki via Flickr.

Problem #3

Geoengineering is being described as an attempt to remedy “global warming.” In this sense, its purpose is to try to stop rising temperatures. It should be noted that “global warming” is a less and less common phrase, because this is not the only issue at hand. “Climate change” is a more appropriate term, because the issues we face have more to do with radicalization of climate and weather; it is a matter of more extremes, not just rising temperatures. Hotter summers, yes, but also colder winters, stronger hurricanes, more frequent earthquakes, more floods, more droughts, and so on. If we attempt to geoengineer the Earth with the objective of reducing warming temperatures but not stabilizing the climate in general, disaster may follow.

Hurricane Katrina. Courtesy of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center via Flickr.

An ongoing trial project in Iceland has been injecting carbon dioxide mixed with water into volcanic rock. While previous attempts at carbon storage have not borne fruit because the element tends to bubble back up to the surface, this approach relies on the reactive nature of basalt; in a relatively short amount of time, the mixture crystalizes into minerals. Yet this process is enormously expensive and requires a titanic amount of water. Again, it does not serve as a solution to our polluting ways. There are also many other causes of pollution and environmental damage that are not addressed with this process. Finally, there is still plenty of doubt as to how safe it really is. If injecting chemicals into shale rock for fracking purposes has proven to induce earthquakes, who knows what consequences tampering with volcanism, which is by nature volatile and unpredictable, might have.

There is no shame in letting go of our pride and admitting that we are not masters of the Earth. She is her own master. Yes, we have caused many problems of late. But rather than continuing to assert control and attempting to fix it, and in so doing only furthering those ailments and further endangering ourselves, we should cut our losses. It would be best to continue attempting to change our ways, and have faith that the Earth can repair itself in time. After four billion years it is still here and relatively healthy; ten thousand years of human civilization will not do it in.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Climate Engineering is Not a Solution to Climate Change appeared first on Law Street.

Laying eyes upon it for the first time, I was ashamed of myself for the image I had conjured up previously. Learning about the Grand Canyon, I envisioned a very large crack in the Earth with a river at the bottom. That sounds impressive, and I was happy to have the opportunity to come visit in person. But when I finally arrived, I was blown away by how, well, grand the Grand Canyon really is. It’s not just a crevice, but a complex. The snaking Colorado River has carved an unprecedented masterpiece into the Southwestern landscape, a transcendental experience for one’s eyes. From the top of the Canyon, the faint whisper of the wind provides joy to one’s ears as well, and from the bottom of the Canyon, riding the Colorado River, the soaring red and orange towers instill in one’s heart a sense of timelessness. But all these emotional evocations may be under threat by the poisonous sight of commercialism and the droning sounds of machines, as a proposal to build a tramway down the Canyon, complete with shops and restaurants, is gaining strength.

The Grand Canyon Escalade is a proposal for a slew of hotels, restaurants, and shops, the epicenter of which is a gondola that would take visitors to the bottom of the Canyon where they can patronize a restaurant, Indian cultural center, and a riverwalk. Especially considering that the base of the tram would not technically be in the Grand Canyon Park, but on Navajo land, some members of that tribe are excited for the proposal and its potential to generate jobs and revenue for the Nation. It would be a productive collaboration between the Navajo people, developers, and the government, all of which may profit from the project.

Yet the proposed site for the base of the tram is at a place called the Confluence, where the Colorado River is met by a smaller tributary, aptly named the Little Colorado. For many Navajo, this place is sacred. They come here to pray, seek spiritual peace, and connect with their ancestors. Building a noisy, gaudy eyesore here would literally be sacrilege; desecration of a temple. Furthermore one must not forget that there are other Native tribes who have been living in the area for millennia, such as the Hopi, who also have religious connections to the site. Their voices are stifled in this debate, as the Navajo are the ones who control the area.

The debate teeters back and forth. Some say that it would ruin the aesthetics, others that it would not be visible from the nearest lookout point. Some say that it would damage the ecosystem, others that the area is already popular among hikers and rafters. Most of all, as previously mentioned, some say that it would economically benefit the Navajo, others that it infringes on existing Navajo practice.

The Colorado continues to carve the Canyon to this day. Courtesy of Hut Slut via Flickr.

How might this tram affect the ways that we think about and experience the Grand Canyon? Defenders have argued that it would enable tourists to experience the Canyon in new ways, and open up opportunities for people for whom the Canyon might otherwise be inaccessible. But there are already ways for people who are not hikers or rafters in peak physical condition to experience the Canyon. If you can stomach the smell, you can ride a mule to the bottom. If you are not phased by the surprisingly high rate of crashes, you can take a helicopter ride through. And of course, the Rim trails are paved and wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs.

A mule train on the Canyon trails. Courtesy of Al_HikesAZ via Flickr.

Casually riding a tram would detract from the experience of the Canyon, not add to it. I would love to see what the world looks like at the summit of Mount Everest. But nobody specifically dreams of simply standing at the top, right? In fact, most climbers only spend a few minutes there. The whole point is to climb the mountain. That is the real challenge and experience of Mount Everest, and that is what makes standing at the top so rewarding, valuable, and coveted. Imagine if there was a tram on which you could ride to the summit? Or a specially designed helicopter or plane that could drop you down on the top? It would certainly be a pretty view, but the experience would be hollow. You would not have earned your right to stand there. As it is, there has been much debate and criticism over the last 20 years regarding the commercialization of climbing Mount Everest. As long as you have the money to spare–about $65,000–any hack can hire a guide and crew who will attempt to get him to the summit. It is this respect and reverence for nature that continues to dwindle in the face of technology and modernization that we must endeavor to preserve.

Throughout modern human history, and particularly since the Industrial Revolution, we have sought to “tame nature,” to regulate, control, master, and rise above it. This has proven to have severe environmental and social consequences.Of late, there have been attempts to reemphasize aesthetics and naturally occurring phenomena. The Grand Canyon fits squarely into this issue. It is a complicated structure that should not necessarily be accessible from all vantage points. We can see and experience it to a very substantial degree but, like Mount Everest, the very inaccessibility, danger, and mystery is what provides it with its mystique and appeal. It is these things that allow it to be a Grand Canyon, and not a tourist-laden crack in the Earth with a river at the bottom.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Tramway and Restaurants in the Grand Canyon? Stop the Escalade appeared first on Law Street.

Their tiny, delicate wings make their migration from Central Mexico to Southern Canada equitable to a trip from the Earth to the Moon and back. But due to climate change and habitat loss, the great Monarch Butterfly is growing endangered and few people are likely to act in their defense.

Butterflies are one of the first things we learn about in school, and one of the last that we come to appreciate. Many of us have fond elementary school memories of collecting caterpillars in jars for the classroom. It was an exciting project, but we rarely truly thought about the wonder of what was happening. During its time in the chrysalis, a caterpillar literally dissolves into a bag of liquid, to reassemble as a new creature. One that can take flight, and has an ingrained knowledge of its mission. A butterfly is a symbol of transformation; a reminder that patience and hard work can yield fantastic results.

Numbering in the half billions, Monarch Butterflies cluster in the Oyamel Fir Forests of Mexico, covering nearly ever square inch of tree trunk and branch. As spring appears and warms the air, they emerge from their sleepy lull and prepare for a fantastic journey. This group of insects can make it only so far, mating and subsequently dying somewhere in the Southern United States; however, their offspring appear shortly thereafter, and resume the flight northward. It takes three generations to make the trip, each one understanding its current location and distance it must travel. Then, one “super generation” makes the entire trip back to Mexico.

Courtesy of Agunther via Wikipedia.

The Oyamel Fir Forests are a product of older geological patterns, when the Earth was cooler and wetter. Monarch Butterflies are adapted to the same conditions; if it gets too hot or dry they are very susceptible to death. As the climate changes, the forest coverage recedes, leaving them vulnerable. In addition, the trees retain heat, which keeps the butterflies warm throughout the night and in general provides a suitable temperature zone for the delicate creatures. As illegal logging takes place in this region, poorly regulated by the Mexican government, the butterflies face threats on multiple fronts.

The brilliant orange shading of a Monarch’s wings is actually a defensive signal to predators, warning them of toxicity; few creatures are willing to eat a Monarch. This characteristic comes from a very particular diet, namely the milkweed leaf. It is on this plant that the caterpillar is born and, though a handful of flower types can provide food for the butterfly, is the only thing the caterpillar is capable of eating before making its transformation. Extensive use of certain herbicides and pesticides is killing milkweed in large swathes; caterpillars now face starvation before ever turning into butterflies.

A Monarch caterpillar. Courtesy of vladeb via Flickr.

In the last 20 years Monarch’s populations have declined by 90 percent, while they have lost over 160 million acres of habitat. So what is being done about this? This past August, scientists filed for protection of Monarch Butterflies under the Endangered Species Act. This would enable authorities to take more action with regard to the logging and pesticide use, as international regulations could help curb hazardous human activities.

In a recent meeting of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, panelists discussed the implementation of butterfly habitats on public property. This would basically be an extension of home gardening, insofar as planting milkweed nurseries outside on which butterflies can lay their eggs. We already enjoy hanging bird feeders in our yards and installing bird baths in parks, right? Birds are pleasant company. Butterflies are too; milkweed gardens in our yards, parks, and schools would draw beautiful creatures to our sides, enhancing our appreciation and outdoor experiences. Furthermore, as Conservation Chair of the Sierra Club’s Central Jersey Chapter Kip Cherry pointed out, it would bring greater visibility to the crisis.

Most recently, this endeavor has received a major boost from the Fish & Wildlife Service as well as the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, who together will contribute over $3 million to assist in the development of butterfly oases in communities across the country. While some people are concerned that this action is not enough, as it does not address the use of pesticides that are killing milkweed plants in the first place, it is nonetheless a major effort to provide for the butterflies and may lead to further productive measures in the future.

A milkweed field. Courtesy of mwms1916 via Flickr.

The Butterfly Effect is a scientific model that suggests a minuscule action at the outset of an event can have titanic ramifications down the line. This is often metaphorically exemplified by images of the flapping of a butterfly’s wings setting in motion a chain of events that will alter the behavior of a hurricane. Similarly, this is a common literary tool, as when a time traveler in the past steps on a butterfly and in so doing induces drastic changes to the future. These constructions are poignant because they rely on our perceptions of a butterfly’s insignificance and lack of importance.

Some people might be hesitant to act in defense of butterflies. They conjure up images of effeminateness; a delicate creature is suitable for a delicate person, such as a Victorian gentleman traipsing about with a net. I myself have been laughed at after arguing that butterflies are awesome. In addition to this cultural stereotype, the bottom line is that butterflies are insects. They have antennae and lots of legs and people find these things gross. We flinch and shoo them if they get too close. We imagine insects in general as being infinitely numerous; it is hard to accept that some of them could disappear. As far as endangered species go, they are not comparable to the great Bengal tiger, or sweet and gentle manatee, or majestic humpback whale. In fact, though, they are all of these things. Our prejudices do not entitle us to judge which species deserve to survive or die off, especially if it is our actions that are putting them in that precarious position in the first place.

Courtesy of docentjoyce via Flickr.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A Member of Royalty is in Trouble appeared first on Law Street.

Now that winter is in full swing, we go to extensive measures to make sure that our roadways and sidewalks are passable and safe. As we plow and shovel, we also use salts to serve as ice melt. While they come in numerous forms, many of them are strong salts that pose problems for the roadways themselves, the environment, and our pets.

As it is, I work hard to clean snow and ice out of my dog’s paws when she comes inside on a winter day. If those things become lodged they can irritate the sensitive pads or cause an infection. But if she steps on salt-based ice melt during the course of our walk, potentially serious problems can occur. First of all, it burns. I’ve seen my dog limp and try walking on three feet with the other raised up in the air because it is painful to step down. She’s whimpered and cried, and licked obsessively in an attempt to remedy it. This can cause further problems; ingesting these salts can cause gastrointestinal ailments such as vomiting and internal burns in the mouth and digestive tract. Extreme cases might even lead to liver failure or pancreatitis. I clean and disinfect her paws, apply soothing sprays, but can only do so much to prevent her from eating snow and ice outside that may contain some of the salt.

Courtesy Franklin R. Halprin

There is no reason to use these types of salts. Sometimes salts are not necessary at all; laying down sand can provide traction enough. In many areas a homeowner is directly responsible for the portion of the sidewalk that is in front of his house. While some people are quite neglectful of this duty, others take it to the extreme. I have encountered stretches of sidewalk that are so choked with strong salts that my dog and I are better off walking in the middle of the street. There are plenty of ice melts that are labeled “pet safe.” These are not nearly as problematic, though they are not necessarily perfect as they may still contain some similar ingredients. It is best to ask your vet or an employee at the store for more information.

Little boots are an option, as well. They are cute and fashionable and will protect the paws; however, I know my dog would not tolerate them. She would feel restricted and would spend the walk trying to tear them off. While they could help some dogs, this is avoiding the problem rather than eliminating it.

Courtesy Franklin R. Halprin

It is also worth noting that we track these salts into our homes on our shoes, as well. This can cause damage to wood floors and rugs. In addition, stronger salts crack the roadways. This is one of the reasons, in addition to the expansions and contractions induced by temperature changes, that roads are riddled with deep potholes by the time spring arrives. This gets expensive for taxpayers to fund repaving year after year, as well as poses dangers to drivers and can damage car suspensions, axles, and tires. Recently there were even several accidents on New Jersey’s Palisades Parkway largely due to incredibly rough roadways.

Remember how when Rome sacked Carthage they sowed the soil with salt so that nothing would ever grow again? We too are doing damage to the environment by sprinkling salt everywhere. It can burn grasses and plants, poison birds, and wash into waterways. From there it can harm aquatic life. This is a major issue; there is a sharp contrast in biological characteristics between fresh water creatures and salt water ones. Salt in fresh water is incredibly deadly.

Courtesy Franklin R. Halprin

We are therefore dealing with an environmentally irresponsible set of practices. Ideally an alternative to salting in its entirety would be a nice development, but in the meantime reducing or eliminating one of the problems that it causes would be a good step forward. So that our best friends can safely take steps outside, let it be with concern to pet friendly salts.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Just Say No to Ice-Melting Salt This Winter appeared first on Law Street.

The popular image of an asteroid field–a chaotic clutter of rocks so dense that the odds of successfully navigating one in a spacecraft are immensely slim–is something of a misnomer. In reality, most known fields are spread over such a vast distance that there are titanic spaces between each body; it would be more like driving on a gently winding road through the mountains; however, there is a dense and dangerous field much closer to home. It orbits tightly around the Earth, and is composed of man-made objects and debris and poses many dangers and problems to those on space missions as well as those of us at home.

Space missions, particularly the earlier ones at the dawn of the space age, have left many things behind. Sometimes it has been accidental from equipment or crafts breaking, other times it has been a discharge of unnecessary material. In this sense, missions are inefficient. Further, there have been reckless and irresponsible actions that produced enormous quantities of space debris. For example, in 2007 China demonstrated its missile defense program by shooting down a satellite orbiting in space. “Shoot down” is a misleading term, because in did not come back down to Earth. Instead, it blew into countless pieces that now orbit us.

Imaging of space debris in a tight cloud and an outer ring. Courtesy of NASA Orbital Debris Program Office, photo gallery via Wikipedia.

Estimates suggest that there are at least 500,000 pieces of debris. In addition to the fact that NASA can only know of and track so many pieces, they all travel at velocities of around 17,500 miles per hour. This is a phenomenal speed, and can inflict massive damage. Debris has collided with satellites and spacecraft, damaging or destroying them, thus adding more debris to the field. The International Space Station is particularly vulnerable. The impact from a larger object can tear away an entire section of a spacecraft, dooming it. Even the smallest pieces traveling at such speeds can tear the airtight suits of astronauts, shatter their face shields, or conjure up other horrifying images we only thought existed in science fiction.

Courtesy Fragile Oasis via Flickr.

Back on solid ground, human society’s ever-growing network of communications deeply depends on orbiting satellites and space relays. This is more than just getting a signal on our cell phones; our entire way of life is tied into outer space relays. Man-made objects in space often face decaying orbits in time. This means that they come back down to Earth. The smaller ones are likely to burn up in the atmosphere, and the ones that make it through face large odds of crashing in the ocean. Hopefully they are subsequently retrieved, as garbage and man-made objects in the oceans is a problem in and of itself; however, there is a chance that these things will hit land. In 2001, the upper stage of a rocket that launched a satellite in 1993, which had been orbiting the Earth as space debris, crashed down in the Arabian desert. Although there have yet to be any deaths or injuries reported in conjunction with space debris, it is an ever more likely scenario.

The crashed rocket module. Courtesy of NASA via Wikipedia.

NASA has protocol for tracking space debris and maneuvering spacecraft in evasive manners if necessary. But what do we do about trying to reduce the problem? We can’t exactly send people up in orange vests to pick up the pieces one by one. There exist some proposals regarding specific trips to the larger objects with the intention of dragging them down, as well as lasers for destroying and redirecting some of the smaller ones. These ideas would be incredibly expensive and highly inefficient. Ultimately, the problem seems irreversible.

The best course of action is to reduce further debris from becoming part of the field. This comes in the form of making parts of rockets and ships that are reusable. As we continue to face questions of sustainability on Earth, our presence in space demands the same standards. Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, one of the companies that NASA has hired to bring supplies to and from the International Space Station, is working on multi-use rockets. The CEO of SpaceX, Elon Musk, stated that using a one-time rocket is equivalent to flying a 747 on a transcontinental flight once and then throwing it away. In this sense, SpaceX’s endeavors are largely motivated by financial concerns. Musk projected that reusing all the stages of a rocket could cut operational costs to a hundredth of what they are now. Nonetheless, a couple of weeks ago the company launched a rocket intended for a cargo run to the International Space Station, a stage of which they subsequently intended to land on a barge in the Atlantic Ocean; however, the piece landed in a rough manner and exploded. Nonetheless it was a good attempt and has positive implications for the future.

After several hundred years of living high environmental impact lives, we only recently have begun to ask serious questions about the damage we have been doing, how to fix it, and how to change for the future. After half a century of venturing into space, we have already left an ugly mark on that environment too. The fact that we are now seeing attempts to address that is optimistic. As we contemplate how to live sustainably on Earth, we attempt to venture sustainably into space.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Near Space is Choked With Debris That We Put There appeared first on Law Street.

On January 8, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration finished the work started by previous Mayor Michael Bloomberg by announcing that styrofoam containers will go by the wayside. This includes to-go boxes from the city’s many food trucks as well as coffee cups and packing peanuts. This is a purely environmental move, which might end up costing consumers more money and inconveniencing vendors. Though it has been met with some controversy, most people agree that ultimately it is a good decision.

Expanded Polystyrene Foam, or styrofoam, is one of mankind’s worst inventions. While it’s buoyant properties are desirable for flotation devices and its insulating properties are handy in construction projects, it is non-biodegradable. Thus it sits in landfills forever, never decomposing into the soil. Furthermore, the Department of Sanitation recently determined that it is not recyclable, which played a substantial part in deciding to ban the product. Finally, since most people’s exposure to styrofoam comes in the form of food or beverage containers, it is worth noting that some studies by the EPA suggest a possible mild carcinogenicity.

Courtesy of Jon Hayes via Flickr.

The New York City ban goes into effect on July 1, 2015; however, there will be a six-month grace period before the city begins enforcement so that vendors can seek alternatives. Furthermore, nonprofits and businesses with less than $500,000 in annual income may qualify for an exemption. Finally, while packing peanuts will no longer be sold within the city, packages containing them can still be shipped in. Nonetheless, this determination represents a great step forward in eradicating the material.

Those who support styrofoam do so because it is cheap to acquire and convenient to use; however, there are plenty of alternatives. For example, the city’s Department of Education plans to serve children their food on compostable plates instead. Starbucks and some other coffee companies hand out their products in paper cups with a cardboard ring around them; these are recyclable products that also do a sufficient job of keeping the customer’s hands from being burned. This is a poignant example, because styrofoam is a part of the fashion employed by Dunkin Donuts. In New York, they will have to find a slightly new appearance to compliment the regulations. Customers might worry that their coffee will not stay as hot for as long or will be inconvenienced in other ways.

Courtesy of Erik Sagen via Flickr.

Smaller businesses and vendors are most concerned about the ban because they will likely have to buy more expensive containers. Assuming they can find effective replacements for styrofoam, they will probably have to charge more for what is famously cheap food in order to make up their losses. Up until now it has cost $86 per ton to landfill foam, and $160 to reuse it in some form. These expenses come out of taxpayers’ pockets. Therefore consumers should be okay with paying a slightly higher price for environmentally friendly containers, because it would likely be to their financial benefit in the long run.

Just as with attempting to live off of alternative energy sources, making the transition to environmentally sustainable items and lifestyles is a difficult one. There are likely to be some monetary losses at the outset, but in the long run these things tend to prove to be more financially viable. Environmental sustainability often goes hand in hand with economic sustainability. We should not be afraid to venture outside of our comfort zones and established ways of life in quest of something new and better. Styrofoam is something we take for granted; our morning cup of coffee seems an insignificant thing, but it ends up having a massive impact as it is on a scale of hundreds of millions and of a daily occurrence.

Courtesy of Jonno Witts via Flickr.

These measures will not simply open up space in landfills; an unfortunately large amount of garbage ends up in the water. Especially considering New York City’s geographic orientation, many feel that the styrofoam ban will benefit the local aquatic biodiversity as well as the urban water supply itself. Styrofoam will not yet disappear altogether, but this is a substantial step in the right direction.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Wave Goodbye to Your Takeout Containers: NYC Bans Styrofoam appeared first on Law Street.

One of the arguments in favor of hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking, is that it has largely enabled the recent oil boom in the United States. Vast stores of shale oil and natural gas are now accessible in large quantities and in short spans of time. Prices at the pump and dependence on the Middle East and OPEC are both down, and domestic industries are up. Yet the key concept in the term “boom” is that it is temporary; the United States must realize that, as with any nonrenewable resource, reservoirs will eventually deplete and we will be back to square one. In the meantime, a vast web of pipelines is being constructed to accommodate for the surge and the necessity to transport the product. This raises an additional set of concerns, namely for the health of the environment.

The wells from which all this liquid gold now flows are a fraction in size to most of the ones in the Middle East. Projections suggest that domestic oil production may plateau as soon as in the next few years, and begin to decline by 2020. Thus the boom is more like a flash in the pan. Being that the oil reserves of just a handful of Middle Eastern nations total more than forty times that of the United States, the latter nation would be wise to retain productive dialogues and relationships with the former, as it is likely that the previous course of trade will resume in due time. It would be unfortunate if the United States burned some bridges in the excitement of its boom, only to find quickly that it is once more dependent on imports. Policy and national behavior are tightly tied into these environmental realities.

In the meantime, it has become necessary to bolster the infrastructure for delivering domestic oil throughout the country. Among the environmentally motivated criticisms of fracking are heavy truck traffic and volatile oil trains. North Dakota, the site of the Bakken Oil Fields fueling the boom, has endured a spike in spills, explosions, and other dangerous missteps over the last few years as production and transportation of the product has increased. It has done so in a haphazard and unregulated fashion, focused more on economic expansion than safety. A primary source of these accidents is a complicated and growing network of pipelines that have sidestepped federal inspection.

In addition to the ongoing controversy regarding the Keystone XL Pipeline, many smaller ones are being approved and constructed throughout the country. New Jersey has recently been faced with proposals to construct a slew of pipelines throughout the state. As with many states in the path of Keystone XL, New Jersey would not directly benefit from the lines, as it serves simply as a crossroads that bears all the burdens and risks. These pipes will not create new jobs or bolster the local economy.

A resolution to oppose the proposed Pilgrim Pipeline in the Northern Valley was recently voted down. If constructed, it would likely run through ecologically sensitive areas and near local water supplies. In the event of a leak or spill, which despite claims that these pipes meet safety standards is more likely than one might expect due to the explosive nature of the particular oil that they will transport, water would be contaminated and difficult to purify.

Courtesy of Mark Klotz via Flickr.

A North Jersey politician who is a proponent of the Pilgrim Pipeline indicated that arguments of the nature that the line will not directly benefit New Jersey are not sufficient because lines that run through other states help bring oil here. While this may be true, it is not persuasive for several reasons. The first is that it throws others under the bus; we enjoy that there are pipes bringing oil here and benefitting us and our economy, while those states bear heavy social and ecological risks to do so and this is presumably all acceptable. Next, complex routes of ecological motion are endangered and still threaten us. For example, another pipe will soon be constructed to bring fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania to New Jersey. Many are concerned with the possible threats this line will pose for the Delaware River, whose water is vital for the variegated regional biodiversity as well as residents over a wide geography. Thus whether a pipe runs through New Jersey to elsewhere, or in from somewhere else, threatens more complications than a localized leak. Finally, the enthusiasm for oil pipelines simply encourages too much economic investment in and social reliance on oil. The domestic boom will die out sooner than later; all these new pipelines will become useless, while in the meantime they present a surge of dangers.

A pipeline running through ecologically sensitive Alaska. Courtesy of US Geological Survey via Flickr.

Once more, investment in renewable energies is a more desirable option, as their production, delivery, and use is far less hazardous and much cleaner, and more realistically intertwined with the United States’ energy and economic future.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fracking is Shortsighted in Light of Temporary U.S. Oil Boom appeared first on Law Street.

In most cultures and throughout history, under the ground has been a place to which few have been interested to venture. It is a place of darkness and isolation, with morbid undertones. Underground is thought of as a place of burial; having crypts and tombs, it is thought of as a place of death. But New York City’s proposed Lowline could change all that, bringing life and light to the deep places of the Earth.

Set to open in 2018, the Lowline is a planned underground park set to be built at an abandoned trolley station on Delancey Street on Manhattan’s Lower East Side. The space, built in 1908, was abandoned 40 years later when trolley services ended in the city; however, there is still some aesthetic appeal with regard to high ceilings and cobblestones. It is located right next to the JMZ subway station, so travelers passing through can stop by. It will have trees, grass, benches, and natural sunlight. This last point is the great appeal; a system of mirrors and refractors will channel sunlight through an irrigation system–specialized pipes–to distribution panels underground. This will allow for real plants to grow under real conditions.

Courtesy of mike via Flickr.

Abandoned urban spaces are eyesores and breeding grounds for dangerous social and health conditions. This program will transform this particular space into something productive and for the public’s benefit. It will provide green space for an otherwise highly built up and concrete sector of the city. Of course, green space and benches will not be enough to draw sufficient crowds regularly enough to maintain the financial viability of the park. Especially considering that the main draw is the natural sunlight, on a cloudy or rainy day when people would not be interested in spending time in an outdoor park, the Lowline might be gloomy and unappealing as well. Therefore engineers intend to include retail space, youth activities, and culturally motivated programs. In this sense, the Lowline is not just a park but a center of activity and events.

Underground cities are not new conceptions. One of the most notable manifestations is in science fiction master Isaac Asimov’s planet-wide city of Trantor in the Foundation Trilogy. In these novels, the massive city is mostly constructed of domes and underground systems; residents do not have much access to open air. People often suffer severe emotional and mental strains as a result, feeling claustrophobic, depressed, and paranoid. Further, the layout is in some ways a tool of control by a tyrannical political regime. At any rate, the philosophical lessons of these books are poignant warnings with regard to planned cities and livelihoods of citizens. If the Lowline is successful it could set a precedent for people spending more time and possibly even living underground like rodents. Human beings are physiologically surface dwellers; it could be a sociological step down to emphasize the underground in this way.

Courtesy of Kris Arnold via Flickr.

Yet this might be taking it too far, and we should focus on all the practical benefits that can be derived from this system of thought and technology. As designer James Ramsey points out, the solar technology can be adapted to places such as hospitals, schools, basements, and office interiors as well. This could enable for much improved mental conditions as well as aesthetic appearances of otherwise bland built environments. Sunlight and green plants have been linked to increased mental health and productivity. Furthermore, if real trees will be able to grow underground due to the real sunlight, imagine the implications for the agricultural industry. Perhaps large swaths of plants can be grown underground in regions whose environments are otherwise unsuitable. This would allow for more effective production and distribution of food, overcoming restrictions of climate, insects, and the like.

In an era of limited access to space and aesthetics, concerns over energy and food, and questions about public welfare, the Lowline represents creative thinking and technological innovation with wide implications and exciting opportunities.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Underground Cities, Brought to You by New York’s Lowline appeared first on Law Street.

Recently, Governor Andrew Cuomo officially announced that New York State will ban fracking. Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a process of extracting natural gas that involves injecting water, sand, and a combination of chemicals underground on site in order to fracture the shale rock and release the gas. A highly controversial topic, Cuomo’s decision was controversial as well–he was met with both praise and criticism from a highly divided demographic. However, the move to ban fracking is a strongly defensible choice, and the arguments against the ban do not hold up well under scrutiny.

For example, natural gas has been lauded as a solution to American foreign oil dependence. In the wake of ongoing turbulent relationships with the Middle East and oil rich nations therein, many suggest that the large deposits of natural gas within the borders of the United States is a possible means of alleviating the country’s need to import oil from them. But is such a complex plan of developing an elaborate and brand new energy industry the most logical solution to problems in international relations? Rather than go about this process in order to avoid dealing with these tense situations, why not attempt more diplomacy in hopes of alleviating them? Oil and natural gas aside, it would not be such a bad thing to genuinely pursue better relationships with Middle East countries. Hiding behind the energy industry as an excuse is not a sustainable argument.

Others argue that natural gas is cleaner than oil. Natural gas emissions byproducts are lower and less damaging than those of oil, and it is of a substantial energy density so as to sufficiently provide power to our machines and devices. However we should not be tempted by the quick, convenient, and immediate solution. It will still cause problems and will run out eventually. This argument comes back to renewable energy. There is plenty of potential and increased economic accessibility to renewable energy, which is cleaner than natural gas and will not run out. Thinking purely in terms of energy requirements, we do not need natural gas.

Aside from geopolitics and national scale energy needs, some tie natural gas and fracking directly to the benefit of people on the ground. There is an American cultural identity tied into coal and mining towns. It is a widely applicable occupation, providing employment to individuals and income for families. Coal mining is a means of asserting ones identity, and has often been passed down through generations. Fracking is a technology intensive process demanding expertise and consequently cannot be undertaken by anybody. Arguments that fracking provides economic opportunities for towns in which shale is located are shaky. Unlike coal, where the industry arrives on site and hires locals to pursue the mining, fracking companies often bring in outside workers to extract the gas; the residents of the town rarely benefit from the boom.

A fracking site. Courtesy of Casey Hugelfink via Flickr.

Some people of a financially minded nature have suggested that the moratorium represents a transfer of economic resources from farmers to environmentalists. Residents of southern New York State are now unable to receive royalties from resource development and gas mining. Tim Worstall, the author of a fiscally conservative Forbes Magazine article on the topic, suggests that the environmentalists are being granted their desires and benefits at a cost which is the loss of acquisition of desires and benefits for the people who could receive money for fracking on their land. He proposes a hypothetical situation that in order to maintain a balanced public policy, environmentalists should literally pay homeowners their losses for not fracking. He is of strong opinion that this would be met with high resistance, in demonstration of his point that this process is unfair.

No doubt this scenario represents a substantial portion of the controversy over fracking. However the author is thinking of benefits and losses purely from an economic standpoint. On the one occasion that he might be considering the state of the environment, he refers to environmentalists’ interest in preventing fracking in “the fair state of New York”. In this sense it is an aesthetic issue. Interestingly enough, there is little in the way of aesthetic damage when it comes to fracking, although it does turn small farm towns into industrial sties. Then there is the catastrophic side effect of increased likelihood of earthquakes. However, environmentalists’ resistance to fracking is very much motivated by human health concerns. The primary problem with fracking is that the myriad of chemicals injected into the rock seeps into the groundwater. This can be damaging to the human body when consumed, potentially causing neurological disorders, birth defects and cancers, and is most visibly linked to flaming faucets. The volume of chemicals is so high that water can literally catch fire. The documentary Gasland delves further into these issues and additional dangers of the industry and refineries. Here is a trailer:

Flaming faucets and contaminated drinking water are most common for homeowners in close proximity to the fracking site. Namely, those on whose land the fracking will take place. Here is a major cost for which the author of the Forbes article does not account.

Produced water is the mix of chemicals, metals, and carcinogens that comes up during the fracking process. In some New York counties, produced water has been used as a de-icer, sprinkled across roadways throughout the winter. Then it runs off into streams and waterways. This is dangerous for fish and local wildlife that live nearby, as well as for humans who drink that water. This increases the range of contamination from near to the fracking site to across the entire state. It is a misuse of a substance that should not exist in the first place.

Considering the long list of potential alternatives for meeting our energy needs, we do not need natural gas. Furthermore, considering all the problems associated with the current method of extracting it, we certainly do not need fracking.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is the New York Fracking Moratorium a Good Thing? appeared first on Law Street.

While climate change, habitat loss, and strains on food resources are all putting pressure on many forms of wildlife to survive, another human induced threat is direct action by way of poachers. Especially in parts of Africa and Southeast Asia, poaching is pushing already endangered animals such as the black rhino, elephant, and some big cats to the brink. Turbulent political situations and market demands further escalate the determination of those involved and the degree of their activity. Attempting to protect said animals will require more than raising awareness and implementing additional rules, rather, we need widespread alterations to value systems. However since there are so many factors involved that need to be addressed, any progress is desirable–during his notable recent visit to the United States, Prince William spent time advocating for wildlife conservation.

A city in Myanmar named Mong La, called by some a mini Las Vegas, is a haven for black market outlets and red light activities. In addition to gambling and prostitution, many endangered animals are desired in one form or another. Rhino horns are thought to have healing qualities, tiger parts are thought to be aphrodisiacs and increase virility, and bear claws, leopard pelts, and live monkeys are also common sights. These things have been the practice in the region for a long time, but recently it has worsened due to China’s economic expansion. A vast increase in members of China’s middle and upper middle classes has provided an enormous demand for these already extremely rare animals. Such people have cash to burn, and desire to spend it conspicuously on trophies, prestige, and lavish leisure.

Poachers cut up a kill. Courtesy of Rod Waddington via Flickr.

One does not need to be ethnocentric, insofar as declaring one’s own culture, values, and belief systems to be correct or superior to those of another. However there is no scientific evidence to support the theories that these animals provide the medicinal benefits that are claimed.

Yet this should not be the only factor in the issue. Individuals and societies should be allowed to exercise their cultures regardless of scientific validity. The Faroe Islanders, located between Scandinavia and Iceland, got into a scrape with Greenpeace over their Grindadrap, or Pilot Whale Hunt. Greenpeace made assumptions about the Islanders–that they were killing simply for the sake of it and in attempts to assert masculinity. This seemed pointless to them and Greenpeace advocated for an end to the hunting practices. However upon further investigation, many minute details regarding the Faroe culture and its relationship to the hunt were discovered. An aesthetic interest in whales was not sufficient to deny the Faroes the right to pursue these values. This conclusion became all the more prevalent when it was discerned that the Islanders were in fact going about the hunt in a sustainable fashion, and the pilot whale itself is not an endangered species. However neither of these two details are the case with regard to the poaching discussion at hand.

Ivory jewelry. Courtesy of USFWS Mountain-Prairie via Flickr.

Currently the primary solution to the poaching problem is armed defense. Many African national parks employ heavily weaponized rangers to patrol and defend the borders. Often times firefights break out; there are often reports of poachers, and occasionally rangers too, getting killed in these conflicts. While this might help on a case by case basis, it does not stop poaching at the source. That is, it does not address the root motivations for poaching in the first place.

Rangers confiscate ivory. Courtesy of Enough Project via Flickr.

Poachers and Rangers are not the only ones engaging in armed conflict in the African national parks. In 2013, the two-year-old country of South Sudan erupted in civil war. Sudan is already known for hosting Africa’s longest civil war, lasting from 1983-2005. During that time, it is estimated that all but 5,000 of the country’s 80,000 elephants died. After the first war, elephants, giraffes, antelope, buffalo, and others were in a position to begin a recovery. Paul Elkan of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s South Sudan program explains that formal protection, ecotourism, and other programs were being established which could have aided these animals in returning to a healthy population. However with the onset of another war these systems collapsed. As a power vacuum has opened up in much of the region, there is little to stop poachers from running rampant. Furthermore, as combat spreads into the parks themselves, poachers are not the only threat to the animals. Commercial bush meat hunting to feed soldiers is a common occurrence during hostility.

The Duke of Cambridge is a longstanding advocate for wildlife conservation. While in Washington D.C. at the beginning of December, Prince William vocalized his intention to address the trafficking aspect of poaching, in an effort to work with transportation companies and international regulations on trade. Trying to cut the actual trade of the animals could reduce the level of poaching on site. This is just one of the many means by which Prince William hopes to improve the situation and spread more environmentally conscious sentiment across the globe. Being in an authoritative and high profile position, he continues to put his influence and altruistic intentions to productive use.

Prince William speaks about wildlife conservation. Courtesy of World Bank Photo Collection via Flickr

If the increased demand for these animals is in part a consequence of modernization, interconnected markets, higher income, and more leisure time for the societies in question, the interest in sustainability and environmental conservation should not be long to follow. If they could heed the Prince’s warnings and follow his example, we may be able to find effective and long lasting solutions to these problems.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Prince William Speaks Out Against Animal Poaching appeared first on Law Street.

They used to be hailed as engineering marvels, as the triumph of mankind’s will and ingenuity over the forces of nature. They were symbols of national pride and strength, and epitomized the age of science and technology. Now they are valued as providers of renewable and clean energy. But dams actually cause environmental problems, and ultimately are not a necessary evil with which we must contend, as there exist alternative and preferable options.

The imposing Hoover Dam was a masterpiece when it opened in 1936. Nothing made a louder statement about the ability of Americans to band together and create something great in the midst of the Great Depression. The dam provided jobs and revenue, as well as power for the energy ravenous cities of Las Vegas and Los Angeles. All around the world a frenzy of dam construction ensued, as the answer to civilization’s rapidly rising energy demands. Yet time and again they coupled their energy yields with environmental damage, loss of aesthetics, and raised questions as to their overall necessity and usefulness.

A poignant example is the O’Shaughnessy Dam, completed in 1923 within the borders of the already established and protected Yosemite National Park. After the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, the urban water system was severely damaged and residents found themselves hard pressed to procure fresh water. In 1908 the Department of the Interior allowed the city to construct a dam in the Hetch Hetchy Valley, a picturesque portion of the park no doubt home to many forms of wildlife. The battle that ensued, spearheaded by the Sierra Club, ultimately failed and the dam was built. In no time at all, the reservoir that accumulates behind a dam came together, flooding the valley. It is widely believed that the burden of this fight and the pain of its failure sapped John Muir of his energy and will, passing away shortly thereafter.

The Hetch Hetchy Valley before. Courtesy of Isaiah West Taber via Wikipedia.

The O’Shaughnessy Dam exemplified a choice between the needs of the people and the aesthetics of the environment. However dams often threaten the actual health and condition of the environment, as well as people themselves. Dams and resulting reservoirs in India displaced 20 million people between 1947 and 1992. Environmental historian J.R. McNeil explains that many residents, especially more tribal ones who lacked the political power to make their voices heard, had to flee and became refugees as their homes flooded. Lands became waterlogged, areas suitable for cultivation were lost, and malaria spread. A series of Soviet dams literally dried up the Aral Sea. As a result, the temperatures during summer and winter became extreme as local climate deregulated. Less moisture and more salt on the wind and in the air meant that crops died, buildings began to corrode, and people experienced eye infections.

Dams are noted for blocking silt. The Aswan Dam brought to a halt the annual and predictable flooding of the Nile. The deposits of silt and nutrients on the nearby shorelines made the soil fertile and suitable for growing crops. The river, which gave rise to the great ancient civilization of Egypt over 5,000 years ago, died in 1970. The British had plans to build the dam in Ethiopia or Uganda, where the higher elevations and cooler temperatures would have made it more effective. But President Nasser, in an effort to create distance from the prior British rulers and seeking nationalist pride and recognition, demanded that it be constructed in his own country. The location of the dam, McNeil explains, is too far downstream; higher evaporation levels reduce its usefulness. Furthermore, directly impeding the Nile from flooding means that Egyptians must use chemical fertilizers, the desirability and consequences of which are problematic as well.

In addition to blocking silt and nutrients, dams block biodiversity as well. A call for the tearing down of a series of dams on the Susquehanna River, a tributary of the Chesapeake Bay, points out that the large migration of a species of herring has been largely impeded. As the author relates, “ladders” and “elevators” intended for the fish to bypass the dams have proven relatively unsuccessful. In the Pacific Northwest, this concept has taken its most ludicrous form yet in the manifestation of the “salmon cannon.”

Salmon are literally picked up by hand and loaded a few at a time into a tube that propels them over the dam so that they can continue on their migration driven by spawning. This process is not as desirable or realistic as some seem to think. Salmon migrate through these rivers by the millions; at the peak of the migrating season, there is little chance that cannon loaders will be able to send them all on their way. It is vital that they do so, as they contribute to a delicate ecological balance in the Pacific Northwest. Not only do they provide a vital source of food for bears and scavengers that pick at the leftovers, but fish dragged into the woods decompose and release nutrients into the soil; salmon feed the trees and contribute to the growth of the great dense forests themselves in the region. One should also consider how the salmon experience the cannon. While powering upstream and leaping waterfalls is an impressive and presumably trying feat, it is driven by instinct and part of the natural process of salmon life. Being handled by a human and barreling through a tube are not; it could be an extremely traumatic and shocking experience for the fish.

Although they provide renewable energy without emissions, dams are an unnatural construction. They are not comparable to the ones made by beavers; on such large scales, they literally block the natural course of environmental processes to a highly disruptive level. Low Head Hydro is a hydroelectric energy system that does not block the flow of a waterway in order to produce power. Solar and Wind continue to rise in desirability, effectiveness, and financial accessibility. Peaking in the early 1900s, dams are an obsolete power source that we can do without.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Despite Some Benefits, Dams are an Obsolete Energy Source appeared first on Law Street.

Due to the incredibly loud and incessant drone of the machines, I angrily slam my window shut and stomp back to my desk where I’m finally able to hear myself think and the gasoline-induced headache starts to dissipate. Throughout the autumn and early winter, leaf blowers are constantly running. In fact, as I write this I can hear some in the distance. (My window is closed right now.) In addition to the noise pollution and annoyance, there may be substantial health hazards to using them.

Due to the fact that most leaf blowers run on gas-powered engines, they emit harmful byproducts into the air such as ozone and carbon monoxide. In fact, one report suggested that a single leaf blower in continuous use for an hour produces the same amount of pollution as seventeen cars. In light of the recent study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and subsequent dialogues regarding the need to reduce emissions, this practice can certainly be placed on the chopping block.

This is not to say that seasonal use of leaf blowers accounts for such a substantial portion of national emissions so as to induce climate change, but if setting standards for corporations and industries is so difficult then here is an unnecessary practice that can easily be eliminated or replaced with alternatives. Attacking the broad aspects of climate change and emissions has proven difficult; why not chip away piecemeal at the smaller problems in the meantime? The head of the New Jersey Landscape Contractors Association, Jody Shilan, pointed out that manufacturers are looking into less toxic machines. Presumably these would be electric motors or something of that nature. This would help, but there are other problems that leaf blowers cause.

Courtesy of Anthony Appleyard via Wikipedia.

Using leaf blowers stirs up dirt, allergens, molds and spores. Therefore in addition to the fossil fuel pollution, they contaminate the air in these additional manners. Perhaps this is the cause of some headaches and dizziness? Often the users of leaf blowers, particularly landscapers, can be seen wearing masks over their noses and mouths. This speaks to the localized air contamination that they induce. Further, what about the people who pass by and do not have a mask in their pocket to put on? I have found that my lungs and eyes can get irritated while passing through an area in which leaf blowers are being used while walking my dog or waiting for the bus.

There is nothing wrong with a good old fashioned rake. Raking leaves provides some physical activity, and often is surprisingly pleasant in the crisp autumn air. When I was little, my family and I would rake up the leaves in the backyard together. It was a fun family activity, and we would stuff them all into large orange & black plastic bags that, when full, looked like giant Jack-O-Lanterns for the Halloween and Thanksgiving season. Granted, some people such as the elderly or those with physical impediments would be hard pressed to clear their yard of leaves themselves.

Most of the time the leaves end up in large piles on the roadside, which are hazardous in their own right. There are supposed to be town regulations as to how wide the piles can be, but these are never enforced. When I walk my dog I often find that we have to venture out into the middle of the road in order to pass around an oversized pile. Even drivers themselves might find this dangerous, as a large pile of leaves prevents cars traveling in opposite directions on some of the smaller roads, such as the one on which I live, to pass each other simultaneously.

It’s fun to hang out in the leaves. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

So why is it so important that we clear the leaves away at all? They’re not hurting anybody by remaining as they lie on the grass. In fact, they are beneficial; leaves eventually decompose and provide nutrients for the soil. Ultimately what it comes down to is aesthetics. I have previously addressed the socially motivated environmental problems of green lawn aesthetics. Similar forces are at play here. A yard full of randomly fallen leaves looks messy and unattractive to many people; it is important to keep one’s lawn clean and organized. There may even be financial ramifications, such as falling home prices for attempted autumn sales. For these reasons, arguments in defense of leaf blowers that point out that lawn mowers also cause air pollution are nil; it is just a different season’s manifestation of the same problem.

Clark University, MA. The leaves in fact give the scene a little something extra. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

We love the autumn because the leaves change colors and become pretty. So why is it so bad when they fall to the ground? Then the ground is pretty too. We have obsessively established certain aesthetic rules, which force us to choose between ourselves and our environment. We need to think of the two together; instead of imagining that things must be a certain way and we must intervene in order to reestablish the standard, we should be more flexible in adapting to the changes that occur naturally.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Leave the Leaves: Why Leaf Blowers are a Harmful and Pointless Practice appeared first on Law Street.

Next Monday begins the week-long tradition of the New Jersey black bear hunt. During this process, between 250-300 bears of a population that tends to dance around a total of 3,400 north of Interstate 80 are “harvested” so as to keep their numbers in check. The reasons for this hunt and the manners in which it is pursued are controversial, and there may exist more progressive and responsible alternatives.

The general argument is that black bear populations can get out of control; they encroach upon our territory and into our backyards, and the likelihood of people experiencing dangerous encounters with them increases. We do not pause to consider that human populations might be the ones getting out of control. Rampant development and overbuilding in the North Jersey area means habitat damage for all manners of local wildlife. As forests are bulldozed, bears’ homes are destroyed. Furthermore, the homes of the animals on which they prey are destroyed as well, meaning that they all must relocate. This concentrates bears into smaller areas, which might produce the illusion that there are more of them while in actuality we simply see them more frequently.

The extensive building does not effectively take into account animal geographies; that is to say, the routes and manners in which they travel, hunt, court and mate, and go about their business. As we build out of control, bears are channeled into ever narrowing corridors or their paths are completely blocked, forcing them to pass through our backyards. We should also keep in mind that leveling wooded areas might put a strain on their food supply; the common image of a black bear sifting through people’s trash might not be a result of overly aggressive and bold bears seeking out human habitat in order to feed, but a last resort to which we have reduced them.

A site of deforestation and habitat destruction. Courtesy of crustmania via Flickr.

The very concept that a large and occasionally predatory animal such as a bear is constantly undergoing a population explosion seems to run contrary to the laws of nature. The food chain is a pyramid; the things on the bottom are the most numerous and as one ascends there are fewer and fewer of those creatures that prey on them. For example, as plants are at the bottom of every food chain, their numbers are astronomical. Then, the small rodents that eat them are naturally less numerous than the plants on which they feed, and the foxes that eat those rodents are fewer still. Bears are very large and, while they feed on roots, berries, and things of that nature as well, there would first have to be population explosions at every level of the food chain below them if their own numbers were to get out of control.

The New Jersey Fish and Game Council’s black bear management policy declares that it intends to consider

The cultural carrying capacity, which is the number of bears that can co-exist compatibly with the local human population in a given area in concert with the biological carrying capacity of the land to support bears.

There are two things wrong with this statement. The first, in conjunction with the previous discussion, is that it presumes to take into our own hands the bear population for the sake of the biological carrying capacity of the local environment. It assumes that the exploding bear population will overwhelm the local ecosystem and it is our responsibility to keep it in check. Again, if the population is growing rampantly it is because the ecosystem is flourishing in a manner so as to support it; the bears will not simply increase on their own. Therefore the ecosystem would maintain its balance. If for some reason at a particular point in time the bear population was unusually large, competition for food, shelter, and reproduction would increase and some bears would lose out and die off. Thus the ecosystem would self regulate. That’s the point; these things occur naturally all the time. Humans do not need to step in and play God.

The second problem with the management policy’s statement is that it assumes bear populations are the only factor in measuring the quality of the cultural carrying capacity. It declares that only a certain number of bears is suitable for a healthy carrying capacity; then if their populations get too high things go wrong. Why must this be the determining factor? Instead, if the unlikely situation arises that their populations do rise substantially, why can’t we readdress our own behavior, building policies, and attitudes and interactions with the environments of which we are a part? Why do we absolve ourselves of any responsibility? On the local level, humans aren’t exactly putting checks on their own populations; it is always others who are in the wrong and must get out of the way.

Let’s assume the bear populations are in fact rising. How is this determined? A team uses a DNA sampling technique in order to estimate the number of actively breeding bears in the region. Based on this, the total number is subsequently calculated. This method is supposedly more accurate than the more traditional catch, tag, and release systems. Be that as it may, does the hunt account for this delicate dynamic or do we shoot indiscriminately? What if, say, 80 percent of the bears killed during a particular hunt are active breeders? This could potentially devastate the bear population. It is not simply a matter of how many bears should or should not be killed, but which ones and where.

Courtesy of Tim Lumley via Flickr.

Rather than turn to black bears as scape goats, we should admit that we are causing habitat destruction and environmental damage. The validity of the black bear management policy has been questioned in the past, but to no avail. On the basis of not just science and policy but inward social reflection and questions of human behavior and value systems, it is time to challenge it again.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s Time to Change the Problematic New Jersey Black Bear Hunt appeared first on Law Street.

Plastic is an absolutely amazing material. It is durable, light, portable, and malleable. It can be made into virtually any product we can imagine. It can be recast, recycled, and reused. It plays a role in every material aspect of our modern lives. But it is usually non-biodegradable, leeches toxins, and if not handled properly can be dangerous to land and ocean environments, animals, and ourselves.

One of the factors that complicated the search for Malaysia Flight 370 last spring was the Indian Ocean Gyre. A gyre is a system of cyclically moving ocean currents, tied into trade winds and the Coriolis Effect. There are five major ones on Earth: in the North and South Atlantic, in the North and South Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. The inexorable motion of the water constantly cast question marks as to where to search for the crashed plane. As the weeks dragged on, the likelihood of locating it in the predetermined locations dwindled; it could have been anywhere by then. Furthermore, search & rescue operators were deceived time and again by what they thought was plane debris. In actuality, it was plastic. The gyres are choked with floating garbage and plastic, earning them the nickname “garbage patches.”

The Earth’s major gyres, courtesy of NOAA via Wikipedia.

Among other things, the 2008 documentary “Addicted to Plastic” details an excursion to the Eastern Garbage Patch in a section of the North Pacific Gyre. Watch the trailer below.

Director Ian Connacher related that the patch is not so much a floating landfill whose contents can be systematically scooped out, but is spread out over an area the size of Western Europe requiring constant painstaking and ultimately minimally effective sifting.

Furthermore, this is not just an aesthetic problem. All new plastic begins life as a “nurdle:” a small pellet that can subsequently be made into whatever product desired. Nurdles account for a large percentage of ocean gyre garbage. In addition, plastic accumulates pollutants such as oils, toxins, and other things that we have also dumped or let run off into our oceans. To the eyes of many fish and birds, nurdles resemble fish eggs and are subsequently eaten. They can choke the animals because they are indigestible, or they can poison the animals because they are riddled with toxins. Then in a process of bioaccumulation, larger fish who eat many of the smaller fish that have ingested nurdles subsequently carry the toxins (and the plastic). Many of these fish are ones that people eat as well; the plastic and toxins work their way back to us and endanger our health, too.

Most of the plastic in the garbage patches arrived there not because it was dumped over the side of ships, but because it was carelessly tossed into the water systems or left on the shores; ocean plastic has worked its way there from the land. Therefore trying to pick all the trash out of the gyres does not stop the problem at the source. The plastic industry is highly flawed and needs to be more properly operated. Greenpeace and others have suggested that governments facilitate more recycling infrastructure and consumers be more conscientious about their use of plastic bags and purchasing products with a lot of plastic packaging. They add that a lot of potential lies with corporations, in regulating and intelligently choosing their plastics. For example, those micro beads in exfoliating products are disastrous and should be eliminated.

These things are only part of the problem, though. Connacher is of the opinion that the regulation of the recycling process and the decisions of corporations in the production process need to be more seamlessly intertwined and cooperative. That is to say, there are problems that make the recyclability of plastic less effective. The cap and ring on a soda bottle is a different type of plastic than is the container. One might be recyclable while the other is not. If they both can be recycled, that may not necessarily be at the same location or by the same means. Inevitably, things get lost in translation. There is nothing that we the consumers can do about this except put our plastics in the bins and hope that everything gets recycled–and properly. Yet these are not unsolvable problems. Scientists in parts of Europe are proposing a “circular economy” with regard to plastics, the idea of which is that “…products must be designed with end of life recovery in mind.” This process has more to do with providing incentives for people to recycle, but theoretically can be applied to the design and production process as well.

“Addicted to Plastic” also provides hope, recounting stories of people who took creative initiative in order to get some of the otherwise wasted plastic out of the environment and put it to productive use. People reduce their plastic consumption on community levels, and researchers and scientists find new types of plastic that are more biodegradable or less toxic. There are things we can do to make the production process better as well as things we can do to address the problematic plastic that is already out there. It requires more than picking it up off the ground or out of the water. It requires major changes, many of which will be difficult. A set of issues like this tends to be overlooked because it does not appear as pressing as climate change or energy regimes; however, it is operating on a global scale, and pervades every aspect of human geography and life. We can emerge victoriously out of our throwaway culture.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Just How Bad is Our Culture of Plastic Obsession? appeared first on Law Street.

Stepping away from the Bedouin camp, I gingerly ventured into Israel’s Negev Desert. A sufficient number of yards out, the few lights emanating from the settlement had been reduced to a glow in the distance. Having grown up outside of New York City, the bright lights often projected a yellow-orange hue onto the night sky. Every now and then under ideal conditions, the nearest and brightest stars would puncture the cloak, enabling a view of the Big Dipper, Orion, and some others. But out in the Negev, the sky was unencumbered by such drapes and positively glittered. A pale band of light unfolded across the view, dividing the sky in half. This was the Milky Way itself; I was looking from the inside out with a horizontal view of one of the spiral arms of our galaxy. I stood there frozen in time, awestruck and amazed. Ever since human beings emerged from their caves we have stared at the sky and wondered. We have pondered what it is like out there, where we came from, and how to find out. In this amazing age of technology and intellect, we are finally in a position to start answering those questions.

The latest giant leap in the exploration of the final frontier occurred on November 12 when the Philae landing probe of the Rosetta spacecraft touched down on the surface of Comet 67P, 310 million miles away. After a ten-year journey, Rosetta and its components represent the first occasion of a man-made object rendezvousing with a comet. Launched by the European Space Agency, its mission is to answer questions such as, “What were conditions like at [the solar system’s] infancy and how did it evolve? What role did comets play in this evolution? How do comets work?”

Comets tend to be very old celestial bodies. Studying their composition and internal dynamics may shed light on what the composition of the solar system was during the early periods of its formation. Furthermore, some theories suggest that life on Earth arose as a consequence of comets, rich in carbon, passing by overhead and depositing the crucial element on the planet. Delving into the comet’s nature might help to understand if and which aspects of this assertion are reliable.

Comet 67P, Courtesy of ESA/Rosetta/NAVCAM via WIkipedia.

Some people criticize space missions in their entirety, questioning their purpose. General intellectual curiosity is one of the greatest attributes of human civilization; the ability to ask questions and seek answers is what makes us successful. In addition, the quest for intelligent life beyond our own atmosphere remains a productive cause. Regardless of whether one believes that there exist such entities or not, the only way to answer the questions is to try to find them. Some people are intimidated by the vast distances between points A and B in the galaxy and the immense amounts of time it takes to get there. The ten years required to make the Rosetta mission happen is a poignant example; however, we must remember that we are still at the early stages of space exploration.

As the renowned astronomer Carl Sagan pointed out, the amount of time required to travel from the Earth to another location in the solar system is comparable to the months or more necessary for European explorers in sailing ships to travel the local seas to the far reaches of the New World. In modernity, we hop these distances in no time at all. We stand at an early and exciting stage of space exploration, due to advance our civilization and guaranteed to become more seamless with time. We are, as Sagan eloquently put it, “on the shores of the cosmic ocean.”

Furthermore, as we continue to threaten the health of our planet and our own existence therein, it might be wise to seek contingency plans. While it is a valid criticism that the search for “earth-like” planets is a narrow-minded quest for intelligent life, as there might exist other forms of life which do not require air to breathe or water to drink or are not based on carbon. We know what humans need to survive and so seeking out celestial bodies of this nature can still be to our benefit. While the idea of needing to abandon Earth because we pushed it into an inhospitable state is deplorable, it is a harsh reality for which we should not be unprepared.

On the other hand, this sounds like a get out of jail free card; we can do as we like with the Earth because we will have other places to go once we wreck it. This does not teach us to change our ways and be more responsible, as does the urgency of a one planet, one chance concept. It undercuts the entire concept of sustainability; no longer would we think of the Earth as a closed system in which it is necessary to run as close to 100 percent efficiency as possible. What’s to stop us from taking our civilization to a new planet and inflicting the same havoc there? Society is not in a position to expand its reach beyond the planet if we cannot first live healthfully, responsibly, and productively here. Who knows what kinds of consequences an industry like deep space mineral mining and importing back to Earth could have.

Yet if we are careful and insightful we can still learn and improve. Just as different types of natural and human environments are not closed systems but rather are interrelated and inextricably intertwined, the Earth in and of itself is not in fact a closed system but very much entrenched in its surrounding solar system and cosmic environment. The more we probe and explore, the better we can understand those dynamics and interactions just as we seek to understand the ones here at home. Ideally we will be a sustainable civilization by the time we officially establish our presence elsewhere, but in the meantime it is exciting and promising to look around and dream about going where no one has gone before.

The Voyager II space probe: epitome of mankind’s ambition, Courtesy of NASA/JPL via Wikipedia.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Comet 67P: Small in Size, Massive in its Implications appeared first on Law Street.

Recently the United Nations made a series of declarations regarding the validity of climate change, its causes, and necessary measures to mitigate it. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a very large “synthesis report,” a product of analyzing tens of thousands of scientific papers. The report covers all aspects, addressing atmosphere and emissions, oceans and sea level, air temperature, water cycle, and many other components of environmental systems. It goes over the changes to each over the last 150 years or so, and produces conclusions as to what induced those changes. Being that the report ultimately concludes that many of these concerns are products of human activity, it goes beyond being a summary of information and warnings, and provides many recommendations as to what needs to change and what measures ought to be taken to answer these warnings. These thoughts are more succinctly presented in the shorter summary for policymakers.

Among the conclusions therein, the most prevalent is probably the projections for changes in global temperature. If we continue on this course, by the end of the century the temperature could rise from 3.7-4.8 degrees Celsius from what it was before the Industrial Revolution. Since variation in global temperature of one or two degrees can result in radical and violent weather patterns, these numbers could presumably result in catastrophic changes to the climate and Earth. Deniers propose that these projections, and the evidence of rising temperatures in the past several centuries, might not necessarily be the result of human activity but rather an indication of general shifts in the Earth’s climatological patterns. For example, starting in the 1300s AD, many parts of the world–particularly in the Northern Hemisphere–experienced a Little Ice Age. Definite conclusions as to the causes of this phenomenon are still incomplete, but proposals range from general rises and falls within the Earth’s patterns to changes in solar or oceanic behavior.

During the Little Ice Age, temperatures dropped by about 1.5 degrees Celsius. The most notable consequence that resulted was major damage to agriculture and resulting famines. What kinds of consequences could there be for a temperature change of double that in the opposite direction as the IPCC proposes? The lesson that the Little Ice Age teaches us is that regardless of whether climate change is a result of human activity or not, it is clearly real and has dire consequences for human civilization if we are not prepared for it.

Supposing that it is in part due to human activity, the discussion on rising temperatures inevitably leads back to emissions and energy. The point of no return is a 2 degree Celsius increase, according to the report. After this point, damage to the climate and Earth could be irreversible. Governments and industries ought to set emissions standards so as to keep the rise in temperature from passing this marker; however, in order to do so we have less than forty years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent, and even further by the end of the century. These are very imposing numbers, and many fear that the existing financial structures cannot accommodate these objectives and the necessary changes to be made. On the other hand some feel that we should be more motivated to pursue these goals, not just because of the impending disasters but because energy-efficient systems are financially advisable.

There are many arguments that the economic infrastructure for renewable energy is already in place, and pursuing those courses is not only environmentally friendly but financially advisable because it would pay for itself in a short amount of time. This report should provide the impetus for making a more wholehearted attempt at transitioning to a substantial degree to these other options.

Carbon emissions go hand in hand with rising temperatures. Courtesy of Kim Seng via Flickr.

It is generally accepted that the Dust Bowl was largely a result of environmentally unfriendly agricultural practices. Did we require over half a century to reach this consensus? This framework can be applied elsewhere, as we consider unnatural elements of “natural disasters.” Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy have often been named in this debate. A heat wave that hit Europe in 2003 claimed 70,000 lives. As the report suggests, time to act is running out. These concerns are not ones to be dealt with solely by governments and world leaders; the threats of climate change pervade the globe and affect all people. We can all improve the decisions we make and the ways we live our lives, and advocate more vocally for positive change.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The UN Validates Climate Change in New Report, Now It’s Up to Us appeared first on Law Street.

The sky darkened as scalding ash and pumice rained down on the city. In some places, people were trapped in a mixture lacking air and moisture, preserved in time. On the other hand, superheated gases rolled down the mountainside incinerating all organic material in their path. Thousands perished in a matter of a few terrifying hours. Fortunately the scene at the Roman towns of Pompeii and Herculaneum in 79 A.D. does not resemble the situation that residents on the Big Island of Hawaii currently face. Nonetheless, the river of lava emanating from the volcanic Mount Kilauea now threatens nearby homes, particularly in the town of Pahoa.

Kilauea has been erupting nonstop since 1983. While there are a number of active volcanoes across the globe, this is one of the few that is constantly busy. “Active” is a vague term loosely applied to volcanoes that have erupted in the last 10,000 years, or have recently shown signs of life in some form such as seismic activity or emission of gases. A handful of volcanoes have “ongoing” eruptions spanning over a century, being on and off but relatively consistent during that time, but Kilauea is one of only several that falls into the classification of “continuous” eruption.

Residents of the Big Island have lived in the shadow of Kilauea for a long time. In most cases substantial lava flows have meandered south toward the Pacific Ocean and posed no real threat. However over the last two years eruption flows have headed northeast, toward communities. The latest flow, posing problems since June, is moving at 10-15 yards per hour, which is relatively fast. Despite the sense of urgency, there is little panic. Authorities have been making their way through the nearby villages to inform people of the lava’s status. Most residents have places to which they can temporarily relocate, and the need to seek shelter is slim to none. Fortunately, the flow seems to have come to a halt; however residents are still prepared to evacuate because the lava is smoldering and remains dangerous. Furthermore, Kilauea’s active status means that this can resume or occur again at any point in time.

Given the nature of their geography, locals are used to these kinds of situations. The Big Island is not so much an island with a volcano on it, but the whole thing is essentially a series of volcanoes. The Hawaiian Hotspot is a massive breach in the Earth’s crust through which magma has poured for millions of years. The smaller Westernmost islands of Hawaii were once situated directly over this point, forming the islands from cooled lava that eventually sprung vegetation. As the Pacific Plate shifts, they have moved off and slowly eroded while the hotspot composed newer islands such as Molokai, Maui, and the Big Island.

This literally flowing process suggests a smooth gracefulness, prompting much tourism as this calm reaction to the current situation. It is as if to say this is a standard, predictable way of life. However, geologists at the U.S. Geological Survey points out that Kilauea is an explosive volcano. In the past several hundred years it has produced large eruptions including spewing ash columns high into the sky and hurling multi-ton rocks. While there would be tell tale signs that an eruption of this nature is coming, and it seems less and less likely, there is no reason to assume that Kilauea is 100 percent predictable.

Science is not the only factor at play for native Hawaiians when it comes to Kilauea. Many believe that the volcano is the embodiment of Tutu Pele, a Polynesian goddess who is short tempered and possessive of her lands. The ongoing eruptions are her way of trying to reclaim the territory from residents. According to a local, “If she [Pele] feels she needs to clean her house, then let her clean her house.” This statement has been filtered through multiple sources and hence much context has been lost. It is unlikely that the man plans to devoutly stay put and volunteer himself as a sacrifice to the goddess and her wrath of lava, but this sentiment speaks to the interconnectedness of the local culture and the radical environmental situation at play.

Courtesy of Lindley Ashline via Flickr.

The wrath of Pele reminds us that the forces of nature are much more powerful than ourselves; we ought to be careful as to where we build our homes and how we live our lives. Sometimes we must yield as nature runs its own course.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post As Hawaii’s Kilauea Erupts, Residents Prepare to Flee appeared first on Law Street.

Species come and go. A virtually inestimable number of living creatures have existed on the Earth since the rise of life. Most of them are not currently in existence; this is the natural order of things. As evolution takes its course, more specialized or adaptable creatures force out less advanced ones. However, there have been several occasions where large numbers of species have disappeared over very short spans of time.

These mass extinctions have tended to be the result of a cataclysmic event that severely disrupted the Earth’s climate and natural processes. The most famous was the killer of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, most likely the result of a catastrophic asteroid impact near the Yucatan Peninsula. There have been more substantial ones though, such as the Cambrian Extinction about 500 million years ago, which is thought to have eliminated a much larger number of species than the Cretaceous Extinction. Some suggest that the Holocene Era, characterized by the last 10,000 years or so, which saw the rise of human civilization, can be characterized as a mass extinction event in its own right.

The duration of any mass extinction event is a constantly debatable topic. Due to the Signor-Lipps Effect, a paleontological theory addressing the incompleteness of fossil records, it continues to be difficult to determine how long it took for the Cretaceous Extinction to unfold. Initial theories were that it was gradual, but sentiments shifted to one of abruptness due to new discoveries including the impact crater. However, this still does not stamp a specific number of years on the process. “Abrupt” sounds very quick; possibly a few years. Yet in geological time, a few thousand years is very abrupt. Therefore human presence on the Earth is not much more than a tiny speck on a very large timeline, and an ongoing extinction occurring in tandem with the presence of humans might be viewed as an abrupt event.

The fossil of a creature from the Cambrian Period, courtesy of Wilson44691 via Wikipedia.

How significant is the current rate of extinction, and how do we know that it is a result of human activity? Since extinctions are a natural part of life, the Background Extinction Rate endeavors to declare a standard pace at which species come and go, outside of human influence and excluding the outliers that are mass extinctions. However this proposal is largely unreliable in and of itself because it is unknown how many species currently exist on Earth, or have existed at any point in time. Furthermore, it is mathematically impossible then to accurately calculate the relationship between this extinction rate and the rate of extinction we are currently seeing. Some suggest that it is about 100 times larger. Finally, it is fiercely debatable what portion of this increased rate is a result of human activity.

Some extinctions and their causes are easy to identify. The Passenger Pigeon, once clouding the skies with its swarm-like millions and an icon of colonial North America, was ferociously hunted and ultimately classified extinct in 1914. Similarly the Western black rhinoceros, mercilessly poached for its ivory, was just declared three years ago in 2011 by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The Great Barrier Reef is on the verge of being listed as endangered. Aside from rising ocean temperatures and agricultural runoff, the Australian government has been entertaining a new project intended to bolster its coal industry, which would require dredging in order to expand major ports and dumping the silt in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Fortunately the project is meeting opposition, including the formulation of a long term sustainability plan for the reef which includes monitoring certain species populations and trying to reduce runoff. However the situation is more complicated. A huge number of plant and animal species life there, and the structure of the reef itself is composed of living things. Estimates suggest that it has lost over half its coral in the last 27 years alone. Thus it is not just the recent developments in the agriculture and coal industries that are threatening its survival, but the general patterns and lives we lead.

The Great Barrier Reef, courtesy of Sarah_Ackerman via Wikipedia.

Flora has come under threat as well. The Giant Sequoias of California, some as old as the Trojan War, are hard pressed to survive now that the past fifty years have brought changes to moisture, temperature, and fire patterns. These towering figures require specific patterns of fog in order to acquire the necessary water, and are very delicate when it comes to long-term drought and resulting dryness that can ignite conflagrations. Though they are for the most part not in outright danger, many scientists feel that the ongoing changes to climate might bring them under threat. Furthermore, the state of New Jersey has been grappling with a bill that would allow for commercial logging in state forests and parks. Bulldozing forests is devastating not just to the trees that are cut down, but it destroys the habitats of all the other plants and animal species that reside within. It would promote erosion and storm water runoff, invite invasive species, and detract from our cultural and aesthetic interests.

The President, a 3,200 year old Giant Sequoia. Courtesy of National Geographic via Wikipedia.

These are very recent, post-Industrial Revolution cases where extensive record keeping provides a comprehensive understanding of actions and consequences. On the other hand, the extinction of large mammals such as the mastodon is thought to be a result of human migration into North America, but it is unknown whether they were hunted out, human arrival corresponded with changing climate conditions, or a combination. Further, it is difficult to determine to what extent those changes in climate were a result of human activity. This continues to be the main point of controversy: as some naysayers continue to deny climate change outright, it is scientifically challenging to calculate to what extent the changing and erratic weather and temperatures we experience are due to humans versus to what extent they are the natural processes and shifts of the planet, much less what effect those things have on plants and animals.

The extent to which human activity is killing off other living things is debatable. There are clear instances wherein our behavior and economic interests inflict damage, while other issues are more vague and complex. Regardless, as humans are one of the only creatures in Earth’s history capable of so effectively driving other species into extinction, including ourselves, we should take theories of a Holocene Extinction as a dire warning.

The Dodo Bird. Courtesy of BazzaDaRambler via Wikipedia.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Yoshikazu TAKADA via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are We In the Middle of Another Mass Extinction? appeared first on Law Street.

Mankind’s greatest enemy is not war or hunger but infectious disease. Throughout history it has cost countless deaths, and even in the twenty-first century our defenses against it remain limited. Above all, it is the threat of outbreak that unsettles us so; it is not just suffering and death, but fear. Whether it’s the Black Plague, Cholera, Spanish Influenza, H1N1, or Ebola, disease is a dark cloud looming over our lives.

Most of the microscopic killers with which we contend have been transmitted to us through animals. In the early ages of settled agriculture, close contact with domesticated chickens, pigs, cows, and others exposed humans to pathogens to which their immune systems had no previous exposure and consequently minimal means by which to combat them. There are two primary behavioral patterns of diseases. Some ascribe to the category of “chronic.” In this case, as geographer and ornithologist Jared Diamond explains, “…the disease may take a very long time to kill its victim; the victim remains alive as a reservoir of microbes to infect other[s]…” The other category is “epidemic.” In this case, Diamond continues, there might be no cases for a while, followed by a large number in an affected area, and then none for a while more. Such behavior is a consequence of the intensity of the disease’s manifestation; it strikes with such force that it basically burns itself out because the potential hosts all either die or become immune.

“Epidemic” is a widely feared term. Rather than consider the fact that they can and have been occurring on very small scales throughout human history, many people associate epidemic with things like the Black Plague in Europe, Smallpox in the New World, or a global zombie apocalypse. Since people naturally fear most what they do not understand, insufficient knowledge of disease vectors and behavior results in widespread fear and panic.

Ebola is a relatively late arrival on the scene. Originally suspected to be yellow fever, it was discovered in 1976 near the Ebola River in what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Samples extracted from an ill nun who had been working in the region came to doctors and scientists in an Antwerp, Belgium laboratory. They eventually discerned that the infection behaved differently from what would be expected of the original diagnosis. After sending samples to the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, their conclusions were confirmed and a new disease had been discovered. Shortly thereafter, another outbreak occurred relatively far away in Sudan. While knowledge of the initial source and starting location of the disease is still vague, it was determined that it had spread via unsterilized syringes and contact with bodies during funerals. Therefore a lack of knowledge of the nature of the disease lent itself to its spread.

Ebola in large dropped off the radar screen until the recent epidemic began in West Africa. Going hand in hand with lack of knowledge of the disease are incomprehensive and underdeveloped means of addressing it. On a recent edition of Global Public Square, the insightful international news show hosted by CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, international relations PhD Chelsea Clinton declared that the disease is spreading exponentially, necessitating exponential containment measures. This is very difficult to achieve, due to the poor technological and economic infrastructures of the region. As Dr. Paul Farmer — another guest on Zakaria’s show — expanded, the Liberian healthcare system is also very weak. Liberian Foreign Minister Augustine Ngafuan detailed how Liberians have deeply ingrained burial practices that involve close contact with bodies; this is an important aspect of cultural values in the region and not easily relinquished in the face of something that foreign experts, much less locals, barely understand.

A Liberian village, courtesy of jbdodane via Flickr.

Globalization and increased interconnectedness between individuals, societies, and locations has exacerbated the rate at which diseases spread. Many Americans cried out when infected aid workers were brought home to be treated. Appropriate measures were taken in this instance, with sanitary transportation vehicles bringing the patients to the Emory hospital in Georgia. Due to its affiliation with the CDC, this is one of the few facilities truly equipped to accommodate infectious diseases of this nature. Both those patients recovered, though they would likely have died if they were forced to remain in Africa. The situation was handled intelligently and effectively, without resounding negative consequences. Yet the outcry and fear demonstrates people’s lack of knowledge and tolerance of the unknown and perceived dangers. This was in fact the first occasion in which Ebola was present on American soil.

The situation changed with the death of Thomas Duncan. Having arrived from Liberia in late September, Duncan provided a new first by being the first patient diagnosed with Ebola in the United States. His illness was unknown during his transit, and so new fears arose as to the likelihood of Ebola crossing the ocean with traveler hosts. Now in a complete state of fear, Americans want more and more action taken in defense of the nation’s health, yet do not know what those measures ought to be because we do not know enough about the disease. Many airports have begun taking travelers’ temperatures. The CDC initially cited 101.4 degrees as the point at which one must be quarantined, but lowered it after some supposedly ill people were cleared. This demonstrates the uncertainty of the disease’s nature; in what ways does Ebola affect a person’s body temperature? At what point in their illness are they contagious? Is a body temperature an effective indicator of this? These questions have yet to be answered for the disease of whose existence we have known for less than 40 years.

Specialists clean up a Hazmat area, courtesy of sandcastlematt via Flickr.

The second set of problems that are causing fear are the alleged breaches of protocol that have enabled several other people to catch the disease in the United States. The Dallas hospital in which Duncan died was not equipped to handle this disease and consequently could not treat him effectively. Furthermore, the staff did not have the proper training insofar as interacting with Ebola, and this has been cited as the reason why nurse Nina Pham, who was treating him, became ill as well. A recent video surfaced wherein a patient is being transferred from one vehicle to another by four workers in “hazmat,” or hazardous material, uniforms. A fifth person, dubbed “clipboard man,” stands with them completely unprotected. Finally, CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden has come under fire for making statements and then retracting them. Pennsylvania Republican Congressman Tom Marino has even called for him to step down. We have quickly forgotten, though, that in the early 1990s Frieden was instrumental in developing awareness and programs to combat a rising Tuberculosis epidemic in New York City. In addition to other stellar career highlights, Frieden is a highly capable leader experienced in engaging these concerns.

We are too wrapped up in fear of the unknown to do anything but demand immediate results. Ebola is a newcomer on the scene and will take some time to understand effectively. As we continue to discern our relationships with our surrounding environments, we do know that ebola is not nearly as contagious as other diseases. It requires direct contact with bodily fluids of infected patients. As we continue to learn how it works, and how our actions, societies, and cultures interact with it, we will become more effective at addressing it. In the meantime, we annually face airborne foes which are far more dangerous and contagious; do not forget to get your flu shot in the coming weeks.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ebola and America’s Fears appeared first on Law Street.

The past couple of weeks saw observance of the Jewish High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, which are the new year and day of repentance, respectively. As the year 5775 begins, some Jews are also noting that this is a shmita year.

The ancient Jewish agricultural cycle followed a rotation of seven years. On the seventh, reminiscent of the Creation story, a rest is mandated. This is called shmita, or “release.” The primary purpose was to let the land regenerate after six years of intensive farming. Allowing the nutrients to return to the soil would provide for more productive harvests in the future. This tradition is indicative of an early awareness of the importance of environmental conservation, long before systematic use of fertilizers or any modern concepts of sustainability.

The ancient trading empire of Phoenicia, in what is today Lebanon, was noted for its purple dye. This was a major export product and source of revenue and wealth in the Phoenician economy. Numbers:15 in the Old Testament states

“38. Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue. 39. And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the Lord…”

Like Phoenician purple, this blue dye was drawn at the time from an uncommon mollusk. When tied into economic forces and trading opportunities, the mollusk became endangered and prices for the dye skyrocketed. Eventually, pressure eased in conjunction with more steadfast observance of shmita. Herein lies an early example of biodiversity conservation. The Biblical commandment is acknowledged in modernity by the colors and patterns of the Jewish prayer shawl, called a talit.

A talit and kippah, courtesy of James MacDonald via Flickr

There were social obligations associated with shmita as well. Since farmers did not actively grow crops at this time, any fruits or edible plants that grew on their own were deemed communal. This suggests a more cooperative economic and social system. Furthermore, outstanding debts were often forgiven and many indentured servants were released from their obligations.

Rabbi Ari Enkin suggests that the Talmud, another holy Jewish text, declares that the purpose of shmita is to remember that the land does not belong to people, but to God. This is further enforced, he argues, by the fact that God provides for people even when they do not work the land. In addition, some interpretations suggest that shmita enables hardworking farmers to take a break from their burdens and refocus their energies. Often this came in the form of more religious worship and, when in conjunction with the realization that the surrounding world belongs to God, reinforces faith in Him.

Extensive farmlands in the Golan Heights, courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

Especially considering that this very ancient practice referred to farming, and specifically in Israel, what modern, global applications and lessons besides direct environmental ones can we glean from it? Yom Kippur is the day of repentance; Jews seek forgiveness from God and from other people for the sins they have committed over the last year. This enables for a fresh start, or a clean slate as is commonly articulated. An important component of this custom is, as an individual, to be willing to grant forgiveness to those who seek it from you. This is as vital to a modern cooperative social system as was the ancient forgiveness of debts and release of servants. Incessant burdens, bitter memories, and grudges damage the individual just as incessant agriculture damages the soil and land. Shmita is an emotional “release” as well, vital for one’s health. It is important to step back, take a break, and start over fresh after a little while.

Though the esoteric Talmudic interpretation that the land belongs to God might not be as universally appealing in 2014, the general principle that the environment is a force that operates largely on its own terms is an important lesson. Perhaps a more suitable wording would be that the environment belongs to the Earth. Just as the ancient Jews recognized that they were part of a larger system that included things beyond their control, we too exist in such a dynamic. In addition, the Hebrews of old recognized that their actions could have consequences of an environmental nature, which in turn would affect their well being and livelihoods because they were deeply intertwined with their surrounding ecologies. This remains true today, and in our technological and globalized society the severity of the consequences of our actions are more alarming than ever. Finally, the very manners in which we think, identify, and behave are inspired in part by our very environments and their roles in our lives.

The environment is not an abstract set of ideas from which we are detached. It contributes substantially to who we are; acting in its benefit is mutually beneficial. May the new year bring release and a clean slate, and kindle hopes for our futures.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Feature image courtesy of [Alexander Smolianitski via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Shmita: The Jewish Calendar Year of Environmental Conservation appeared first on Law Street.

The Appalachians, one of the world’s oldest mountain ranges, might be gone forever sooner than we expect. It is not erosion or tectonic activity that will be the culprit, but human action.

Mountain Top Removal (MTR) is a mining process wherein literally the top of a mountain is blasted apart so as to access the coal that resides within. This is a more efficient process than the older underground mining style, requiring fewer men, less time, and resulting in higher yields. However, it inflicts catastrophic damage to the surrounding ecosystems as well as the people who live in the region. Whether it be for human health, biological diversity, or aesthetics, MTR has been the subject of an intensifying debate over the last few decades.

One of the most immediate problems caused by Mountain Top Removal is damage to rivers and contamination of water supplies. When the peaks are blown apart, many tons of rock, minerals, and sediment packed with metal materials fall into the water. In some cases, this has buried streams entirely. Often it chokes the flow of the waterway, and as journalist Eric Reece detailed, changes the chemistry of the water. This causes many fish, larvae, and other aquatic life to die. Furthermore, these contaminants find their way into the human water supply. There have been reports of contaminated wells and illnesses attributed to drinking fouled water.

Companies have sought to promote feigned silver linings in their actions. One corporation operating in Eastern Kentucky asserted that its actions, which cleared the landscape and opened up space, were in fact beneficial to the elk population there. It claims that it is an ideal habitat for “free ranging elk” whose grazing keep deer in check and maintain a balance of biodiversity in the ecosystem. This is an intentional misinformation campaign. Conservation biologists have argued to the contrary, detailing the requirements for a healthy elk population and the complicating factors of a healthy ecosystem, the vital interconnected set of relationships of which have been removed by clear cutting and a landscape thrown out of balance.

A pair of elk forage in the early morning. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

In addition to these micro-environmental concerns, there may be macro ones as well. Mountain ranges have substantial influence over weather patterns. The air barriers created by the Himalayas and Andes are vital to the thriving diversity of the rainforests in Indochina and the Amazon, respectively. Although the Appalachians do not reach such soaring heights, there is no reason to doubt that their presence as a substantial topographic feature plays into the interconnectedness and complexity of the environments there.

Most of the issues elucidated so far deal with scientifically motivated concerns; there are sociological ones as well. Many local proponents of MTR cite the Bible, wherein God said to subdue the Earth. God put the mountains there for us to mine, they argue. It is a fulfillment of our place as the favored species and rulers of the planet to do so. On the contrary, others assume a stance that God put the mountains there for us to admire. They serve a purpose of spiritual fulfillment and self betterment, and to destroy them is sacrilegious. Reece, who spent a long time in Kentucky delving into this issue referenced a local clergyman who took a middle ground on this debate. He suggested that these passages intend to promote “stewardship.” Human-environmental interactions should be balanced and reciprocal; each needs the other. Clearly, discourses of this nature can be recast so as to be appropriated toward any camp’s objectives.

Religion aside, many proponents of the practice reference the practical benefits of mountain top removal. It provides many jobs and figures substantially into the export economy of a region with a relatively low standard of living and median income. These arguments do not hold water when held under scrutiny. The towns themselves do not see much financial benefit, as profits go to the companies and the wealthy elite. Furthermore, reminiscent of fracking, the process of mountain top removal requires specialized training that is carried out by company employees brought in from the outside. The industry does not provide many jobs for local residents. In fact, there have been cases of companies buying up locals’ land, inflicting damage, then going bankrupt before distributing compensation. In this sense they impart direct harm on the people’s livelihoods.

Why is there such willingness to throw a large group of people under the bus? The term “sacrifice zone” refers to a geographic region that is used as either a physical dumping ground or a section that is allowed to degenerate in consequence of industrial and developmental activity intended for the benefit of other regions. The environment and people who live in a sacrifice zone suffer greatly. In her insightful book Removing Mountains: Extracting Nature and Identity in the Appalachian Coalfields, sociologist Rebecca R. Scott addresses shifting and contradictory ideas about the people of Appalachia in history and modernity, and their relationship to the physical environment. In some cases the people are portrayed as descendants of the British; they are an idealization of rural, innocent, white Americanness. More commonly, she argues, they are portrayed as backwards, uneducated, vile, violent, white trash. These two divergent concepts are appropriated depending on the agenda at hand. Scott provides as an example the efforts to bring home prisoner of war Jessica Lynch from Iraq. Here, the former dialogue was brought into play. It evoked sympathy and aroused humanizing emotion in favor of her return. Scott provides many perceptive revelations, but suffice it to say that the latter discourse is more common and convenient when promoting the actions of mountain top removers. It establishes all of Appalachia as a sacrifice zone for the coal industry.

Ultimately, massive human and environmental damage is being inflicted in quest of a fuel source that is less and less preferable anyway. Although it has been around since the 1960s, mountain top removal has been on the rise in the last twenty years. Resulting problems are increasing, while the benefits are short lived and the consequences are long term. The quality of our bodies and ideas about our identities are just as tightly intertwined with our environments are are wildlife and waterways. Alternatives to the process, and alternatives to the coal, are vital.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Mountain Top Removal Threatens Environmental and Human Welfare appeared first on Law Street.

Standing in the middle of a crushing crowd of people can be quite stressful, but this time it was worth it. The United Nations General Assembly spent the final week of September in session and one of the primary items of concern on its agenda is climate change and the environment, addressed in the form of the Climate Summit on Tuesday, September 23. On September 21, an astounding 400,000 people marched through the streets of Manhattan to vocalize the necessity of addressing climatic and environmental concerns.

In the largest environmental rally in history, activists began lining up earlier than 9:00am at designated locations from 59th street as high as 86th street. They organized under a variety of banners, from environmental organizations, scientists, private citizens, and more. It was under this final group that I started the march. It contained sub groups as well; there were community organizations, college students, and others. I am proud to note that a group representing my alma mater Rutgers University was among the most vocal in the area.

The March, at the steps of the Museum of Natural History. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

Reminiscent of how a car at the back of a long lineup will probably not make the light when it turns green because everybody hits the gas one at a time, my section of the four-mile long rally did not start marching until 45 minutes after the event was set to begin. It was very exciting once we did begin to move, and a surge of energy rolled through the crowd. However the density of the crowd meant that we moved like an inchworm; the line would stretch and we moved forward a little, but then compacted again and we stood in place for a bit. Eventually the line spread out and the walk became more consistent.

It was still quite slow going though, so eventually I exited the group and walked alongside on the sidewalk. As I was moving faster than the line, I was able to advance through the march and see all the different sections. There was no repetitiveness to the line’s appearance. Each group had its own chants and jingles, instrumental support, and occasional matching t-shirts. A migrant women’s workers rights group even performed a series of dances as they made their way down the street.

A section of the line, dedicated to protecting wildlife. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

At 12:58pm the march stopped dead in its tracks for a moment of silence in honor of those who have been lost to climate crises. The huge crowd, moving and making noise for an hour and a half, was still and silent with hands to the sky. It was a powerful moment. I’m not sure from which direction it came, but the moment of silence was ended by a wave of shouts that rolled through the entire length of the line. The ultimate call to action had been sounded, and the march resumed with great vigor and enthusiasm.

The moment of silence. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

Despite the motion and noise, music and megaphones, others took part in the call to action in different ways. Among the most striking was the Earth Vigil, a group sitting silent and meditative at the edge of Central Park. There are many ways for people of diverse backgrounds to express concerns over shared fates.

The Earth Vigil. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin.

It is this detail that really struck me throughout the march. The health of the environment and fate of the planet are issues that span every economic class, race, orientation, and geography. The sheer variety of people merging voices over a common cause speaks to the urgency of the challenges we face and the importance of addressing them effectively. Environmental activism has tended to be viewed as an activity of the middle and upper classes who have the wealth and leisure to dedicate their energies to this more abstract set of problems. The Climate March proved otherwise. Every level of society is aware, concerned, and willing to act. Furthermore, every level of society is affected by environmental woes; its consequences are real and tangible, not an abstract, theoretical, “out there” set of problems.

The rally in New York City was the most notable, but other cities throughout the world held their own rallies on this day and throughout the week as well. Twenty-six hundred events in over 150 countries, in fact. This further indicates the global awareness and importance of climate and environment. Before the event began, I had an interesting conversation with a Climate March surveyor of Nigerian origin. He explained how China has been buying up land there for agricultural and mining purposes, inflicting horrific environmental damage in the process. The locals there tend not to understand the consequences, and further are often excited about the Chinese presence in hopes of generating revenue and raising the standard of living. However, as the surveyor detailed, these activities are channeled to benefit the Chinese economy and industry only; locals are left no better off from it. He feels that this and other rallies around the world will help raise awareness of this, among many problems. The key is not just making a loud statement to global leaders, but spreading knowledge to all people.

We should come away from this event with great optimism. It demonstrated that more and more people are aware of these problems, and are willing to act in order to solve them. The people are not willing to continue down this path; society has reached a turning point and a new era of knowledge and responsibility is beginning. Whether that be on an individual, communal, national, or global level, the power to make change is growing.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Franklin R. Halprin]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Climate Change Unites World Community Across All Spectrums appeared first on Law Street.

If your pretty green lawn has gone brown due to drought, what is the best solution? Paint it! At least, this is the trend in Southern California.

Though it didn’t quite spark it, “Leave it to Beaver” heavily popularized America’s aesthetic interest in happy suburban homes with manicured lawns and picket fences. This carried over after World War II, during the rapid suburbanization of the United States. Ethnically homogenous and virtually standardized communities represented the perceived “Americanness” and values of the middle and upper classes. A manicured lawn, privately owned home, a car or two, and a nuclear family epitomized to many the ideal. In the last half century, many of these aesthetic values and symbols have not changed.

Green grass remains not only aesthetically appealing, but economically important. As the housing market rebounds, a pretty lawn is an attractive component in a home’s appearance and ability to sell. Some claim that it can add 15 percent to the home’s value. Consequently, companies have popped up that will help ensure this appearance; however, these are not landscapers or gardeners, but spray painters.

In the latest and laziest effort to display human mastery of nature and promote the aesthetic, spray painting one’s lawn green has been gaining popularity. Promoters say it is more environmentally friendly than conventional landscaping, which requires many gallons of fuel for machines, chemical pesticides, and heavy water use. They claim that it is non toxic and grows out with the grass, similar to temporarily highlighting one’s hair. Furthermore, this practice is already quite common in golf courses, ballparks, and other athletic venues. In those cases, however, the ground is built of turf or fake grass. On a front lawn, it is real grass and real dirt with things living in it. Regardless of the truth or falsehood of the non toxicity of the spray, would applying a sheet of paint to the soil clog its pores and reduce insects’ and small animals’ mobility and access to air and food? Furthermore, could covering living blades of grass in a layer of paint block its access to the sun and ability to photosynthesize?

An overlook of a Southern California town, courtesy of Frank Halprin.

A CBS San Francisco article interviewed a lawn painter who said that “…the grass doesn’t die completely, and when the winter rains come, the lawn will turn green again on their own.” Does this mean that the grass dies partly? Or that parts of the lawn die completely while others do not? This would seem to throw a monkey wrench into the apparent eco-friendliness of the product. A New York Times article explains that many spray companies claim that the paint includes some fertilizer “…which can help cut down on weekly watering while keeping the grass from dying completely.” Again, the explanations are vague: is the paint intended to contribute to saving the drought-stricken grass, or does it damage it and so they add some fertilizer so it is not completely deadly? Brown grass is not already dead, it is dehydrated. In fact, grass is among the most resilient of plants on the planet. Even wildfires pose no serious threat to it, as the seeds are deep enough in the soil that only the top layer will burn off; it will grow back in time.

The author of the Times article also relates that owners’ dogs come inside with green stains on their paws, and that the grass itself feels crunchy once painted. Especially considering the paint has plant fertilizer in it, is it healthful for dogs to be playing in it and licking it off themselves? The crunchiness further ties into the concerns with regard to covering blades of grass with paint. The comparison to hair dye does not hold water; hair is composed of dead cells. Applying hair spray and making it crunchy is not problematic. Grass is alive and requires the below- and above-ground components to be healthful.

White fences, green lawns, and pets, courtesy of Jesse Millan via Flickr.

The blame for this series of issues should not be dropped squarely on the shoulders of homeowners. They are finding themselves caught between a rock and a hard place, facing fines for excessive water use during the course of the drought, but at the same time being threatened with fines for brown and insufficiently tended lawns! The obsession with green lawns, dating back over a century, resides not solely within the minds of American people but is a factor in American law and policy formation. The local governments and economies clearly value it as well, and so residents are pressured to maintain that appearance.

Ultimately, people are masking the realities of the drought with artificial nature. After a century of using green lawns as a means of attempting to conquer nature, now you’re spray painting your lawn green in a continuous effort to convince ourselves that we are capable of so doing. Rather, it is a clear example of quite the opposite. Instead of turning a blind eye or applying a thin veil, we should take this opportunity to address the current situation and its causes. Be okay with the lawn being brown for a little while. There are more important things to consider.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Chris Ford via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Think Twice Before Spray Painting Your Lawn Green, California appeared first on Law Street.

My house rumbles and shakes as the cargo trains thunder down the rail that is less that 500 yards away. Although the necessity of turning up the volume on my TV is not much more than a nuisance, the fact that I sleep within the blast zone of a highly combustible material being transported in an inept and accident-prone manner is highly unnerving. Despite the speed of aircraft or the capacity of cargo ships, railroads remain the most efficient medium for transporting goods. That does not mean, though, that they are a flawless medium. In fact, when dealing with the transportation of crude oil, they and the system on which they operate are horrifically flawed.

Fracking in North Dakota yields a crude oil that is shipped in trains across the country and down the Hudson River. In the New York portion, the rail runs literally right along the river’s edge. The particular form of crude coming from these fields can turn into an explosive fire should the trains derail, giving this transportation system the name “bomb trains”. The American Petroleum Institute disputes this claim, though. The issue is compounded by the fact that it is being transported in outdated cars, called DOT-111s, which have thin hulls and are prone to puncture. In the last several years, oil train derailments have spilled millions of gallons and resulted in deaths, notably in Quebec last year.

Apparently the Transportation Department has been looking into the DOT-111 situation for several years now, but a surge in oil production in the North Dakota Bakken shale region has resulted in an immediate demand for large scale transport. There are not enough pipelines to accommodate this volume, so it is being sent along in trains, dubbed a “virtual pipeline.” Furthermore, the existing oil trains were not originally intended to move this type of oil at this level of intensity, thus the dangers. While safer designs are in the proposal stage, many of the existing cars are too old to be retrofitted with the new features and would have to be replaced all together. This is problematic, Jad Mouawad of The New York Times points out, because the transition period would mean that there are fewer cars on the rails and the oil demands would be difficult to meet.

Also sorely lacking is an emergency response plan. Should a disaster occur, sufficient measures are not currently in place either to mitigate the consequences of a spill or to effectively address the human welfare. Not only would lives be endangered, but a spill would gravely threaten the drinkability of the water for both locals and the eight million residents of New York City, as well as the wellbeing of the river’s biodiversity. In a flash, a spill could undo everything that the Hudson conservation organization Riverkeeper has spent the last half century trying to accomplish.

A bird struggles amidst an oil spill near Crimea, courtesy of Marine Photobank/Igor Golubenkov via Flickr

The lack of safety precautions is not the fault of emergency workers, but the Transportation Authority and oil industries themselves. The latter needs to be more open as to when trains are running through what areas, and what is the nature of their cargo. Last month, Orange County, New York joined neighbors Rockland and Ulster in calling for a full environmental review of the potential impacts of the increased oil shipments, a ban on DOT-111s, and an exploration of alternative means of transporting the oil. Embodying the philosophies of Riverkeeper, these actions criticize the secretive nature of the oil industry and demand the release of data to the public. By empowering the people with information, appropriate measures can be taken.

One town in North Jersey took things a step further, staging a protest and calling for a moratorium on the oil trains until safety standards are met. As previously mentioned, the trains run through my own hometown and neighboring ones in Bergen County, New Jersey pass through a very built up and densely populated region; a disaster in this area would be catastrophic and unquestionably deadly.

One must be cautious when performing a review of potential environmental impacts, as the method can be manipulated so as to be favorable to one party over another. The mayor of Albany recently accused the Department of Environmental Conservation of segmentation, an illegal action under the Environmental Quality Review Act. This process enables the review of a project in individual groups, not as an overall whole. In so doing, environmental impacts can be overlooked or miscast. This has allowed oil companies to enlarge or change their transportation permits time and again without raising any red flags. Ecosystems are large and complex; an issue in one arena will affect, often in an unforeseen manner, aspects of another. Further, humans are tightly intertwined with their surrounding environments. The issue must be looked at in its entirety in order to properly assess the dynamics of the dangers and their potential consequences.

The interrelatedness of people, policy, and environment with regard to this issue extends widely. The overemphasis on oil shipments is creating a backlog in other industries. Millions of dollars are lost and countless jobs are endangered as North Dakota farmers, the longtime mainstay of the economy there, are unable to ship their grain products across the country. A cascade effect follows; food companies are pressured to put out their products in light of delayed shipments, occasionally resulting in lower supply and higher prices. Exportation economics suffer as well, as these rails send grains to the Pacific Northwest to be shipped to Asia, and down the very same routes in New York State to be sent to Europe. In the long run, grain will be a more reliable product than oil. Companies are too short sighted and capitalize on the spike, with wide ranging and ever worsening consequences.

While the increased production, transportation, and use of oil is frustrating enough for those who would rather see progress in the field of renewable energy, the fact that it is compounded by a massive threat to local ecosystems and human welfare is outrageous and unacceptable. This issue is more than a concern over energy policy; it is making the use of fossil fuels an environmental and human threat in manners that go beyond emissions and pollution. The dangers must be effectively addressed, and soon.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The New Black Death: Oil Trains and Insufficient Safety Regulations appeared first on Law Street.

While venturing out toward the stars may be the final frontier, the vast depths of the Earth’s oceans remain largely hidden from view and knowledge. The incredible diversity and sheer volume of life in the seas is staggering to the human mind, and consequently we have developed certain egregious impressions about the oceans and what they may provide for the needs of modern civilization. Some seem to feel that the oceans are sources of infinite resources for global fisheries. They are so big and teeming with life; surely there is more than we could possibly consume. This misnomer is compounded by increases in the technological efficiency of fishing, as well as the fact that oceans serve as common pool resources; many nations and parties may share, or compete for, their portion of fish yields.

Global wild fish stocks have been declining for a long time. In his seminal paper The Tragedy of the Commons, Garrett Hardin argued that the economic forces that define our approaches to use of common pool resources are not sustainable in the long run. Namely, an individual acting in the logical manner so as to maximize his share of the resources is acting against the better interest of the whole group, because every individual is doing this and ultimately everyone will suffer. This concern has plagued high seas fishing for centuries, and continues to worsen as the efficiency and rate of fishing increases. Perhaps one of the most tangible and unsettling consequences of these dynamics is the collapse of the Northwest Atlantic cod fishery in 1992, after an epic 500-year run that shaped the economic, social, and cultural development of Europe’s early North American colonies.

The cod fishing town of Portugal Cove in Newfoundland, 1908, courtesy of Musee McCord Museum via Flickr

That is to say, there are consequences other than economics and conservation when dealing with unsustainable fishing. After so many hundreds of years, the Newfoundland locals had developed cultural identities around fishing. From fishermen to transporters, to salesmen in the markets, fishing played a substantial role in their ways of life and manners of self identification. How do the residents think of themselves, their place in society, and what do they actually do with themselves now that the fishery has collapsed? These are concerns that can crop up anywhere that natural resources are strained.

Another incorrect assumption about fishing and the oceans is that anything that might go wrong there or, our actions there in general, bear no consequences to ourselves and society. This might stem from the simple fact that we do not live in the oceans, and so we do not often see with our own eyes ecological collapse there. However it is clear, as exemplified by the Newfoundland cod fishery, that the fate of the seas and their biodiversity is tightly tied to our own state of affairs.

In light of these problematic developments, a new practice has been gaining ground. Aquaculture is the process of raising fish or shrimp in tanks on land. The most important result of supplying seafood in this manner is that it takes pressure off wildlife. There are many other advantages too, as Hiroko Tabuchi explains in a New York Times article. Fish farmers tend to already have environmentally and socially conscious motivations for doing what they do, and so it is uncommon that one’s plate of farm-raised fish will contain harmful chemicals. Furthermore, it reduces the need to import certain fish species, which may be caught by way of slave labor on fishing boats in the South Pacific. Finally, it produces local jobs while promoting economic self sufficiency.

A fish farm tank, courtesy of Bytemarks via Flickr

The Atlantic cod fishery is not the only one to have failed. Eighty-five percent of marine fish stocks are considered either fully exploited or overfished, and more than one in five fisheries has collapsed. In addition to the environmental consequences herein, it is becoming more and more difficult for fishermen to make ends meet. As their daily catches go down in volume, they yield declining pay, endangering their jobs and the financial stability of their families. As the national economy and job markets of Chile waver, for example, they have been turning to large-scale aquaculture. Having safeguarded existing jobs, produced over 100,000 more, and served as a major source of exportation, AquaChile is setting an example that is sure to be followed around the world.

How do consumer behaviors and cultural identities figure into this system? Tabuchi suggests that some people might have an aversion to eating fish raised on a farm. Somehow, it does not seem natural; real fish must be wild and from the oceans in order to be fresh and appetizing. This is a simple mental barrier that can be overcome in time. Fishing is one of civilization’s oldest practices; it will require patience and continued exposure to this new system. In addition, fish farming provides new opportunities with regard to cultural development. Just as the Newfoundland fishermen produced an identity and way of life around their jobs, so too can fish farmers. Therefore, a larger embrace of aquaculture would yield more than just the jobs themselves. Even before the days of Westward expansion Americans have taken pride in farmers. This action carries cultural baggage, tying itself to wholesome values, hard work, and individual enterprise. Thus there is something appealing to consumers in purchasing locally farmed products, and supporting the hardworking farmers. This set of relationships can certainly apply to seafood farmers in time as well.

Aquaculture also benefits other marine wildlife. World Wildlife writer Julian Smith explains that “Healthy ocean ecosystems are more resilient to emerging threats such as warming water temperatures and ocean acidification.” In addition, it has a “ripple effect,” benefiting other marine life such as sea birds, sea turtles, dolphins, and seals. This raises another point of interest: salmon populations in Oregon had been declining for years as a result of dam construction on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Recently, they have been rebounding, drawing tens of thousands of birds who intend to feed on them. Local officials feel threatened by the competition for salmon, and have considered shooting the birds. The National Audubon Society cried out in protest, suggesting measures such as shooing the birds or drawing them elsewhere. Felicity Barringer of The New York Times suggested that this situation is different from people’s fights with wolves and coyotes, who raided their chicken farms, for example. While that series of episodes was still shameful, as those predators were endangered by human defensive hunting, this situation involves killing a wild predator that is competing with humans for a wild prey. Aquaculture could alleviate this competition, as humans consume more farm-raised fish, leaving the wild salmon for the birds and removing the presumed necessity of shooting them.

Cormorants of the Pacific Northwest, courtesy of Brocken Inaglory via Wikipedia

If we continue on our current course, the future of fish and the oceans themselves will be further jeopardized. In our ongoing quest for sustainable societies, aquaculture provides a partial answer and opens many new doors.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image couresty of [CAUT via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Aquaculture: Farm the Fish to Save the Seas appeared first on Law Street.

The five-foot high tires were insufficient to prevent the specially designed bus from jostling about as it turned off the road and toward the Columbia Ice Field in Alberta, Canada. The massive carpet of ice expanded in all directions upon disembarkation, as I walked about the sheet that was hundreds of feet thick and thousands of years old. A small stream of water meandered by. It was water only recently thawed; water that had frozen before industrialization and heavy increases in air pollution. I cupped my hands in the crystal and cold flow and sipped. It was perfect. I was eight years old, enthralled, and officially a nature lover.

The Columbia Ice Field Snow Coach, courtesy of Leonard G. via Wikipedia

Four years later we returned to the Canadian Rockies to immerse ourselves in the wilderness once more, without any doubt that we would pay a visit to the Columbia Field. The bus again turned off the road, but this time onto an expanse of grey rock. We were in the same location as last time, but the glacier was not there. It still existed, but was far in the distance. In only a few years it had melted substantially, retreating into the mountains. I was 12 years old, horrified, and officially an environmental activist.

Glaciers are the most visible manifestation of climate change. Photographer James Balog utilized this concept in an attempt to bring to the forefront the urgency of the issue. In his project Extreme Ice Survey, he and his crew mounted 25 cameras to take snapshots of glacial activity every daylight hour for three years, yielding distressing results as to the rapidity of glacial melting. The project was documented in the 2012 film Chasing Ice.

Some argue that the situation is not so severe, as glaciers ebb and flow with the seasons. The guide at the Columbia Ice Field related that the sheet rises 50 feet in the winter and melts 80 feet in the summer. Therefore, while it does grow in the cold months, there is an overall trend of recession. Further, many glaciers consistently recede regardless of season.

A study in the Yukon from 1958-2008, Chasing Ice explains, tracked 1,400 glaciers in the region. Over the course of the half century, four grew, 300 disappeared entirely, and the other 1,096 shrunk. Though they are powerful symbols of environmentalism and conservation, these figures do not solely embody a concern for saving the glaciers. Despite the fact that they are often portrayed in tandem with other champions of conservation, such as polar bears and their struggles to survive in the face of melting ice sheets, the issues at hand are a microcosm of the challenges of mitigating the causes and repairing the consequences of human-induced climate change.

A recent article in the Alaska Dispatch News explored the potential effects of climate change on said state’s tourism industry. The U.S. Forest Service in Juneau has expressed concern over the shrinkage of several notable glaciers as they withdraw from the line of sight at lookout points, reducing the number of annual visitors. Furthermore, the author relates, a study suggested that melting permafrost might increase the region’s susceptibility to invasive species and shorten ski seasons.

The study attempts to take an optimistic angle in the face of these ominous developments, suggesting that the extended summer cruise season and concept of “last chance to see it” are about to create a short-lived boom in the tourism industry there. These are very shallow cheers. A “last chance” promotion is not financially sustainable for the long term of tourism, and more importantly, it is not an acceptable response to the threats to the environment there. Nor is it acceptable to sit back and allow unnatural change to occur, capitalize on the new reality, and allow the old state of things to disappear and be destroyed. While Alaska is beautiful in the fair weather and expanded opportunities for a summertime vacation there are enticing, that is not what the place was originally like before substantial human intervention. There are plenty of locations across the globe to which one can venture for a summer retreat; Alaska should be visited for what it was, and for what it ought to remain.

A cruise ship docked in Ketchikan, AK, courtesy of blmiers2 via Flickr

What Alaska was, and ought to remain, has figured substantially in American cultural identity and early manifestations of the conservation movement. In 1879, John Muir made his first trip to the wild lands. Many followed in his footsteps, including an expedition in 1899 on which a crew of scientists noted how deforestation, clear cutting, over fishing, and animal slaughtering were already stripping Alaska of its natural resources. One of the scientists later published a study arguing that the mining activities there, as the Yukon Gold Rush was in full swing, were not sustainable in the long run; Alaska’s economic future, he prophesied, lay in wilderness (eco) tourism. Furthermore, as historian Douglas Brinkley relates, Muir believed that the more people saw of Alaska’s frozen wonders, the more likely they were to become conservationists.

These two concepts formed powerful components of Teddy Roosevelt’s platform and presidential objectives. He agreed with the naturalist William H. Dall in seeing Alaska as “…having ecological, moral, scientific, and spiritual values that would help reserve the frontier spirit.” Regardless of truth or falsehood, the frontier mythos and concepts of rugged individualism played important roles in American identity. By the early 1900s, Manifest Destiny had brought the United States border to the Pacific Coast; Alaska was dubbed the final frontier. The wilderness, presumably so vital in the development of values and Americana, had to be preserved here if American culture was to survive. Enabling people to get in touch with nature would, as writer and environmentalist Aldo Leopold stated, “build receptivity for ecosystems in human thinking.”

Teddy Roosevelt (left) and John Muir (right) in Yosemite National Park, CA. Courtesy of Library of Congress via Wikipedia.

The growing awareness and value systems resulting from human contact with nature helped in the latter’s preservation, and continues to do so to this day. It worked for me; the spiritual beauty of the glacier inspired an appreciation in my heart for the natural world and its right to survive. In order to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, it must endure in order to inspire people and societies to maintain it. The current tourism industry in Alaska must remain focused on the real environments and benefits of the North. Establishing national parks to protect lands has helped in the past, as the main threats to the environment were direct human activities such as logging. Now, the threats are more varied in source and wider in scope. It will take many actions on multiple fronts to retain an interest in the locale and take the necessary steps to maintain the state of things there. The glaciers and tundra of Alaska and the Arctic are not a desolate wasteland, but places of great aesthetic value to be admired in their own right.

As John Muir wrote:

“Though the storm beaten ground it is growing on is nearly half a mile high, the glacier centuries ago flowed over it as a river flows over a boulder; but out of all the cold darkness and glacial crushing and grinding comes this warm, abounding beauty and life to teach us that what we in our faithless ignorance and fear call destruction is creation finer and finer.”

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Climate Change, Melting Glaciers, and the Future of Alaskan Tourism appeared first on Law Street.

Many alarms have sounded over the last half century with regard to expanding population and potential consequences to planetary and human health. Recently, some have argued for the converse: population is actually on the verge of a decline, and this is in fact the true threat to our well being. So what is actually happening, what are the dangers, and what do we do about it?

In Outgrowing the Earth, Lester R. Brown argues that the problem is a combination of expanding populations, increasing demands, and decreasing agricultural productivity. In what he calls “The Japan Syndrome,” industrializing countries experience an increase in grain consumption, especially via indirect means such as meat, while simultaneously the land that can produce the grain is converted into industrial and residential space, thereby limiting the amount of grain the nation can produce.

An additional point herein, Brown argues, is that as average incomes rise, so does the overall desire to consume meat, the production of which is more grain and water intensive; there are economic and social identity factors tied into natural resource use. As a result, self sufficiency is lost as the country becomes heavily dependent on imports. Furthermore, globally pervasive damage to cropland quality by way of issues such as desertification, falling water tables, and rising temperatures exponentially contribute to the declining productivity of agricultural lands.

Desertification of previously arable land, courtesy of Bert van Dijk via Flickr

Brown proposes some solutions to maintain farming productivity, such as increased use of soybeans. This crop is nitrogen fixing, and therefore would be effectively paired with the nitrogen-hungry corn in a biennial rotation. This would result in sustained high yields without substantially depleting the nutrients of the soil. He also suggests a method of farming that does not involve tilling, which would decrease erosion. Some actions must be taken, Brown declares, as he is convinced that increasing population and development will result in “food insecurity [that] may soon eclipse terrorism as the overriding concern of national governments.”

Brown’s analysis focuses on the threats of population increase, with regard to food and water security. On the flip side, in The Empty Cradle, Philip Longman addresses threats of population decrease, particularly with regard to economics and capitalism. He feels that these things are fueled by ever increasing populations. A diminishing worker base would require “pushing more people into the workforce and getting more out of them everyday” in a system reminiscent of serfdom. He goes on to argue that entrepreneurship and innovation depend on the presence of many young people. Rather, partly as a result of the Baby Boom, the general population is aging and older people outnumber the young, straining the financial system due to Social Security and Medicare needs.

So who is correct? Brown paints a picture in which humanity is headed to destruction because it will grow too large to sustain itself, while Longman feels that it will fizzle out and collapse. In reality, some countries are experiencing declining populations, while others are rising. The trend may be nearing peak, to be followed by a general decline, but many of the problems in Longman’s assessment arise due to the spike resulting from aging Baby Boomers; once their demands as elders drop off, the situation might stabilize.

One point on which Brown and Longman agree is that one of the primary problems with population and access to natural resources is not necessarily shortage, but maldistribution. There are geographic regions and social classes that are well supplied, while, particularly due to political and social injustices, others decline into famine. The latter rightfully receives extensive media coverage, but consequently our perceptions as to the situation are skewed. Similarly, population geographies are not evenly distributed; more and more people are moving into the cities.

China’s population geographies (darker colors are more densely populated areas), courtesy of TastyCakes via Wikipedia

Looking at a map of the United States or China, one will see the populations very densely concentrated at the coasts, while land at the center remains sparsely populated. Whether populations in general are increasing or decreasing, urban populations are on the rise and sustaining them is a challenge.

The Fall 2013 issue of the NYU Alumni Magazine offered some theories regarding innovations in urbanization. The author of the headline article, “Earth Goes Urban,” views these dynamics not as an alarmist’s theme, but as “…a moment of enormous promise, an opportunity to actually spread the blessings of modernity while ushering in an era of sustainable, smart growth.” The author, Jennifer Bleyer, spoke to Neil Kleinman of the NYU Wagner public policy school, who discussed building innovation into the infrastructure. That is to say, rather than do things as they’ve always been done and face the consequences of change, accommodate for the inevitability of change so that it can be absorbed. This idea applies broadly to Longman’s concerns as well; he is afraid that the economic infrastructure, which is predicated on increasing populations, will suffer. Instead, we can make adjustments so that shifting population dynamics will still interact harmoniously with our financial and social needs.

One of the ways in which innovation can be included in infrastructure, Bleyer details, is with carefully calculated sprawl. Sprawl is one of the causes of Brown’s Japan Syndrome, consuming productive land with pavement and construction, while damaging ecosystems and reducing the health of the country. Shlomo Angel, a professor at NYU Wagner, explains that since growth is inevitable, we should prepare for it instead of trying to contain cities or let them grow haphazardly. By planning in advance where and in what manner a city will grow, we can reduce the negative impacts addressed by Brown, while producing a healthy and thriving urban center.

The Innovative Designs of Dubai, courtesy of Eugene Kaspersky via Flickr

It does not matter whether human population is increasing or decreasing; as long as we plan responsibly, we can answer either threat. Bleyer got it right when she called the search for answers an opportunity; it is not just about trying to save ourselves and reduce our impact, but by way of this quest we can actually thrive.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Moyan Brenn via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Urban Expansion and Population Pressures Strain Natural Resources appeared first on Law Street.

The Grid is the great bane of renewable energy aspirations in the United States. An all pervasive electrical infrastructure links together power plants, homes, and anything else that contains a switch or button. Regardless of the company with whom one is registered, everybody gets a share of everybody else’s energy. That is to say, all power companies inject their energy into the grid; a customer simply pays premiums to a particular producer.

The same principle applies with green energy. Supposing a customer gets his bills from Company Green, this does not mean that his home has a minimal carbon footprint; the building is getting energy from the grid, which also includes energy produced by Company Brown. There is still merit in this, though, as the more money a green energy company accrues, the more effective it will be at diluting the grid with green energy. Hopefully in time, the entire grid will be green. In the meantime, the grid poses additional challenges.

Solar power has been gaining ground as of late, but it continues to meet opposition from the large utility companies it threatens. The genius of solar power, aside from the fact that it is clean energy with massive potential (the Sun produces so much energy that an hour’s worth could power the entire Earth for a year), is that it decentralizes the grid.

Solar used to be an unreliable and erratic form of energy to inject into the grid and share among customers. Now, however, private homes can draw nearer to energy self sufficiency. Furthermore, solar-powered homes are able to contribute energy to the grid themselves. Utility companies balk at this, declaring that the grid is designed for one-way flow. They go further, writer Edward Humes explains, in attempting to label solar customers “as mooching ‘free riders’ who avoid paying their fair share for the grid.” This is a misrepresentation of the dynamic; utility companies are simply losing customers. If a more favorable alternative provides one with a chance to opt out of complete dependence on the previously established grid, why not do so?

The crowning cause of opposition by utility companies to solar power is the concept of net metering. This policy enables solar homeowners, upon producing surplus energy, to receive credits from power companies as they distribute it back into the grid. In this sense, customers can easily overcome the initial costs of retrofitting their homes with solar panels, as they will not only save money on their energy, but can actually make money selling it back. In what Al Gore calls the Utility Death Spiral, their losses exponentially increase as they lose customers to this process, then consequently must raise prices on those who remain, who subsequently leave the grid as well.

Another factor influencing the appeal of solar power and its grid decentralization is that the barriers posed by storage are less and less significant. Aside from playing a substantial role in the possibility of net metering and generating surplus energy to sell back, increased and more efficient storage capacity enables solar users to fill in the gaps in cloudy stretches or during the night and provides for a more fluid energy-consuming experience.Furthermore, it decentralizes the grid; the individual and the community are more able to place their energy and their fates in their own hands. As Humes points out, it can “allow homeowners to form small, super-efficient neighborhood micro grids that huge, costly utilities could never outcompete.” It would be efficient because the generation and use of energy would be based on the specific neighborhood’s needs, as opposed to a more generalized, business- and profi- motivated number.

A Solar Neighborhood, courtesy of Lauren Wellicome via Flickr

Micro grids are flexible, adaptable, and have geographic advantages. An insightful article from David J. Hayes at The New York Times showcases the merits of renewable energy in remote places where the grid thins out or is non existent. In small Alaskan villages, residents are compelled to utilize dirty and expensive diesel generators to meet their energy needs. Setting up a renewable energy system there on a micro grid would alleviate such a burden, while providing eco-friendly and more affordable power to the people. For residents in northern climes, Hayes details, wind power will probably be more common, while solar systems are likely to appear in more tropical settings. This furthers the argument, demonstrating that other forms of renewable energy can also operate on micro grids and provide all the advantages therein.

Solar power has also met opposition from the political and governmental arenas. Perhaps because the centralized nature of the current electrical system is conducive to the control and oversight preferred by ruling bodies, or perhaps because of initial economic barriers or higher perceived priority of other objectives, the necessary funding for solar installations is difficult to come by. While Arizona maintains the top spot in the country for its solar program, New Jersey often surprised people with the number two position. Now it has dropped to number five. Governor Christie and his cabinet have removed the rebate incentives for solar installations, and, in addition to diverting funding for solar and offshore wind projects to balancing their budget, have been providing subsidies for natural gas power plants.

While solar power and energy democratization may be slowly winning the battle against utility companies, there clearly are additional barriers to solidifying its foothold and future. Solar power is unique among current renewable energy options, though, as the economic incentives for it are in place; the transitions that must be made in order to come on board are very doable. That being the case, convincing the nay sayers of its viability will hopefully be more and more common. The future of solar power seems sunny indeed.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Solar Power Could Change Everything You Know About Energy appeared first on Law Street.

We tend to envision our oceans as blue and our lands as green; the residents of Toledo, Ohio, however, had a bit difference experience recently when they were faced with green water.

When municipal officials declared they found toxins in the city’s drinking water supply, residents refrained from using it entirely. Naturally they did not drink or cook with it, but the contamination was deemed so severe that even boiling the water beforehand would not be sufficient. Emma G Fitzsimmons of The New York Times relates that children and people with weak immune systems were urged not to bathe in such water either. As local bottled supplies ran dry, the National Guard arrived to disperse fresh water.

Eventually, investigators determined that a large Lake Erie algae bloom, the source of water for the city of Toledo and 11 million residents in the lake’s vicinity, was the source of the contamination. Algae refers to a very broad spectrum of aquatic organisms ranging from the microscopic and single celled to the giant kelp of the Eastern Pacific. A bloom results in the production of a large amount of peptides, compounds consisting of multiple linked amino acids, in this case called microcystin. This particular peptide is toxic to humans, inducing vomiting, diarrhea, and liver damage, Fitzsimmons relates.

A 2012 algal bloom in Lake , courtesy of Olga Nohra via Flickr

Algal blooms resulting from human activity are often caused by massive introduction of phosphorous into an aquatic system. Lake Erie has been plagued by blooms in the past, particularly in the 1960s and 1980s. These occasions tended to be the result of poor septic infrastructure and consequent excessive discharge of waste into the lake. Since then, those threats have been somewhat ameliorated; however, agricultural runoff continues to provide undesired phosphorous discharge into water bodies such as Erie.

It is difficult to impose barriers on the leakage of phosphorous into Lake Erie. Journalist Michael Wines clarified that,

“The federal Clean Water Act is intended to limit pollution from fixed points like industrial outfalls and sewer pipes, but most of the troublesome phosphorous carried into waterways like Lake Erie is spread over thousands of square miles.”

This process is called “non-point pollution.” There have been some initiatives to try and reduce the pollution output in the first place, by providing farmers with methods of reducing fertilizer use, for example. But enacting laws that set limits on pollution is a daunting task. They must go hand in hand with voluntary efforts by those involved with the sources of pollution, to more accurately calculate how much fertilizer and materials are necessary, rather than carelessly applying an estimated amount.

An issue that must be addressed throughout the course of the dialogue on this event is the fact that algal blooms choke off other aquatic life. They absorb a massive amount of oxygen from the water, and other biodiversity are hard pressed to survive. This should be sufficient motivation in and of itself to mitigate the causes of blooms. Furthermore, substantial damage to the ecosystems of a place like Lake Erie causes fish catches to plummet, causing threats to our food supplies and commercial endeavors. The health of the lake’s biodiversity is also tied into lay fishing and other forms of recreation, which in turn brings to mind the importance of tourism and the state of the regional economy.

Simultaneously, another city farther east is also concerned with the state of its drinking water. New York City is famous for its pure and high quality drinking water. This is in large due to the vigorous efforts of organizations such as Riverkeeper, that maintain a presence in the Hudson River estuary in attempt to protect it from polluters, dumpers, and violators of other environmental and water protection laws. The source of water for more than nine million urban residents has come under threat recently from a rise in oil shipment by rail right along river’s edge in the so labeled “bomb trains,” or cars that are prone to spillage and explosion. On top of this, one of the primary aqueducts in the water infrastructure is leaking, journalists Aaron Ernst & Christof Putzel reveal. If it bursts, over half the city could be left without drinking water. In the meantime, plans are for it to be diverted through a bypass tunnel while repairs take place, which could take several years.

One of New York City’s reservoirs in the Catskills, courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

This case is the inverse of from Toledo; the problem is not the quality of the water, but the ability to deliver it. However, in the New York area there are many dangers to the quality of the water, and similarly the mediums by which Toledo’s water arrives in the city are an important factor when addressing phosphorous discharge and the quality of water resources. The cities face multiple and similar challenges: urban drinking water, water infrastructure, and reservoir protection. These concerns will only grow as cities expand and pressure on natural resources requires new approaches. If only two to three percent of the Earth’s water is freshwater, and the United States agricultural industry accounts for more than 75% of the nation’s water consumption, then civilian residents and policy makers face many challenges in ensuring that enough water remains drinkable and accessible to the people.

It is evident, then, that we humans are deeply entrenched in our environments. An ecosystem is very delicate, complex, and interconnected; a series of events in a remote corner may multiply and have unforeseen consequences elsewhere. It is vital for us to be more responsible in how we treat our water. We need it, the rest of the environment needs it, and we need the environment.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lake Erie Algae Bloom Raises Questions on Water Policy appeared first on Law Street.

If a red state known for its oil can spearhead a massive campaign in support of the installation of wind farms and restructure its economy to correspond, then there is no reason why the rest of the country cannot follow suit.

Texas is now the place to be when it comes to turbines and renewable clean energy. Bruce Selcraig explained in a Sierra Club article that politicians, including then-governor George W. Bush, deregulated the electricity industry in Texas in 1999. It was not so much motivated by environmental altruism, but by the nature of the business industry there. Investors are usually willing to make substantial investments so long as there is a reasonable expectation of profit. This is telling, though — clearly there are economic incentives to pursue renewable energy campaigns. If the government of Texas embraces and benefits from these changes, imagine the results on a national level.

Monetary returns provide the driving incentive for the wind industry in Texas on all fronts. In addition to the business-motivated profits, many private landowners are amenable to the installation of turbines on their land because of the promise of royalties. Further, corporate tax incentives and federal support have assisted substantially in wind’s ability to carve out a foothold. As long as it is fiscally advisable, it would seem that the wind will blow strong in Texas.

Harnessable Wind Energy in the US, courtesy of US Department of Energy via Wikipedia

There is a danger, though, in leaning too heavily on financial motivations for clean energy, while completely neglecting the environmental angle. In recent years, fracking and horizontal drilling have led to a reawakening of big oil and gas, especially in Texas. These industries, Selcraig points out, have historically received several billion dollars in annual support from the federal government, while wind has received less then one tenth of that amount. This disparity could widen with the recent increased attention on black gold.

Business savvy investors should understand, however, that in the long-run these non renewable sources of energy are not viable solutions. Despite the surge induced by fracking, wind energy has also been experiencing technological improvements that heighten its efficiency and viability. In 1991, the US Department of Energy speculated that North Dakota, Kansas, and Texas alone had enough wind potential to meet the country’s electricity needs. Since then, there have been many improvements to the technology. These include simple changes, such as making the shafts of turbines longer so that they reach heights where winds are stronger and steadier.

As a result of this and other changes, that same assessment now concludes that the wind capacities of those three states could satisfy the country’s energy needs. This is a bold statement, but if anything it demonstrates that wind is a more reliable and efficient energy source than most think. In addition, the technology continues to have room for growth and improvement, while non-renewable sources can only yield so much.

Large Global Wind Cells, courtesy of Wikipedia

With regard to renewable energy, the relationships between customers and utility companies vary. Thanks to the installation of new high-capacity electricity lines, a Texas panhandle wind project is on the rise. However, as New York Times journalist Matthew L. Wald illuminates, some residents are concerned that they are compelled to assume the financial risk; customers are seeing an increased monthly bill to pay for the new lines. Wald continues, however, that the efficiency wrought by the new lines will cut electricity costs by more than the increase. This dynamic ought to be conducive to encouraging more people to come on board, as it offers tangible returns.

Where in this debate are the voices of the people? The fate of the energy sector and the health of the planet ought not to be decided solely by corporations. As people become more aware of the dangers we face, and more able to voice their opinions on what to do about them, citizens will project ever increasing influence on the policy-making process. We still have a long way to go, as there are still many “climate denialists” and individuals with too jaded a nature to feel compelled to act. Some changes simply require small lifestyle adjustments. Others require dedication and major overhauls of the status quo. But the status quo is shifting, and the means of its shift continue to fall into our own hands. We must be cautious and proactive with this great responsibility. As Al Gore wrote in a Rolling Stone article,

The progressive introduction of Internet-based communication — social media, blogs, digital journalism — is laying the foundation for the renewal of individual participation in democracy, and the re-elevation of reason over wealth and power as the basis for collective decision making.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Chuck Coker via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Winds of Change: Renewable Energy Booming in Texas appeared first on Law Street.

Deep within the heart of the notoriously dangerous and underdeveloped city of Paterson, New Jersey, lies a scenic waterfall of historical and environmental significance.

In 1778, Alexander Hamilton picnicked in the vicinity and was impressed with the power of the Passaic River and its Great Falls. The brilliant and foresighted founding father envisaged water as a source of power for the industries of the new and developing nation. Hamilton’s work, including founding an organization called the Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures, did in fact result in the river and waterfall providing power for the region, including the newly founded city of Paterson, which it continues to do to this day.

Alexander Hamilton: Paterson’s founder and the Great Fall’s promoter. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

The Paterson Great Falls area is supervised by the National Park Service and the US Department of the Interior. Many people have not heard of this all, much less the fact that it is a national park. Granted, one might not visualize this place alongside Niagara Falls, the Grand Canyon, or Old Faithful; however, this is not a consequence of its inferiority or failure to provide for its visitors a transcendental experience in nature. Rather, the National Park Service, and We, the People, have forgotten about it and let it languish.

One can be easily misled by the high quality literature received upon arrival. An NPS map delineates the site along with trails and overlooks. Another references an audio guided walking tour around the park and other local points of interest. None of these things is a particularly viable option for the curious tourist or visiting family. The trails have fallen into a state of disrepair, or are completely closed for renovations, the completion dates of which are vague. The limited angles by which one can view the falls do not effectively convey their beauty. Furthermore, in order to get there one must wade through an accumulation of trash on the grassy area. At one point, I picked up and threw out a deflated balloon. This was particularly frustrating because of the dangers these items pose to local animals; a hedgehog scampered by shortly thereafter.

Minimal access in the park. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

On the day I attended, there happened to be a decent number of people present because a small lecture was scheduled. It had recently been the anniversary of the infamous duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, and so some people came out to hear the historic tale. Otherwise, I am told by some associates who had explored the park on an average day, the place tends to be relatively vacant. The brochure map indicated a visitor center across the street; I figured it would be productive to look into it and acquire more information. All I found, though, was an empty parking lot and building with no signs or indicators. Was this it? There was no evidence in any of the literature, nor at this building itself, that the center was under renovation or closed. Upon further research at home, I discerned that this empty building was in fact the Great Falls Historic District Cultural Center and its overhaul should be completed later this summer.

The Great Falls Historic District Cultural Center. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

It is a disgrace in its own right that this historically and environmentally significant location has fallen into such a state of disrepair, under-appreciation, and under-attendance, but there are economic and social factors at play here as well. While there are many complex reasons why the city of Paterson is in such poor condition, the Great Falls provide an untapped opportunity to inject some life into the local sector. Fostering tourism via the Falls could provide a source of income to the Paterson economy. While there are many other issues that must be addressed in order to truly lift the city out of its current situation, the Falls are an easy starting point. This would also provide incentive to refurbish the locale and other points of interest, creating a self reinforcing system. As it stands, the streetwise tourist is not likely to wander around the streets of Paterson listening to an audio tour; improving the park experience and improving the local quality of life go hand in hand.

Paterson is a prime example of the social and economic ramifications of deindustrialization. There is a plethora of abandoned buildings and vacant streets, which are breeding grounds for violence, gang activity, and drug use. Aside from the fact that many people do not know of the Falls, finding one’s way there and back is relatively stressful. Once arrived, one is deterred from truly experiencing everything the site could and should offer. Rather, one is distracted by the abysmal infrastructural and human conditions that abound. These are all things that surely reduce the number of annual visitors. If many people wanted to come, the city would find more motivation to improve; if the city found more motivation to improve, many more people might want to come. However, the city of Paterson is not wholly responsible or to blame, as the Falls are a national park and the initial spark must be provided by the federal government.

A typical sight in the Great Falls vicinity. Courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

We must understand that the quality of our environments and the quality of our lives are intertwined. Nature is not something that only exists “out there,” but is right in our backyards. It is all around around us and is a part of us as much as we are a part of it. This nation has a culturally motivated value system that has to do with preservation of natural spaces. The Paterson Great Falls is a gem that needs polishing. It is a beautiful site that we ought to appreciate and for which we should be grateful. Revamping this gift of nature would not be just for its own aesthetic sake. A quality national park site would have a direct effect on the local conditions and continued potential for growth and improvement in the city and region.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Franklin R. Halprin]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A National Park That’s a National Disgrace appeared first on Law Street.

Let’s work backwards: there is a nuclear power plant in upstate New York called Indian Point, and it needs to be shut down.

Nuclear reactors are notorious for their cooling systems; the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima meltdowns all occurred because of cooling system failures. Located in Buchanan in Westchester County, the Indian Point nuclear plant sits at the edge of the Hudson River. It draws in two billion gallons of river water every day in order to cool its reactors, discharging it back into the river eight degrees warmer. This has catastrophic consequences for the fish, eggs, larvae, and other aquatic life there. In fact, more than a billion of them die every year, said Paul Gallay, president of Riverkeeper, an organization devoted to protecting the Hudson River and its tributaries (read more about this important organization here).

In a process called entrainment, fish and river life are sucked into the cooling intakes and annihilated. For decades conservationists have advocated for a closed cooling system, which has not come to fruition because it would require a financial investment that Entergy, the plant operator, is not willing to make. Rather, the company has proposed installing screens at the mouths of the intakes. Researchers have revealed that this is a far cry from a solution, not doing enough to protect the river’s biodiversity. In addition, it does not address the warm water discharge.

The Indian Point Reactor, courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

The quality of the reactor itself and its operation therein are sorely lacking as well. Security guards consistently fail mock attack tests, there is no viable evacuation plan for the surrounding region, and the reactor is deteriorating with age. The Indian Point closure debate is particularly hot right now because the site’s 40-year license is about to expire and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering granting them a 20-year renewal. The reactor provides a substantial percentage of the power used by New York City and the surrounding area; instead of shutting it down, why not repair and renovate?

In addition to closed cycling cooling, there are things that can be done in order to make Indian Point a bit safer, including fire safety measures and dry cask storage. These actions are insufficient; they do not change the underlying threats due to the reactor’s age, such as embrittlement, corrosion, and metal fatigue. Considering these problems are irreparable, why not tear it down and build a new reactor? Forty years ago, population geographies were different. Indian Point’s location is undesirable, due to its proximity to communities. Furthermore, several fault lines run through the area.

Unenforced “Keep Out” buoys, courtesy of Franklin R. Halprin

Nuclear energy is an efficient and clean means of powering our world. A controversial and provocative documentary called Pandora’s Promise (2013) makes a case for its desirability. Watch the trailer here:

One pound of uranium, the size of a person’s finger, yields as much energy as 5,000 barrels of oil. Nuclear energy does not pollute the air the way fossil fuels do. The amount of nuclear waste is overestimated: all the United States’ spent fuel rods would occupy a space no larger than a football field. Proposed “fourth generation reactors” are even more efficient and can recycle waste into another round of energy productivity. Renewables may be best for the long term sustainability of civilization, but right now, considering we continue to expand our energy demands, we need something realistic and nuclear is the way to go. These are some of the arguments the documentary presents, many of which are reasonable and worthy of consideration.

According to Gallay, Riverkeeper does not have a stance on nuclear power in general, but renewable energy and energy efficiency are two separate but interrelated things. We cannot argue that our needs for energy are increasing so drastically, while we waste 30 percent of the power we use. We can make many lifestyle changes so as to limit the growth of our demands. The idea of fourth generation nuclear plants is a fruitless quest for a Holy Grail. Rather, we should utilize the options we already have in hand. Declarations that carbon emissions in New York State would skyrocket if Indian Point were to close can be neutralized by a more wholehearted embrace of renewable energy systems. The economic infrastructure for them is more firmly established than ever, and market penetration is at an all time high. Furthermore, the sources of 650 of 2,000 potential megawatts are already in place and good to go.

These statistics are specifically in reference to New York State, but the conceptual framework is just as applicable to the United States at large and its national energy policy. Nuclear power has many advantages over fossil fuels, but it is not the ultimate answer. There are some notable outliers, such as France. Gabrielle Hecht’s The Radiance of France brilliantly chronicles the country’s national embrace of nuclear energy in the second half of the 20th century and the cultural values therein, as a means of assuaging the damage done by two world wars and as an attempt to reclaim its status as a member of the top of the geopolitical order. When the 21st century arrived, France had achieved energy independence and was even exporting its surplus to other countries. The general health of the environment and air there is notable; however, at the start of its program in the late 1940s, wind and solar power were barely in the conversation, and the state of technology did not allow for the viability of options such as geothermal energy. Just because France found success with its nuclear embrace half a century ago does not mean that the United States should pursue the same course now. We are fortunate enough to have at our fingertips a wider array of more preferable options.

It is time to make some substantial decisions regarding national energy policy and the directions in which we want to go. The Indian Point debate is a good starting point, and shutting it down would provide a great opportunity to set ourselves on a more renewable, and environmentally and socially responsible course.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Nick Fedele via Flickr]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s Time to Shut Down New York’s Indian Point Nuclear Plant appeared first on Law Street.

A thrifty friend used to point out that the savings at a store sale are misleading. While a shopper can save money on a marked down item, he would save even more if he refrained from purchasing it in the first place, since they probably do not actually need it. One is lured in by the promise of a lesser burden, in this case financial. This concept applies to the disposal process as well.

Composting is a process by which food scraps and other organic leftovers are added to a specially prepared soil so as to create a nutrient-rich mixture. This is a sustainable practice for several reasons.

1. Composting lessens the amount of trash we produce, which ultimately ends up in a landfill. One can break this process down further: consider the reduced amount of air and noise pollution that would result from fewer garbage trucks traveling the roads, or the reduced number of garbage bags produced (and the environmental consequences of the manufacturing process therein).
2. Composting is recycling at its maximum. This special soil often serves as the site for small gardens, or even larger scale agricultural purposes. Composting uses waste to produce something new by natural means. Even formal recycling, which is still a vital practice in which everyone should partake, requires a detailed mechanized process of breaking down and re-manufacturing the products in order to be redistributed.
3. Composting instills a sense of community participation and teamwork. Its sites are often locally oriented. People feel like they are pitching in and doing their part both to help the earth as individuals and as group, and working toward a more sustainable future.

A  recent New York Times article detailed the growth of the New York City school composting program, which started in 2012, and now includes more than two hundred schools. Again, this is a fantastic program and participants are confident that eventually public school composting will be city wide. The program does not encourage children to pursue healthier eating habits. The author of the article, Al Baker, quoted one school’s assistant principal who offered consolation by explaining that even though the children are not eating the healthy foods more, at least it’s not going to waste. Part of this sticky situation is a series of city health regulations that forbid the redistribution of foods once the packages have been opened, Baker clarifies. Therefore, when the children take the healthy foods on their trays and then do not eat them, it goes to composting instead of trash so this helps balance things out.

While this is true, composting offers us a buffer against wasteful lifestyles and slightly reduces the environmental consequences that would result. Rather, it is up to us not to depend on new practices as excuses for bad habits. We would be better off with a more successful attempt at getting children to eat healthy, or at the very least, not take the food on their trays if they absolutely will not eat it. The less we take, the less we dispose, which is a better practice regardless of the means of disposal.

We must be cautious not to be lulled into a false sense of accomplishment like when we buy store items on sale. I recently worked at a conservation society fundraiser where it was made known to the guests that food scraps would not be trashed, but composed, keeping with the organization’s philosophy. I was astounded by the amount of uneaten food that went into these receptacles. What was the cause of this? Of course, we as Westerners have been criticized by others, and rightly do not hesitate to criticize ourselves, for our overindulgence and lack of appreciation for the great gift that is a full belly three times per day. This seemed excessive, though. Could it be that people were less conflicted about not finishing their food because they knew that it would be composted and not trashed?

Fortunately, composting is probably here to stay. It offers us many opportunities and we should take advantage of them. The very fact that the concept is catching wind is indicative of the general trend in consciousness toward environmentally friendly behavior. But we must be cautious not to become too dependent on it, content to sit back and create waste knowing that somebody else will take care of the problem and turn negative impact into something positive and productive for us. Composting should be a calling card inviting us to take action on our own initiative.

Whether it’s burning fewer fossil fuels, recycling plastics, or finishing our vegetables, the path to sustainability lies not just in improved technologies or more efficient practices, but in responsible individual consumer decisions.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Ksd5 via Wikipedia]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Composting is Great, Reducing Waste Output is Better appeared first on Law Street.

Environmental policy is a hollow shell if it lacks the crucial component that is the interest and engagement of the people. An Ossining, New York-based conservation organization called Riverkeeper seeks to merge these arenas by sparking communal engagement and care for their surrounding ecosystems, in particular the Hudson River, so as to more effectively pursue regulations and values that are conducive to a healthy environment and lifestyle. As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated in Riverkeeper’s eponymously titled biography, “…environment is not something distant and inaccessible to most Americans. It is not an issue that can be separated out and dealt with on its own. The environment is our neighborhood, our community. It is our quality of life.”

In the 1960s, a group of fishermen banded together to patrol the Hudson in search of environmental law violators. As the strength and breadth of the coalition that would become Riverkeeper grew, they became increasingly effective at pinpointing and prosecuting individuals and corporations who polluted the waters of the Hudson. After a half century, Riverkeeper is now a respected organization with various departments and manifestations throughout the country. Its founding principle of a “neighborhood watch,” which sparked its initial coalescence, remains a treasured and vital practice.

I recently joined my fellow Riverkeeper interns aboard the patrol boat, Fletcher, for an abridged estuary survey. Now in his fourteenth year at the post, Captain John Lipscomb detailed that a full patrol requires thirteen days, from New York City up to the mouth of the Mohawk River, the largest tributary of the Hudson. The key to a successful patrol, he explained, is to “…look, but also be seen looking.” Having people on the shores see the vessel and “Riverkeeper” emblazoned on the side of the hull is a deterrent; this is a powerful and often more preferable means of keeping the Hudson clean than catching violators red handed. Furthermore, it is advertising as well as policing. The boat’s presence and visibility raises environmental awareness; it gets the concepts into people’s heads and hopefully influences their behavior.

The Fletcher on patrol

Riverkeeper’s patrol has many other functions that tie into this philosophy of engaging the community. The organization seeks to empower the community with data, primarily with water quality sampling and subsequent output of its findings in reports. The EPA’s recommendations for testing in recreational waterways occasionally meets opposition on the basis that it is unnecessary because nobody swims at particular points on the river; however, designated beaches are not the only points at which people partake in river activities. During our patrol, as it was a hot and sunny day, we encountered a group of kids jumping from a low rocky precipice into the water and swimming about. The captain drew the boat near, and acquired their permission to snap a few photos. He intends to present this evidence of countless examples that clearly the people are partaking in recreational activity all along the water. This raises several points. First is that water sampling is undoubtedly warranted. Second, it speaks to the role of community members in environmental policy formulation, as well as the fact that such responsible policies are in the best interest not just of nature but the people as well.

Scenic Surprises on the Hudson

Riverkeeper has been passionately engaging the problems raised by the Tappan Zee Bridge construction project. In addition to outrage over the discovery that Albany was using clean water funds to finance the endeavor, the actual work is being done in a somewhat careless and haphazard fashion with regard to the delicate ecosystem by which it is surrounded. Captain Lipscomb has been documenting the number of dead fish discoveries, particularly the species as some teeter on the endangered list, in an effort to raise public awareness and induce a more responsible approach to the project with regard to the Hudson River’s biodiversity.

It goes without saying that an additional responsibility of the Hudson patrol involves active, first-hand clean up. Unfortunately, I was not surprised to see a substantial amount of trash choking the waterway. In fact, at one point we slowed the boat so as to draw out a fully intact television bobbing at the surface. Hopefully in time, through the work of Riverkeeper and other like-minded organizations and citizens, the amount of garbage that finds its way into the water will diminish to a negligible amount.

Captain Lipscomb wants to extend the range of the patrol into the Mohawk. If this is to be accomplished, Riverkeeper will need to cultivate relationships with other organizations in that area so as to effectively take on a mission of such large scope. This is already a philosophy of the organization. “We promote positive sustainable relationships; it is not in our best interest to sue everybody” clarified Dana Gulley, manager of the Community Outreach & Volunteer Programs at Riverkeeper. Rather, she added, it is important to communicate. Riverkeeper seeks to open dialogue and educate; if they encounter a violator, they approach them and ask if they knew they were polluting.

Beneath the Bear Mountain Bridge

These activities are not just for aesthetic conservation. More than nine million people in New York City and the surrounding area drink from the Hudson watershed. Human health and human culture are at stake in environment-society relationships. As Robert Kennedy Jr. and the first Hudson Riverkeeper John Cronin put it: “As Riverkeepers we protect nature, not so much for nature’s sake, but for the sake of humanity. Nature enriches us economically, but we have other appetites besides money. These hungers — spiritual, cultural, and aesthetic — must be fed if we want to grow as we are meant to — if we are to fulfill ourselves.”

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

All images courtesy of [Franklin R. Halprin]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Riverkeeper: Patrolling the Hudson to Keep NYC’s Water Clean appeared first on Law Street.

The onset of summer means that wildfires are likely to occur more often. Last month one raged in the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. As crews sought to tame it, questions arose as to its origins, effects, and how to view such forces.

Investigators believe human activity caused the fire. This immediately puts a bad taste in our mouths, as we accuse mankind of selfishness, carelessness, and destruction of our surrounding world. Indeed, the very thought of an unattended campfire or discarded cigarette butt igniting a forest-consuming conflagration is repulsive. “Conservation” and “sustainability” have not always been popular buzzwords.

It was not until the mid 1800s that Westerners began to view the environment as a thing of beauty, and as environmental historian William Cronon put it, “…a landscape where the supernatural lay just beneath the surface…expressed in the doctrine of the sublime…” Cronon has explained that cultural perceptions of human relationships to the wilderness have shifted, and the current discourse that we embrace reflects the romantic writings of towering figures such as Thoreau, Emerson, and Muir. We think of untamed nature as a cathedral to be preserved and only lightly trodden by our feet. This preservationist ethos has its merits, as protecting vast and beautiful spaces from the development, industry, and encroachment of society is vital to preserving nature itself as well as our cultural identity that has spawned from it.

Viewing nature and civilization as separate entities raises problems, Cronon points out. The value of “sustainability” is that it allows for an interaction between the two forces, which ultimately is an unescapable and acceptable dynamic if we are to live maturely on our planet and in our environments. The key is not necessarily to leave all nature alone, but to find a responsible manner in which to interact with it. Naturally, if the Alaska wildfire was caused by human activity, this was not a responsible interaction with nature.

It would seem the logical response to fight the fire and put it out. After all, “…fire officials are worried that recreational cabins and secondary homes…may be at risk.” This raises several points of interest. First of which is the obvious implication that the primary motivation for putting out the fire is the protection of human life, human residences, and economy & tourism; this trumps the genuine concerns for the health of the environment. However, especially considering that the fire was probably caused by human activity, putting it out has been determined the right way to go. California is already experiencing an above average occurrence of fires, and predicts an active season. Consequently, they have retrofitted Black Hawk helicopters to be an extreme response mechanism, unofficially called the Firehawk.This comes partly in response to a series of large fires in the San Diego area last May.

What if the Alaska fire was ignited by natural causes? We tend to view those differently. The mindset of separation between society and nature abounds in this concern. We hesitate to intervene with natural forces, citing that the lack of human involvement denotes a need to let nature run its course. Why, then, do we also instigate controlled burns? Despite continuing struggles to find a responsible way of living in the environment, we take it upon ourselves to be the guardians of nature. When is it acceptable for us to intervene, and when should we leave things alone?

People have a difficult time accepting change. This is problematic, considering nature is constantly in flux; change is vital. The environmental historian Nancy Langston argued that “…we only perceive a crisis when we have first learned to observe, and then to value, a particular set of relationships that are about to be destroyed.” When hailing “conservation” and “preservation,” what are we trying to protect: the environment as we see and value it, or the environment as it functions? California is expecting a particularly active wildfire season, and the coming years are expected to see increased damage from fires. A report by Headwaters Economics suggests that there are climate change-induced factors such as “higher temperatures, widespread drought, earlier snowmelt, spring growth, and expanded insect and disease infestations…” In this sense, the occurrence of wildfires is broadened from a case-by-case basis to the general and wider concerns of human global impact.

When should we start fires, and when should we put them out? How sure can we be that a particular wildfire occurred naturally, by direct human activity, or secondarily by shifting ecological parameters? The Alaska wildfire and California fire season are examples of mankind’s struggle to find appropriate ways of interacting with our fragile world.

—

Franklin R. Halprin (@FHalprin) holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Franklin at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Famartin via Wikipedia]

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Man vs. Nature: When Do We Intervene in Wildfires? appeared first on Law Street.